The strongest evidence linking the alleged hijackers to 9/11 was a video said to be from the closed circuit TV (CCTV) system at Dulles International Airport in Washington DC. The video was not made available until the day before the 9/11 Commission Report was released, in 2004, and it helped to pave the way for widespread acceptance of the official account. Since the other evidence against the accused hijackers was dubious and suspiciously convenient for the FBI, which provided it, the Dulles video should be examined closely.
Doing so has led some independent 9/11 investigators to conclude that the Dulles video contains “no information to link its images to AA 77.” Reasons include that:
- None of the Dulles airport staff remembered seeing the alleged hijackers at the airport
- Dulles had over 300 cameras but no footage was released except for portions of this one video (and no video was available from the other airports)
- The alleged Dulles video contains no date, time stamp, or camera identification
- The video was shot at a rate of 30 frames per second (fps), which the investigators said is not typical of CCTV videos
- The video appears to be an edited composite of shots taken from different angles
Additionally, it has been noticed that the airport screeners in the Dulles video did not perform their duties according to airport requirements. An attorney representing 9/11 victims’ families stated that security agents in the video screened the suspects in ways that were not like those required in Dulles training videos.
Could the video be fraudulent?
Interview with Tony Szamboti
Transcript published 23 May 2016
For this important interview we welcome Tony Szamboti, mechanical engineer and 9/11 researcher, who joins us for a detailed discussion on crucial evidence that, in the words of his research group, "clearly demonstrate(s) that the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) were unscientific and fraudulent."
With the group's white paper as our focus, "Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports" which lists 25 Points seriously challenging NIST's work in this area, we discuss striking new evidence demonstrating that NIST intentionally omitted significant structural components from its analysis of Building 7, and explore the almost inescapable conclusion that this was done in order to avoid the explanation of controlled demolition. We also discuss the potential these findings might have for legal action.
Former 9/11 commission member calls for release of 28 pages in report
CNN - Nicole Gaouette Tue May 24, 2016
Washington (CNN) — A former member of the 9/11 Commission called Tuesday for the public release of 28 classified pages pertaining to the attacks.
"I am strongly in favor of declassifying this information as quickly as possible," Tim Roemer told a House committee. "The 9/11 families deserve it, the American people deserve it, and justice deserves it. We have the right to transparency and sunlight -- not the darkness."
The hearing, titled "The U.S.-Saudi Arabia Counterterrorism Relationship," comes amid increasing scrutiny in Washington about Saudi Arabia's possible role in the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, and a push in Congress to allow victims of terrorism to sue foreign governments linked to terror attacks on U.S. soil.
That has fueled calls for the release of 28 classified pages on the report into the attacks. The pages indicate that a network of Saudis, some in official positions, supported al Qaeda operatives in the run up to the attacks, according to some of those who have seen the documents and are pushing for their release, including former Navy Secretary John Lehman and former Senator Bob Graham.
At Tuesday's hearing, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle criticized the Saudi Arabian government for funding the spread of Wahabi Islam, a fundamentalist interpretation of the ancient religion that "teaches that apostates should be persecuted and in some cases killed," said Texas Rep. Ted Poe, the Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on terrorism.
Poe noted that some analysts say that followers of Wahabi Islam might be more disposed to feel sympathetic to terrorist groups. And he echoed Roemer's call.
Is Senate bill allowing 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia all it seems? Lawmaker ‘added loophole that allows State department to
Is Senate bill allowing 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia all it seems? Lawmaker ‘added loophole that allows State department to stall action’
May 25, 2016 By Tom Wyke for MailOnline and Associated Press
~The Senate passed legislation Tuesday that would allow families of September 11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia
~The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act had triggered a threat from Riyadh to pull billions of dollars from the U.S. economy
~Now it has been revealed loophole was inserted to reduce bill's power
~Senate Democrats had firmly supported the legislation, putting them at odds with the Obama administration
The Senate's unanimous passing of legislation that allows families of September 11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia may not be as groundbreaking as it was first believed.
The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) was initially reported as being a chance for the families to pursue damages from the Saudi government but now it has emerged a clause was inserted to water down the bill's power.
The wording of the loophole states the Secretary of State just has to engage 'in good-faith discussions with the foreign-state defendant concerning the resolution of claims against the foreign state,' according to the NY Post.
It had been feared the legislation would trigger potential diplomatic issues with Riyadh, which was threatening to pull billions of dollars from the U.S. economy, if the bill is enacted.
The National Archives released a series of memos written by Sept. 11 Commission staff members, a compilation of numerous possible connections between the hijackers and Saudis inside the United States. The document appears to be a glimpse into what is still contained in the classified 28 pages of the congressional inquiry into the 2001 attacks.
What I believe to be an extremely important piece of information.
Kevin Fenton's article on the subject:
The 9/11 Family Steering Committee Website:
It should be noted that when al Thumairy was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission, there were Saudi Government Minders present. I don’t know if that’s true with the other Saudi interviews, but it most likely is. I wonder how intimidating they are.
Senate passes bill allowing 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia
By Jordain Carney - The Hill- May 17, 2016
The Senate on Tuesday approved legislation that would allow victims of the 9/11 terror attacks to sue Saudi Arabia, defying vocal opposition from the White House.
The upper chamber approved the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act by unanimous consent.
"This bill is very near and dear to my heart as a New Yorker because it would allow the victims of 9/11 to pursue some small measure of justice," Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. "[This is] another example of the [John] Cornyn-Schumer collaboration, which works pretty well around here."
President Obama has threatened to veto the bill. Schumer said he wouldn’t uphold a veto, and expects that most senators wouldn't, either.
"I think we easily get the two-thirds override if the president should veto," Schumer said.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said he and Schumer are talking with leadership in both parties to get an "expedited" vote on the bill in the House.
Announcing a new paper, "The Pentagon Event: The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted," by Victoria Ashley, David Chandler, Jonathan H. Cole, James Hoffman, Ken Jenkins, Frank Legge, and John D. Wyndham.
The paper can be found in the Pentagon section of http://www.scientificmethod911.org or directly at http://www.scientificmethod911.org/docs/Honegger_Hypothesis_042916.pdf.
Honegger's hypothesis is that no plane impacted the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, and that pre-planted explosives caused all the deaths and damage. Honegger also postulates that a large "white" plane was destroyed outside the Pentagon west wall without causing any damage to the wall.
The authors of the above paper refute Honegger's hypothesis and show that the physical, eyewitness, radar, and FDR data, plus other data, all support impact by a large silver plane, a Boeing 757, and most probably American Airlines Flight 77, as the main cause of all the deaths and damage.
Meet Osama Basnan and his wife
Osama Basnan according to FBI Agents investigating the 9-11 attacks is a Saudi Government Agent with close ties to high ranking Government Officials. He is also "an ardent UBL Supporter".
FBI Document on Osama Basnan:
Connections of San Diego PENTTBOMB Subjects to the Government of Saudi Arabia
"has been in contact with UBL family members; ardent UBL supporter"
This is the same document with different redaction's telling us more.....
9/11 Family Member Lorie Van Auken holding up the JICI showing redacted pages on CNN.
You may have heard of the 28 redacted pages from the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11. They have been redacted for years, and the 9/11 families and others have been fighting for their release since the day it was announced they were redacted. According to people like former Senator Bob Graham, those pages talk about alleged Saudi Government support for the hijackers.
Recently, there was a short segment on 60 Minutes about the pages. This resulted in a much needed push for the release of the 28 redacted pages. When Obama first came into office, it was reported that he told 9/11 Family Member Kristen Breitweiser “that he was willing to make the pages public.” A few years later, according to 9/11 Family Member Bill Doyle, Obama told him “Bill, I will get them released.”
Many times throughout Obama’s Presidency, we have seen him protect the Saudis against the 9/11 Families who want their day in court. Right now, he is threatening to veto a bill called JASTA that would finally give the families that day in court.
The 28 pages were originally classified by the Bush Administration “for reasons of national security.” Obama said that “Jim Clapper, our director of national intelligence, has been going through to make sure that whatever it is that is released is not gonna compromise some major national security interest of the United States.”
We have heard from many people who have read them say that there is nothing in those pages that would affect national security. Rep. Walter Jones said “there's nothing in it about national security.” Former Sen. Bob Graham has said “they do not affect national security.”