Flashback: Citizens' Commissions on 9/11

It seems that in the last 2 years in which I have been paying attention to the 9/11 alternative movement the number of discussion points has dwindled down to smaller and smaller numbers. This narrowing of focus has been primarily the effect of the need to have concise talking points, pictures, and videos which can be quickly shown in an attempt to garner public interest, and cover in 3 minutes of air time. Unfortunately this narrowing of focus can in turn have a negative affect as well.

As the public becomes more and more susceptible to looking into 9/11 questions, we in turn must widen the focus so as to show the breadth of areas in which real investigations are needed. The constant focus on 3-4 points which can be spouted in a few minutes has its use, but those that become interested in the subject matter must not be lead to believe that those 3-4 points makeup the entire scope of 9/11 questions and research - and likewise we must not be pigeon-holed into only focusing on these hot topics.

With that said, there have been a number of 'citizen commissions', or 'citizen grand juries' that have been held regarding 9/11. These commissions typically contain hours of information on a very wide variety of subjects and from a variety of presenters - since they are videos they in turn are great to refer to those looking for a bit more substance than just WTC7 for example.

Here is a listing of the 9/11 public commissions and grand juries, all of which are hosted at 911busters.com, please keep them in mind in the future.

A No Planer Resigns from

A No Planer Resigns from S.P.I.N.E.

Morgan Reynolds — August 1, 2006

Joseph Keith is a retired 76-year-old software engineer who worked in the aerospace industry and just resigned from a professional group known as the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine Eleven (SPINE) founded by Canadian scientist, A.K. (“Kee”) Dewdney. The website is www.physics911.net. Curious about why he resigned (I’m still a SPINE member), I interviewed him from his home in southern California.

Q: Why did you resign from SPINE?

A: Well, I was a founding member in 2002 but I have little patience. With all the arguments I have gone through with Kee, I’ve spent so much time with Kee, it’s led nowhere. A plane never hit the second trade center tower, WTC 2, that’s what started our disagreement about 4 years ago.

Leonard Spencer first came out with what I thought was a smoking gun, the pod. I thought that pod must be a smoke screen device to hide the fact that a real airliner flew by but did not hit the building. And then editors doctored the tape after the fact.

Later on I decided the pod was a distraction since I determined that the video was fake. Case closed.

Q: Why is the video phony?

A: The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!

Q: Why would the establishment elite pull off a phony video?

A: The video had to be phony because the Illuminati, or whatever we want to call them, had to eliminate all possibilities of a foul up. They needed the hijacking scam to implicate the Muslims, but they couldn’t afford any risk. They had to Keep-It-Simple-Stupid so they faked the crashes.

Since we know that the rich will always hang together, have their children intermarry, and do anything to protect their wealth, they must have an organization, an interlocking directorate, if you will, that is compartmentalized. I could have done a better job, but they faked the video in an amateurish way. A friend of mine could have done a much better job of faking an airplane crash—break a wing off, break a part of the body, throw some fluff in and then I wouldn’t have noticed anything wrong.

Q: When did you realize something was amiss about 9/11?

A: I watched 9/11 on TV that day and my next-door neighbor is a pilot for SkyWest Airlines. We were good friends and when 9/11 happened I called up right away and said, “Turn on the TV.” He came over to my house. I said, “It’s fake.” “Yes, it’s fake,” he said. Later, we decided that the networks did not get the real-time feed of the crash and simulated it instead. In about a week we were convinced by neighbors that the networks were displaying the real thing. His wife is an American Airlines flight attendant and she’s very outspoken. Every 9/11 anniversary they put out a big display about praying for 9/11 flight attendants and all that. She thinks I’m a stupid conspiracy nut. Kee used to ask David, through me, airline questions, but now David is not allowed to talk to me. I don’t know if Kee is personally contacting him now.

Q: You knew right away it was an inside job because the WTC hit was faked?

A: I have spent lots of time trying to figure out how the New World Order could screw up so badly, and the only conclusion I can come to is that there must be some high-ranking insider, or possibly group, that is trying to warn the world of the danger of allowing such a powerful force to rule. In another era, the most powerful force in the World was the Holy Roman Empire and it was brought down by an insider who exposed the document that gave it its power as a fraud. I can’t go into the details now but it later led to the Reformation. I wrote a paper on it 50 years ago.

Q: You say anyone can prove the video is fake. How?

A: First get any video. They’re getting harder to find. A good example is “In Memoriam, New York City 9/11/01” from HBO, narrated by Rudy Giuliani, because the plane crashes at the beginning. Start the DVD and as the plane comes into view, hit the pause on your remote and then go frame-by-frame until the plane goes into the building, step by step.

Carefully watch the plane go into the building: it’s like a hot knife cutting through butter. Marvel at how a plane can meld into a steel-concrete building. A plane should crash against the building. It makes one curious! It should make you think about how a plane would enter a steel-concrete building.

Q: One argument we hear is that all the videos can’t be fake.

A: Well, get all 30 of ‘em and run ‘em, I have four. One of mine doesn’t show the actual crash, two of them show a plane banking, one doesn’t.

Every video that shows impact shows a plane flying through the tower wall the same way it flies through thin air: no cratering effect, no pushing parts of the building in, no crunching of the airframe as it hits resistance, no reaction from the heavy engines and hidden landing gear, no parts breaking off, no outer 30 feet of the wing breaking off, no bursting, shredding or bending of the wing. No nothing.

Q: Isn’t that impossible in reality?

A: Yes. Then after absorption of the plane, you see the building closing up and then an explosion. Meanwhile, nothing fell from either the building or the plane.

Q: That’s compelling evidence of video fakery. What else?

A: One more test is to pause with the plane on the screen. Take a magic marker or tape and mark the nose of the plane and then count frames until the tail passes the mark. You’ll find that the number of steps the plane takes while the plane is in thin air is the same as the number of steps the plane takes as it melds into the building.

Q: So there’s no deceleration?

A: Right. It violates all Newton’s laws of motion. I’ll state them:

1. An object at rest remains at rest and an object in motion remains in motion until a force is applied.

2. When a force is applied to an object, the object accelerates in the direction of the force. When an object in motion hits stationary resistance, the force acts in the opposite direction of the object and therefore the object decelerates.

3. Newton said, “For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction” but I say, every action produces an equal and opposite reaction.

Q: So, for example, a diver speeds through thin air but slows in the resistance of the water unless he has a new energy source to maintain speed.

A: Right. It’s like this TV show I was watching called Myth Busters. They dumped this dummy from 100 feet and it registered 16 G’s when it hit water. That can kill you, we can only take about 10 G’s. Then think about hitting steel and concrete.

Q: Believers in Boeing 767s hitting the twin towers always bring up kinetic energy as the big explanation for how an aluminum plane could fly right through the wall of a steel and concrete tower. Speed squared is supposed make us believe the plane-like outline of the holes in the towers.

A: The more kinetic energy, the more damage the speeding object will do when it hits, but they’re claiming that it punched right through. The plane should have continued right through the building like a bullet through paper. Sure, in the bullet case, little kinetic energy is lost. No plane deceleration also means the plane never lost kinetic energy. Victor Thorn and the others, even though they’re good on demolition and no plane at the Pentagon, are afraid to come out for the No Plane Theory (NPT).

When Jerry Longspaugh, an aerospace engineer and SPINE member, saw a photo of a hole in one of the towers and thought he saw the core, he wrote to Kee and me, “It looks like the NPT is true.” Maybe Kee said something to him, I don’t know.

Kee’s got to be a phony. He’s been saying how sorry he was about the hassle I’m suffering from the plane huggers. That kind of thing is not unusual in my life.

Q: Why won’t Kee do the video test?

A: His university won’t let him.

Q: But he’s done a lot exposing 9/11 lies like proving the cell phone calls were impossible.

A: Kee is allowed some freedom but NPT is the key to the kingdom. It would topple the kingdom, so he won’t go there. Physics911.net has this “What may have happened” and “What did not happen” and he won’t use ‘em. He won’t run your article. They have to have Arab hijackers, so they have to have airplanes.

Q: So do you believe there were no planes?

A: Logic tells me there were no airliners involved. They never showed any wreckage, the hole was empty, and the government showed a few parts but no serial numbers, no part numbers.

Q: The government could have crashed a plane, say, in Pennsylvania, by remote control.

A: Too many problems. Somebody could pick up a part with a serial number.

Q: What about the controversy over high-energy explosives at the WTC?

A: Well, I tend to agree with those who believe they were used but my problem has always been the video. It was fake and that was the end of it for me. Case closed!

Q: Is SPINE or Scholars for 911 Truth doing any good?

A: Absolutely not, they haven’t done anything for a couple of years. SPINE is defunct. In 2004, for example, I sent something by Gerard Holmgren against the plane huggers to Kee and nothing came of it. SPINE never puts up anything controversial so it is just safe stuff, orthodoxy now.

Q: Nila Sagadevan is a big defender of planes at the WTC.

A: When he joined SPINE I called him up because he lived in southern California and found he lived only 6-7 miles from me. We talked about going for a beer but when I g

Please put this out for

Please put this out for reader comment.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt: In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.

Can’t anybody see what’s going on? If Alex Jones is such an enormous threat to the New World Order – if we’re at critical mass, they’re on the run, and Alex Jones is ready to topple them (all his exact words) – then why would they willingly put him on their own controlled network (C-SPAN) by broadcasting his L.A. seminar? And remember, C-SPAN is undoubtedly part of the “controlled media” [see bios below].

So, why isn’t anyone addressing this point?

Read article at WingTV.net


Doug: I've been saying that


I've been saying that those who get on TV have become suspicious.

But we'd have to find out who allowed this.

Maybe they thought the content of the discussion would turn most people off, or maybe CSPAN doesn't have that broad of an audience.

Maybe it is just democracy

Maybe it is just democracy in action

WING TV disinfo nuts: Maybe

WING TV disinfo nuts:

Maybe it's because C-SPAN has been flooded with phone calls and emails to allow it to be aired.

Great point, but it's

Great point, but it's unfortunate that some sketpics will only tollerate a few seconds of information.

Now with the major

Now with the major breaktrough, paranoia creeps around for COINTELPRO purposes.

Why is it that on the 52MB

Why is it that on the 52MB zip file pentagon flight 77 crash video from the released trial evidence have an appearing pole at the beginning? Trivial, but strange.

NM, figured it out

NM, figured it out

Sorry to rub it in. HA HA HA

Sorry to rub it in.

HA HA HA ...


Total News Blackout!!!

If the below information is

If the below information is correct, it would be very powerful to have some of these individuals presented to the public. This would be a physically tangible contradiction of the "official" story. Has anyone attempted to do this?

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well


Resurrected Hijackers


The thing is that whoever

The thing is that whoever "they" are, they don't feel threatened by anyone.
Don't forget this little gem:
‘That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’'' (Ron Suskind, “Without a Doubt,” the New York Times Magazine, October 17, 2004.)

I don't care who gets on TV

I don't care who gets on TV as long as the end result is a new, independent, international investigation.

I also feel that as soon as people start feeling the heat, the house of cards will tumble.

Doug Kenline, Perhaps there

Doug Kenline, Perhaps there are enough people @ C-SPAN who hava a conscience & are opposed to the NWO?

Also, by your paranoid reasoning, any truther who makes it into the msm is "suspect."

^So I guess Steven Jones,

^So I guess Steven Jones, Bowman, Tarpley, & Fetzer are suspect too, because C-SPAN allowed them to be broadcast also???

I know this is a long shot,

I know this is a long shot, but apparently CNN is creating a feature by which viewers can submit pictures, video, etc., and, well, why not submit brief clips from the C-Span program, or video of WTC7, or other forms of activism?


NEW YORK (AP) - With camera phones and other gadgets a greater part of everyday life, CNN wants to make it easier for viewers to submit images they happen to capture as they witness news in the making.

CNN and other news organizations have long accepted submissions from the public, but until now the tools at CNN's Web site have been made available in response to specific stories or events.

DZ, I thought your comments

DZ, I thought your comments "on top of" this thread, the ones about widening the breadth and not negating the tremendous depth of the 9/11 topics, are right on.

It is easy to think that 9/11 is all about the Pentagon, or WTC, or one or more planes (or lack of them), but 9/11 is an event with such huge scope that it cannot be discussed in four minutes, or 40 minutes, or even 4 hours. The sheer size of the Cooperative Research timelines, or the work at the wtc7 web site, or the numerous books, or even the various movies (whatever their flaws might be) should give pause to those who argue for 9/11 truth, and certainly to those who try to de-bunk it.

Perhaps we need to take a giant step backward and re-visit all those "commissions" in depth so that we can take three giant steps forward and re-create them, with updates and improvements, in some future event, or series of documentaries, or in the context of a major learned or "scientific" symposium or other learning/presentation/discussion format.

I've noted the concept mapping software; if you are unfamiliar with it, it's what the character(s) were doing on the wall in the film "Who Killed John O'Neill?". In some ways, it's similar to what is being done at the WTC7 web site.

One of the drawbacks to the 9/11 movement (disinformation and misinformation aside) is that there are a lot of streams of information that are disconnected and unvetted... loose flaps of dried crap floating around in the breeze.

Similarly, there is a lot of information that has been vetted, documented, footnoted, for which there are two or more sources, or connecting skeins, or about which valid research has been done, or about which there is general agreement among serious 9/11 researchers.

But the short-attention span media and public has a hard time differentiating which is which.

We need some mechanism that will allow us (and them) to see the foundation, the structural beams, and the cross-strutting that will allow the 9/11 issue to stand on its own in the crosswinds of debate.

Washington Journal open

Washington Journal open phones at 7am est!!!

Call-In Numbers
Support Democrats:
(202) 737-0002
Support Republicans:
(202) 737-0001
Support Independents:
(202) 628-0205
Outside U.S.:
(202) 628-0184

How to drum up online

How to drum up online support, the Israeli way. (I thought that this was an over exaggeration when first informed of this - evidently not).


If the below information is

If the below information is correct, it would be very powerful to have some of these individuals presented to the public.

IF it is correct.

I remember seeing a subtitled German TV investigative journal thing where is was claimed that the BBC had retracted the story.. that the german jorunalist had phoned the british newspaper and got an answer along the lines of:

not proven, may have been false info, cannot be followed up.

so there you have it. Most info is NOT OFFICIALLY CONFIRMED and when challenged it is doubted.. which leaves you with

EXACTLY ZERO information.

And that is the intent, right?

heres that pic of the

There's an article in

There's an article in today's New York Times about Kevin Barrett that is worth reading:

I found this 1984 "Big

I found this 1984 "Big brother is watching you" poster: http://www.rit.edu/~rfaite/big%20brother.jpg

And i decided to clean it up a little.....

repaired in colour:
repaired in black/white (ready for printing):

oops...i forgot to clean the

oops...i forgot to clean the edges...
These are better:
black white

Here is another flashback:

Here is another flashback:

The 9-11 Investigation



According to Simon Schama's book, "Two Rothschilds and the Land of Israel", the House of Rothschild had acquired 80% of the land of Israel. They also paid the expenses of the early settlers, manipulated into being the 1917 Balfour Declaration which recognized Israel as a Jewish homeland, funded the Nazis and created Mossad and the terrorist underground in Palestine.

Israel was founded by, and has always been controlled by, the Rothschilds and the rest of the Elite. The "Jewish homeland" scam is just a smokescreen and Jewish people are pawns in the game.

Watching the 9/11 citizen's

Watching the 9/11 citizen's commission, like here: http://www.911busters.com/video/MOV/CC6_John_Judge_911_Omission_Report.html
reminds me of how OFF THE TRAIL so much of the truth movement has gone, and how much it's scared off the original researchers, activists and people involved.

Makes you wonder that HAD something like this citizen's commission, with calm and collective speakers, 9/11 families, congresswomen, etc been used
on CSPAN if it might have been more productive?

Yelling how the calls were fake, the hijackers are alive, or a missile hit the pentagon AINT going to win anyone over...

9/11 is WAY TOO FUCKING FOCUSED on the to towers and pentagon.

I focus on the US using the Pakistani ISI as a proxy. Let me show you guys some of my research:

Five of the 19 hijackers trained at US millitary bases:
(links to a ton of mainstream news articles on the subject)

Bush ORDERED the FBI off the trail of al Qaeda hijackers and Osama
as of January 2001 under Order WF-199I:

Khalid Shaik Mohammed is a Pakistani ISI operative, and Pakistan ultimately controls al Qaeda and was behind 9/11:

Ahmed Omar Saaed, the main funder of 9/11. He is a top Pakistani Intelligence operative, an operative for British MI6, and aprotected CIA asset:

Mamoun Darkazanli, Hamburg Cell planner, was a CIA asset:

Omar was the one, under orders by the head of Pakistani Intelligence Mahmoud Ahmed, to wire $100,000 to Mohammed Atta.

Luai Sakra, #5 guy in al Qaeda who helped plan and facilitate the attacks:
Turns out he worked for the CIA as late as 200:

Top Secret Pentagon Operation Monitoring and possibly manipulating 4 of the 19 hijackers under "Able Danger"
Republican Congressmen Curt Weldon calls Able Danger "sinister", and says it may have been used to control the hijackers:

9/11 hijackers lived with well known FBI informants:

Head of Pakistani Intelligence funded 9/11 with other ISI officials:

This SAME ISI official MET WITH the heads of the CIA on 9/11:
CIA meets with Osama TWO MONTHS before 9/11:

#3 CIA man says Osama should be left free:

CIA Playing Games With Mole In Al Qaeda:

CIA tells Federal informant who sits in on Pakistani ISI/al Qaeda
9/11 planning meeting in 1999 to "keep quiet"

CIA USED al Qaeda to fight Serbs in mid to late 1990's:

British Intelligence protecting al Qaeda assets in 9/11 and 7/7:


10/12/2002 Bali(one year, one month, one day after 9/11)

3/11/2004 Madrid Spain(911 days after 9/11)

9/9/1999 Russia(Russia's "9/11", used to start the 2nd Chechyn war)

7/7/2005 London:
Fox News Special: 7/7 mastermind working for British intelligence?
BBC: Drills of exactly what happened on 7/7 going on at the
same station and trains at the same time as real attacks:

Miami "al Qaeda Plot to Blow up Sears Tower"
CNN: FBI orchestrated patsies?

Regarding the citizenry and

Regarding the citizenry and speaking of politics, it is high time that Democrats take up the issue of the 9/11 farcical story in full force - and that includes all left-wing media (e.g., DemocracyNow, AirAmerica, etc.).

Democrats have no voice and continue to be painted as the valueless, godless, unpatriotic and immoral political party.

9/11 has been made THE defining issue of this generation. Few (if any) in-office Republicans will speak out. And Democrats are nearly as bad except for a few heroes.

Democrats can hang it up in November if they can't look at the long road (big picture) and see where this country is headed because of all the lies about 9/11 (and other misdeeds).

9/11 is not a Repulican/Democrat issue. It's a human issue. But, if we are going to play politics, Democrats had well better shape up.

If someone cannot speak up about the 9/11 farce in their campaign this season, they can forget my vote. As it stands now, I probably won't be pulling any lever or marking any ballot.

I'm pissed. And I'm godd*mn sick of the intimidation and ridicule anyone publicly receives when questioning the 9/11 fairy tale.

pockybot- What a waste of

pockybot- What a waste of time and energy on your "research" about hijackers.

1.) There were NO HIJACKERS.

2.) There were NO PLANES.

The Blessing of the House of David


Thanks dz for posting these.

Thanks dz for posting these. I thought it was important for people to see the history of what it is we're actually questioning. For people to see the "meat & potatoes" of the movement. Aside from the Pentagon, and aside from Controlled Demolition, there is so much more, and I'm fearful that it's being lost along the way.

Please take the time to watch these, and show them to everyone you know.


Thanks AmandaReconWith for

Thanks AmandaReconWith for the inspiration.

I refer you to here.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt:

Franklin Delano Roosevelt: In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.

Can’t anybody see what’s going on? If Alex Jones is such an enormous threat to the New World Order – if we’re at critical mass, they’re on the run, and Alex Jones is ready to topple them (all his exact words) – then why would they willingly put him on their own controlled network (C-SPAN) by broadcasting his L.A. seminar? And remember, C-SPAN is undoubtedly part of the “controlled media” [see bios below].

So, why isnÂ’t anyone addressing this point?

Read article at WingTV.net

Doug Kenline | Homepage | 08.01.06 - 12:02 am | #


Here's the big picture. By allowing it to air on CSPAN, it has now made its way to the Internet. While CSPAN's audience may be suspect, the Internet's audience is not.

Let's not make this about personalities. While Alex Jones is one of the acknowledged leaders, this is way BIGGER than just Alex Jones.

As soon as he proves himself unworthy to lead, he will be replaced. Just like Michael Ruppert (for whatever reason) appears to have been replaced.

Let's stay focused on what we can control. Let's move forward. And let's remain ever vigilant.


Move over Mr. Coffee, Mr.

Move over Mr. Coffee, Mr. Gadget is here now! I just love my hot beverage machine! I can have an espresso, cappuccino, or fine German Kronung coffee anytime I wish!

I have this steel pole in my back yard that once supported a DSS dish until Murdock got control of it. I thought that a Thermite reaction would be the best way to remove the pole. So off I walked to the hardware store across the street looking for powered aluminum and powered iron. I took the following news item to show them how a Thermite reaction works.



WingTV is not to be trusted.

WingTV is not to be trusted.

We're an empire now, and

We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.

Maybe someone should tell these guys that the reality they are creating is total crap!

Chris- There are many 9/11

Chris- There are many 9/11 toads you will kiss before you find the prince of peace.


pockybot, You are right to


You are right to suggest 9/11 Truth advocacy has become too focused, but consider why the FBI and CIA interference you cite has been ignored as a PR strategy: plausible deniability. The government line is that, yes, they had all of these smoking guns lying around but they didn't translate messages in time, or they made mistakes, or they simply didn't connect the dots. A failure of imagination, according to Zelikow, right?

That's a powerful rhetorical move, because it requires the other side to prove beyond a doubt that these FBI blunders were intentional. As Fetzer said in LA, of course when an FBI agent is denied 70 requests this is an indication of deliberate policy, not erroneous handling. But the government can still claim, however implausible to reasonable people, that the person denying those 70 requests was simply mistaken, or whatever.

On the other hand, physical evidence of controlled demolition needs no argument for or against human agency. It simply is. And I guess that's why WTC and Pentagon have replaced other issues.

I happen to agree with Ruppert and Hopsicker, however. They basically argue that you can't prosecute physics. You have to follow the money, follow the human beings, to get a case that can be prosecuted. Hence, Hopsicker's statements that he doesn't care about controlled demolition. Maybe proving controlled demolition is the first step in this direction, and Ruppert is ignoring the promise of this thread? I don't know. But I think his instinct is correct. Paul Thompson's work on Saeed Sheikh is bang on, in this respect.


What this movement needs is a good lawyer. Consider what Robert Kennedy is doing to the e-voting companies: his lawsuit will at the very least put fear into some people who might otherwise be complicit with criminality thinking no one is watching. Something like that needs to be done with 9/11: a lawsuit, and one not filed in NYC. I don't know enough about the legal system to know if that makes sense. It just seems like there are elements in the NYC legal system that have prevented this sort of legal action from happening.


Wilford Brimley as Asst. US

Wilford Brimley as Asst. US Atty General James Wells in the movie "Absence of Malice":

"Tell you what we're gonna do. We're gonna sit right here and talk about it. Now if you get tired of talking, Mr. Marshal Elving Patrick there will hand you one of them subpoenas he's got stuck down in his pocket and we'll go down and talk in front of a Grand Jury....

Wonderful thing, a subpoena."

Ok...seriously.... Sick of


Sick of the "No Plane" theory.

Sick of the "No Hijacker" theory.

It's so old and boring.

We saw, heard, smelled, felt and recovered plane parts.

Knock it off. You're fucking crazy!