9/11 Spitzer Scandal


EXCLUSIVE! "The Real Spitzer Scandal" a 9/11 Spitzer Scandal SCOOP!

Brooklyn Newspaper Delivers the Goods:
Spitzer Filed Legal Brief, Helped Silverstein Win $4.5 Billion WTC Insurance Windfall

Contact: Sander Hicks, Publisher, NY Megaphone
718 940 2084 sander@voxpopnet.net

The Spitzer scandals continue.

On the 6th anniversary of the 9/11 attack, Brooklyn activist newspaper the New York Megaphone breaks this exclusive story:

NY Governor Eliot Spitzer filed an amicus brief on 1/15/03 on behalf of the World Trade Center's controversial lease-holder, the real estate magnate Larry Silverstein. This document shows that Spitzer, as Attorney General, helped Silverstein get the whopping $4.5 billion windfall for the 9/11 attacks. The record is clear: Spitzer helped reverse a lower court's decision, by making credible Silverstein's argument that the two different plane crashes on 9/11/01 should be compensated as two different terrorist attacks.

This amicus brief has never been reported before today, in print or online. It was discovered in the court archives on the 17th floor of the 2nd Circuit Court (NYC), and released to the New York Megaphone by attorney Carl Person. In reporter Sander Hicks's exclusive story, author and lawyer Carl Person says:

"I was surprised to see that Spitzer had used his position as attorney general to support one private litigant over another. Normally, this is not done."

Hicks' story also covers Governor Spitzer's recent scandals with police spying on rival Joe Bruno, the Roger Stone voice mail threat, as well as new information and interviews regarding the Spitzer links to Kroll executives Michael Cherkasky and Jerome Hauer. Hicks hands in an original interview with Jerome Hauer, probing his documented links to anthrax suspect Steven Hatfill. Hauer is widely believed to be the source of the White House's foreknowledge about the anthrax attacks on 9/11/01.

In 2004, Eliot Spitzer was asked to investigate 9/11 by 66% of New Yorkers. Those pleas were ignored. 51% of the USA wants Bush and Cheney investigated for 9/11, according to a Zogby poll last week.

This is the 6th issue of the New York Megaphone, a quarterly newspaper published by activist writers and "Citizen Journalists Pursuing the Unreported Story" at the Vox Pop coffeehouse and community center in Ditmas Park, Brooklyn. http://voxpopnet.net

"The Real Spitzer Scandal" is currently distributed in a print run of 40,000 for the Fall NY Megaphone, distributed throughout NYC. Circulation is estimated to be over 62,000. "The Real Spitzer Scandal" is also online, free and in full, at http://www.nymegaphone.com/node/24 This issue of the New York Megaphone also includes a wide variety of quality original reporting, small business features, and humor.

Hicks' original interview with "bio-terror expert" Jerome Hauer is at http://www.voxpopnet.net/podcasts/hauer.mp3

The Spitzer/Silverstein Amicus Brief is at:

The story was reported and written by Sander Hicks, with reporting help from Igor Kossov and Kempshall McAndrew.

Contact: Sander Hicks, Publisher, NY Megaphone
718 940 2084


Jennifer Givner
212 681 4640

More info on Vox Pop:

The place for "Books, Coffee, Democracy," Vox Pop is a vibrant, fair-trade, community-empowering, consciousness-raising space, on Cortelyou Road, in Flatbush, Brooklyn. In three years, Vox Pop has spawned new activist groups, redefined "community development", and published a muck-raking tabloid, The New York Megaphone.

More info on Sander Hicks:

Sander Hicks is one of the most provocative media activists of his generation. He runs the Drench Kiss Media Corporation's retail dynamo, "Vox Pop." In 1996, he founded Soft Skull Press, Inc. (acquired in 2007 by Winton & Shoemaker). In 2003, Hicks was star of "Horns and Halos" (HBO/Cinemax) the independent publishing documentary that recorded Hicks's attempts to get unpopular truths out about G.W.Bush, through the biography Fortunate Son (Soft Skull, 1999). His own book, The Big Wedding (Vox Pop, 2005) breaks new ground on the working-class intelligence assets and whistle-blowers who tried to stop 9/11 from happening. Hicks has reported for Alternet, GNN, Long Island Press, New York Press, and INN World Report Television (FSTV, Dish Network).

Keep looking for things on these people

This is some of the best news I have heard yet on getting to the behind the scenes 911 related activity of probable perpetrators and accomplices.

911 could not have been pulled off without complicity from high New York officials.

Spitzer showed everybody he was possibly one when he ignored the call to investigate. Now it seems he not only didn't investigate, but he used his position in an unethical way to aid one of the possible perpetrators. I wouldn't doubt that his ballyhooed bust of some of the stock fraudsters was just for show to put him in a good light, prior to 911. I don't remember any of the fraudsters going to jail. I believe they just paid big fines, which were less than what they stole, with no full restitution required. That always bothered me.

These guys are just other people and are bound to have left other trails. Keep on digging and their criminal foundation will crumble.

Let's see this story confirmed

I urge people to verify this before jumping to conclusions... this should be our motto from now on.

At least one person I know has questioned Mr. Hicks' credibility.

Alright... since people are voting me down I will tell you that someone has reported he has strong connections to Jim Fetzer ("Hicks has two books where Fetzer either contributed or wrote the introduction"), and that he gave a questionable 9/11 discussion in a church referencing Hustler Magazine.. I don't have the time to research everything folks... I'm just telling you to watch out for hoaxes.

I am not familiar with the work of Mr. Hicks so I really don't have an opinion on him, nor do I have an opinion on this article except that we should be careful. I don't have an opinion on Spitzer either, except that I would like him to take the 9/11 stuff seriously--and he hasn't.

Now let's say that this is a hoax--and people harass Mr. Spitzer because of that. Do you think that would make him more or less objective to looking at 9/11 related questions?

one person? and now hes disinfo or something?

you're always telling us to watch out for hoaxes. im not accusing you of anything but this seems to be your main purpose. remember how you told me not to speculate? numerous times? you might try that when talking about other 9/11 researchers. there seems to be a new trend in this movement where if somebody even mentions the name of a Fetzer or Barrett or Tarpley they HAVE TO BE disinfo. im not happy with Fetzer or Barrett etc. but not everybody is gonna cut ties with all of these people even if you and i think it would be best(and i do). and when did Fetzer write introductions to his books? when he was still widely accepted in the movement and before he started talking DEW? and i think if you know anything about Spitzer you would know he has no intentions of looking into 9/11. he already refused to when he was the top law man in NYC and was in a position to do so. he has a job to do and if some hoax like this, if thats what this is, is enough to discourage him from looking at 9/11 evidence he should be fired now, im sure you would agree.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

Caution and reason

Chris, caution is sensible -- why dis it?

>>you're always telling us to watch out for hoaxes.

So am I, BTW. What hurts us is when we show no tolerance for careful work and reasoning, and caution. The hoaxes are everywhere this anniversary, NY, LA and even Ireland! It's a real swamp sometimes.

>>there seems to be a new trend in this movement where if somebody even mentions the name of a Fetzer or Barrett or Tarpley they HAVE TO BE disinfo.

As someone who answers the mail on the scholars group I've seen a LOT of people come along with questions about Fetzer and when they are answered with the facts, most people with any sense at all respond expressing their gratitude, concern and support for our work to expose that stuff and keep the names of professionals unmucked with the nonsense he advocates. People that don't have that response are the ones I have to be concerned about -- they aren't interested in evidence, they are interested in hype.

caution is one thing.....

you miss my point while voting me down, i too think Fetzer is disinfo and that he should be exposed. that doesnt mean slandering everyone who has ever done business with the man. thats the kind of reactionary thinking ive seen more and more of around here from the self styled disinfo police. mention Barrett etc., and not even in a supportive way? you get voted down and your thread gets about 3. are book burnings next?

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA


>>Fetzer is disinfo and that he should be exposed. that doesnt mean slandering everyone who has ever done business with the man.

I saw no slander, I saw caution and questions. Sometimes there is a larger picture too, and we don't have all the information right away.

>>are book burnings next?

This is the classic response to try to intimidate anyone from asking questions, expressing concerns and feeling they are allowed to do that. "Censorship!" "Book burning!" "No critique allowed!" etc.

I'm sorry you don't approve of people interested in more than cheerleading or positive responses. We need to allow the range of responses.

We all wish Sander the best and many support his work. But this is a discussion forum we also have some people bringing up concerns. So what? If there's nothing there than nothing will come of it. No need for strong reactions. All of us get our work looked at closely at one point or another because this is an investigation we are involved in, and we each have to be open to it because if the ability to even ask questions and voice concerns is shut down, we are left unable to call the nonsense when we see it.

Tolerate critique, dissent, analysis. Don't tolerate abuse and slander. Those are two different things. I see no slander anywhere on here.

classic response? i guess

classic response? i guess head of the 911blogger disinfo police would know huh? :-) hows that saying go about those who scream the loudest about something etc.? i forget. i critique people all the time, i know exactly what the word means and im not against that. scrutinize away. i am against censorship in all its forms. you were one of the few that applauded the censorship policy here while it lasted correct? and just when is it ok to speculate? Arabesque gets on me and others when we do it but i guess its ok when it comes to personalities and if they are disinfo or not? whats your guys rules? you guys know whats best for the movement right?

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

Let's all takea deep breath and calm down.

This is not just dirrected at you Chris, but at everyone who is "hoax" fatigued. Which appears to include you, but you can correct me on that point.;-)

Let's remember that the 9/11 attacks, as the official story pushes them, are a big HOAX. So, as 9/11 activists, exposing hoaxes is our raison d'etre.

Now the perpetrators of the 9/11 hoax will happily and cheerfully do what they can to distrupt our efforts. That WILL include perpetration MORE hoaxes. If you prefer to say disinformation or disruption, fine, the semantics don't matter as much as recognizing when we're being fucked with.

Some responses to the KW I've observed are very much like the mainstream public's responses to 9/11 is an Inside Job--even though one preson in particular has blown his credability out of the water by unneccesarily insulting anti-war activists publically, some of us just don't want to believe it. I'll let those people take time to process--I'm not pushing on that point. But the one thing that is beyond doubt is the bad behavior given little provocation.

Now if we can't hold our own people responsible for their actions and words, how do you think we'll keep any cred when asking everyone "not there yet" to hold Cheney, et al responsible for 9/11?

As we are all leaders here, we should ALL be the disinfo police, right? That's why we're here. Not everyone will be interested in doing everything, and that's fine. But if someone thinks something MIGHT be dodgy, you'd want them to tell you, right? Give you a bit of heads up? So you could go a bit more carefully? Wouldn't you be a bit annoyed if you stepped in some shite then found out someone could have warned you but didn't?

I'm not telling anyone what to think. I don't have an opinion on this thread--yet. But given this IS a 9/11 annivereary, and we do know "they are out to get us", caution should be the watch word.

I will agree with you the "temporary moderation policy" was overkill--but I don't think that has anything to do with being cautious about dodgy looking info.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

I'm closing this thread to

I'm closing this thread to try to keep the peace. Agree to disagree and move on.


"one person you know?" - maybe verify this yourself and report back rather than spreading FUD.



Anthrax was discovered in the Urban Moving Systems warehouse on 9/11 (Mossad front), as reported by Wayne Madsen (still looking for corroboration). This could account for the 9/11 anthrax scare at Dick Cheney's office (no honor among thieves).

The most likely US government source for anthrax was exposed by whatreallyhappened.com and others, and it ISN'T "Steven Hatfill."

See link.

"The FBI knows of a man who was caught entering the lab where the Anthrax used in the letters was kept, after he had been fired for a racially motivated attack on a co-worker. So, why is the FBI wasting its time with Steven Hatfill?
News Story identifying Dr. Philip Zack as the man caught entering the Anthrax storage area at Fort Detrick without authorization.

In this story, it is reported that Dr. Zack was caught on a security tape making an unauthorized entry into the Anthrax storage area.

Foreign press picks up story that Anthrax letters were sent by American bio-war scientist ... and that the FBI is dragging its feet on the case.

FBI'S PRIME SUSPECT ON ANTHRAX LETTERS IS JEWISH! No wonder they were dragging their feet.

Salon's story of the attempt to frame Dr. Ayaad Assaad, an Egyptian, for the Anthrax letters"


4.5 billion dollars.! Yeah someone got bought...

It's a good thing 50 planes weren't hijacked and flown into the WTC complex. Someone would really be going bankrupt at the mercy of that man's logic. Obviously something's wrong here. (I wonder if he is one of those 20% who cant find the US on a globe?)

And people actually thought he was one of the good guys? "Oh Eliot please reopen 9/11!!!" Ha.