Group calls for new 9/11 probe

" More kook fringe tripe.....by the way, Bush/Cheney have been gone over a year now...time to blame someone else for everything. "

" I had no idea there were that many dumb people in this neck of the state. Let's save town meeting for town business, and leave 9/11 conspiracy theorists for the insane asylum. "

" The previous 2 commenters are the insane kooks here.
Anyone who watches video of the towers and Building 7 falling can see with their own eyes controlled demolition in progress. Building experts not commissioned by the gov't all agree on that. It's time for a truly independent investigation with real power to compel testimony and start prosecutions of the real criminals of 9-11 (Hint: the conspiracy was not hatched in a cave in Afghanistan).
And it's the responsibility of all citizens to demand accountability at all levels of government. Washington DC has not responded to citizen disbelief at their lies on 9-11, so it is our right to start to demand action at the local level and work up. Thanks to the local leaders named in this article for speaking out ! "

" See patriotsquestion911.com and ae911truth.org to view the opinions of hundreds of highly-credentialed scientists, architects, engineers, and others who have publicly and openly stated their professional opinions.

A New York Times/CBS News poll in 2006 found that 81% of adults polled thought the government was either hiding something or mostly lying in the "official" account of 9/11. The margin of error was 4%.

The scientific and physical evidence that the WTC Towers and Building 7 were brought done by controlled demolition is overwhelming. "

" Just what we should be spending our money on. I suppose it will come from that "Free Federal Grants Fund"! Enough said! "

" these "truthers" are left wing moonbats and all normal people should boycott The Pub" "

" You 911 truthers have way too much time on your hands. I watched the towers come down live (on TV). I've watched the video 1000 times since then. There was no controlled demolition and people who think that the government did it for whatever reason you kooks think are nuts. Plain and simple, nuts. Including all your so called scientists, college professors, engineers and anyone else who is silly enough to give this garbage more than a wave off is wasting their time.

And please, stop with the polls. CBS and the New York Times? Like they have any credibility at all?

What a waste of time and poor use of town meetings. Leave the fringe kook politics in the college classrooms and out of our town meetings. "

" "Highly-credentialed scientists, architects, and engineers" can be kooks too... I know, because I work with some. A degree in one of those professions doesn't make you an expert in government conspiracy. Believe me, anyone who's shouting 'conspiracy' is being laughed at and marginalized by his equally-qualified peers in the office because he's probably a paranoiac whose view of the world is extreme fantasy. Stop being so naive! "

" Many senior veterans of the US Counter-terrorism and Intelligence services also do not believe the official account of 9/11.

- Ray McGovern, former Chairman of the CIA's National Intelligence Estimates (NIE) "I think at simplest terms, there's a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke."

- Bill Christison, former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis. "I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. ... An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. ...The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them."

- Mel Goodman, former Division Chief of the CIA's Office of Soviet Affairs and Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. "The final [9/11 Commission] report is ultimately a coverup. I don't know how else to describe it."

For more info see the article "41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11" http://patriotsquestion911.com/#Articles "

" Do you all really believe the US Government will ever admit to this? You can get 10 million signatures if you want. It will not matter. I think you people are all just wasting your time. You should all be putting your efforts into something more usefull!!!!! "

" This is good. Too many ihonest & informative people have passed thru Keene for them NOT to make this happen.

GOD BLESS "

" Well then, maybe "Harvey M" and the other geniuses here can explain precisely what we're seeing in the following video if it's not what the author (and common sense) say it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O36ReZixfiY "

" Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission Lee Hamilton: "we got started late; we had a very short time frame... we did not have enough money... We had a lot of people strongly opposed to what we did. We had a lot of trouble getting access to documents and to people. ... So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail"

Chairman of 9/11 Commission Thomas H. Kean: "FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue... We, to this day, don't know why NORAD told us what they told us... It was just so far from the truth." "

" Harvey M:

Wow, besides totally inventing that number (1000) you apparently know all there is to know about those collapses by just looking at them! How convincing!

Apart from the fact that by looking at them, I still see aspects completely ignored by the NIST investigations, it's WAY BETTER to actually do scientific research on that audio and video material. It's WAY BETTER to dispassionately research 9/11 using the scientific method.

My conclusion: scientific fraud is extremely pervasive in government circles, such as NIST, part of the Department of Commerce.

This phenomenon has a familiar name: Bush science. Please Google NIST whistleblower.

Technical people, please visit:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

Try to take in the counterscience. It'll do your skeptical brain some good. And please remember: if you find anything that might disqualify the science there, and you've done your homework, then contact the authors and inform them. This how a healthy scientific process works, unless the corrupted political science so often produced by the government. Truly, it's a disgrace.

P.S. HarveyM, that site is only for healthy thinkers, not deceitful and obsessed pseudoskeptics. "

" For all you other readers who have at least a smattering of rationality...

Look at every one of the government supporter's comments. Notice the following:
1. Each calls everybody names, such as "moonbats", "kooks", "wingnuts", etc. As if calling someone a name was a sound argument for their point of view.
2. Each provides NO EVIDENCE for their viewpoint other than "I saw it on live TV, and it wasn't a demolition". As if you should believe what they say, simply because they, the acknowledged expert (lol), know better than anybody else.
3. They claim that getting to the bottom of the worst crime of this millenium is wasting valuable time. If this is a waste of time, show me something that is not a waste of time.
4. They ignore any and all substantive evidence and refuse to acknowledge all the other true experts and highly credible people who have come forward.

You have to wonder whether these people are paid to say these things or whether they really are that foolish. "

" 1,000 Architects & Engineers Call for a Real 9/11 Investigation
Press Conference and Dinner February 19, 2010

First I would like to congratulate the good people in the Keene area and to thank you for your efforts. The nation ans indeed the world is paying attention.

Japan is getting close to its own investigation.

AE911Truth will hold a press conference on Friday, February 19, at 11:00 AM at the Marines Memorial Club and Hotel in San Francisco. We will announce and honor the milestone of our achievement of obtaining 1,000 architects and engineers (A/E's) petitioning for a real investigation into the destruction of the 3 World Trade Center skyscrapers.

The Marine Memorial Club and Hotel in the heart of San Francisco provides a first-class backdrop for announcing AE911Truth's achievement

Invitations are being sent to more than 400 local AIA members, to many local, national, and international media outlets, and to more than 15,000 AE911Truth.org petition signers and supporters from around the world.

The press conference will include a large-screen scrolling display of all 1,000 A/E's; statements by Richard Gage, AIA, founder of AE911Truth and several petition signers; and a short ten-minute presentation of "9/11: Blueprint for Truth" – the explosive evidence for the engineered destruction of the 3 World Trade Center skyscrapers. A press kit including the AE911Truth DVD will be made available to all attendees.

We will also be inviting various leaders in the 9/11 Truth movement to this milestone event. We are working with We Are Change and other 9/11 Truth organizations to deliver hardcopy petition evidence press kits to every member of Congress.

A fund-raising and working luncheon will be held after the press conference in the hotel. It is open to all who RSVP to an imminent email invitation. Join us on February 19 in San Francisco to honor this remarkable achievement and meet some of those who have made AE911Truth one of the most respected voices in the 9/11 Truth movement.

Following the above events we will host a professional conference open to our architect and engineer petition signers. RSVP and join us from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. for this critical get together of fellow professionals to further organize strategy for AE911Truth. We will be reviewing our existing evidence content and programs as well as employing our expertise and energy in amplifying and disseminating the AE911Truth message. Our goal: a real WTC investigation.

Mr. Gage, said "It's an extraordinary statement that more than 1,000 architects and engineers have put their credibility and reputations on the line to demand a new investigation into 9/11. Compare this number to a dozen or so that are willing to publicly support the official NIST findings. We expect big breakthroughs in 2010."

Michael Newman, NIST Media Relations, when asked if NIST had any comments on the fact that over 1,000 architects and engineers have signed the petition, said that "NIST stands behind its reports." Its position is the same as it always has been, and that "NIST saw no evidence of explosions or melted steel whatsoever."

NIST will have another wake-up call soon. The voices of thousands of petition signers of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and everyone who supports a new investigation grow louder and louder. Soon our irrefutable evidence in support of a new investigation will no longer be ignored. We now have the solid foundation of 1,000 A/E petitioners. We are launching the effort to force NIST to retract their flawed and fraudulent reports. Using all avenues available, whether through the Office of the Inspector General, or through Congressional investigations, factually correct findings based on the evidence must become the official position. The American public must come to see such public statements of denial by NIST as being totally unacceptable. "

" I comment here on the nanotechnology aspect of Jerry Mazza’s masterful review (Rock Creek Free Press, January 2010, page 6) of David Ray Griffin’s extraordinary 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False.

By the time we (Dorion Sagan – my eldest son and Sciencewriters partner – and I) met David Griffin in 2003 in his native habitat at the Center for Process Studies (which is on the campus of the Claremont School of Theology in southern California), he had written over two dozen books, none of which I had ever read or even heard of. We immensely enjoyed a three-day scientific-philosophical meeting on the Darwinian-evolutionary view of life that had been organized by Griffin’s sage mentor, the sweet-tempered but razor sharp, Jimmy Carter-sounding, octogenarian professor emeritus and director, John B. Cobb, Jr. The results of this fascinating meeting have since been published (Cobb, ed. 2008).

At that meeting, Griffin’s talk was sober, academic, competent, scholarly – and entirely new to me: Christian theology in a much broader philosophical context than any to which I had ever been exposed.The science-friendly philosophical outlook Griffin espoused apparently was developed by Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947), the English mathematician-philosopher who became a Harvard professor, or by Cobb. Why would I have known anything about this theological-philosophical work? My own expertise after all is in protoctist and organellar genetics. With close colleagues I reconstruct the origin and evolution of nucleated cells in the Proterozoic Eon. Where I understood DRG’s talk at all, he made clear to me his honesty. Truth, especially scientifically/empirically established truth, seemed intrinsic to his Christianity. As a typical agnostic scientist overtly critical of organized, and even disorganized, religion, I was surprised by the scientific commitment to approaching empirical truth in a religious context rather than the usual authority-pleasing consensus.

Griffin went on to elaborate that, although as a Whiteheadian he embraces the methods and results of science, he is critical of the entire international scientific enterprise as generally practiced today. Not only do scientists extrapolate their intrinsically specialized empirical knowledge into intellectual territory where it does not belong, but they don’t heed Whitehead’s recognition that, after all, scientists –like all people – have an emotional life and an inner spirit. The acclaimed “objectivity of science,” on close scholarly inspection (by, say, Cobb, Griffin and other Whiteheadians), often translates into tribalism, jingoism, naiveté, denial of obvious truths, uncritical service to The State, and other forms of profoundly dangerous ignorance. Scientists, as do all groups of people, share unstated philosophical assumptions. For example, they not only have faith in the consistency and “knowability” of the real world, but they often assume that the concrete particulars of the world are adequately described by the abstractions that have proved useful for limited purposes in their own disciplines – an assumption that Whitehead called the “fallacy of misplaced concreteness.”

On the return trip east from this meeting, I read, non-stop, DRG’s seminal book on 9/11, The New Pearl Harbor. Since then I have watched the “aging theologian” (his self-description as quipped in the excellent video-graphed lecture “9/11 and Nationalist Faith” (or was it 9/11: Let’s Get Empirical? Both are highly recommended) metamorphose from a compelling, careful scholar to a brave and extraordinary orator (but still careful scholar). Griffin has become a superb politician with a single agenda item: We must re-open public inquiry into the events of September 11, 2001, especially the collapse of the World Trade Center. "

" Any investigation should include the anthraz attacks.

The investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks ended as far as the public knew on July 29, 2008, with the death of Bruce Ivins, a senior biodefense researcher at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) in Fort Detrick, Md. The cause of death was an overdose of the painkiller Tylenol. No autopsy was performed, and there was no suicide note.

Less than a week after his apparent suicide, the FBI declared Ivins to have been the sole perpetrator of the 2001 Anthrax attacks, and the person who mailed deadly anthrax spores to NBC, the New York Post, and Sens. Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy. These attacks killed five people, closed down a Senate office building, caused a national panic, and nearly paralyzed the postal system.

The FBI's six-year investigation was the largest inquest in its history, involving 9,000 interviews, 6,000 subpoenas, and the examination of tens of thousands of photocopiers, typewriters, computers and mailboxes. Yet it failed to find a shred of evidence that identified the anthrax killer—or even a witness to the mailings. With the help of a task force of scientists, it found a flask of anthrax that closely matched—through its genetic markers—the anthrax used in the attack.

This flask had been in the custody of Ivins, who had published no fewer than 44 scientific papers over three decades as a microbiologist and who was working on developing vaccines against anthrax. As custodian, he provided samples of it to other scientists at Fort Detrick, the Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, Ohio, and other facilities involved in anthrax research.

According to the FBI's reckoning, over 100 scientists had been given access to it. Any of these scientists (or their co-workers) could have stolen a minute quantity of this anthrax and, by mixing it into a media of water and nutrients, used it to grow enough spores to launch the anthrax attacks.

View Full Image

Getty Images
.Consequently, Ivins, who was assisting the FBI with its investigation, as well as all the scientists who had access to the anthrax, became suspects in the investigation. They were intensely questioned, given polygraph examinations, and played off against one another in variations of the prisoner's dilemma game. Their labs, computers, phones, homes and personal effects were scrutinized for possible clues.

As the so-called Amerithrax investigation proceeded, the FBI ran into frustrating dead ends, such as its relentless five-year pursuit of Steven Hatfill, which ended with an apology in 2007 and Mr. Hatfill receiving a $5.8 million settlement from the U.S. government as compensation. Another scientist, Perry Mikesell, became so stressed by the FBI's games that he began to drink heavily and died of a heart attack in October 2002.

Eventually, the FBI zeroed in on Ivins. Not only did he have access to the anthrax, but FBI agents suspected he had subtly misled them into their Hatfill fiasco. A search of his email turned up pornography and bizarre emails which, though unrelated to anthrax, suggested that he was a deeply disturbed individual.

The FBI turned the pressure up on him, isolating him at work and forcing him to spend what little money he had on lawyers to defend himself. He became increasingly stressed. His therapist reported that Ivins seemed obsessed with the notion of revenge and even homicide. Then came his suicide (which, as Eric Nadler and Bob Coen show in their documentary "The Anthrax War," was one of four suicides among American and British biowarfare researchers in past years). Since Ivins's odd behavior closely fit the FBI's profile of the mad scientist it had been hunting, his suicide provided an opportunity to close the case. So it held a congressional briefing in which it all but pronounced Ivins the anthrax killer.

But there was still a vexing problem—silicon.

Silicon was used in the 1960s to weaponize anthrax. Through an elaborate process, anthrax spores were coated with the substance to prevent them from clinging together so as to create a lethal aerosol. But since weaponization was banned by international treaties, research anthrax no longer contains silicon, and the flask at Fort Detrick contained none.

***

Yet the anthrax grown from it had silicon, according to the U.S. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. This silicon explained why, when the letters to Sens. Leahy and Daschle were opened, the anthrax vaporized into an aerosol. If so, then somehow silicon was added to the anthrax. But Ivins, no matter how weird he may have been, had neither the set of skills nor the means to attach silicon to anthrax spores.

At a minimum, such a process would require highly specialized equipment that did not exist in Ivins's lab—or, for that matter, anywhere at the Fort Detrick facility. As Richard Spertzel, a former biodefense scientist who worked with Ivins, explained in a private briefing on Jan. 7, 2009, the lab didn't even deal with anthrax in powdered form, adding, "I don't think there's anyone there who would have the foggiest idea how to do it." So while Ivins's death provided a convenient fall guy, the silicon content still needed to be explained.

The FBI's answer was that the anthrax contained only traces of silicon, and those, it theorized, could have been accidently absorbed by the spores from the water and nutrient in which they were grown. No such nutrients were ever found in Ivins's lab, nor, for that matter, did anyone ever see Ivins attempt to produce any unauthorized anthrax (a process which would have involved him using scores of flasks.) But since no one knew what nutrients had been used to grow the attack anthrax, it was at least possible that they had traces of silicon in them that accidently contaminated the anthrax.

Natural contamination was an elegant theory that ran into problems after Congressman Jerry Nadler pressed FBI Director Robert Mueller in September 2008 to provide the House Judiciary Committee with a missing piece of data: the precise percentage of silicon contained in the anthrax used in the attacks.

The answer came seven months later on April 17, 2009. According to the FBI lab, 1.4% of the powder in the Leahy letter was silicon. "This is a shockingly high proportion," explained Stuart Jacobson, an expert in small particle chemistry. "It is a number one would expect from the deliberate weaponization of anthrax, but not from any conceivable accidental contamination."

Nevertheless, in an attempt to back up its theory, the FBI contracted scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Labs in California to conduct experiments in which anthrax is accidently absorbed from a media heavily laced with silicon. When the results were revealed to the National Academy Of Science in September 2009, they effectively blew the FBI's theory out of the water.

The Livermore scientists had tried 56 times to replicate the high silicon content without any success. Even though they added increasingly high amounts of silicon to the media, they never even came close to the 1.4% in the attack anthrax. Most results were an order of magnitude lower, with some as low as .001%.

What these tests inadvertently demonstrated is that the anthrax spores could not have been accidently contaminated by the nutrients in the media. "If there is that much silicon, it had to have been added," Jeffrey Adamovicz, who supervised Ivins's work at Fort Detrick, wrote to me last month. He added that the silicon in the attack anthrax could have been added via a large fermentor—which Battelle and other labs use" but "we did not use a fermentor to grow anthrax at USAMRIID . . . [and] We did not have the capability to add silicon compounds to anthrax spores."

***

If Ivins had neither the equipment or skills to weaponize anthrax with silicon, then some other party with access to the anthrax must have done it. Even before these startling results, Sen. Leahy had told Director Mueller, "I do not believe in any way, shape, or manner that [Ivins] is the only person involved in this attack on Congress."

When I asked a FBI spokesman this month about the Livermore findings, he said the FBI was not commenting on any specifics of the case, other than those discussed in the 2008 briefing (which was about a year before Livermore disclosed its results). He stated: "The Justice Department and the FBI continue working to conclude the investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks. We anticipate closing the case in the near future."

So, even though the public may be under the impression that the anthrax case had been closed in 2008, the FBI investigation is still open—and, unless it can refute the Livermore findings on the silicon, it is back to square one.

I am currently completing a book on the 9/11 Commission. "

" What we can say today, with certainty, is that if we are to believe that al Qaeda orchestrated the events of 9/11 then we do not know much about al Qaeda. Alternatively, there was a far more powerful and highly connected system of intelligence and financial networks, represented by organizations like Carlyle, Kissinger, SAIC and Halliburton, that converged upon the events of 9/11. That other system continues to profit from the 9/11 attacks, and uses the fear and rage generated by al Qaeda-attributed terrorism to its own advantage. Understanding and destroying terrorism might simply be a matter of understanding and destroying the organizations that continue to profit from 9/11. "

" 27 / 17 Saints "

" 13 foreign countries, 3 FBI offices, and the CIA warned of upcoming attacks. Why were the warnings ignored?

CIA head Tenet and Richard Blee told Condi on July 10, 2001 that an al Qaeda attack would be coming in the next few weeks. Later they said that if she had acted on their warning, 9/11 might have been prevented.

Why no air defense for 100 minutes?

How can asymmetrical structural damage and asymmetrical fires yield a collapse that propagates across a robust, cross-braced structural core to yield a symmetrical, total structural failure proceeding "essentially at free fall" according to NIST?

If fires weakened the structural steel, why then does NIST not have the steel samples to prove it?

Because NIST's investigation stops at the point of collapse initiation, it manages to sidestep the most baffling aspects of the towers' failure -- symmetry, speed, totality, the total pulverization of 220 acres of concrete floors, and the unexplained presence of molten iron in the debris pile.

I am glad that the people of New Hampshire are pursuing this issue through local democratic means. "

" jldsh'asiu'go;ejg'eoqrjjg'eojg'we'fo;wjgf'operj'poqewrjg'peqojg'reopjg'
oepj/lk;lsjkudflkjsalfj'ojt'rokt'oerpkt
r[opktjdgjhakjwhlghwrwghdr;htg;woie

What I typed above makes about as much sense as what these kook fringers are saying. "

" There is a consensus among 1,000 failed and/or unemployed architects and engineers that need jobs right now and we need to spend federal money to allow them to investigate every lead for the next 10 years, unabated. Anyone who doubts this is an outlier, a naysayer, a denier. The science is settled and we must continue to spend money to maintain the pursuit of global climate change - er , um, I mean Truth about 9/11.



STOP THE GLOBAL LYING.. and pay no attention to the kooks behind the curtain...we are not making this stuff up, this time. And no, you may not have access to our internal emails....





. "

" Architects and engineers with amazing credentials and backgrounds are becoming outspoken 911 Truth activists. The scientific evidence continues to be the driving force of the 911 Truth Movement, with WTC 7 as the smoking gun that gets jaw dropping attention. Thanks for covering this most important topic. "