Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

How false flag attacks are manufactured by the world's elite.

Archive

Archive for August, 2011


August 28, 2011
This guest blog is from Kevin Ryan, co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies.

Recent developments among supporters of the US government’s version of events indicate that they plan to begin blaming Saudi Arabia for the attacks of September 11, 2001. There is, in fact, much evidence suggesting complicity by some elements within the Saudi government. But that fact only further implicates western powers due to the close relationship between the Saudi royal family, which runs the Saudi government, and deep state controlling interests that have partnered with and manipulated the Saudi royal family for many decades. Blaming Saudi Arabia would, however, make a lot of sense if seizing resources, including the world’s greatest oil reserves, was what the war on terror has always been about.

Two weeks ago I spoke to NPR producer, Alex Kingsbury, who asked if I felt the release of the 28-pages of redacted material from the Joint Congressional Inquiry might help to solve the mysteries still surrounding 9/11. Those redacted pages, and much of the 9/11 Commission report that followed, have always seemed to be a kind of “Get into Saudi Arabia free” card for the powers that be. Kingsbury was interested in knowing whether the redacted pages, which are thought to contain significant references to Saudi Arabia, were of interest to me personally. Of course they would be, I said, but we should remember that the government of Saudi Arabia is far from representative of its people.

Similarly, a recent interview with “Counterterrorism Czar,” Richard Clarke, has been the subject of considerable discussion. Ostensibly, Clark’e objective with this interview was to make the controversial suggestion that two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers were targets for recruitment by the CIA. What many have failed to emphasize, however, is that Clarke was simultaneously suggesting that the two alleged hijackers were actually working for the government of Saudi Arabia at the time of the attacks.

About a month ago, military intelligence officer and 9/11 staffer, Miles Kara, wrote to me asking if I was aware of the publication of a book called The Eleventh Day by Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan. Kara declared that this new book was – “the definitive work, to date, on 9/11.” Having since had a chance to borrow a copy of this book from the library, I can say that it is a malevolent piece of propaganda that attempts to persuade the ill-informed of three things.

The first thing that the Summers and Swann book attempts to do is malign the 9/11 truth movement. For example, the authors suggest that the movement is well represented by people like video-fakery and Star Wars beam advocate, James Fetzer, and it has been well answered by government employees and simple-minded contrarians like Ryan Mackey. Summers and Swann also state that well-sourced samples of World Trade Center dust, collected using completely appropriate chain of custody forms, are not good sources of information yet long-time propagandist, Gerald Posner, and Weekly Standard contributor, Thomas Joscelyn (who recently tried to link Iran to 9/11), are excellent sources.

The second goal of the book is to propose that the partial release of documents by the 9/11 Commission in the last few years has answered all the unanswered questions about the attacks. It’s not clear if the authors had a chance to look at many of those documents though. For example, one of them says that the training school for Hani Hanjour, whom the 9/11 Commission called “the operations most experienced pilot,” questioned Hanjour’s pilot certificate because he had “no fundamental skills / poor English” and they “wondered if the cert was false.”[1] This is but one of many examples in which these newly released documents directly contradict the 9/11 Commission report, instead of supporting it as Summers and Swann claim.

Most importantly, this new book attempts to blaze a new trail for Saudi complicity in the attacks of 9/11. Unfortunately, although the book details a number of reasons why the Saudi government should be investigated for supporting the alleged perpetrators of 9/11, it paradoxically avoids many of the important Saudi links to 9/11. The authors appear to do this in an effort to accuse the Saudis while simultaneously covering-up evidence that western corporations and western government leaders were really behind many of the Saudi links.

Link to the rest of the article Playing the “Get into Saudi Arabia free card”

NEW YORK PREMIERE OF DOCUMENTARY
9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out
By Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Sept. 7, 7:00pm
Theatre 80
80 St. Marks Place, @ 1st Avenue, New York, NY
Take 6 train to Astor Place

Sept. 11, 6:30pm
Unitarian Church of All Souls
1157 Lexington Avenue, @ 80th Street, New York, NY
Take 6 train to 77th Street Station
Richard Gage, founder of AE911Truth is the featured speaker.

Admission: $10

The 10th anniversary of 9/11 activities in New York will include the premiere of this long anticipated film that promises to add a critically important dimension of understanding to this seminal event in world history – 9/11.

The film features cutting-edge WTC forensic evidence from more than 40 credentialed experts in their fields – high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and more.

9/11 author and researcher Kevin Ryan and James Corbett discuss the Toronto Hearings, a four-day event taking place from September 8th to the 11th at Ryerson University that will present evidence that calls into question the official story of 9/11.

Link to interview 2011-08-26%20Kevin%20Ryan.mp3

Written by Andrea Dreger
August 23, 2011

Editorial: NIST likes to point out how many scientists and engineers worked on its WTC investigation, and how much time was spent. But the number of participants and the time and money spent does not guarantee a thorough investigation.

That NIST’s investigation is not in line with the most basic requirements of the scientific method is demonstrated by a closer look at NIST’s examination of the steel, which was based on the premise that nothing other than airplane impact damage and the subsequent fires brought down the Twin Towers, and where the most relevant question – why did the strong steel frames below the impact area give way – is neglected. NIST cannot justify its failure to adequately examining the steel with its published results; examining the evidence adequately is a step that needs to be done at the beginning of an investigation.

(Abridged version)1
NIST’s exclusion of most of the steel from being adequately examined

The 236 pieces of structural WTC steel that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) “catalogued” for its WTC investigation included 55 columns that NIST discuss in paragraph 4.1 “CORE COLUMNS” in NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, of which NIST analyzed only four for damage and failure modes. The remaining 51 columns were excluded from being examined for damage and failure modes based on the argument that only columns with a known as-built location2 in or near the impact and fire areas were of interest for the WTC investigation.3 A similar argument was applied by NIST to the 90 “catalogued” perimeter wall panels4 and their columns. NIST describes “in-depth” only those five of the 90 panels that were located in the airplane impact zone of WTC 1.5 Regarding the remaining 85 panels, NIST states:6 “All damage found on the panels located outside of the impact zone was ascribed to events occurring during and after the collapse, therefore, in-depth descriptions were not reported.” The damage and failure modes of about 128 perimeter columns are reported in summary fashion in just a few sentences and in one table with statistical data.7 The following quote by NIST8 underlines that no adequate damage and failure analysis was conducted for those columns: “”While these damage features were observed and recorded for each individual column, no effort was made to quantify the frequency with which the modes occurred for each column …” Likewise, the damage modes of the spandrel connections and end plate connections for panels from outside the impact area and for unidentified panels are summarized in only a few sentences and in tables with statistical data.9

Any serious investigation into the reasons why the Twin Towers were completely destroyed would attempt to find out why the strong steel frames below the impact and fire areas lost their strength and gave way. But NIST deliberately decided not to do this. NIST excluded — quite systematically and based on the explicit argument that only the few columns with a known as-built location in the impact and fire areas were of interest for the investigation – the columns from the parts that failed and gave way so unexpectedly, i.e., the columns with as-built locations below the impact and fire areas, from being adequately examined for their damage and failure modes. Scientists and engineers in relevant fields should know that those parts of the structure that gave way need to be included in the investigation of a building failure. There are many indications that NIST’s scientists and engineers have been actually well aware that the failure of the load bearing structures of the Twin Towers cannot be investigated by focusing exclusively on the collection of data concerning the impact and fire areas. For example, NIST developed a “structural database” that included the data for the structural members from bottom to top. They developed “global structural models” for both Towers that stretched over their full heights. And they analyzed the performances of the undamaged structures for three loading cases, and checked the demand/capacity ratio for the structural components.10 NIST examined (as part of the same “Project 3: Mechanical and Metallurgical Analysis of Structural Steel,” which systematically excluded steel from outside the impact and fire areas from being adequately examined) samples of all steel qualities used throughout the buildings to check if they complied with the demanded quality standards.11

NIST cannot justify the exclusion of the steel from being adequately examined for damage and failure modes by its published result of the investigation, i.e., the “how the point of collapse initiation was reached” models and the few lines with suggestions why “global collapse ensued”. The named models and suggestions were presented by NIST as results of the investigation, so they should not have influenced decisions at the beginning of the investigation. Examining the evidence and collecting data based on the evidence was a task that NIST needed to perform before any hypotheses were formulated. But NIST excluded columns from outside the impact and fire areas, and columns with an unknown as-built location, from being adequately examined for their damage and failure modes at the very beginning of the investigation. The above quote, “that no effort was made …,” is one of the indications that show that it is not just a reporting problem in the published final report, but a problem of NIST’s study design. The named steel was indeed not adequately examined, but excluded from the very beginning.

Link to the rest of the article How NIST Avoided a Real Analysis of the Physical Evidence of WTC Steel

Presented by the International News Net. A made for television event at Walker Stage in lower Manhattan on September 11th, 2011

11:30 till 5pm
Suggested Donation: $10
56 Walker Street, Manhattan
Take 6 or N trains to Canal St. Station
Walker St. is 1 block south of Canal St., between Broadway and 6th Avenue
Join us for the 10th anniversary of 9/11 as we examine issues of media coverage, plane evidence of pilot and airplane anomolies, procedural discrepancies, the Bin-Laden effect, the 9/11 Commission cover-up, the NIST cover-up, remembering the reality not the myth, and more.

Our panel presentation will contain objective analysis gathered from 10 years of independent research by leading professionals into the events leading up to, the day of, and following that fateful day.

Speakers include:
Mike Rivero, whatreallyhappened.com
Richard Gage, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Wayne Madsen, former Naval officer, former NSA, investigative journalist, thewaynemadsenreport.com
Barbara Honneger, author of “October Surprise”, researcher of Pentagon attack
Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Journalism, NYU
Webster Tarpley, author & historian
More to be announced soon.

Our panel presentations are sure to be a very special discourse in objective analysis gathered from 10 years of alternative research into the events of 9/11 which pose profound questions of the official narrative. Afterall, 10 years is time enough for truth!

This event will be followed by a premier screening of 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out. Founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Richard Gage, will be there to introduce this new, ground-breaking film.

Location: All Souls Church
80th & Lexington Avenue, Manhattan
6:30 pm
Take 6 train at Canal St. & Broadway uptown to 77th Street Station, then walk 3 blocks north
Suggested Donation: $10

In this compelling documentary you will hear 40 top experts in fields of architecture, physics, metallurgy, engineering, and more share their professional analysis of the destruction of the 3 WTC towers as well as expose the lack of science employed by NIST. Also, several psychologists were interviewed to explain the psychological barriers often encountered when people first consider the alternative research of 9/11. See the trailer at AE911911truth.org.

Contact Information How the World Changed After 9/11

By Paul Craig Roberts
August 24, 2011
Information Clearing House

In a few days it will be the tenth anniversary of September 11, 2001. How well has the US government’s official account of the event held up over the decade?

Not very well. The chairman, vice chairman, and senior legal counsel of the 9/11 Commission wrote books partially disassociating themselves from the commission’s report. They said that the Bush administration put obstacles in their path, that information was withheld from them, that President Bush agreed to testify only if he was chaperoned by Vice President Cheney and neither were put under oath, that Pentagon and FAA officials lied to the commission and that the commission considered referring the false testimony for investigation for obstruction of justice.

In their book, the chairman and vice chairman, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, wrote that the 9/11 Commission was “set up to fail.” Senior counsel John Farmer, Jr., wrote
that the US government made “a decision not to tell the truth about what happened,” and that the NORAD “tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public.” Kean said, “We to this day don’t know why NORAD told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth.”

Most of the questions from the 9/11 families were not answered. Important witnesses were not called. The commission only heard from those who supported the government’s account. The commission was a controlled political operation, not an investigation of events and evidence. Its membership consisted of former politicians. No knowledgeable experts were appointed to the commission.

One member of the 9/11 Commission, former Senator Max Cleland, responded to the constraints placed on the commission by the White House: “If this decision stands, I, as a member of the commission, cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the commission had full access. This investigation is now compromised.” Cleland resigned rather than have his integrity compromised.

To be clear, neither Cleland nor members of the commission suggested that 9/11 was an inside job to advance a war agenda. Nevertheless, neither Congress nor the media wondered, at least not out loud, why President Bush was unwilling to appear before the commission under oath or without Cheney, why Pentagon and FAA officials lied to the commission or, if the officials did not lie, why the commission believed they lied, or why the White House resisted for so long any kind of commission being formed, even one under its control.

One would think that if a handful of Arabs managed to outwit not merely the CIA and FBI but all 16 US intelligence agencies, all intelligence agencies of our allies including Mossad, the National Security Council, the State Department, NORAD, airport security four times on one morning, air traffic control, etc., the President, Congress, and the media would be demanding to know how such an improbable event could occur. Instead, the White House put up a wall of resistance to finding out, and Congress and the media showed little interest.

During the decade that has passed, numerous 9/11 Truth organizations have formed.

There are Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Remember Building 7.org, and a New York group which includes 9/11 families. These groups call for a real investigation.

David Ray Griffen has written 10 carefully researched books documenting problems in the government’s account. Scientists have pointed out that the government has no explanation for the molten steel. NIST has been forced to admit that WTC 7 was in free fall for part of its descent, and a scientific team led by a professor of nano-chemistry at the University of Copenhagen has reported finding nano-thermite in the dust from the buildings.

Larry Silverstein, who had the lease on the World Trade Center buildings, said in a PBS broadcast that the decision was made “to pull” Building 7 late in the afternoon of 9/11. Chief fire marshals have said that no forensic investigation was made of the buildings’ destruction and that the absence of investigation was a violation of law.

Some efforts have been made to explain away some of the evidence that is contrary to the official account, but most of the contrary evidence is simply ignored. The fact remains that the skepticism of a large number of knowledgeable experts has had no effect on the government’s position other than a member of the Obama administration suggesting that the government infiltrate the 9/11 truth organizations in order to discredit them.

The practice has been to brand experts not convinced by the government’s case “conspiracy theorists.” But of course the government’s own theory is a conspiracy theory, an even less likely one once a person realizes its full implication of intelligence and operational failures. The implied failures are extraordinarily large; yet, no one was ever held accountable.

Moreover, what do 1,500 architects and engineers have to gain from being ridiculed as conspiracy theorists? They certainly will never receive another government contract, and many surely lost business as a result of their “anti-American” stance. Their competitors must have made hay out of their “unpatriotic doubts.” Indeed, my reward for reporting on how matters stand a decade after the event will be mail telling me that as I hate America so much I should move to Cuba.

Scientists have even less incentive to express any doubts, which probably explains why there are not 1,500 Physicists for 9/11 Truth. Few physicists have careers independent of government grants or contracts. It was a high school physics teacher who forced NIST to abandon its account of Building 7’s demise. Physicist Stephen Jones, who first reported finding evidence of explosives, had his tenure bought out by BYU, which no doubt found itself under government pressure.

We can explain away contrary evidence as coincidences and mistakes and conclude that only the government got it all correct, the same government that got everything else wrong.

In fact, the government has not explained anything. The NIST report is merely a simulation of what might have caused the towers to fail if NIST’s assumptions programed into the computer model are correct. But NIST supplies no evidence that its assumptions are correct.

Building 7 was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report, and many Americans are still unaware that three buildings came down on 9/11.

Let me be clear about my point. I am not saying that some black op group in the neoconservative Bush administration blew up the buildings in order to advance the neoconservative agenda of war in the Middle East. If there is evidence of a coverup, it could be the government covering up its incompetence and not its complicity in the event. Even if there were definite proof of government complicity, it is uncertain that Americans could accept it. Architects, engineers, and scientists live in a fact-based community, but for most people facts are no match for emotions.

My point is how uninquisitive the executive branch including the security agencies, Congress, the media, and much of the population are about the defining event of our time.

There is no doubt that 9/11 is the determinant event. It has led to a decade of ever expanding wars, to the shredding of the Constitution, and to a police state. On August 22 Justin Raimondo reported that he and his website, Antiwar.com, are being monitored by the FBI’s Electronic Communication Analysis Unit to determine if Antiwar.com is “a threat to National Security” working “on behalf of a foreign power.”

Francis A. Boyle, an internationally known professor and attorney of international law, has reported that when he refused a joint FBI-CIA request to violate the attorney/client privilege and become an informant on his Arab-American clients, he was placed on the US government’s terrorist watch list.

Boyle has been critical of the US government’s approach to the Muslim world, but Raimondo has never raised, nor permitted any contributor to raise, any suspicion about US government complicity in 9/11. Raimondo merely opposes war, and that is enough for the FBI to conclude that he needs watching as a possible threat to national security.

The US government’s account of 9/11 is the foundation of the open-ended wars that are exhausting America’s resources and destroying its reputation, and it is the foundation of the domestic police state that ultimately will shut down all opposition to the wars. Americans are bound to the story of the 9/11 Muslim terrorist attack, because it is what justifies the slaughter of civilian populations in several Muslim countries, and it justifies a domestic police state as the only means of securing safety from terrorists, who already have morphed into “domestic extremists” such as environmentalists, animal rights groups, and antiwar activists.

Today Americans are unsafe, not because of terrorists and domestic extremists, but because they have lost their civil liberties and have no protection from unaccountable government power. One would think that how this came about would be worthy of public debate and congressional hearings.

——————————————————————————————-
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was appointed by President Reagan Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury and confirmed by the US Senate. He was Associate Editor and columnist with the Wall Street Journal, and he served on the personal staffs of Representative Jack Kemp and Senator Orrin Hatch. He was staff associate of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, staff associate of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress, and Chief Economist, Republican Staff, House Budget Committee. He wrote the Kemp-Roth tax rate reduction bill, and was a leader in the supply-side revolution. He was professor of economics in six universities, and is the author of numerous books and scholarly contributions. He has testified before committees of Congress on 30 occasions.

Kevin Ryan will be on NPR Thursday, August 25th, at 10 am ET (7 am PST). Unfortunately they have recently reduced his air time from one hour down to 10-minutes. He will be the only 9/11 skeptic on this 2-hour show about 9/11 skeptics. Instead, they will have Jim Meigs from Popular Mechanics and Johnathan Kay starting at 10 am ET. The show is called ‘On Point.’ http://onpoint.wbur.org

Call-in number: 1-800-423-8255

A scientific study analyzing over 30 million economic actors shows that an elite 147 actors control a vast amount of global upstream and downstream financial transactions.

Dprogram.net
August 23, 2011

(ScienceNews) – For many years conventional wisdom has said that the whole world is controlled by the monied elite, or more recently by the huge multi-national corporations that seem to sometime control the very air we breathe. Now, new research by a team based in ETH-Zurich, Switzerland, has shown that what we’ve suspected all along, is apparently true. The team has uploaded their results onto the preprint server arXiv.

Using data obtained (circa 2007) from the Orbis database (a global database containing financial information on public and private companies) the team, in what is being heralded as the first of its kind, analyzed data from over 43,000 corporations, looking at both upstream and downstream connections between them all and found that when graphed, the data represented a bowtie of sorts, with the knot, or core representing just 147 entities who control nearly 40 percent of all of monetary value of transnational corporations (TNCs).

In this analysis the focus was on corporations that have ownership in their own assets as well as those of other institutions and who exert influence via ownership in second, third, fourth, etc. tier entities that hold influence over others in the web, as they call it; the interconnecting network of TNCs that together make up the whole of the largest corporations in the world. In analyzing the data they found, and then in building the network maps, the authors of the report sought to uncover the structure and control mechanisms that make up the murky world of corporate finance and ownership.

To zero in on the significant controlling corporations, the team started with a list of 43,060 TNCs taken from a sample of 30 million economic “actors” in the Orbis database. They then applied a recursive algorithm designed to find and point out all of the ownership pathways between them all. The resulting TNC network produced a graph with 600,508 nodes and 1,006,987 ownership connections. The team then graphed the results in several different ways to show the different ways that corporate ownership is held; the main theme in each, showing that just a very few corporations through direct and indirect ownership (via stocks, bonds, etc.) exert tremendous influence over the actions of those corporations, which in turn exert a huge impact on the rest of us.

The authors conclude their report by asking, perhaps rhetorically, what are the implications of having so few exert so much influence, and perhaps more importantly, in an economic sense, what the implications are of such a structure on market competitiveness.

More information: The network of global corporate control, Stefania Vitali, James B. Glattfelder, Stefano Battiston, arXiv:1107.5728v1 [q-fin.GN] http://arxiv.org/abs/1107.5728

Abstract
The structure of the control network of transnational corporations affects global market competition and financial stability. So far, only small national samples were studied and there was no appropriate methodology to assess control globally. We present the first investigation of the architecture of the international ownership network, along with the computation of the control held by each global player. We find that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure and that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity” that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers.

Copy of the complete study Scientific Study Shows 137 Elite Entities Control Global Finances

Site Administrator Note: Look for the rats to turn on each other as the truth comes out about 9/11. While Israel was involved in engineering 9/11, they were not the only ones.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

When an event occurs that that fundamentally changes the dynamics of global geopolitics, there is one question above all others whose answer will most assuredly point to its perpetrators. That question is “Qui bono?”. If those so indicted are in addition found to have had both motive and means then, as they say in the US, it’s pretty much a slam-dunk.

And so it is with the events of 9/11.

Discounting the ‘Official narrative’ as the absurdity it so clearly is, there are just two organisations on the entire planet with the expertise, assets, access and political protection necessary to have both executed 9/11 and effected its cover-up to date (ie the means). Both are Intelligence Agencies – the CIA and Israel’s Mossad – but only one had a compelling motive – Mossad. That motive dovetailed perfectly with the Neocon PNAC agenda, with it’s explicitly stated need for “…a catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” [1] in order to mobilise US public opinion for already planned wars, the effects of which would be to destroy Israel’s enemies.

This article marshals evidence for the proposition that “Israel did it”.

Click on the link for the rest of the article 9/11 : Israel did it

Link to The Official 2001 FBI Docs On Urban Moving Systems and the Dancing Israelis on 9/11

Message from Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth:

Join the ever-growing worldwide AE911Truth 10th Anniversary Team. Our educational 10th anniversary action plan launches an array of events designed to bring broad local public attention to the truth about the destruction of the three World Trade Center high-rises on 9/11. Your participation is required in this massive action plan now being implemented in cities around the world. We are engaging in open, frank public discussion about the events of 9/11 in local communities everywhere.

AE911Truth volunteers across the U.S. Canada, Europe and beyond are making telephone calls to our petition signers, inviting everyone to get involved. In fact we now have petition signers in 96 countries. We are still seeking volunteers to call petition signers in some countries outside the U.S. If you have not received a call, please visit our AE911Truth 10th anniversary web page, see what’s going on and join us! As soon as you volunteer to help, our team of regional coordinators will help you to connect with other AE911Truth petition signers in your area.

The AE911Truth 10th anniversary web page provides you with detailed but easy to follow guides to our four big actions:

Judge, DA’s and others will be hearing from AE911truth supporters all over the country
1) Contact legal and law enforcement professionals in your community and ask them to look at the explosive evidence for themselves.

2) Hold a daytime vigil at your local county courthouse (or other government building as appropriate). This should be a respectful public presence along with a local press conference to get the AE911Truth message out to your local community. The message of course is the need for a new WTC investigation – based on the forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony indicating controlled demolition.

Be sure to see the 4 minute trailer now in case you missed it earlier
3) Host a premiere screening of the new AE911Truth documentary, 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out and introduce people in your community to the credibility and depth of expertise in AE911Truth petition signers. Preorder your copy of the 9/11: Explosive Evidence DVD and register your event to be listed online.

4) Gather a small team of AE911Truth supporters and visit the local office of your congressional representative or member of parliament, and show them the powerful short version of the new AE911Truth DVD. Congress is on recess in late September.

Let’s work together, starting today, to take advantage of the public attention surrounding the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and bring about a positive change in public understanding about the truth of the 9/11 events.

AE911Truth’s online store has a full range of materials to assist you in making a high quality professional presentation in your community. Volunteer to be a leader in AE911Truth’s worldwide action plan. Choose which range of actions work for you in your community. Please sign-up to help today!

Sign up online or place a direct telephone call to these regional coordinators in the U.S. and Canada:

Pacific/Northwest (AK, WA, OR, HI) – Rodger Herbst, 425-780-8757

California (CA) – Chris Bowman, 619-255-7746

Mountains/Plains (ND, SD, NE, KS, MT, ID, WY, CO) – John Meaders, 909-576-3328

Midwest (OH, IN, IL, MI, MO, IA, MN, WI) – David Arnold, 314-952-6257, or Stan Beattie, 248-851-1673

Southwest (OK, NM, TX, AZ, NV) – Bryan Black, 903-886-4595

Southeast (VA, NC, SC, FL, GA, AL, MS, LA, AR, TN, KT, WV) – Mike Smith, 404-890-6321 or Dave Rickerson, 727-543-3343

Mid-Atlantic (NY, NJ, PA, DE, MD, DC) – David Slesinger, 443-683-8725

New England (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT) – Richard Krushnic, 617-276-7839, or Wayne Coste, 860-234-5405

Canada – James MacDonald, 604-733-5504

Better Tag Cloud