Skip to content

9/11 – A Cheap Magic Trick

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


Tag: missile

By Rady Ananda
Global Research
April 29, 2011

Bush court dismisses 9/11 suit against Bush officials, orders sanctions

Rather than judicially review significant evidence in the events of September 11, 2001, on April 27, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s dismissal of an Army Specialist’s complaint against former Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard Myers.

One of Plaintiff April Gallop’s attorneys, William Veale, didn’t know whether to relate the decision to “Kafka, Orwell, Carroll, or Huxley,” referring to the absurdity and dearth of reason emanating from the court regarding the deadliest attack on U.S. soil the nation has ever faced.

“The Court’s decision, analogous to reviewing an Indictment in a liquor store hold-up without mentioning the guy walking in with a gun, refuses to acknowledge even the existence of the three defendants much less what they were doing that morning or saying about it afterwards,” Veale added.

Of the three judges on the panel, John Mercer Walker, Jr. is first cousin of former President George H.W. Bush and first cousin once removed of George W. Bush, who used 9/11 to manipulate public emotion to support passage of the unconstitutional PATRIOT Acts and waging illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East. According to Wikipedia, Walker shares a grandfather with the 41st president, George Herbert Walker, whose daughter married Prescott Bush. A motion to force Judge Walker’s removal from the case was denied, despite a clear conflict of interest.

The lawsuit, prepared by the Center for 9/11 Justice, accuses the defendants of conspiring to facilitate the terrorist attacks of 9/11 that killed 3000 Americans and which has resulted in the deaths of many more, due to the toxicity of the clean-up conditions at Ground Zero. The plaintiff and her son were both injured in the attack on the Pentagon, multiple videos of which the government has refused to release to the public.

Read more

Aidan Managhan
Journal of 9/11 Studies

Aidan Monaghan is an engineer and an open records researcher of the 9/11 attacks. He is the author of the book Declassifying 9/11: A Between the Lines and Behind the Scenes Look at the September 11 Attacks.

Here’s the abstract:

It has been the consensus of informed observers that the loss or alteration of Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) information for the four September 11 flights was caused by accused hijackers allegedly seizing control of the aircraft flight decks and manually turning off or adjusting each plane’s Mode S (Mode Select) transponder. This was presumably for the purpose of evading detection and interception by U.S. air defense systems. However, this view appears to be based only on circumstantial information – the simple loss or change of SSR flight data to Air Traffic Control (ATC) – and seems unsupported by conclusive facts. Following these transponder operation changes, ATC was still able to tag and track the primary radar returns of three flights and estimate their locations, directions, ground speeds, and even altitude changes.

Read more

Michel Chossudovsky (Editor)
August 2012
Global Research

The 911/ Reader is part of Global Research’s Online Interactive I-Book Reader, which brings together, in the form of chapters, a collection of Global Research feature articles, including debate and analysis, on a broad theme or subject matter. To consult our Online Interactive I-Book Reader Series, click here.


The tragic events of September 11, 2001 constitute a fundamental landmark in American history. a decisive watershed, a breaking point. Millions of people have been misled regarding the causes and consequences of 9/11.

September 11 2001 opens up an era of crisis, upheaval and militarization of American society.

A far-reaching overhaul of US military doctrine was launched in the wake of 9/11.

Endless wars of aggression under the humanitarian cloak of “counter-terrorism” were set in motion.

9/11 was also a stepping stone towards the relentless repeal of civil liberties, the militarization of law enforcement and the inauguration of “Police State USA”.

September 11, 2001 marks the onslaught of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), used as a pretext and a justification by the US and its NATO allies to carry out a “war without borders”, a global war of conquest.

At eleven o’clock, on the morning of September 11, the Bush administration had already announced that Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) and the Pentagon. This assertion was made prior to the conduct of an indepth police investigation.

CIA Director George Tenet stated that same morning that Osama bin Laden had the capacity to plan “multiple attacks with little or no warning.”

Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks “an act of war” and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would “make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them”.

Former CIA Director James Woolsey, without mentioning Afghanistan, pointed his finger at “state sponsorship,” implying the complicity of one or more foreign governments. In the words of former National Security Adviser, Lawrence Eagleburger, “I think we will show when we get attacked like this, we are terrible in our strength and in our retribution.”

That same evening at 9:30 pm, a “War Cabinet” was formed integrated by a select number of top intelligence and military advisors. And at 11:00 pm, at the end of that historic meeting at the White House, the “War on Terrorism” was officially launched.

The tragic events of 9/11 provided the required justification to wage war on Afghanistan on “humanitarian grounds”, with the full support of World public opinion and the endorsement of the “international community”. Several prominent “progressive” intellectuals made a case for “retaliation against terrorism”, on moral and ethical grounds. The “just cause” military doctrine (jus ad bellum) was accepted and upheld at face value as a legitimate response to 9/11.

In the wake of 9/11, the antiwar movement was completely isolated. The trade unions and civil society organizations had swallowed the media lies and government propaganda. They had accepted a war of retribution against Afghanistan, an impoverished country in Central Asia of 30 million people.

The myth of the “outside enemy” and the threat of “Islamic terrorists” was the cornerstone of the Bush administration’s military doctrine, used as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the repeal of civil liberties and constitutional government in America.

Amply documented but rarely mentioned by the mainstream media, Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA going back to the Soviet- Afghan war. This was a known fact, corroborated by numerous sources including official documents of the US Congress, which the mainstream media chose to either dismiss or ignore. The intelligence community had time and again acknowledged that they had indeed supported Osama bin Laden, but that in the wake of the Cold War: “he turned against us”.

The 9/11 Commission Report has largely upheld the “outside enemy” mythology, heralding Al Qaeda as the “mastermind” organization behind the 9/11 attacks.

The official 9/11 narrative has not only distorted the causes underling the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, it has also erased the historical record of US covert support to international terrorism, while creating the illusion that America and “Western Civilization” are threatened.

Without an “outside enemy”, there could be no “war on terrorism”. The entire national security agenda would collapse “like a deck of cards”. The war criminals in high office would have no leg to stand on.

After 9/11, the campaign of media disinformation served not only to drown the truth but also to kill much of the historical evidence on how this illusive Al Qaeda “outside enemy” had been fabricated and transformed into “Enemy Number One”.

Read more

September 10, 2016
by Paul Craig Roberts

There are many conspiracy theories about 9/11. The US government’s own expanation of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory in which a few Saudi Arabians outwitted the American national security state. Little doubt that many of the more imaginative conspiracy theories were created for the purpose of stigmatizing any skepticism, no matter how well reasoned and supported, of the official story.

When thinking about 9/11, it is important to differentiate expert opinion from improbable explanations.

Among the expert opinion are 2,600 structural engineers and high-rise architects who comprise Architects & Engineers for 9/11 truth and have written to Congress asking for a real investigation, Firefighters for 9/11 truth, Pilots for 9/11 truth, physicists and chemists who analyzed the dust from the twin towers and report finding reacted and unreacted materials used in controlled demolitions, and former government officials who understand that a security failure as great as 9/11 would have produced an immediate and exacting investigation.

These groups of qualified and experienced people say that the official story of 9/11 is false. Architects, engineers, and scientists say that the official story is physically impossible. Firefighters and WTC maintenance personnel say that there were numerous explosions within the towers and that the first explosions were in the sub-basements prior to the buildings being hit by airplanes. Experienced military and civilian pilots say the maneuvers of the aircraft are beyond the capability of the alleged hijackers. Both co-chairman of the 9/11 Commission and the legal counsel have written books in which they have said that information was withheld from the Commission, that the US government lied to the Commission, and that the Commission was set up to fail

In other words, the hard evidence simply does not support the official story.

We know that the official story is false. We don’t know who is responsible or the purpose the event was intended to serve. However, circumstantial evidence strongly supports suspicion of the neoconservatives whose high positions in the government would have enabled them to succeed with a false flag attack and to delay and divert any investigation until the official story was set in stone. We also know from the “dancing Israelis” that elements in the Israeli government had advance notice of the attack as Israeli agents were set up ready to film the destruction of the twin towers.

Read more

February 29, 2016
By Prof. Edward Curtin
Global Research, February 28, 2016

The Neoconservative Threat To World Order is a compendium of his essays written between February 2014 and July 2015. Most of them deal with Washington’s destabilization of Ukraine and its ongoing threats against Russia. Roberts sees this new Cold War as rooted in the neoconservative doctrine of world hegemony. He correctly argues that this is based on the Wolfowitz Doctrine, written in 1992 by neoconservative Undersecretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz (a signatory of the 1997 Project for the New American Century), which became the blueprint for NATO’s expansion to Russia’s borders and the growing threat of nuclear war that we are faced with today. In the preface Roberts writes:

Once in place the Wolfowitz Doctrine resulted in the Clinton regime abandoning the guarantees that the George H. W. Bush administration had given to Gorbachev that NATO would not move one inch to the East. In violation of the U.S. government’s word, former Warsaw Bloc countries were incorporated into NATO. Then NATO was used to attack Yugoslavia and Serbia. Then the George W. Bush regime withdrew the U.S. from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and began locating anti-ballistic missile bases on Russia’s borders. Washington orchestrated “color revolutions” in the former Russian provinces of Georgia and Ukraine. When the Orange Revolution failed to deliver Ukraine into Washington’s hands, Washington spent $5 billion cultivating Ukrainian politicians and creating pro-American Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) that were used in Washington’s 2014 overthrow of the elected government of Ukraine.

Read more

by Kevin Ryan
911 Blogger

People sometimes wonder why is it important to investigate the alleged hijackers and others officially accused of committing the 9/11 crimes. After all, the accused 19 hijackers could not have accomplished most of what happened. The answer is that the official accounts are important because they are part of the crimes. Identifying and examining the people who created the official 9/11 myth helps to reveal the ones who were responsible overall.

The people who actually committed the crimes of September 11th didn’t intend to just hijack planes and take down the buildings—they intended to blame others. To accomplish that plan the real criminals needed to create a false account of what happened and undoubtedly that need was considered well in advance. In this light, the official reports can be seen to provide a link between the “blaming others” part of the crimes and the physical parts.

Pushing the concept of “Islamic Terrorism” was the beginning of the effort to blame others, although the exact 9/11 plan might not have been worked out at the time. This concept was largely a conversion of the existing Soviet threat, which by 1989 was rapidly losing its ability to frighten the public, into something that would serve more current policy needs. Paul Bremer and Brian Jenkins were at the forefront of this conversion of the Soviet threat into the threat of Islamic terrorism. Both Bremer and Jenkins were also intimately connected to the events at the World Trade Center.

The concerted effort to propagandize about Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden (OBL) seems to have begun in earnest in 1998. That’s when the African embassy bombings were attributed to OBL and the as-yet unreported group called Al Qaeda. The U.S. government responded with bombings of Sudan and Afghanistan and, with help from the New York Times, began to drum up an intense myth about the new enemy.

“This is, unfortunately, the war of the future,” Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said. “The Osama bin Laden organization has basically declared war on Americans and has made very clear that these are all Americans, anywhere.”

In retrospect, it is surprising that this was the first reference to Al Qaeda in the New York Times, coming only three years before 9/11. More surprising is that The Washington Post did not report on Al Qaeda until June 1999, and its reporting was highly speculative about the power behind this new threat.

“But for all its claims about a worldwide conspiracy to murder Americans, the government’s case is, at present, largely circumstantial. The indictment never explains how bin Laden runs al Qaeda or how he may have masterminded the embassy bombings.”

Despite this skepticism from The Post, the reports about Al Qaeda continued in an odd mixture of propaganda and doubt. For example, The Times reported on the trial of the men accused of the African embassy attacks in May 2001. That article contradicted itself saying that “prosecutors never introduced evidence directly showing that Mr. bin Laden ordered the embassy attacks” and yet that a “former advisor” to Bin Laden, one Ali Mohamed, claimed that Bin Laden “pointed to where a truck could go as a suicide bomber.” The fact that Mohamed had worked for the U.S. Army, the FBI, and the CIA was not mentioned.

Other facts were ignored as well. That OBL had worked with the CIA and that Al Qaeda was basically a creation of CIA programs like Operation Cyclone were realities that began to fade into the background. By the time 9/11 happened, those facts were apparently forgotten by a majority of U.S. leaders and media sources. Also overlooked were the histories of people like Frank Carlucci and Richard Armitage, who played major roles in Operation Cyclone and who remained powerful players at the time of the 9/11 attacks.

Read more

by Jim Willie
14 September 2015

The ultimate patriotic act is to invest the life savings in Gold & Silver, which does honor to real money, shows disdain for paper merchants who rule the central banks, and forces nations to put forth honest sound money in usage. It is important to recall the 9/11 event, however based in reality, not the official story. Honor should be given to the 2500 victims of the mass murder event. The official story makes far less sense than the Kennedy assassination, while the two events appear to be front and back bookends of the same Fascist takeover of the United States Govt. The Patriot Act was a fascist manifesto, much like the Enabling Act installed in Germany over seven decades ago. The two acts have a 90% correlation and overlap, yet the American public remains largely in the dark on the similarity in template. The USCongress passed the controversial Patriot Act, which has totally opposite direction to patriotism, under threat of anthrax in their ventilation system (rumored to be engineered by the FBI). The creation of the Homeland Security Agency should ring loud gongs about the Gestapo similarities. That the US & London & Swiss bankers are fascists with roots to 1930 fascists should also be brought to public attention. The US bankers on Wall Street actually had loans extended to the German Nazis, a fact the public seems to overlook. Operation Paperclip, which opened the US gates to the several hundred bankers, scientists, and industrial captains should have been a wakeup call to Americans, but they remain asleep. Imagine a nation that makes a mockery of citizens seeking the truth on the event, calling them disparagingly the Truthers. Recall that truth is the enemy of fascist regimes, and the early victim of any war.

The 9/11 event was the coming out party for the American Fascists. It was also a complex sequence of criminal events, to abrogate $230 billion in Russian bonds, to wipe clean the Black Eagle Fund on gold obligations. But in the immediate, it was a bank heist. Few Americans realize that the World Trade Center housed the largest bank in the Western world. Thus the object of the bank robbery, where $100bn in bearer bonds were stolen, $100bn in diamonds were stolen, and $100bn in gold bullion was stolen. For reasons tied to national security, no investigations or claims are permitted. It was also an opportunity to test out some nano-technology and extreme micro nuclear demolition methods. Over 2000 people perished on that day. Around 200 police, firemen, and emergency medical professionals also died on that day. The event sealed the fate of the nation, to become a fascist enclave, the exceptional nation, the home of the new brown shirts. Much credit is due to the courageous and diligent scientific groups like AE1000, the Architects & Engineers, who have contradicted the official nonsensical silly reports which serve as the Official 9/11 Commission report, far more vacant and illogical and baseless than the Warren Report of 1963. Both were hastily produced under political pressure, both with Papa Bush fingerprints at the crime scene. The group of scientists have produced a powerful body of evidence in dispute, yet over half the US nation believes the fairy tale in the official USGovt story. It was a fascist takeover of the USGovt and establishment of the banking system as the power center.

All manner of war and sanctions cannot prevent the removal of the USDollar from its global currency reserve privilege. Too much abuse from violent war, sponsored terrorism, $trillion gifts to bankers, backdoor bailouts to bankers, has caused a global upheaval and resistance. Sanctions are the device used against nations which oppose the USDollar in usage, primarily in crude oil payments. The USGovt has refused to liquidate the big banks, which have served as the Western seat of power and pilferage. The series of sanctions have backfired badly. The obstacles to gas pipelines cannot be maintained. The movement against the corrupt toxic USDollar has gathered tremendous momentum. It has an African monetary policy attached, an incredibly destructive policy, and worse, it is called stimulus. The return of the Gold Standard is inevitable. The big question is how much destruction the USGovt, its powerful military, and its subversive security agencies will permit before the legitimate monetary system is put in place. The path seems clear, that the legitimate system will first arrive on the trade front, deposing the USTreasury Bill in back pressure like excrement from the global bowels.

Read more


NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) held a training exercise just over a month before September 11, 2001, which had some uncanny similarities to the 9/11 attacks. The exercise, called Fertile Rice, was based around the scenario of Osama bin Laden–the man who supposedly ordered the 9/11 attacks–organizing an aerial attack on a high-profile government building in Washington, DC–one of the cities attacked on September 11.

NEADS personnel were scheduled to take part in an exercise on September 11. We therefore need to consider whether the similarities between the scenario for the Fertile Rice exercise and some of the incidents they had to deal with on the morning of September 11 caused them to mistake real-world events for part of the day’s exercise and thereby impaired their ability to respond to the 9/11 attacks.

NEADS, based in Rome, New York, was responsible for monitoring and defending the airspace in which the hijackings occurred on September 11, and was consequently responsible for coordinating the U.S. military’s response to the 9/11 attacks. [1] It ran an exercise called Fertile Rice each week. [2] On August 4, 2001–five and a half weeks before 9/11–Fertile Rice was based around the scenario of Osama bin Laden’s operatives attacking a target in Washington. [3]

An information sheet on the exercise outlined the details. It stated that the scenario for the exercise involved an “Osama bin Laden threat to [the] U.S.” Bin Laden had “reportedly acquired at least one and possibly two” unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The UAV he’d obtained was believed to be the Russian-developed “Colibri,” which had been modified to be launched off a ship.

Bin Laden’s operatives intended to carry out an attack in the next 24 to 36 hours. Although their exact target was unknown, it was believed that they intended to strike a “highly visible U.S. government target” that was probably in the Washington area.

The Colibri they would use to carry out the attack was a propeller-driven drone aircraft designed to perform various military and civilian missions. It was 4.25 meters long, had a wingspan of 5.9 meters, and its maximum speed was 155 miles per hour. It was fitted with sophisticated electronic jamming equipment, as well as equipment for monitoring electronic communications and radar.

The ship transporting the Colibri to the Washington area had left a port in the Middle East and was set to rendezvous with one of the terrorists off the coast of Norfolk, Virginia, on August 4. This person would provide the final targeting information that would be programmed into the Colibri. The ship was believed to be carrying additional military equipment, including shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, rocket-propelled grenades, automatic weapons, and plastic explosives.

The Colibri’s “weapon payload” was “reportedly some type of fuel-air explosive” that would be “activated with an altimeter device.” [4] Fuel-air explosives are highly destructive weapons. They spray an explosive mist and then ignite the vapor, thereby creating a blast far larger than a conventional weapon produces. [5]

The exact form that the Colibri’s “weapon payload” would take in the scenario is unstated in the information sheet. It could perhaps have been a fuel-air bomb that the UAV would drop onto its target. Alternatively, the mock terrorists’ intention may have been to fly the Colibri into its target such that the fuel-air explosive it carried would detonate on impact.

Read more


In the fourteen years since the September 11 attacks, there have been numerous highly newsworthy stories that were grossly under-reported or outright ignored by the major media. Even so-called “alternative media” have not done their job in reporting this subject. Some, like the Huffington Post and Daily Kos, have policies censoring 9/11 questions.

If any of the following stories had been properly reported, it could have sparked a public demand for a new investigation.

Here are a few of the bombshells missed:

1. Suppressed Oral Histories Corroborate Demolitions. On August 12, 2005, The New York Times announced the release of more than 12,000 pages of oral history in the form of transcripts of interviews with 503 firefighters and emergency medical responders. The interviews were conducted between October of 2001 and January of 2002 under the direction of Thomas Von Essen, who was New York City’s fire commissioner at the time of the attack. Among the eyewitness observations preserved in the oral history are accounts of hearing and feeling explosions and ground tremors, as well as seeing dust clouds and debris flying from the Twin Towers as they were coming down. The accounts can be read here:

2. 9/11: Press For Truth. In 2006, a documentary about the September 11 attacks was released. The film features interviews with the Jersey Girls — four widows whose husbands were killed in the World Trade Center attacks and who were convinced that the truth about 9/11 was being suppressed by the government. They and other family members pushed relentlessly for answers, until finally the federal government reluctantly formed the 9/11 Commission. The Jersey Girls became members of the Family Steering Committee, which was tasked with providing questions for the Commission to answer. But to their disappointment and dismay, a full 70 percent of their questions were ignored by the Commission and never answered in the Commission’s final report. Without the advocacy of the Jersey Girls, there never would have been an investigation — shallow and contrived though it was — into the biggest terrorist attack on US soil in history. Unbelievably, their 9/11: Press for Truth documentary was ignored by major media. You can read about the film here: and watch it here:

3. Without Precedent. The same year, 2006, the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, released their book Without Precedent, in which they detail all the ways their investigation was a failure and was based on government lies. The facts they revealed should have been a blockbuster story and should have compelled a new investigation. And not only the co-chairs, but a majority of the Commission members, after they served, spoke out about its failure to find the truth of what really happened at the World Trade Center that fateful day. You can read the commissioners’ reactions here: and watch a video here:

4. Bin Laden Not Wanted for 9/11. On June 6, 2006, The Muckraker Report contacted the FBI and asked why the Most Wanted poster of Usama Bin Laden made no mention of his involvement in the attacks of September 11. An FBI spokesman revealed the reason: “There’s no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” This bombshell statement by the FBI should have been a lead news story. The details are explained here:

5. Explosives Expert Says WTC 7 Was a Controlled Demolition. In 2007, Europe’s top demolition professional, Danny Jowenko, was shown footage of World Trade Center Building 7’s destruction on the afternoon of September 11, 2001. This 47-story skyscraper was not hit by a plane, yet it imploded at free-fall acceleration and landed in a heap in its own footprint. After watching Building 7 fall, Jowenko declared with absolute certainty that it was brought down by explosives in a controlled demolition. His reaction can be seen here:

6. NIST Admits to the Free-fall of Building 7. In November 2008, after being criticized by physics teacher David Chandler, the National Institute of Standards and Technology finally admitted that World Trade Center Building 7 came down at free fall in the first few seconds of its collapse. NIST had previously maintained that free-fall was an impossibility, since the structural components in the lower floors of the building would have provided resistance and prevented it from falling at the speed of gravity. Hence, NIST’s stunning admission means that either the impossible occurred or that WTC 7 had to have been brought down with explosives. You can read all the details about this free-fall collapse here:

7. Scientific Paper on Nano-thermite. In April 2009, a scientific paper was published by a team of independent researchers who discovered a highly engineered explosive-incendiary material in several dust samples collected near the World Trade Center site. In their paper, titled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, these nine scientists, led by Professor of Chemistry Niels Harrit from the University of Copenhagen, concluded: “[T]he red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.” Read their paper here: and learn more about the subject here:

8. Sibel Edmonds’ OBL Bombshell. On August 1, 2009, FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds revealed on the Mike Malloy show that “the U.S. maintained intimate relations with Bin Laden all the way up until that day of September 11.” If Bin Laden did indeed work for the US government until 9/11, as Edmonds claims, that fact completely undermines the official story. To read about her interview, go here:

9. 1,000 Architects and Engineers. On February 19, 2010, press conferences were held around the country by 1,000 architects and engineers, who called for a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11. Yet there was no media coverage. Today, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth membership includes more than 2,350 (and counting) licensed and/or degreed architects and engineers. Find out more here:×8 and get the latest here:

10. The Toronto Hearings. On September 8-11, 2011, in honor of the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, expert witnesses gathered at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada, to present evidence-based research that called into question the official story. This event was known as The Toronto Hearings on 9/11. Over a period of four days, experts in structural engineering, physics, chemistry, history, and philosophy gave professional testimony to an international panel of distinguished judges. Afterward, the panel of judges, in conjunction with the hearing steering committee, would go on to publish their final analysis of the evidence and a call for a new investigation. To see the hearings in their entirety or read the final report, go here: For a summary of the strongest evidence over the four days of hearings, watch here:

  • A congressional intelligence report had the explosive pages redacted
  • The two men who authored them are likely to be called to appear in court
  • The lawsuit has been brought by victims’ families against Saudi kingdom
  • Suit claims links between two hijackers and former Saudi figures in US
  • By Tim Macfarlan
    10 August 2015

    A federal lawsuit could reveal details implicating the Saudi government in 9/11.

    A congressional intelligence report contains 28 censored pages reportedly linking Saudi officials to two of the Saudi hijackers.

    The Obama administration refuses to publish the pages, despite requests from Democrats and Republicans in Congress.

    The World Trade Center south tower burst into flames after being struck by hijacked United Airlines Flight 175 on September 11, 2001. Allegations linking the Saudi government with the attacks could soon be revealed

    Now, the two investigators who authored the section are expected to be called to testify in a federal lawsuit against the kingdom of Saudi Arabia brought by families and insurers of the victims of the atrocity.

    Michael Jacobson was an FBI investigator and Dana Lesemann a Justice Department attorney when they authored the explosive 28-page section, reports the New York Post.

    In addition, the pair are believed to have uncovered more evidence linking the Saudi Embassy in Washington, the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles and the two terrorists.

    They did so while working for the independent 9/11 Commission, from whose final report the most grave allegations against the Saudis were stricken.

    Read more

    Better Tag Cloud