Thomas Kean & Lee Hamilton Call For The Release Of The 28 Redacted Pages of the 911 Commission ReportJul 24
Written by James McDowell
July 20th, 2014
Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth
CHICAGO AIA CONVENTION ACTIVISTS NET OVER 120 MORE A/E PETITION SIGNERS
BUILDING PROFESSIONALS CAUGHT OFF GUARD ON WTC 7
Chicago-AIA-ConventionExperience has proven that, when presented with indisputable evidence, the people who design and construct buildings for a living quickly grasp the cause of the third worst structural failure in history.
Of course we’re speaking of the 6.5-second demise of the 47-story, steel-framed skyscraper in the World Trade Center known as WTC 7.
But what if, in fact, most building professionals have never even heard about the collapse of this high-rise on 9/11?
This incredible reality — that the majority of our nation’s architects and engineers are oblivious to WTC 7—is one of the primary reasons that AE911Truth headed to the Windy City last month for the 2014 National Convention of the American Institute of Architects. It was the fifth time since 2008 that our non-profit organization has attended this annual event, which this year was held at Chicago’s McCormick Place on South Lake Shore Drive, the largest convention center in North America. The nearly 800 exhibitors and more than 15,000 architects in attendance had an opportunity to hear AE911Truth sound a wake-up call about the impossible claims of the official story of collapse by fire of the three skyscrapers on 9/11/01.
Our volunteers are so passionate about educating the architectural world that that they came from as far away as the UK and from as many as a dozen states in the US to help out in our booth at the Chicago convention.During the three-day convention (June 26-28), Richard Gage, AIA, and his team of volunteers staffed a 10′ x 10′ evidence-packed booth, where attendees dropped by to learn the compelling facts which demonstrate that the Twin Towers and a third, new-to-them building were all destroyed by explosive controlled demolition.
In addition to explaining evidence, answering questions, and handing out the AE911Truth petition for architects to sign, they gave away hundreds of 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out DVDs to those who visited the booth. “Most everyone said that they would be quite willing to receive a call from us in a couple of weeks to ask what they thought about the DVD,” notes AE verification team leader Laura Nieboer. “We have our follow-up work cut out for us.”
Chicago presented what Gage calls “some different challenges from other AIA conventions we’ve attended. In Denver last year, we had a groundswell of volunteers helping us before we even set foot in the convention hall. On the other hand, we went to Chicago with practically zero upfront support.”
But 9/11 activists from near and far rose to the occasion on each of the three days, and by the third day, Saturday, AE911Truth had surpassed even its own expectations, eclipsing the Denver results by amassing more than 120 new petition signers — 100 of them architects or engineers, including four new FAIA members (an FAIA, or Fellow of the American Institute of Architects, is an AIA member who has been recognized for making outstanding contributions to the profession).
July 21, 2014
Kirby says the financial markets are not the only thing controlled; so is the current global chaos. Kirby explains, “The chaos is planned because the architects of the chaos are the globalists. The globalists have a little saying: ‘out of chaos will come order.’ So, what they do is whip up animosity and fear and play groups off of one another. . . . The goal of the globalist, ultimately, is to have one world government, one world currency and one world religion. The whole idea of globalism is to first round countries into regional blocks and then merge the blocks into one super country. These people have contempt for humanity, and they have stated their contempt for humanity. They want to reduce the world population by something of a factor of 80-90%. These globalists have taken control of the U.S., Canada, most of Western Europe and the United Kingdom. These people are dangerous, and these people are seemingly taking the world to the brink.”
by Lucy Steigerwald
July 18, 2014
As we’ve been told since 9/11, the government needs certain special powers in order to keep us safe from terrorism. The PATRIOT Act, FISA Courts, telecom immunity, the NSA looking at your naked pictures – all of this is made or enhanced in the name of fighting the type of monsters who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. Certainly the Fourth Amendment can be weakened in the name of that most noble of goals.
And man, has it! But as I have previously mentioned in this space, the convenient thing for the security state fanatics is that so much of the anti-terrorism work has been done for them already in the name of another cause all together. Frequently, that would be the war on drugs.
Earlier this month, the Administrative Office of the US Courts released their report on 2013 state and federal wiretaps. A great deal of ventures were excluded from the report, most prominently ones which go through the FISA Court. So, this isn’t a terrorism report. But at the same time, it confirms the fact that government powers – assuming they were well used, effective, reasonable, moral, etc., etc. until the end of time – are not for worst case scenarios. They are not for would-be murderers or terrorists. They are for the current panic of the moment. And the panic that has had legs for decades is the one over narcotics. Eighty-seven percent of the 3,115 wiretaps that took place last year were over drugs. Homicide came in at number three at “less than 4 percent of applications.”
February 2, 2014
by Kevin Ryan
President Obama’s 2013 advisory panel on NSA spying included some interesting people considering that the justification for such crimes against democracy always go back to 9/11. One member was Cass Sunstein, who had previously advised the president to “cognitively infiltrate” citizen groups that sought the truth about 9/11. Another panel member was Richard Clarke, the former “counterterrorism czar,” whose opinions on the subject continue to be widely publicized despite suspicions that Clarke might have been in league with the 9/11 terrorists.
In one of several interviews with TV host Bill Maher, a supporter of NSA spying, Clarke suggested that Osama bin Laden was never worried about being caught before he was killed because he “thought he’d get tipped.” Clarke meant that Bin Laden was helped by retired intelligence officials and would be tipped off to any operation. In the same interview, Clarke told Maher that Afghanis were pathetic and that Pakistanis were “pathological liars.”
However, there are good reasons to believe that it is Clarke who is a pathological liar. Those reasons include that it was Clarke who tipped off Bin Laden’s friends in the years before 911, effectively preventing the capture or killing of that alleged terrorist mastermind. Clarke later promoted lies about a man called Abu Zubaydah, whose torture testimony is behind much of the 9/11 Commission Report.
People need to know more about Richard Clarke before taking any more of his comments at face value. The following excerpts from my book Another Nineteen might make that point a little more obvious.
Not Just Another COG
Clarke began his government career in the Ford Administration. He worked as a defense department nuclear weapons analyst and shared a Pentagon office with Wayne Downing, who later became a leader of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). Clarke went on to become President Reagan’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence. In that role, Clarke negotiated for a U.S. military presence in Arab countries including Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, and Saudi Arabia.
In 1984, Clarke was selected to take part in one of the most highly classified projects of the Reagan Administration. This was the secret Continuity of Government (COG) program run by the National Program Office that continued up to and after the attacks of September 11. Other than Clarke, the members of the COG group included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George H.W. Bush, Kenneth Duberstein, and James Woolsey. If not a formal member of the group, Oliver North reported to it and acted on its behalf. Although Cheney and Rumsfeld were not government employees throughout the twenty years that Clarke participated in this official government program, they both continued to participate.
COG was developed to install a shadow “government in waiting” to replace the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Constitution in the event of a national emergency like a nuclear war. In 1998, Clarke revised the COG plan for use as a response to a terrorist attack on American soil. The first and only time that COG was put into action was when Richard Clarke activated it during the 9/11 attacks. As of 2002, that shadow government continued to be in effect as an “indefinite precaution.”
Their foreign-military policy = pure sadism
by Justin Raimondo
July 18, 2014
A group of Palestinian boys is playing on the beach in Gaza, kicking a soccer ball around in the bright sunshine. But not for long: an Israeli missile hits a nearby shack, where their family members keep their fishing boats: it bursts into flames and the boys take off running. But they can’t run fast enough to evade the second shot: four are instantly killed, and several wounded. Ahmed Abu Hassera, who was with them, told Reuters:
“The kids were playing football on the beach. They were all … under the age of 15. When the first shell hit the land, they ran, but another shell hit them all … It looked as if the shells were chasing them.”
The shells were fired from an Israeli ship patrolling off the coast, which was no doubt equipped with the highest hi-tech monitoring system American tax dollars can buy. There isn’t any doubt that the Israelis knew just what they were doing and who they were targeting. The Israeli side practically admits this, albeit sotto voce. A New York Times account of the incident reports:
“Alon Ben-David, a well-sourced Israeli military affairs analyst, said on Israeli television that the first beach blast targeted a structure that Israel believed was used by Hamas. He said the second blast might have been aimed at the running children, perhaps mistaken for militants. He added that given the military’s technologically advanced surveillance equipment, ‘it is a little hard for me to understand this, because the images show that the figures are children.’”
by Andrew P. Napolitano
July 17, 2014
“Chilling” is the word lawyers use to describe governmental behavior that does not directly interfere with constitutionally protected freedoms, but rather tends to deter folks from exercising them. Classic examples of “chilling” occurred in the 1970s, when FBI agents and U.S. Army soldiers, in business suits with badges displayed or in full uniform, showed up at anti-war rallies and proceeded to photograph and tape record protesters. When an umbrella group of protesters sued the government, the Supreme Court dismissed the case, ruling that the protesters lacked standing – meaning, because they could not show that they were actually harmed, they could not invoke the federal courts for redress.
Yet, they were harmed, and the government knew it. Years after he died, longtime FBI boss J. Edgar Hoover was quoted boasting of the success of this program. The harm existed in the pause or second thoughts that protesters gave to their contemplated behavior because they knew the feds would be in their faces – figuratively and literally. The government’s goal, and its limited success, was to deter dissent without actually interfering with it. Even the government recognized that physical interference with and legal prosecutions of pure speech are prohibited by the First Amendment. Eventually, when this was exposed as part of a huge government plot to stifle dissent, known as COINTELPRO, the government stopped doing it.
Now, the government fears the verbal slings and arrows of dissenters, even as the means for promulgating one’s criticisms of the government in general and of President Obama in particular have been refined and enhanced far beyond those available to the critics of the government in the 1970s.
So, what has the Obama administration done to stifle, or chill, the words of its detractors? For starters, it has subpoenaed the emails and home telephone records of journalists who have either challenged it or exposed its dark secrets. Among those journalists are James Risen of The New York Times and my colleague and friend James Rosen of Fox News. This is more personal than the NSA spying on everyone, because a subpoena is an announcement that a specific person’s words or effects have been targeted by the government, and that person continues to remain in the government’s crosshairs until it decides to let go.
by Justin Pavoni
July 15, 2014
Why does everyone care so much about the Middle East? The answer is obvious: it’s all about the oil. Do you really think the United States would give a damn about Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or Libya if they didn’t control so much of the world’s master resource? Not a chance. Seen in this light it’s easy to dismiss the propaganda about American intervention in the region.
War for American freedom? Nope.
War for Iraqi freedom? Nope.
War against terrorism? Nope.
War against WMD? Nope.
Oil? You bet.
War is fought for one reason and one reason only: money. The rest is just a means to manufacture consent on the part of an otherwise peaceful population. Oil, a.k.a. “black gold” is money in more than one way.
First, the availability of cheap excess energy translates directly to economic growth. The largest sources of cheap energy are the conventional elephant fields of the Middle East. Of these, the Ghawar field in eastern Saudi Arabia is the world’s largest. To make a long story short, you can’t manufacture cheap goods without relatively cheap energy. You can’t transport them without cheap oil. Those who control the world’s energy resources have a serious competitive advantage in the world economy.
Second, there’s more at stake than easy access to the world’s supplies of cheap energy. There’s the “petrodollar,” i.e. the methodology by which you must pay for the oil is as important, perhaps more important, than the oil itself. A quick history on the subject is valuable. In 1971 the United States under President Nixon defaulted on its international promise to redeem dollars for gold according to the Bretton Woods monetary agreement of 1944. Justifiably, there was a run on the dollar and it began to rapidly lose its purchasing power. To save the newly fiat currency, the United States (President Nixon and then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger) agreed to defend the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia so long as the Saudis agreed to settle oil contracts exclusively in dollars. The Saudis would reinvest their excess dollars in United States treasury bonds and the Americans would support the corrupt Saudi Regime. All other nations suddenly needed dollars to pay for oil. Defending this arrangement is one of the principal causes of all of the evil that has happened in the region since then.
Published on Jul 12, 2014
VisitHigh-Rise Safety Initiative for more info.