Frivolous: April Gallop Lawyers to Pay Fines and Adhere to “Sanctions”

February 3, 2012

Back in April of 2011, April Gallop’s court case against Dick Cheney and others, for playing parts to a conspiracy on 9/11, was determined to be frivilous. 

However, it was long before then that people within our own movement knew this court case was doomed. Why? Read here and scroll down.

*A blogger named “Vullich” said this quite clearly in May, 2011:

Indeed, the kitchen sink approach seems “set-up to fail“.  It lumps together the strongest evidence with the baseless nonsense as though it is all the same.  And as we all know, if someone had a large lawsuit about a complex topic, and inserted within it were the equivalent of (to most Americans) “and aliens landed in the middle of the event and then flew away and no one noticed,” any judge would go out of his way to dump it just to keep from discrediting himself with ever even considering it.

Pentagon flyovers, plane swapping, etc are on the level of nutso for most Americans, and when even the movement itself rejects those claims, a judge would look like a total idiot to buy into them.

Set-up to fail.

This has nothing to do with heroic acts, wishes or intentions.

One of many important statements made by “jimd3100″ on the same thread was this, “Gallop offers not a single fact to corroborate her allegation of a ‘meeting of the minds’ among the conspirators.”

Brian @ Nor Cal Truth    *late edit

source: Reuters      Feb 3, 2012

A federal appeals court on Thursday sanctioned lawyers behind a lawsuit accusing former officials in the Bush administration of orchestrating theSept. 11 attacks.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ordered two California lawyers to pay $15,000 in addition to double what the government spent defending the case. For the next year, the lead lawyer behind the litigation must inform other federal courts in the circuit of the sanctions against him.

Three attorneys — Dennis Cunningham, William Veale and Mustapha Ndanusa — filed the lawsuit in 2008 on behalf of April Gallop, a member of the U.S. Army injured in the Pentagon attack on Sept. 11, 2001. The lawyers accused then-Vice President Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld of causing the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in order to create a political atmosphere that would allow the U.S. government to pursue domestic and international policy objectives. The suit alleged conspiracy to cause death and bodily harm and a violation of the Antiterrorism Act.

U.S. District Judge Denny Chin dismissed the case in 2010, ruling that the complaint was frivolous and a product of “cynical delusion and fantasy.” A three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit upheld that decision, imposing $15,000 in sanctions on the three lawyers for filing the suit.

Read the rest of this entry »

9 Comments | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact

January 9, 2012

by John D. Wyndham   source: 9/11 Blogger   Jan 9, 2012

In ongoing research into the Pentagon attack the following peer-reviewed paper has now been published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies:

“The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact” by John D. Wyndham. http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Wyndham1.pdf

As stated in the abstract, this paper shows that, of all the theories about what caused the damage and debris at the Pentagon on 9/11, a large plane impacting the Pentagon is in best accord with the majority eye witness testimony and main physical evidence, and is by far the most plausible theory. The failure of the 9/11 truth movement to reach consensus on this issue after almost a decade is largely due to a failure to rigorously apply the scientific method to each proposed theory.

This work is supported by recent papers by Frank Legge and David Chandler:

http://stj911.org/legge/Legge_Chandler_NOC_Refutation.html

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/12/27/addendum-to-the-paper-ref…

In these papers, Legge and Chandler show the path required for the flyover theory is impossible as the wing loading is excessive and the bank angle would be far steeper than anything reported by the many observers.

1 Comment | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

Mondays on 95.1 FM The Bridge: Ongoing 9/11 Discussions

September 27, 2011

Nor Cal Truth    Sep 27, 2011

Milo is the host of Touch, a daily program from 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific on The Bridge, 95.1 FM in Guerneville. Milo has invited me (Brian Romanoff) to be a regular guest on his show to try to bring more light into the events of 9/11. I appreciate the opportunity and I hope you enjoy the show.

This week we discuss the Pentagon.

Available as a live-stream every Monday 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific at the website provided below:

The Bridge is supported by a volunteer staff.

Leave a Comment » | 9/11, 95.1 FM "The Bridge", Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77

September 24, 2011

Nor Cal Truth   Sep 24, 2011

What is important to remember is that nothing should have hit the Pentagon (or the WTC) on 9/11.

Unfortunately this simple and exposing fact has been carefully manipulated into a debate of no-plane hitting the Pentagon. I fell for it for years.

Where are 100 witnesses to a “missile” or a “fly over” or “drone?”

Below is an excerpt from the ever-resourceful 9/11 Research:

Trends in Witness Data

Anyone who reads the collections of Pentagon witness accounts such as Eric Bart’s is likely to be impressed by the broad agreement among witnesses on aspects of the event — the low-angle approach of a large jetliner followed by a huge explosion and billowing smoke. Some proponents of theories excluding a jetliner have amplified inconsistencies and bizarre details in the accounts, while ignoring their agreement.

about 89 The amount of eye witnesses I gathered who stated they saw an
object crash into the Pentagon. The vast majority of the still available
ones.
at least 45 The amount of eye witnesses who reported seeing a plane and described it
with words like: ‘airliner’, ‘big’, ‘silver’, ‘roaring’, etc.
at least 23 The amount of eye witnesses who specifically said they saw an American
Airlines jet. In all cases a large jet.
at least 22 The amount of witnesses who reported the noise of the plane was very loud to
deafening.
at least 17 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a plane running down light
poles when crossing the highways.
at least 12 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw and heard the plane increase
its throttle at the last seconds.
at least 11 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a C-130H flying 30 seconds
behind a jetliner.
at least 5 The amount of eye witnesses who specifically stated they saw the plane had
its gear up.
at least 2 The amount of eye witnesses who stated that they saw a small corporate jet,
without doing any creative interpretating [sic] of the witness
accounts.
at least 0 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a missile. What the person
thought he heard isn’t relevant!
at least 0 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a military jet fighter at
the time of the crash.
at least 0 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw a Global Hawk at the time of
the crash.
at least 3 The amount of witnesses who reported the sound of the plane was quite
noiseless. (One of them acknowledged it was the shock)
at least 1 The amount of eye witnesses who stated they saw the plane had it’s gear
down. (Indirect, said a wheel hit a pole)
at least 25 The amount of witnesses who have said something that might point to the use
of explosives or incendiaries. (White flash, powerful blast waves which blew
people through the air, molten glass, burning aluminium, [sic] spreading debris
over hundreds of yards back to where the plane came from, including 2 engines,
the missing plane itself, etc.)

It will never be a better time than now to discuss 9/11 with accuracy and facts based on the best evidence.

1 Comment | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

The Pentagon Attack on 9/11: A Refutation of the “Flyover Hypothesis”

September 4, 2011

by Dr. Frank Legge and David Chandler     source: Global Research     Sep. 4, 2011

Analysis of the Flight Path

Introduction

The legal and political implications of 9/11 have turned scientific research in this area into a high stakes competition for the minds of the public. Pertinent information has been kept secret, the corporate media has systematically kept “damaging” information (such as video images of the World Trade Center Building 7) out of public view, 9/11 research has been marginalized, and the official investigations have failed to answer, or in many cases even address, the most troubling questions. One development that appears to be a tactic in the ongoing cover-up is the high profile promotion of transparently false theories, “straw men,” the only purpose of which appears to be to allow the 9/11 Truth Movement to be ridiculed.

With the tenth anniversary of 9/11 upon us, the battle for public perceptions has intensified and there is a heightened campaign to undermine the scientific basis of the truth movement.

Dr Judy Wood has published a book asserting that the World Trade Center (WTC) towers were felled by “dustification” of the steel, which she claims is achieved by the use of “directed free energy”.[1] It is, however, obvious that the steel was severed and fell in normal lengths, otherwise intact, as seen in conventional demolitions. The similarly foolish idea that the WTC towers were demolished by nuclear explosives, long ago refuted,[2] has also been recently revived, with a new claimant appearing, Jeff Prager,[3] but this appears to be having little influence so far. No explanation involving “directed free energy” or nuclear devices could account for the way separate explosions appeared in the Twin Towers, layer by layer, descending at a precise rate, as the towers came down.[4]

Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment » | 9/11, Pentagon, Professionals for 9/11 truth | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

Since 9/11, Nearly Half of all Pentagon Contracts Awarded Without Competition

August 30, 2011

related: Pentagon pays $720 Million in late fees for storage containers since 2001

source: Raw Story   Aug 30, 2011

Nearly half of the approximately $300 billion of taxpayer money the Department of Defense spent on projects in 2010 was awarded for no-bid contracts — some of which weren’t necessary, the Center for Public Integrity’s iWatch News reported on Monday.

The cost of the non-competitive contracts the U.S. military has tripled in the last 10 years, now tallying up to $140 billion of taxpayer money per year on quick solution defense spending.

Though competition amongst companies saves taxpayer money, the stated urgent nature of the military’s needs pushed aside fiscal concerns. In 2001, the Pentagon’s non-competitive contracts cost around $50 billion. In 2010, nearly a decade after the war on terror began, that spending has risen to around $140 billion. Only 55 percent of contracts awarded in the first two quarters of 2011 were competitive.

more at original story: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/29/since-911-nearly-half-of-all-pentagon-contracts-awarded-without-competition/  

Leave a Comment » | "Terror War" News, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

The Mystery of the Helicopter Flying Around the Pentagon Before the Attack There on 9/11

June 12, 2011

A U.S. Park Park Police helicopter flying over the Pentagon

by shoestring   source: 9/11 Blogger   June 12, 2011

A mysterious helicopter was seen flying near the Pentagon in the minutes before the attack there on September 11, 2001. Several witnesses have described seeing the helicopter, which circled the Pentagon and then apparently landed for a brief period on the helipad, near where the building was subsequently hit. It then flew off very shortly before the attack took place. And yet there has never been any public acknowledgement of this incident, or any official explanation of what the helicopter was doing at the Pentagon at that time.

While interviewing one of the witnesses to the incident, however, a Navy historian revealed that the helicopter belonged to the United States Park Police, and, the historian said, had been instructed to intercept the aircraft that was on a crash-course for the Pentagon.

Official accounts have claimed that Park Police helicopters only took to the air after the Pentagon was hit, to provide assistance in response to the attack. However, evidence casts doubt on this version of events. A woman who was dating one of the Park Police helicopter pilots has written an account of her experiences on September 11, which clearly supports the contention that the helicopters took off before the Pentagon attack occurred. And there are several contradictions between the various accounts describing the official narrative, indicating this narrative may, at least partly, have been fabricated. Furthermore, it appears there could have been a deliberate attempt to cover up the true details of what happened. The Navy historian in fact told the eyewitness he interviewed: “Don’t tell anyone about that story. … We don’t want the press to get this.”

WITNESSES SAW HELICOPTER BY THE PENTAGON
Several individuals have recalled seeing a helicopter flying near the Pentagon just before the attack there on September 11. Shortly after the attack occurred, a senior Air Force officer at the Pentagon told CNN’s Chris Plante that he had seen “a helicopter circle the building,” which had “disappeared behind the building where the helicopter landing zone is … and he then saw [a] fireball go into the sky” when the Pentagon was hit. [1] Jennifer Reichert had been stuck in traffic on the road in front of the Pentagon. She described that “a helicopter [took] off from the heliport at the Pentagon.” Then, “Minutes–maybe seconds–later,” she heard the aircraft coming toward the Pentagon and then felt the explosion of the crash. [2]

Read the rest of this entry »

2 Comments | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

April Gollop versus Dick Cheney: Court Dismisses 9/11 Suit against Bush Officials

April 30, 2011

related:  Judge John Walker, George Walker Bush’s Cousin, Judges April Gallop’s Suit 

related: Amidst Growing World Doubts About 9/11, Career Army Officer Takes Bush Administration Officials to Court April 5th Represented by the Center for 9/11 Justice

by Rady Ananda     source: Global Research   April 30, 2011

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.

Read the rest of this entry »

1 Comment | 9/11, Bush Admin/ officials, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

Why the Planes Were Not Intercepted on 9/11: The Wall Street Lawyer and the Special Ops Hijack Coordinator

April 27, 2011

by  Kevin Ryan    source: 9/11 Blogger     April 27, 2011

Of the many unanswered questions about the attacks of September 11, one of the most important is: Why were none of the four planes intercepted?  A rough answer is that the failure of the US air defenses can be traced to a number of factors and people.  There were policy changes, facility changes, and personnel changes that had recently been made, and there were highly coincidental military exercises that were occurring on that day.  But some of the most startling facts about the air defense failures have to do with the utter failure of communications between the agencies responsible for protecting the nation.  At the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), two people stood out in this failed chain of communications.  One was a lawyer on his first day in at the job, and another was a Special Operations Commander who was never held responsible for his critical role, or even questioned about it.

The 9/11 Commission wrote in its report that – “On 9/11, the defense of U.S. airspace depended on close interaction between two federal agencies: the FAA and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).”[1]

According to the Commission, this interaction began with air traffic controllers (ATCs) at the relevant regional FAA control centers, which on 9/11 included Boston, New York, Cleveland, and Indianapolis.  In the event of a hijacking, these ATCs were expected to “notify their supervisors, who in turn would inform management all the way up to FAA headquarters.  Headquarters had a hijack coordinator, who was the director of the FAA Office of Civil Aviation Security or his or her designate. “ 

The hijack coordinator would then “contact the Pentagon’s National Military Command Center (NMCC)” and “the NMCC would then seek approval from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to provide military assistance.  If approval was given, the orders would be transmitted down NORAD’s chain of command [to the interceptor pilots].”[2]

Read the rest of this entry »

3 Comments | 9/11, Pentagon, Professionals for 9/11 truth | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

Judge John Walker, George Walker Bush’s Cousin, Judges April Gallop’s Suit

April 9, 2011

by Truth makes Peace       source: 9/11 Blogger    April 9, 2011

Background: Army Specialist April Gallop, was in the wing of the Pentagon that was hit on 9/11, with her small boy, and injured in the rubble. She was instructed by her commanding officers to speak the Official Story, but bravely spoke her true observations. In 2008, she sued Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Myers for not evacuating the Pentagon, when they knew it was a potential target. Her case was dismissed on March 15, 2010, but appealed that decision.
www.CenterFor911Justice.org
http://911blogger.com/news/2011-03-25/895-germans-doubt-oct-army-spc-apr…

Status: On April 5, 2011 the appeal of the case of Gallop v. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Myers was heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit at 11 a.m. at New Haven, Connecticut. But one of the 3 judges turned out to be George Walker Bush’s cousin, Judge John M. Walker Jr., an obvious conflict of interest.

Update: Press Release from William Veale of the Center for 911 Justice, April 6, 2011

April’s attorney William Veale gave a radio interview with Kevin Barrett after the hearing on his No Lies Radio Show:
http://noliesradio.org/archives/32320
(Turn live RADIO: OFF in the upper right. Then click the arrow next to “It is now archived here — Use Player”)

Read the rest of this entry »

2 Comments | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

Army Command Center at the Pentagon Planned to Hold Exercise in Week After 9/11 Based on a Plane Hitting the WTC

March 28, 2011

by Shoestring   source: 9/11 Blogger    Mar 28, 2011

Army officers at the Pentagon were planning a training exercise that would take place less than a week after 9/11 and that would, extraordinarily, be based around the scenario of a plane crashing into the World Trade Center. Preparations for the exercise were being made about a week before September 11.

The existence of the planned exercise was revealed by Major General Peter Chiarelli, who on September 11, 2001, was the Army’s director of operations, readiness, and mobilization. In that position, which he had moved into about a month before 9/11, Chiarelli was in charge of current operations in the Army Operations Center (AOC) at the Pentagon.

Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment » | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

Amidst Growing World Doubts About 9/11, Career Army Officer Takes Bush Administration Officials to Court April 5th Represented by the Center for 9/11 Justice

March 25, 2011

source: PRNewswire-USNewswire   Mar 24, 2011

A December 2010 poll conducted by the prestigious Emnid Institute, and reported in the German magazine “Welt der Wunder,” revealed that 89.5% of German respondents do not believe the official story of 9/11.

The issue is heating up in America as well, and will soon be heard in court.

Top Secret Military Specialist April Gallop saw disturbing things up close that have not been reported in the media.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, she was ordered by her supervisor to go directly to work at the Pentagon, before dropping off her ten-week-old son Elisha at day care.

Amazingly, the infant was given immediate security clearance upon arrival.

The instant Gallop turned on her computer an enormous explosion blew her out of her chair, knocking her momentarily unconscious.

Escaping through the hole reportedly made by Flight 77, she saw no signs of an aircraft – no seats, luggage, metal, or human remains.  Her watch (and other clocks nearby) had stopped at 9:30-9:31 a.m., seven minutes before the Pentagon was allegedly struck at 9:38 a.m.

The 9/11 Commission reported that “by no later than 9:18 a.m., FAA centers in Indianapolis, Cleveland, and Washington were aware that Flight 77 was missing and that two aircraft had struck the World Trade Center.”

Why then were there no anti-aircraft defenses, Gallop asks, or alarm warnings inside the Pentagon?

Gallop was briefed by officials not to tell her story in public; she also received an email from a Fox News reporter who had been told by the Pentagon not to interview her.

Gallop now believes that officials within the Bush Administration conspired to destroy the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and WTC 7 – the third building brought down at 5:20 p.m. that day – with pre-placed explosives detonated after the planes hit.

On April 5th, 2011, at 11 a.m., at the Federal Courthouse at 141 Church Street in New Haven, Connecticut, the case of Gallop v. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Myers will be heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.  

Read the rest of this entry »

3 Comments | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

My Pentagon Manifesto (In Retrospect)

January 10, 2011

by Russell Pickering   source: 9/11 Truth News     Jan 10, 2011

Dear Patriots,

My name is Russell Pickering. I spent approximately 4 years of my life seriously dedicated to understanding what happened at the Pentagon. I used to have the Pentagon Research website. When I decided to leave the 9/11 movement I handed it off to Cosmic Penguin. They let the domain lapse and now it is a purveyor of 9/11 books.

The reason I’ve decided to share some observations here is so that those of us with a pre-disposition to myopia might look up for a minute and assess the current social climate and its implications for near future events.

Many here are astute observers and certainly the majority of you carry credentials far beyond my GED, so, bear with me and just consider this message fairly. Most of you here are sincere Patriots with a deep regard for Truth. Some here are not so benevolent!

After meticulous and dedicated research, including a trip to DC as part of Loose Change’s research team, I can assure you with 100% certainty an aircraft impacted the Pentagon. This is just a physical fact – albeit a counterintuitive one.

Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment » | 9/11, Pentagon | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

Joint Statement on the Pentagon: David Chandler and Jon Cole

January 2, 2011

David Chandler is a physics teacher, and has made invaluable videos and contributions to the 9/11 movement, including being a large part in forcing NIST to admit free-fall acceleration in the collapse of WTC #7.  Jon Cole has made many “9/11 Experiments” videos including, “The Great Thermite Debate“.

Please read this post by the two of them and follow their links given for further research.

source: 9/11 Speak Out     Jan 2, 2011

Overwhelming Evidence of Insider Complicity on 9/11

If you watch our videos and read the links on our site (http://www.911speakout.org) you will understand why we assert that the weight of the evidence points to the fact that 9/11 was orchestrated by insiders…

* with access to high-tech military-grade nano-energetic materials (aka nano-thermite)
* with access to the infrastructure of some of the most highly secure buildings in New York over an extended period of time
* with the expertise to accomplish the most difficult demolitions in history
* with the ability to manage public perception of the event despite numerous contrary contemporaneous eyewitness reports
* with the ability to coordinate the take-downs of the twin towers with the airplane flights
* with the ability to coordinate with the military to not intercept the airplane flights
* with the ability to stage a highly coordinated cover-up, starting on the day of 9/11 itself
* with the ability to prevent ANY investigation for many months
* with the ability to stage-manage fraudulent investigations once the demand grew too loud (the 9/11 Commission report the NIST reports)

All of this evidence comes from the investigation of the World Trade Center, based on public evidence and the laws of physics. The evidence is overwhelming, consistent, persuasive, and broadly agreed upon by the “scientific wing” of the 9/11 Truth Movement. The concrete physical and video evidence leading to these conclusions narrows the field of possible perpetrators significantly.

The Pentagon

There are also anomalies in the events at the Pentagon. The biggest anomalies, in our opinion , have gotten some of the least attention.

* How could the Pentagon, the hub of the US military, have been so poorly defended that it could be hit in the first place, after the buildings in New York City had already been hit and other hijacked planes were known to still be in the air?
* Why was Norman Minetta’s testimony about Cheney’s response to the approach of the aircraft discounted in the 9/11 Commission report?

Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment » | 9/11, building 7, NIST, Pentagon, Professionals for 9/11 truth | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Brian

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 46 other followers