Raising the Dead: Navy SEAL Disputes bin Laden Raid

November 11, 2011

“No one knew or could even imagine what was going on inside the building. They didn’t know.” – Former Navy SEAL, Chuck Pfarrar

Brian Romanoff         Nor Cal Truth        Nov 11, 2011

If you did not read it last week, a Navy SEAL has already written a book that contradicts the official account(s) of what happened during the Usama bin Laden raid.

He disagrees that there was a 45-minute fire-fight, saying instead that within 90 seconds bin Laden was killed by the SEALs, among other things. Read more about that here.

In my opinion, the new version of events described by former Navy SEAL Chuck Pfarrer may be considered one of these possibilities:

  • An attempt to create more book sales with controversy
  • Spinning more accounts to what “actually happened” so in the end no one knows and most don’t care
  • Spin by the NAVY and the SEAL teams particularly to improve their image regarding the assassination of UBL

I could be wrong.

However, the following is worth mentioning:

Pfarrer’s story likely does not include important information on topics pointed out on Nor Cal Truth and other websites in the past. Important details to the story of tracking and killing bin Laden. Stories like the CIA’s “bin Laden hunter’ being told stand down almost a dozen times. I imagine Pfarrer’s book also does not account for Sibel Edmonds’, a former FBI translator and current whistleblower, statement that bin Laden”worked for the U.S. until 9/11.”  The new book by Pfarrer probably does not get into the fact that the FBI did not have “hard evidence” to link bin Laden to 9/11, a crime that bin Laden denied his involvement in. I wonder if it gets into the details of the CIA living next to bin Laden in Pakistan…

Dumping bin Laden into the sea was not in tradition of typical Islamic burials as Obama wanted everyone to think. It is also an amazing disposal of evidence regarding 9/11 - do I need to mention that Senators fell for fake photos of a dead bin Laden?

Read the rest of this entry »


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.


Who–and What–Are Behind the “Official History” of the Bin Laden Raid?

August 24, 2011

by Russ Baker   source: Who What Why   Aug. 24, 2011

The establishment media just keep getting worse. They’re further and further from good, tough investigative journalism, and more prone to be pawns in complicated games that affect the public interest in untold ways. A significant recent example is The New Yorker’s vaunted August 8 exclusive on the vanquishing of Osama bin Laden.

The piece, trumpeted as the most detailed account to date of the May 1 raid in Abbottabad Pakistan, was an instant hit. “Got the chills half dozen times reading @NewYorker killing bin Laden tick tock…exquisite journalism,” tweeted the digital director of the PBS show Frontline.  The author, freelancer Nicholas Schmidle, was quickly featured on the Charlie Rose show, an influential determiner of “chattering class” opinion. Other news outlets rushed to praise the story as “exhaustive,” “utterly compelling,” and on and on.

Read the rest of this entry »


U.S. Revises Story on Bin Laden’s Raid

May 4, 2011

Nor Cal Truth   May 4, 2011

Dumping Bin Laden into the sea was a premature disposal of evidence, but you probably know that by now.

It is also NOT “traditional” in Islam to bury a body at sea.

What is interesting is that the U.B.L. raid was watched by so many in “real time”; Obama, Gates, Biden, Mullen Clinton and many others.

So why did it take almost 2 full days to clarify that he was not armed, and why did that story gain so much traction?The official blundering that is happening right now is reminiscent of the Bush era.

From CNN:

U.S. officials issued a revised version of the nighttime raid that killed the world’s most-notorious terrorist, including additional details that revealed other options were on the table before settling on the assault.

The 40-minute raid early Monday in Pakistan left Osama bin Laden dead, along with four others in the complex that sits on a mountainous region near the capital.

Bin Laden was not armed during the raid, but he put up resistance when U.S. forces entered the compound, the White House said. Officials had earlier said that bin Laden was an active participant in the firefight, implying that he was armed and gave the U.S. Navy SEALs little choice but to shoot him down.

Read the rest of this entry »


The US Justice Department Lacks Evidence To Indict Bin Laden For 9/11 Attacks

April 22, 2011

related: Disposal of 9/11 Evidence Continues: Bin Laden Body Dumped at Sea

related:  U.S. Revises Story on Bin Laden’s Raid

Please note:  This post was published  July 22, 2011….just a week before Usama was killed and dumped in the sea.

Video source:ICSD911  Text So urce: Project Censored   July 22, 2011

The news segment below is from 2006, however I had not seen the video report about Bin Laden and the lack of evidence to indict him for 9/11. 

Osama bin Laden’s role in the events of September 11, 2001 is not mentioned on the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted” poster.

On June 5, 2006, author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 1998 bombings of US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, the poster does not indicate that he is wanted in connection with the events of 9/11.

Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” Asked to explain the process, Tomb responded, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”

Read the rest of this entry »


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 »


9/11 Debris: Investigation into Ground Zero

December 2, 2010

related: Dump Trucks Ready to go on 9/11/01

by Joe    source: 9/11 Blogger      Dec 2, 2010

Part 1 of 2

Part 2 of 2

John Gross of NIST and other molten metal clips:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-XA0Rv1Ng8

Witness accounts and WTC “collapse” videos:
http://www.911conspiracy.tv/WTC_demolitions.html

“Think of the thousands of file cabinets, computers, and telephones in those towers – I never saw one – everything was pulverized,’ he said. ‘Everything that was above grade – above the 6th and 7th floor – disintegrated…it was like an explosion.”
- Peter Tully of Tully Construction, contractor responsible for the eastern quadrant of the pile– the South Tower, WTC 4 and 5, and underground

Read the rest of this entry »


Noam Chomsky: No Evidence that Al-Qaeda Carried Out the 9/11 Attacks

November 5, 2010

Many people in the 9/11 community will be      a)shocked     b)happy    c)suspicious     d) all of the above        from this news report.  Please visit 9/11 Blogger to see peoples’ reactions. 

source: Washingtons Blog       Nov 5, 2010

Leading liberal intellectual Noam Chomsky just told Press TV:

As Wired wrote on September 27, 2001:

President Bush has said he has evidence that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks, so it would seem obvious that the FBI would include him and other suspects on its 10 most wanted fugitives Web page.

Think again.

Bin Laden is listed, but only for the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. There is no mention of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing or the attacks on the USS Cole in October 2000, both of which he is widely believed to have orchestrated. And forget about Sept. 11.

The reason? Fugitives on the list must be formally charged with a crime, and bin Laden is still only a suspect in the recent attacks in New York City and Washington.

“There’s going to be a considerable amount of time before anyone associated with the attacks is actually charged,” said Rex Tomb, who is head of the FBI’s chief fugitive publicity unit and helps decide which fugitives appear on the list. “To be charged with a crime, this means we have found evidence to confirm our suspicions, and a prosecutor has said we will pursue this case in court.”Larry C. Johnson, a former CIA officer who was deputy director of the U.S. State Department Office of Counterterrorism from 1989 to 1993, said in a Sept. 12 interview conducted by Frontline that there is no concrete proof that bin Laden is responsible for the USS Cole and the 1993 WTC attacks, but bin Laden celebrates those attacks and associates himself with people who are responsible for it.

President Bush promises to reveal evidence linking bin Laden to the suicide hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Bin Laden has applauded the attacks but denies direct involvement.

The Bush administration never provided such evidence.

As I wrote last December:

President Obama said Tuesday night as justification for the surge in troops in Afghanistan:

We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people.

Al Qaeda’s base of operations was in Afghanistan, where they were harbored by the Taliban”, who refused to turn over Osama bin Laden.

Is that true?

 On October 14, 2001, the Taliban offered to hand over Osama bin Laden to a neutral country if the US halted bombing if the Taliban were given evidence of Bin Laden’s involvement in 9/11.

Specifically, as the Guardian writes:

Returning to the White House after a weekend at Camp David, the president said the bombing would not stop, unless the ruling Taliban “turn [bin Laden] over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over.” He added, “There’s no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he’s guilty” …

Afghanistan’s deputy prime minister, Haji Abdul Kabir, told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US.

“If the Taliban is given evidence that Osama bin Laden is involved” and the bombing campaign stopped, “we would be ready to hand him over to a third country”, Mr Kabir added.

However, as the Guardian subsequently points out:

A senior Taliban minister has offered a last-minute deal to hand over Osama bin Laden during a secret visit to Islamabad, senior sources in Pakistan told the Guardian last night.

For the first time, the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden for trial in a country other than the US without asking to see evidence first in return for a halt to the bombing, a source close to Pakistan’s military leadership said.

And yet … the U.S. turned down the offer and instead prosecuted war.

And in 2006, FBI agent Rex Tomb told reporter Ed Haas that the FBI still did not have enough evidence:

The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.

 

In fact, many leading liberals have expressed doubts about 9/11, including Daniel Ellsberg, Ray McGovern, William Blum, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, Lewis Lapham, Dan Hamburg, Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Amy Goodman, Thom Hartmann, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Marc Crispin Miller, Howard Zinn, Robert McChesney, Gore Vidal, Chris Floyd, Robert Fisk, Medea Benjamin, Doris “Granny D” Haddock, Paul Hawken, David Cobb, Randy Hayes, Ernest Callenbach, Dennis Bernstein, Paul H. Ray, Michael Franti, Janeane Garafalo and Ed Asner.

As have many prominent old-fashioned conservatives. And the 9/11 Commissioners themselves. See this.

“The explicit and declared motive of the [Afghanistan] war was to compel the Taliban to turn over to the United States, the people who they accused of having been involved in World Trade Center and Pentagon terrorist acts. The Taliban…they requested evidence…and the Bush administration refused to provide any,” the 81-year-old senior academic made the remarks on Press TV’s program a Simple Question.

We later discovered one of the reasons why they did not bring evidence: they did not have any.”

The political analyst also said that nonexistence of such evidence was confirmed by FBI eight months later.

“The head of FBI, after the most intense international investigation in history, informed the press that the FBI believed that the plot may have been hatched in Afghanistan, but was probably implemented in the United Arab Emirates and Germany.”

Read the rest of this entry »


Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth Introduce Newspaper Packed with Evidence

August 14, 2010

source: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth  August 14, 2010

Order 100 today for only $20 – Ships to you September 1

This September, the most important print item in the history of AE911Truth will make its debut. The “911 Investigator,” the first annual edition of our informative new color broadsheet newspaper, is now available for early order in our online store, and you’ll be able to get 100 copies shipped at low bulk prices and distribute them proudly in your local community.

The “911 Investigator” goes where no mainstream newspaper has dared by detailing the witness testimony and scientific forensic evidence behind the destruction of the 3 World Trade Center high-rises on 9/11. This handy publication presents the compelling case for explosive controlled demolition in a graphically oriented easy-to-read format, while maintaining the scientific integrity that is honored by technical professionals around the globe.

Read the rest of this entry »


No Good Info on Bin Laden for Years: CIA’s Panetta

July 2, 2010

source: Reuters  July 2, 2010

It has been years since the United States has had good intelligence on the whereabouts of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin laden, although he is thought to be in Pakistan, CIA director Leon Panetta said on Sunday.

He also gave a sobering account of the war in Afghanistan, saying the Taliban seemed to be strengthening with a stepped-up campaign of violence, even as U.S.-led forces undermine the Islamist movement with attacks on its leadership.

Progress is being made in the nearly nine-year-old conflict but “it’s harder, it’s slower than I think anyone anticipated,” Panetta said on ABC’s “This Week” program. He did not directly answer a question about whether the war was being won.

Read the rest of this entry »


Summary and Analysis of “National Security Alert” by Chris Sarns

May 20, 2010

Please go and visit the source of this post. The lively discussion on what did or did not happen at the Pentagon should be enlightening to many of my readers. We don’t have as active a comment sections as 9/11 Blogger, so I would recommend to scroll through the discussions being held there. What hit, or didn’t hit , the Pentagon continues to be quite the debate within the 9/11 community and essentially, quite the unknown.

by Chris Sarns   source: 9/11 Blogger   May 20, 2010

Like many others I was impressed with the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) video “National Security Alert” (NSA) when I saw it for the first time. I thought that the unanimous testimony of the witnesses confirmed the North flight path of American Airlines flight 77, but I could not see how that in any way proved their “flyover theory”. I did not give the “flyover” theory much thought because it seemed to be a minor point. As it turns out, the strong evidence for the north flight path was just the “hook”, and “flyover” was actually their main point.

I started to doubt the validity of NSA when I found out that CIT had misled me into thinking that the witnesses were unanimous in confirming the North flight path. That is not true. There are numerous south flight path witnesses including four that CIT had interviewed. CIT claims that these witness statements are “dubious” and this justifies not mentioning them in the video. CIT not looking for south flight path witnesses and excluding the ones they did find is like NIST not looking for evidence of explosives and excluding the FEMA C report. You can’t find something if you don’t look for it. A real investigative report would give all the evidence and let the viewer decide.

Read the rest of this entry »


Texas Engineer Demolishes the 9-11 WTC 7 Fairy Tail

April 15, 2010

This is a great presentation! It’s all introductions and appetizers untill 7  minutes into the first video. Again, the meat and potatoes are starting at 7 minutes in.

April 15, 2010

Part 1 of 8

  Part 2 of 8

Read the rest of this entry »


City to Sift Again for 9/11 Remains

March 27, 2010

We are close to 9 years after the fact. The victim’s families (that I know of)  did not push for this effort; the article states that families “received notice yesterday” of the “sifting operation.” Things I wonder:

  • Who is paying for this 1.4 million dollar contract?
  • Who issued the contract and who bid, along with who won the bidding, for the contract.
  • What tools will be used in the sifitng process?
  • Will there be multiple 3rd party witnesses to the sifting process?

source: Staten Island News    March 27, 2010

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. — Families of 9/11 victims received notice yesterday afternoon that the city will conduct a three-month sifting operation for World Trade Center remains at the shuttered Fresh Kills landfill.

Work will begin on Friday.

“The city is opening a forensic mobile sifting platform at Fresh Kills in Staten Island to thoroughly evaluate the material, using the same techniques employed during the prior operation at the facility at 11 Water St. in Brooklyn,” states the e-mailed letter, sent by Nazli Parvizi, commissioner of the city Community Affairs Unit.

Some 844 cubic yards of WTC material was excavated over the past two years from the following areas in and around Ground Zero: N.Y. State Route 9A (West Street), Haul Road, Cedar Street, Washington Street, Vesey Street, the rooftop of Fiterman Hall and various subterranean structures, according to an attached memorandum written to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg by Deputy Mayor for Operations Edward Skyler on Jan. 28.

Read the rest of this entry »


Live Broadcast Tonight: Erik Lawyer of Fire Fighters for 9/11 Truth

March 17, 2010

source: 9/11 Blogger    March 17, 2010

Rescheduled Interview with ‘Firefighters for 9/11 Truth‘ founder Erik Lawyer

TVNL RADIO LIVE : Wednesday, March 17th, 8:00pm ET

A common sense test: You’re dispatched to a house fire in a 2 story with
a basement. Upon arrival, all 3 floors are well involved. After the fire
has been extinguished, the neighbor across the street tells you he saw
flashes on all 3 floors within seconds of each other. It turns out the
owner has arson convictions on his record. You smell gasoline. Now, should
you test the debris for accelerants? No matter what the owner and his
friends tell you, wouldn’t you still test it? It’s a
“NO-Brainer”…isn’t it?

Read the rest of this entry »


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 46 other followers