“If we are truly going to be respectful of the victims of 9/11 one of the things the president and this administration must do is get to the bottom of these questions,” said Graham, who co-chaired Congress’s bi-partisan Joint Inquiry into the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. – Broward Bulldog
by Dan Christensen and Anthony Summers source: Broward Bulldog Feb 22, 2012
Former Florida Senator Bob Graham has seen two classified FBI documents that he says raise new questions about the Bureau’s once secret investigation of a possible Saudi support operation for the 9/11 hijackers in Sarasota.
Graham would not disclose the content of the documents, which are marked “Secret,” but said the information they contain is at odds with the FBI’s public statements that there was no connection between the hijackers and Saudis then living in Sarasota.
“There are significant inconsistencies between the public statements of the FBI in September and what I read in the classified documents,” Graham said.
“One document adds to the evidence that the investigation was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI,” Graham said. “An important investigative lead was not pursued and unsubstantiated statements were accepted as truth.”
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 discussthe big NIST lie of finding no evidence for explosions during the WTC collapse investigation.
Listen here:
Available as a live-stream every Monday 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific at the website provided below:
Ten years after, how do the French perceive the events of September 11, 2001?
With the support of its members and sympathizers, the French association ReOpen911 has commissioned a survey on the subject by an independent organization and have published their results on
September 9.
To this date, two surveys of this type have been made available in France: one by “TNS Sofres/Logica” for the French newsmagazine “NouvelObs” and another by World Public Opinion which was conducted in France as well as in 16 other countries. These surveys, which date back to September 2008, are already three year old, and the questions asked at the time do not measure the degree of skepticism of the population regarding the official story of the 9/11 Commission and the Bush administration.
For this reason, ReOpen911 requested an opinion poll by HEC Junior Consulting. The official junior company of the business school HEC Paris, HEC Junior Consulting was ranked first in its sector by the newsmagazine “Expansion” in 2009. The school has also been a finalist for the CNJI award for excellence every year
since 2004. The survey was conducted in June 2011 based on a cross-section sample of the French population [1].
This survey is very revealing about the opinion of the French on the subject of 9/11.
Poll Results Summary
Key results:
58% of the French population express doubts about the official version, compared to only 31% who express no doubts.
Only 14% know that three towers collapsed on September 11, 2001.
Nearly half of French respondents (49%) believe that US authorities may have let the attacks occur.
One third (34%) believe that some US authorities may have been involved in the attacks.
49% are favorable to opening an independent inquiry to determine more about the events.
Only 28% consider that the media have informed the public about September 11 in the fullest possible manner.
Could it be that more remains in 2011 have been found? The NY Medical Examiner does not make it 100% clear if these were body fragments from previous fragment recoveries in 2010 or 2006, or if perhaps more fragments have been found in 2011. Here is the latest from CBS New York:
Forensic technicians have identified another set of human remains found in the rubble of the World Trade Center, nearly a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The office of New York City’s medical examiner announced Tuesday that it had successfully matched a set of remains to 40-year-old Ernest James, who had been assumed dead in the Twin Towers’ collapse.
James was identified within the last few days through DNA testing, a spokeswoman said. He worked for the professional services firm Marsh & McLennan Companies, which lost more than 350 employees and consultants that day.
Support the 9/11 Families and First Responders As They Call for a New Investigation in the Largest 9/11 Ad Campaign Ever
THE PLAN
The 10th Anniversary Campaign will use the unprecedented level of attention and burning desire for truth felt across the world to mobilize thousands of people to donate a total of $1 million between Labor Day and September 11. Remember Building 7 will use that money for an historic nationwide ad campaign in the month of October showing the American people the unmistakable footage of Building 7’s demolition and forcing the mainstream media to finally discuss Building 7.
THE ADS
The campaign will be a three-pronged blitz of TV, print, and out-of-home advertising. New York City subways will be flooded with poster ads while TV ads saturate every major cable channel. Print ads will appear in several national publications and in local newspapers in Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Dallas.
TAKE ACTION
You can help reach tens of thousands of people by making this campaign go viral.
Visit the Official Event’s Facebook page, click “I’m Attending,” and spread it around on Facebook pages and group’s walls and by sharing it with your friends.
Click the “Like’ button on the top of the website at RememberBuilding7.org and follow the campaign on Twitter.
COORDINATED EFFORTS THROUGHOUT THE 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT
Ever since the FBI claimed (for a second time) that it had discovered in 2008 the identity of the anthrax attacker — the recently-deceased-by-suicide Army researcher Bruce Ivins — it was glaringly obvious, as I documentedmany times, that the case against him was exceedingly weak, unpersuasive and full of gaping logical, scientific, and evidentiary holes. So dubious are the FBI’s claims that serious doubt has been raised and independent investigations demanded not by marginalized websites devoted to questioning all government claims, but rather, by the nation’s most mainstream, establishment venues, ones that instinctively believe and defend such claims — including the editorialpagesof thenation’slargest newspapers, leading scientific journals, the nation’s preeminentscienceofficials, and keypoliticiansfromboth parties (led by those whose districts, or offices, were most affected by the attacks). To get a sense for the breadth and depth of the establishment skepticism about Ivins’ guilt, just click on some of those links.
Since that initial wave of doubt, the FBI’s case against Ivins has continuously deteriorated even further. In February of this year, a panel of the National Academy of Sciences released its findings solely regarding the bureau’s alleged scientific evidence (independent investigations of the full case against Ivins have been successfully blocked by the Obama administration), and found — as The New York Times put it — that “the bureau overstated the strength of genetic analysis linking the mailed anthrax to a supply kept by” Ivins; the Washington Post headline summarized the impact of those findings: “Anthrax report casts doubt on scientific evidence in FBI case against Bruce Ivins.”
But the biggest blow yet to the FBI’s case has just occurred as the result of an amazing discovery by PBS’ Frontline, which is working on a documentary about the case with McClatchy and ProPublica:
The Justice Department has called into question a key pillar of the FBI’s case against Bruce Ivins. . . . On July 15 [], Justice Department lawyers acknowledged in court papers that the sealed area in Ivins’ lab — the so-called hot suite — did not contain the equipment needed to turn liquid anthrax into the refined powder that floated through congressional buildings and post offices in the fall of 2001.
The government said it continues to believe that Ivins was “more likely than not” the killer. But the filing in a Florida court did not explain where or how Ivins could have made the powder, saying only that the lab “did not have the specialized equipment’” in Ivins’ secure lab “that would be required to prepare the dried spore preparations that were used in the letters.”
The government’s statements deepen the questions about the case against Ivins, who killed himself before he was charged with a crime. Searches of his car and home in 2007 found no anthrax spores, and the FBI’s eight-year, $100 million investigation never proved he mailed the letters or identified another location where he might have secretly dried the anthrax into an easily inhaled powder. . . .
Amid its June 6th launch of 425 advertising spots on New York television, Remember Building 7 – an advocacy campaign calling for a new investigation into the collapse of a third skyscraper on 9/11 – has released findings from a new poll it commissioned on what New Yorkers believe about that day.
The May polling of 643 New Yorkers (including respondents in all of New York City’s five boroughs) by the independent Siena Research Institute shows meaningful levels of doubt and concern regarding the truth about what happened that day, with only 60 percent of New Yorkers ready to “move on”, and 48 percent in favor of the Manhattan District Attorney or New York City Council opening a new investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.
The poll finds:
• 1 in 3 New Yorkers were unaware of Building 7’s collapse (the skyscraper was not hit by an airplane; it collapsed seven hours after the Twin Towers), only 25 percent have ever seen video footage of the collapse, and 86 percent were unable to name the building;
• Of those aware of Building 7’s collapse, 24 percent believe it was a controlled demolition that brought the building down, 23 percent are unsure, and 49 percent believe it was caused by fires;
• 36 percent of all respondents are inclined to believe critics who argue against the government’s explanation that the collapse was caused by fires, including a group of 1,500 architects and engineers who say no steel-framed skyscraper has ever succumbed to fire. Forty percent are inclined to believe the government’s account, and 23 percent are unsure;
• 48 percent of those polled are in favor of a new investigation into Building 7’s collapse, compared to 44 percent opposed and 8 percent who don’t know or refused to answer.
New Poll: 48% of New Yorkers Support a New 9/11 Investigation into Building 7′s Collapse
As the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks approaches quickly, a new Siena poll shows that half of New Yorkers today are in support of a new probe into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.
The poll shows that 1 in 3 New Yorkers were unaware of Building 7′s collapse and, despite the importance of the events of that day, only 25% have ever seen video footage of Building 7 collapsing at free fall. Only 14% could identify the name of the skyscraper.
Moreover, the poll shows that only 49% who were aware of Building 7′s collapse believe fires brought it down. 24% believe it was a controlled demolition, and 23% are unsure.
The poll was conducted in May of 2011 and is sponsored by Remember Building 7 (a group including 9/11 family members), NYC CAN and by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth). Four 9/11 family members and four AE911Truth representatives actually feature in a historic TV ad now being seen across New York City. The people appearing in the TV ad are asking the public to learn about the collapse of Building 7 and are challenging US officials at NIST for their conclusions about the event.
“Investigate Building 7 “, the Univ. of Hartford, W. Hartford, Ct 3/26/11
First of a Three-part Presentation: “The Case for a New Building 7 Investigation” Introduced by Dr. William Pepper, International Human Rights Attorney
Foreknowledge of Building 7′s Collapse
Dr. Graeme MacQueen
Even though World Trade Center Building 7 is said to have been the first steel-framed building in history to undergo total collapse due to fire, there were many people who knew the building was going to collapse long before it did. In this presentation, the evidence for this peculiar foreknowledge will be summarized and its significance discussed. The argument will be made that it is impossible to explain this foreknowledge on the basis of the collapse hypothesis offered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The only hypothesis that explains this foreknowledge is the controlled demolition hypothesis.
Launching criminal prosecutions and real investigations is one of the main prerequisites for an economic recovery.
Trust in Government is Necessary for a Stable Economy
A 2005 letter in premier scientific journal Nature reviewed the research on trust and economics:
Trust … plays a key role in economic exchange and politics. In the absence of trust among trading partners, market transactions break down. In the absence of trust in a country’s institutions and leaders, political legitimacy breaks down. Much recent evidence indicates that trust contributes to economic, political and social success.
Forbes wrote an article in 2006 entitled “The Economics of Trust”. The article summarizes the importance of trust in creating a healthy economy: Read the rest of this entry »
The 2010 Colorado Democratic Party platform, approved by the 146 member platform committee states:
“The Colorado Democratic Party calls for the establishment of a truly independent Grand Jury and public investigation in order to find the truth of the September 11, 2001 attacks.”
This controversial plank was added to the State Democratic Party Platform after evidence supporting the critical need for a new investigation was presented at several caucuses in 2004, 2008, and 2010.
The citizens who presented arguments for a new investigation at their precinct caucuses are signatories to the Architect and Engineers for 9/11 Truth organization (http://ae911truth.org) which calls for a new investigation into the events of September 11, 2001.
by Carol Brouillet source: 9/11 Blogger Oct 9, 2010
Listen to the weekly Community Currency radio show on Progressive Radio Network 5- 6 pm (EST), Thursday, October 14, 2010 – to hear more about the California 9/11 Truth Commission Initiative with former Senator Mike Gravel (U.S.Senator from Alaska 1969-1981), best known for his courageous effort to read the Pentagon Papers into the public record. (He is featured in the documentary- The Most Dangerous Man in America) Senator Mike Gravel’s passion has been Direct Democracy, which allows people to make laws, rather than allowing “elected representatives” exclusive ability to make the laws. He has also taken brave stances and spoken out against secrecy in government.
He supported and worked on the NYCCAN 2009 ballot initiative in New York City that would have established a local commission to conduct an impartial, evidence-driven investigation into the events of September 11, 2001. 80,000 New Yorkers signed the petition, far exceeding the requirement for the proposed City Charter amendment to be presented to the voters on the November ballot. However, the City of New York refused to place it on the ballot citing legal insufficiencies in the petition, and the State Supreme Court ruled in the City’s favor.
September 11, 2010 was the 9th anniversary of the sudden collapse and pulverization into fine toxic dust (except for the thermite-sectioned steel beams), of the three World Trade Center towers (1, 2 & 7). What really happened on 9/11, contrary to the mainstream media-promulgated Bush/Cheney White House conspiracy theories, is becoming increasingly clear. The most recent among many clinchers is the fact that the dust at Gound Zero has been found, conclusively, to contain large amounts of weapons-grade nanothermite, a highly explosive substance that is only manufactured for the US military and is only used for demolition purposes.
There are now significant numbers of clear-headed, intelligent, patriotic US citizens (as well as hundreds of millions of equally clear-headed critical thinkers worldwide) who have finally seen through the provably-untrue Bush/Cheney White House-generated, Mother-of-All-Conspiracy-Theories about who and what they wanted us to believe brought down the towers on the morning and afternoon of 9/11/01.
Everyone who had access to a television screen back then saw, over and over again, large jet planes hitting WTC skyscrapers 1 & 2, but there was no media coverage allowed of the obvious controlled demolition of WTC tower #7 later that day (at 5:30 pm). (WTC # 7 was a 47 story steel-reinforced skyscraper that was a couple of blocks from the twin towers. It was not hit by a plane and only had a few small fires on lower floors.)
Progressives should press for exposure of the problems related to the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. (An abbreviated set of seven of these problems are available at the 7problemswithbuilding7.info website, and over 1,200 architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation.) Thus far, these problems have been mostly hidden from the public. Exposure could provide a rallying point for efforts to bring accountability and justice in America. It can bring clarity to the press for transparency in government, and it can expose corporate Machiavellian manipulations that have clearly gone on relative to Building 7′s collapse.
Transparency in government is badly needed, both within the Administration and in Congress. The happenings related to Building 7 make this abundantly clear.
Within the Administration, a number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests have been submitted seeking records on the Building 7 collapse-analysis data. The final report on World Trade Center 7 was issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in November 2008; however, going on two years later, most requests have been denied. Most troubling is the reason given for denial. The Director of NIST has determined that release of the information “might jeopardize public safety.” This reasoning is outrageous. If anything, not releasing the information might jeopardize public safety.
Posted by Brian 
