More News

What Happened At shanksville?

click here

Ferdinando Imposimato, Italian Supreme Court Judge:  "The Bilderberg behind the strategy of tension"

April 11, 2013 - Ferdinando Imposimato, judge and lawyer,
talks about  unsolved killings in Italy: "I found a document that left me appalled, where when it comes to slaughter it also speaks of the Bilderberg Group. A document held by a terrorist of the New Order,  I believe this document. I did some tests and I can say that behind the strategy of tension and the slaughters there is also the Bilderberg group, a sort of Big Brother is over, maneuvering, uses terrorists,  blacks and Masons. "
 "Falcone e Borsellino - says Imposimato - were also killed because they found out who maneuvered procurement of major infrastructure projects,  I knew them and discovered that in public procurement were the mafia, and some large companies in the north, also on the Tav, one of the great works that saw bribes divided among mobsters and criminals. "

State and Corporate Crimes Against Democracy Conference
Oct 15th 2011 - London

Speakers: Prof Anthony Hall, Ian henshall, Prof Niels Harrit, David Halpin, Robin Ramsay, Martin Summers, Bridget Dunne, Tom Secker, Tim Gopsill, Tony Gosling. videos youtube

May 2nd 2011

Press Release: Osama killing raises more questions.

The announcement that Osama was killed yesterday, photographed for Pakistani TV and then dumped at sea by US authorities, raises more questions than it answers.

One expert said the photograph was photoshopped so that the corpse's mouth was indeed Osama bin Laden's. Certainly the beard was much darker than the real Osama's was ten years ago, the face wider and the focus on the various parts of the face was different.

Was it really necessary to dump the body at sea? The reason given today on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme was the need to conform with Islamic practice. Sceptics are asking when has the CIA up top now been sensitive to Muslim practices of a speedy burial. Are the obvious suspicions justified: was the body someone else's? Or is the CIA as usual trying to foment off the mark conspiracy theories by acting as if the whole affair is a hoax when it is not?

What was the role of the Pakistani authorities? Was the raid carried out by Pakistan as reported in the Pakistani press or was the raid a complete surprise because the CIA gave Pakistan no warning as reported on the BBC this morning? Is there a connection with the affair of the CIA contractor Raymond Davis?

The then British ambassador to Washington Christopher Meyer told BBC listeners this morning that it was several days before they were sure that Al Qaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks. This contradicts the official 9/11 story that US officials knew this straight away, from analysing flight manifests of the apparently hijacked planes.

These vital manifests have never been released to the public. On the internet self described conspiracy theory debunkers have circulated "leaked" manifests to "prove" the official 9/11 story, but these manifests appear to be faked. Some sceptics suspect the apparently hijacked planes on 9/11 were part of a reluctantly confirmed top secret anti-hijack exercise the Pentagon was running on the morning of the 9/11 attacks.

How come the world's most wanted man could have been living in a huge, inevitably high profile compound in a Pakistani military city less than an hour's drive from the capital, asked bemused BBC reporters this morning.

Independent experts are on record with possible explanations, but the BBC on past practice will probably ignore them. Many including CIA personnel believe OBL died in Afghanistan in late 2001. Others believe OBL never gave up the role that he started in: loyal CIA asset. Still others argued that as OBL's health would not have stood up to life on the run, so if OBL was alive he could only be in custody, to be used for propaganda videos whenever Washington needed. This theory gained traction when an apparent OBL video, issued three days before, effectively ensured George Bush's reelection in 2004.

Without an Egyptian style popular uprising which could force open the files of the CIA, we may never know when or even if Osama bin Laden died. The dubious history of 9/11 and the war on terror tells us one thing: up to now the mainstream media has not had the courage to ask hard questions.

We call on the media to confront the interests that have benefited so much from 9/11: the military industrial complex in Washington and its aggressive allies in Tel Aviv and London. There are plenty of questions to be asked. Please start now.

April 27th 2011 at 7.30pm

Alan Hart Veteran BBC ITN Middle East Expert at The Frontline Club, 13 Norfolk place, London W2 1QJ (near Paddington Station) Has The Mainstream Media Betrayed Democracy ( in its reporting of the Middle East)

£8.00 at door, £6.00 prior bookings, £4.00 concs, groups £25.00 for 5 seats if prebooked. To book: Coffee Plant 0208 453 1144 9am- 5pm (sponsors of the meeting)

In his television reporting days for ITN and BBC Panorama, Alan Hart was celebrated for his scoops and his special relationships with leaders such as Golda Meir, Yasser Arafat,  on both sides of the conflicts.

His talk will range over events of his life, how they were reported and why he doubts the official story of 9/11.

George Galloway endorses RI911. George Galloway has blown hot and cold on the 9/11 truth movement for some time now, but as Vice President of Stop the War he endorsed this campaign on Talksport radio in November. Interviewing RI911 co-ordinator Ian Henshall he agreed that the official anti-hijack exercise running at the time of the 9/11 attacks was an extraordinary co-incidence and remarked that "Al Qaeda" had failed to pull off anything comparable to 9/11 before or since. Galloway remains hostile to the sort of activist who asks him to agree with alternative 9/11 theories.

  • John Pilger: Bush regime "let it happen" is the most plausible explanation of 9/11. Legendary journalist John Pilger came close to endorsing the 9/11 inside job thesis at a meeting in London. "We know the senior FBI people who gave warnings right throughout 2001. We know about the extraordinary inactivity by the NORAD aircraft on the day of September 11th. We know that Cheney was in charge of the White House on that day. I think the most plausible is the "let it happen", now at what stage it was let happen, I don't know, I don't know". Pilger has always been a brave voice for truth and his honest admission that he does not know for sure what happened on 9/11 (who does?), is in shameful contrast to the gatekeeper leftists like George Monbiot and Charlie Booker who have attacked the 9/11 truth movement. Ref: 9/11 Truth News.


October 2010 to February, 2011

Other 'war on terror' news

The shocking news that 7/7 terrorist planner Mohammed Junaid Babar was an FBI informant, and has been quietly released from gaol after serving only four years has done little to disturb the complacency of the media. But at least The Guardian, ten years after 9/11, has finally started to ask the right questions:

"An American jihadist who set up the terrorist training camp where the leader of the 2005 London suicide bombers learned how to manufacture explosives, has been quietly released after serving only four and a half years of a possible 70-year sentence, a Guardian investigation has learned. The unreported sentencing of Mohammed Junaid Babar to "time served" because of what a New York judge described as "exceptional co-operation" that began even before his arrest has raised questions over whether Babar was a US informer at the time he was helping to train the ringleader of the 7 July tube and bus bombings."

A pattern seems to be emerging of fake terror disguised as the real thing. Remember the 2009 Christmas bomber?  Kurt Haskell, an attorney from Detroit who was on the plane witnessed the 'bomber' being escorted through security onto the plane even though his papers were not in order. Haskell has devoted sections of his blog to the issue. Other passengers commented that the apparent bomber was filmed  before (sic) and after the incident by some passengers a few seats in front. State Department officials told Congress that they had been asked by a member of  "the intelligence community" NOT to revoke the man's US visa. Many 9/11 sceptics believe that fake terror incidents are planned as legitimate security exercises and in some cases made 'real' by a small team of black ops personnel, most of whose work has already, quite legitimately, been done for them.

Other terror scares are faked with agents provocateurs. In a rare article the Washington Post has detailed an FBI provocateur who tried to talk the members of a  Californian mosque into becoming terrorists. "Tension is growing between the Muslim community and the FBI after an informant, Craig Monteilh, infiltrated a mosque, only a month after a local FBI leader visited the mosque and said the agency would do no such thing. Now, Monteilh is suing the FBI and revealing details of his operation." Like the recently exposed British police, these Orwellian agents are full time and spend months if not years infiltrating. They press for terrorist solutions, agitating and recording their targets' responses. If they only once flirt with the idea of violence this can be presented later to a jury as clinching evidence of terrorism. Monteilh received USD 177,000 tax free for 18 months work.

Bombay Attack planner was US asset. It has emerged that John Headley the suspected planner of the Bombay attack is a long standing agent of the US. The Washington Post has detailed the facts (with the usual spin that it was all due to incompetence): John Headley was a long standing US agent; US authorities had multiple reports from those close to him that he was organising terrorist attacks but they did nothing in response; the US has managed to get him extradited despite claims from the Indian government that he should be questioned there; and Headly is co-operating with the US.  Sceptics will be asking: when did the co-operation start and what would Headly have said to the Indian investigators if he had not been snatched by the US. The Bombay attack saw the murder of a senior Indian policeman who was accusing a pro-Israel network in the Indian federal police agencies of faking bomb attacks to make the culprits look like Muslims. Just another co-incidence?

Fake bomb made in the US caused Germany terror alert 19 Nov 2010. When a suspicious package was identified at Windhoek airport in Namibia, the flight was halted, the Munich-bound passengers delayed and news sped round the world that an x-ray scanner with batteries attached by wires to a detonator and a ticking clock had been found. But then a German government minister revealed the "bizarre truth": the bomb was fake, manufactured in the US to 'test airport security'. It was not yet clear who had planted the test suitcase, the German interior minister, Thomas de Mazière, said, but the one fact they had established was that the device had been manufactured by a US company that specialises in alarm systems. The usual 'security sources' told the Guardian this had no connection with the rumours that Germany was to suffer a terrorist attack, but funnily enough the threatened attack never happened.

January, 2011

9/11 Families: More Coverups on 9/11

9/11 victim families who were at one time the heroes of the Washington media are now ignored when they challenge the 9/11 coverup and demand answers. They are currently demanding the release of censored testimony from FBI translator Behrooz Sarshar.

Sarshar told Congress and the 9/11 Commission that he translated a summer 2001 warning from a long term reliable FBI agent in Afghanistan that "Al Qaeda" was planning to use kamikaze pilots in an attack on the US. This contradicts Washington's claims that 9/11 came out of the blue. Some 9/11 truth campaigners are wary of this and similar reports as they say it indirectly validates the official 9/11 story. Others say it is further evidence that an "Al Qaeda" plot was managed and protected by a small group of top officials. Click here for the 9/11 families statement and commentary from whistleblower Sibel Edmonds

October to February, 2011

Mainstream sceptics begin to find their voice

It may not be a landslide but the drip drip of 9/11 truth continues in the mainstream media: in the past few weeks Noel Glynn of RI911 has been on BBC Radio London (admittedly in the middle of the night, but London never sleeps) while Jim Corr told Ireland's Late Late Show "it was obvious to me that the official story just could not be true."

Following a highly successful TV ad campaign by New York 9/11 activists, Fox News commentator Andrew Napolitano has joined George Galloway in stating that he cannot see any explanation of how the three buildings in New York could have collapsed in the way they did. Sadly, the response of "liberal" commentators in Washington has been to ignore Galloway and attack Fox News for espousing "conspiracy theories" - code for asking awkward questions.

In Colorado, public TV has shown the film Loose Change 3, up to now almost totally censored in the US MSM. The demand for a new investigation into 9/11 is now part of the official platform of the Colorado Democratic Party.

Simon Jenkins, one time Thatcherite and now an anti-war columnist on the Guardian, is sailing close to the 9/11 wind with attacks on the anti-terror bureaucracy, recognising that they have a massive vested interest in a thriving terrorism threat. Commenting on the recent case of a British policeman who was undercover for years as a provocateur in the green movement. "Only those who have tarried in the foggy corridors of the Home Office, the Ministry of Justice and the Metropolitan police can have any notion of the Orwellian extravagance of these places... If challenged, they incant their motto: We keep you safe."

The toner bomb alert was too twisted to go into the details here. But as Daily Mail commentator Peter Mackay wrote "To an inexpert eye, the printer cartridge affair looks an attempt to cause panic rather than a plot to murder hundreds... The problem with 'war on terror' plots is that we've learned over the past ten years that the narrative offered by our leaders - that Al Qaeda is an evil force dedicated to ending our freedom and way of life - is simplistic, to put it mildly... the (9/11) culprits were said to be Al Qaeda... So why make such a fuss about an atrocity which didn't happen? Is it because it helps our leaders establish that they're in charge, as well as justify dictatorial criminal laws and pointless air transport regulations?"

January, 2011

Opinion poll bombshell in Germany

Germany's leading TV production company in the science area has sponsored an opinion poll from the country's leading poll organisation EMID and published it in its flagship magazine, Welt der Wunder. The spectacular result is that less than 10% of Germans believe that we have been told the whole truth about 9/11. This not of course the same as saying that 90% believe alternative scenarios but it does show just how out of touch the mainstream media and its commentators are

September, 2010 - February 2011

Research updates

911 Researchers have long noted the bizarre way that Pentagon exercises seemed to be mimicking the actual 9/11 attacks, in particular the anti-hijack exercise on the morning of the hijackings. The 9/11 Commission went to some lengths to obfuscate this information, perhaps because in the words of one mainstream journalist it "fed into" conspiracy theories. Now it has emerged that a new continuity of government communications system was turned on for the first time on September 10. Yet another 9/11 coincidence, this feeds into the theory that 9/11 was some sort of an internal coup. Bizarre? Tell that to Dick Cheney. White House counter-terror supremo Richard Clarke recounts in his memoirs that he was stopped on his way to Cheney's 9/11 bunker in the White House by machine-gun toting guards. They recognised him but would not let him into the bunker.

Anyone for a diversion? With great fanfare the US Congress has reluctantly coughed up compensation for the hundreds of 9/11 first responders who are dying from mostly lung and cancer ailments. They believed the false assurances of Bush officials that the air in New York was safe to breath. But just what is causing their illnesses? There was a cocktail of nasty pollutants but scientist Kevin Ryan has culled evidence from official reports and medical journals to suggest that deadly particles, identified by nano-technology expert Niels Harrit in multiple samples of dust from the Ground Zero, would explain several of the normally rare ailments reported by first responders. These engineered nanoparticles have the power to cut through steel, and seem to account for the unexplained spectacular collapse of the three New York buildings that day.

If officials were nasty or fanatic enough to make or allow 9/11 to happen they might also have made money from it by placing insider trades. Indeed the evidence for 9/11 inside trading was widely acknowledged - until it became clear that it was not 'Al Qaeda' but US officials who were the likely culprits. When a German company, Convar, charged with reclaiming data from WTC computers, appeared to confirm this, the company was bought by New York's Kroll Associates who promptly forbade employees to make any further public statements. A new analysis of the information that has leaked out makes the case even stronger

Help wanted. Little-Known 9/11 Truth Organization Strikes Gold. A Texas-based research group has forced the authorities to release a mountain of videos and other documents used in the Commerce Bureau's NIST investigation, which claimed to explain the rapid and symmetrical collapse of three steel frame buildings in the 9/11 attacks. The data is online and researchers are asking 9/11 sceptics anywhere to trawl through it in the hope of finding further evidence of a controlled demolition. At least one key video seems to have been edited to remove a crucial sequence at the start of the WTC7 collapse, but new footage has emerged where firefighters confirm that explosions preceded the buildings' collapse. Other firefighters have been bullied by the mainstream media and their employer into withdrawing similar statements .

November 19, 2010

National Stop the War march London tomorrow

Left leader Noam Chomsky recently told PressTV that the invasion of Afghanistan was never justified, because no proof was offered that Al Qaeda carried out the 9/11 attacks We agree and have been calling for a long time on left leaders to explain this to their supporters. We hope the leadership of Stop the War will now endorse our call for a new inquiry. In any case we urge all our supporters to turn up at Saturday's demo.

Please ask your MP to  write to the Iraq Inquiry

We have been exchanging letters with the Iraq Inquiry asking them to take up the 9/11 truth issue. They should be asking questions since Blair told them that 9/11 was a key event that "changed the calculus of risk" on Iraq. In our last newsletter we asked you to write to the Inquiry and we understand that a lot of you did. We believe they have tied themselves in legal knots in their responses and must now be worried about facing a judicial review. We are writing to about fifty MPs and Peers who have expressed interest in 9/11 in the past with the following letter at the bottom of this email and attached. We are asking you to do two easy things....

click to see the correspondence and how to contact your MP and the Iraq Inquiry

September 8, 2010

This Saturday: London  Day of Action for 9/11 Truth... RI911 Films and Teach-In

Passing Clouds Dalston unites with over 20 venues across London to raise awareness for the alternative evidence that contradicts the official story we have received through the mainstream media. The event will consist of films and talks during the day, then progress to live music showcases in the evening. It will also provide a launch pad for a number of new 911 Truth initiatives.

Venues across London including Passing Clouds, Notting Hill Arts Club, Vibe Bar, Hootenany, 93 Feet East, Off Broadway, Rio Cinema, Arcola Theatre, Cafe 1001, Zigfried's. Artists including 12 Tone, Hempolics, Saravah Soul, Peyoti For President, Yaaba Funk, Aruba Red, Zena Edwards, Saravah Soul, Zena Edwards, Yaaba Funk, Liam Bailey.

For full details of the various events click here.

July, 2010

Quakers for Truth on Terrorism Founded

Noel Glynn, co-ordinator of Quakers for Truth on Terrorism writes: "After leafleting the annual Quaker get-together in May I have found a handful of other 9/11 sceptical Quakers. We set up a group called Quakers for Truth on Terrorism We have also made contact with some 9/11 sceptical Quakers in the US. The challenge for us now is to remind other Quakers that they need to apply the principles of their Peace Testimony and Truth Testimony to the issue of 21st century terrorism.  It should be remembered that Quakers tend to be highly regarded in the Peace Movement with influence in many campaigning groups. We would welcome contact with any other 9/11 sceptical Quaker attenders or members whom readers may know.

July, 2010

Left Academics Challenge fellow Marxists on 9/11

The World Socialist Website has long been an excellent source for a range of suspected false flag incidents, including the 1986 Berlin disco bombing (pretext for the bombing of Libya), the 2005 Hariri assassination in Lebanon (blamed on Syria) and the recent "sinking by North Korea" of a South Korean warship (which not even the South Koreans alleged until pressed by Washington). However many other left publications have ignored the deep politics dimension to the 9/11 wars. But now Socialism and Democracy has published a seminal article, Marxism, Conspiracy, and 9-11 by experts Paul Zarembka and David MacGregor. They point out that Marx himself analysed the rise of France's Louis Bonaparte in ways that too many of today's Marxists might describe as "conspiracy theory".

Meanwhile David Ray Griffin, an eminent academic and a doyen of the 9/11 truth movement, has issued an appeal to those on the left who have gone out of their way to support the official 9/11 story. In an article entitled "Left-leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Do you Really Believe in Miracles?", carried on the leading left website Global Research, he points out that it is the supporters of the official 9/11 story who have failed to prove their case scientifically.

26 May, 2010

Retired BBC Middle East Expert: Mossad and CIA pulled off 9/11

Breaking his self-imposed rule against talking about 9/11, former Senior BBC Mideast Correspondent and author  Alan Hart described what he thinks may have really happened.

Hart, who got to know Yasser Arafat and Golda Meir while serving as a Security Council-briefed Mideast peace negotiator, said that he has been assured by a top-level demolitions/engineering expert who wishes to remain anonymous that the three World Trade Center skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolitions, not plane crashes and fires.

Hart suggested that while there may have been some original terrorist plot conceived by fellow-travellers of Osama Bin Laden, the Israeli Mossad, with its near-total penetration of Middle Eastern governments and terrorist groups alike, would have quickly detected and hijacked the operation to its own ends. Hart added that the Mossad operation that became 9/11 would have been aided and abetted by certain corrupt American leaders.

Hart has said that he has maintained silence up to now to avoid being ostracised by the controlled corporate media, which begs the question of how many other leading journalists feel similarly obliged to stay mum about their suspicions.


May, 2010

Military Officers for 9/11 Truth Launches

"At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying.  I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described... I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft.  I could not have done what these beginners did.  Something stinks to high heaven!"

These comments from Commander Ralph Kolstad are typical of the hundreds of military experts signed up to Military Officers for 9/11 Truth which launched in April.

Video evidence, released reluctantly by Washington under international pressure in 2002, indicates Flight 77 flew at top speed some 16 feet above the ground, before slamming into the only empty section of the Pentagon, hence Kolstad's comments. The mystery deepened further with with the 2006 release of the flight recorder from Flight 77. It confirmed alleged terrorist pilot Hani Hanjour's near impossible rapid 7,000 feet spiralling descent but indicates that Flight 77 then flew over the Pentagon.  It also records that there was no disturbance in the flight path at the time that, according to the official story, the plane's controls were violently taken over. It also indicates that he cockpit door was never opened, making it impossible for Hanjour even to have got into the cabin.

Apologists for the Washington story say that the amateur terrorist pilots were self taught on flight simulators but flight schools Hanjour visited that summer said he had no skill at all even on small planes.

http://MO911Truth. org


March, 2010

Top Psychologists discuss 911: "State Crime Against Democracy"

In a major breakthrough the February edition of  American Behavioral Scientist has devoted its entire issue to "SCADS", state crimes against democracy. This is no upstart publication. For 50 years it has been a leading source of behavioral research for the academic world, indexed by an extraordinary 67 major database services. The publisher, Sage, is headquartered in Los Angeles, with offices in London, New Delhi, Singapore, and Washington DC.


911 sceptics have long said that the Bush White House and the CIA were able to foist their simplistic 911 conspiracy theory onto the rest of the world with the use of psychology. Like the victims of a con trick people wanted to believe in 9/11. As Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu said when he first got the news "This is good for Israel".

The six papers in the February 2010 issue investigate how human behaviour has failed to recognize the reality of SCADS. "SCADs differ from earlier forms of political corruption in that they frequently involve political, military, and/or economic elites at the very highest levels of the social and political order," explains one essay. Another defines "negative information actions" as "wilful and deliberate acts designed to keep government information from those in government and the public entitled to it. Negative information actions subvert the rule of law and the constitutional checks and balances."

[Ref. ]


March, 2010

911 Victims Support Call for New Inquiry

Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth have received a significant new endorsement from a group of family members of 911 victims. Since the early days the "Jersey Girls" have led the call for a genuine investigation into who was really behind the 911 attacks. They were initially successful when the Bush White House reluctantly agreed to create the 911 Commission, but they later recognised that the Commission, stuffed with Washington insiders, was a sham, rubber stamping the official story. They have no faith either in Washington's NIST investigation, when government scientists said they had explained how three (sic) high rise buildings collapsed at or near freefall speed on that day, something which has never happened before or since: "As family members of 9/11 victims, we have been seeking truth and transparency since 200l. Almost nine years later, in spite of the NIST Investigation and the 9/11 Independent Commission, a vast majority of our questions remain unanswered."

This position is particularly significant because it belies the suggestions from the BBC and other controlled media sources that it is somehow offensive to 911 victims' families to question the official 911 story. For many victims insult comes rather from the media's failure to disseminate important information which casts doubt on the official story.


March 18, 2010

In London The Independent joins the 9/11 Debate.

Nine years on 9/11 is as divisive as ever, but now the debate has shifted. Instead of asking whether the 9/11 wars were the right reaction to 9/11, the mainstream media are beginning to think the unthinkable: after the Iraq WMD lies and the CIA's open endorsement of torture, why should we all take on trust the official narrative of 9/11?

In two weeks we have seen a long balanced report in the Washington Times explaining the many outstanding questions about the collapse (or controlled demolition) of the Twin Towers and WTC7, followed by an extraordinary outburst of vitriol (and little else) in the Washington Post, denouncing "poisonous thinking" in Japan, where leading government politician Yuki Fujita is an outspoken 9/11 sceptic. Now in London the Independent, the UK's most heavyweight newspaper has weighed in with an oped from US opposition leader Cynthia McKinney emphasising how we are all victims of 9/11 and demanding that the full story be told.

Since the Chinese started to divest last year, Japan is the largest foreign holder of US government bonds. Can Washington and it's tame media go on simply waving a finger at the rest of the planet? It could be that the Post's thinking is itself poisonous. And by the way, why not have a genuine international inquiry anyway? After all, Washington does not have anything to hide. Or does it?

March 10, 2010

Press Release: Cynthia McKinney supports call for a new 9/11 investigation.


Speaking at meeting in the House of Commons and later in a packed public meeting called by Reinvestigate 911, on Monday Cynthia McKinney endorsed the call for a genuinely independent investigation into the 9/11 attacks. The issue has become live again since President Obama cited 9/11 as the reason for escalating the war in Afghanistan and extending it into Pakistan, she said.

Tony Blair cited 9/11 as the event that made the subsequent wars possible when he supported calls for military action against Iran at his Chilcot appearance in February.

McKinney was the only person in Congress to ask questions about the many exercises which were being conducted by the Pentagon on the morning of the attacks. One was an anti-hijack exercise, which official sources put down to a bizarre coincidence. The existence of the anti-hijack exercise only came to light after the 9/11 Commission seized and reclaimed tapes which the Pentagon thought had been erased.

(Contd here)


March 8, 2010

Behind the War on Terror 7.00 for 7.30 SOAS King's Cross.


Cynthia McKinney
Member of the US House of Representatives for 12 years and now a global campaigner for many causes including Palestine. Cynthia was targeted for removal from the US Congress after asking what the White House knew about 9/11 and when they knew it. Last year she was snatched by Israel from a ship trying to lift the blockade of Gaza and held illegally for a week.
Dr Nafeez Ahmed
UK based terrorism expert. He has questioned some of the key tenets of Bush's "War on Terror", a posture which has continued in all but name under the new administration. He is the author of The London Bombings and The War on Truth.
Ian Henshall
Author of 911 The New Evidence and a co-ordinator or Reinvestigate 911
Chair, Dr Jay Ginn
Lecture room V211 SOAS Vernon Square Campus. Click here for map or follow these directions
King's Cross Tube, East on Pentonville Road, right onto King's Cross Road
Large old building, corner of King's Cross Road, Penton Rise and Vernon Rise. WC1X 9EW
Entrance free, donations welcome.
Our new exclusive T shirts will be on sale, organic cotton, dyed not plasticised logo, limited edition. Also Ian Henshall will be signing copies of 911 The New Evidence.

Supported by Coffee Plant 180 Portobello Road, organic and Fairtrade coffee


February 5, 2010

Hot News! US Official says Intel Agencies cleared the path for Xmas bomber. 

The left wing website has picked up what appears to be a devastating admission from State Department Under-Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy: the Christmas bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was allowed into the US on the express wishes US Intelligence. Explaining why the terrorist suspect was allowed on the plane, Kennedy told a congressional committee: "And one of the members [of the intelligence community] ... said, ‘Please, do not revoke this visa. We have eyes on this person. We are following this person who has the visa for the purpose of trying to roll up an entire network, not just stop one person.’”

This flatly contradicts the comments by officials and media speculation about "failing to join the dots" etc and underlines the reports from witnesses of a mysterious well dressed man with a US accent expediting the bomber through formalities at Schipol airport onto the plane without showing a passport.

To many 9/11 sceptics this looks like a rerun of 9/11 when evidence from FBI field officers and subsequent official investigations indicates the CIA cleared a path for the presumed hijackers. In the case of 9/11, officials and the corporate media have angrily denied any sort of collusion between US intelligence and "Al Qaeda", describing the possibility as a conspiracy theory. Apart from two articles in the Detroit News “Terror Suspect Kept Visa to Avoid Tipping Off Larger Investigation” the media appear to have ignored the news.

Note: Detroit News now has a re-edited version of the story without the quote from Kennedy paraphrased.


February 1, 2010

Press Release: After Blair's Testimony, Chilcot Should Ask Questions about 9/11

Tony Blair has told the Chilcot Inquiry that 9/11 is the key to everything in understanding why he invaded Iraq. Reinvestigate 9/11 agrees with this but calls on Chilcot to examine suspicions, widespread in many countries, that in some way 911 was an inside job. After a series of devastating leaks in the US it is no longer possible to claim that the 9/11 Commission satisfactorily explained how, armed with plastic knives, 19 fanatics, several known to the CIA, were able to evade arrest, take over and accurately control large modern jets with considerable skill.

So far Chilcot has failed even to acknowledge the submission sent to his inquiry by Reinvestigate 911.

Ian Henshall, co-ordinator of Reinvestigate 911, said:

"Chilcot has been charged to examine and report on how we went to war over Iraq and its non-existent WMD. Many will find it ironic or even dishonest if he now bins our submission and takes the official 9/11 story on trust."

Chilcot's brief starts in June 2001. This was when, as the 911 Commission confirmed, the White House was turning a deaf ear to warnings of an imminent attack within the US. After 9/11 officials deceitfully told the media that the attacks had been unimaginable and unforeseen.

Reinvestigate 9/11 calls on everyone of goodwill to join our demand for a real investigation into 9/11 and supports those calling for a public inquiry into the events of 7/7 in London. There is an accumulation of evidence which strongly suggests that all is not as it seems with the war on terror. There are some very odd coincidences and many who should not have done have benefited from 9/11. For instance we now know that Blair and the neocons were planning to invade Iraq - not after 9/11, but before.

Reinvestigate 911 says in the US and UK there has been a worrying lack of interest from the corporate media in these issues, and has condemned the BBC's Conspiracy Files programmes on 9/11 as failing in its duty of impartiality.

When the BBC's Nick Robinson said after the Iraq WMD fiasco: "we are not investigative reporters" was he speaking for the whole news broadcasting establishment?

January 2010

Osama bin Laden: Dead Bogeyman? More bad logic from the BBC's Conspiracy Files.

Many people no longer believe that bogeyman Osama Bin Laden is still alive, and this includes senior CIA officials with knowledge of the case. This was the subject of the BBC's latest Conspiracy Files broadcast on 10 January, narrated as usual in the severe tones of actress Caroline Katz. It followed the usual pattern. Some but not all of the reasons for doubting the official story were rehearsed, followed by a string of "experts" who all said the same thing: nobody in the CIA can keep anything secret so therefore we should believe the official story.

But surely the CIA's job is to keep secrets? They managed for instance to keep the multiple warnings of 9/11 secret in the summer of 2001 when they could have aborted the attacks. This argument flatters establishment academics and "investigative" journalists like the Conspiracy Files team, and helps reassure those viewers who want to be reassured. It was particularly odd in the case of OBL's reported meetup with the CIA in Dubai a month before 9/11. Whether or not the meeting took place, it could hardly be described as a secret after the French media and The Guardian had reported it.

Osama Bin Laden on the other hand can keep secrets, we were told. A helpful CIA man explained that he has successfully kept his location secret because it's difficult to take a four wheeled drive into the area he is allegedly hiding. He seemed to have forgotten about mules, satellites, drones and the multi-million dollar price on OBL's head. Nobody asked why OBL, if he is so keen to reach his fan base, could not allay the doubts over his very existence by investing in a decent mobile phone like the one side-kick Ayman Zawahari uses for his broadcasts. What happened to the multi-billion dollar empire of "Al Qaeda"?


FBI Presents Spanish MP as Osama bin Laden

From left: Osama Bin Laden (1998); Photo-fit of Osama Bin Laden

Soon after the Conspiracy Files came out the FBI helpfully bolstered the OBL myth by releasing a picture of what he might look like now. Many assumed that some sort of science had gone into this. How embarrassing when it emerged that the FBI had cut and pasted their OBL "face" from the internet. The lucky donor on the right was a Spanish MP. So far as we are aware, nobody in the US/UK corporate media had noticed anything wrong.

January 2010

Mainstream Western Media Challenge 9/11 Legend

It is impossible to keep up with the rapid speed with which 9/11 truth is penetrating the world in places traditionally suspicious of the US and Israel: places like Venezuela, Iran and Malaysia and now Russia after recent major TV programmes there. But even in the neocon heartlands the story is beginning to wobble. Canadian TV ran a major investigation which in contrast to the BBC's deplorable Conspiracy Files treated the sceptics and believers even-handedly. Now Germany has begun to crumble, despite fierce attempts from the powerful Israel lobby there to smear truthers as Holocaust deniers. A major article in Focus Money a branch of Focus, the German equivalent of Time magazine presented the sceptics view over 5 pages under the headline "we don't believe you".

In the US the media embargo on 9/11 has taken hit with ex-Minnesota governor and now general trouble maker Jesse Ventura dedicating a full episode of his new TV show to exposing the holes in the official 9/11 myth. Any lingering hopes that the Obama administration might care to investigate were dashed when a sinister article emerged written by Obama protege Cass Sunstein, head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Sunstein advocates "cognitive infiltration" of media sympathetic to 9/11 truth.

December, 2009

Christmas Bomber: Questions Mount

Reinvestigate 911 has doubts about the official story of other apparent terrorist attacks that have followed 9/11, especially since a House of Commons committee revealed last year that contrary to very clear statements at the time alleged 7/7 ringleader Mohammed Khan was well known to MI5. The extraordinary features of the apparent Christmas bomber incident demand a mention.

Who was the well dressed man who helped the bomber onto the plane without having his passport checked, through gates controlled by the same Israeli owned security firm that covered the airports used for the 9/11 attacks? Why was a passenger filming the alleged bomber before as well as after he struck? Could the tiny amount of explosive really have brought the plane down? Sceptics have also noted that the man's father, who supposedly tipped off the CIA, was a super rich Nigerian arms dealer and banker with close links with Israel too, and vast financial interests in Yemen, the new "war on terror" target.

Unaware of the irony, 9/11 Commission chair Kean told CNN that the Christmas bomber "probably did us a favour" by drawing attention to Yemen as a new theatre in the war on terror. In this sense 9/11 certainly did a lot of people in Washington London and Tel Aviv a favour too.

Flight 77 "could not have been taken over" by hijackers.


A new analysis by Pilots for 9/11 Truth seems to imply that Flight 77 which apparently hit the Pentagon on 9/11 could not have been taken over by hijackers. The most mysterious of the 9/11 flights became even more so after the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released the raw data from the flight recorder in 2006. Now Pilots for 9/11 Truth have announced that their analysis of the black box data shows that the cockpit door was not opened and therefore the cockpit could not have been stormed by hijackers. Others add that they cannot see any flight disturbance that would have occurred during a struggle which saw two burly ex-military pilots overpowered or murdered and removed from their seats, which inevitably would have disengaged the autopilot.

In addition the data were cut short a few moments prior to the supposed impact with the Pentagon but showed the plane heading over the building, not into it. The hijacking was supposedly confirmed when right wing TV celebrity Barbara Olson reported it to her husband Ted Olson (a Bush appointee in the Department of Justice) from her mobile phone on board the plane. Olson vanished after the attacks, presumed dead, but FBI phone records released in 2005 showed that the calls were never made, lasting zero seconds. Experts have confirmed that successful mobile calls are impossible from above 10,000 feet.

There are various possible explanations for these contradictions, none of them of much use to supporters of the official 9/11 story. If Flight 77 really did hit the Pentagon, then the widely respected NTSB released a grossly false set of data. Why would Washington see the need to do that? And why would the corporate media fail to notice?

One, two, three, four what are we fighting for? Don't ask me I don't give a damn, the next stop is Vietnam...

If there is one thing that people who were political in the sixties DO remember it's Country Joe and the Fish with the Vietnam Rag. Now biker Bruce Arnold has updated the lyrics to cover Afghanistan. The words have been put to music by punk rocker Johnny Punish in The Magnificant Afghanistan. Bruce and Jonny have little doubt that the new war is based on a massive lie, much as Vietnam was based on the "Gulf of Tonkin incident". How many people will have to die before the establishment section of the "sixties generation" wakes up? Here it is...

Yo, wake up texters, listen in,
Uncle Sam's after more boogeymen;
Dubya left Barack in a terrible jam
Way over in Afghanistan.
So put down your iPhone and pick up a gun,
We're gonna have a whole lotta fun.

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for?
Not freedom or our fellow man,
Next stop's Afghanistan;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no need to wonder why,
For peak oil, we're all gonna die.

Well come on, McChrystal, let's move fast;
Your big chance has come at last.
Gotta kill all those towel heads

Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup

Loose Change, the iconic internet movie on 9/11, described as the first internet blockbuster, is now into a fourth edition, available through who are streaming it from their website arranging showings and sending out DVD's. Publicity for the film is being handled by Rachel Davenport (

November 21, 2009

News round-up

9/11 Ringleader trial to be in New York. Not.
Announcements that alleged 9/11 ringleader Khaled Sheikh Mohammed is to be tried in New York are misleading. KSM is apparently going to plead guilty and will be supported in this by "his" defence lawyers, so this is not going to be a trial where anyone challenges the government's case or its evidence. In any case the trial was never going to be a normal one, but is instead under the new military tribunal rules.

The history of show trials shows that someone who is tortured in custody for a long period, as KSM reportedly was, is not only likely confess to anything but also to believe it. 9/11 sceptics have a range of opinion on where KSM might fit into a full account of 9/11 (which we have never been given). Some hold that he is a patsy and may well be technically guilty, others say he should be regarded as innocent until proven guilty. One thing that all believers in the rule of law can hopefully agree on is that after long torture sessions he cannot now receive a fair trial from the authorities who tortured him.

An article has been posted at the History Commons website pulling together several reports that suggest not only KSM but also his children were tortured after they were kidnapped by the US.

BBC's 9/11 censorship becomes bizarre
The BBC's already tight censorship of 9/11 dissenters has reached new levels of absurdity. A report on local 9/11 activists on BBC Suffolk  was taken down within 24 hours. You can check the text here, it's a fair and balanced report on the opinions of the people interviewed, none of whom are anti-semites or Holocaust deniers. Perhaps that was the problem.

Meanwhile on Radio 4 Fi Glover (who took over from John Peel Saturday 9.00am) had a minor panic attack on air when a comedian offered to repeat a joke he made on the evening of 9/11. "Tell me off air" she said sharply, they would decide if they would run it.  It didn't run, but there was a defensive comment about listeners complaining of censorship. This was not censorship, explained Glover in her prissiest voice, people could always listen to the joke in a nightclub (but not one broadcast by the BBC presumably)

French TV debate: No experts to defend official 9/11 story
Two 9/11 experts had to be dropped from the recent debate on France 2 TV. Nanotechnology expert Niels Harrit, who has analysed dust from Ground Zero was told that the producers could not find anyone of sufficient status to defend the official story. The 911 sceptic case was instead put by comedian Jean-Marie Bigard and film producer and actor Mathieu Kassovitz, both of them major figures in France. To see how they fared in the face of a barrage of attacks, click here for a version the programme with English subtitles.


November 5, 2009

Report: Reinvestigate 911 meetings in Commons, SOAS

Reinvestigate 911 has gained more momentum following Monday's meeting in the House of Commons and a well attended public meeting at SOAS the same evening. The Commons meeting was attended by one Peer, one senior MP and several aides to various MPs, some senior. About eight more MPs from all parties had asked to attend but due to last minute events and diary clashes were not present. (This is normal, the system keeps MPs overburdened with meetings and short of help.)

MPs and aides contacted after the meeting have said they found the presentation impressive. Several one-on-one follow-up meetings are being arranged.

There were presentations from UK 9/11 victim Scott Forbes, nanotechnology expert Niels Harrit and 911 The New Evidence author Ian Henshall.

for more details click here


October 30, 2009

Saturday 31 October: Full Page Newspaper Ad

The ad is due to run in the Independent, the UK's most serious newspaper, read by MPs and others in the elite. These people have the greatest difficulty accepting that 9/11 was most likely some sort of an inside job, so we have been careful not to go an inch beyond the provable facts. Click here to see a full-size version of the ad.

The ad has been financed by Coffee Plant, organic Fairtrade coffee bean suppliers and retailers ( Already Reinvestigate 911 has received some 10% of the costs from supporters, if most of the remaining costs are defrayed by donations Coffee Plant will do the same again. To donate click on the "support us" button to the left or call Coffee Plant on 0208 453 1144 with your credit card details.

Monday November 2: Public Meeting in London, Private Meeting in House of Commons

Please contact your MP to press them to attend the meeting, see below. The list of speakers is the same for both meetings (with video and audio from several others).

SCOTT FORBES is a British victim of the 9/11 attacks. Scott had the trauma of seeing many colleagues die as the Twin Towers collapsed opposite his New York flat. He was off work after attending to a power down the weekend before the disaster. Workers were recabling the building. The media and the 9/11 Commission have refused to investigate what was going on. Scott is not making allegations, he just wants to know the truth.

NIELS HARRIT is an expert on nanotechnology. His suspicions were aroused when he saw the rapid symmetrical collapse of Building 7, which took place hours after the attacks took place. The media announced the collapse before it happened but it took Bush's scientists years to offer any sort of explanation. They have admitted the collapse was at free fall speed. Niels has analysed dust samples from the site and found some bizarre high energy particles which seem to be artifical.

IAN HENSHALL is the author of 911 The New Evidence. He is suspicious of the paper trail: warnings ignored, FBI investigations blocked prior to 9/11 and a series of "exercises" including a "hijack exercise" taking place on the day of the attacks.

MPs are increasingly taking an interest in the holes and inconsistencies of the official 9/11 story. PLEASE CALL YOUR MP as a constituent to draw their attention to the invitation they have received. Phone the House of Commons on 0207 219 3000 and ask to be put through or better still ask for a meeting. Alternatively fax them by going to Please remember that for people in the establishment the idea that the 9/11 official story is false is hard to accept, especially during a hurried conversation. All you may have time for is to explain that the 911 Commission is discredited and no solid evidence has been produced to cover many aspects of the official story. Beyond that, we advise you not to try to argue with them. We will send a free copy of 911 The New Evidence to any MP or assistant promising to read it. Please make sure to email us with their reaction, particularly if they are at all sympathetic.


October 23, 2009

Danish PM: I had Tip-off Towers Would Collapse

Poul Rasmussen, Prime Minister of Denmark on September 11 2001, has told TV viewers he was personally tipped off that the first of the Twin Towers was going to collapse some ten minutes before the event.

To those without curiosity over the events of 9/11 this may not seem significant, after all the media tell us experts have proved scientifically that the Towers were always going to collapse.

But US government scientists took more than two years to come up with an explanation for the spectacular collapse of the Twin Towers, and another two years to explain the free fall collapse of WTC7 (which had not been hit by a plane) later in the day. Who figured out the building would collapse some thirty minutes after the South Tower was hit by a plane and ten minutes before the collapse happened?

Apparently not any architect or engineer. In an extensive investigation The New Yorker magazine could not find one expert who thought at the time that the Twin Towers would collapse after the plane impacts and fires. This is no surprise. The Empire State Building was hit by a plane years before the plans for the Towers were proposed, so there was a very public debate culminating in a general acceptance that the design could easily withstand one, some said several, plane impacts. And planes at the time the Towers were built were just as big, just as fast and, despite strange suggestions in the corporate media to the contrary, planners knew that a colliding plane would have fuel on board too.

In fact the super fast, symmetrical and total collapses have still not been scientifically explained. The NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology, part of the Commerce Department) report, based on secret evidence, secret computer models, never peer reviewed, and written by government scientists whose ultimate employer was President Bush, was about as scientific as the inquisition. It took several alterations to the secret computer models (according to sacked whistleblower Kevin Ryan) to get the desired answer. Even then they could not find any evidence that the fires reached the high temperatures their theory required. The report ended at the moment when the collapse began, thus failing to explain the most bizarre features of the event.

The question remains: who figured out that the architecture and engineering professions would get it wrong, and phoned the Danish PM to let him know? It wasn't the firefighters: chiefs were planning to set up a station a few floors below the seat of the fires. Two firefighters had reached the fires and radioed to say they were manageable with two hoses. One was the Fire Department's terrorism expert who had made a study of the structure of the Towers. Fire chiefs told the media that a total collapse was "the farthest thing from our minds".

Some 9/11 sceptics have an explanation: it was whoever recabled the Towers in the weeks before 9/11, and encouraged Mayor Giulliani's team to leave their emergency management centre in WTC7 which collapsed later in the day. The team were part of Dick Cheney's anti-terrorism exercise which involved a fake hijacking and a disaster in New York. A smoking gun, say sceptics, a simple coincidence, say the corporate media.

If experts and the media had blown the whistle on the controlled demolitions, say sceptics, it would have been presented as a desperate act of necessity to make sure the buildings came down in their own footprint, minimising the damage. But this would be the fallback position, or limited hangout in CIA jargon. To keep the story simple, and avoid public suspicions and expensive lawsuits, top politicians and the media were told in advance to expect a spontaneous collapse, say sceptics.

This is clearly a case for the BBC's Conspiracy Files. But the BBC had a tip-off too. Recently a video surfaced of a BBC reporter announcing that the third building that day, WTC7, had already collapsed while viewers could plainly see it still intact in the background behind the reporter (

So how will the BBC Conspiracy Files react to the news? Will they go back to their sources, ask Rasmussen where the tip-off came from or perhaps ask 10 Downing Street if they had a tip-off too? Unlikely. "Due impariality" though an obligation incorporated by law into the BBC's royal charter, in practice extends to giving a platform to nazis but not to 9/11 sceptics.

The BBC are ultimately paid by the UK government, so they will probably choose to stand shoulder to shoulder with the scientists at NIST, paid by the White House, and wait for the next official report. This might take several more years, especially if NIST are called on to explain the droplets of molten iron and traces of nano-thermite (an explosive/incendiary agent used in controlled demolitions) recently found in samples of WTC dust by independent experts.

In the meanwhile, since 9/11, there's always a war somewhere to report on.

September 6, 2009

Report the 9/11 debate honestly: September 11 demo outside the BBC

Activist group London Truth Action are picketing the BBC from 12.00pm to 8.00pm this Friday September 11. Reinvestigate 911 supports this picket and calls on all who doubt the 9/11 official story to assemble. Co-ordinators of Reinvestigate 911 will be available to meet supporters and for media interviews between 4.00 and 6.00pm.

The BBC has reported that it intends to give a place on Question Time to the right wing BNP, recognising its legal obligation under a rule known as "due impartiality". Reinvestigate 911 deplores the fact that the BBC has ignored repeated requests to apply this rule to us. Instead they have produced a series of programmes (The Conspiracy Files) featuring wild speculation by radicals, half truths and smears, while refusing mainstream 9/11 sceptics any right of reply.

It appears the BBC only airs doubts over the official 9/11 story when they think they have evidence to refute them, evidence they present uncritically without giving sceptics a chance to reply. The BBC website still has an article rushed out soon after 9/11 quoting an "expert" as saying the Twin Towers collapsed because the fires caused the steel beams to melt, a view that has since been refuted by scientists on both sides of the 9/11 debate. Another article contains a structural diagram of the Twin Towers which entirely omits the massive load bearing central columns.

More recently the BBC has failed to report on the peer reviewed paper by Danish chemistry professor Niels Harrit, who has found highly energetic thermate type nano-particles in several samples of dust from Ground Zero in New York, an indication that explosives were involved in the rapid collapse of the three buildings (WTC 7 collapsed in a similar symmetrical and rapid way to WTC 1 and 2 later on the day of the attacks though it had not been hit by any aircraft). The BBC de facto censorship has been maintained even after Harrit flew to the UK and impressed a House of Commons meeting in July.

We are disturbed by the allegation from far right activist Martin Webster that the BNP has done a backdoor deal to get access to the media in return for the BNP dropping anti-Semitism and instead targeting Muslims. The BNP's support for Israel's attacks on Gaza seems to vindicate Webster's theory. We call on the BBC to refute this allegation and explain why due impartiality is applied to the BNP but not to Reinvestigate 911.

Here is one blog presenting criticism of the BBC sent in by a supporter of Reinvestigate 911 (but please note that we do not necessarily endorse the content of this or any other link on this site)

September 6, 2009

FBI translator and whistleblower: CIA was working with Al Qaeda right up to 9/11

At the heart of the official 9/11 story lies the assertion that the CIA had cut off all contacts with alleged 9/11 godfather Osama bin Laden years before the 9/11 attacks. This would be unusual behaviour for an intelligence agency and there have been many allegations to the contrary.

French mainstream media reported widely that in the weeks before 9/11 Osama bin Laden was in high level meetings with the local CIA station officer in Dubai, under cover of receiving hospital treatment. Unsurprisingly the doctor concerned refused to comment publicly and US/UK media mostly failed to report the story.

Now the CIA/Al Qaeda link has been corroborated by whistleblower Sibel Edmonds who was given the job of translating intercepts for the FBI after 9/11. When she started to go public on the corruption and double dealing she had become aware of through her work she was gagged by the Bush White House, but that gag that has now been lifted. Edmonds has distanced herself from the 9/11 truth movement, so her recent statement is all the more significant: Osama bin Laden was indeed in contact with the CIA right up to the 9/11 attacks. In our view this alone should justify a new investigation into whether Washington has been lying, and what else they may have been lying about.

The case of Ali Mohammed presents another problem for the official story. Investigative journalist Peter Lance (Triple Cross, published by Regan books) has established that Mohammed trained the 1993 World Trade Centre bombers while working as a special forces instructor at Fort Bragg, that he helped to train Osama Bin Laden's personal bodyguard and expedited his 1995 move from Sudan to Afghanistan after the US government refused an offer from Sudan to extradite him to the US.

Many suspect the CIA/Al Qaeda ties did not end with 9/11. Respected journalist Seymour Hersh reported that the Pentagon was sponsoring radical Sunni expansion into Lebanon, and a few months later "Al Qaeda in Lebanon" appeared .

September 6, 2009

Japan: Democratic Party victory propels prominent 9/11 sceptic to government benches

One of the planet's most prominent 9/11 sceptics and leader of politicians for 9/11 truth, Yukihisa Fujita, is a senior government Senator after the Democratic Party of Japan swept to power last week. Fujita, a prominent supporter of humanitarian and peace issues, has said that the Japanese government should not accept the official US story without conducting its own investigation of 9/11. Unlike the UK, where Michael Meacher was hounded by the media after writing that the war on terror was a fraud, in Japan the media have been more even handed, so it will be interesting to see what happens next.

September 6, 2009

Date confirmed for second House of Commons meeting

The second Reinvestigate 911 Commons meeting has been fixed for Monday November 2, following the success of the July meeting which drew several MPs, peers and researchers (unlike most campaigns who have lots of activists but no MPs present). Please ask your MP or any peer you know to look out for their email invitation and come to the meeting where a series of key speakers will be answering questions. The goal is to confront the various smears we face and break the media embargo on 911 doubts. Only those activists who are involved in the lobbying effort will be invited. If you would like to get involved beyond lobbying your own MP (we assume you would do that anyway) please contact us at

July 16, 2009

Reinvestigate 911 Breaks into Parliament

In a breakthrough for campaigners, a meeting has been held in the new Parliamentary extension Portcullis House at which speakers challenged the official story of the 9/11 attacks. This was the first time since the attacks nearly eight years ago that MPs and Peers heard - on their own premises - the widespread view outside it: that 9/11 might have been an inside job.

A followup meeting is pencilled in for November 2. Reinvestigate 911 is calling for members of the public to alert their MPs to this.

A previous meeting was abandoned after the MP who had booked the room cancelled at short notice, after apparently being pressured. One UK based intelligence expert and 9/11 sceptic who frequently addresses academic audiences described the meeting as a breakthrough.

Only a few MPs and Peers attended the meeting in person, but others sent assistants, gave support for future meetings or asked for a report of the meeting. This includes well known and senior figures, but to protect politicians from the predictable attacks and smears from those who support the official 9/11 story, organisers are not releasing names at this stage.

November 2 is pencilled in for a followup meeting, with foreign politicians and experts expected to attend. In the runup to that meeting Reinvestigate 911 will be exploring with sympathetic MPs and Peers various plans for raising Parliamentary and media interest in discovering the full story behind the 9/11 attacks.


June 28, 2009

House of Commons meeting to discuss 911 attacks

Reinvestigate 9/11 has invited all MPs and Peers to a seminar on the 9/11 attacks, taking place on July 6. This is the first time such a meeting has been held in the Palace of Westminster and will upset journalists and editors in the mainstream corporate media who deny that there are any legitimate doubts over the official 9/11 story. 

A room in the Palace of Westminster can only be booked by an MP or Peer. A previous meeting was cancelled at short notice by 9/11 sceptic and senior Labour MP Michael Meacher. The explanation remains murky.

Reinvestigate 911 is calling on members of the public to approach their MP as a constituent. Please either go to to fax or email, or call the Commons switchboard on 0207 219 3000. Ask to speak to your MP and you will be connected to their office. Other MPs should not be approached.


June 22, 2009

New York Campaign Update

Campaigners in New York are close to forcing New York State to hold a genuine investigation into the 9/11 attacks. A petition is being collected and now has over 52,000 signatures, which if they are all valid will force the authorities to put the inquiry proposal on the ballot at the next elections in the autumn. If voters then  support the call for a new enquiry it will go ahead with full subpoena powers and serious open minded investigators in charge.

One such investigator is William Pepper the man who established that, contrary to the official story,  Martin Luther King was indeed killed as part of a conspiracy. Pepper persuaded a jury of this in a civil case in the 1990's but the verdict was largely ignored by the corporate media.

Only New Yorkers can sign the petition, but donations are welcome to help pay for the massive operation needed to collect so many signatures. To contribute go to their web site, New York CAN where 9/11 victims, truth campaigners and first responders all demand the full story.

May, 2009

Obama CIA Chief: Cheney almost wishing for another 9/11

In a deeply significant intervention in the 9/11 saga Obama's CIA chief Leon Panetta has accused Dick Cheney of "dangerous politics". Panetta told The New Yorker in response to Cheney's recent media campaign in support of the Bush/Cheney torture policies: "When you read behind it, it's almost as if he's wishing that this country would be attacked again in order to prove his point".

Panetta did not publicly say that Cheney wished at the time for 9/11 to enable the Bush political agenda, but his highly unusual comments pointed to this possibility. Normally the mainstream US media maintain a polite discourse which consigns such ideas to the realm of "conspiracy theories".

The record shows that before 9/11 the Bush White House along with CIA director George Tenet were making detailed plans for the invasion of Iraq even though, as Rumsfeld told the 9/11 Commission, the invasion of Afghanistan was out of the question politically at that stage.

Some 9/11 sceptics believe the Bush White House inherited a relatively harmless CIA plan to engineer an attack in the US, and drastically upped the ante to create a bloodbath and use the ensuing hysteria to enable the invasion of Iraq. Panetta was chief of staff in the Clinton White House and would have been aware of any CIA plans in the pipeline at the time.

April 02, 2009

Leading 911 sceptic to visit London Tuesday 14 April

Professor David Ray Griffin will be speaking at the City University, Northampton Square EC1, London at 7.00 pm

Nearest underground: Angel tube station. Tickets £5 from

David Ray Griffin, perhaps the planet's leading 9/11 sceptic, was dismissed as an unnamed "theology professor" by The Guardian's George Monbiot in his hysterical attack on 911 sceptics last year, in which he accused them of being "morons" who believe in magic.

The truth is different. Griffin's 35 books (the titles of which can be seen at Amazon) include several that deal with the philosophy of science. Griffin's definitive treatment of 9/11 to date, "The New Pearl Harbor Revisited," was named "Pick of the Week" last November by the authoritative Publishers Weekly.

(Monbiot's judgement, on the other hand, seems to have been informed by little more than a biology degree, a tough deadline and the need to provide the lively copy expected of highly paid  Fleet Street columnists. His views are not shared by Lynn Margulis one of the world's leading biologists, currently a visiting professor at Oxford University, who recently gave support to 9/11 sceptics.)

Griffin's views on the impossible official story of the 911 attacks are increasingly shared by independent scientists with expertise in relevant fields (see for instance the recent blog from Egypt), several of whom have endorsed his books - the next of which will be titled: "The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False."  Reinvestigate911 does not necessarily endorse all of DRG's views and arguments, but his case is certainly as strong as can be made prior to an independent investigation with subpoena power. In "9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press," he showed that the official story about 9/11 is riddled with internal contradictions. For example, the FBI now contradicts its earlier reports about the alleged phone calls from the planes. It denies that the famous calls from Flight 77 made by CNN commentator Barbara Olson to her husband, Ted Olson (then the Solicitor General for the Department of Justice), ever happened. And it denies that any high-altitude mobile phone calls were made from the airliners.
To find out more about how the official 9/11 story cannot stand up, join David Ray Griffin on Tuesday.

See also press release re. DRG's tour on

"911: The New Evidence" makes big splash in Middle east

While the US escalates its war in Afghanistan 9/11, doubts are increasing in the Muslim world.

US policy seems set on a collision course, not only with the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan but intellectuals across the Muslim world who increasingly doubt the official story of the 9/11 attacks, the US's main justification for escalating the war. Many believe 9/11 was an inside job to convince Americans and Europeans that pre-planned wars of aggression were actually self defence.

In the declining days of the British Empire and the Suez fiasco, Cairo was the heart of an earlier anti-colonial struggle. In February 2009, half a century later, a crowded meeting of around 200 people responded to a small ad in Al Ahram to attend the Cairo launch of the Arabic language translation of 9/11 The New Evidence. The seminar was later aired in full on Al Jazeera's streaming news channel, Al Jazeera (Mubasher).

(Continues here)

March 15, 2009

Political leaders follow medics, religious leaders, form 9/11 truth groups

The war in Iray may be winding down, but the eight year war in Afghanistan is certainly set to escalate, with no exit strategy and no end in sight. The most common justification is that "Al Qaeda" must not be allowed a safe haven or we will risk "another 9/11". So it's not surprising that more and more intellectuals and experts are putting their heads over the parapet to challenge the official story of the 9/11 attacks.

In the last few months Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has been joined by Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth, Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth and now, most recently, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth. Most sceptics are unsure of the real story of the collapse of the Twin Towers and the attack on the Pentagon, but all agree that the legend of diabolically skilled Al Qaeda operatives who succeeded in evading US immigration controls, tricking the CIA, evading at least two separate teams of FBI officers hot on their trail, hijacking planes without even one official hijack warning  from the eight pilots and co-pilots (most of them ex-military), and achieving navigational and targeting successes that would shame most experienced pilots, seems pretty unlikely.

Political leaders are wondering why the Bush cabinet had, top of the agenda, detailed plans for the invasion of Iraq in February 2001, eight months before the 9/11attacks took place. All commentators agree it was only 9/11 which made the attack on Iraq remotely politically feasible. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, who has revealed this, says cabinet discussions were joined by CIA boss George Tenet. Tenet told the 911 Commission he had not met Bush in the weeks before the attacks, but later said he "forgot" about  flying to Texas for an all day meeting with Bush and the Chiefs of Staff. Days after the attacks, Tenet and Cofer Black, head of counterterrorism at the CIA (whose department, instead of stopping the attacks, failed to pass on vital information to the FBI) were presenting Bush with detailed plans for the notorious torture network, and a multibillion dollar budget increase.

Unusually for the US corporate media, CBS has run a serious interview with Political Leaders' co-founder Robert Bowman.

The end of the Bush "reign of terror" in Washington has given campaigners the opportunity to demand accountability. As 9/11 victims relatives put  it in an open letter to Senator Leahy (who is proposing a Truth Commission to look into the Bush regime):

"At the 9/11 Commission hearings, little actual evidence was ever produced. Many individuals were not sworn in... Whistleblower testimony was suppressed or avoided all together... With the narrative of the 9/11 Commission's final report predetermined and with the preexisting intention to never hold anyone accountable in place ... completing that investigation should also be included on your list of matters to be examined."

February 27, 2009

Plane Crash Widow Campaigned for 9/11 Investigation

The 9/11 widow who died in the recent crash in New York doubted the truth of the official story of the 9/11 attacks. Beverly Eckert was so sure the US government are still hiding important information that she waived an automatic seven figure compensation pay-out. In order to force further investigations she refused to sign an undertaking to give up all her rights.

Beverly Eckert and her fellow campaigners should not be dismissed as "conspiracy theorists". Many of them are victims of 9/11, have studied the large amount information released by official sources and concluded that the official 9/11 story does not add up.

The corporate media in the UK played up the tragedy last week, casting Beverly Eckert as a hero, but generally failing to mention her campaign, which led to the formation of the Washington's 9/11 Commission. The Commission reported in 2005 but Chair Thomas Keane later admitted it had been "set up to fail" by the Bush White House.

A spokesman for Reinvestigate 9/11 said:

"Newspapers fear a haemorrhage of credibility from another weapons-of-mass-destruction type scandal if the official story of the 9/11 attacks turns out to be substantially wrong. They are operating de facto censorship and denying basic democratic debate in pursuit of an industry vendetta against what they call '9/11 conspiracy theorists'. It is sickening that they would insult her memory by denying even in death her right to ask questions about the 9/11 attacks".

Contact: Ian Henshall. 079469 39217


1. It may be that the new White House team is as sceptical of 9/11 and the CIA as the US public appears to be. According to opinion polls, 85% agree with the proposition that the US government is hiding things. Along with Ms Eckert at the White House meeting were survivors of the attack USS Cole, allegedly carried out by Al Qaeda while the ship was refuelling in the port of Aden on Oct 12 2000.

2. The media have speculated that icing was the cause of the crash but so far no direct evidence of that has emerged from forensic tests or from pilot tapes. The plane had extensive protective equipment against icing. With Beverly Eckert such a high profile 9/11 truth campaigner and respected by the new President, there has been speculation that the plane was sabotaged.

3. Here are the original questions asked by Beverly Eckert and her fellow campaigners. Mist have still not been answered by official sources to date.

February 06, 2009

Senior US Terror Official: Official 9/11 Story Not Credible

Terrell (Terry) E. Arnold a senior Washington anti-terror boss has spoken out on the 9/11 attacks, saying the official case is unproven and contradicted by the evidence. This follows leaks (see earlier blogs) from FBI officials on secondment to the CIA at the time, claiming that the CIA not only blocked the FBI probes that would have aborted the 9/11 attacks but did this deliberately. Here are extracts from Arnold's interview with the George Washington blogspot, an excellent 9/11 source...

Terrell (Terry) E. Arnold was the number 2 counter-terrorism official at the U.S. State Department, and is one of the world's leading experts on terror.

Arnold served as the Deputy Director, Office of Counter-Terrorism and Emergency Planning, at the U.S. State Department. He is also the former Chairman of the Department of International Studies at the National War College.

GW: You write:

"Washington leadership [has] brought us no closer than we were on September 12, 2001 to resolving how [9/11] was executed and by what enemy.

Let's focus on the how question first.

What facts or observations make you doubt that the official government story does not fully explain how 9/11 was carried out?

Terry Arnold: The nature of events in New York. The buildings falling down. I'm not satisfied by the notion that planes hitting buildings would have caused them to collapse. The last building to fall was not even attacked.

GW: Now let's address the question of who carried out the attacks. You write:

"They tell us repeatedly that it [9/11] was the work of al Qaida, but they have yet to show us the proofs."

As a counter-terrorism expert, what sort of proofs would you expect the government to show if al Qaeda had carried out the 9/11 attacks - at least without the help of any state?

Terry Arnold: The case has not been fully made. The official story is not too persuasive.

Publishers' Weekly Picks 9/11 Book

Here is a significant item we should have posted in November. The gretest obstacle to the truth about the 9/11 attacks is undoubtedly the uncritical acceptance of the official story by corporate journalists and more importantly editors and executives. These people have an air of authority - undeserved, when you consider the lies about Iraq's WMD and the failure to report the significance of the Project for a New American Century's plans for world domination, published before the 9/11 attacks. So whenever experts from outside the Washington led media mafia endorse 9/11scepticism it is significant. Publishers Weekly is the BBC of publishing. Here is an email from Ray Griffin...

"The New Pearl Harbor Revisited", by Dr. David Ray Griffin, has been named "Pick of the Week" by Publishers Weekly, November 24, 2008.

In 2004, when David Ray Griffin published his first book about 9/11, "The New Pearl Harbor", the book was largely overlooked by mainstream sources. Now Griffin's seventh book about 9/11, "The New Pearl Harbor
Revisited", has been named "Web Pick of the Week" by Publishers Weekly

Weekly reviews from this trusted and prestigious publisher have guided the book trade, including booksellers, publishers, librarians, and literary agents, for 136 years

Dr. Griffin's book can be found at good bookstores or purchased at a discounted price from ( or from (

Top TV Drama Leads with 9/11 Accusations

The 9/11 Truth movement has always maintained that it will be impossible to suppress the truth for ever, but it is hard to predict just how the dam will burst. Who would have expected a Murdoch-owned TV show to feature detailed and articulate criticisms of the official 9/11 story? Here is the New York Times version (as it is fair and factual one can conclude it was written by someone from outside their hopeless news department)

The Political Suspicions of 9/11


Published: February 1, 2009

A coming episode of the acclaimed FX drama "Rescue Me" will tackle what may sound like a far-fetched plot line: that the attacks of Sept. 11 were an "inside job." The actor who espouses the theories on camera, it turns out, also subscribes to them in real life. The actor Daniel Sunjata calls the attacks an "inside job."

Claims that terrorists were not solely responsible for the attacks have a lively following on the Internet, including on YouTube, but the second episode of "Rescue Me’s" fifth season, starting in April, may represent the first fictional presentation of 9/11 conspiracy theories by a mainstream media company (FX is operated by the News Corporation).

"They’re not discussed a lot in the press," Daniel Sunjata, the actor who plays Franco Rivera on "Rescue Me," told reporters at a television press tour last month. He predicted that the episode would be "socio-politically provocative."

In the episode, Mr. Sunjata’s character delivers a two-minute monologue for a French journalist describing a "neoconservative government effort" to control the world’s oil, drastically increase military spending and "change the definition of pre-emptive attack." To put it into action, he continues, "what you need is a new Pearl Harbor. That’s what they said they needed."

Mr. Sunjata surprised some of the TV reporters when he said that he "absolutely, 100 percent" supports the assertion that "9/11 was an inside job."

The alternative theories "seem to me to make a lot more sense than the ones that are popularly espoused," he said, calling it admirable that the conversation was allowed within "Rescue Me."

Peter Tolan, an executive producer, said Mr. Sunjata is "well read" and has "done a lot of research."

"Look, obviously not all of us buy in," he told reporters. "But we went: ‘Wow, that’s interesting, and he’s passionate about it. Let’s use that.’ "

Sept. 11 has been a touchstone for the series, which is set in a New York City firehouse. Denis Leary, who plays the lead character, said Mr. Sunjata’s character creates a rift among the fictional firefighters. Similar scenes have played out in actual firehouses in New York, he said, "where some of the younger members don’t even have to completely buy into the theory of 9/11 being an inside job, but want to discuss it." BRIAN STELTER

February 06, 2009

Jimmy Carter Supports New 9/11 Probe
Friday, January 30, 2009

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter has become the latest, and perhaps most prominent, public figure to express support for a new investigation into the 9/11 attacks.

We Are Change Ohio attended a book signing by the former President in Chicago. Despite the best efforts of secret service personnel to abduct the person recording the conversation, the audio of Carter's words were still captured.

Carter was asked, "I was just wondering if you'd support the victims family members that want a new investigation into 9/11". Carter clarifies the question before responding, "Yeah, I don't have anything to do with it but I certainly would... it would be nice"

February 05, 2009

BBC Airs Holocaust Smear

I have just sent off a press release protesting about an item on today's BBC flagship Today programme. A Jewish spokesman brought the issue of 9/11 scepticism into a discussion on the Holocaust, suggesting that 9/11 sceptics are Holocaust deniers. At the same time the beeb refuses any platform to sensible 9/11 sceptics who are not radical libertarians or Holocaust deniers (yes, they did manage to find one in our ranks). Any lawyers out there wanting to take up a no win no fee libel action against them on my behalf? These smears are particularly annoying as I am just about to get on a plane to Cairo for the launch of 911 The New Evidence in arabic. The media my book reach are seem to be Talksport and PressTV, while the national broadcaster most people here in the UK trust is conniving in smears and operating de facto censorship. Anyway, here is the text of my press relase:

January 20, 2009

What did Olmert Have on Bush?

Bush made a humiliating U turn on Gaza. Was he being blackmailed?

It was so bizarre that it might have been dismissed as an internet rumour if it had not been reported in the Washington Post and other corporate media. Last week, just before the UN Security Council voted for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, Israel's PM Olmert (by his account at least) phoned George Bush, insisting that he leave the podium in the middle of a speech and told him to change America's vote. The State Department has issued a semi-denial, but a few hours later Condoleza Rice did indeed change the US vote from the promised yes to an abstention, giving Israel the public OK to continue the slaughter in Gaza. According to many reports they used illegal phosphorus weapons which set human flesh on fire. According to the Sunday Telegraph they hit a surprising number of children "accidentally" in the head.

As respected blogger Professor Juan Cole says, Olmert must have something on Bush. But what? Bush is a rich man, he's not facing reelection. He's also a proud and arrogant man: why humiliate himself publicly?

Could it be that Israel has evidence that 9/11 was allowed to happen, or (when you consider the near impossibility of anyone, let alone amateurs, flying large passenger jets in the way they were supposedly flown on that day) made to happen? Could it be that Bush has been a victim of blackmail since tasting the forbidden fruit: benefitting from a crime so ugly that, however indicative the leaks and however compelling the evidence, no-one in the corporate media would countenance its possibility.

Of course this can only be speculation at this stage. But one thing we do know is that 9/11 has never been properly investigated. Another is that 9/11 provided Washington neocons and Tel Aviv with their biggest propaganda gift for a long time. It bought the opportunity to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, two long term neocon goals, and it bought Tel Aviv another seven years of settlement building in Palestine. Those with any political nous can deduce that a real investigation into 9/11 would almost certainly turn up a lot more than the brazen lies that Condoleeza Rice and George Tenet told on oath to the 9/11 Commission.

(Ignored by the corporate media apart from Agence France Presse, George Tenet denied and then admitted that he had been in multiple meetings with Bush at his Texas ranch in the weeks before 9/11. One he "forgot" was with the Chiefs of Staff and lasted all day. Condoleeza Rice told the Commission, entirely wrongly, that "she could tell them" there was "nothing" in the CIA's infamous August memo to Bush, still secret at that time, to say attacks were anticipated in New York. In fact the memo stressed this possibility.   

But the really odd question is this: why do so many people on the establishment left, the UK's Socialist Workers Party for instance, Johan Hari in the Independent or George Monbiot in The Guardian, denounce 9/11 sceptics as some sort of enemy?

They often justify this judgment with the claim that 9/11 is no longer relevant.

Tell that to the people with the burning flesh in Gaza.

December 17, 2008

Career Army Specialist sues Rumsfeld, Cheney: "official 9/11 story is false"

April Gallop was nearly killed in the Pentagon attack, allegedly carried out by amateur pilot Hani Hanjour flying a Boeing 757 at full speed for hundreds of metres at literally 15 foot above ground level. Hanjour's expertly steered plane then struck a newly reinforced wing that was mostly unoccupied, acording to the official 9/11 story. Gallop, one of the unfortunate people in that part of the building, does not believe this and she is taking court action to discover the truth.

This case shows, if nothing else, just how many ways there are for the truth to emerge. For the coverup to succeed each and every case like April Gallop's will have to be suppressed (although it is perhaps instructive to note that many have been). Here are extracts from internet news service Rawstory.


911 victim April Gallop: Rumsfeld and Cheney conspired to facilitate 9/11 attacks

A career Army specialist who survived the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, claims that no evacuation was ordered inside the Pentagon, despite flight controllers calling in warnings of approaching hijacked aircraft nearly 20 minutes before the building was struck.

On behalf of Spc. April Gallop... California attorney William Veale has filed a civil suit against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney and former US Air Force General Richard Myers, who was acting chairman of the joint chiefs on 9/11. It alleges they engaged in conspiracy to facilitate the terrorist attacks...

Spc. Gallop also says she heard two loud explosions, and does not believe that a Boeing 757 hit the building.

"What they don't want is for this to go into discovery," said Gallop's attorney, Mr. Veale, speaking to RAW STORY. "If we can make it past their initial motion to dismiss these claims, and we get the power of subpoena, then we've got a real shot at getting to the bottom of this. We've got the law on our side."


November 10, 2008

Mumbai: murdered police chief had exposed false flag Hindu terror cell

Shock as top Indian Army officer arrested over bomb attack.

No, this was not the 26 November Mumbai attacks, but a sinister and under reported incident some three weeks earlier. In the words of The Times:

"The Indian Army has been shocked by the arrest of a senior Military Intelligence officer on suspicion of involvement in a bomb attack by Hindu extremists in western India in September.

"Colonel Srikant Prasad Purohit is the first serving officer in India's Army (seen as a bastion of secularism since the country's independence in 1947) to be arrested on terrorism charges.

"His detention is prompting calls for a ban on Hindu nationalist groups accused of stirring political violence, including recent attacks on Christians in eastern India, before national elections next year.

"It may also force Indian authorities to investigate whether Hindu radicals were behind other recent bomb attacks, many of which have been blamed on Islamic extremists backed by Pakistan's intelligence service."

In fact other attacks blamed on Muslim extremists were already being reviewed when this story came out. But the bizarre feature of this case is that Purohit was arrested by the Mumbai anti-terror squad and the head of the squad, Hemant Karkare, the man responsible for fingering Purohit and his military intelligence based gang of false flag terrorists, was assassinated, ostensibly by Muslim terrorists in the highly professional Mumbai attacks three weeks later.

Some 9/11 sceptics pointed out a parallel with the FBI's John O'Neil who died in the 9/11 attacks. O'Neil was forced out of the FBI in the  months before theattacks after a major feud with the US State Department who he accused of obstructing his investigations into Al Qaeda. O'Neil died on the first day of his new job helpfully found for him by friends in New York: head of security at the World Trade Centre.

Reinvestigate 911 does not jump to conclusions, but clearly there needs to be an independent investigation into whether the Mumbai attackers really were from Pakistan and, if they were, who organised them and whether anyone in India, perhaps an associate of Purohit, could have helped them find and murder Karkare. has a large number of references, including to the increased co-operation in recent years between Israel's Mossad and Indian intelligence.

November 06, 2008

Obama wins

I don't want to seem sour, but I have a worrying feeling that the only good thing about Obama is that he is not Bush or McCain. The best chance for 9/11 truthers is not that Obama decides to open the files on 9/11 (as Green candidate Cynthia Mackinney promised), he won't. His policy positions and appointments so far suggest he is more of a Washington man than his supporters think.

He might however be distracted enough by current events to allow some slack to people in Congress like Dennis Kucinich who arre planning some limited inquiries.

He probably thinks 9/11 sceptics are harmless conspiracy theorists and does not understand the need to keep everything about 9/11 under wraps. There are oppoortunities for the 9/11 truth movement because most of us believe the official story is so precarious that it will withstand very little proper scrutiny.

October 26, 2008

The Endorsement From Hell


Backing Bush and McCain: But is he even alive?

One oddity of the 9/11 attacks is that the politicians in the US like George Bush and John McCain who have championed the "war on terror" enjoy the endorsement of Al Qaeda. Washington writer Ron Suskind quoted senior CIA analysts as determining that Al Qaeda was pushing for a Bush victory in 2004. That election was arguably swung by the notorious "Osama Bin Laden" video a few days before polling, in which OBL (or an actor) praises US progressives like Michael Moore and offers them his support.

Now Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times has learned from a CIA source that a leading password protected Al Qaeda website is saying they will support Mc Cain in this election.

Many of those who believe the official 9/11 story accept that this sentiment is privately reciprocated in Washington, pointing out that within days of the attacks the CIA got an 18 billion dollar budget increase, along with carte blanche to torture, kill and kidnap.

Ron Suskind: The One Percent Doctrine, pub Simon and Shuster

October 04, 2008

Officials from FBI and CIA "ready to speak out"

FBI agents involved in tracking suspected terrorists in the months before the attacks have always claimed that they were prevented from investigating suspects later named as 9/11 terrorists. Some 9/11 sceptics say that the number of investigations which were aggressively blocked by senior FBI managers cannot be explained by overwork and lost messages as the official narrative insists.

Up to now, however, agents have not alleged that vital information was deliberately withheld by the CIA. This would be clearly illegal, as the FBI was the lead agency in counter terrorism (by presidential directive) and the CIA was in any case forbidden under separate legislation to intervene within the US.

Now FBI agents Mark Rossini and Douglas Miller, on assignment in summer 2001 to the "Alec Station", the CIA's top secret Osama bin Laden unit, are reportedly prepared to describe on camera how the CIA blocked them from sharing crucial intelligence on two alleged terrorists with FBI headquarters - and then later threatened them into lying to Justice Department investigators to cover this up.

This would be powerful new evidence for the view held by many sceptics that key personnel in the CIA and FBI were protecting ther 9/11 plot from discovery. Cofer Black, who later championed  CIA's post 9/11 strategy of torture and extrajudicial killings, was in overall charge of the Alec Station team, which was stationed on separate premises and secret from the rest of the CIA. Black, who cut his teeth working for the CIA in apartheid South Africa, wrongly told a 2002 Congrssional Inquiry into 9/11 that the CIA had passed on vital information "verbally".

In addition, ex CIA Station Chief Robert Baer, an advisor for the 2003 film Syriana, has expressed deep scepticism about aspects of the attacks in an interview with alternative film makers We Are Change.

Baer discusses the mystery of the white van seized by FBI agents on the day of the attacks, whose occupants turned out to be Israelis with links to Isaeli intelligence, and goes on to the issue of whether anyone in Washington had foreknowledge of 9/11: "I know the guy that went into his broker in San Diego and said `cash me out, it’s going down tomorrow.’", says Baer who goes on to say the man's brother "worked in the White House."

Baer has quoted insiders as saying that 9/11 was not a disaster but the CIA's "greatest triumph": exactly the view of many 9/11 sceptics.

September 11, 2008

Rep Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, Cynthia Mackinney all want new 9/11 probe

Dissident Democrat congressman Dennis Kucinich is calling for a South African style 9/11 Truth Commission.

"Before the Congress adjourns, I will bring forth a new proposal for the establishment of a National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation, which will have the power to compel testimony and gather official documents to reveal to the American people not only the underlying deception which has divided us, but in that process of truth seeking set our nation on a path of reconciliation."

His statement cited the false links between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein's Iraq and did not openly challenge the official 9/11 "facts". However Kucinich has expressed strong scepticism over the 9/11 attacks on previous occasions, so it would appear the omission had more to do with meeting the editorial line of establishment media on the centre left like The Nation and the Huffington Post which have mostly given unqualified endorsement to the official 9/11 story.

Most US 9/11 sceptics nonetheless welcomed Kucinich's the call, arguing that a commission with full subpoena power would soon get to the facts.

The call for a new 9/11 enquiry was endorsed by Green candidate Cynthia Mackinney who promised that as President she would open all the files on 9/11. In addition, veteran populist Ralph Nader described the 9/11 Commission as "flawed, right from the get go... can you imagine an attack like that and the government didn't even want to have an inquiry?" he asked, referring to the two year's of campaigning by victim families which eventually led to the 9/11 Commission.

For Kucinich's full statement see

For Nader see

September 11, 2008

Russian TV screens documentary sceptical of Washington's 9/11 story

ZERO, a documentary made by eminent Italian journalist and euro MP Giulietto Chiesa but largely suppressed by corporate media in western Europe, has been screened on prime time Russian TV. The documentary argues that the official story cannot be true.

It has long been the view of many 9/11 sceptics that, as ex-President of Italy Francesco Cossiga stated recently, every intelligence service in the world knows this. Some have speculated that the Russian screening of Zero was a warning shot to US and its allies not to restart a cold war with Russia, as appeared to be happening after the brief August war in Georgia. There are unconfirmed reports that Russia has satellite pictures taken on the day of the attacks that would prove the official story is not true. Many 911 sceptics say an amateur pilot could not have flown a large Boeing 757 passenger jet at high speed at ground level to hit the Pentagon, as the official account insists.

For more news about Zero, and its screening in Berlin,2144,3626100,00.html

Less than half the planet blames Al Qaeda for 9/11 attacks.

The poll was conducted by the Project on International Policy Attitudes. It interviewed 16,000 people in 17 countries, far larger than the normal sample for an opinion poll, and included people in the US, UK and other allied countries. They were asked who they thought was behind the 9/11 attacks. Many, for instance 25% in Germany, thought the US government was the culprit. Despite the neutral tone of the question, the result understates the strength of the sceptic position because many sceptics believe that although the attacks were probably the work of Al Qaeda, they must have been helped to succeed by the deliberate inaction of US authorities. Others believe Al Qaeda indeed organised the attacks, but is controlled by the CIA.

Other polls have found that over 75% of US citizens believe they have been not been told the full story of the 9/11 attacks, while one in three believe it is likely that the US government deliberately helped the attacks to succeed.


September 09, 2008

New York 9/11 ballot initiative achieves goal.

Cynics say that the true story of the 9/11 attacks will never be known, but they could be underestimating the tenacity of New Yorkers, 30,000 of whom have signed a petition calling for a new independent investigation of the events that the corporate media say were entirely the work of 19 fanatical hijackers.  Here is a report from New York:

Thanks to all the hard-working petitioners who have spent months on this historic effort, we have now gathered over 30,000 signatures of NYC registered voters!

This is the minimum requirement to submit a ballot initiative to NY City Council. Now the foundation has been established. From here we will build and create a winning campaign that will result in placing the Initiative for a new, independent, comprehensive 9/11 investigation on the ballot in 2009.

Now there is a grassroots action which is designed to obtain an honest, independent investigation of 9/11 by placing an initiative on the New York City ballot. Although we hoped to be ready for the Nov. 4th, 2008 general election, we would have needed at least 2-4 weeks longer in order to submit everything to New York City Council. So now we will aim for the mayoral election of 2009. Our core team of 25+ volunteers actually feel positive about this. We prefer to increase our numbers to a much higher level which will make an undeniable case for passage. Therefore, we will continue to gather petition signatures into the next year with the goal of reaching 100,000 signatures and establish a powerful mandate showing the voters of New York City are calling for the creation of a new Commission that will conduct an authentic and comprehensive investigation of 9/11.

If you're not a resident, you can direct all your friends and family in New York City to this site and urge them to sign our petition and volunteer. Also, you can also donate to the cause. You will be contributing to the momentum we are creating to call for an impartial, independent investigation of the most consequential event of our time.

September 06, 2008

Canadian Professor: we need an International Tribunal on 9/11

Anthony J. Hall, Founding Coordinator of Globalization Studies University of Lethbridge, Nova Scotia, has eloquently made the case for an International Tribunal to try to discover the whole story behind the 9/11 attacks.

Here are some extracts from his paper:

We must empower a credible international tribunal of esteemed jurists with sufficient independence to asses on its own merits the growing body of evidence to indicate that the destruction of the Twin Towers and World Trade Centre 7, together with the hit on the Pentagon, were caused by something considerably more elaborate than the actions of nineteen young Saudis equipped with nothing but box cutters, flight training and jihadist zeal...

Too much state terror and too much state criminality has occurred since 911 not to revisit the scene of the crime that created the springboard for such systemic and unrelenting abuses of authority and sacred trusts vested in our governments. Was the whole 911 operation really planned and instigated by a band of Islamic extremists acting alone?

Was the whole undertaking really planned and coordinated in distant Eurasian caves, ones conveniently located on planned pipeline routes meant to tap the last large reserves of unexploited Middle Eastern oil? Was the role of Wall Street in the events of 911 confined to that of victim? Wouldn't any truly independent inquiry into what actually transpired on 911 begin by addressing such fundamental questions and then work from there?

September 01, 2008

Flight 93 cellphone mystery

9/11 sceptics have from always been suspicious of the part of the official 9/11 story which claims that cellphone calls were made from hijacked planes. Initially suspicion was based on the extreme difficulty of making mobile calls from planes flying at normal altitude. Much later FBI records were released which confirmed the sceptic view: nearly all the alleged cell phone calls were made by in flight phones, the FBI now concedes. But this creates another problem: why were the calls so snatched and frequently cut short? Because, say many sceptics, the calls were faked, using voice cloning technology. To hide the fact that the caller was an impostor the calls were made to look like mobile calls, cut short when the recipient might become suspicious. One call had the caller introducing himself to his mother by his surname and then asking if she believed him before being apparently cut off.

Now 9/11 author Rowland Morgan has discovered that according to the FBI the mobile phone belonging to presumed 9/11 hero Todd Beamer was used for multiple calls AFTER flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania. According to the official story the phone should have been buried with the plane wreckage. Morgan concludes

"The long series of one-minute calls to Woodbridge NJ after the 9/11 events, starting at 11:07 and ending at 20:58 is perplexing. The intervals range from 1:38 hours to 0:02 minutes and show no pattern that I can distinguish...

Woodbridge, a small town not far from the Fresh Kills crime-scene where all the WTC debris was collected... The only connection I could find was a management recruiting company that works for Oracle, which was Todd and Lisa Beamer's workplace...

I think this is contributory evidence that Todd Beamer was not aboard Flight 93 - at least, not with his cell-phone about his person."

(Source: private correspondence based on FBI court testimony. Journalists and researchers wishing to follow up this lead should contact reinvestigate 911)