David Eisenbach, a Columbia University professor, said he will submit an amicus brief in a lawsuit filed by families of people killed in the World Trade Center attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
New evidence in a 9/11 lawsuit against the government of Saudi Arabia alleges the kingdom’s embassy in Washington, DC, may have funded a test run for the deadly attacks in 2001, according to the New York Post. Sean Carter, the lead attorney for the 9/11 plaintiffs, stated wihtout hesitation, “We’ve long asserted that there were longstanding and close relationships between al Qaeda and the religious components of the Saudi government.”
Additionally the NY Post is reporting the following:
“…Two years before the airliner attacks, the Saudi Embassy paid for two Saudi nationals, living undercover in the US as students, to fly from Phoenix to Washington “in a dry run for the 9/11 attacks,” alleges the amended complaint filed on behalf of the families of some 1,400 victims who died in the terrorist attacks 16 years ago.
The court filing provides new details that paint “a pattern of both financial and operational support” for the 9/11 conspiracy from official Saudi sources, lawyers for the plaintiffs say. In fact, the Saudi government may have been involved in underwriting the attacks from the earliest stages — including testing cockpit security…”
“…Citing FBI documents, the complaint alleges that the Saudi students — Mohammed al-Qudhaeein and Hamdan al-Shalawi — were in fact members of “the Kingdom’s network of agents in the US,” and participated in the terrorist conspiracy.
They had trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan at the same time some of the hijackers were there. And while living in Arizona, they had regular contacts with a Saudi hijacker pilot and a senior al Qaeda leader from Saudi now incarcerated at Gitmo. At least one tried to re-enter the US a month before the attacks as a possible muscle hijacker but was denied admission because he appeared on a terrorist watch list….”
The NY Post further went on to report that two Saudis conducted a dry run of how to hijack a plane on a flight from Phoenix to Washington DC. The two men were also in constant contact with the elements and agencies of the Saudi government:
“…Qudhaeein and Shalawi both worked for and received money from the Saudi government, with Qudhaeein employed at the Ministry of Islamic Affairs. Shalawi was also “a longtime employee of the Saudi government.” The pair were in “frequent contact” with Saudi officials while in the US, according to the filings…”
I have reviewed more transcripts from the press releases coming from the plantiffs attorneys. The evidence, as represented by the summary evidence presented in this article appears strong. However, I have very little faith in the judicial process in this country because Obama appointed judge after judge that has expressed extreme disdain for the United States and its laws.
Even if the court case is successful in implicating the Saudi government in the 9/11 attacks, this does not explain away the apparent cover-up of the United States government, as directed by the Bush administration in which key evidence was ignored or tainted.
The Complicity of the Bush Administration in the 9/11 Attacks
A general historical rule of thumb states that one cannot judge the true implications of landmark events for 20 years following the event. History has indeed demonstrated that a culture is not a good judge of its own immediate history. With regard to the events of 9/11, we are over half way through this historical prohibition related to the judging the significance of a landmark event. However, a clear and unmistakable pattern is beginning to take shape. And that pattern points to a government who continues to lie about the events of 9/11. I want answers and I want them now!
A Day That Will Live In Infamy
Pearl Harbor is often heralded as the most defining event in the 20th Century. The events surrounding the events of that fateful December 7th day have been meticulously investigated (e.g., battle tactics, leadership ineptitudes and conspiracy theories). Don’t the three thousand families of the victims of 9/11 deserve any less of an analysis? Apparently, the United States Government does not think so. Therefore, in the absence of full disclosure, the rank and file of the American people are left to conduct their own investigations. However, for many who have dared to question the official 9/11 Commission Report, they have been met with unyielding oppression which has often resulted in the researchers and skeptics being fired and publicly humiliated (e.g., Steve Jones).
I have serious doubts about the validity of the findings of the 9/11 Commission. The findings are neither complete nor completely believable in their present form. Here is a brief and partial summary of my continued unanswered questions related to 9/11 that I want answered and I will continue to ask these questions, each and every year, until each and every question is answered completely and accurately.
It Is Time for Answers
1. Why was the video of the Mineta testimony removed from the 9/11 Commission website?
2. Why has not the government addressed the “coincidence” of Able Danger? It is a case of a terror drill providing plausible deniability for the terror act embedded within the drill.
3. What explains the failure of the Government to release the many videotapes of the plane, on approach, that struck the Pentagon? It is 12 years later, where are the tapes?
4. Why was there a change in the scramble/intercept procedure three months prior to 9/11 for jets that are off course accompanied by a change in the shoot down orders?
5. What can explain the failure of the government to scramble jets over a period of an hour and twenty eight minutes between the Twin Towers being struck and the crash in Pennsylvania? With this kind of air security, Somalia could successfully invade the United States.
6. How could the unrelated events of 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq be successfully linked which culminated in the demise of Saddam Hussein despite strong evidence to the contrary?
7. What explains the well documented (e.g., Kevin Phillips) Bush/Cheney plans to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq within the first 10 days of the Bush Administration. This was well in advance of 9/11? However, 9/11 was used as the excuse in the early days of our military action to justify these unwarranted invasion. Why wasn’t this contradiction investigated?
8. The well documented engineering and architectural arguments which, in my mind clearly demonstrate that the fire and heat generated by the planes striking the Twin Towers were insufficient to melt the core of the buildings. Why doesn’t this evidence support the 911 Commission findings? Why hasn’t a Congressional investigation looked into this striking discrepancy?
9. What could explain the almost near free-fall collapse of all three towers which defies the official explanation? Never before in the history of engineering and planes crashing into buildings has a building come down in such a free-fall and symmetrical manner?
10. Where are the pieces of plane wings that supposedly struck light poles on its approach to the Pentagon? Shouldn’t independent investigators be able to examine these wings to determine the authenticity of the 9/11 report on this topic. The trust me approach did not fly in 2001 and it damn sure doesn’t in 2013.
11. The attack upon the Pentagon appears to any layman who looks at this evidence to look more like a missile strike than an airplane crash. Why does the circumference of the hole in the Pentagon greatly differ from the width of the plane? Why is there an exit hole on the backside of the building since the plane melted upon impact? Where is the debris field that one would expect on the backside of the building?
12. What about the pop outs we see on each floor of the WTC buildings before the collapse? Howe could this not be considered to be a controlled demolition?
13. Where are the skid marks on the lawn prior to impact at the Pentagon that would have been left by the plane which supposedly struck the Pentagon?
14. What about the evidence which strongly suggests that 11 nations warned the United States about the possibility of such an attack?
15. Maintenance worker, William Rodriguez, was the last man out of the Twin Towers. At 8:46AM, Rodriguez reports that he heard two distinct explosions, seven seconds apart, which emanated from the floors below him. Rodriguez also reports the two explosions occurred before the planes hit the towers. Rodriguez was interviewed by the 911 Commission for 30 minutes, in secret, behind closed doors. His testimony is conspicuously absent from the 9/11 Report. So why did the last man out of the Towers manage to have testimony left out of the 9/11 Commission Report?
16. Brigham Young University professor, Steve Jones, concluded that super thermite was used to bring down the Towers, including Tower 7, through a controlled demolition. Jones contends that he was warned by governmental officials that if he published his results his personal “pain would be great.” And the warning proved prophetic as Jones was fired his job as a professor after publishing his results. How does a tenured university professor get fired for publishing legitimate research results when the peer review process could have been utilized to analyze and discredit the Jones’ claims?
17. Ground Zero rescue worker, Mike Bellone, claims he was approached by unknown FBI agents a short time after he and his partner, Nicholas DeMasi, a retired New York firefighter, found three of the four “black boxes” among the WTC rubble before January 2002. In the 9/11 Commission Report, Chapter 1, footnote 76, there is the sole but definitive reference to the airline “black boxes”: “The CVR’s and the FDR’s