9/11 - The Legal Initiative

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Mar 19, 2017.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No dodge Shiner, I answered your ignorant questions. No one ever "authors" facts, that is as idiotic as it gets. If you want to know who all the people are that discovered and/or confirmed all these massive NIST failures I can provide a list of most of them but that's not what you asked for nor are you really looking for any answers. You're already operating under the delusion that there's no OCT and no grand jury investigation as you claim.

    I never said any such ad hominem invention of yours, they're not MY facts, I don't own them and who are you "leaning on" for what YOU believe are facts? The US government of course, that's as pathetic as it gets.

    No it's you who lives in fantasyland, YOU bought the phony OCT and defend it 24/7 despite the enormous amount of evidence that proves it's impossible.
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Correct, so what didn't you understand about:


    So first you deny the source material was listed for you and at the same time you question the source material, the very same source material NIST used. But yet you claim the 9/11 investigations were "adequate" despite that you question the source material NIST used. You don't even understand that this has nothing to do with what actually happened, it's strictly about NIST's failure to properly investigate what happened to the 3 WTC towers including NIST's failure to investigate for controlled demolition, of which there is overwhelming physical evidence and eyewitness and expert witness testimony being presented to the grand jury. And as a result, a demand for a legitimate investigation, it's not a conclusion. The NIST theory is on TRIAL here, do you get it?

    Do you understand basic physics Shiner? Based on your posts it's obvious you are clueless. What kind of ****ing engineer doesn't understand that 47 story buildings about an acre in size just don't free fall from fire? How much more basic can this be for you?

    Yeah the ones NIST admitted they omitted from the drawings and failed to account for to formulate their theory. Right, STIFFENERS, you do know what those are eh Mr. "engineer" who knows nothing about physics?
     
  3. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,546
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    83
    so the only thing you accept as a fact is something that comes from someone else? Brilliant.
    that is extremely rare, so rare it vitually does not happen and when it does it gets engineering approval first, wth did you come up with that crap? citation?
    Very oft? Citation?
    All what physics? I never viewed cutter charges as a monumental physics problem
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2018
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So what names should be at the top of the list for the grand jury to subpoena to testify in 2019? It will not be made public but my guess is that it will be leaked.

    If it were my choice I would place Mr. "Pull It" Lucky Larry Silverstein as the #1 to be questioned. The video testimony of the late Barry Jennings should also be heard by the grand jury as well as in person interviews with Michael Hess.



    Willie Rodriguez would also be high on the list.



    Kevin McPadden would also be a person of very high interest.



    As Marlene Cruz.



    And Indira Singh



    These are just some of my suggestions, there are of course many, many more, none of which appear in the 9/11 Commission Report.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Recommended subpoena of expert testimony:

    Tom Sullivan:



    Dr. Leroy Hulsey:



    Roland Angle:



    And of course Shyam Sunder:



    And his sidekick John Gross:



    To name just a few.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Expert Testimony - Part II:

    The NIST reports face an insurmountable obstacle in legal land for any defense strategy, they just don't pass the legal smell test. In fact they fail miserably. What is also true is that many of the articles written that dispute the NIST reports are legally sustainable. The smell test is something called the Daubert test, a standard established by the Supreme Court in Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113, S. Ct. 2786, 125 L. Ed 2nd 469 (1993) for determining if expert testimony is admissible in any criminal proceeding or not. There is a lengthy technical article written on the subject that is available for anyone to review the details on the subject called The Cause of the Destruction of the World Trade Center Buildings on September 11, 2001 and the Admissibility of Expert Testimony:

    http://www.journalof911studies.com/...oped-in-daubert-v-merrell-dow-pharmaceutical/

    In summary (for those who don't want to read the article), what it means is that in science, what is universally accepted as valid must follow all the principles of the scientific method. One of the primary components of the scientific method is peer review. Without peer review, it can be determined that the scientific method has not been employed and cannot be considered expert testimony and must be rejected by an impartial judge as unreliable.

    The NIST reports have never been peer reviewed and NIST has done everything it can to make peer review impossible by refusing to disclose ALL their data and models, denying them under FOIA request. In fact these reports would fail under peer review anyway given the many peer reviewed scientific articles written challenging the conclusions of all the NIST reports. The exact opposite is true for many of the scientific studies/articles that have been written in challenge of the NIST reports. One such key study written by Dr. Leroy Hulsey's team will soon be available and entered into the court record.
     
  7. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,138
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    48
    wake me from my slumber when the grand jury actually convenes ... and I promise to shave off my waste length beard when Hulsey actually produces a report ... his grad students are having grandchildren already ...
     
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It seems only ONE newspaper is willing to report on the grand jury investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. And of course it's a very local newspaper called WestView News. The puppet MSM suppresses all news stories that contradict or questions the OCT.

    https://www.911tap.org/557-news-releases/783-the-little-newspaper-that-could

    Grand Jury Should Investigate World Trade Center Explosions On 9/11

    https://westviewnews.org/2018/06/grand-jury-should-investigate-world-trade-center-explosions-on-911/
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    9/11: Finally the Truth Comes Out?
    By Paul Craig Roberts

    Although the United States is allegedly a democracy with a rule of law, it has taken 17 years for public pressure to bring about the first grand jury investigation of 9/11. Based on the work of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth led by Richard Gage, first responder and pilots organizations, books by David Ray Griffen and others, and eyewitness testimony, the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry has presented enough hard facts to the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York to force his compliance with the provisions of federal law that require the convening of a federal grand jury to investigate for the first time the attacks of September 11, 2001.

    This puts the US Justice (sic) Department in an extraordinary position. Every informed person is aware that elements of the US government were involved either in the perpetration of the 9/11 attacks or in a coverup of the attacks. There will be tremendous pressures on the US Attorney’s office to have the grand jury dismiss the evidence as an unpatriotic conspiracy theory or otherwise maneuver to discredit the evidence presented by the Lawyers’ Committee, or modify the official account without totally discrediting it.

    We can have hopes that the United States can establish the true story of its own Reichstag Fire, but I am not holding my breath that the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York can stand up to the powerful elements in the Deep State that perpetuated or covered up the 9/11 false flag attacks or that he is inclined to try.

    What the 9/11 truthers and the Lawyers’ Committee have achieved is the destruction of the designation of 9/11 skeptics as “conspiracy theorists.” No US Attorney would convene a grand jury on the basis of a conspiracy theory. Clearly, the evidence is compelling that has put the US Attorney in an unenviable position.


    Skipping ...

    If the Lawyers’ Committee and the 9/11 truthers trust the US Attorney to go entirely by the facts, little will come of the grand jury. If the United States had a rule of law, something as serious as 9/11 could not have gone for 17 years without investigation.

    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/01/04/9-11-finally-the-truth-comes-out/

    It's difficult to disagree with Paul Craig Roberts on this issue. He questioned 9/11: finally the truth comes out? Some truth has already come out such as about the 9/11 Commission, NIST and their respective reports, that they were all scams designed to coverup the truth about 9/11 for example. And that's partly why there's a petition for a special grand jury investigation into 9/11. The other part of the truth is that there exists a body of corroborating physical and eyewitness evidence of multiple explosions, prior to the initial airplane impacts and prior to the destruction of 3 towers on 9/11. And there are also the many corroborating eyewitness claims of seeing large amounts of molten steel. Explosion evidence comes in the form of seeing, hearing, feeling, being injured by and killed by these explosions.

    As such most of the exhibits (the evidence) fully support the likelihood of controlled demolition and the US government has not supported its official natural gravitational collapse hypothesis (peddled as fact) with anything that would stand up to a Daubert test. OTOH quite a bit of scientific research in support of the controlled demolition hypothesis does stand up to a Daubert test. The problem is the Daubert test is not typically applied in a grand jury investigation that I'm aware of. That would be part of a courtroom procedure if this gets that far.

    https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Daubert+Test
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    According to the petition (begin at page 22):

    Evidence that Pre-planted Explosive and/or Incendiary Devices Were Detonated and Ignited at the World Trade Center on 9/11 is Broad and Conclusive.

    In the body of and in the attachments to this Petition, the Lawyers’ Committee provides evidence of the commission of the four federal crimes described above, and the related aiding and abetting and conspiracy crimes, which crimes were effected via the planning and implementation of multiple bombings of places of public use and government facilities by use of pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries. These crimes took place on 9/11 and during the months preceding 9/11, in New York City. These crimes involved the placement of explosive and/or incendiary materials in the WTC north tower (WTC1) and in the WTC south tower (WTC2) as well as in WTC7 prior to 9/11, and the detonation of those explosive and/or incendiary materials on 9/11. These crimes resulted in the death and serious injury of thousands in these buildings and near these buildings at the times of detonations and at the times of the destruction of these buildings, including hundreds of First Responders and two federal agents.35 The actions of the perpetrators who placed and detonated and ignited these explosive and/or incendiary materials in these WTC buildings increased the number of fatalities and injuries and the shock of the crimes of 9/11 well beyond that which would have resulted from the aircraft attacks alone.

    The fact that pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries were used to destroy these three WTC buildings on 9/11 is supported by extensive evidence including forensic evidence, expert analysis and opinion, and eyewitness testimony. The evidence includes laboratory analyses of the dust found at the World Trade Center, scientific studies by experts in the fields of architecture, engineering, chemistry, and physics and by numerous reports of explosions and other observations by witnesses on the scene including WTC employees, firefighters, policemen, and other First Responders. The Lawyers’ Committee considers the totality of this evidence conclusive.

    This evidence falls into the following categories
    [details for each provided, referencing the exhibits]:

    Forensic Evidence
    Expert Opinion
    Eyewitness Testimony & Video
    Anomalies


    IMO unless an (uncorrupted) grand jury subpoenas NIST (or any other respected scientific/investigative authority) and NIST can offer scientific evidence that can successfully refute most of the evidence provided by the petition in scientific/technical detail, there is no chance the grand jury can conclude anything but controlled demolitions. Furthermore, in addition to criminal indictments for anyone found responsible, the grand jury should also recommended criminal indictments for those responsible at NIST for conspiracy to perpetrate a massive fraud.

     
  11. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You see Bob, this is what I meant. You claim this "evidence" is incriminating. In reality this horseshit has been debunked on dozens of forums, hundreds of times. It's why the Grand Jury will throw this junk out for the complete garbage it is.

    I actually laughed at your crazy backwards logic. NIST don't need to refute crap, the crap needs to be shown not to be.
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So what kind of evidence will the grand jury be considering? To begin with, following the text of the first amended petition, the exhibits filed with the petition will require consideration as they are the supporting source material for the amended petition (i.e. the incriminating evidence of explosions/controlled demolitions). The grand jury will then have the option to subpoena any person or representative of any entity referenced by the petition and the attached exhibits. They may also ask for independent confirmation of the expert opinion introduced by the petition using outside expert witness testimony. But what they will likely never consider are individual posts from discussion forums and contents from anonymous "debunking" sites (as ridiculously implied), that would make no sense at all. The petition itself explains it quite clearly (see page 53 of the first amended petition):

    A GRAND JURY MAY CONSIDER ALL EVIDENCE OF ANY TYPE.

    Although there are no limitations on the type of evidence a grand jury may consider, the types of evidence provided in this Petition, including eyewitness reports from firefighters and EMTs who were among the First Responders, as well as photographic and scientific evidence are among the most reliable of all the types of evidence that grand juries are allowed by law to receive and consider. No constitutional provision prescribes the kind of evidence on which grand juries must act.136 The grand jury’s work is not circumscribed by technical requirements such as those which govern ascertainment of guilt of defendants once a grand jury has finished its inquiries and an indictment has been issued, but rather may consider any evidence a reasonable person might use to reach logical conclusions.137 In this case, the evidence is not only reasonable, it is compelling and disturbing. It raises serious questions about the events of 9/11, and proves that other perpetrators beyond the alleged hijackers were involved in the slaughter of so many innocent people.

    A grand jury is not blocked in its investigation by rules of evidence which operate at a criminal trial. It may hear and consider any testimony including hearsay, and an indictment returned by a legally constituted, unbiased grand jury, if valid on its face, is enough to call for a trial of a charge on the merits.138 The Fifth Amendment allows a defendant to be tried on minimally sufficient allegations of an offense if a grand jury makes a determination that it considers those allegations sufficient to warrant exercise of its prosecuting discretion.139

    A federal special grand jury in this case is empowered to investigate the evidence presented by this Petition, to issue subpoenas and compel people with knowledge to testify, to draw its own conclusions and to indict as it sees fit to hold anyone to account for any role they played in the federal crimes related to 9/11 and the murder of so many people.
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Edit for the above:

    136 Costello v. U.S., 350 U.S. 359, 361-62 (1956), rehearing den. 351 U.S. 904
     
  14. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Evidence cited in the petition.

    Wow, another crazy interpretation of a straightforward statement. If the internet can show how easy the horseshit is to explain and has done so on numerous occasions, they will also be able to come to the same obvious conclusion. That was what was implied!
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2019
  15. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,138
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I wonder if the Hulsey report will be ready in time ... I'm sure there will be discovery if the grand jury decides to move forward with a trial ...
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The claim by Hulsey himself was that it should have been ready at the end of last year. The claim by the Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry is that the Hulsey report will be filed as supporting evidence for the grand jury investigation but likely after it passes peer review and in its final form. The grand jury investigation will likely take many months as there is an incredible amount of evidence to examine and if the grand jury is doing its job properly, many, many witnesses of all types to interview. So the likelihood is that it will be ready within that time frame. Regardless, there's more than enough supporting evidence even without the Hulsey report to reach the conclusion that the towers were very likely control demolished. I'm not even sure what evidence or eyewitnesses the grand jury will examine that can successfully refute that. Definitely not "internet" forums, blogs or "debunking" sites lol. Those are the only sources that spend all their efforts defending the OCT. I'm sure Mick West won't be subpoena'd to testify. He would have a hard time explaining that he has the proper background/standing as an "expert witness". Remember all they need is hearsay evidence*, they don't need conclusive evidence. So given the adage that a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich, this one should be a massive hoagie.

    The only 2 known engineering studies other than NIST and Hulsey were the Weidlinger and ARUP studies, both of which contradicted NIST's findings and both of which were rejected by the Hulsey study as invalid for numerous reasons (see the preliminary Hulsey report). In any case they were strictly limited to WTC7 and had no access to the entire body of NIST's data (no one does) nor did they interview any eyewitnesses. Will those be used to support/defend the "natural gravitational collapse by fire" hypothesis of WTC7? I have no idea but they are both severely limited and don't have anything to do with the twin towers anyway.

    * U.S. v. Garnes, 156 F.Supp. 467, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 1957), aff’d 258 F.2d 530, cert. den. 359 U.S. 937. Even an indictment based on hearsay, incompetent, or inadequate evidence would not be void or violate defendant’s constitutional rights. U.S. ex rel. Combs v. Denno, 231 F.Supp. 942, 944 (S.D.N.Y. 1964), aff’d 357 F.2d 809, cert. den. 385 U.S. 872.

    Of course, there has to be discovery prior to any legitimate criminal or civil trial. And discovery is what everyone who wants the truth about 9/11 is looking for and has never had, especially the 9/11 families. Any legitimate 9/11 trial would take many years and involve many. It was after all the crime of the century.
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2019
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    From the petition:

    CERTAIN PERSONS MAY POSSESS MATERIAL INFORMATION.

    The Lawyers’ Committee has decided to not reference in this First Amended Petition either suspected perpetrators or potential material witnesses by name. (but I will) However, there are obvious categories of persons who may have material information regarding the federal crimes reported herein that would be helpful to a special grand jury, or in the alternative to a grand jury, and to the DOJ. (Silverstein Group - Larry Silverstein, CEO and all those who purchased put options on the 9/11 airline companies - American Airlines and United Airlines and the WTC insurance companies) Those individuals who were arrested after reports that they were celebrating the airplane strikes on the WTC are one such category. (the dancing Mossad Israelis) The FBI already has the names of these individuals. A second category of such persons who may have material information related to the federal crimes reported herein are those contracted service providers who performed any work in the WTC buildings at issue in the weeks and months prior to 9/11 including those who performed construction, maintenance or repair work in these WTC buildings, including but not limited to work on the elevators. (ACE Elevator Company) A third category of such persons are those persons involved in WTC security and in controlling or documenting who had access to the WTC buildings at issue in the months prior to 9/11. (Stratesec/Securacom - Marvin Bush & Wirt Walker III, co-CEOs) The Lawyers’ Committee is willing to present to the DOJ, and to appear before a special grand jury, or in the alternative to appear before a grand jury, and present directly to such grand jury the information available to the Lawyers’ Committee regarding any such persons known to the Lawyers’ Committee and the material information they may have.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  18. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,388
    Likes Received:
    2,246
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's powerful stuff Bob.:fingerscrossed:
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Only if every juror is not brain dead.
     
  20. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That statement is back to front.
     
  21. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,138
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    48
    have they submitted any physical evidence of explosives? ...
     
  22. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Once something explodes, what physical evidence would be left? Most of the physical evidence was deliberately destroyed prior to any investigation. Not to mention NIST admitted they never looked for any during their "investigation" because they deliberately dismissed it in favor of a pre-conceived hypothesis.

    There is however submission of photos, FEMA reports and research identifying physical evidence of incendiaries and accelerants, eyewitness claims, expert witness analysis, coroner reports, fragments of human remains (reported but not submitted to my knowledge), video evidence and debris field all strongly indicating explosives.

    https://www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org/exhibits-index-grand-jury-petition/
     
  23. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,153
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    Trophy Points:
    113
    From an FAQ from the Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry:

    Q: How would you explain your case in brief, layman’s terms?

    A: If you see a bird on the lakeside and it walks like a duck
    and quacks like a duck, it is likely a duck. First Responders saw and
    heard, and reported, the sights and sounds of explosions at the WTC on
    9/11. Chemical testing of the WTC dust shows the presence of high-tech
    explosives and incendiaries. Videos of the collapse of WTC1, WTC2, and
    WTC7 show for all to see to this day the characteristics of a
    controlled demolition. The obvious conclusion from these key categories
    of evidence is corroborated by numerous other categories of scientific
    and technical evidence described in the Petition. The emperor (the
    official story that the WTC buildings collapsed due to fires from the
    aircraft attacks) has no clothes. As Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s
    character, consulting detective Sherlock Holmes, is famous for stating,
    when one has eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however
    improbable, must be the truth. The complete collapse of these three WTC
    buildings on 9/11 was caused by the use of pre-planted explosives and
    incendiaries. No other theory fits all of the available evidence.


    https://www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org/frequently-asked-questions/

    The key sentence is highlighted above. NIST is the ONLY officially designated (by Congress) authority that has published the ONLY known official "probable collapse initiation" hypotheses for the twin towers and WTC7. It has been proven that their published hypotheses for the destruction of 3 WTC towers on 9/11 is not only not scientifically valid but based on contrived data. As such there is NO known official theory that fits ALL the available EVIDENCE. That evidence includes but is not limited to physical, video, eyewitness testimony and expert witness testimony.
     
  24. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I'm not surprised by the fact they are using long debunked conspiracy theories as their evidence. This legal action wont go far.
     
    l4zarus likes this.
  25. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    9/11 is an Inside Job because of Ducks.
    Got it...a masterful legal strategy.
     

Share This Page