New Investigation

The only way a truly fair investigation could be conducted is if there were some entity on this earth who had nothing to lose or gain, no matter the outcome. Good luck finding that!

However, if said entity existed, it need only to look at 2 aspects of what happened on 9/11

1- How did 3 "pilots" with questionable training and skill, and no experience in airliners hit their target?

2- WTC 7

I know that there are countless other angles to look at, and if your hot button isnt here, im sorry. But these two occurences, in my mind, are the ones with the highest probability of error, as well as the most impossible, yet they both occurred.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

Exactly. The 9/11 commission didn't just sit in a room and make up some story up on their own. They held an inquiry to listen to many, many, MANY witnesses to piece together the puzzle, and as already shown, witnesses like Ted Olson can't even discuss a telephone conversation he had with his wife Barbara without a bunch of paranoid conspiracy idiots accusing him of lying to cover up the murder of his wife, or worse, making up ridiculous claims that Barbara was alive and arrested in Europe while carrying millions in Italian Lira. What possible kind of peer review could anyone possibly do that the conspiracy peopel would find credible?

Most people do not believe in the rubbish that some of you guys post in here in your lame attempt to insult everyone including people who question 911 and the proven lies that have been exposed. A “few” of you in here may scare many posters away from posting their opinions because they don’t want to deal with some of the ad hominem attacks however, many of you OS defenders who have an agendas’ they are clearly recognizable for the garbage they spew against proven truths.

Let's face it, these trusters aren't looking for an investigation becuase they genuinely have unanswered questions. They're demanding an investigation becuase they're looking for excuses to keep their conspiracy stories alive, the same way they keep insisting they want to see the Pentagon video even though they're the only ones claiming any more usable video even exists to begin with. Even if they did get another investigation, they wouldn't accept that one any more than they did any of the prior ones.

This is the only garbage that the OS supporters can give for answers in supporting their OS fairytales.

Come on Dave, when are you going to stop this nonsense of attacking everyone who will not agree to support the exposed lies in the OS while cunningly trying to stick to given topic. That’s walking the fine line, if you ask me.

People want a new investigation, most people have accepted that the government lied, cover up, and “stonewalled” many parts of the 911 inquiries . Why is it a threat to your cause?

Well so far all I have seen with respect to a new investigation is the same old thing:

The theory is the government did it, now lets find evidence that will support that theory.

Do as anyone see a problem with this line of inquiry?

Guys, ignore the trolls. They are all over this stuff today, one right after another. All 911 threads have their blood libel smeared across them.

reply to post by hooper

The theory is the government did it, now lets find evidence that will support that theory. Do as anyone see a problem with this line of inquiry?

This is the first important step for a new investigation. As some comments on this thread suggest, there is a strong subversive element that will try to impede or derail any investigation. Care will be required in selecting the investigation team members. There are also ongoing risks to the investigation, for example parts of WTC 7 where undertaking some large scale investigations into wall street insider trading. These investigation where stopped when the building collapsed. There is some uncertainty for how deep and wide the criminal aspects of this case go, so there may be unexpected threats to the investigation as it progresses. A strong security plan will be necessary to ensure the safety of the staff and the investigation.

The buck stoped in the Bush administration and the Pentagon. Fact: The Bush administration stonewalled every inquiry.
Fact: George Bush and Dick Cheney would not allow the 911 Commission swear in their statement for public records.
Cheney and Bush insist on being interviewed together and not separately. My opinion is so the two of them could keep their story straight.
Fact: there are conflicting stories to the whereabouts of Cheney when 911 was unfolding.
Fact: The Bush administration did not want any inquires into any of the 911 events before the 911 Commission was formed.
Fact: had it not been for the Jersey Girls, a 911 Commission may have never been formed.
Fact: it really didn’t matter if a 911 Commission was formed because, everyone interviewed from the White house and Pentagon were lying according to the 911 Commissioners, that is why they wanted the Justice Department to do a criminal investigation.
Fact: FAA and Pentagon couldn’t keep their stories straight, that is why the 911 Commissioners wanted a criminal investigation.
Fact: the truth has not been told about 911 from our government, because in my opinion they pulled off a false flag operation and covered it up. Why do I believe this, is because our government has admitted to nothing the People in the Bush Administration, Pentagon, FAA, NORAD, American Airlines and United Airlines, have sat silently from the day 911 happened to this day. If there were no secrets why are they all silent?
If the OS was true then, why hasn’t the government showed us the evidence to prove their stories?
Perhaps this is enough to prove a conspiracy. What do most intelligent criminals do when they are suspected of committing a crime? They become silent.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by FDNY343
PS. You're still wrong about the TM not believing in holograms and DEW's at GZ. I linked you two different sources.

Who do you think speaks officially for the "truth movement"?

Anyone and everyone?

That is my point son. Every one of those links I gave claim they are the "Truth" movement. You claim they aren't?

There seems to be no offical anything. AE911T is one fraction, then the DEW'ers (Judy Wood) and her bunch of people. Then theres the No-Planers, etc. etc. etc.

There IS no "head" or official spokesperson. Nowhere.

So, do you have 1 investigation, or 6?

reply to post by FDNY343

There IS no "head" or official spokesperson. Nowhere. So, do you have 1 investigation, or 6?

One investigation with different stages. There has been a lot of information that has been amassed over the years, some good, some bad and some so, so. It is going to be up to the investigation to work through this information in the early stages to compile the sequence of events that are proven and beyond a reasonable doubt to exist. From here a suspect list can be drafted to further aid and narrow the investigation. Once a strong sequence of events has been put together, the prosecution has built a case and the next stage can begin.

By already having a strong body of evidence before any commissions or trials start it will help keep the process on track and avoid getting bogged down in areas of doubt, uncertainty and fantasy. As the investigation progresses, new facts and evidence may present itself and will need to be taken on board. Once the investigation is satisfied with its progress and has developed a clear and evidence back picture of events it can present its findings and recommendations for further action.

Depending on the mandate of the investigation, these recommendations could take the form of a list of charges that individuals are to prosecuted for. It could also include a list of government recommendations to help avoid similar events from happening again.

reply to post by kwakakev


Well, I must commend you, I think you are the very first "truther" I have EVER seen that has actually laid out any kind of logical investigation.

Now, simple question.

What's stopping the "TM" as a whole from banding together, and doing it?

reply to post by FDNY343

What's stopping the "TM" as a whole from banding together, and doing it?

America is in gridlock with the legal system. People have tried to bring cases to help expose the issue but are usually dismissed with extreme prejudice. This is a deep issue that spreads to the most powerful institutions in the land. Obama is unable to get past the policy of extraordinary rendition, let alone something as big as this. The implications would be earth shattering for some as it is learnt that millions of people have died over some lies, let alone the self inflicted carnage. The implications may also save America from the grip of corruption that is bleeding the nation dry and help avoid the nation falling back into a third world nation through over extended military engagements and ongoing economic mismanagement.

Another problem the TM faces is with the vast amount of misinformation that has been released to the public. From your posts it looks like you have had a hard time trying to work through it. I know I did when first looking at it and so have many other people. This is part has been due to the Psyops campaign that has been waged to help cloud the issue and keep the people divided, we are in a new age of warfare and the media is one of the flags in any war.

Finally if I do see the TM uniting it will be over other issues as well mainly due to economic hardship and rebellion. This is already happening in Tunisia with other Middle Eastern and European Union nations warming up to this fire of unresolved issues that is brewing. I would prefer things were resolved in a more civilised manner, but the corporatists have been getting out of control with no oversight and accountability. I consider a new 9/11 investigation that is performed with integrity as the best chance to strike at the rampant corruption undermining global stability. From all indications so far, America is incapable of addressing 9/11 by itself and needs international support to help clean its house up. It will not be easy, but the consequences of failure will be costly.

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by bsbray11
Who do you think speaks officially for the "truth movement"?

Anyone and everyone?

That is my point son. Every one of those links I gave claim they are the "Truth" movement. You claim they aren't?

Well that's my question. Who is the authority of the "truth movement" that says, "okay, this is part of the truth movement, but this over here isn't." Who is that person again? You, I guess?

There IS no "head" or official spokesperson. Nowhere.

Right, so whether we like it or not, the people who just think there was foreknowledge that was ignored (which is already on-the-record fact actually), are grouped with the people who believe the planes were holograms and space beams brought the towers down. By... you.

You see why we're such big fans of your "reasoning" on here? No? Of course not, you're always right.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by bsbray11
Who do you think speaks officially for the "truth movement"?

Anyone and everyone?

That is my point son. Every one of those links I gave claim they are the "Truth" movement. You claim they aren't?

Well that's my question. Who is the authority of the "truth movement" that says, "okay, this is part of the truth movement, but this over here isn't." Who is that person again? You, I guess?

No, I don't associate with liars.

Well, since there is no head, or authority over the "Truth Movement" then I will just assume you have nothing. Just of bunch of people who believe something.

Originally posted by bsbray11

There IS no "head" or official spokesperson. Nowhere.

Right, so whether we like it or not, the people who just think there was foreknowledge that was ignored (which is already on-the-record fact actually), are grouped with the people who believe the planes were holograms and space beams brought the towers down. By... you.

You see why we're such big fans of your "reasoning" on here? No? Of course not, you're always right.

You all claim to be part of the "Truth movement" right? Just the same as no-planers, DEWers, and the shape-shifting reptilians.

Since this is really a moot point, I will ask again.

What's stopping you (whatever group you identify with) from conductiong your own investigation?

Originally posted by FDNY343
Well that's my question. Who is the authority of the "truth movement" that says, "okay, this is part of the truth movement, but this over here isn't." Who is that person again? You, I guess?

No, I don't associate with liars.

Well, since there is no head, or authority over the "Truth Movement" then I will just assume you have nothing. Just of bunch of people who believe something.

Hmm, so you just get defensive and don't answer the question. How new and unexpected.

You all claim to be part of the "Truth movement" right?

Nope. I don't call myself a "truther," either. You care to know why? There's a saying to make things as simple as possible but no simpler. Making a label like "truther" or "truth movement" for you to ignore many different people simultaneously, based on the things a small fraction of them might actually say, is too simple. It's exactly because of stupid comments like "Oh yeah well SPACE BEAMS!! LOLOL" that I don't like being blanketed by labels.

I'm one individual. I never signed a contract, I don't control what the different organizations do, and much less do I control what any other individual says. But despite all that, you and many other non-thinking people like you, continue to lump me in with a massive group of your own creation. A massive, non-existent group you create for your own convenience, just to trash-talk.

Just the same as no-planers, DEWers, and the shape-shifting reptilians.

You see what I mean? Just because you say so (which fortunately doesn't mean much anyway), I'm now "just the same as no-planers, DEWers, and the shape-shifting reptilians."

I don't believe the same things, but anyway I'm "just the same" as they are. Am I really? You already know I would say no. Are you making me "see the light" by grouping me with other people I also don't agree with, and telling me I'm the same as they are? No, instead you're showing me how foolish your own reasoning is, which has the opposite effect.

Since this is really a moot point, I will ask again.

What's stopping you (whatever group you identify with) from conductiong your own investigation?

I don't identify with any group. What's your problem with that? Every time you try to force me into some group for your own convenience, all you're doing is reminding me that you're literally incapable of thinking "outside of the box." You can't even get past the idea of groups and labels, and when they apply and when they don't, and that's just basic semantics. So beyond that why should I even have any hope of an intelligent discussion with you?

What's stopping me personally from conducting my own investigation? Easy, and feel free to remedy my situation. 1) Money (enough to contract panels of various experts, hire writers, etc). 2) Legal recognition/authority/subpoena power. 3) Unrestricted access to whatever evidence is left over at this point. As it stands, those 3 things are a little over my head, so that it's not a realistic goal. If you can help me change that then I'm all ears.

Originally posted by ANOK

Where do you get this from?

You've been here less than a month, and I have yet to see ANYONE in the threads you are involved in talk about any of that stuff.

You really did come here with a closed mind and an agenda, as it's obvious your mind was made up before you even joined.

Ive got a sneaky suspicion that a certain entity is responsible for a few different screen names.
The context of their grammar and signature lines kind of gives that away.
Just my opinion...I may be wrong. But, I may be right.

Originally posted by kwakakev

This is the first important step for a new investigation. As some comments on this thread suggest, there is a strong subversive element that will try to impede or derail any investigation. Care will be required in selecting the investigation team members. There are also ongoing risks to the investigation, for example parts of WTC 7 where undertaking some large scale investigations into wall street insider trading. These investigation where stopped when the building collapsed. There is some uncertainty for how deep and wide the criminal aspects of this case go, so there may be unexpected threats to the investigation as it progresses. A strong security plan will be necessary to ensure the safety of the staff and the investigation.

...and as I had asked a hundred times already...and which the trusters continuously ignore...just WHAT constitutes a fair and balanced investigation? The FAA put in their investigation result son crash site forensics and yet the trusters don't accept it. The NYPA put in their two cents on the events going on in the WTC and yet the trusters don't accept it. NORAD documents their military response and yet the truthers don't accept it. Heck, Ted Olson can't even discuss talking with his wife on the telephone without the trusters accusing him of covering up the murder of his wife, enturely becuase the trusters explicitely trust every fool thing these damned fool conspiracy web sites are shoveling out up to and including hologram airplanes and lasers from outer space.

Seeing that the trusters have developed for themselves a cottage industry of pitiful excuses for why they shouldn't accept anything that refutes their conspiracy claims, just who would be on any investigation whose findings could ever be considered credible?

reply to post by GoodOlDave

just who would be on any investigation whose findings could ever be considered credible?

It is a good point you have made as a bad selection could just end up wasting everyones time. I am in Australia so I don't know many people in America. For one recommendation there is Tony Fitzgerald, Order of Australia and Queens Council. He is a former Australian judge, who presided over the Fitzgerald Inquiry. This Inquiry looked into police corruption in Queensland, Australia and helped clean up the system. It was a hard job and he done it well. He is retired these days so not sure if he is up to such a job, but someone with his level of ability and integrity is a good start. I expect there are many other good judges around the world, but one with a track record in confronting and reducing large scale corruption is a good start. This investigation can only go as far as the evidence suggests and for credibility you need someone who is determined to take it all the way.

Has anyone EVER explained this?

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Has anyone EVER explained this?

Yes, it was an early report arising from the confusion of the day and it was wrong, just like the car bomb at the State Dept was wrong.

Dan Rather later made a retraction,

Originally posted by bsbray11

What's stopping me personally from conducting my own investigation? Easy, and feel free to remedy my situation. 1) Money (enough to contract panels of various experts, hire writers, etc).

Well, gage makes $75K/yr traveling around and producing absolutely nothing original. Put him to work and have him produce something.

2) Legal recognition/authority/subpoena power.

Produce something that indicates that there is a reason to give this power. So far, no organization has succeeded in even nudging the needle. Except on my irony meter. They've broken that many times.

3) Unrestricted access to whatever evidence is left over at this point.

Again, produce something first.


If you start at the beginning, it could take this form:

1- did NIST do an accurate evaluation of the plane speeds and angle? Anybody could do this.
2- did NIST do an accurate evaluation of expected impact damage? There are some details lacking on the ext columns - ksi ratings and bolts that held it together - and connection details of the core columns, so there is a reasonable case to be made by truthers to whine about this. (They absolutely would) But there is no reason a bounding estimate couldn't be made with available info.
3- did NIST do an accurate evaluation on how much thermal insuation would be removed? It would depend on the above analysis, but again, a bounding condition cold be done.
4- did NIST do an accurate evaluation of load redistribution from the plne impacts? One could start with the NIST case and do an FEA from there to check.
5- did NIST do an accurate evaluation on fuel - as in paper, carpeting, etc - loading in the towers? Anybody could do this.
6- did NIST do an accurate evaluation on fire temps and spread? ANyone could do this with the proper software program.
7- did NIST do an accurate evaluation of how the steel was heated by the fires? Again, this could be done by anyone using the right software, once a conclusion was reached on thermal insulation removal.
8- did NIST do an accurate evaluation of load transfers and column failures due to creep and strain rates from the fire damage? Again, this could be done by anyone with the right software.


In short, it's a lie that there is nothing that the Gage, with his "experts" in structural engineering ( ) could do. There's plenty that they could independently check on in order to make the case that there needs to be another investigation by a completely different panel.

Ain't gonna happen, cuz they're only interested in fleecing the flock. Not in any truth.

There's only one constant in the replies to the questions over who should be involved in a new investigation, and that's "not me". So I'm going to put myself forward. Craig Ranke, the bloke who did the Queensland police corruption case mentioned above (he seems like a decent shout), and me. A truther, an Australian retired judge, and a totally unbiased - if somewhat amused - member of the public.

Let me know when you need me.

Also, for some reason some in the Truth Movement seem keen to trust a new bunch of scientists when they don't like the findings of the first lot. I don't mean to be a cynic, but I doubt it would be long before the new guys started getting the shill label. That whole stance implies a serious disconnect with reality - that there are thousands of scientists who just haven't looked at the evidence, and when they do they'll be astounded and corroborate the ideas of the TM. I have to say that I think that's unlikely to be the case.