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:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's obvious he's not interested, he's here to demonize those who don't believe the official conspiracy theory and demand the truth about 9/11. But then again, he's irrelevant.

    The petition for a grand jury investigation is very broad. For me there are 3 additional compelling points.

    1. Dr. Hulsey's research proves the NIST theory about WTC7 is impossible. His research will be peer reviewed later this year and I'm confident will be accepted by the scientific community and become settled fact as a result.

    2. NIST admitted in a footnote that they never investigated the "collapse" of WTC1 and WTC2.

    3. Neither the FEMA report(s), the 9/11 Commission Report or the non-existent PENTBOM report contain any detailed technical information with regard to the destruction of these 3 towers

    Given the above and the fact that these were the primary official "investigations" into 9/11, the totality means there never was a legitimate investigation into the destruction of these 3 towers on 9/11. These points with regard to the officially accepted "investigations" were not adequately addressed in the petition IMO.
     
  2. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,780
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Judge Hellerstein is an Israel First type of guy. I suspect he is dual citizen, but he is very much an enforcer of the official story.
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  3. Charles Rice

    Charles Rice Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2018
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Okay, how does the video account for the physical evidence--plane parts and downed light poles--at the pentagon?
    Am I going to get an answer or just a link to another "maybe", "perhaps", "could have"? I'm guessing another link
     
  4. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
    My posts on page #1 of this thead contain the answers to all of that.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-pentagon-on-9-11.482175/
     
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    REMINDER: Please keep this discussion to the topic intended.

    9/11 - The Legal Initiative

    There is another thread for discussions about the Pentagon.
     
  6. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    click through the links for this legal initiative ... and then bust out your credit card to make a donation ... just another fraud perpetuated by lawyers looking for a shekel or 2 or 10 ... the truthers still can't see the scam ...

    ****ing joke ...
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How many tens of thousands have you "donated" in taxes in the fake war on terror scam manufactured under pretext of 9/11?
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2018
    jack4freedom likes this.
  8. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    This is the peculiar sh!t regarding paradigms of reality!

    A 1300 foot skyscraper coming down in less than 30 seconds is not evidence if you can believe a narrative that is completely idiotic. That belief makes experimental testing of the physics totally unnecessary. The believers in some dumb "narrative" do not even need to think about how steel must be distributed in 1360 foot skyscrapers?

    What is the relationship between sanity and physics? Maybe physics is too complicated for psychologists and psychiatrists. Psychology was referred to as a "p***y course" at the engineering school I attended.

    Engineers are so Sexist!!! Of course we had not heard of Political Corretness back then. We were such nuckel draggers!

    https://psikeyhackr.livejournal.com/1276.html

     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2018
  9. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    the military industrial complex has never needed much of an excuse now have they? ... you still paying your taxes Bobby? ...
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They always need an excuse and are very capable of manufacturing them for the benefit of people just like you. See the latest Syria excuse.

    You mean is government still robbing me? That's nearly impossible to stop, isn't it?
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2018
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A special thanks to the mods for cleaning up the trolling posts. Please try to remain on topic, I understand straying on occasion however trolls will be reported. Thank you.
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The following is EVIDENCE in support of the petition for a grand jury investigation into 9/11.

    Who exactly destroyed the WTC steel? And can they be held accountable?

    On April 11, 2018, AE911Truth added a new piece to our library of technical articles titled, “Documenting the Destruction of Physical Evidence at the World Trade Center.”

    The purpose of publishing the article on that date was to provide well-sourced information supporting the claim that New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s role in destroying the WTC evidence was “well-documented” — a claim we made in an accompanying news article, “Lawyers and Victims’ Families File Petition for Federal Grand Jury Investigation,” on the same day.

    The larger reason for publishing the technical article was to clarify exactly who was responsible for destroying the WTC steel. The destruction of this evidence is widely known in the 9/11 Truth movement, but many are unaware of who actually carried it out. For example, some mistakenly believe the evidence was destroyed by FEMA, the government agency that conducted the first investigation.

    Furthermore, we wanted to counter any suggestion that the destruction of evidence was simply an innocent action that had the unintended consequence of preventing a proper forensic investigation.

    Indeed, the public record establishes very clearly that the destruction of evidence was deliberate and was carried out in direct defiance of requests by official investigators for the steel to be saved. The destruction of evidence then continued for several months, despite outcry by 9/11 families and members of the fire safety community.

    The record also identifies four individuals who were most responsible for ordering and carrying out the recycling of the steel: Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, NYC Department of Design and Construction (DDC) Commissioner Kenneth Holden, DDC Deputy Commissioner Michael Burton, and cleanup advisor Richard Tomasetti of Thornton-Tomasetti Engineers.

    In New York State, hindering prosecution of a class A felony (such as first degree murder) by way of destroying physical evidence is a class D felony and has a statute of limitations of three years. However, a strong argument can be made that the offense has not yet been discovered because prosecutors and the larger public have still not recognized, almost seventeen years after the crime, that the Twin Towers were destroyed by controlled demolition (in part because the offenders’ destruction of the physical evidence had its intended effect).

    Thus, the destruction of physical evidence at the World Trade Center is likely to remain prosecutable beyond the point in time when it becomes widely recognized that the Twin Towers were destroyed by controlled demolition — whenever that may be.

    We invite you to read the article, “Documenting the Destruction of Physical Evidence at the World Trade Center.”


    https://www.ae911truth.org/news/450-who-exactly-destroyed-the-wtc-steel

    Documenting the Destruction of Physical Evidence at the World Trade Center

    Ted Walter, Tony Szamboti, and Dennis McMahon
    April 11, 2018

    Editor’s Note: This article was originally written as a letter to Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance as part of a four-week letter writing campaign by the NYC Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN) in 2010. Each week, hundreds of activists participated in mailing identical letters to the District Attorney in an attempt to get him to investigate the unpermitted demolition of World Trade Center Building 7. This, the fourth and final letter of the campaign, presented carefully sourced, publicly available information on the illegal destruction of physical evidence, with a focus on identifying individuals most responsible for ordering and carrying out the recycling of the structural steel.

    Article 205 of the New York Penal Code, § 205.50 Hindering Prosecution


    “[A] person ‘renders criminal assistance’ when, with intent to prevent, hinder or delay the discovery or apprehension of…a person he knows or believes has committed a crime…he...suppresses, by any act of concealment, alteration or destruction, any physical evidence which might aid in the discovery or apprehension of such person or in the lodging of a criminal charge against him;” 1

    Official acknowledgement of the destruction of physical evidence from the WTC
    • Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives, March 6, 2002: 2
    “In the month that lapsed between the terrorist attacks and the deployment of the [FEMA Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT Team)], a significant amount of steel debris—including most of the steel from the upper floors—was removed from the rubble pile, cut into smaller sections, and either melted at the recycling plant or shipped out of the U.S. Some of the critical pieces of steel—including the suspension trusses from the top of the towers and the internal support columns—were gone before the first BPAT team member ever reached the site. Fortunately, an NSF-funded independent researcher, recognizing that valuable evidence was being destroyed, attempted to intervene with the City of New York to save the valuable artifacts, but the city was unwilling to suspend the recycling contract.”
    • Joseph Crowley, U.S. Congressman, 7th District, New York: 3

    “[T]here is so much that has been lost in these last six months that we can never go back and retrieve. And that is not only unfortunate, it is borderline criminal.”

    • Jonathan Barnett, PhD, FEMA BPAT Investigator: 4

    “Normally when you have a structural failure, you carefully go through the debris field looking at each item – photographing every beam as it collapsed and every column where it is in the ground and you pick them up very carefully and you look at each element. We were unable to do that in the case of Tower 7.”

    Control of the WTC cleanup

    Read the rest ....

    https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence...f-physical-evidence-at-the-world-trade-center
     
  14. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    #1 on my list of 29 irrefutable facts about the 9/11 Commission and their reports.

    One of the primary facts listed in support of the petition for a grand jury investigation is:

    So is there a conflict here? Absolutely not. Although the 4 individuals listed may be the most responsible for ordering and carrying out the destruction of physical evidence, the Bush administration are still directly responsible in that they did nothing to stop this criminal act, prosecute it or bring attention to it in any way. The 9/11 Commission covered up the crime by this fact:

     
  15. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    all credibility lost here ...
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yours? Of course, long ago and always. But as far as what you quoted? Just an empty response from you as usual, devoid of any substance. Imagining you know better than attorneys.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2018
  17. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    yeah, Yale teaches Controlled Demolition 101 ... you might as well quote The Onion ...
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I quoted attorneys who quoted the law with respect to the topic of this thread. You post worthless drivel, you are trolling.
     
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Congratulations to AE911Truth for achieving the milestone of over 3,000 verified architects and engineers signatories to the petition to legitimately investigate the crimes of 9/11.

    [​IMG]

    LEGAL EFFORTS

    Using the results of the UAF study, AE911Truth will submit a detailed “Request for Correction” to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), asking that it correct the erroneous analysis in its WTC 7 report. If, as expected, NIST’s response to that request is inadequate, AE911Truth will file suit against NIST under the Information Quality Act, seeking a judgment that requires NIST to correct its report.

    Following on the heels of the recently-filed petition for a federal grand jury investigation, AE911Truth will continue its collaboration with the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry and 9/11 family members to advance groundbreaking civil litigation over the next year.


    https://aemembership.org/
     
  20. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    https://datausa.io/profile/soc/170000/
     
  21. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
  22. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,145
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I can't even watch this through ... the presenter makes so many mistakes and is clearly uninformed ... cringe worthy ...
    edit: ... I'm at the 3:50 mark but going to try and watch a little more ... I have always loved lawyerspeak ...

    edit #2 ... at the 4:20 mark he clearly lies stating that none of the official investigations examined the physical evidence ...
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2018
  23. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I suggest you sue them Shiner, they failed to defend the OCT for your hobby pleasure. This is "cringe worthy" but NIST and the 9/11 Commission that failed in every way they could possibly fail is not "cringe worthy". You're a real piece of work.
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They say a Grand Jury can indict a ham sandwich. They also say a Grand Jury is in the back pocket of the Prosecutor. A Grand Jury can indict on hearsay evidence, they are not bound by the Constitution or the rules of evidence. The reason is that the Jury represents The People, who are supposed to be the masters of their government. In this case there is not only hearsay evidence but there's a mountain of hard and eyewitness as well as expert witness evidence. It's going to be interesting either way.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  25. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,186
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Eleuthera likes this.

Share This Page