46 votes

Unbelievable: Drudge is linking to 9/11 cover up stories

Inside the Saudi 9/11 coverup
By Paul Sperry
December 15, 2013 | 5:13am

Is the federal government protecting the Saudis? Case agents tell me they were repeatedly called off pursuing 9/11 leads back to the Saudi Embassy, which had curious sway over White House and FBI responses to the attacks.

President Bush inexplicably censored 28 full pages of the 800-page report. Text isn’t just blacked-out here and there in this critical-yet-missing middle section. The pages are completely blank, except for dotted lines where an estimated 7,200 words once stood (this story by comparison is about 1,000 words).

A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are "absolutely shocked" at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks.

Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) can’t reveal the nation identified by it without violating federal law. So they’ve proposed Congress pass a resolution asking President Obama to declassify the entire 2002 report, "Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001."

...

Just days after Bush met with the Saudi ambassador in the White House, the FBI evacuated from the United States dozens of Saudi officials, as well as Osama bin Laden family members. Bandar made the request for escorts directly to FBI headquarters on Sept. 13, 2001 -just hours after he met with the president. The two old family friends shared cigars on the Truman Balcony while discussing the attacks.

Bill Doyle, who lost his son in the World Trade Center attacks and heads the Coalition of 9/11 Families, calls the suppression of Saudi evidence a "coverup beyond belief." Last week, he sent out an e-mail to relatives urging them to phone their representatives in Congress to support the resolution and read for themselves the censored 28 pages.

Link: http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I know the 9/11 Tragedy better than you.

And if the MAJORITY of surviving family members got their day in court they could prove a lot more than just Smith Barney going down. BUT THEY KEEP GETTING RAILROADED

Dude, just stop. YOU HAVE KNOW IDEA OF THE TIME AND EFFORT BY MANY WHO HAVE DEGREES AND DECADES OF EXPERIENCE IN ENGINEERING, PHYSICS, AND ARCHITECTURE **** WITH NO GOVERNMENT AFFILIATION *** TRYING TO SOLVE THE 9/11 MYSTERY. TWO PLANS DID NOT ON THEIR OWN BRING DOWN THREE MODERN SKYSCRAPERS !!!!

Go take a class or something ...
Leave this to the non-bias experts who actually care about the 3000 people who died, SO IT NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN !!!

fireant's picture

It doesn't take a genius to know that if you take a handful

of toothpicks, break them in half, and drop them on the floor, you will look down and find broken toothpicks on the floor.

Undo what Wilson did

Well at least we have an agreement there!

YOU ARE NOT A GENIUS !!!

Too easy ,,, but I had too

Firepest, please take the time to do more research.

fireant's picture

No, you need to start digging to find some

structural evidence in order to overcome the tons of it which shows CD did not happen.
And resorting to personal insults just shows you haven't a case.

Undo what Wilson did

fireant's picture

Then you should have no problem producing structural evidence

of artificial dismemberment in order to overcome the tons I will show that confirms they broke apart. Why haven't you produced it, instead of driving around in circles? Telling. Just produce the structural evidence and you have a case. Til then, you have none.

Undo what Wilson did

Wrong, what he said is right to one extent

There was an explosion at that tower which tossed the roof onto the other tower, resulting in that massive structural damage.

Likewise, there was in a fact a series of explosions which are equal to a controlled demolition. Everyone wants to know why, this is again why the new investigation must be reopened. Why were explosives used and erstwhile, who planted them there to start with?

I didn't disagree

Tread carefully, however.

No one seems

No one seems to be picking up this story. It should be a bombshell but instead it's like dropping a penny into a well. Really shows how controlled the media are.

Saudis?? What about the G*DDAMN ISRAELIS??

Ok, so maybe there is a Saudi connection... but what about the 5 dancing Israelis, the truck bombs on the Geo. Washington bridge, the Mossad agents admitting they were documenting the event on Israeli TV, the Mossad front company Urban Moving Systems, Dominic Suter, the Israeli demolition experts taken into custody, Dov Zakheim, Silverstien, Netanyahu, the warnings on Odigo, etc, etc, etc...??

This is just pissing me off because its more bullshit. Let's just blame everyone but the biggest culprit... WTF is going on here???

You forgot

The van with a painted mural of a commercial airliner crashing into a WTC tower, that was driving erratically in Manhattan near the WTC on the same day at the same time real commercial airliners were crashing into the WTC towers. That van was located by police - their communication radio recordings testify to it - then chased down. The two "middle eastern" suspects jumped out and started to run away; the van blew up into pieces in front of the police officers. The two suspects were chased down on foot, apprehended - "suspects under" - then officially never heard of, from, about, blamed or named.

Why? If they were Arabs or "Al Kedda" it would have been mainstream news for weeks but there was no mention of it in any mainstream reporting. Nothing.

Israelis in van that had explosives, like the other Israelis arrested on 9/11 in vans that had explosives and traces of explosives. Let me spell it out :

I.S.R.A.E.L. M.O.S.S.A.D. H.E.L.P.E.D. A.T.T.A.C.K. U.S. O.N. 9.1.1. W.E. S.H.O.U.L.D. H.A.V.E. A.L.S.O. H.I.T. I.S.R.A.E.L. I.N. 2.0.0.1. W.I.T.H. M.I.S.S.I.L.E.S. &. B.O.M.B.S. W.H.E.N. W.E. H.I.T. A.F.G.H.A.N.I.S.T.A.N.

Maybe you mean Al-Kidding

At minimum we now know incontrovertibly Al-Quaeda had no part in 9-11 nearly whatsoever. Ever at any time.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/02/21/dimitri-khalezov-gor...

http://911blogger.com/news/2013-12-02/therealnews-paul-jay-c...

We know the official story is lies, and there is a cover up.

Get those 28 pages unclassified, yesterday.

We'll learn about it

When the Coen Brothers release the movie.

I have been following this Saudi angle with great interest

It seems to me that people are getting too close to connecting the Mossad-CIA dots so they needed to throw a quasi-conspiracy bone to the truthers, which kind of sounds like "truth" but really isn't. In other words it smells like desperation. Not sure it's such a bad thing because eventually, where do the Saudi Intel dots lead? They circle right back to Mossad-CIA. Pak intel same thing. Let them scramble.

Fact is, only two intel organizations in the world have the technology, access, organization, and resources to pull off bringing down 3 towers, plant war games inside DoD, and remote crash airliners: CIA and Mossad. Saudi intel still couldn't get 24/7 access to the WTC like Marvin Bush could. If the Saudis were players they were bit players.

Keep hammering the truth. It could be a sign we're doing something right.

Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Studies at US Army War College, General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research. Concludes that a combination of treasonous elements in the US government and Israeli MOSSAD orchestrated 9/11, in order to enable invasion of Iraq.

http://youtu.be/EPLU4N7gmY4

Release the Sandy Hook video.

Saudis were involved; other than the official story Saudis.

There might be other motive for this - like why report it now? - but it isn't trying to ascribe false blame, it isn't a purposeful misdirection. Otherwise you're totally correct about CIA/Mossad.

A question: are you male or female? I ask because a few days ago I referred to you as Sue, I have always read your screen name as: Sue, For the Bill of Rights.

oh you better believe it is a mis direction

AND making good on a promise to release the Bush edited pages if certain relationships weren't maintained. This is really a good sign that the truth might come out, maybe the Saudis will have the game to one up this desperate leak. I don't doubt that the Saudis were in on it, but these bad guys aren't gonna give up. Kinda scary .... if CIA /MOSSAD is really preparing to play hard ball... these rogue thugs have enough nukes, drones, crisis actors... to make sure nobody remembers anything, and my intel shows that things have gotten this bad with the FED, CIA, and wars around the world because of bullies like these controlling everyone with blackmail, terror, and assassinations for too long now. They ain't been caught yet, on any significant level, they ain't gonna stop till they do

People would rather continue to be fooled than admit that they have been fooled in the past.

It would be nice for a change...

... that it doesn't take 50 years or more for the truth to come out.

Right on. Notice how all the WWII lies

bubbled up in the 1990's and later.

A related 9/11 story reported that Building 7

was found not to have collapsed due to negligence.

"The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said it was “simply incompatible with common sense and experience to hold that defendants were required to design and construct a building that would survive the events of September 11, 2001.”" Even though the building wasn't hit.

"In a dissent, Judge Richard Wesley said a trial should have been conducted to at least establish from expert testimony why Tower 7 collapsed." Um, yeah. That would be nice to know, huh?

http://nypost.com/2013/12/04/negligence-not-cause-of-3rd-wtc...

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

fireant's picture

"Even though the building wasn't hit."

How can the truth be found with lies? The building was hit with multi-ton slabs of steel perimeter wall from the North Tower. Massive enough to sever the south wall of 7 top to bottom and undercut the SW part of the building.

Undo what Wilson did

But NIST said that had

But NIST said that had nothing to do with the collapse!

fireant's picture

So now NIST is correct???

That's no better than the politicons who quote the constitution only when convenient.

Undo what Wilson did

No, it shows that EVEN NIST

No, it shows that EVEN NIST realized it couldn't pass the collapse of wtc7 off on falling debris! It could plausibly blame fire, given that conclusion about the twin towers. Try again...

WTC 7 wasn't hit with multi-ton slabs...

Post the evidence to support your statement please.

fireant's picture

It's posted below.

The fold of the north face and the corresponding south face breach. There are no direct photos of the SW undercutting, but photos of debris pile around it and eye witness reports confirm it.

Undo what Wilson did

Really then post these reports!

Don't be a phoney.

fireant's picture

The burden of proof is yours.

You are making the claim of CD. Show us the structural remains which confirm the buildings were artificially dismembered. Google "freshkills video" for starters. Then look for the many videos of ground zero and first responders. There is tons of evidence for you sift through. If the buildings were CDed, there will be plenty of cut columns or connectors to find.
Then start talking to first responders who were there. Ask them if they saw any sign of cut up girders. You should be able to find plenty of witnesses who saw cut up members.

Undo what Wilson did

fireant's picture

Nice, but still no structural proof of artificial dismemberment

.

Undo what Wilson did

Firepest, are you joking ??? So you posted the pix

Popular Mechanics won't release?

I know and you know that you did not take the time to read and digest everything posted in those 5 links. If you had, you would have read the section contradicting your opinion (not fact) with eyewitnesses.

Link 4
http://www.ae911truth.org/news-section/41-articles/793-fraud...

The fictitious “10-story gouge” claimed early on by NIST in WTC 7's south face is exposed.

I first noticed the conundrum that suggested that the “10-story gouge” in the side of WTC7 could not have actually existed back on September 6, 2006 while “debating” with Ryan Mackey at the JREF forum:

Conundrum in June 2004 progress report

"middle 1/4 to 1/3 width of the south face was gouged out from floor 10 to the ground"

"No heavy debris was observed in the lobby area as the building was exited, primarily white dust coating and black wires hanging from ceiling areas were observed" NIST June 2004 Progress Report, Appendix L p. 18 [pdf p. 22]

Obviously, debris large enough to create a 10-story gouge, 1/4 to 1/3 the width of the building, would have landed in the 1st floor lobby along with everything it brought down, including the 3rd floor lobby.

NIST depicted this ‘damage’ in the graphic on pg 23 as “Possible region of impact damage” and again on pages 31 & 32 as “Approximate region of impact damage”

June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (NIST SP 1000-5)

9/11 researcher Winston Smith found another quote that was in conflict with the 10-story gouge on page 20 of the FEMA report Chapter 5.

"According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner." FEMA, Chapter 5 p.20

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Chapter 5, WTC 7

Later I found two more quotes that were in conflict with the 10-story gouge. Chief Frank Fellini [in charge of operations at West and Vesey]: "…building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the tower. When it fell it ripped steel out from between the third and the sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street."

World Trade Center Task Force Interview – Chief Frank Fellini – Interview Date: December 3, 2001

Also on page 18 of NIST 2004 Progress report, Appendix L, was a well-obfuscated quote that was in conflict with the 10-story gouge. It is only after careful reading that it becomes clear:

"debris damage across one-fourth width of the south face, starting several floors above the atrium (extended from the ground to 5th floor*), noted that the atrium glass was still intact" NIST June 2004 Progress Report, Appendix L p. 18 [pdf p. 22]

*The atrium, not the damage, extended from the ground floor to the 5th floor. The “10-story gouge” would have taken out much of the atrium glass.

Post on the “10-story gouge” at the JREF Forum on April 10, 2007.

The evidence for the ‘10 story gouge’:

Knowing of these contradictions, Shyam Sunder still stated in Popular Mechanics’ article "Debunking the 9/11 Myths."

"Sundar: On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom — approximately 10 stories — about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out."

He stated this as if it were a fact.

Popular Mechanics (PM) says:

"NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research."

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - The World Trade Center

Davin Coburn, editor/researcher for Popular Mechanics, told Charles Goyette in this radio interview that he had seen a photo of the 10-story gouge

Coburn: "When the North Tower collapsed … there was damage to Building 7 … What we found out was … about 25% of the building’s south face had been carved away from it …"

“We have seen pictures that are property of the NY Police Department and various other governmental agencies that we were not given permission to disseminate …”

Goyette: "Popular Mechanics got to see them, but the average American citizen can’t see them."

Coburn: "Correct."

Firepest, the fact the building was demolished in a "Controlled" fashion is proof enough; even Circumstantial Evidence determines Judgments everyday in this country.