911 family's trial & cover up of evidence

So you still think the OS is "the gospel" regarding 911? Then have a look into the cover up of evidence that had the potential to blow the OS story out of the water once and for all. And put to rest those who constantly defend this weak explanation for the events on 9/11/01.

It is not known whether evidence sequestered in the TSA “reading room” indicates whether Bush administration officials met with airline executives to discuss strong evidence in the form of pre-9/11 presidential briefs and personal experience in Genoa, Italy with Muslim air attack threats—either of which would implicate President Bush and/or the airline executives themselves as having prior knowledge of the attacks while either failing to take strong and decisive action or letting them occur to fulfill other unnamed geo-political, financial or oil agendas.

Judge literally refuses to allow victim's involved in lawsuit to subpoena witnesses and seek evidence in their case. To me thats not only aiding in a cover-up but once again, suppressing the facts & evidence of 911 to be brought out for public consideration.

Hellerstein has curiously not permitted family attorneys to seek evidence and interrogate federal witnesses, agency chiefs and President Bush regarding why airline executives did not take proper precautions for air safety when Mr. Bush said “we had intelligence from Genoa,” [July 20-22, 2001 G-8 summit in Genoa, Italy prior to September 11] but Bush has never been compelled to explain full details of the Muslim air threats.

Two months before the attacks on July 10, 2001 Arizona FBI agent Ken Williams sent a memo [ “Phoenix memo”] to FBI Headquarters in Washington warning that “unusual numbers of Muslim extremists are learning to fly in Arizona,” the contents of which would seem to be of high importance to Judge Hellerstein and the victim family attorneys.

Above is a clear indication that an agency had prior knowledge that terrorists were in the US.

The contents of the July 5, July 10 and August 6, 2001 intelligence briefing memos may also explain why Congress and the President needed to be protected from criminal or civil court actions and why the Ashcroft Justice Department placed Judge Hellerstein in position to consolidate, control, limit evidence and testimony, and/or settle any remaining 9/11 “maverick” victim family lawsuits before more evidence leaked out—despite the judge’s conflicts of interest involving a foreign government and citizens of that government arrested as suspects in the attacks.

"Maverick familys uh?" - Or they don't want ANYONE getting their hands on evidence that could blow them out of their water along their OS cover story!! In other words while others easily bought and fell for the weak OS storyline, some did not and still don't to this very day.

Story here

So do I presume correctly that the particular conspiracy you subscribe to isn't gov't controlled demolitions, Jewish world order, or whatever, but that the 9/11 attack really was staged by muslim terrorists and Bush knew the attack was coming but did nothing?

There are more "absolute truths that irrefutably explain the 9/11 attack" than there are colors in the rainbow, and it's getting harderer and harder to keep track of them all.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

There are more "absolute truths that irrefutably explain the 9/11 attack" than there are colors in the rainbow, and it's getting harderer and harder to keep track of them all.

There are no "absolute truths" on either side of the 911 story.

There are tho, things that have happened , and are happening now, in this OP

that make a Open Minded person say :

'What the hell is that about"?

A Judge not allowing all possible evidence and witnesses to be brought
forward , to find the Truth in the Court case ???

" Dave, what the hell is that about"?

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Removed by mikelee. Mods delete if needed.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by mikelee]

reply to post by mikelee

It is not known whether evidence sequestered in the TSA “reading room” indicates whether Bush administration officials met with airline executives to discuss strong evidence in the form of pre-9/11 presidential briefs and personal experience in Genoa, Italy with Muslim air attack threats—either of which would implicate President Bush and/or the airline executives themselves as having prior knowledge of the attacks while either failing to take strong and decisive action or letting them occur to fulfill other unnamed geo-political, financial or oil agendas.

Doesn't starting out a sentence with the phrase "it is not known" give you just a little pause when considering the veracity of the statement?

wow thick day on ATS first there are no earthquake victims
now the 9-11 i remember i was there in the city is not real????
evidence people
witness(me)
facts: (super heated jet fuel)(messages on scene via phone and video)so many proofs im out of patience with this i feel stupider(fake word) for even clicking on the thread.


this is the last 9-11 thread i will ever address your kidding me with this cockamamee crap yeah its a cover up of what dude some hypothetical groups agenda you cant even prove exists your gonna be searching forever to prove this fiction ya know why cause its fake !!!!
gooood luckk

Originally posted by triplescorpio



this is the last 9-11 thread i will ever address

You wont be missed

You haven't contributed a iota of reasonable fact

reply to post by Sean48


better then lies that you are breeding.

Do you think the earth is flat too

It never ceases to amaze me at the “right in your face” obstruction of justice and the public's right to know the truth. With so many heads on the hydra monster we call 911, it stands to reason that the operation was not entirely Zionist Mossad, Arab, Muslim, or domestic American groups within the financial, military industrial, intelligence agencies and corporate partners in crime.

I believe this operation had many players and yes, some of the players had more fun than others and some players got richer than others. Overall, it was about coming together to not only change the direction of foreign policy, but to make trillions in wealth for all involved at the higher levels of the food chain.

In the future, I am certain that we will know that the only motivation for 911 regardless of the total number of foreign elements involved, did so because it was all about wealth, power, and ritualistic sacrifices intended to confer upon the magicians involved the highest grade of sorcery. Everyone got rich, got away with it and appeased their dark lord master with the blood of the innocent victims sacrificed that fateful day.

They are all here tonight! Where the heck is there anything in the OP's thread that mentions Jet fuel, or the lack of for that matter. Or whether or not there were mobile messages. Please have the curtesy to read the OP's thread and link first.

Even if the US security sevices knew sod all, (they did of course) then Johnny Foreigner, (them damn foreigners) had already done the job for them,

"June 2001 - German intelligence, the BND, warns the CIA and Israel that
Middle Eastern terrorists are "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to
use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli
culture." [Source: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, September 14, 2001.]"

Why did Colin Powell give £43m to the Taliban regime to compensate the ex-Poppy farmers, in 2001 while later that year US and Pakistan security, and others, meet in Berlin to tell the Pakistani security that there were plans for the US to attack Afghanistan..the net result of that was for Pakistani security chief Ahmad to send $100,000 to Mohammad Atta,

" Summer 2001 (est.) - Pakistani ISI Chief General Ahmad (see above)
orders an aide to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammed Atta" Source, The Times India."
chief Ahmad was to later resign, seems like he was the only one to do so after what happened on 9/11

Originally posted by Sean48
A Judge not allowing all possible evidence and witnesses to be brought
forward , to find the Truth in the Court case ???

" Dave, what the hell is that about"?

Well that's the problem, isn't it? When the courts ask for proof, they want to see something tangible like WTC steel cut by explosives or an insider coming forward to spill the beans and name names and give time tables. When the conspiracy movement asks for proof, they want innuendo, rhetorical questions, bait and switch, and five degrees of separation, "Kevin Bacon" games linking pretty much everyone on the planet to Osama bin Laden. Not last week someone here offered the proof that the 9/11 attack was staged by the Masons, becuase "the WTC looked like the number eleven and eleven is a sacred number to the Masons".

Don't believe me? Take a look at Judy Wood's lawsuit against NIST on the grounds that NIST wasn't taking her calculations seriously that the towers really were blown up by lasers from outer space. To her, that was proof. To the judge, it was cause enough to throw her lawsuit out and warn her not to waste any more of the court's time. Would you like me to post the court ruling?

"What the hell is that about" pretty much sums it up.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


good to hear there are rational minds out there.STAR!!
opps

[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]

reply to post by GoodOlDave
Wrong,
You are making assumptions about evidence not even heard. At least the judge in the case you mentioned threw it out AFTER he heard the evidence, even though he could still have been wrong. In cases like you mention, you need an expert witness do you not?

reply to post by triplescorpio
You are quite correct about the "Artional minds" out there. Can you guide them to this subject matter; 'trial and cover up of evidence, please.



[edit on 20-1-2010 by smurfy]

Originally posted by smurfy
Wrong, You are making assumptions about evidence not even heard. At least the judge in the case you mentioned threw it out AFTER he heard the evidence, even though he could still have been wrong. In cases like you mention, you need an expert witness do you not?

That is true, but then, it's also true that a religious philosophy professor pretending to be a physicist, and a college kid making internet videos in his dorm room pretending to be an investigative journalist, and an economist pretending to be a Material engineer, are NOT expert witnesses.

We already know what the expert witnesses are saying, but the conspiracy theorists don't want to believe them. To them, physicists, investigative journalists, and materials engineers are really gov't secret agents.

reply to post by GoodOlDave
Who is the economist pretending to be a materials engineer? just curious.

Originally posted by smurfy
Who is the economist pretending to be a materials engineer? just curious.

Morgan Reynolds. He was chief economist in the US dept. of labor under Pres. Bush, and who later signed on to Dr. Judy Wood's whackadoodle claim the towers were brought down by lasers from outer space.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Sean48
A Judge not allowing all possible evidence and witnesses to be brought
forward , to find the Truth in the Court case ???

" Dave, what the hell is that about"?

Well that's the problem, isn't it? When the courts ask for proof, they want to see something tangible like WTC steel cut by explosives or an insider coming forward to spill the beans and name names and give time tables. When the conspiracy movement asks for proof, they want innuendo, rhetorical questions, bait and switch, and five degrees of separation, "Kevin Bacon" games linking pretty much everyone on the planet to Osama bin Laden. Not last week someone here offered the proof that the 9/11 attack was staged by the Masons, becuase "the WTC looked like the number eleven and eleven is a sacred number to the Masons".

Don't believe me? Take a look at Judy Wood's lawsuit against NIST on the grounds that NIST wasn't taking her calculations seriously that the towers really were blown up by lasers from outer space. To her, that was proof. To the judge, it was cause enough to throw her lawsuit out and warn her not to waste any more of the court's time. Would you like me to post the court ruling?

"What the hell is that about" pretty much sums it up.

OK, you executed a classic BEDUNK 101

You made a speech , away from the question, and of course lesser minds fell for it

QUESTION again: A Judge Not allowing pertinent witnesses and evidence to be presented , to seek the truth.

Dave . Im not the Tri guy , answer please.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by Sean48]

John Farmer was the General Counsel on the 9/11 commission. His book came out late last year. He points no fingers but says that pretty much all the evidence they were given turned out to be lies. The commission went to the Justice department in 2004 to see what kind of charges could be brought & the Justice Dept. would not talk to them.
Looks like the Left & Right do not want anything disturbing the status quo. Better watch out, the Government is watching you.
AND WILL SHUT YOU DOWN - BWAAA HAAA HAAA
(is that how you do a scary laugh?)