Interview 1383 - Lawyers Petition for 9/11 Grand Jury

08/31/201866 Comments

Today we're joined by Mick Harrison (and David Meiswinkle) of the Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry to discuss their recent petition to the U. S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York to convene a special grand jury into the unprosecuted federal crimes relating to the destruction of three World Trade Center Towers on September 11, 2001. We talk about the committee and its formation, the nature and powers of a special grand jury, and what legal options remain for those seeking justice for 9/11.

Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry

Lawyers' Committee Grand Jury Petition

Exhibits index for the Grand Jury petition

Filed in: Interviews
Tagged with:

Comments (66)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Octium says:

    I think there is more than enough evidence to convict those involved.

    As anarchists (some of us anyway), do we really need a Freemason ceremony by some guy holding a hammer and wearing a stupid wig to make the verdict official?

    I don’t believe the Nuremberg Trials had any legal jurisdiction inside Germany, yet they carried out the trials and even executions of those they found guilty.

    Nobody expected the Nazis to arrest themselves, put themselves on trial, convict themselves, climb up onto the gallows, put a rope around their own necks and pull the lever all by themselves.

    • pearl says:

      Except tthat the allied military tribunal aka the Nuremberg trials was its own form of controlled demolition, smoke and mirrors:

      The Control Council which was given the task of preparing directives for the arrest and detention of war criminals, moved into Germany after the war. It was headed by the Council on Foreign Relations. Professor Sutton observed, “At the end of World War II, Wall Street moved into Germany through the Control Council to protect their old cartel friends and limit the extent to which the denazification fervor would damage old business relationships.

      The CFR/Wall Street managed these investigations from the top. “So when we examine the Control Council for
      Germany,” wrote Professor Sutton “we find that the head of the finance division was Louis Douglas, director of the Morgan-controlled General Motors,” and the head of the “Economics Division was William Draper, a partner in the Dillon, Read Firm that had so much to do with building Nazi Germany in the first place.” “All three men [Douglas, Clay, and Draper] were, not surprisingly … members of the Council on Foreign Relations,” he added.

      “None of the Americans were ever prosecuted,” wrote Perloff. “The story of American ties to German fascism has been avoided like the plaque by the major U.S. media.” Professor Sutton declared, “After World War II the Tribunals set up to investigate Nazi war criminals were careful to censor any materials regarding Western assistance to Hitler.”

      • Octium says:

        No doubt the Nuremberg trials were a farce, a bit of lubricant for operation paperclip etc. But that’s just the point I’m trying to make. Expecting the criminals to put themselves on trial is just irrational.

        Events like 9/11 demonstrate a complete systemic failure, not just a few bad apples in the system.

        • Octium says:

          BTW, I don’t intend my comment to be against what the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry are doing. I think it is a useful exercise, not for achieving justice directly, but for keeping the pubic attention on 9/11 and hopefully it will wake up a few more people.

        • pearl says:

          I hear ya now, Octium. I misunderstood (preaching to the choir, how annoying is that?!).

          Like you, my pessimist streak was flaring up a bit after watching the interview. I have the highest respect for these men pursuing it this far, but the system…

        • calibrator says:

          I agree regarding the Nuremberg trials, but really, who expected anything else?

          However, I perceive 9/11 completely different. To me this particular event doesn’t demonstrate systemic failure at all. In my eyes the system (or rather specific parts of it) produced it. It is an intended product that pretty much worked like it was planned (except perhaps the Shanksville “crash” – but that got corrected, too).
          The public is now so gullible that not even WTC7 became a real problem – it is still not even widely known, that this building was brought down, too.

          Just like the JFK assassination it is rather a demonstration of limitless power as nobody will come close to fully investigate and/or publish the details of how it was done, who is responsible (as in “who ordered it”) etc.
          Investigations are either stopped, derailed or closed without results.

          Political commissions are installed that publish reports that lead nowhere (remember when Kissinger was planned to lead the 9/11 commission? I bet he would have cleared that up to everybody’s satisfaction…)

          Problematic stuff like video films or rubble from Ground Zero gets carted to the “enemy” (China) faster than you can say “Giuliani!”.

          Witnesses will either be ignored, have “accidents” or simply disappear.

          If at all the trial is a joke that nobody except the dumbest sheeple believe in.

          In other words: The system itself is the bad apple.

          This is not to say that one should stop fighting it – it only means one should be aware who the enemy is…

          • Fawlty Towers says:

            However, I perceive 9/11 completely different. To me this particular event doesn’t demonstrate systemic failure at all. In my eyes the system (or rather specific parts of it) produced it. It is an intended product that pretty much worked like it was planned (except perhaps the Shanksville “crash” – but that got corrected, too).
            The public is now so gullible that not even WTC7 became a real problem – it is still not even widely known, that this building was brought down, too.

            Exactly. No systemic failure at all. That is what they would like the public to believe.
            Just by coincidence a dozen or so government agencies goofed at the same time on 9/11. But they’re only human after all right? So they must be forgiven.

            The ‘hijackers’ just simply lucked out on 9/11 as Hunter Maats would like us to believe, four times in one day. 🙂

          • pearl says:

            “In other words: The system itself is the bad apple.”

            Good catch. Exactly right.

        • mkey says:

          Octium, you meant purported criminals, yes? Everyone is innocent until proven otherwise.

          I do not mean to provide a “Nazi whitewash” but war crimes are usually looked through colored glasses. I.e. the “good guys” kill a hundred thousand people and that’s OK. But when the “bad guys” do it, it’s up the gallows without a trial.

    • Duck says:

      Stolen from Wikipedia on Nuremberg
      “…the Soviet prosecutor, Roman Rudenko, later became commandant of NKVD special camp Nr. 7.[95] By the time the camp closed in the spring of 1950, at least 12,000 prisoners had died due to the catastrophic prison conditions, hunger and psychological or physical exhaustion.[96]..”
      Criminals prosecute criminals
      Youtube “pirates and Emperors, schoolhouse rock” its a funny parody

  2. RobinHood77 says:

    Can’t the government simply say ”State secret privilege”, and throw the case out?

  3. AnimalsArentFood says:

    Well, in the past I might have said this has no chance of succeeding because they’re essentially asking the PTB to investigate themselves, but I’ve seen some things happen during the past decade that I never thought would happen so my certainty about the degree of control and ability the PTB actually have isn’t what it used to be.
    I just mailed some cash to them (address is on their website). I’ll try to find some other way to help them too.

  4. rob32367 says:

    In the 70’s, the evidence of the JFK assassination was there and the HSCA under Sprague and Tannenbaum started a real criminal investigation … and the powers that shouldn’t be shut down that investigation real quick and replaced Sprague with Blakey and that was the end of the criminal investigation.

    In the 80’s, Danny Sheehan & the Cristic Institute brought a lawsuit against Theodore Shakley and the Iran Contra gang. The judge destroyed their case & assessed such a large fine it ruined the Cristic Institute. They took their evidence to Congress and ran up against all kinds of road blocks to protect the powers that should’t be.

    These are just two examples … it’s nice of these guys to try, but if they get close, they will run into the same hurdles. I wish this could lead somewhere, but the corporate state holds all the levers of power.

    • Duck says:

      They hold the levers of power but if enough people are unhappy about something they have to at least PRETEND to care or to be doing something about it.
      It all depends on how much traction this gets in the popular imagination and how easy it is to hijack and misdriect the organization … the new generation might be quite happy to toss a few of their older cronies under the bus.

  5. Fawlty Towers says:

    I’m glad you asked that question at the end James.
    I will contact them and see if I can help in some way.

  6. HomeRemedySupply says:

    During this interview, I thought of one of my heroes, the late Hoppy Heidelberg, a grand juror in the Oklahoma City bombing case.

    During my late twenties, in the early 1980’s, when I was roadsiding pictures on street corners for a living, I was called for a jury pool. I put on my suit, grabbed a clipboard to take notes, and went down to the Federal Courthouse in downtown Dallas. The judge, smiled and picked me as Deputy Foreman for a Federal Grand Jury. There were around 20 of us, and we would serve for 18 months. Some months we would meet in Dallas, and other months in Ft Worth.

    The Foreman for the Grand Jury owned the Coors Beer Distributorship in Ft Worth. He was a nice old guy, and we got along great. We sat next to each other. In fact, the Foreman took me out to lunch one time at an exclusive elite membership club restaurant. The backdrop was like in the movies with dark wood and tall ceilings…all these old rich oilmen, judges, business owners, etc. The Foreman knew them all.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      As a jury, we could vote to indict someone or to “no bill” them. If someone was indicted, then it meant there was enough evidence worthy of a trial. A “no bill” means there is insufficient evidence to prosecute someone.

      One time, just prior to IRS tax season, the D.A. (or one of the many assistant D.A.’s) brought forth two cases of tax evasion. One was a plumber who wrote off his grandfather clock as a time clock. Another, was a small business guy who fudged some figures. I knew what the deal was. The IRS was trying to dig up some fraud cases to scare the public during tax season. It so happened that I was also reading a book about how bogus the IRS is. So, in the jury room I stand up and give my speech. I reminded everyone that it is Grand Juries which can change things. We don’t have to indict these folks. There were a few folks who sided with me, but not enough. The two cases were indicted.

      One time, the Foreman showed me a newspaper article. It was about a case which we as a grand jury had indicted. The article was about the trial’s outcome. The person was found not guilty and his jury said that the person should had never been indicted. This puzzled the Foreman and me. The evidence which we had seen, seemed very cut and dry, to indict.
      It was a “wake-up call” that the D.A. had the power to manipulate the grand jury. In fact, the D.A. and judges can be very intimidating. They like to stay in control of the situation.

      • mkey says:

        That was almost 40 years back, imagine what kind of shenanigans they pull today. Also, kudos for figuring IRS out that early on, did it help you in the coming decades?

        • HomeRemedySupply says:

          I have been audited twice by the IRS.
          Also, there have been 3 or 4 times where I had to make monthly payments to the IRS for back taxes.

          During the early 90’s, still the age of typewriters, was the first audit.
          I was intimidated by the IRS notice in the mail to audit me.
          Heck, the tax forms intimidated me and were like reading Greek or Croatian.
          I called the lady who did my tax forms. The lady was going to charge me a huge fee per hour to represent me in the audit.
          I passed on her. I was just a poor hardworking guy.

          The IRS Agent was a bitch, out to nail me.
          This was a large open room with no “cubicle dividers” and lots of agents with desks. I bring in a box with all my records.

          • mkey says:

            Oh, how much do I hate cliffhangers.

          • HomeRemedySupply says:

            Fortunately, prior to going in, I started studying in detail the tax forms and my records. I found where there was a typewriter key overlay on an income statement. A ‘$’ symbol had covered a ‘1’ digit representing about $10,000. The lady who did my taxes, missed this ‘double-stroke’ and put down 10k less than what it should had been.

            Even though I had discovered the error, I knew I could not divulge it when I first go in for the audit. The IRS Agent might get the idea that it was intentional deception. So, here is the Agent, pouring through figures, really on a roll out to get me. She is trying to intimidate me. Then, I feign surprise, when she points to the income on the tax form. I said, “Oh!…I made more money than that. Where’s my income statements?” I fumble around, then ‘accidently’ find the error. Fortunately, the Agent saw it as an honest mistake which the tax lady made, not a deception on my part. I had to make payments for a year or two, until the tax bill was paid.

            After this incident, I started doing my own tax forms. One year, I did 9 IRS tax forms. They can get pretty complex.
            But, when I formed a Corporation, I finally had to get an accountant to do my taxes. Taxes get very complex with Corporations and with investments and capital gains.

            The second IRS audit. Well, I knew that was coming. After all, agents were coming to my business to try to find me. I always ‘wasn’t there’ when they came by. When I had all my ducks in a row, I called the IRS and set up the audit. Rolled in a dolly with 4 large boxes. The Agent was very civil. I explained the full story of why I deliberately did not pay my taxes…so I could first pay off some individually-owned small businesses before I declared bankruptcy for my Corporation. I had my business records well organized and with summaries. Took me 5 years to pay the IRS off.

      • manbearpig says:

        Quite an anecdote. Must’ve been instructive Indeed. My Dad was called for jury duty 7 different times in his life. Until his daughter was murdered. They never called him again after that. Funny how that works. I’m sure it was just the odds. Don’t think my Mom was ever called once.

        • mkey says:

          7 sounds like a very high number to me, I don’t know anyone who did any jury duty. Of course, my failed state is not actually a state ran by laws and an efficient judiciary system.

          Maybe if you get called in once you end up on a shortlist.

          • HomeRemedySupply says:

            In the U.S., sometimes they get potential jurors from the Voter roles. In fact, many folks don’t register to vote because they don’t want to be called for jury selection.

            I’ve lost count on how many times I have been up for jury selection. I haven’t been selected to serve on a jury since the grand jury many years ago.

            There are different jury venues. Federal, State, County, Municipal. The jurisdiction will call up (give notice) to a bunch of folks to come in for the selection process. If you are not selected, then you don’t serve on the jury.
            When a person is given notice, they must appear or face a fine…unless they have an extremely good excuse. People get paid a token amount of money to appear for jury selection, or if they serve on a jury.
            Sometimes, attorneys will deliberate a group into a room, give a talk, then size up who they want as a potential juror.

            During the past decade, I make it a point not to register to vote. However, sometimes I still get a notice to appear for jury selection. In fact, I got a notice about a year ago.

            Now-a-days, with the internet, you can find out the current status of your jury selection date. Sometimes, the county already fills the juror demand and so they cancel online your summons to appear for the selection process.
            My past two previous summons were cancelled that way.

        • HomeRemedySupply says:

          Interesting about your Dad, jury duty and the murder.

          I get called occasionally for local (municipal or county) jury selection. Sometimes, there will be a hundred or more of us, and then they select the jury from this large pool.

          One time, I deliberately took some 9/11 promo with me to the selection process. While we were waiting in the courtroom for things to start… I sat next to a guy, and we talked about the 9/11 Cover-up. I made sure my voice carried in that echo-ey courtroom so everyone could hear.

          • manbearpig says:

            Nnaaaahhh it’s not very interesting ’bout my Dad…

            …but he really was the incarnation of the furious rise and fall of the American Dream… Son of a navy cartographer and country schoolteacher, was delivering papers before he was 10, holding down pre and post schoolday jobs as a teen-ager, army (testing A bombs in the Nevada desert), distinguished himself as an economist, got a cushy lifetime job on the 44th floor of a Manhattan highrise as head of strategic development and research for the JCPenney company. He and his beautiful, crazy, child wife hung out in the chic artistic and academic circles of NYC, shared a prestigious psycho-therapist by the name of Albert Ellis, were profoundly affected by the sixties… A great and thoughtful left-leaning humanist who consumed considerable quantities of whiskey and cigarettes, he was loved by all, gave his ex-wife, his only love, away in marriage multiple times after his divorce, bought houses, cars and cruises for her and his daughters and otherwise lived frugally and alone in Westchester county working hard ’til his early retirement when the company headquarters moved down to Plano, Texas…died bankrupt and grieving at the hospital on the day of the spring equinox during a total solar eclipse with a Stephen Hawkings book in his hand, his youngest daughter by his side, having donated his body to science.

            no sh#t.

            ya did good with yer 9/11 promo, I admire that…


  7. Drazen says:

    You had two guests on this episode but your second guest, David R. Meiswinklem, did not have his contribution to this discussion presented. Was it left out in editing or was there some other reason you present two guests but only one of them speaks?
    Not implying anything, just curious.

  8. HomeRemedySupply says:

    I am curious with how the D.A. or prosecutor’s office would proceed with this.
    Certainly, there is plenty of evidence concerning a cover-up.

    But Who would be listed on the indictment? Who are the suspects?

    Corbett’s series, “9/11 Suspects”, would be good videos for a grand jury.

    • manbearpig says:

      In their video on the home page of their site one speaker says “the United States committed a crime”…

      Best case scenario, should this campaign get any media traction at all, the message will simply be what most people vaguely suspect anyhow deep down, which is that some vague corrupt element imbedded in the American system made it happen, as was the case for Kennedy, and MLK etc etc…

      Yea, it might even just be reformulated or framed by the media to suggest “the american system, the american dream… American Capitalism and imperialism! made the towers come down!”

      brilliantly reinforcing the growing anti-American ethos and drowning dollar in favor of a more global technocratic era

      as if Uncle Sam and the old world he represents had been effectively castrated on 9/11…

      the powerful symbolism of the WTC towers crumbling, preparing the collective mind of the masses

      for the dawn of a sustainable new age…

      For sure, no one effectively pin-pointed and indicted, everything’ll remain vague with people drawing whatever conclusions they care to in direct proportion to their ignorance of the details, as mentioned…and certainly upstaged by some new devastating event or crisis…

      Nevertheless, it doesn’t seem moral or constructive to ignore this legal initiative…if only for personal existential reasons…as is the case for the poor papa who lost his son in the horrific mass murder…

  9. pearl says:

    “Yea, it might even just be reformulated or framed by the media to suggest “the american system, the american dream… American Capitalism and imperialism! made the towers come down!”

    “brilliantly reinforcing the growing anti-American ethos and drowning dollar in favor of a more global technocratic era”

    Brilliant indeed. Barely into the third episode of the very bleak “Handmaiden’s Tale”, that is a very scary and plausible scenario, part and parcel of multi-dimensional chess strategy.

    • manbearpig says:

      Elizabeth Moss reminds me very strangely of my own daughter in that series…
      And an absolutely fabulous actress who played in Black Mirror’s Men Against Fire, Madeline Brewer, plays Janine…another awesome actress and characters…
      Guess I like Madelines or something ’cause I ‘adored’ Madeleine Stowe in the 12 Monkeys. Actually I ‘adored’ everyone in that movie, my favorite one of all…I can imagine a happy ending…

      On totally different note, my student this morning, a successful sales manager for a pharmaceutical company, couldn’t give a hoot about 9/11; his preoccupation is that he’s convinced that the French state is literally trying to kill off part of the population as a form of population control by monetarily incentivizing people to use generic drugs that in the case of heart problems, parkinson’s and cholesterol are distinctly inferior (largely demonstrated by mortality stats according to him). Indeed, the Social Security System only immediately ‘pays for’ generic drugs… But for him, 9/11 conspiracy theory is “irrational”.

  10. pearl says:

    Before this, I’d only seen Moss in Madmen. I’m so impressed by her range. And Brewer is excellent too. But my goodness, what was I thinking? This series is not exactly binge friendly. I’m currently medicating myself by whipping up a batch of blender chocolate pots de creme while the Beatles’ blue album plays on.

    To the student who doesn’t have a problem with his pharmaceutical employers, couldn’t population control be implemented numerous ways simultaneously? Off the top of my head, there’s war, terrorism, modified foods, medical mistakes, drugs,…what am I missing?

    • manbearpig says:

      No people know they see obscure plots in their own sector, but are afraid to adhere to “conspiracy theories”…

      Because strangers outside their own sector are dangerous and manipulative…

      The second season of The Handmaiden’s Tale is hard but more galvanizing as there is more promise of collaborative sabotage…

      consolation beatles and chocolate pots de creme… what a miraculous era we’re living in…

      sorry, it’s Saturday night… I’ll do better next time…

      handmaiden’s tale is not binge friendly… no…

  11. candlelight says:

    I believe James can now be fully exonerated for being unjustly berated for “ducking” the demolition aspect of 9/11 in another interview, with the introduction of this lawyerly group petitioning for a grand jury to look into the explosive crimes of 9/11. This must be the same group Ed Asner had mentioned when he was interviewed by Dan Dicks earlier this year, because among the lawyers, Asner is listed among those in the group.

    It was a pleasure to listen to Mick Harrison run through the most compelling talking points comprising the preponderance of evidence, circumstantial or otherwise( e.g., thermite chips found in the dust)which at the very least might lead a rational person to question the government’s veracity, and think about – forgive my pun – what actually went down on 9/11.

    Will this lead anywhere? No. Except to implement Plan B, which is to essentially sue the government to take the case up to a grand jury.

    I pray the government caves and makes the hubristic error allowing this body of evidence of controlled demolition to be presented to a grand jury to be examined in such a court of law with its unique judicial powers. If such a grand jury determines there’s a case for demolition and begins to subpoena witnesses, it will be mighty interesting.

    The question if it gets this far of who the grand jury would indict remains somewhat of a mystery, because this aspect is not clarified either in the interview, the interviewee’s website, or in their petition, unless I missed it. And the matter of who is to blame for the demolitions, even while a rather heavy finger could and should be pointed at the “United States government” in general, represents a whole other can of worms to open and explore, not to mention, prove.

    In any event, there’s much solace that even if the perpetrators after seventeen years are still at large, the questions are still alive.

  12. HomeRemedySupply says:

    There are some livestream 9/11 Events coming up.

    Note that Corbett Report’s 9/11 Trillions: Follow the Money will be playing in California.

    The Lawyer’s Committee will be participating in the live stream.

  13. HomeRemedySupply says:

    This is a “Good News” example of how people are becoming more aware.

    We recently had the historic Monsanto Trial.
    The following video is an interview with two of the attorneys involved in the $289 million lawsuit revolving around Monsanto’s Roundup.
    Some fascinating details about the case come to light.

    Jury Selection
    About 120 potential jurors are called. 12 are needed.
    However, almost half of the potential jurors hated Monsanto so badly, that they were dismissed.
    QUEUED VIDEO (about 2 minutes)

  14. generalbottlewasher says:

    Thank you James. The ball maybe at the top of the hill.

    • generalbottlewasher says:

      Begging the question , has anyone world wide seen this on the 6 o’clock news. Amy? Rachel? How is it not the 15 second blurb of the week?

  15. zyxzevn says:

    Fun for the whole family..

    Play the 9/11 game of lies.
    Board game like monopoly, but now you work together to
    get the pentagon trillions.

    If someone wants to improve it, be my guest.

    You can also watch this family movie:
    pulverised & vaporized bodies 911

  16. says:

    I think what they’re doing with this legal action is good but like many on this message board I feel that the system is so broken that it won’t likely amount to much legally speaking. But I think its a good thing to go through this process to elevate public awareness and create a case that could be used again when we finally evolve out of this state of utter systemic dysfunction.

    I think the surveillance abuse issue is a too often overlooked aspect of educating the public on 9/11 and rallying the public’s support–especially after the Snowden disclosures, the insane surveillance abuse all have seen Assange be put through and the Orwellian surveillance that has continued to be rolled out in spite of the Snowden revelations. This issue manifested as a direct result of the 9/11 lie.

    The “targeted-individual” phenomenon illustrates THE most extreme form of surveillance abuse being rolled out on the public and I think exposing this issue is equally useful for advancing the 9/11 truth movement as anyone can now have all the surveillance collected about them used to literally utterly their lives and mind. “Targeted-individual” just protested en mass worldwide last week in an epic protest convergence. I think the 9/11 movement and the surveillance abuse/targeted-individual movements need to collaborate.

    Read my essay on the recent worldwide targeted-individual protests:

    And my deep-dive essay on the “targeted-individual” epidemic:

  17. keith.w says:

    I am interested to know if this Grand Jury will prevent or inhibit future prosecution of related matters regarding 9/11. I strongly suspect that there have been several legal “holes” identified regarding 9/11, and this particular outfit (LCfor911) will certainly plug them.

    I do understand that the ideas of Pre-planted explosives and Thermite have wandered their way into the narrative over the years, but if these accusations don’t hold up (which I suppose is a foregone conclusion), does this prevent future indictments??

    I am particularly concerned about the mention of seismic data, as these “experts” must have seen the data they would know there was minimal seismic data for the actual “collapse” of the towers (WTC1= Richter 2.3 / WTC2= 2.1). Additionally, a fully intact basement, and the only survivors being located in the second story stairwell (they looked up to see blue sky when it was over), does not seem likely after a collapse from explosives.

    I regard the research done by Dr. Judy Wood (B.S. Civil Engineering, M.S. Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), Ph.D. Materials Engineering Science) titled “Where Did The Towers Go” as a seminal analysis of what actually happened on 9/11, which very much contradicts the charges this organization is bringing to the table. We don’t need a new investigation, we need her expert testimony and research (written as evidence to be submitted to a court of law) to be brought to light and acknowledged. I find it impossible that these gentlemen are not familiar with her, which is highly suspect.

    Also, how do you fit the rubble from two 110 story buildings made of concrete and steel into a footprint less than 8 stories high?

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      There have been discussions about Wood before on Corbett Threads. Do a Search Engine search with keywords and “Corbett Report”.

      I sure don’t trust Morgan Reynolds as far as I can spit…well, not even that much…not at all. The guy stinks. He spoke in Dallas more than a decade ago to a group of 9/11 Truth Advocates. Reynolds at one time officed in Dallas. I live here in the Dallas area.

      Reynolds is one of three filers of RFCs (Request For Correction) to NIST who filed together, including Dr. Judy Wood. NIST responded to the claims and rejected them.

      I personally feel he deliberately pushed this agenda so it would undermine the 9/11 Truth Movement.
      I rarely would call someone a government sponsored “disinfo agent”, but Morgan Reynolds wins that nickname hands down.

      I ain’t gonna get into a ‘back-n-forth’.
      This is my take on things.
      You can have your take.

  18. djgood says:

    @19:00 The key problem: “Objective vs Biased” investigation

    The main assumption is that the Grand Jury will be made up of “normal” people that aren’t biased based on their own beliefs against questioning 9-11 “conspiracies” to start with including those within the Federal Judicial system and US Attorney’s office who are on the Zionist payroll.

    And if it’s done in “secret”, there goes any hope of justice since Zionist goons will probably get to them one way or the other before it’s all over!

  19. VolitionalJames says:

    November 26th, 2018 UPDATE:


    Press Release Here:

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      Very interesting.
      – Bump –

    • manbearpig says:

      Well… it’s hard to know how to react to this… waves of joy stifled by heavy clouds of cynicism…

      I’d be tempted to say that in a world where Q-anon represents hope and man-made climate change hysteria is passed off as urgent environmental action, who really cares about the dull reality of false flag attacks dating back a generation…?

      But the constant, draining and on-going battle is NOT to be overcome by paralyzing cynicism

      NOT to give in to the Chomskian temptation of

      “Who knows? and uh Who cares?”

      I’ll lift my cup (of coffee) and drink to Mr Asner’s “greater transparency”!

      Thanks for this update!


      • HomeRemedySupply says:

        You said it well…
        “Well… it’s hard to know how to react to this… waves of joy stifled by heavy clouds of cynicism…”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top