49

9/11: Seven Questions to Evaluate Nineteen Suspects

Kevin Ryan

Who could have committed the crimes of September 11, 2001? Answering that question requires understanding the details of 1) what happened that should not have happened and 2) what did not happen that should have happened. Additionally, it requires asking specific, well-formulated questions and seeking answers that are evidence-based to assess potential suspects in terms of means, motive, and opportunity.

In my book Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects, a case is made for the investigation of nineteen people who were in position to do everything that was needed to affect the crimes. These legitimate suspects can be compared to the nineteen young Arabs who were accused of the crimes yet who did not have the means or opportunity to accomplish most of what happened that day.

The following seven questions should be asked when considering suspects. For each question, my nominees are described.

1. Who could have prevented U.S. intelligence agencies from tracking down and stopping the alleged hijackers before 9/11?

  • Louis Freeh was Director of the FBI for the nine years leading up to 9/11. Under Freeh’s leadership, the FBI failed miserably at preventing terrorism when preventing terrorism was the FBI’s primary goal. During this time the actions of FBI management suggest that it was facilitating and covering-up acts of terrorism. After 9/11, Freeh went on to become the personal attorney for Saudi Arabian ambassador Prince Bandar and a director for a company linked to 9/11 insider trading.
  • As Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (DCI) from 1997 to 2004, George Tenet led an agency that botched and bungled its duties related to counterterrorism. The evidence suggests that, as with Louis Freeh and the FBI, at least some of those failures were intentional. Tenet had developed secret paths of communication with Saudi authorities and he appears to have disrupted plans to capture or investigate al Qaeda suspects.
  • Richard Clarke was appointed U.S. “Counterterrorism Czar” by President George H.W. Bush in1992 and he held that position until after the 9/11 attacks. Clarke was also a member of the highly secret Continuity of Government planning group along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and he implemented that secret plan for the first time on 9/11. He was a personal representative of the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), a country that financed terrorism and had many ties to 9/11. Clarke predicted terrorist attacks on Washington and New York and, through tipping off his friends in the UAE, was behind the failure of two CIA attempts to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden. On 9/11, he led the secure White House videoconference that failed to respond to the attacks.
  • Richard Armitage was a special operations soldier, long-time covert operative, and a member of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). On 9/11, Armitage was Deputy Secretary of State and, in this role, he implemented an express approval program that provided visas to the alleged 9/11 hijackers. On 9/11, he was involved in the secure videoconference run by Richard Clarke that failed to respond to the hijacked airliners.

2. Who could have disabled the systems in place to prevent hijackings that should have been effective?

  • On 9/11, General Michael Canavan was in the role of hijack coordinator for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) but he was mysteriously missing that morning. Canavan’s role was most responsible for communications between the FAA and the military and his absence was critical to the failure of air defenses. Having only started as FAA’s hijack coordinator just months earlier, Canavan left the position in October 2001. According to an FAA intelligence employee, Canavan started his job by running training exercises that were “pretty damn close to the 9/11 plot.”
  • Duane Andrews, a long time protégé of Dick Cheney, was a leading expert on the defense systems that failed on 9/11. At the time, he led the company Science Applications International (SAIC) that created the national databases to track and identify terrorists, supplied U.S. airports with terrorism screening equipment, predicted and investigated terrorist attacks against U.S. infrastructure including national defense networks and the WTC, helped create the official account for what happened at the WTC both in 1993 and after 9/11, was a leader in research on thermitic materials like those found in the WTC dust, led the robotics team that scoured the pile at Ground Zero using equipment capable of eliminating explosives, and provided the information to capture the alleged mastermind of the attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
  • Benedict Sliney was the FAA’s Command Center national operations manager on 9/11. It was his first day in the job, having just left a lucrative law career defending Wall Street financiers. Despite his lack of experience, his FAA superiors deferred to him as the attacks proceeded and allowed him to take charge of the response to the hijacked airliners. Sliney’s failure to respond effectively on the day of the attacks, allegedly not even knowing how to respond, contributed significantly to the failure of the national air defenses.

3. Who could have disabled the U.S. chain of command that should have immediately responded to the attacks but did not?

  • Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was in charge of U.S. defenses on 9/11. After the Pentagon was hit, Rumsfeld wandered out to the parking lot for approximately 30 minutes. His presence there showed that he was not concerned about other planes that were reported as hijacked, as if he knew what to expect. Rumsfeld did not concern himself with the work of his direct subordinate, NORAD Commander Ralph Eberhart, and he did not do his job to ensure the nation’s air defenses. Rumsfeld and his Defense department later failed to cooperate with 9/11 investigations.
  • Vice President Dick Cheney was in charge at the White House on 9/11 and is known to have been the primary decision maker that day. In the Presidential Emergency Operations Center, Cheney gave instructions that appear to have directed a stand down of air defenses as well as an order to shoot down United Flight 93. Cheney later worked to prevent any investigation into 9/11 and led a campaign of lies to start the Iraq War.

4. Who could have disabled the U.S. national air defenses that should have responded effectively and intercepted some, if not all, of the hijacked aircraft?

  • Ralph Eberhart, the commander of NORAD on 9/11, sponsored the highly coincidental military exercises (i.e. war games) that obstructed the military response. Twelve hours before the attacks, Eberhart apparently ordered the defense readiness alert system Infocon to its least protective level, making it easier to hack or compromise the defense computer networks. Failing in his duties to protect the nation while giving orders that further prevented response, Eberhart later lied to Congress about the military’s knowledge of the hijackings.
  • As a special agent in charge for the Secret Service, Carl Truscott supervised all protective matters relating to the president, the first family, and the White House. The response of the Secret Service to the 9/11 attacks suggests foreknowledge of the events because the agency failed to protect the president from the obvious danger posed by terrorists. Combined with the failure of the Secret Service to follow-up on offers of air support from Andrews Air Force Base, this led to the suspicion that the agency was complicit in the attacks.

5. Who could have caused three WTC skyscrapers to fall through the path of what should have been the most resistance?

  • Brian Michael Jenkins, as deputy chairman of Crisis Management for Kroll Associates, played a leading role in planning for terrorist events at the WTC, including having reviewed the possibility of airliner crashes into the towers. A special operations soldier and long-time right-wing political advisor, Jenkins had been accused of implementing a “terror war” in Central America during the 1980s.
  • Wirt Walker was named a 9/11 insider trading suspect in previously classified 9/11 Commission documents. Walker’s company Stratesec provided security services for the WTC, United Airlines (which owned two of the planes hijacked on 9/11), and Dulles Airport (where American Airlines Flight 77 took off that day). Stratesec held its annual meetings in offices leased by Saudi Arabia and Walker also ran an aviation company in Oklahoma at an airport that was associated with the alleged hijackers.
  • Barry McDaniel was the chief operating officer of Stratesec. McDaniel was in charge of WTC security in terms of what he called a completion contract, to provide services up to the day the buildings fell down. He is also an Iran-Contra suspect and previously worked for companies that conducted covert operations, like Sears World Trade and The Vinnell Corporation. After 9/11, McDaniel went on to start a business with Dick Cheney’s former business partner, Bruce Bradley.
  • Rudy Giuliani was Mayor of New York City on 9/11. He and his staff had foreknowledge that the WTC Towers would fall when no one could have predicted such a thing. Giuliani was also responsible for the destruction of critical WTC evidence at Ground Zero. In a crime that continues to take lives, he told people in the area that the air was safe to breathe, when it was not, in order to speed the removal of evidence.
  • L. Paul Bremer’s career with the State Department and as managing director of Kissinger Associates led to him becoming, like Jenkins, one of few leading experts on terrorism before 9/11. On the day of 9/11, Bremer had an office in the South Tower of the WTC and was working for Marsh & McLennan, a company that occupied all the impact floors in the North Tower. Also associated with a company that had patented a thermite demolition device, Bremer was one of the first people to provide the official account for what happened on television that morning.

6. Who could have coordinated an attack against the Pentagon that struck the exact spot that had just been renovated while allowing all Pentagon leadership to escape unharmed?

  • Paul Wolfowitz was Deputy Secretary of Defense on 9/11. Along with Armitage, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz was a leader of the organization PNAC that, one year before 9/11, had called for a transformational event “like a New Pearl Harbor” to reinvigorate U.S. military spending. In the eight months leading up to 9/11, Wolfowitz led the Pentagon building project that renovated the exact spot where Flight 77 was reported to have impacted the building.
  • Peter Janson was the chief officer of AMEC Construction, the company that performed the renovation work on the Pentagon building in the exact spot where it was hit on 9/11. AMEC was also hired to clean-up the debris at both the Pentagon and the WTC immediately after the attacks. A long-time business associate of Donald Rumsfeld, Janson went on to benefit from the War on Terror as a director of an oil and gas transport company.

7. Who could have ensured that no effective investigation was conducted and that no one was held accountable?

  • Porter Goss was a CIA operative who, after 9/11, became DCI. On the day of 9/11, Goss was meeting with Pakistani secret service (ISI) General Mahmud Ahmed as the first plane struck the WTC. He later helped cover-up the crimes through his leadership of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11. As DCI in 2004, Goss took actions to ensure that no one in the intelligence community was held responsible for 9/11.
  • Robert Mueller, although not named as a suspect in my book, was a leader of the 9/11 cover-up in his role as director of the FBI, a position he took one week before the 9/11 attacks. Mueller had a history of covering-up government crimes including FBI collusion with organize crime, the 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103, and the CIA terrorist financing network known as BCCI. That made him the perfect guy to lead the FBI investigation into 9/11.

It should be obvious that the 19 young Arab suspects accused of the crimes could not have accomplished any of the things required to pull off the 9/11 crimes, as described in these seven questions that need to be answered.  In fact, the evidence indicates they could not even fly small aircraft. On the other hand, the suspects noted above not only had the means, motive, and opportunity to carry out the crimes, many of them were long-time associates known to have engaged in covert operations or cover-ups. Anyone who is objective in an analysis of 9/11 suspects knows which of these groups should be investigated first.

This article first appeared on DigWithin.net,

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
49 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Antonym
Antonym
Sep 15, 2019 5:36 PM

From the horse’s mouth (eye witness Edward Snowden at Fort Meade): the NSA had no clue and evacuated the place the minute a second plane hit the WTC: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/15/edward-snowden-on-911-and-why-he-joined-the-army-now-finally-there-was-a-fight

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 5:23 PM

There’s either that psychotic emptiness in their eyes, or just the rigid face of egotistic determination to do whatever the hell they like.
I’m beginning to know them at sight…

TFS
TFS
Sep 13, 2019 11:10 AM

Philip D. Zelikow

His outline, apparantley drafted 16 months before the comission reported.

https://hcgroups.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/911-commission-report-outline-from-spring-2003-similar-to-final-report/

He could have a least had a section dealing with the vulumnious information Bush had about who was responsible in the hours after the attack….oh wait!

Deschutes
Deschutes
Sep 13, 2019 7:57 AM

New Univ. of Alaska study disagrees with NIST on WTC building 7: did NOT collapse from fire-
http://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
“The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

Mucho
Mucho
Sep 12, 2019 11:43 PM

Interesting and worthy 9/11 summary from AlienScientist, a longtime promoter of Kevin Ryan and his contribution to solving 9/11

The Men Behind 9/11: COGs in the Machine – The Ultimate 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Sep 12, 2019 10:41 PM

“In my book Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects, a case is made for the investigation of nineteen people who were in position to do everything that was needed to affect the crimes.”

OK. To start in the middle, at random because that’s where a few random scrolls down got me to:

“Twelve hours before the attacks, Eberhart apparently ordered the defense readiness alert system Infocon to its least protective level, making it easier to hack or compromise the defense computer networks.” (My emphasis)

There follows a list of proposed suspectible names, each with some incontrovertibly documented fact and a lot of “apparently”, with links of each name to a great deal more of the same proportionate mix of fact and “apparently”, supported by extensive footnotes with citations of and references to sources that, in turn, have about the same mix of fact and “apparently”.

“Investigating” all that meticulously presented material and refining or discarding the “apparently”s to a fact/apparently proportion that would support the next step of doing something useful with it could, for each name, cost thousands, often tens of thousands and in some cases hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal research time, and that’s before a big beagle is called in to proffer their multi-thousand dollar “opinion”.

So my prior question is who or what is going to fund such an “investigation” of the nineteen names (or even just seven names, the one most likely based on pre-investigation cost-saving hunch, per “question”)? For which court? The Court of the Official Narrative? And in light of the likely obstructions or even, im some cases, potential personal dangers?

I guess that this post can be paraphrased as “so what”, because if nothing salutorily practical can be done with it then of what use is it except as a jolly good long, long read for the very few wonks who will give the intricate mass of it the attention it needs to be rendered actionably meaningful in terms of justifying, let alone mounting, any further, formal “investigation” of even just one name?

Igor
Igor
Sep 13, 2019 12:52 AM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

I take it as a carefully compiled list of persons who were in positions key to pulling off 9/11. Personnel below their level could not have done 9/11 without authorization and support from above. Which leads right back to this group. There are multiple interconnections between the individuals. No careers suffered as a result of apparent failures on 9/11. They may have stepped down from their government roles, but went right through the revolving door to the Industrial arm of the military industrial complex.

Means and motive is present in each individual.

The 19 accused “terrorists” were not in any position to cause a tower to free fall into the building’s footprint. They were in no position to ensure the removal of the contents of the scene of the crime to Staten Island, then on to China. It works out well that they were all suicide “terrorists”. Wonder what actually happened to the “terrorists”? Snatched and dropped in the Atlantic ocean? Only one “hijacked” airplane is accounted for by minimal debris found in Pennsylvania.

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 5:34 PM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

I reckon that’s a valid criticism, and, like you, I am always looking for signs that somebody is actually going to do something.
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, as well as Lawyers, First Responders and others are certainly doing their best – and their best is most impressive, but of course the entire might of the “establishment” is lined up against them.
I imagine the criminals involved are counting on our collective memory lasting about 20 years, after which nobody will care about such “historic” (= antique) events any more.
After all, how did those of us who are now in our later years feel twenty years after the end of WW2?
I can remember being a child who thought it might as well be a million years ago for all the relevance it seemed to have to my life at the time.
I’m pretty sure that will be their primary defence strategy in the current scenario.

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 9:40 PM
Reply to  wardropper

For the benefit of the unkind and judgemental person who voted that comment down, I should clarify that I am of course no longer a child, and so WW2 is naturally as relevant to me now as anything else concerning military matters and the evil things perpetrated in the name of “military thinking”.

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 9:56 PM
Reply to  wardropper

My point was that with each new generation comes more distance from crucial events, and my fear is simply that the 911 criminals will deliberately use that fact to the hilt.

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Sep 13, 2019 11:10 PM
Reply to  wardropper
TFS
TFS
Sep 12, 2019 1:35 PM

Philip D. Zelikow is Dr Ray Griffins favoured trojan horse on the Commission Investigation into the event of 9/11

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 1:10 PM

The idea – as I see it – is not so much identifying WHO, but of recognising HOW. Any ‘who’ can be under their own narrative assumptions within their own personal agenda of identity and purpose. Everyone plays a part at some level and to put it the other way around, everybody plays apart – at some level.

(The division of Consciousness to ‘levels’ is on a ‘need to know’ basis – and to turn that around – is also on a NEED-TO-NOT-KNOW basis *1 – see below *1.

The only ‘how’ of planning, executing and managing the narratives while operating the power grab – for such a pivotal event that operates on many levels at once – is of such a deep rooted and pervasive corruption as to effectively run as a shadow power or dark economy and network of influence.

The core nature of this is a logical outcome of the identity in private self interest that is no longer held in check or balance by moral recognition of self and life in being, except as each their own private bubble of diminishing and depleting ‘control’ set against fear of loss that masks in substitution as possession of wealth and power – which is itself set over the powerlessness of others as the hierarchy of sacrifice by which a true cooperative purpose is lost to Corporate systems of control.

All as a result of becoming blinded by substitution of a false self-inflation – forever seeking ‘sustainability’ through the interjections of scarcity and threat by ingenious recourse of (any and every) means as if ITS survival is too big to fail – in other words your investment is so deeply entangled as to PAY the sacrifice as the survival set against a greater fear that is never named – but is in effect an Orwellian ‘room 101’ of projected hates, fears and guilts that each bubble or personality structure was in a sense built upon – as its survival response to separation trauma.

The ‘system’ of substitution for true awareness and appreciation is the need for alliance set in mutual protections and self-reinforcement – tied to the drive or compulsion of need for ‘more’ because there IS no substitution for love and life that CAN satisfy – and so the ritual of ITS fantasy life – raised upon the death or denial of ‘other’ – is re-enacted as a destructive and degenerative addiction to which the addict is themselves blind as the ‘need-NOT-to-know.

A fungus that spores above ground is not the cause and controller of the threads of its being in the soil. Likewise the propagating effects of the mind-in-its-own-spin are not powerful or causative in and of themself – but are given power by a willing host – who is then in a sense ‘hacked’ to serve a dual or split allegiance in which the Call to Live is replaced by the fear of pain of loss of Life.

Addressing the forms by which we are deceived is not without risk of being drawn into deeper deceit unless in the living context of the Call to Live – which contains the qualities of Life – such as the Call to heal, to joy and to reintegrative perspective. The ‘Call to War’ will seem loud and powerful and compelling to the mind trained to victimhood and powerlessness in search of power to escape or overcome. But a willingness to KNOW is not setting conditions (*2 – see below *2) on truth, so much as releasing them to a deeper self-honesty of being that OF ITSELF re-aligns to an integrity of communication that incrementally transforms the personality structure – one willingness at a time – because truth is not coercive, and – to put that the other way round – a coercive thought system effects the exclusion or masking and substitution of truly resonant thought, word and deed – as experience of struggle in separation trauma – normalised and rendered tolerable for the exploration and development of that experience.

“To all things there is a season” – speaks to the cyclic nature of the world and our experience of it. This also speaks to the releasing of ‘old identities’ that no longer serve their allotted purpose within a greater Whole and so are finding lack of support in the rising of a New Perspective that is like a tide rising all boats irrespective their size, type or location. In a sense the New is no recycle of the ‘same old’ but our Original, given service and expression through the re-purposing of the mind of abilities grown under fear and division. Whatever agenda ‘denial of Life’ accepts by acting out, it cannot LEAVE the truth it thus denies or seeks to image, grasp and control and so suffers subjection under.

The idea that we made evil and we have to get RID of it (*3 – see below) – is a trick-minded deceit operating as a rolling present of the stamp of its own PAST JUDGEMENT into a future like itself. Orwell showed this but couldn’t see any way OUT. Yet in his terms, ‘control of the present’ is the ‘narrative’ identity of a mind set within its own framing – unrecognising its substitution of the presence of the heart’s command within experience of a breakdown of communication – taken as actual separation, disconnection and loss of guidance, power, love and support. The mind CANNOT and is not designed or intended to control – but rather to hold the focus of the heart’s intention and desire. In order to know or be found in our true desire, we need simply release active investment in the false – now. And to grow a consciousness of heart-connecting integrative willingness to replace a fear-divisive OVERRIDE of Life in mental anguish that outsources to emotional and physical displacement seeking magical solutions of sustainability by sacrifice by which to buy ‘time’.

The ignorance and arrogance of the mind-in-its-own-spin is ‘alone in all the Universe’ – such as to regard It as dead and even Life as merely patterns of mechanism to control, ‘improve’, use or exploit for a private self-agenda. The un-spinning of the mind from a false or mis-taken foundation is its transparency and release to a truly free self awareness – in place of a narrative self-consciousness. The noticing of the ‘old habit’ is the awakening responsibility to the choice not to use it. The old habit will seem to bait reaction by which to reassert itself by any and every means – but as such it NOW offers an education in recognising and releasing who your are NOT and what does not belong to you and which in your right mind you see you do not even WANT.

What we resist, persists.
What we leave unused fades from non use.

‘Ground Zero’ is not just its ‘nuclear namesake’ but the zero-point within All That Is and the Source-Nature of All That Is. And the ‘Gateway’ from the mindset of polarised conflicting forces and things, to a resonant recognition of an all embracing and creating Life – that to a dark model must be ruled out – and so “it is life, Jim, but not as we think to know it”.

The Meanings are not set by conditions or by ‘others’ of whatever agenda – but by the decision and command of our wakened heart. All things serve ‘double duty’ according to the freedom to accept love or seem to deny it by accepting something else in substitution. Because ‘love’ is so degraded by misuse, along with all other words for the qualities of being – we have to release old currency to get with what is truly Current. The nature of the Current is also a Totality of Communication. What we draw down or attract and align in sharing is according to what is given allegiance in the heart. Waking up is a Call and Response both. You cant have one without the other. Receiving and giving, teaching and learning. The Golden Rule depends upon truly guided perception. Healing our perception is awakened responsibility for the framing of our thought – from which outcomes automatically proceed. Until we see our own thinking, we suffer a thought reversal in a world in which “Everything is BACKWARDS; everything is upside down! Doctors destroy health, Lawyers destroy justice, Universities destroy knowledge, Governments destroy freedom, Major media destroys information, And religions destroy spirituality”. (Michael Ellner).

*1. Who seeks to know that which would undermine their separate or private existence as they believe and defend themselves to be? Knowing – or having and being existence – is of qualities that are intimately felt. The interjection and overlay of narrative structured identity and world is the mind of a personal or private judgemental division, distortion and denial or ‘shadow’ substitution that filters or rules out wholeness of being by assigning it to narrative identity – and outsourcing or projecting conflict away – onto ‘others’ and ‘world’ out there as ‘not me – and therefore threat or resource to use, manipulate or exploit for survival within the FRAME of assertive power that is both victimiser and victim to its own shadow reflection in others and world – because it PUTS it there and WANTS it there.

*2. The frame of Security as the overriding CALL to power OVER all else is the weaponising and marketising of ‘truths’. Such that only the subversion of truth can run in a negatively or fearfully defined ‘Economy’, Model’, System’ or Identity. This is a persistent and perpetual fear-triggering, running as if autonomous or indeed as a self-conditioned programming of a personal AND collective entanglement in false with-ness or worth-ship.

*3. The attempt to get rid of something we have already identified in is an attempt to kill ourself. This insane and ultimately absurd doublethink is a self in conflict with itself or a split mind. The true Nature or Mind is ‘sow AS you would reap – and reap AS your would sow’. For garbage in; garbage out shows the value of the ideas and definitions FROM which we go forth in finding witness of reinforcing experience. That Life itself inspires its own Expressions is lost to the mind that is trying to put its garbage OUT as if to get rid of itself and become or achieve Life – in its OWN terms – as a new world order. A true New Order is a living inspiration to align in and be expression of, but it is New because it is not a persistence or recycle of the old ‘God’ of guilt and sacrifice as divine punishment – although it works the transformation of the old towards its capacity to recognize its way OUT of an impossible situation – by revealing it is IMPOSSIBLE and so we are not IN IT. This allows what we ARE in and of to move or vibrate to our RE-Conition.

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 4:04 PM
Reply to  Brian Steere
vexarb
vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 8:01 PM
Reply to  Brian Steere

@Brian Steere: “The idea – as I see it – is not so much identifying WHO, but of recognising HOW”

Kevin Ryan’s article is now putting The Case for the Prosecution, having previously established the Means to Hand of the criminals. At this level (of suspects rather than means) the WHO & the HOW are connected: by naming 19 suspects with interlocking connections by virtue of their office and authority within the Bush regime WHO could and/or did know HOW to act together in such a manner as to facilitate and/or fail to prevent the greatest terrorist atrocity in history .

vexarb
vexarb
Sep 14, 2019 7:19 PM
Reply to  vexarb

In short, at this high level of Executive Authority (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovitz) the WHO is the HOW.

SharonM
SharonM
Sep 12, 2019 11:43 AM

Off Guardian’s coverage of the 9/11 anniversary with 5 articles is great! Thank you:)

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 9:31 AM

Interesting article exploring how the intelligence community intimidate the media (a system backed by compromised politicians) – this is not a defence of the Guardian, BTW, just exposing the apperatus which can control the flow of news/information.
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/amp/

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 4:10 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Unaccountable ‘Notional Security’ trumps all else and doesn’t allow you to tell others that you cant tell anything but what its legal jurisdiction dictates. Or Else! On the other hand willing compliance receives rewards – or at least seeks mitigation of penalty under the enforced austerity of unnatural selection.

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 8:58 AM

It’s obvious Julian Assange is not a spy.

It is obvious Jeremy Corbyn is not an antisemite.

It is obvious WMD was a fabrication to enable war.

And its obvious the 19 hijacker, 2 planes/3 towers version of 9/11 is the mother of all lies.

But one thing history has taught us: US foreign policy is above the law (aided and abetted by the rancid MSM, of course).

Corrupt US establishment figures have no intention of investigating themselves and there is no supranational authority that has the power, or at least the balls to call these murdering scum to account.

Great work by Paul Ryan, BTW – thnks for assembling this rogues gallery.
At least for some 9/11 watchers these smirking neocons have been found culpable, or at least complicit in the court of public opinion.

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 9:00 AM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Apologies, meant Kevin, not Paul.

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 4:51 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Well the lie is untruth and the father of it is the wish that it pass off as true.
Do you think the USA retained its sovereignty of in fact lost it long ago?
We think in terms of convenient labels – but US could be seen to be a ‘pay for play’ global en forcer as one part of a broad spectrum dominance.
Yes, the power to break law with impunity and re-make it as a weapon set over the populations of Earth, is as gods set over men or true humans set over sub-species. Such an ‘elitism’ has no country or belonging but uses any and every form of accepted authority or symbol of life – as a mask through which to get for itself.

911 may serve a mass awakening to a corrupted order that has been running in the shadow for a very long time. But the waking to a corrupted darkness is the recognition of the need for a true light – rather than a seeming light set over and against the axis of evil – whoever and wherever that accusation may be pointed. False light is self-righteous and implicitly justified hate – aka exceptionalism or self-specialness – set in grievance to fuel vengeance.

There are those who effectively suck on psychic emotional energy as a power source. For without conflicted emotional charge, their batteries are not ‘sustainable’ – because they operate a disconnect that can only use the power they induce others to give away.

They are thus our own denials personified.

The rub is that to institute a Court of Law that could hold corporate cartel corruption to account, needs international backing and support. Globalism – as the idea of a unified biodiversity of life, has been subverted to global domination. Just as Environmentalism and any other ism. The ability to subvert the currency of thought and language, image and meanings, is the mind of deceit… given allegiance.
That is to say we are generally, collectively willing to protect it from exposure because to reveal deceit in full is to lose our own investment.

Yes the lie is obviously an act of power to interject and maintain narrative control – regardless the response. regardless the facts, or witnesses against it, or the incoherency of its assertion. When you believe nothing that your authorities tell you, you no longer have to look there for meaning, for they reveal themselves by what they accuse in others.

Opinions are an evaporation. While they hold a charge they may be exploited. The young ones grow up never knowing any different. A world of lies can only seem to exist on the sacrifice of the truth – and a true inheritance can only be squandered in lies.

If a world of lies is no longer able to pass off as true – what then IS the Truth?
Curiosity is innate to the Child of God or if you prefer, the unique Expression of Life that we each are. The mind of ‘explained away ‘is an invested set of self-definitions – protected against change. But there is no protection against change – and so it is forever reforming as the narrative continuity of a sense of power and possession – against fear or pain of loss.

vexarb
vexarb
Sep 12, 2019 6:42 AM

“9-11 was a Mossad operation.” Dr. Alan Sabrosky,

That would explain the origin of tons of Military Grade Nano Thermite which Bush brother’s company installed in WTC while “working on” the lift-shafts under armed guard, because the U$ Army keeps embarrassingly strict account when issuing Shaped Charge Explosives (aka Directed Energy Weapons) to civilian demolition contractors.

BBC CENSORS DR ALAN SABROSKY, former US Marine & US Army War College Director who says “It is 100% certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation”

https://sites.google.com/site/censorshipbythebbc/bbc-censors-dr-alan

Antonym
Antonym
Sep 12, 2019 11:35 AM
Reply to  vexarb

“9/11 was a Pakistani ISI operation”.

Etc.

Whoever done it, the some US officials mentioned ATL failed their job and should have been sacked for at minimum negligence.

Vexarb
Vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 11:27 AM
Reply to  Antonym

It was not Pakistani MI but Mossad agents who were caught dancing and high fiving while watching the Literal holocaust of 3,000 Gentiles on 911 2001.

Vexarb
Vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 11:50 AM
Reply to  Vexarb

PS It was not Pakistanis but Dual Citizen Israeli-Americans who were warned not to turn up for work at the WTC on that day. Including Larry Silverstein — the only time Lucky Larry did not turn up in his office as owner of the buildings; pity he did not cancel the appointment of the whistleblower who had been told to meet him there.

Antonym
Antonym
Sep 13, 2019 1:00 PM
Reply to  Vexarb

Thousands were dancing in the streets after 9/11 in Pakistan and on the West Bank.

Vexarb
Vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 5:24 PM
Reply to  Antonym

But only Israeli Mossad agents danced in NYC while viewing their holocaust of 3,000 Gentiles being burnt alive.

And it wasn’t a Pakistani shipping company but Israel’s ZIM who terminated their tenancy at a loss and vacated their office in WTC two months before 911 2001.

vexarb
vexarb
Sep 14, 2019 5:55 AM
Reply to  vexarb

Kevin Ryan’s link contains an interesting caveat: his list of suspects must be based on accusations that would hold up in a court of law.

“For instance, some people are convinced that Israel committed the crimes of 9/11. When asked why they think this, the answer is usually that Israel had foreknowledge as indicated by the “Dancing Israelis” and that Israel benefited because of the countries that were attacked after 9/11. However, as indicated above this reasoning is not convincing and would certainly never stand up in a court of law.”

https://digwithin.net/2016/02/27/investigating-911/

UreKismet
UreKismet
Sep 12, 2019 4:46 AM

What a great idea, get people to vanish up their own arseholes ‘investigating’ something where not only is it impossible to access, much less examine primary evidence, there is zero chance of altering the outcome.
Every theory I have witnessed suffers from the same problem as the accepted theory only more so as it depends on always unreliable eye-witness evidence, second and third hand hearsay stuff plus logic flaws

None of us will ever know what happened back then, there are many theories much speculation, and worst of all a big chunk of the world’s population are firmly cemented into what they believe happened and cannot be persuaded otherwise. However the results of the event are still with us, able to be examined, and are also badly wanting in rationale and humanity.

IMO that is a better area to concentrate attention on, more pressing and more likely to meet with success, as long as opinions about ‘what really happened’ are left out.

Bringing ‘it was this other mob wot done it, milud’ into the discussion, never fails to divert energy away from here and now, while chasing off humans who also loathe the open police state most ‘western style’ nations have adopted since 911, and/or the racist war & blatant resource theft visited on the people of the ME, but who do not share that particular opinion about ‘what really happened’.

For me that makes speculation a game not worth the candle.

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 8:56 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

Me : Imagine if some or all of the writers on the anti-imperialist ‘Left’ put their names to the following statement and actively campaigned on it-
‘We the undersigned are without doubt that the official narrative of 9/11 is provably inaccurate and incomplete. Without subscribing to any alternative theory- yet considering the far reaching consequences of the crimes of 9/11, we all support the demand for a new, fully funded, independent, and fully empowered investigation.
signed,
Ben norton
Max blumenthal
John Pilger
Chris Hedges
Noam Chomsky
Aaron Mate
Glenn Greenwald
Amy Goodman
Lee Camp
Jimmy Dore
David Edwards and David Cromwell
Mark Curtis
Craig Murray
George Galloway
Jonathan Cook
….. et al’

Ure : whatever.

UreKismet
UreKismet
Sep 12, 2019 2:32 PM
Reply to  crank

Dream on crank. As if yet another missive signed by all the usuals whose previous correspondence has been studiously ignored would achieve SFA.

Let a bit of amerikan ‘reality’ give you some perspective Foreign Policy dot com that journal of junior US diplomats’ angst has an article today which while looking through the wrong end of the microscope at least focuses on the world in September 2019 not September 2001.
This article points out that this year’s intake of college freshmen is comprised of types born after 911 who have no frame of reference other than that where the official yarn is the standard reality, where the global war on terror has always been happening, the patriot act oppression is the society they know.

It makes far more sense to change the awful results of the post 911 world than to try to argue the toss over arcane facts when there are so many conflicting points of view about something most young people only vaguely comprehend.

Take a truth from the Vietnam war resistance. Protesters would say they were fighting to keep Vietnamese civilians safe, but the sad selfish reality I recall is Americans and Australians fighting to stop a war that they did not want to die in.

Campaigning to alter the effect of 911 makes much more sense than campaigning to deny 911 because done correctly it plays to the desires of the community.

Agent Orange didn’t dream up his isolationist platform outta altruism, he ran his campaign on no more wars because he knew working class voters have had enough of their kids being put in harm’s way for no good reason other than to enrich the already rich.

Bolton copped the flick because trump was shit scared bolton could get the US into a war in the lead up to prez 2020.

At this stage, for the people most affected by the post 911 world, youngsters likely to end up fighting in it, exactly what happened in 2001 is distant and academic, but getting killed in Iran cos Iranians are all on some nonsense politicians’ beat up terror list, is close and real.

I could argue for days about the flaws on both sides of the ‘who kicked off the 911 fireworks’ but what would be the point. Hell the Cheney faction of the amerikan war party still claim Saddam Hussein was behind it all when the ‘official’ history scrubbed that back in 2007.

The US government’s official policy is still that North Vietnamese patrol boats attacked a US navy boat in the Gulf of Tonkin, a much simpler, much longer ago and far more disproven piece of history than people from the ME hijacked the planes that flew into the Pentagon and the twin towers. If you imagine for one moment that any amount of evidence is going to change that official view, you clearly have no comprehension of how the world works.

It makes far more sense to fight the battles which not only can be won, winning will be a great outcome for all the poor f++kers unlucky enough to live somewhere that has resources amerika covets.

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 3:10 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

Your argument is based on either – or.
The ‘Truth Movement’ (or certainly the best of it) had as its primary goal the end of the ‘effects of 9/11’ – that was the whole point, as well as the bringing to justice of the perpetrators. The two things are inseparable, and unless you believe in selective justice and self limited reasoning then that should be obvious.
The anti-war Left has disintegrated, and whilst I wouldn’t attribute all its demise to this issue, I think that failure to even engage in what is not (as you say) and endless round of what ifs and maybes, but incontrovertible proof that 9/11 was a massive fraud, has undermined its intellectual coherence and credibility. The aftermath of the events saw the Left in a corner where any moral position criticising the US ‘response’ to 9/11 was deemed to be sympathy with the terrorists. This was only really effective because they could re-invoke the terror and produce the pavlovian response.
There was only ever one way to stop that and it wasn’t hand waving denial of 9/11 evidence and attacking honest researchers – something that happened repeatedly from Left acticists.
9/11 is a psychological bind, and the Left’s deep deep confusion about the epistemology of ‘conspiracy theory’ has contributed greatly to our collective predicament.
We need a major revolt or we are doomed, and only something like 9/11 truth can provide the impetus to wake the somnambulists around us.
It is you who are sleeping.

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 3:21 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

As an example of how disconnected I think your approach is: if we were to compare notes on what we think the relationship berween Israel and the US is really about, then would the provable involvement and foreknowledge of Israel in 9/11 have any bearing? For you not, it would seem. Just ‘a distraction’. That is nonsensical.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/12/israel-white-house-spying-devices-1491351

George Mc
George Mc
Sep 12, 2019 10:32 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

I don’t see how you can “change the awful results of the post 911 world” without first – and constantly – challenging the official story. Yes, I am well aware that the chance of any “independent” investigation is zero and that that vast mountain range of media hacks will bleat away about “conspiracy nuts” from now till the end of time. The point is that by keeping up a constant barrage of querying the official account, you endanger the credibility of that account.

Take JFK. The majority of Americans believe there was a cover up. Had the original sceptics gone along with your idea i.e. just shrug and say, “Oh it’s all so complex and hopeless. We’ll never know” etc. then the lone nut theory would have passed into historical record without any opposition.

Also, I see no necessary contradiction between opposing a war on principal and opposing a war because you don’t want to die in it i.e. if the protesters really thought the war was a scam then of course they wouldn’t want to die in it. Alternatively, if they just opposed the war because the didn’t want to die in it (a perfectly logical position) then that wouldn’t automatically make the war “right”. You may oppose a war for the wrong reason – but still be on the right side because the war was started for fraudulent reasons.

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 9:52 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

The world works slightly differently today.
People like myself now have the internet as a tool with which to search, and extremely widely at that. Finding a site like this one, for example, is invaluable.
When I was a teenager, all we had was a telephone…
When everybody knows what’s going on, they tend to get very annoyed with people who try to tell them lies.
I reckon we’re getting there. Very slowly, but we’re getting there.
People are even putting pictures of guillotines on FaceBook, for pete’s sake, and the message through the humour is not lost on their readers.

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 9:02 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

‘firmly cemented’ ?
Opinions are changing apparently. Polls show (below).
If we look at those at the forefront of today’s investigative reporting we might note that there are some who are at least open minded about the issue and see the importance of it.
Whitney Webb for example: https://www.mintpressnews.com/americans-questioning-official-september-11-new-wtc-7-evidence/261744/
Also Eva Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley, Abby Martin…

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 9:07 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

9/11 was a major crime scene – are you saying it is not worth investigating because any investigation would be too difficult?

The official version of events has already been dismantled because of the work already done by scientists and various experts – surely the next step is to find a way of bringing these findings into a court of law so that the lies that were told can be exposed as a matter of public record?

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 5:21 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

I agree with you Harry but note that the holding of an opinion may be kept secret even from ourself, if its leaking could bring us and our family to ruin – or if its secrecy is held as a sacred trust by which our lives are vindicated regardless the passing show of events. The idea that one can go to a court and testify and justice be done, is all well and good – but the possibility of a true independent judiciary, and the abuse of the law as a weapon of obfuscation and denial – along with trial by media and dirty tricks that extend to loss of life and loved ones, all add up as a fear that can self-censor the mind from thinking, let alone the mouth from speaking.
UreKismet and anyone else, is within their right to disregard what isn’t relevant to them at this time, but the fact that the comment was made as if a superior judgement reveals that more is unsaid than said.

Change the world by changing our mind about the world. The world will in any case change.
The mind we employ to perceive it is largely an internalised structure of self contradictory thought under a sort of unifying narrative. So change you mind about your mind as a result of watching it in act. There is much about deceits and false flags that is extrapolated from ‘psychological defences’ – which are… internalised structures of belief from which we automatically perceive and react.

Uncovering deceit as the nature of a denied but active agenda running so pervasively as to have captured or subverted all key vectors of institutional influence is a broken world-view and closer to home, a broken mind-set. Deceit has to run on a frequency of fear and division. Merely shifting to a new fear-channel may seem to reduce the dissonance for you – at expense of everyone else (and you) and so the opportunity to question reality as distortion of social construct, is lost to a more ‘sustainable’ cover story.
Those who think to make reality for us and enforce it are manipulating the distortion field – not reality itself. Go directly to your Source of current sustenance in place of thinking, and let your mind be renewed. Truth correct illusions – as willingness allows.

If lying is deemed the lesser evil set against a far greater, it will seem good, or at least justified or necessary. Then we lie. Entanglement with derivative evils, confused with the Good is the Great Unconsciousness. Discernment cannot be mandated.

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 14, 2019 5:19 AM
Reply to  Brian Steere

I reckon far too many people already know about this crime for it to be feasible to “bring all of them and their families to ruin”, and some also feel that they have nothing to lose by replacing a ridiculous narrative with the truth.
Bobby McIlvaines elderly father, for example.

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 14, 2019 9:27 AM
Reply to  wardropper

The freedom to speak freely of what is known to be false is relative to social status.
The saying is that you know where power resides by what you cannot speak openly of – without penalty.
9/11 New York can be seen as many things.
One is the power to execute such a synchronised series of actions.
Another is to set and control the narrative of the official public record regardless and despite facts, witnesses and heavy grievance.
This can seem like power because it denies justice of a true account, but it can also set such ‘power’ as a sham that has no basis but deceit, fear and insanity.
The sacrifice of truth to ‘Security’ is not new.

Its a kind of ‘religion’ that works backwards – as the sacrifice of truth to the fantasy of control.
9/11 New York can also be a wake up call to the sacrificing of truth to insanity – but unlike the narrative dictate of an ‘mind tyranny’ – this is your call – whenever you want to take it.
Can we sacrifice insanity to truth?
Not really.
We simply recognise the false as false and no longer use it as a basis from which to live – but freely so and whole in our decision.
To stand in integrity of self-honesty or transparency to the true of our being, is our right, but to make that right conditional on others choice or behaviour is to set ourself in powerlessness – and seeking power.
Equality of being doesn’t demand rights so much as live and teach them by example. But I speak to the qualities of your being and not the personality structure of an asserted narrative identity.

Whatever anyone else does is their choice or their abnegation of choice to false thinking and therefore setting their own curriculum.
What I am choosing is my responsibility and my result – and so what I make of my world is a result of either my own thinking – or the result of a transparency of thought to a deeper self honesty by which my thought is aligned in the heart – rather than spinning off as the mind of of a an aggrieved and broken heart and becoming lost in hatred and despair.

To come into love’s awareness now is to let into a wholeness that the mind cannot conceive – while it holds You hostage to a thing apart. I don’t speak to a lofty ideal – but to the only real basis for sane perspective of guidance and support in releasing identity from a world of lies. But it does not SHOUT to coerce attention – or persuade with fear framed temptation, and that is how your recognise the heart of truth as your own will.
Perhaps from the stark contrast with all that you are NOT.

If a blind eye to a creeping corruption stores up denials under appearances of a filtered and distorted false reality, then its breaking forth as a claim to power – is all the power we give it.
Law in human society is both in our hearts and in the rules of the mind. The usurpation or criminal disregard for law by an untethered mind has to be itself untethered from our heart’s allegiance by aligning our mind to the heart.

If our moral outrage is simply a cover story for identity in power struggle – then is our only ‘truth’ – that of being defeated, emasculated and subjugated – as a core of hatred brought to paralysis?

9/11 New York has been set and run as a particular pivot of demanding and setting attention – but there is a broad spectrum of pervasive deceits working degradation and destruction that are either hidden in plain sight or running under the mask of power to protect or save us from what it is in fact delivering us to. I don’t say this to feed despair but to waken from it and grow a culture of shared worth in conscious appreciations – rather than let unconscious hate, fear and denial set identity. This is only our choice when brought to light. Darkness defaults the ancient choice to hide in, and hide from.

John Thatcher
John Thatcher
Sep 12, 2019 10:49 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

I see your point about the need to bring policy after the event into the spotlight.However,questioning the ridiculous official account of events on the day and relevant actions of the various actors before during and after the event will help to show the need for close scrutiny of post 9/11 security policy.

Catte Black
Catte Black
Sep 12, 2019 12:05 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

@urekismet

That’s an anachronistic position to take up in 2019. Forget theory. We have increasing amounts of hard evidence from multiple sources that strongly suggests the 3 WTCs were brought down by controlled demolition.

That’s enough. We don’t need any more. A new inquiry is essential. Anyone who denies or deflects from this stark truth is an idiot, a coward or a shill.

Present company excepted of course.

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 1:49 PM
Reply to  Catte Black

Anyone who denies or deflects from this stark truth is an idiot, a coward or a shill.

There are a few out there :
Michael Tracy, Patrick Cockburn, Max Blumenthal, Glenn Greenwald……

https://twitter.com/ChrisRulon

Refraktor
Refraktor
Sep 13, 2019 1:48 AM
Reply to  Catte Black

Well said Catte and I love your tell-it-as-it-is invective. However I must demur at one point:
Those who deny or deflect are in fact actively evil and this is is useful to bear in mind and when the ad hominems begin to fly. Certain closed minded individuals think nothing of impugning the truth movement’s motives or indeed sanity. It is good and accurate to describe these as bad persons who countenance the mass murder. Saying so puts the opposition on the back foot and offers them something to think about.

Oliver
Oliver
Sep 13, 2019 5:54 PM
Reply to  Catte Black

Her Majesty’s Armed Forces must have studied the WTC attacks in 1993 (explosive a compound of urea – yeah, right) and 2001. At a senior level, in common with the militaries of every country that can produce GCSE level physics students, they know how it was done. Who and why are different questions. What lurks behind the obvious perpetrators?

    Deschutes
    Deschutes
    Sep 13, 2019 9:52 AM
    Reply to  UreKismet

    What are you doing here, reading an article about 9-11 research–and even taking time to type a lengthly comment– if you are ostensibly not interested in 9-11 and think it’s a waste of time? Your actions contradict your words. Quite contrary to your claim that research into 9-11 is a waste of time, University of Alaska researchers just published their findings into the collapse of WTC Bldg. 7. So, they obviously disagree with your opinion that researching 9-11 is ‘not worth a candle’–

    http://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
    “The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

    In short, you’re wrong. Its great to see an American university publishing their findings which contradict the fantasy official story that “building 7 collapsed due to fires”.

    Epic fail, dude. You convince nobody. If you don’t find 9-11 interesting, then go away.

    MASTER OF UNIVE
    MASTER OF UNIVE
    Sep 12, 2019 3:21 AM

    Dear Dr. Kevin Ryan,

    It’s an honour to read your article on offG, and an honour to meet a true American & patriot. I was formally educated in Mechanical Engineering and Metallurgy with regard to tool & die making proper.
    As one formally educated in Mechanical Engineering I have followed your webcasts & documentaries put out by Architects & Engineers for Truth.

    I salute your efforts to confront the Government of the United States of America on the 911 Controlled Demolition & Nuclear Demolition of the base of both WTC buildings. The USA Government is criminally liable for their criminal actions and they must be held accountable to the public & world for their felony acts of terrorism directed at innocent human beings for political & financial short-term gains alone.

    18 years have passed since they committed these treasonous criminal acts of terrorism against the people of the world & almost all ethnicities given the 3000 human beings they murdered outright for false flag purposes only.

    George W. Bush & his terror regime cannot deter Mechanical Engineering or we that come from that discipline. Mechanical Engineering & the brotherhood of engineers will indict these criminals in short order not long from now.

    The hammer of Engineering will come down on the politicians & officials that carried these terrorist acts out. That you can bank on.

    respectfully yours, MOU

    tonyopmoc
    tonyopmoc
    Sep 12, 2019 2:40 AM

    Kevin Ryan, Brave Man

    Thank You,

    Tony