U.S. District Court, Southern New York, Unseals 9/11 "Inside Job" Case

Discussion in 'Conspiracy' started by CB_Brooklyn, Aug 28, 2007.

  1. CB_Brooklyn

    CB_Brooklyn Member

    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr Morgan Reynolds is the former Chief Economist of the US Dept of Labor and is represented by attorney Jerry Leaphart.

    Reynolds is demanding a Trial By Jury.



    ===================================================

    http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=federal_case

    Reynolds Makes a Federal Case of 9/11 —
    Sues NIST Contractors for 9/11 Plane Fraud


    Morgan Reynolds
    August 21, 2007

    Summary:

    Last month, the U.S. District Court, Southern New York, unsealed a 9/11 case filed by Dr. Morgan Reynolds, thereby making the case public. Reynolds is suing on behalf of the United States of America after the U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York who represents "the government" declined to intervene in the case. The suit, a so-called qui tam case, alleges that the 9/11 contractors NIST hired to investigate destruction of the WTC Towers on 9/11 defrauded the U.S. government of substantial money by rendering bogus, impossible physical analysis and animations about how two hollow aluminum aircraft (allegedly Boeing 767s) flew into a steel/concrete tower and disappeared. Yet it can be easily demonstrated, after a great deal of hard work by dedicated 9/11 researchers, that no planes hit the towers. The office of Reynolds' attorney, Jerry V. Leaphart of Connecticut, is now serving(notifying) the defendants in the suit, including Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Applied Research Associates (ARA), Boeing, American Airlines, United Airlines and Silverstein Properties. I will post new information on the case as developments warrant.

    Unsealed Complaint PDF here.
    http://nomoregames.net/911/federal_case/07cv4612unsealedcomplaint.pdf
     
  2. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,693
    Likes Received:
    4,504
    well that's all very interesting, but what is it that so many of us watched footage, much if not most of it, NOT of corporate media origen, flying into those towers and the clouds of smoke and dust shortly after come billowing out and the two main towers subsiquently begin to fall?

    and does how the towers, the two main ones, were actually brought down, really have all that much bearing on the real machinations which brought the event about?

    i believe u.s. and international economic intrests are 'in it up to their assess', but the buildings DON'T have to have not been brought down by what they are claimed to have been physically, to prove, disprove, or have anything to do with, whether and how they were and are.

    as for building seven, yes i see no reason it couldn't have had built into it a self destruct mechanism to protect the secrecy of the documents that were stored there, that could have been set off, either deliberately in response to the threat indicated when the big towers colapse was seen to be eminent, or even inadvertently triggered by their collapse.

    but i really see no pertinance as to whether they, buildings one and two, were brought down by explosive aircraft impacts or pre-implanted charges, or some combination of the two.

    not to whether or not domesting intrests had their hand, up to their assess, in bringing about their collapse.

    =^^=
    .../\...
     
  3. CB_Brooklyn

    CB_Brooklyn Member

    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good questions. All available videos are in the following link. This includes the pro-media footage and amateur shots as well. They all show the same thing: an aluminum airplane with a plastic nosecone gliding into a steel/concrete building. http://killtown.911review.org/2nd-hit.html

    You may find the following article interesting:

    Technology Review Magazine Discusses How the Military and TV Networks
    Can Insert Prerecorded Images Into Live News Feed to Alter World Politics
    in their July/August 2000 Article "Lying With Pixels":
    [​IMG]
    http://www.911researchers.com/node/174


    Regarding the Twin Towers, they did not "collapse", they were pulverized:

    http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=57

    [​IMG]
     
  4. Sub-Zer0

    Sub-Zer0 Member

    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    No planes hit the towers? Reynolds has a credibile background but I think his theories are out of left feild. He should spend more time discussings building 7's mystery collapse, NORAD's stand down, and Bush taking the FBI off of Bin Laden's trail.
     
  5. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,461
    The solid evidence points to no planes hitting the towers. What was seen on TV was fake.
     
  6. ExposeTheTruth

    ExposeTheTruth Member

    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pressed Rat...you ARE a rat...and a clown. Glad to see you already know it.

    Anyone who states that they believe "no planes hit the World Trade Center" is working to UNDERMINE AND DESTROY the real 9/11 truth movement. If there's any doubt about that, think of the many eye (and ear) witnesses in Manhattan who SAW and HEARD the planes hit the twin towers. As to the question of *what kind* of planes hit is another story. But TV fakery, space beams, and other such BS is intentional disinformation designed to discredit those calling for a new investigation into 9/11, including 9/11 family members.

    Rat, you just outed yourself buddy.

    Morgan Reynolds, David Shayler, James Fetzer, Judy Wood, Killtown, and Webfairy are people to be AVOIDED and IGNORED.

    And the info war rages on.

    For REAL 9/11 truth, visit:

    www.911blogger.com
    www.911proof.com
    www.truthaction.org
    www.wearechange.org
    www.911truth.org
     
  7. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,461
    I think you're just regurgitating what your establishment-given heroes are telling you, without actually looking at the evidence like any truly CRITICAL THINKING person would do. Why do you think those websites you listed receive so much attention and are regarded by the self-professed "leaders" of the movement as being the "official" 9/11 Truth websites? Have you ever looked into some of the people BEHIND these websites, as I have done? Why do you think Loose Change is promoted by the mainstream media and people like Mark Cuban? Do you even look at some of the shady characters you blindly follow like a little sheep? Do you even know about the David Ray Griffin (an open proponent of global governance and a one-world religion) connection to the Rockefellers, and that the person who wrote the foreward to his "New Pearl Harbor" book, Richard Falk, is a long-time CFR member who played a crucial role in the plan to overthrow the Shaw of Iran? Or how about Steven Jones, who worked at Los Alamos, who helped play a key role in the suppression of free-energy technology (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQz7JUJ4hOU).

    Try looking at the facts before simply repeating things you've heard Alex Jones say.

    If you can watch September Clues and come up with a decent refutation to the evidence presented in that video, then maybe I will listen to you.

    The entire 9/11 "Truth" movement is a massive COINTELPRO op, yet you don't even question the people who have just magically turned up at the forefront of this movement overnight, who are given widespread coverage by the mainstream media and people like Alex Jones (who tells us conventional explosives brought down and pulverized the towers). You think that because they pretend to question the official version of events, then they MUST be genuine in their intent simply because of that. You are no different than the person who votes Democrat because they believe it to be in opposition to the Republican party, when BOTH parties are controlled by the same few at the top. The same applies to the so-called 9/11 "Truth" movement, which would be more aptly referred to as the 9/11 BOWEL movement.

    Try being a THINKER instead of a FOLLOWER once and for all. You come off as being just another Alex Jones cult follower.
     
  8. ExposeTheTruth

    ExposeTheTruth Member

    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    David Ray Griffin a member of the elite!! hahahahahaha Now THAT there alone takes the cake.
    Sorry bud, but I don't buy into your garbage, nor do most truth seekers. The "entire" 9/11 truth movement being a Cointel op? Uh...that's a tad far-fetched even for disinfo, dontcha think? Certainly there are cointelpro operatives working to end the 9/11 truth movement (folks like you, probably) but truth WILL prevail.
    And to think that you're calling the entire truth movement a government operation when YOU are actually saying that no planes hit the trade towers.
    You're a fool and your silly little campaign will fail. There are too many of us.

    Oh...and, I'm not a follower or even a fan of Alex Jones. At times I suspect that HE is cointelpro, though I'm even more convinced that YOU are. I can tell just from looking at your face. You actually LOOK like a rat. No wonder you work for the dark side.

    As for doing anything so you'll "listen" to me...I couldn't give a flying RAT'S ass whether or not you choose to listen to me. What I'm doing is to warn people against taking anything you say as gospel. Unlike you, I'm asking honest questions. What you're doing is spreading false information. Oh, and...the 9/11 truth and justice movement is much bigger than LooseChange and Alex Jones combined.

    I have to say though...you have more nerve than I usually see among those working to undermine our movement: you actually accuse David Griffin of being an NWO operative. Stupid, but nervy all the same. Nobody will buy it because it's such an obvious lie. You ugly little...rat.
     
  9. astaff

    astaff Member

    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    1
    Pressed_Rat--- lose change was a great film. it was given to me by a stranger and i watched it and gave it to someone else. if you have it pass it on that move is the shit.
     
  10. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,461
    As I figured, "ExposeTheTruth," no facts and all insult.

    I am still waiting for you to tell me how steel buildings swallow aluminum planes, and how the fiberglass nosecone of a plane can come out the other side of a steel-frame building without disintegrating. Or, maybe you can explain how three networks showed pictures of the same shot, from the same angle, but with three different approaches from the "plane."

    Oh, and I should have perhaps clarified this before, but I am not necessarily saying NO planes hit the towers, just that two Boeings didn't. I don't know what hit the towers. All I know is that the footage we were shown can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be FAKE!

    And where exactly did I say that David Ray Griffin was a member of the "Elite"? Why do you put words in people's mouths? I said that David Griffin is a proponent of one-world government and a one-world religion, and that Richard Falk, a CFR member with ties to the overthrow of the Shaw, wrote the foreward to his book.
     
  11. CB_Brooklyn

    CB_Brooklyn Member

    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    People like ExposeTheTruth have fallen for 9/11 Perp COINTELPRO hook, line, and sinker.

    There are two truths and two truths only that the perps don't want people to know about:

    1. NO PLANES HIT THE TOWERS / TV-FAKERY

    2. DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS DESTROYED THE TOWERS


    Anyone following sites such as 911Blogger, 911Truth, TruthAction, etc, or people like Alex/Steven Jones, DRG, etc are being taken for fools.

    Those with a basic knowledge of high school level physics know that the videos of the WTC "strikes" are physically impossible.
     
  12. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,693
    Likes Received:
    4,504
    all this focus on how the buildings were brought down is, intentional or not, a smoke screen that distracts public attention away from who might have been involved. particularly the u.s. + packistan connection!

    you might find robert avery's (however his name is spelled) 9-11 piece on spotlightonfreedom.com of some slight interest.

    =^^=
    .../\...
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice