Apologies for the outage folks, I was preoccupied with a project and didn't notice.

Also, 911datasets will be back soon, it's being moved to a more reliable platform.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THBy5TNafLw

http://nypost.com/2017/09/09/saudi-government-allegedly-funded-a-dry-run-for-911/

Saudi government allegedly funded a ‘dry run’ for 9/11
By Paul Sperry
September 9, 2017

Fresh evidence submitted in a major 9/11 lawsuit moving forward against the Saudi Arabian government reveals its embassy in Washington may have funded a “dry run” for the hijackings carried out by two Saudi employees, further reinforcing the claim employees and agents of the kingdom directed and aided the 9/11 hijackers and plotters.

Two years before the airliner attacks, the Saudi Embassy paid for two Saudi nationals, living undercover in the US as students, to fly from Phoenix to Washington “in a dry run for the 9/11 attacks,” alleges the amended complaint filed on behalf of the families of some 1,400 victims who died in the terrorist attacks 16 years ago.

The court filing provides new details that paint “a pattern of both financial and operational support” for the 9/11 conspiracy from official Saudi sources, lawyers for the plaintiffs say. In fact, the Saudi government may have been involved in underwriting the attacks from the earliest stages — including testing cockpit security.

From: https://news.uaf.edu/presentation-to-examine-911-building-collapse/

Date: September 06, 2017
Time: 4 p.m.
Location: Schaible Auditorium

The University of Alaska Fairbanks will host a public presentation on an ongoing study into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 at 4 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 6, in Schaible Auditorium.

UAF researcher Leroy Hulsey is leading the study. He will present the findings outlined in his team’s September 2017 progress report, which will be released the same day. A draft report of the two-year study will be issued later this fall, followed by a six-week public comment period, with a final report scheduled for release in early 2018. Hulsey’s study is being funded by the nonprofit organization Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

WTC 7 was a 47-story office building that fell nearly seven hours after the collapse of the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers on Sept 11, 2001. In a 2008 report, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology attributed the collapse to office fires in the lower stories of the building.

To 911Blogger Readers:

I’m pleased to announce that the online journal Publications, which is part of MDPI, has published my paper titled:

“Peer Review in Controversial Topics – A Case Study of 9/11”

You can find the published paper at http://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/5/2/16 .

Here is the Abstract:

“Beginning with an historical reminiscence, this paper examines the peer review process as

experienced by authors currently seeking publication of their research in a highly controversial area. A case study of research into the events of 9/11 (11 September 2001) illustrates some of the problems in peer review arising from undue influences based on financial and political considerations. The paper suggests that ethical failures, rather than flaws in the process itself, are mainly responsible for perceived problems. The way forward lies in improved ethics and a more open process. In addition, editorial review boards and peer review strategies would help to improve the ethics of peer review in general.”

The paper was written at the invitation of one of the Publications’ editors, and underwent a substantial peer review process. In the invitation, the editor cited the paper "Ethics and the Official Reports about the Destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers (WTC1 and WTC2) on 9/11: A Case Study," by John D. Wyndham, Wayne H. Coste and Michael R. Smith. This paper was presented at the 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science and Technology. See http://www.scientistsfor911truth.org/news.html#news_ieee_ethics_paper .

About MDPI: From their website at http://www.mdpi.com/ :

“MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute) is an academic open-access publisher with headquarters in Basel, Switzerland. Additional offices are located in Beijing and Wuhan (China), Barcelona (Spain) as well as in Belgrade (Serbia). MDPI publishes 177 diverse peer-reviewed, scientific, open access, electronic journals, including … [list of journals]. Our publishing activities are supported by more than 12,800 active scientists and academic editors on our journals' international editorial boards, including several Nobelists. More than 216,400 individual authors have already published with MDPI. MDPI.com receives more than 4.2 million monthly webpage views.”

With appreciation and thanks for all the individual and combined efforts of those in our movement that led to this publication,

John D. Wyndham

(from Kevin Ryan, editor J911S)

A new article has been published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies. It's by Aidan Managhan and is called Implications of September 11 Flight Transponder Activity.

Aidan Monaghan is an engineer and an open records researcher of the 9/11 attacks. He is the author of the book Declassifying 9/11: A Between the Lines and Behind the Scenes Look at the September 11 Attacks.

Here's the abstract:
It has been the consensus of informed observers that the loss or alteration of Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) information for the four September 11 flights was caused by accused hijackers allegedly seizing control of the aircraft flight decks and manually turning off or adjusting each plane’s Mode S (Mode Select) transponder. This was presumably for the purpose of evading detection and interception by U.S. air defense systems. However, this view appears to be based only on circumstantial information - the simple loss or change of SSR flight data to Air Traffic Control (ATC) – and seems unsupported by conclusive facts. Following these transponder operation changes, ATC was still able to tag and track the primary radar returns of three flights and estimate their locations, directions, ground speeds, and even altitude changes.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/implications-of-september-11-flight-transponder-activity/

Scientist and scholar Frank Legge passed away on October 20th 2016.

Frank was a leader of the international 9/11 Truth Movement. He had been a co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies and a founding member of both Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice and Scientists for 9/11 Truth. His contributions to research into 9/11 will be remembered as among the most important in history.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/10/remembering-frank-legge.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov5kvWSz5LM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zic64WhR14k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ_CYS-KMjM
http://911blogger.com/news/2016-02-17/open-thread

The paper was published in the Foreign Policy Journal on October, 7, 2016 and can be found at:
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/07/bringing-closure-to-the-911-pentagon-debate/

For over fifteen years the 9/11 truth movement and some of its most visible leaders have debated this question: Did a large plane, matching a Boeing 757 in general and Flight AA 77 in particular, hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001? In the last several years a group of scientists and engineers have presented a number of scientific papers that answer both of these questions with a resounding “Yes.”

It’s time for the 9/11 truth movement to resolve its Pentagon debate by applying the scientific method to the Pentagon evidence. Doing so points conclusively to large plane impact.

This paper is also listed on the Scientific Method 9/11 website in the Pentagon section and comments can be sent to moderator@scimethod911.org .

Sincerely,
John D. Wyndham

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdCopUZ2XOg

http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

Announcing a new paper, "The Pentagon Event: The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted," by Victoria Ashley, David Chandler, Jonathan H. Cole, James Hoffman, Ken Jenkins, Frank Legge, and John D. Wyndham.

The paper can be found in the Pentagon section of http://www.scientificmethod911.org or directly at http://www.scientificmethod911.org/docs/Honegger_Hypothesis_042916.pdf.

Honegger's hypothesis is that no plane impacted the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, and that pre-planted explosives caused all the deaths and damage. Honegger also postulates that a large "white" plane was destroyed outside the Pentagon west wall without causing any damage to the wall.

The authors of the above paper refute Honegger's hypothesis and show that the physical, eyewitness, radar, and FDR data, plus other data, all support impact by a large silver plane, a Boeing 757, and most probably American Airlines Flight 77, as the main cause of all the deaths and damage.

Sincerely,
John Wyndham

“I think it’s implausible to believe that 19 people, most of whom didn’t speak English, most of whom had never been in the United States before, many didn’t have a high school education, could have carried out such a complicated task without some support from within the United States,”

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/senator-60-minutes-911-attackers-had-support-us/

There continues to be some limited interest in the many links between Saudi Arabia and the crimes of 9/11. Although many of those links point back to powerful people in the U.S., the mainstream media tends to focus the story on Saudi Arabia alone. That seems to be due to the fact that control of oil and gas resources in the Middle East is what really drives terrorism. Nonetheless, its important to continue revealing Saudi connections to 9/11 because they can help us understand what really happened. One very interesting link is that Stratesec, the security company for the World Trade Center and other 9/11-impacted facilities, held its annual meetings in offices leased by Saudi Arabia. That fact highlights the glaring lack of investigation into the men who ran Stratesec.

Read More: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/04/wtc-security-firm-saudi-offices.html

It's been a interesting few months.

Giuliani was on Fox re: 911 Warnings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq7NjcaKeeM

What's on your mind?