Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
The New 9/11 Inquiry
32 Plays5 years ago
This week Josh and M return to 2001 and ask "What happened to those Twin Towers in New York City?" Well, actually, they ask the why, the who, and the how of a new Grand Jury inquiry into 9/11.
--
Watch M’s series “Conspiracism” here:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJEp7xTcFU3hc2W0kfdSvAQ
and learn more about their academic work at:
Why not support The Podcaster's Guide to the Conspiracy by donating to our Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/podcastersguidetotheconspiracy
or Podbean crowdfunding?
http://www.podbean.com/patron/crowdfund/profile/id/muv5b-79
You can contact us at: podcastconspiracy@gmail.com
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction & Humor
00:00:09
Speaker
The Podcaster's Guide to the Conspiracy, brought to you today by Josh Addison and Dr. Imdentith. Hello and welcome to the Podcaster's Guide to the Conspiracy. I am Josh Addison. Sitting next to me is Imdentith. We're both
00:00:27
Speaker
Sweltering is perhaps a bit of a strong word. But we are. We're humid. We're fettered. We're moist. I personally would recommend that you listen to the podcast version of this episode rather than watch the video version on YouTube just so you don't have to subject yourself to my visible sweat stains. But that's what I get for wearing a grey mile t-shirt on a hot day.
00:00:48
Speaker
It's true, of course I'm dressed in my customary dark evil wizard style garb and thus it's much harder to notice the fact that I am 98% water at this particular point in time. On the plus side though we are recording in the afternoon now instead of the evening so we have a bit of natural light so probably my sweat stains and greasy sheen will show up better than they normally would.
Reflections on Past Topics
00:01:12
Speaker
Isn't Greasy Sheen the third... Sheen? The third Estevez brother. Yeah, Greasy Sheen. Probably, probably. So, we have stuff to talk about this episode, which is good, because otherwise we'd have nothing. We'd get complaints. We'd get complaints. So shall we move on to things we've talked about previously on the podcaster's guide to the conspiracy? I think we should. Previously on the podcaster's guide to the conspiracy.
00:01:43
Speaker
So Joshua, the past, you've been there, what's it like? Not bad, I suppose. Is it in black and white? Partly, yes. Really? There's parts of it when I was a dog.
00:01:56
Speaker
We don't talk about the part where you're a dog. No, so maybe let's stick to the more recent past, specifically the past in which we were recording episodes of this podcast and look back at what we were doing then as some sort of mirror on our current age. We should have a sound effect back to 2015. Back to 2015, what were we doing in 2015? Celtic New Zealand thesis, that's what we were doing in 2015. Hasn't really gone away, has it?
00:02:21
Speaker
No, to the point where I think maybe we should do an update and talk about not just the Celtic New Zealand thesis, but the variety of different conspiracy theories that claim there is a hidden history out there that people don't know, don't know, don't want you to know about and also don't
Hidden Histories & TV Theories
00:02:38
Speaker
know.
00:02:38
Speaker
And it might be a good reason to talk about Scott Walter and the American Unearthed TV series, which is coming back for a new season. And American Unearthed is a TV show that seems to claim there's a large-scale Fremasonic Night Templar plot to hide the fact that the Templars got to North America before Columbus and somehow stole Minoan bronze stores. It's very confusing. Exciting.
00:03:06
Speaker
Yeah, well that's a good idea for when we run out of current events to talk about. Moving ahead though, 2017, things got presidential, but not in the way you might expect. Oh no, no. Not that president. We talked about the other president, President Nixon. Yeah, there have only been two, as I recall. I think three. I think there have been three presidents. No, that's just because you're thinking there were two Bushes. Oh, you're quite right. Yeah, sorry. And Garfield was two presidents.
00:03:33
Speaker
It's true. I'm quite sure how they managed. No, was it Garfield, Cleveland? One of their presidents was two presidents. I do know that much. Yes. Because they had a non-continuous turn. Anyway, but no, Nixon. Obviously Nixon, the only president worth talking about. I can't even think of the names of the current one. Could be anyone. And the gold standard of fear in particular. What was that again?
00:03:53
Speaker
Well, fiddling around with the gold standard. So the gold standard conspiracy theory to basically make gold the standard and then move away from the gold standard to a fiat currency, or at least the
00:04:11
Speaker
The machinations that went behind the scenes behind the people who wanted to keep to a gold standard and those who wanted a fiat currency and just the kind of weird things, the fact that Nixon was involved and Nixon was right. Oh yes, yes. Nixon, I remember that. I remember actually having to look into a, speak into a microphone and say Richard Nixon was right. Yeah. Uh... Yeah. Nixon could spot a conspiracy when he saw one. Ooh. Ooh. Interesting, that. He's a funny fellow.
00:04:41
Speaker
Good thing, the current president, what's his name? Nothing like him. Shall I know? Yeah, that's probably him. Yeah, so there we go. That's what we've been looking at this time, early mid-February now. God, it's mid-February. It's that bloody time. Too much past. It's all the past. It piles up behind you, and then sort of the momentum of it starts pushing the present forwards quickly. So you're saying it kind of accelerates our move into the future. You know what it should be doing? It should be accelerating us into the next segment.
00:05:11
Speaker
Lord adjusted. Update and retractions.
Khashoggi Case Discussion
00:05:18
Speaker
Some Jamal Khashoggi news. It's been reported that a year before the incident in Ankara, Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia's crowd prince, told one of his senior aides that he would go after Khashoggi with a bullet. Which makes it all the more unusual that the White House, but not the rest of the US government, is standing behind the, well, it's still not certain what really happened story of Khashoggi's murder.
00:05:48
Speaker
I mean at this point it's hard to come up with surprise. We've got through the horrible details, the bone sores and the dismemberments and all that business and all that's left is the cover-up aspect of it which really looks quite cover-up and it really does look like the American administration
00:06:06
Speaker
just doesn't want to blame Saudi Arabia because then they'd have to stop selling Saudi Arabia arms or at least have a big conversation with Saudi Arabia about their foreign policy. Yes, now we're past all the interesting conspiracy stuff and just into boring old politics. Yep.
MH370 Conspiracy Theories
00:06:25
Speaker
Moving on, as is so often the case, we have a quick update on the fate of MH370, the conspiracy theory which also functions as a mascot for this podcast.
00:06:34
Speaker
One of the many pieces of evidence people used to suggest something untoward happened to cause MH370 to disappear was a phone call between one of the pilots, Captain Zahari Ahmad Shah, and a mysterious other a month beforehand. In 2014, it was revealed this phone call was to his cousin, Zilhaimi Benwahidin, who also happens to be an aircraft engineer.
00:06:56
Speaker
Could Ahmad Shah and Ben Wahidin have been plotting together? Did Ahmad Shah ask Ben Wahidin for engineering advice and wanted to take down MH370? These questions have dogged certain conspiracy theories about the event, and now it seems we have an answer. Ben Wahidin was interviewed by the Australian
00:07:15
Speaker
and said not only was he questioned by the police but the police gave up on him as a potential angle on the case for one simple reason. It turned out that over the last 20 years he and Ahmad Shah were in frequent contact. They were family. The phone call turned out to be not mysterious at all in context because in context it was a fairly returning call between two friends. So that's a mystery solved in the ongoing case of MH370.
00:07:38
Speaker
Do you think we'll ever stop talking about MH370? Until such time. Well, I was going to say until they actually find the plane. It's not just where is it, it's what happened to it. So yeah, I mean, we could continue talking about it from now until the end of time. And on past records, I think we will. Yeah, that's what it is, the mascot of the show. Once they resolve MH370, this show will probably come to an end. It would actually make for a great final... Yeah, it would actually.
00:08:08
Speaker
episode. So if you're a fan of the podcast's guide to the conspiracy, make sure you get involved in the conspiracy to make sure that we, the rest of the world can find out, but make sure that we never find out. Yes, no, fair enough. Get some sort of Truman Show thing going for after half the population of New Zealand to ensure that we're living up high. Yeah, rewrote the Herald website to make sure that we never see the version of it that says MH370 mystery solved.
00:08:37
Speaker
Yep, so that's it for updates to old news. Now it's time for the segment that puts the new into news. The news.
FIFA & Sports Conspiracies
00:08:44
Speaker
The news.
00:08:52
Speaker
Sports News! Yes, we do love a good sport, especially the game with two halves where one team wins. Sports! And in the wide world of sport, well there's always FIFA, one of, if not the, most corrupt and conspiratorial organisations of all time.
00:09:12
Speaker
But in a hold my bear moment, Australian political operative Lyndon Crosby, who is best known for working with conservative political parties in Australia, Ayatollah and the United Kingdom, offered to work on a campaign to cancel the 2022 Quatar World Cup and thus get it awarded to another country all for a call
00:09:35
Speaker
£5.5 million. The offer was made to a self-styled Qatari opposition leader based in London, one Khalid Al-Hail. Now Crosby, via his lawyers, has said no contract was ever entered into, and none of the proposed campaign was ever acted upon. But Crosby has worked with Al-Hail in the past, notably during a state visit to London by the Emir of Qatar.
00:10:04
Speaker
Interestingly enough, at the time, a PR company that had previously worked with Ahal attempted to pay hundreds of actors to protest outside the visit's visit to see Theresa May at 10 Downing Street, something which went disastrously wrong at the time.
00:10:25
Speaker
It was turned out that the protesters were being paid. And so it wasn't a spontaneous grassroots protest. It was in fact an astroturf campaign.
Quadriga CX & Cryptocurrency Mystery
00:10:35
Speaker
Indeed. Well, speaking of artificial things, everyone loves cryptocurrency. At least that's what we were told several years ago. But it turns out that aside from cryptocurrency mining being possibly a major contributor to climate change due to the huge power consumption of cryptocurrency mining equipment, there are other issues to contend with.
00:10:53
Speaker
such as what happens when the person running the cryptocurrency exchange dies and he's the only person with the passwords to the vault. This appears to have happened the week before last. Gerald Cotton, founder of Quadriga CX, died leaving the majority of his exchanges, Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ethereum, in a cold wallet, in a crypto-digital, offline rather digital vault basically, which cannot be accessed as he was the only person with the passwords.
00:11:20
Speaker
It's claimed that there's up to $180 million worth of currency in the vault, which cannot be paid out to the exchange's customers.
00:11:30
Speaker
Except. Except. Questions are being asked about whether this is true. For one, Cotton's death while travelling in India is being called into question. Some people think this is a cover story designed to let him lie low and then grab the cryptocurrency later. And others think the whole story about the cold wallet being inaccessible is bogus because currency was being exchanged by Quadriga in the weeks after Cotton's death.
00:11:51
Speaker
All we can say here at the podcaster's guide to the conspiracy is that if Jordan Peterson really is going to get his patrons to give him Bitcoin, now he's no longer on Patreon, then well, take out some life insurance on the exchange's founder. So yes, it's the story that we've had forwarded to us by numerous people for the sheer fact that initially it just looked like an unfortunate cryptocurrency story. And one of the one of the
00:12:12
Speaker
of weaknesses perhaps. Yes, that if everything's encrypted only one person has the password and that password that password dies with the person then cryptocurrency disappears or is locked in a way that can't get access to. But now there are big questions about whether cotton is actually dead or whether this is insurance fraud and if so his family is presumably in on it which does make it rather conspiratorial.
00:12:40
Speaker
And a hundred and eighty million Canadian dollars is not something to be sneezed at. No, no. I mean, does this does this sound like just people not wanting to acknowledge that cryptocurrency might be a bit dodgy and weird? Well, I think it's too. I think I think it's that there's also there's a large sum of money here and there are no coincidences when it comes to large sums of money.
00:13:03
Speaker
I mean, but yeah, the sticking point here is the set of the exchange is not accessible, but we know money's been paid out from the exchange since Cotton's death, so someone's lying. And lying, why not go big and make it a gigantic conspiracy to keep 180 Canadian smackaroos from the good people of Canada? Well, fair enough. Yeah, precisely.
Nationalism Controversy
00:13:29
Speaker
So, moving on, and last week's bonus content, we talked briefly about the launch of Turning Point UK, an offshoot of Turning Point USA, which is a right-wing group which ostensibly seeks to make campuses safer for conservatives, but became famous for creating a professor watch list, which is a watch list of professors, not an amusing professor character in some sort of... Hello! I'm Professor Watch List!
00:13:52
Speaker
uh of the of the canadian watch lists of vancouver fame you might know of my grandfather general watch list he was big in the war you know well the black sheep of the family sex offenders register yeah let's not
00:14:07
Speaker
Over the last week, Turning Point UK has suffered a number of PR disasters, but none probably as big as a talk by Candace Owens, one of the stars of the US alt-right. Owens claims to have been a Liberal Democrat supporter up until 2017, at which point she came to see Donald J Trump as the saviour of Western civilisation.
00:14:26
Speaker
She's now the Director of Communications at Turning Point USA, which makes what she said in December of last year, which came to light last week, all the more interesting. In a UK meeting, she was asked about nationalism in western politics. Owens herself brought up Adolf Hitler and said,
00:14:42
Speaker
I actually don't have any problems at all with the word nationalism. I think the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism. Globalism is what I don't want. Whenever we say nationalism, the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. He was a national socialist.
00:15:00
Speaker
But if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, okay, fine. The problem is that he wanted. He had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everyone to be German. Everybody to be speaking German. Everybody to look a different way. To me, that's not nationalism. And thinking about how we could go bad down the line, I don't really have an issue with nationalism. I really don't.
00:15:28
Speaker
Now, Owen's sentiment here that Hitler should have just stuck to making Germany great again is one of those things which might seem okay at first glance until you remember the Holocaust and the extermination of the Gypsies and the burning down of institutes which focused on researching the history of homosexuality in the transgender community. If Owens has no trouble with the notion of nationalism, then she probably shouldn't engage in a cod defense of Adolf Hitler. But we live now in a world where we can't just assume people dislike Nazis and Nazism anymore.
00:15:58
Speaker
And it's important to note, she brought up Adolf Hitler. She wasn't asked to defend nationalism under Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Movement. She wasn't asked about Adolf Hitler. She brought up Adolf Hitler and then engaged in a cod defensive of only Hitler had focused on making Germany great again. She'd be okay with what he did. And the thing is,
00:16:26
Speaker
A lot of the things he did were in Germany. Two German citizens.
00:16:32
Speaker
And then, of course, she gets into globalization as well because globalism has in the past been used as one of those dogless silly ones. Yeah, there is a certain element of crypto anti-Semitism to talk of globalism, which admittedly there are legitimate complaints to have against globalism. But you probably don't want to talk about your critiques of globalism whilst talking about Adolf Hitler. Yeah. So not a well thought out move.
00:17:02
Speaker
No, no. And as Director of Communication, frankly, she should actually know better. But that's one of the criticisms about organisations like Turning Point USA in the UK. They're actually not very good at the whole thinking through what they're saying or doing. And that was The Socialist Guide to the Conspiracy. Bring you the news update. Which is now over, so I guess we should talk about
00:17:31
Speaker
I don't know.
New 9/11 Inquiry
00:17:33
Speaker
9-11? Yeah, why not? We haven't talked about 9-11 for ages. Let's do that.
00:17:43
Speaker
Now, that wasn't a complete sort of non sequitur off the top of the head. There is reason to be talking about that. There is, yeah. There's going to be another inquiry into the event of September 11th, 2001, where according to the official story, two planes flew into World Trade Center towers one and two, and another plane was brought down and another plane hit the Pentagon. But certain people in a community we shall call the truth is, and that's in part because it's a self
00:18:13
Speaker
have described them, have always claimed that there's something suspicious about the events of September 11th, 2001. And they've been pushing for further investigation and pushing back against the official story. And it seems that they've managed to persuade someone to impanel a grand jury to look at possible criminal behavior with respect to 9-11.
00:18:40
Speaker
Now, I'll admit to being massively underprepared for this episode. I've been a bit busy this week, which is one of the reasons why we were recording on a Sunday and not a Thursday. It also means that Em has basically done all of the work in preparing for this one. So I think my role is largely going to be prompting you to say stuff and then sitting back and saying, hmm, that's interesting. But what about?
00:19:00
Speaker
So, that is interesting. What about this group? We have the Lawyers Committee for 9-11, the people who have got this. What do we know about them? What's their deal? Right, so they are a bunch of lawyers in the US. I know about this
00:19:16
Speaker
Largely because the architects and engineers for 911 Truth had a post up on their page in December of last year about there being a grand jury. It's been on our list as a topic for quite some time. I was actually kind of waiting to hear whether the grand jury panel had been in panelled, but as far as I know, nothing's actually started yet. But I thought it was worth talking about because it's actually quite interesting to look at
00:19:44
Speaker
how they've gone about getting a grand jury what a grand jury is because for those of us outside the US this is a term I've heard yeah but it's one of those terms that outside the US we go well it sounds like a jury which sounds grand but I don't know what that means so this was an interview from
00:20:04
Speaker
the Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth kind of podcast, but there's a transcript available on their website, which is where we've sourced all the quotes and things here because it's much easier to actually work with text when it comes to researching rather than trying to listen to a podcast and make notes at the same time. So this was interviewed with two members of the Lawyers Committee for 9-11, Mick Harrison and Dave Mieswickel.
00:20:31
Speaker
Mieswinkle? Mieswinkle? Mieswinkle? So Mieswinkle is a former cop and Harrison is a former teacher. They're both trained as lawyers subsequently. So they are legal minds and they have a legal training background. The Lawyers Committee for 9-11 is in fact made up of lawyers, which is A, truth in advertising, but B, means they're actually approaching this from there's a legal procedure and we've got legal reasons for doing things.
00:21:01
Speaker
things. And basically these two individuals are interested in it. Mies Winkel is interested because he as a former cop thinks that the investigation of 9-11 was improper or incompetent
00:21:18
Speaker
And Harrison is interested from a constitutional perspective, because he's concerned that if this was a crime committed in the US, not by the usual suspects, Al Qaeda, then we've got a constitutional challenge to the very nature of the American democracy.
00:21:38
Speaker
And so we have this quote, which I think comes from Harrison himself, I look at this incident as a litmus test for the feasibility or the integrity of our system. If we cannot address a crime and at least investigate it, which has never been done before and properly investigated the murder of 3000 people, we have a problem.
00:22:02
Speaker
And we do have a problem. It seems to imply that he thinks 9-11 has not been investigated. Well yes, and that's of course going to be the big thing here, in that they're going
00:22:15
Speaker
they're approaching this particular issue by going look a crime was committed and there wasn't a proper investigation yes i guess when he says it hasn't been uh we cannot address a crime and at least investigate it i assume when he says at least investigate he means investigate fully
00:22:32
Speaker
in a way that he doesn't believe it happened. Yes, so basically the official story, so things like the NIST report and the 9-11 Commission, as far as they're concerned, were not a proper investigation of the events of 9-11. And of course that's
00:22:49
Speaker
That's going to be the eternal bugbear we have in this entire discussion. Their perspective is this wasn't investigated properly. For a lot of people, though, it is essentially, as Gerald Poston would say, case closed. There was an investigation. Like Sussbooks were pointed out, the suspects who took responsibility at the time, it's been investigated. Why do we have to go back to this? Why rehash something we already know the conclusions to?
00:23:19
Speaker
So yeah, you sort of have to wonder, are they starting at their conclusion and working backwards? It's not so much... The only reason I can think, or the main reason I can think of why they would think the investigation is subpar is because it didn't produce the answers they were looking for.
00:23:36
Speaker
Yes, or which is in part the other rationale, there was a conspiracy to hide the truth. Well, yes. And of course the thing is, as we've discussed at great length on this podcast, government conspiracies occur. Oh, yes. Tonkin, Moscow show, trials. We have examples of governments covering up their malfeasance in the past, so it's not beyond the bounds of probability.
00:24:01
Speaker
that there could have been a cover-up with respect to 9-11. But there is this worry here, as you said, are they starting with a conclusion and then trying to find reasons to justify it, or are there good procedural issues to think, look, even if it turns out a new investigation confirms what is already widely believed,
00:24:28
Speaker
we still need a better investigation than the last one. So I are the people on the commissary.
00:24:35
Speaker
If a grand jury found that the official story was still largely correct, would they be happy with it? Yes. And that, I think, is the interesting part of this entire discussion. So what are they actually alleging conspiracy then? Are they actively claiming that the government has covered stuff up? Are they claiming incompetence when it comes to the reporting and the investigation of 9-11?
00:25:03
Speaker
or are they claiming sort of active people hiding the truth? Well let me tell you about what their petition for the grand jury actually alleges. So on April 10th they put forward their petition.
00:25:18
Speaker
And the major crime that was enumerated is that there's a federal law criminalizing bombings of places of public use and government facilities. So the initial claim was the controlled demolition claim. The Twin Towers were brought down by a series of planted explosives.
00:25:36
Speaker
Now on July 30th they amended the petition and added in that there's a federal law criminalizing acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries, a federal law criminalizing providing support to terrorists and federal law criminalizing the killing of federal government agents and or employees. Now note
00:26:05
Speaker
terrorism transcending national boundaries. So suddenly the amended petition is not just controlled demolition, the amended petition at least rules in the possibility that an investigation will show that foreign actors were involved in the destruction of the Twin Towers.
00:26:27
Speaker
towers, which either is a sop to the official story might be correct, or the American government was working with foreign actors to bring about this event. Yes, so certainly that they then follow it with their laws criminalizing, providing support to terrorists, which would imply that they think the terrorists were provided support from within America. So yes, it does seem like they certainly have an angle of their own, which is what their
00:26:53
Speaker
pushing for but also you might amend the petition to make it more likely to go before a grand jury because if you simply go we think it was a controlled demolition then the US attorney who has to then
00:27:08
Speaker
take this petition and either present it before a grand jury or not might go I think that's unlikely so we're not going to investigate it but if you go oh no no but it was a it was a terrorist act that may have involved foreign actors the US Attorney might go well that kind of fits in with with what we suspect anyway so yes maybe we should move forward with it so it might be a tactical thing to at least make it look as if all options are on the table
00:27:37
Speaker
Well, tell me about grand
Understanding Grand Jury Role
00:27:39
Speaker
juries then. I have seen the last season of Daredevil in which there was a grand jury but the kingpin threatened all the jurists and so they came back with the wrong verdict. That is, I think, the sum total of my experience with grand juries. Are they all about the kingpin threatening people to achieve the right verdict? I mean, most of them are. Most of them are about Daredevil versus kingpin in a court of law. I think they're in ninjas in the background and things like that. But sometimes,
00:28:07
Speaker
Sometimes it just turns out to be a term of art. It's a federal jury established in the bigger districts of the country. They kind of exist as a kind of ongoing basis, so they can be impaneled at any particular point in time. And there's a possibility to establish them in other smaller districts when there's a need. And it was kind of invented to combat organized crime.
00:28:31
Speaker
to be able to create a panel of jurors to investigate criminal conspiracy. And the role of the grand jury is largely independent of the other branches of American government. And it's basically between 18 to 23 people, selected like a normal jury.
00:28:53
Speaker
There will essentially be a lottery, a larger pool and then the first 18 to 23 who are viable candidates will be put onto this jury and their job is to investigate crimes that are reported, determine if a crime was committed and also determine whether there's enough evidence to show that an indictment can be returned.
00:29:22
Speaker
At which point, if the grand jury says yes, there was a crime, the US attorney is basically eligible and often required to then engage in a prosecution. The grand jury is mostly an investigative body, so they can call upon witnesses. They can compel witnesses to give evidence before the grand jury. And it's mostly done in secret. So it's kind of done behind closed doors.
00:29:51
Speaker
And grand jurors can't really talk about the process whilst it's ongoing. People who are called before the grand jury can say we've been called to testify about X, but that's also basically as much as they can say. And I think actually a large amount of the Mueller investigation is being done by the grand jury process.
00:30:13
Speaker
So it's not about it's not about finding a person guilty. It's about determining whether or not there is a crime for which. Yeah, and then the U.S. attorney will base it is I don't think they're actually compelled. I think they can if they want go. Well, I know there's a crime was committed, but it's not worth our investigating it again.
00:30:33
Speaker
But there is a kind of if a grand jury has said a crime has been committed then the US Attorney is kind of obliged to then go well, I have to report that and Probably do something about it which admittedly
00:30:45
Speaker
If the grand jury found that 9-11 was an inside job, you probably would hope. A US attorney would then say, so we've got to prosecute the people who actually committed this act of terror on our soil and then blamed it on an organisation overseas.
00:31:04
Speaker
So, we've got this, this law, actually, sorry, one thing I wasn't clear of, the lawyers committee for 9-11, are they part of architects and engineers for 9-11 Truth? Are they connected or? They're kind of an associated body. Right, because, yep. So,
00:31:21
Speaker
They are bringing about a petition to form a grand jury. Well, they're not just brought about a petition. The US attorney has accepted it, which means that they are going to impanel a grand jury at some point in the presumably near future.
00:31:38
Speaker
I think there's a two-year time limit between a petition being put forward and the US Attorney having accepted it, being required to impanel. So once you accept the petition, you have to impanel the jury, but you've got some time to fit it into your busy schedule. So there is going to be a grand jury that's kind of set in stone now. But so having presented the petition, having it being picked up,
00:32:04
Speaker
Is their involvement in the case done now, or do they just sit back and let the mechanism work, or are they going to remain involved, if only hopefully getting themselves called as witnesses? Well, yes. So the hope is, from their perspective, they will be called as expert witnesses to present the jurors with the evidence they need to make a proper determination whether a crime is being committed.
00:32:31
Speaker
And they want to be involved with the US attorney's approach towards presenting evidence to the grand jurors. But basically, once the petition is put through, unless they're called upon, they have no part of the procedure. They're the petitioners.
00:32:54
Speaker
So a grand jury is called, but after that point, it's really up to the US Attorney or the grand jury to involve them if they feel they need to be involved.
00:33:05
Speaker
How much of a worry would that be? Because reading down here, they have said a few things that does make one doubt their sort of objectivity or lack of preconceived notions when it comes to this case. Tell me about your doubts here, Joshua. Well, they say things like, I'm sure the corporate media will do everything they can to look past it or try to prejudice cover it of it. But that doesn't matter. They're completely marginalised, I believe, in the minds of regular people who've known exactly what Dave just said, that these buildings were brought down with explosives. For me, the case is already closed.
00:33:34
Speaker
So okay, so it seems they very much do have a very definite opinion. And I assume they wouldn't be bringing a grand jury case if they didn't believe that they could get the grand jury to believe with their opinion.
00:33:50
Speaker
Yeah, I mean, so this gets into a rather tricky case here, because if you're convinced a crime is being committed, and you get a grand jury panel in paneled, I really should have thought that end of that sentence through before I said in paneled, paneled in paneled, it's very confusing. It'll do.
00:34:08
Speaker
It was actually not confusing, it just doesn't sound good. Grammar. What's that for? Syntax, semantics. They're just words we use to express opinions. Nonsense. You forgot what you were going to say now, haven't you? No, I haven't. I just got distracted by my vibriage. So there is this concern, as you say, maybe they're starting from the conclusion. But of course, if you are sure crime is being committed,
00:34:34
Speaker
and you want it investigated, you're fairly sure that a panel of reasonable people will agree with you. But given there's already been an investigation, and this investigation, despite what they say, is considered to be at least adequate by a large number of people, both inside and outside the US,
00:34:59
Speaker
There is a concern here that they're basically trying to have a second swing of the system. The first investigation didn't give us the result we wanted. A second investigation surely will. The question will be, even if they're heavily involved in the grand jury process, what happens if the grand jury disagrees with them?
00:35:23
Speaker
Yeah, I mean, I'm sure I've brought this up before. You know, you know, everybody finds a thing on the Internet that I think is really profound and end up applying it everywhere they see it. For me, that was the false consensus bias when I first read about that, which is the idea that we all kind of think everyone broadly agrees with us, which tends to get supported by the fact that we tend to live, if not in an echo chamber. I mean, we live in a self-selected community. We largely choose our friends. We kind of choose where we work.
00:35:50
Speaker
and things like that. So we tend to be surrounded by people who broadly agree with us, which leads people to think that everyone is largely in the majority. And the corollary of that is that anyone who doesn't agree with you must have something significantly wrong with them to believe that. So when they say things like, I believe the minds of regular people,
00:36:10
Speaker
have always known that these buildings are brought down with explosives. They believe that the mainstream media is marginalised in the minds of regular people. That screams false consensus bias to me. Or Bader-Meinhof syndrome, as it's also known.
00:36:26
Speaker
weren't they a group? Yes, but that particular, once you hear something, you see it everywhere, is called Beta-Meinhof syndrome, because the person who formalized that thing noticed one day that he was either reading about or heard about Beta-Meinhof on the radio, and then started noticing all of these other references the next day to Beta-Meinhof, and other stuff he was reading was going, oh, that's really interesting.
00:36:53
Speaker
I only found out about the Mesti, or actually, no, I've been doing this stuff for ages, but now it's noticeable, so now I'm seeing all those connections. It's a little bit like when you point out to people that the number 23 appears in fiction an awful lot, and as soon as you reveal that fact, people start finding examples of 23 in fiction everywhere.
00:37:15
Speaker
and ignoring the other numbers. Yeah, precisely, because you only got, well, I keep, I was told by Dr. Dent with 23 peers everywhere, so you only notice the number 23 and don't notice the 13s, the 17s and the other numbers.
00:37:31
Speaker
Yes we're getting a little bit off topic but as a non-driver you possibly haven't had the phenomenon of buying a new car and then noticing... It's true, I've never had the phenomenon of buying a new car. Well when you do that you suddenly notice all the cars that are the same make of yours on the street, you start seeing them every morning.
00:37:48
Speaker
that you decide you want to buy a distinctive colour of car because it would make it easier for you to find your car in the car park and then suddenly you realise that everyone's car is the same colour as yours. But anyway, enough pop psychology. Normally when we start rambling off topic it means that we've reached the end of it, but we do have one more important
Dark Overlord's Ransom Threat
00:38:05
Speaker
thing to say. We do, yeah. In this case, which is the supposed 9-11 document dump. Yeah, so this isn't related to the grand jury thing. Although it could be.
00:38:15
Speaker
Potentially if it happened, but everything could be really so Once again, this is beginning of this year. So there's a notorious hacking group called dark overlord And dark overlord have been involved in leaking TV shows a head of schedule and things and basically demanding Bitcoin ransoms for you know, if you don't pay up we'll do this particular thing again and
00:38:39
Speaker
And they've got a whole bunch of insurance documents about what happened after 9-11, in particular to the law firms handling the cases attached to the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center. And so in early January, they said that unless someone pays the ransom,
00:39:03
Speaker
we are going to release an 18,000 document strong cash of insurance documents relating to the 9-11 attacks and the insurance payments afterwards and they said that the material will capitalise on various conspiracy theories around 9-11.
00:39:27
Speaker
So what's the record? Have they... Dunked Overlord had threatened to release stuff in the past and then...
00:39:39
Speaker
There's been the suspicion those ransoms have been paid and things have not been released. They did release a few documents with respect to 9-11 in advance to show that she had the documents in question. And one of the law firms that you don't think I noted it down did admit that they're...
00:39:59
Speaker
databases were hacked at some point last year, and that some record disrespect to insurance payouts from 9-11 were stolen at that particular point in time. So it does seem the document trumps actually does exist, but also interestingly enough, nothing's happened.
00:40:18
Speaker
Right, so does that suggest the ransom got paid? Well, I was looking into this and it does seem that there are two schools of thought in the IT world about this. One is never pay the people who are putting forward ransoms because basically it's a bad precedent. The other is always pay the ransom because it doesn't really matter what's in the documents being released, something embarrassing is going to be in there.
00:40:46
Speaker
And the litigation that comes afterwards will probably be a lot more than the actual payment of the ransom. So it doesn't really matter whether or not there's embarrassing details in the tranche. It's better to pay the ransom and not have to suffer through endless legal battles, which could cost a lot of money anyway. So pay the smaller amount to stop the bigger amount being taken from you at a later point in time.
00:41:13
Speaker
Right, so assuming the ransom has been paid, this doesn't necessarily mean that those documents would have proved 9-11 conspiracy theories right. It could just mean that insurance companies didn't want the hassle, or even didn't want potentially sensitive details, or details of their internal processes that their competitors could have fun with, whatever like that released. Or, you know, if the documents weren't properly redacted, people who
00:41:40
Speaker
had their privacy broken. We have a friend who works in insurance and I'm fairly sure we've heard stories about how some internal correspondence probably should never ever get out to the public because nothing untoward is said but certain descriptions of clients might come out that might make clients decide not to do business with you in the future.
00:42:06
Speaker
Yes, not even for legal reasons. I might simply go, oh, we're just moving our business elsewhere. We're not suing you. We're just not going to take that contract anymore after you described to me as a nit-hitter. Yes, indeed this friend also is basically
00:42:23
Speaker
doesn't have massive interest in 9-11 conspiracy theories, but basically thinks that the beginning and the end of it is that the insurance companies paid out, which basically means the official version happened, because insurance companies just paid out. By and large, yeah. This is one of the arguments as to why we should take climate change seriously.
00:42:46
Speaker
which is because insurance companies are taking it very, very seriously. Insurance companies, by and large, don't take things seriously. Unless they think they're actually going to happen. There's a genuine chance of them losing money otherwise. Now, so, I mean, it doesn't... The fact that a ransom may have been paid on these documents perhaps doesn't prove that they had anything to do with non-level, although they did specifically claim, though,
00:43:13
Speaker
that these documents that they had hacked were material to the 9-11 conspiracy theories. Well, they didn't say in various, I mean, they never said inside job, they never said in various conspiracy theories, which God, maybe they're just trying to ignite themselves.
00:43:30
Speaker
Right, well that's the end of our content for this episode, although if you happen to be one of our patron patreon patrons, you can stick around for the next, but we will continue the theme of people trying to get money out of institutions or individuals with enormous amounts of money when we talk about, of course, the fund that's been happening with Jim Bezos,
00:43:54
Speaker
Oh yes, and his nudes. We might talk a little bit about some local politics as well because stuff's always happening. Yes, there's a crisis with China and Simon Bridges, leader of the opposition, thinks that's the reason why our planes are turning back. But
00:44:15
Speaker
if you're not one of our patron-y patron patron-y pape-a-patron arises. So patron-y makes it sound like a patron pony, a kind of patron brawny? Nah, I thought it sounded like a kind of pastor to me quite frankly, but whatever you are, if you're not one of them, you're one of the other ones, then you won't get to hear that. And the last thing you'll ever hear, as far as I know, will be the two of us saying goodbye right now. Goodbye right now. Goodbye. Right now. Right now.
00:44:48
Speaker
you
00:44:53
Speaker
You've been listening to the podcaster's guide to the conspiracy, starring Josh Addison and Dr. M.R. Extended, which is written, researched, recorded and produced by Josh and Em. You can support the podcast by becoming a patron via its Podbean or Patreon campaigns. And if you need to get in contact with either Josh or Em, you can email them at podcastconspiracyatgmail.com or check their Twitter accounts, Mikey Fluids and Conspiracism.
00:45:54
Speaker
And remember, the truth is out there, but not quite where you think you left it.