11 Years After 9-11, UK Group “Re-Investigate 9-11” Won’t Talk About What Happened

08 Sep 2012

Ian Henshall’s "Re-investigate 911" Initiative continues to ignore and censor research that has been published for years. This short paragraph is especially noteworthy:
There has been no detailed explanation for the unprecedented collapse of three multistorey steel frame buildings, World Trade Centre 1, 2, and 7 at near free fall speed, landing neatly in their own footprints. Most of the planes’ jet fuel was burnt off in the initial impacts and Building 7 was not even hit by a plane. The buildings were explicitly designed to withstand a high speed jet impact. (12) (13)
It is reminiscent of Ian Crane’s statement in this video, from approximately 1 year ago.
Ian Henshall, to my knowledge, has never asked for a copy of Dr Wood’s forensic study of the destruction of the WTC.
Why is this?
Why does Mr Henshall continue to promulgate out-of-date and incomplete information, and promote a site which censors research and discussion of evidence (AE 911):
Perhaps someone can ask him – he won’t listen to me. Why is he treating certain court-submitted evidence and research just like the mainstream media. Why is he linking to an organisation whose leader characterises Dr Judy Wood’s research as "witchcraft"?
Does he not realise that thousands of copies of Dr Wood’s book are now in circulation, and reviews on Amazon make quite an interesting read… (66 reviews rated 5*)
Thousands of people have watched Dr Wood’s updated presentations – and hundreds – maybe thousands of DVDs are in circulation.
Part 1 – 
As we approach the 11th Anniversary, I would be happy to send anyone copies of information in DVD or booklet form.
If people want to know about the 911 truth movement’s cover up of certain important 911 research, they can download my free e-book:
It’s available free as a PDF, Kindle book and iPad book – so should be readable on almost any platform. Recently updated audio version is also available from the same page – now with a volunteer reading much of the text out. (See page above).
Alternatively, ignore the above information and focus on what Ian Henshall has written below.

Re-cap on 2010 with Ian Henshall

From: reinvestigate911-l-bounces@… [mailto:reinvestigate911-l-bounces@…] On Behalf Of Ian Henshall
Sent: 08 September 2012 13:51
To: reinvestigate911-l@…
Subject: 9/11: Eleven Years On And Still Many Questions Remain 

To Reinvestigate 9/11 contacts list:

Hello all,

Here is the press release we have just sent out for the 11th anniversary of 9/11. Some of you may (actually, do) complain that the content is insufficiently strong, but our calculation is that this is about as far as we can expect anyone in the corporate media to go.

Please send it out to any contacts you may feel are interested.

Thanks for your support and please don’t forget about the SCADS Confernce on November 10. A provisional schedule and ticket details will be going out soon.

Ian and all at RI911


8 September 2012

From: www.reinvestigate911… 
079469 39217

9/11: Eleven Years On And Still many Questions Remain

Its eleven years since the world changing events of 11 Sept 2001, used to justify wars abroad and erosion of civil liberties at home. 

9/11 was used to justify the Iraq war with claims of Al Qaeda links with Saddam Hussein, later shown to be entirely false. (1) 

World wide opinion polls indicate a highly sceptical public attitude to the Washington account of 9/11. (3)

Last year’s 9/11 opinion poll in the UK conducted by ICM on behalf of www.reinvestigate911… showed only 7% of respondents believe they have been told the whole story of the 9/11 attacks. (4), (5) 

The media in the NATO countries have failed to look into the many unanswered questions feeding public disquiet. Recent revelations have confirmed collusion between the New York Times and intelligence agencies (6).

Meanwhile most members of the 9/11 Commission have now distanced themselves from its findings. (16)

Here are some of the unanswered questions.

Could 9/11 have been nipped in the bud by the CIA’s then secret Osama Bin Laden unit who identified at least two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers as they entered the US, or the FBI’s three field offices which were refused permission to investigate individuals connected with the attacks?

Was 9/11 really such a surprise, as claimed by the Bush Administration? Not so according to newly released CIA documents (7), (8). Bush received several CIA intelligence warnings that attacks were ‘imminent’ in the summer of 2001. Yet Bush ignored them and took no defensive measures. Why? 

Richard Clarke, (9) Bush’s anti-terrorism co-ordinator, has accused the CIA of deliberately withholding information that could have prevented the attacks. Ali Soufan, at the time the FBI’s lead Al Qaeda expert, has also criticised the CIA for blocking investigations of suspects prior to 9/11 (10). Why would the CIA and senior FBI administrators have made these decisions?

The events of the day have led to many independent experts posing still unanswered questions. 

Andreas von Buelow, German intelligence expert and one time Defence Minister echoes the voices of many US military experts and Gore Vidal writing in The Observer. Von Buelow asks why, "for 60 decisive minutes, the military and intelligence agencies let the fighter planes stay on the ground?" (11)

There has been no detailed explanation for the unprecedented collapse of three multistorey steel frame buildings, World Trade Centre 1, 2, and 7 at near free fall speed, landing neatly in their own footprints. Most of the planes’ jet fuel was burnt off in the initial impacts and Building 7 was not even hit by a plane. The buildings were explicitly designed to withstand a high speed jet impact. (12) (13)

Reinvestigate 911, along with many 9/11 families, first responders, firefighters, pilots, scientists, architects, military officers, CIA and FBI whistleblowers, are calling for an independent re-investigation into 9/11. (14) (15)

For more information: www.reinvestigate911…

Ian Henshall author of 911 The New Evidence is available for interview on 079469 39217. His first book 911 Revealed(co-author Guardian columnist Rowland Morgan) was serialised in the Daily Mail and he has appeared regularly on Talksport.

If following jpgs do not come through, please see .doc file attached


caption: Some became suspicious when the BBC and other media announced the collapse of WTC7 before it happened.


caption: Richard Clarke became a media hero when he told the 911 Commission "your government failed you" but when he blew the whistle on the CIA’s 9/11 role last year he was widely ignored. He is the most senior Bush official to doubt the official story in public 


1) news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/…

3) www.worldpublicopini…

4) reinvestigate911.org…

5) uk.prweb.com/release…

6) www.guardian.co.uk/c…

7) www.washingtontimes….

8) www.cbsnews.com/2100…

9) www.cbsnews.com/2100…

10) www.bbc.co.uk/news/w… 

11) www.druckversion.stu… 

Quote From: Andreas Von Bulow Andreas, former State Secretary in the German Defence Ministry

(Tagesspiegel, 13 January 2002)

12) www.globalresearch.c…

13) www.ae911truth.org,

14) www.militaryofficers… /

15) pilotsfor911truth.or…

16) See Without Precedent by Thomas Keen and Lee Hamilton (Knopf), The Commission by Phil Shenon (Little, Brown). Commissioner Max Cleland resigned calling it a "national scandal" and a "whitewash".

Reinvestigate 9/11
01273 326862 daytime

We will support any new investigation of the 9/11 attacks so long as 
*it is run by uncompromised people with a range of opinion including those inclined to disbelieve the official 9/11 story,
*it follows the evidence wherever it leads
if it takes place in the US to be credible it will need 
*full legal authority to demand immediate access to any evidence and any witness it chooses
*the resources it requires to carry out its investigation

Reinvestigate 911 is supported by Coffee Plant ( www.coffee.uk.com) suppliers of organic and Fairtrade coffees to caterers and retail customers. Phone 0208 453 1144 

2 of 2 File(s)

Related articles...

Comments are closed.