The State Of Our Investigation: One Year After
by MalcontentX
host site:
Last Update: Sept 11, 2002

911Network, Peaceful Tommorrows

Paul Thompson's "Complete 911 Timeline"
(and the opportunity/challenge implied within)

"The War on Freedom"

John Judge

Dear Friends,

What with the import of the moment, (one year since the "black Tuesday" attacks) and the exciting developments taking place in our investigative community, this review might be inadequate to express the full significance of the situation in which we find presently find ourselves.

While the warlords on the brink of planetary dominance prepare for their next anticipated slaughter of innocents, we have before us an auspicious gathering for the good taking place.

It is because of these positive developments that there has been so little time to gather in and reflect on them as a coherent whole; yet, as is often the case in the course of history, time waits for no one but the eternal voice within; and it is often better to get something "out there," than to wait for a later version to sound its song of lonely perfection.

What aspects are not adequately covered here will hopefully be followed up with a more-comprehensive update in a month's time.

Of all the somewhat "recent" developments, (i.e. not covered by my last review) what stands out above all, in my opinion, is the emergence of,

as a viable focal point for our investigation.

Why? Because it represents the coalescing of a real community of people, rather than simply another information resource.

As I have attempted to suggest in the introduction to FURTHER Unanswered Questions and in More Thoughts on Research, I believe that the great strength of the internet -allowing grass-roots individuals to share information on a mass scale- is also a great hurdle to overcome, an illusion to understand.

In of itself, information... potentially infinite in amount, ultimately only paralyses the mind and heart. In behind our theories and statistics, we must have relations of trust; that is, for the understanding to go beyond the most basic, primitive level.

It is of little significance for there to be an analytical genius or saint in our midst, if he/she cannot speak in words that the rest of us can understand; nor does it serve us if we stand mesmorized by their insight, unmotivated to make them understand us. What allows for the simpler, deeper truths to emerge are the relationships which form when various individuals and groups try to get together and form a common platform of understanding and activity.

The theories, framework, by which we begin this process may change over time; of far greater significance is that we begin it, that we seize upon some potential gathering point and send the word out with clear intent: build it, and they will come.

There are many groups, associations, communities in-formation within our larger community, covering various aspects of the issue. What makes unique, I believe, is that the primary focus is to facilitate communication and understanding within our investigative community, (that we may then speak more effectively to the general public).

This could only have come about once a significant core of researchers had established a body of evidence -that some could look around and say, "we need to talk to one another, so that we can organize, present this information more-effectively -to make it more accessible to researchers and citizens alike.

As I understand it, the central theme of the group is simply that there are a great many unanswered questions relative to the events of 911, and that we have a right to explore them before giving assent to our governments violent ambitions.

From this modest, open-ended basis, a great many people from very diverse backgrounds and outlooks may feel welcome to join the discussion.

What makes this invocation significant, is that it is supported by people who do not shy away from asking the tough questions and digging for answers. The founders of the group, (Kyle Hence, Tom Flocca, Catherine Austin Fitts, Alastair and Myles Thompson) have all proven themselves capable of measuring their investigative work to very high standards, for seeing in people the potential for great change, and committing themselves to the task. That such people are prepared to open the way for discussion in which unanswered questions hold center stage, is an important development indeed.

It is from this basis of credibility, association, and powers of persuasion, that the UQ group was able to bring together a number of important investigators/voices for a June 10th Press Conference in Washington, DC.

These included: Mary Schiavo, former inspector-general of the NTSB, (National Transportation Safety Board) who is representing 911 victim-families suing the government/airlines in an attempt at full disclosure; John Judge, Michael Ruppert, researchers extraordinaire; Michael Springmann, former Fmr. Chief, Visa Section, U.S. Embassy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; surviving family members; and numerous other competent voices.

UQ has just financed the production of a short 911 video, (produced by Guerilla News Network) recently premiered at two seminars given by Michael Ruppert in New York city. The group is presently working towards their next "event" -possibly featuring Nafeez Ahmed, author of the outstanding book, "The War on Freedom."

Such developments are still in their early stages. An important new collaboartion with the research community associated with now seems underway.

Inroads are also forming with a group on the broad side of the "left," "peace movement," who are calling for

"the immediate establishment of an Independent 9-11 Truth Commission, charged with the calm, determined, and open investigation of the facts related to the tragedies of September 11th, 2001.

We call for the establishment of an Independent 9-11 Truth Commission to determine and detail the facts. How and by whom were the attacks of September 11th perpetrated? What knowledge did the Bush administration possess of the attacks before September 11th? What was the history of the relationship between the Taliban government, Al Qaeda, and the Clinton and Bush administrations?"

Many of the signators of the above petition are members of groups involved in the wider peace movement which, although not specifically calling for a national citizen's investigation into the "official story" surrounding 9/11, are certainly raising serious questions about the so-called "war on terrorism."


"an advocacy organization founded by family members of September Eleventh victims... [seeking] effective nonviolent responses to terrorism..." (which says, in part)

"Our nation has yet to begin a meaningful, independent investigation of how and why the September 11 attacks occurred, information that is crucial for protecting us from similar attacks in the future."

Beyond these associations, UQ maintains ongoing and close correspondence with M. Ruppert, Michel Chussudovsky, John Judge, Dave Ratcliffe, Carol Brouillet, each of whom are, (or will soon be) discussed below.

The UQ website, as yet, is a modest one, (presently undergoing transition). I recommend readers visit and stay tuned to future developments.

In my opinion, the second most-significant development of late is the rather sudden arrival of Paul Thompson's "timeline."


I don't think it an exaggeration to say no other single document will have as much of an impact on the the credibility and readership of the 9/11 debate, (over the foreseeable future) as this one.


Not only is it massive in scope, brutally-precise in its references to the most credible, and relevant online sources, its organizational coherence is simply astounding.

The main "timeline" is organized into a dozen different formats, for pursuing various aspects of the case.

The author shows an uncanny ability to identify the relevant facts within the various reports, and lays them out in a clear, concise fashion. Combine this with his steady hand in keeping his own interpretations of the facts to a minimum, and we have a body of evidence upon which serious researchers can confidently focus at least a few month's attention -to explore the meaning of the various facts at hand -rather than having to search, organize and verify.

In having performed this monumental task, in providing such a service, Mr. Thompson may have also posed to us a challenge: recognize the limits to a particular way of doing things, the need for an adjustment, and the opportunity to take this investigation to a whole other level.

The issue of 9/11, (in terms of information) is massive, as is Paul's "timeline." The focus, clarity, coherence, of his "timeline" has come from a single mind; and there is, in turn, a limit to what a single mind can do.

Though Paul will continue to search, write, add new information and offer fresh insights, I believe he has posited to us the limitations of what the focus of a single individual can do -that, in order to advance our investigation to the next level, it's time for a qualitative shift in how we organize and exchange information: not simply to gather, analyse, and organize information as individuals, but to begin organizing ourselves to work together on a common research project, (which is capable of sufficiently grasping the "event," as a whole).

In other words, it seems fair to say that "Thompson's timeline" has sufficiently covered the breadth of the 9/11 "thang," that for someone to come up with another "timeline," it would seem, well, redundant.

I mean, there will always be new things to add to this "timeline," like any other. This one is simply so comprehensive that it doesn't seem, (for the foreseeable future) that there is going to be another "timeline" of near equal scope... with vastly different yet equally well-referenced/relevant material. It only seems an efficient use of our time to leverage on the work that has already been done -rather than have three, five, fifteen different massive "timelines" with only a few variant facts in each.

The task now before us does not seem to be to create new and better "timelines"; rather, it seems time for a number of us to work together on assessing what the evidence in the timeline means, and amend/expand the body of understanding in an organized manner.

I'm not suggesting that every researcher in our loose-knit community be involved in such a project. There are many contributors who will continue contributing worthwhile material regardless. I'm suggesting that, in order for our investigation as a whole to move to the "next level," then a certain core of researchers, a critical mass, must commit them/ourselves to working as a team on a common, concrete project, (sufficiently reflective of the whole).

Only in this way does it seem possible for us to transform the limitations of "too-much" information -one person's brilliance- into a deeper quality of understanding, shared.

I believe Paul Thompson's "timeline" has arrived to present to us this challenge/opportunity -an achievement worthy of such commitment. It must be equally clear that in studying, refining, adapting, and amending such material, it is time for our emphasis to shift from information towards dialogue.

We need to put more emphasis in raising the quality/clarity of our dialogues.

In this, we may be talking about how to bring two important components of our citizen's investigation... closer together.

I refer here to the informal community of independent websites/investigators, (operating as a source of information and expression) and the various 9/11 message-boards which have also been a hotbed of grass-roots activity, (operating as a source of information and dialogue).

I speak of two message-boards in particular,


In general, there seems to be a division between the investigative community in the macro sense, the various message-boards which have been created to facillitate public discussion, and the e-lists within which we researchers/citizens tend to dialogue in relative isolation.

I believe a large part of the resistance on the part of researchers, (to using the public message-boards) is due to the difficulty in maintaining a focused discussion. i.e. open public access means people of varying commitment/background can easily dilute the focus on a given task/question at hand... simply by not paying attention to what's already been said.

This is stating things simply. Multiple human communication can be a complex affair. I believe it fair to say that there is room for increasing the clarity of focus on what is being discussed, generally speaking, in the message-board format. I further believe it's time that we take up this challenge, by creating a clear intention around the desire to discuss various aspects of Paul Thompson's "timeline" in a serious, focused manner.

It appears the tools are hand, as is the talent, and connections; all that is needed is the action to bring the various parts together.

Perhaps the next most-important development in the 911 citizen's investigation, (imo) has been the arrival of Nafeez Ahmed's book, "The War on Freedom."

It has been available for a few months online, (albeit to a limited extent). In mid- July it started to become widely available in U.S. bookstores.

In terms of bringing the 911 issues into the general public's eye, perhaps no other document stands, at present, as potential equal.

The book is widely-recognized in the 911 investigative community as being exceptionally comprehensive, thoroughly referenced to credible sources, and stunning in its conclusions.

Many of us, (inluding have taken it upon them/ourselves to help promote and distribute the book as a pillar of public-awareness strategy.

Like Michael Ruppert's "Truth and Lies of 911" video, Nafeez's book has become a favorite "fundraiser gift" for those donating to Pacific radio stations.

The main limitation, naturally, is that, as a book, "The War on Freedom" cannot directly serve to feed the online discussion -as can Paul Thompson's "timeline," (or my own, "Unanswered Questions"). It's not possible to place the whole of this information in front of our viewscreens. Significant excerpts, however, have been posted, that we can have a taste of the depth and precise analysis involved.

Here are two reviews:

I highly recommend the book.

Another development that portends significance to our discussion is the "arrival" of,

An examination of this site will quickly impress upon most readers two things: an extremely comprehensive, credibly-referenced discussion of the various 911 issues, and one which is also exceptionally well-organized.

What may then soon become apparent is that the intent of the website is to provide a framework by which the vast store of information in this area, (and others) can be credibly gathered, sifted, and presented in evermore organized, coherent, accessible formats. It seems that this may dovetail beautifully with the desire of to act as a bridge between the general public and the investigative community.

Stay tuned. Find out more.

Get more involved.

Another very exciting development is the completion of John Judges collected reflections on the events surrounding 9/11, which can be found here:

As many fellow researchers will contend, John Judge is widely-recognized as being an events-analyst of exceptional insight.

I have not yet been able to examine the contents here but briefly; yet what I did come across within minutes had me very excited indeed.

The webmaster/host/poster of John's writings, (and his otherwise partner in crime, Dave Ratcliffe) is also an exceptional provider of research in his own right. I highly recommend readers check out his main site,
(esp: "Understanding Special Operations")

And his archive devoted to 9/11:

I leave readers to enjoy this feast for yourselves, with no more interference from me.

This ends, for the moment, this investigative update. I have covered here only some of the most obvious of the new developments, and have yet to provide an update on the contributors which I have discussed in previous editions of "Thoughts on Research." Hopefully, I will be able to get to that shortly.

Thanks again for your time.

Good luck to us all.