by Mary Maxwell, PhD, LLB.
Did Todd Beamer Say “Let’s Roll”? Yes or No
Since the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, it has been officially known that Todd Beamer’s cell phone made many calls AFTER the crash.
As fascinating as that may be, no one seems to have picked up on it. Clearly Todd (Let’s Roll”) Beamer did not die, and was probably never on the missing plane. An excellent book Hijacking America’s Mind on 9-11: Counterfeiting Evidence (Algora, 2013) has been written by Elias Davidsson. It deals with the authenticity of the alleged 9-11 phone calls. The 15 people who reportedly made calls from the planes to the ground are as follows:
— American Airlines Flight 11, calls from Betty Ong and Madeleine Sweeney;
— United Flight 175, from Brian Sweeney and Garnett Bailey;
– American Flight 77, from Barbara Olson and Renee Mey;
— United Flight 93, from Todd Beamer, Mark Bingham, Sandy Bradshaw, Thomas Burnett, Edward Felt, Jeremy Glick, Lauren Grandcola, CeeCee Lyle, and Elizabeth Wainio.
Elias Davidsson, the author of Hijacking America’s Mind, lives in Bonn, Germany; he is a musician and human rights scholar, and host of the website juscogens.org. He is interviewed here by Mary W Maxwell who lives in Adelaide.
Maxwell: I would say that the most vivid section of your book is the portrait of “life on Mars” – I mean the stark emptiness of the ground at Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the “Let’s Roll” plane is said to have crashed. To any onlooker except the wilfully blind, that scene has no plane wreckage in it whatsoever.
Davidsson: Whether it is the most vivid section or not, it is undeniable that many observers were amazed at the sight, but only a few dared to question what they saw (or did not see). I find it particularly revealing that the FBI did not allow any documentation of the alleged recovery of the plane from the pit and claimed after merely 12 days to have recuperated 95% of the plane.
Maxwell: When did you come to see the official story of 9-11 as not believable?
Davidsson: Gradually since 2002 but definitely around 2004.
Maxwell: Myself, I did not notice the problem until I was reading the Hutton Inquiry into the death of David Kelly, when I was a law student in 2005. For years I have seen on your website, jusgocens.org, an offer to pay $10,000 to anyone who would prove the official case for 9-11. Have you had any nibbles?
Davidsson: No. I have removed the offer now, as no one responded.
Maxwell: What is the main idea of your new book?
Davidsson: To debunk definitely the legend that a group of Muslim/Arab fanatics perpetrated the mass-murder of 9/11.
Maxwell: Your book indicates that, in the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the FBI presented bogus passenger seating plans that include the seats of alleged hijackers. Offering false material to a US court would constitute perjury and may also come under the federal crime of obstruction of justice. Have you tried to challenge the FBI on this?
Davidsson: No, because I have no legal standing.
Maxwell: I see that the Wall Street Journal of May 16, 2013 gave an unusual acknowledgement of the “conspiracy view.” It said:
“During the 2006 Moussaoui Trial, the FBI (under oath) reduced the number of cell phone calls to two calls made from 5,000 feet, and presented evidence of only one (not two) “unconnected” call from Barbara Olson, lasting “0 seconds.” … [A]lthough the FBI conducted a massive investigation into the calls, none of the telephone billing, nor any of the cell phone location data stored in standard phone company records has been publicly released.”
Davidsson: The Wall Street Journal may have been responding to my book, which had been published two weeks earlier, and to the work done by the 9-11 Consensus Panel.
Maxwell: Over what matter did you write to Judge Brinkema?
Davidsson: I wrote Judge Leonie Brinkema on March 17, 2006 as a response to alleged contradictory directions she gave to the jury in the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui. She told them first “I assume every one of you is aware of what happened on September 11, 2001, and has watched or read extensive media coverage about that day and has watched news reports or read about Al Qaeda” and then added, “Persons on trial must be judged not on the basis of what is in the news or popular media, but rather on the hard evidence presented in the courtroom during the trial.”
I expressed to her my concern that “the failure by your Court to establish, according to standards of evidence required in criminal law, that the crime of 9/11 was committed by the nineteen alleged hijackers, may represent a gross miscarriage of justice” and urged her to reconsider her decisions. This remained, as we now know, a futile and perhaps naive undertaking on my part.
Maxwell: I personally don’t think it was either futile or naive. One has to start somewhere to put some balance and common sense back into this thing, and you are just the man to do it. Your exhaustive research into the phone calls from all the planes of 9-11 is meticulous. I am interested in this statement you made on page 14 of Hijacking America’s Mind on 9-11:
“When attempting to solve a criminal mystery, formal operations [can be] used to discover the unknown. These operations include deduction, induction, tests of logical coherence, tests of reliability and plausibility…. Where major pieces of evidence have been destroyed, the solution to a criminal mystery may not yield a precise answer but can provide an approximation….
Davidsson: You may see that I followed that up, on page 15, by quoting approvingly the conservative approach of Nafeez Ahmed in his book The War on Truth and the Anatomy of Terrorism (2005: xiii). He said: “Although I attempt to outline what seem to me the obvious deductions from the available facts, the actual value of my work is in the facts themselves. The readers are…free…to draw their own overarching conclusions.”
Maxwell: I agree that it is the facts in your book that matter. They are stunning. Probably it helps that you are a foreigner to the US, and thus not worried about using logic in matters that Americans consider emotional. A member of Japan’s parliament, Mr Yukihisa Fujita, has also demanded that his government inquire into the 9-11 “put options.” By the way, most Americans don’t know that the 9-11 families got a gift of approximately one million dollars each. Did you know of it?
Davidsson: They actually got on the average $2.1 million per family.
Maxwell: How does your book fit with your avocation as a scholar of international law?
Davidsson: The mass-murder of 9/11 was a “crime against humanity” under customary international law. This places a legal obligation on the US government to search for and prosecute the perpetrators. The crime falls also under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction, providing third states with the potential (or even duty) to arrest any person suspected of having participated in the crime. The obligation of states to adequately investigate is also a corollary of the right to the truth of victims’ families. The right to the truth is one of the remedies to which victims of the violation of the right to life are entitled.
Maxwell: The part of your book I found most startling was your condemnation of the “entire academic class’ for its shutting down of its brain in regard to 9-11. What do you think the academic class needs to do now?
Note: For further discussion of the fact that some of the passengers may still be alive, see “Grave, Where Is Thy Victory?!” by Mary W Maxwell. She can be reached at ProsecutionForTreason.com
Buy the book Hijacking America’s Mind