This podcast explores the many facets of the 9-11 attacks which contradict the governments official story, the massive cover-up which is currently underway, the failure of the mainstream media in America to ask real questions, and the aftermath of 9-11 including the un-Constitutional wars and the taking of liberty here at home. This broadcast examines the big picture of what is taking place in America today and how September 11th fits into the scheme of things. Forget "conspiracy theory"! The governments own story about what happened is itself a "conspiracy theory"! We want 9-11 Truth.
Visibility 9-11
Claim This Podcastby Michael Wolsey
3.5(106 reviews)
129 episodes
Updated Inactive
Accepts GuestsHas SponsorsLocation 🇺🇸
Podcast Overview
This podcast explores the many facets of the 9-11 attacks which contradict the governments official story, the massive cover-up which is currently underway, the failure of the mainstream media in America to ask real questions, and the aftermath of 9-11 including the un-Constitutional wars and the taking of liberty here at home. This broadcast examines the big picture of what is taking place in America today and how September 11th fits into the scheme of things. Forget "conspiracy theory"! The governments own story about what happened is itself a "conspiracy theory"! We want 9-11 Truth.
Language
🇺🇲
Publishing Since
1/9/2006
2 verified contact emails on file for Visibility 9-11
Pitch yourself as a guest, propose sponsorships, or reach out directly to the host.
Recent Episodes
March 11, 2011
9/11 WTC Debate: Collapse by fire or explosive controlled demolition?
<p><img src="http://visibility911.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/COdebate-ae911truth.png" style="float: left; margin: 8px;" height="409" width="264" />On Sunday afternoon, March 6th, at the Boulder campus of the University of Colorado, Colorado 9/11 Visibility hosted a debate between Richard Gage, AIA (American Institute of Architects), and Chris Mohr, Denver investigative journalist and nondenominational minister. This is the audo of that historic debate.</p> <p>The question: What brought down the <em>three </em>World Trade Center skyscrapers?</p> <p><span style="color: #000080;"><strong>Richard Gage, AIA,</strong></span> is a San Francisco Bay Area architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects. He has been an architect for over 23 years and has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed, steel-framed buildings. His quest for the truth about 9/11 began in 2006, and he subsequently founded <a class="ext" href="http://www.ae911truth.org/" target="_blank">Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth</a>.</p> <p><span style="color: #000080;"><strong>Chris Mohr,</strong></span> investigative journalist and advocate of the “natural collapse” theory, is a sincere seeker of the truth who has extensively researched the collapses of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings, consulted with independent physicists and engineers, and passionately argues that the buildings collapsed due to the plane impacts and fires.</p> <p>In November 2010 at Denver’s Mercury Cafe, Mohr debated attorney Earl Staelin on the collapse of the twin towers. This debate was unprecedented in its civility and professionalism.</p> <p>During this debate between Chris Mohr and Richard Gage, the discussion explored not only the collapse of the twin towers, but also that of 47-story World Trade Center Building 7, which collapsed completely at 5:21 pm on 9/11/01. For those of you not familiar with the collapse of WTC7, this is a riveting, don’t-miss controversy. We look forward to a dynamic, respectful, and thoroughly informative exploration of these topics.</p> <p>Special thanks to Colorado 9-11 Visibility and all the volunteers and donors that made this event possible.</p>
February 13, 2011
Red Flag - Saudi Government Suspects Protected at Every Turn
<p><img src="http://visibility911.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/SaudiArabia911commission.jpg" style="float: right; margin: 8px;" height="276" width="316" />Soon after the September 11th attacks, the US government actively tried to minimize and oppress information relating to a possible role in the attacks by Saudi Arabia. Ultimately, the 9-11 Commission <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3815179.stm" target="_blank"><strong>cleared Saudi Arabia</strong></a> of any role in the terrorist attacks despite many anomalies including the fact that <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/02/06/saudi.htm" target="_blank"><strong>15 of the 19 high jackers</strong></a> were actually from Saudi Arabia.<br /><br /><br />In December 2002 Congress released its’ Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry into the 9-11 terrorist attacks. When released, this document contained 28 pages of redacted information that allegedly pointed to foreign state-sponsorship of the attacks, specifically Saudi Arabia. The 9/11 Commission Report failed to ascertain the contents of the censored 28-pages of the report.<br /><br />Victims family members asked President Bush why he refused to release this information and got no answer.<br /><br />Years earlier, in August 2002, victim family members publically announced a $1 trillion lawsuit against alleged Saudi bank rollers of Osama Bin Laden. This lawsuit has been stalled and defeated at every turn. In <a href="http://articles.sfgate.com/2002-11-23/news/17573117_1_transfers-from-wealthy-saudis-numerous-foreign-banks-dozens-defendant-prince-turki-al" target="_blank"><strong>November 2002</strong></a>, the lawsuit became even bigger and costlier at $15 trillion dollars as more than three-dozen new defendants were added, including members of the Saudi Royal Family. Interestingly, three members of the Saudi royal family have since been <a href="http://archive.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=70526&d=23&m=9&y=2005" target="_blank"><strong>given legal immunity from prosecution</strong></a>. Attorneys for the victims' families told the Staten Island Advance in 2006, that it could be "another several years before the lawsuit goes to trial. "<br /><br />In July of 2003 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland was interviewed by <a href="http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_cleland.html" target="_blank"><strong>Frank Sesno of PBS</strong></a>. In that interview, he stated: "You can read between the lines and see that there were foreign governments that were much more involved in the 9/11 attack than just supporting Islamic fundamentalist teachings and schools. Now, that has been redacted. A whole 28 page section." <br /><br />The 2008 book “The Commission”, by New York Times reporter Philip Shennon revealed that 9/11 Commission Executive Director, Phillip Zelikow <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a0403zelikowblocksredacted#a0403zelikowblocksredacted" target="_blank"><strong>blocked other 9/11 commissioners</strong></a> who were working on the Saudi connections from accessing the 28-page redacted section.</p> <p><br />In August 2003, an anonymous official told <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a080103secretchapter#a080103secretchapter" target="_blank"><strong>New Republic magazine</strong></a> that the 28-page redacted section outlines “connections between the hijacking plot and the very top levels of the Saudi royal family.”</p> <p><br />In September of 2004, a month after the official close of the 9/11 Commission, Senator Bob Graham <a href="http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/09/08/graham/index.html" target="_blank"><strong>accused the White House</strong></a> of covering-up the involvement of Saudi government officials in the 9/11 plot. <br /><br />Despite <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/world/middleeast/24saudi.html?_r=1" target="_blank"><strong>attempts by family members</strong></a> to get this information made public and promises from the Obama administration to do so, the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry into 9-11 remain secret and are likely to remain so. In May of 2010, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/05/11/kagan-helped-shield-saudis-911-lawsuits/" target="_blank"><strong>refused to give the victims' families’ lawsuit a hearing</strong></a>. Her argument was that US foreign policy would be interfered with if the lawsuit was allowed to go ahead.</p> <p><br />Secrecy continues to cloud the possible role of Saudi Arabia in the events of September 11th. Despite calls from members of Congress, victims family members, and even one of the 9-11 Commissioners to dig deeper into the role of Saudi Arabia, no such inquiry has yet to take place. Why would the US government and the 9-11 Commission protect Saudi Arabia?</p>
February 5, 2011
Dr Frank Legge on Visibility 9-11: Mounting Evidence Shows Boeing 757-200 Impact with Pentagon Probable
<p><img src="http://visibility911.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/frank_legge.jpg" style="float: left; margin: 8px;" height="322" width="242" />In this podcast, Dr Frank Legge discusses his new paper which was co-authored with Warren Stutt and has been published at the <a href="http://www.jounnalof911studies.com" target="_blank"><strong>The Journal of 9/11 Studies</strong></a>, titled <em><strong>Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon</strong></em> ( http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Calibration%20of%20altimeter_92.pdf ).<br /> <br />In this lengthy and detailed discussion, Dr Legge is careful to lay out his way of thinking on the Pentagon issue and why it is so important to the 9/11 Truth Movement to not make unsupported claims about the events there. Legge looks at this issue from a purely scientific perspective and is only interested in what he can prove to be true based on hard evidence. It is clear to Legge and to the vast majority of scientists who have studied the issue, that while the Pentagon is a mystery to a degree, it is most likely that AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757-200 did hit the building based on the physical evidence available. <br /> <br />We now have the correctly decoded digital flight data from Flight 77 and it's time for more people to get behind the call to reason on the Pentagon issue leading up to the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 Attacks! There is nothing wrong with supporting the parts of the "official story" of 9/11 that are most likely true. The team at Visibility 9-11 believe, as does Dr legge that it actually helps the interested public and especially the scientific community to see us as reasoned and balanced truth advocates when we do exactly that. <br /> <br />Lets stop being what we are labeled as "conspiracy theorist's" and become "conspiracy factulist's"! <br /> <br />For other instructive reading on the Pentagon please see related items below-<br /> <br /><a href="http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2009/WhatHitPentagonDrLeggeAug.pdf" target="_blank"><strong>What Hit the Pentagon? Misinformation and its Effect on the Credibility of 9/11 Truth</strong></a><br /> <br /><a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html" target="_blank"><strong>The Pentagon Attack: What the Physical Evidence Shows</strong></a></p> <p>Music by <a href="http://root1.net/" target="_blank"><strong>Root1</strong></a> also known as <a href="http://www.threeshoesposse.com/" target="_blank"><strong>Three Shoes Posse</strong></a>.</p>
129 total episodes available
Similar Podcasts
Discover related shows you might enjoy
Deep-dive analytics for Visibility 9-11
Frequently asked questions
Have a different question and can't find the answer you're looking for? Reach out to our support team by sending us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as we can.
- What is Visibility 9-11?
- How often does this podcast release new episodes?
This podcast updates inactive.
- Where can I listen to this podcast?
This podcast is available on 2 platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and more. You can also use the RSS feed directly.
- Does this podcast accept guests?
Yes, this podcast regularly features guests.
Legal Disclaimer
Pod Engine is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or officially connected with any of the podcasts displayed on this platform. We operate independently as a podcast discovery and analytics service.
All podcast artwork, thumbnails, and content displayed on this page are the property of their respective owners and are protected by applicable copyright laws. This includes, but is not limited to, podcast cover art, episode artwork, show descriptions, episode titles, transcripts, audio snippets, and any other content originating from the podcast creators or their licensors.
We display this content under fair use principles and/or implied license for the purpose of podcast discovery, information, and commentary. We make no claim of ownership over any podcast content, artwork, or related materials shown on this platform. All trademarks, service marks, and trade names are the property of their respective owners.
While we strive to ensure all content usage is properly authorized, if you are a rights holder and believe your content is being used inappropriately or without proper authorization, please contact us immediately at hey@podengine.ai for prompt review and appropriate action, which may include content removal or proper attribution.
By accessing and using this platform, you acknowledge and agree to respect all applicable copyright laws and intellectual property rights of content owners. Any unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or commercial use of the content displayed on this platform is strictly prohibited.