The Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry was set up in New York in February 2018. In April 2018, it filed a 52 page petition and 57 pieces of evidence before the Attorney General (the A-G) of the Southern District of New York. After the six month statutory period had elapsed, the A-G appointed a Grand Jury to examine the brief.

At this stage, the Lawyers Committee is not challenging Bush’s version of the 9/11 attacks. It is not stating an opinion on the impact of two planes that crashed into two of the three buildings destroyed. It focuses exclusively on the presence of explosives in the towers WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7. It states that the role they played on that date constitutes a federal crime which has till now [not] been investigated.

The current A-G, S. Berman, was in the past a partner of Rudy Giuliani for two years. Mr Guiliani was the Mayor of New York at the time of the 9/11 attacks. Mr Giuliani called his citizens to evacuate the twin towers (WTC1 and WTC2), on the grounds that they could collapse as a consequence of the impact of the two planes (one plane against each of the two buildings). As it happens, these towers had been built to withstand far more violent shocks.

The Grand Jury hearing should take place in 2019. This will be the first time, eighteen years after the crime, that the US civil court (and not a military court) will make a decision on any aspect of a 11 September attacks.

Mister President,

The crimes of 11 September 2001 have never been judged in your country. I am writing to you as a French citizen, the first person to denounce the inconsistencies of the official version and to open the world to the debate and the search for the real perpetrators.

In a criminal court, as the jury, we have to determine whether the suspect presented to us is guilty or not, and eventually, to decide what punishment he should receive. When we suffered the events of 9/11, the Bush Junior administration told us that the guilty party was Al-Qaïda, and the punishment they should receive was the overthrow of those who had helped them – the Afghan Taliban, then the Iraqi régime of Saddam Hussein.

However, there is a weight of evidence which attests to the impossibility of this thesis. If we were members of a jury, we would have to declare objectively that the Taliban and the régime of Saddam Hussein were innocent of this crime. Of course, this alone would not enable us to name the real culprits, and we would thus be frustrated. But we could not conceive of condemning parties innocent of such a crime simply because we have not known how, or not been able, to find the guilty parties.

We all understood that certain senior personalities were lying when the Secretary of State for Justice and Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, revealed the names of the 19 presumed hijackers, because we already had in front of us the lists disclosed by the airline companies of all of the passengers embarked - lists on which none of the suspects were mentioned.

From there, we became suspicious of the « Continuity of Government », the instance tasked with taking over from the elected authorities if they should be killed during a nuclear confrontation. We advanced the hypothesis that these attacks masked a coup d’état, in conformity with Edward Luttwak’s method of maintaining the appearance of the Executive, but imposing a different policy.