By Craig McKee
In an ideal world, April Gallop’s lawsuit would be the 9/11 breakthrough that the Truth movement has been waiting for. If real justice existed, this suit would break the story wide open.
I have to be realistic and see it as a long shot, but you never know…
Gallop is suing former vice-president Dick Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and former acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Richard Myers for damages in connection with injuries she and her newborn son suffered in the supposed terrorist attack at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.
The suit comes before the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit (Connecticut) on April 5. On March 15, 2010, Judge Denny Chin dismissed the suit with prejudice in a lower court, contending that the complaint was based on “cynical delusion and fantasy.”
Let’s hope things go better this time. In particular, she and her lawyer William Veale hope that the case goes forward giving her the power to subpoena witnesses. If she and Veale succeed then things will really get interesting.
Gallop, a former U.S. Army executive administrative assistant (with top secret clearance), contends that the three defendants – along with an unknown number of others – engaged in a criminal conspiracy to perpetrate a mass fraud on the American public and the world either by orchestrating the attacks or by allowing them to happen. You can read the original complaint here: (http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2008/12/21/text-of-the-april-gallop-lawsuit/)
Gallop and her two-month-old son were injured in the event when an explosion in her office brought the ceiling down on them. The Pentagon has refused to help her with surgeries she and her son have required because of the event, according to David Ray Griffin in his book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited. They’ve even tried to stop other agencies, like the American Red Cross, from helping her, Griffin reports.
Gallop’s desk was in the Pentagon’s E Ring, the outermost of the building’s five rings. Her desk was reported to be just 40 feet from where Flight 77 is supposed to have hit the building shortly after 9:30 a.m. on Sept. 11.
She was on her first day back at work after a two-month maternity leave. She says she was heading to the Pentagon day-care center with her son when she was told by her supervisor to take care of an urgent document-clearing job first.
So, she went to her desk, son in tow. When she pressed the ‘on’ button on her computer, a huge explosion literally brought the ceiling down. Debris fell from above and hit her and her baby.
Gallop reports that after regaining consciousness, she carried her child to safety through the hole in the building where the plane was supposed to have entered. She says saw no evidence of a plane having hit: no wreckage, no bodies, no jet fuel, nothing. She says she thought her computer had triggered the explosion, reporting that there were “flames coming out of the computers.” A woman in the D ring, Tracy Webb, reported the same thing, according to Griffin in The New Pearl Harbor Revisited (p. 101).
Gallop’s suit points to the fact that no alarm was ever sounded at the Pentagon even though it appears that Cheney and others were tracking a plane’s progress towards the Pentagon. She has stated that there were frequent alarm drills in the Pentagon in the days leading up to 9/11 but none on that day.
The idea that Cheney knew a plane was heading for the Pentagon is supported by the 9/11 Commission hearing testimony of the then transportation secretary, Norman Mineta. Mineta reported to the Commission that Cheney was in the presidential bunker prior to the Pentagon “crash” and was tracking the plane as it approached the Pentagon but not taking action to intercept it.
The suit states that explosives were detonated inside the Pentagon to simulate an airliner hitting the building. I addressed the issue of explosions in the Pentagon in this post: http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/evidence-points-to-bombs-detonated-inside-the-pentagon-on-911/
The original 2008 Gallop lawsuit contended that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Myers and an unknown number of co-conspirators:
“…engaged in an unlawful conspiracy, or a set of related, ongoing conspiracies, in which the concrete objective was to facilitate and enable the hijacking of the airliners, and their use as living bombs to attack buildings containing thousands of innocent victims; and then to cover up the truth about what they had done.
“The defendants’ purpose in aiding and facilitating the attack, and the overall object of the conspirac(ies), was to bring about an unprecedented, horrifying and frightening catastrophe of terrorism inside the United States, which would give rise to a powerful reaction of fear and anger in the public, and in Washington. This would generate a political atmosphere of acceptance in which the new Administration could enact and implement radical changes in the policy and practice of constitutional government in our country. Much of their intention was spelled out prior to their coming into office, in publications of the so-called Project for the New American Century, of which defendants Cheney and Rumsfeld were major sponsors. There they set forth specific objectives regarding the projection of U.S. military power abroad, particularly in Iraq, the Persian Gulf, and other oil-producing areas. They observed, however, that the American people would not likely support the actions the sponsors believed were necessary, without being shocked into a new outlook by something cataclysmic: “a new Pearl Harbor”. By helping the attack succeed, defendants and their cohorts created a basis for the seizure of extraordinary power, and a pretext for launching the so-called Global War on Terror, in the guise of which they were free to pursue plans for military conquest, “full spectrum dominance” and “American primacy” around the world; as they have done.”
So the stakes couldn’t be higher. If this case goes forward then a great deal might come out. I just wish the possibility didn’t seem too good to be true.