April Gallop with fellow 9/11 Truth activist William Rodriguez.
By Craig McKee
April Gallop’s legal battle to expose the real perpetrators of 9/11 is over. And now the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit wants to turn the tables on the former U.S. Army specialist.
On Wednesday, the court dismissed Gallop’s appeal in a decision that came complete with sarcasm, conflict of interest, and obvious bias. The decision also came with a threat of sanctions on the basis that the case was frivolous and should never have been appealed in the first place.
Gallop launched her suit against former vice-president Dick Cheney, former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld, and former of the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Richard Myers in 2008. She sought damages for injuries she and her son suffered during the alleged plane crash into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001. In March 2010, a lower court threw the case out, stating that it was based on “cynical delusion and fantasy.”
Gallop’s suit contended 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.
The fact that the lawsuit failed is not a big surprise; the deck was stacked against Gallop from the start. First, we learned that one of the three judges hearing the case was George W. Bush’s cousin, John M. Walker. Then we heard that an effort to have Walker removed from the case had been denied. At least they had the smarts not to have Walker write the decision, which was penned by Judge Jose A. Cabranes.
Here’s a key passage in the 10-page decision:
“As the sentient world well recalls, on the morning of September 11, 2001, “agents of the al Qaeda terrorist organization hijacked commercial airplanes and attacked the World Trade Center in New York City and the national headquarters of the Department of Defense in Arlington, Virginia.”
Did you catch the dripping sarcasm? “As the sentient world well recalls…” They might as well have said that anyone with a functioning brain knows Osama bin Laden did it. That might be fair comment from any member of the public, but from a court that is supposed to be unbiased?
The decision goes on to say: “Apart from these factual allegations, the Complaint hypothesizes a fantastical alternative history to the widely accepted account of the “explosion” that injured Gallop and killed hundreds of other men and women inside the Pentagon. Among other things, Gallop’s complaint alleges that American Airlines Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon – indeed, that no plane crashed into the Pentagon.”
I’m not a lawyer, but is the “wide acceptance” of the official story really significant – or even true? I don’t think so. I think there is plenty of evidence to contradict the government’s version of what happened, starting with then transportation secretary Norman Mineta telling the 9/11 Commission that Cheney was tracking a plane that was heading for the Pentagon – but did nothing to stop it. Maybe Mineta was delusional, too.
Obviously, one could argue both sides of the legal question. I’m not saying that Gallop’s case was airtight or that the decision was devoid of correct legal points – I’m in no position to do this. I acknowledge that her earlier lawsuit against American Airlines didn’t help with the current suit because it suggested an inconsistency. I do, however, find that Gallop was never going to get a fair shake from this or any other U.S. court.
The decision concludes with an order for Gallop and her lawyer, William Veale, to show why they should not be sanctioned for launching a baseless appeal. It points out that the Court has the authority to impose sanctions even without a request from the defendants that it do so. Let’s hope they quit while they’re ahead.
By the way, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “delusion” as being a “persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or person or persons outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary.”
I agree that someone in this situation is delusional; I just don’t think it’s April Gallop.
Here’s that key passage in the 10-page decision:
Mr. McKee wrote:
What I notice from the passage is an opportunity. If his declarative sentence regarding “agents of the al Qaeda terrorist organization” is proven wrong, it calls into question “what does the sentient world truly recall, why, and who told them that?”
“Scooby-Doo meets Batman” has a great line in this regard. Batman says, “Robin, I think this is a case of mass hypnosis.”
Elias Davidsson makes a very convincing argument regarding there being [PDF] No Evidence of Muslims or “agents of the al Qaeda terrorist organization” attacking us on 9/11.
What a shame. The judgment (or lack of) displays just how much control the “higher powers” have on the US judicial system. I’ve never heard of a court using such a ridiculous statement to back up the decision. That is pure propaganda. The court’s later reaction against April Gallup is a futile attempt to detract others from bringing similar cases against the actual perps
I haven’t looked deeply into the issue, but it seems on its face that Mr. Veale made a severe tactical error when he married April Gallop’s lawsuit to the extremely weak flyover story. Many in the truth movement have had a very dim view of 9/11 lawsuits because of their record of failure: Stanley Hilton’s, Phil Berg’s, the various Judy Wood Qui Tams, abnd now this. These counterproductive efforts only give the impression that our evidence does not stand up in court. I read Hilton’s and Berg’s lawsuits, and they were shockingly illiterate and incompetent. It was difficult to avoid the supposition that they were designed to fail.
William Rodriguez, by the way, is the kiss of death. The 9/11 truth movement had a good relationship with C-Span–they covered the David Ray Griffin speech in Madison, the family members’ press conference in DC, the scholar’s symposium in LA. Then 8/17/07 they gave 2 hours to William Rodriguez, who squandered time that could have been used for serious truth and instead bragged for two hours about how important he was and lied about what he did on 9/11. He repeatedly claimed that his Key of Hope was “opening doors and letting people out”. This was a lie because the people were not locked in. Fire exit doors are only locked in the return direction. The people were not locked in.
After Willie’s brag-fest, C-Span never to my knowledge gave time to 9/11 Truth again.
Dear Mr. Good,
You may be correct in your impressions expressed in the last two postings regarding failings of the 9/11 truth movement, their court cases, and Sr. Rodriguez. Most of those court cases were destined to fail from the onset by design, which their wording reveals. I’m passed the half way mark in Dr. Judy Wood’s textbook, I’m still impressed, I still recommend it, and I might find myself in the embarrassing position of having to apologize for all of my fusion-triggered fission milli-nuke rants, because the evidence (as presented by Dr. Wood) does appear to be heading into the realm of “cold fusion nuclear weapons”.
On an entirely different subject, I believe you might be active on Screw Loose Change. I have tried to contact you through a cyber-sluethed email address that seems to be associated with your pen name there. Of course, you probably are not monitoring it.
Would you kindly respond to me off-list? If you have lost my email, you can obtain my email address through Mr. McKee.
Willie R. stole his hero story from Pablo Ortiz, a true hero who broke down doors on the 89th floor to set trapped people free, who saved dozens of lives, and who died himself when the north tower fell down.
On Willie’s lower 39 floors there were no trapped people, the fire exit doors were not locked, and survival statistics are no higher than on any of the other 129 floors below the impact zones. Willie’s claim that his magic “Key of Hope …. saved hundreds of lives” is a lie.
The investigators do not investigate themselves, and they do not prosecute themselves either. Everyone that has a “sweet” gubment job (judges, prosecutors, everyone) knows that they have to follow the gubment’s 9/11 storyline or they will be labeled nut-jobs, ruined publicly, and lose their easy-going, gravy-train paycheck. Come on people, realize that “the people” meaning us, are all just slaves and cannon fodder to the powers that be. We are the same as milk cows that the farmer (gubment) keeps alive because we can give them milk (taxes). The gubment only has to keep enough people on the payroll, and do a few nice things for some other people (both with other people’s money) to keep the naive believing in them.