Binney Gage Corbett AE911Truth Raw Draft TXT Dump

[MUSIC]

William Binney spent 30 years with the NSA
before resigning in 2001

and beginning a whistleblowing crusade

over the agency's flagrant violation
of the US Constitution.

Now, he has joined forces
with Richard Gage,

signing the petition from Architects
and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

calling for a new investigation

into what really happened on 9/11/2001.

This is a GRTV feature interview
with our special guests,

William Binney and Richard Gage.

Well, let's start with you, William Binney,

because this is your first time
on the program.

And perhaps, for some of my listeners...

I'm sure many of my listeners
will be familiar with you,

but for those who aren't,

why don't we just talk a little bit
about your background,

your time with the NSA, and what
drove you to become an NSA whistleblower.

OK. Now, I started my experience
in the SIGINT business,

the Signals Intelligence business,
with the United States Army back in 1965.

I was getting out of school then,

and they were drafting people to go
in the Army and kill people in Vietnam.

So I -- being a country boy, you know --
I was a good shot,

so I was a candidate, prime candidate:

everybody I knew going into the military
at that time, being drafted,

was being... were put into
these rifle companies

and sent out in the front lines
in Vietnam to kill people.

So, I didn't want to do that,
so I checked out my options,

and ended up volunteering: what could I do
to avoid that kind of thing?

So the recruiters, they told me
all kinds of stories,

but the point was that they said,

"You can get into intelligence here,
and you won't be in the rifle companies,

and so you can have an opportunity
to do something other than kill people."

And so I thought that was a great option,
so I figured I'd do that.

And so that was my introduction to NSA,

and that got me into
the intelligence business at NSA.

And from there on,
I wanted to get out of the service,

and they wanted to recruit me;
and so I became a high-priority recruit,

and then I joined NSA as a civilian.

Got out of the service in '69,
joined NSA in '70,

and then I stayed there
until October, 2001,

and throughout that career I was...
for almost 30 years,

I was involved in analysing
the Soviet Union,

breaking codes and things like that:

data systems, ciphers,
all kinds of things like that.

And that's where I got into doing
that kind of thing.

And so I was designing systems
at that time,

and the systems I came up with were a way
to solve the volume-velocity problem,

and do a selective attack on... being able to look at all the data, first of all,

and then select out only that
which was relevant to issues of crime,

or military, or any kind
of political activity in the world,

so that we could monitor that
and keep track of that.

Well, that was... that solution I came on board in 2002, and we...

or, late 2000 we had it running completely.

And so we were, at the time,
proposing we deploy that

to take care of the terrorist problems
at 18 sites around the world...

-- for $9 million. OK?
That's all it was gonna cost --

...so we could monitor everything
the terrorists were doing

any time they did anything. And that was the whole point of it. So...

To make it short, they rejected that
because it didn't cost enough money;

it didn't build a big empire, and...

you know, that was their
fundamental problem with it.

So, that's what they did, then.

They basically ignored it
even after, until 9/11.

And then they looked around and they said,

"Well, hey." This program that we did
would handle massive amounts of data.

In other words, we saw no limit
as to how much data we could handle.

And we could index it, and graph it,
and understand what was in it,

and also map it together so we could do
timelines for all kinds of massive data.

So that was the thing that they looked as
as useful to them,

to monitor everybody in the United States,
and, indeed, everybody in the world.

And so that's where they went, and they
did that starting in October of 2001.

And so at that point, I decided,

"Well, I have to get the hell out of here,

because I can't be a part of this,
you know."

So... and this was a real mess,
and I couldn't stand by.

And so for the next seven years I tried,

along with Kirk Wiebe and Diane Roarke
and Tom Drake,

to try to get the government
to correct its ways

by working inside the government,
going to the Intelligence Committees,

the Inspector Generals of the Department
of Defense and the Department of Justice,

and also other members of Congress

that weren't part of the
Intelligence Committees:

and none of that worked.

It was all basically a failure.

All it did was draw attention to us,

and that we were loose cannons on deck,
so to speak,

and nobody wanted anybody to be aware of
the real program that they were running,

and so they sent the FBI to raid us
and threaten us and intimidate us,

and then they used the DOJ after that
to threaten us with prosecution.

They manufactured evidence, by the way

-- which I caught them at:
that's why they dropped it --

Tom... I didn't have the evidence to save
Tom Drake, so he had to go to trial,

but Jim Bamford also looked at that
and found all the data

that they were accusing him of having
that was classified:

he found it all on the Web.

I mean, it was all issued
by NSA on the Web.

So I mean, this is our
Department of Justice

fabricating evidence to try people.

I mean, this is insane, you know?

This is why I've been calling this a police state.

And that shift in focus towards mass bulk collection of data

was motivated specifically by 9/11?

Or was that something that had been discussed before the events of 9/11?

Well, at the time, I thought it was
motivated by 9/11,

but later on, in 2006, when some testimony
by the CEO of Qwest, Nacchio...

-- and his court case came out --
...and the lawyer said that Nacchio...

-- and they had records for the visit and all,
to go with that --

was visited on the 27th of February
of 2001 by someone from NSA.

It was either General Hayden
or someone else.

And they came in and asked him
to supply them

with all the customer data
that he had on hand,

and all the billing records
and communications

of all the people
who were his subscribers.

It's just like the billing data
they took from AT&T and Verizon:

just like that Verizon order,
this was, again, without a court order,

and it was done, basically, by word-of-mouth.
And he said,

"Well, if you give me a warrant,
I'll give it to ya."

And of course, they weren't
prepared to do that.

So, they wanted to do it all in secret:

again, because it was a violation
of our Constitutional rights,

and they didn't want anybody opposing it.

So there was a shift already taking place,
but it was certainly...

the public unveiling of that, just,
was motivated by 9/11,

and the supposed terrorist threat
that 9/11 itself represented.

So that brings us, I think,
to the other part of our conversation

with our so-far silent partner,
Richard Gage.

First of all, Richard: obviously
my regular listeners

will be familiar with yourself
and your organization,

but there's always
new listeners joining in.

Why don't you just explain to us

what Architects and Engineers
for 9/11 Truth is.

We're a non-profit organization of over
2,200 architects and engineers, now,

demanding a real investigation of
what happened at the World Trade Center.

We have over 19,000 other individuals
joining us,

demanding a real investigation,
based on the specific evidence,

the scientific evidence
for explosive-controlled demolition

at all three World Trade Center
skyscrapers on 9/11.

Now, tell us specifically about
the petition that's available for signing

by architects and engineers
and other supporters at AE911Truth.org

The petition demands of Congress
a real investigation

of the destruction of these
three high-rises,

including World Trade Center Building 7,

a 47-story skyscraper that falls
on the afternoon of 9/11

-- without having been hit
by an airplane --

straight down, uniformly, symmetrically,
into its own footprint, just about,

at free-fall acceleration,
in under seven seconds.

So these licensed and degreed individuals
are placing their reputations on the line,

having looked at and examined
the eyewitness testimony,

the video testimony, and the forensic
evidence available to everybody

on the Internet...
-- not in the mainstream media --

...based on all of that,
demanding a real investigation.

NIST, the National Institute
of Standards and Technology,

did not perform an investigation at all:
they were just building reports,

and they are full of fraud.

Now, this is where we can start
to connect these two narratives.

Mr. Binney, I understand
that you recently signed the petition

to become a supporter of AE911Truth.

Tell us about the story of how and when
you came to sign this petition.

Well, I was at the Ridenhour Award
ceremony in 30 April of this year.

I was asked to accept the award
for Laura Poitras.

Both Laura and Snowden
got awards there at that time.

And I was accepting for Laura;
and we had a conference afterward:

a panel meeting that discussed
some of the issues

with what was going on
in the United States at the time.

And David Schlesinger was there;

and he asked me, towards the end
of the panel,

If I would come and just listen to them
to hear what they had to say.

So I did: I agreed to do that.

And of course, it took me a while
to do that;

and that was just recently that I did.

And I went to Dr. Tim Eastman's house.

He's a physicist; and David and Tim
took me through all the evidence

that they were looking at
and talking about.

Because I had never looked at that myself,
because I'm not a structural engineer

or a demolitions expert,
or anything like that.

So I couldn't... what I would say about it
doesn't really mean a great deal,

because I don't know that much.

But I do know science,

and I do know what good science is
and what bad science is.

And it was pretty clear to me
that, at best,

what they were doing, and what they
could call it, was sloppy science.

And that was what I got out of
the NIST statements.

So from there, I just said, well,
I would sign the petition

to get a new investigation
that wouldn't ignore basic facts

or basic observable occurrences.

That's fundamental to science.
You don't...

basic observation is fundamental.

I mean, It's not something you resist
because you don't like something:

you don't ignore it.

And like I said earlier, I mean, if you...

you'll never solve a crypto problem
if you take that approach.

You just will absolutely fail every time.

So that's why... that's how I came
to sign this petition.

So, Mr. Gage, I understand
this is your first time

talking to Mr. Binney directly.

What was your reaction when you found out

that he was one of the signatories
to this petition?

I was delighted that we have

former high-level officials
in the US intelligence, and others

who have come forward to join us

in our growing call
for a new investigation.

Those Bill's (xx) are impeccable,
and he is getting the word out,

along with the other whistleblowers
in the United States.

And we have to have more and more people
like Bill stepping forward,

or, like, Bill said,
we're very concerned, also,

that we're stepping into a police state

as a result of the policies enacted
as a result of 9/11.

So if there's any question about
what happened on 9/11,

then we've got to have a real investigation that gets at the truth.

After all, we've lost 6,000 US soldiers;

a million Iraqis and Afghanis have lost
their lives, at least: maybe two million;

and we have draconian policies
that have set forth, that have...

Well, our legislators have sacrificed
our civil liberties in favor of security.

So, we don't hand in our freedom
for security,

especially with all of the questions
that Bill is raising,

or we're going to lose both.

That is a very astute observation.

So, Mr. Binney, you obviously have been
in the United States for the past 13 years

and viewing what's going on;

and yet you say that this is the first time
in that 13 years

that you've really been presented
with the evidence

on controlled demolition at
the World Trade Center complex,

in a thoroughgoing manner,
in that 13-year period.

What do you think that tells us about
the state of the mainstream media,

and its abdication of responsibility

in actually informing the public
of these issues?

Well, like... I think I tried to imply

that they had a selective outcome
they were picking basic facts to meet.

So in other words, they were
prejudicing the entire argument

to get to a point
where they wanted to be.

And nobody challenged that.

I mean, our... when it comes
to national security,

anything that comes close to that,

none of the mainstream media
really challenges it, anyway.

I mean, you can see people in Russia,
Russia Today,

or maybe when Eliot Spitzer had his show
on Current TV,

or Glenn Beck, or Bill Maher even:
it's across the entire spectrum.

Those people are standing up and saying,

"Hey! This is something we should
really be concerned about."

So, but the mainstream media
is out to lunch,

And I think that's the way they want to be,
because that gives them...

that continues to give them access
to people they need to interview,

and things like that, I think.

That appears, to me,
to be the reason they're doing it.

Well, as I'm sure you're aware,

the implications of the petition
that you have signed

are -- if you'll excuse then pun --
quite explosive,

insofar as they do posit a fundamentally
different narrative of 9/11

than the one we've been told
all of this time.

And obviously, this hinges on an extremely important detail...

-- I suppose you could call it a detail --

...whether or not these buildings
were taken down

as the result of a controlled demolition.

And if that is the case,
if we can establish that scientifically,

that does fundamentally change
the narrative of who was involved,

and what the government knew,
and what has taken place in the meantime.

What can you say about the implications
of this investigation,

and what it can possibly uncover
about what really happened on 9/11?

Well, you know, I think I've been
basically saying

that they've been perpetrating a fraud
on the people of the United States,

so that's really what has to be addressed.
Let's get the truth out here.

They don't seem to want
to address the truth.

They don't wan't the truth out:
that's all.

So my point is very simple:

let's have at it again,
and this time let's do it right

and be honest with the outcome
that we get.

I mean, even if they observe something or
find something and they can't explain it,

they should at least say,

"Well, we saw this,
but we don't know what it means."

They could say that, too.
I mean, that's fair enough.

I think no reasonable person
can disagree with that;

but unfortunately, as I'm sure
you must be aware,

anyone who's even been associated with
questioning the official Commission Report

or the Congressional Investigation
into 9/11 has been deemed a crackpot,

a conspiracy theorist,
all of these labels.

And I'm sure you are now prepared

for this label to be applied
to yourself in this case?

What do you think might be
the ramifications on this,

in terms of the attacks
on your own personal character?

Well, I don't see any of that.

I mean, after all, they called me
a disgruntled employee

when I left talking about these things.

So that was the technique they got to...

I mean, at least they didn't call me
semi-insane like they did with Russ Tice.

I mean, they called him that.
They called him mentally disturbed.

And so that was how they discredit people:
it's how you...

-- that's standard KGB tactics,
by the way,

except the only difference was they didn't
put him in an institution.

That's the only difference.

The implications of this are staggering
on so many levels.

And again, I just don't think that most of
the public truly appreciates this yet.

So we have to get the word out about this;

and one of the ways
to delegitimize the system, of course,

is to delegitimize the founding
rallying principle of all of this,

which is the September 11th attacks,

which somehow seemed to justify,
in the minds of some,

all of this abrogation
of basic civil liberties.

So it is a momentous thing, I think,

when we start to see some of these
different threads coming together,

and different people working together,

which is why I am glad
to see William Binney a signatory

to 911Truth.org's
[sic: AE911Truth.org]'s petition,

which, again, will be linked up
in the show notes for this.

Mr. Gage, any final thoughts
that you'd like to leave us with today?

I think it's extremely important
that we have people

who are not just listening to this
vital information, this wake-up call,

but doing something about it.

And so we're encouraging everybody,
this September 11th,

when the consciousness of the American people and people around the world

are focused on 9/11,

it is such a vulnerable hinge-point
in the plan, if you will,

of the perpetrators
-- whoever they are -- of 9/11

that we use it to
the maximum possible extent

to break the censorship wall,
the wall of denial in people,

by bringing this information

as we've highlighted it on our website,
AE911Truth.org.

And email it to every architect/engineer,

every media official,
every political official that people can.

This is the time to act,
and to wake up people,

And we've found that the scientific evidence has woken up, if you will...

-- in the case of William, here, with us --

...it does work. We've just got
to get people to look at it.

And that's the listeners'
responsibility today.

Well, then: let's leave it in the hands
of the listeners and viewers out there,

and thank both our guests for your time.

William Binney, Richard Gage:

thank you so much for taking the time
to talk with us today.

- Thank you
- Thank you for having me.

[MUSIC]

For more on this story and other
breaking news and current events,

please go to GlobalResearch.ca

For more research and analysis
by James Corbett,

please go to CorbettReport.com.

[MUSIC] The Centre for Research
on Globalization depends on your support.

To purchase a book or DVD
or to make a donation,

please visit GlobalResearch.ca today.

[Subtitled by: Adjuvant]
[CC-BY 4.0]