Rodriguez vs. Everyone

In October, 2004, William Rodriguez and his attorney Philip Berg filed a lawsuit suit against George Herbert Walker Bush, George Walker Bush, John “Jeb” Bush, Neil Mallon Bush, Marvin Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Dov Zakheim, Colin Powell, Richard Armitage, Condoleeza Rice, John Ashcroft, Robert S. Mueller III, David Frasca, George J. Tenet, Porter Goss, Norman Y. Mineta, Larry K. Arnold, Tom Ridge, Mark Racicot, The Republican National Committee, Inc., Alan Greenspan, Thomas A. Kean, Jamie S. Gorelick, Phillip D. Zelikow, John F. Lehman, Fred F. Fielding, Karl Rove, Thomas Delay, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Myers, Ralph E. Eberhart, Kenneth R. Feinberg, Halliburton Company, Kellog Brown & Root Services, The Project For The New American Century, Inc., Election Systems & Software, Diebold Voting Systems, Inc., Walden O’Dell, Sequoia Voting Systems, Inc. Chuck Hagel, Saxby Chambliss, New Bridge Strategies, LLC, Joe M. Allbaugh, James A. Baker III, John Sweeney, Matthew Schlapp, Thomas Pyle, Michael Murphy, Garry Malphrus, Charles Royal, Kevin Smith, The United States Of America, The Federal Emergency Management Agency, and “DOE #1 Through DOE #100.” Really. The court documents about this case, from its 2004 filing through its 2006 dismissal, are here.

The 237-page complaint accused the defendants of involvement in a massive conspiracy involving carrying out the 9/11 attacks and subsequent covering up their involvement, as a pretext for invading Iraq. It doesn't explain why those defendants didn't think of using Iraqis as their 9/11 patsies.

When I ran into Rodriguez on September 9, 2006, at Ground Zero, we had a pleasant talk. It wasn’t the time or the place for debate. I did ask some probing questions. For instance, I asked what he thought about the 9/11 “truthers” who claimed that the FDNY was “in on” the “inside job.” I told him that some of the people he was associating with there, on that day, made such accusations.

“That’s ridiculous,” Rodriguez said. “The firemen are heroes.”

I wanted to remind him that his lawsuit directly accused the FDNY of destroying the 47-story WTC building 7:
WTC Building 7 was deliberately “pulled” (demolished) by agreement between the FDNY and Larry Silverstein shortly after 5:00 P.M. on 9-11, as he himself admitted on public television” (Rodriguez suit, page 9)

I didn’t pursue that, because Rodriguez said he was dropping his lawyer, Philip Berg, and because he said he was having an emotional day after hearing the 9/11 recordings of the Port Authority maintenance staff for the first time the night before. He didn't mention that his lawsuit had been dismissed by the court months earlier.

When I asked him about the reports of people smelling kerosene (Jet-A fuel is basically kerosene) in the basement levels just after the fireball erupted there, he said he also smelled the kerosene.

The Rodriguez complaint is an epic compendium of crackpot 9/11 theories. I have no doubt that Rodriguez had little to do with preparing it. His main “evidence” of an “inside job,” that an explosion occurred in the basement prior to the flight 11’s impact, is not included in the complaint. What is included is a claim that seismic data show evidence of explosions at the start of the building collapses:

106. Jet fuel fires as the effective cause of the Twin Towers’ collapses are discredited
also by seismic evidence. The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York (in
Rockland County, roughly 21 miles or 34 km north of the WTC) recorded seismographs on 9-11 that show seismic events at the beginning of the collapse of each of the Twin Towers. (p. 49)
Again, the simple refutation from the experts:

"There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers. That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."
–Arthur Lerner-Lam, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory

Rodriguez put his name to the lawsuit in 2004 and did so again in 2006 (the court dismissed the suit in July, 2006). He even had a laugh about it in his speech at the American Scholars 9/11 Conference in June, 2006. After describing how he received a north tower master key through legal arbitration, after suing the Port Authority when he fell down stairs and couldn’t get help because of locked doors, he joked, “I guess that’s when I got this experience of suing and doing all this! (laughs)” Source
Asked why he decided to bring this controversial lawsuit, Rodriguez explains that, having survived the World Trade Center disaster when so many did not, he feels he must learn the truth of what happened on that day. “If what the government has told us about 9-11 is a lie,” he says, “somebody has to take action to reveal the truth. Since that plane hit the North Tower on 9-11, like it or not my life’s meaning has become to reduce the number of victims, and the amount of suffering from those attacks. If suing President Bush is what I have to do to accomplish that, so be it.” –Philip J. Berg press release, Oct. 22, 2004
Rodriguez doesn't explain how a frivolous lawsuit against the Bush administration will "reduce the number of victims."

Remember Rodriguez's claim that he isn't a conspiracy theorist? From pages 10-11 of the lawsuit:
Plaintiff will not be equivocal. His complaint is not based on allegations of the defendants’ negligence, nonfeasance, errors in judgment, poor management of various branches of the government bureaucracy, or intelligence failures (e.g., failing to resolve “turf battles” among security agencies such as the CIA and the FBI, or failing to “connect up the dots” of supposedly sketchy information that threatened possible attacks on American soil). Although all of the foregoing may have occurred, plaintiff is accusing the defendants of foreknowledge of, and (in the case of most of the defendants) approval and sponsorship of the 9-11 attacks, kidnapping, arson, murder, treason against the United States, conspiracy to commit the foregoing and multiple other crimes (many of which are enumerated “predicate acts” under the RICO statute), aiding and abetting such crimes, and/or being accessories after the fact to the same.

A few days ago this subject came up on the internet forum of the James Randi Educational Foundation, where I post frequently. Rodriguez was asked if he believed all the things that were claimed in the lawsuit. This is his response:

“You are right, I was very surprised and removed myself from the lawsuit when I read the whole case, it was full of speculation and I did fire Phil Berg.
I did not agree with a lot of things that [forum member] Enigma rightly says, were put in there by Berg and a group of volunteers from all over that after I removed myself, wrote to me constantly and even appeared on some of my presentations to make me change my mind and return to the lawsuit.
Last I heard from PB was that he was trying to get a First Responder to become part of the lawsuit and re-file. Funny thing is that Iam very involved with them.....

Here is a link from last year:
It says: ‘William Rodriguez wants everyone to know that he is longer associated with Phil Berg's RICO lawsuit.

Phil Berg's website here:

The site is still seeking donations, but Mr. Rodriguez does not have access to the funds, nor does he know how they are used. Just passing this message along from Rodriguez.’

Up to today, the site is still up. i sent many emails to Mr. Berg to remove me from it and to bring the site down. He hasn't. Maybe he is still taking donations? Ellen Mariani was also another dissatisfied "customer".
I understand many things attributed to me, when I took steps to rectify, was not documented widely. People like Greg Zsymansky from AFP-wrote exagerated items, so Christopher Bollyn, ther were both fired from AFP.
Bye for the next week.” Source

Rodriguez claimed that he removed himself from the lawsuit when he read the whole case. The suit was filed in October, 2004. Rodriguez’s 9/11Blogger notice appeared nearly two years later, in September, 2006. As attorney “LashL” points out on the JREF forums,

“In early 2006, Rodriquez swore an affidavit in support of his resistance to the government's motion to dismiss his action in NY, in which he reiterated his belief in the numerous conspiracy theories that formed the basis of his lawsuit.

Rodriguez did not distance himself from Berg, even according to the link Rodriguez sent to Enigma, until after the lawsuit was dismissed by the NY court. The defendants' motion to dismiss was granted in NY on June 26, 2006, dismissing his claims against The United States of America, Department of Homeland Security and FEMA, and Rodriguez had until July 7, 2006 to show cause why his lawsuit should not be dismissed as against all of the other defendants as well. He did not do so and an order dismissing his claim against all defendants was issued on July 17, 2006.”
In the link provided, Rodriguez posted - in September 2006 - that his lawsuit had not been dismissed at all:
Thanks for your comments. I will explain my reasons in the future, but will tell you that the case was not dismissed, instead, I stop my involvement with Mr. Berg and ordered my removal from "his" lawsuit. I will have a new lawsuit with a team of highly recognized lawyers. Just working the details.
My reasons were more personals and lack of trust of the way things were going. I am very busy with all my outreach out there to get the truth out and expect the same from the people that uses my name to gain attention.

William Rodriguez
Last Survivor of the North Tower
(Note his false claim to have been the north tower's last survivor, examined in the next section.)

“LashL” at the JREF forum:
“That is not true. As noted above, his claims were dismissed on June 26, 2006, as against the only defendants whom he had served with his lawsuit, and on July 17, 2006 his claims were dismissed as against all remaining defendants.”Source
So, not only did Rodriguez not renounce the bizarre claims in the 2004 lawsuit, including the claim that the firefighters were involved in the conspiracy, he reaffirmed them in 2006, and he added the new claim that he thinks explosives were involved. Does he really want us to believe that he didn't read his 2004 sworn, signed, and notarized lawsuit and his 2006 sworn, signed, and notarized affidavit until after they were dismissed by the court, and that he allowed his attorney to falsely represent him? He has made no such claim. Rodriguez stated that his reasons for dropping Berg were personal and due to the lack of progress in the suit (the court dismissing the suit was probably a big clue that it wasn't going well), and that he would continue a lawsuit with new lawyers. As of March, 2009, he has not filed a new suit.

Note also Rodriguez’s criticism of two writers for the anti-Semitic American Free Press, including his would-be biographer Greg Szymanski. I hope that Rodriguez has learned from his association with these disreputable people.