BREAKING: Discover How A Slacker Makes $100,000 A Year!

WEBMASTERS! Get Your Website To The Top Of Google

CNN Pulls 9/11 E4B ‘Doomsday’ Plane Video?

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

Mike Baron

CNN Pulls 911 Mystery Plane Video: The Military’s 747 E4B ‘Doomsday’ Plane flew over white house on 9/11 - A large plane was sighted over the White House on 9/11 at about the time of the Pentagon strike, or soon after. Witnesses who saw the plane say it circled over Washington.

Now, you simply don’t see aircraft in the area over the White House. That is supposed to be restricted air space. Amazingly enough, it is not mentioned in the 9/11 report.

The video was here. But it is mysteriously not working (7:30 am EDT) as CNN has pulled it (video expired), but why? Working now, imagine that. (1:30 pm EDT)

However, we now provide it and another below. If they do not play, ckick here for the first one and here for the second.

Last night during Anderson Cooper 360, CNN replayed their footage of the “mystery plane” seen over the White House roughly 10 minutes before the 1st WTC tower fell. That plane has now been definitively identified. It is the National Airborne Command Center.

Yet after making the discovery, CNN has seemingly shut it down. Most likely for national security reasons.

Have Your Say: CNN Pulls 9/11 E4B ‘Doomsday’ Plane Video?
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Pat Tillman Soldier Death In Afganistan War By M16

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

Patrick Daniel Tillman was born on 6^th November, 1976 in San Jose, California and was into football. He was an American, who quitted sports and joined the United States Army in May, 2002 accompanied by Kevin Tillman, his brother. However he did not live for a long time and died fighting against Afghanistan on the 22^nd April, 2004. This resulted in a lot of enquiries being conducted. To get a proper result the United States Congress also initiated the search because of the poor performance of the people involved earlier.

Pat Tillman initiated his college life performing as the linebacker for the Arizona State University in the year 1994 and was able to get the last scholarship which would help the team. He had a quarterback friend called Jake Plummer, who also became his teammate in the Arizona Cardinals. He was also given the honor of the Pac-10 Defensive Player of the Year. He excelled in the field of marketing and took three and a half years to complete his graduation securing 3.84 GPA.
 
Pat Tillman was the first one as the football player who met death in combat after the end of the life of Bob Kalsu from the Buffalo Bills. Bob was  killed in the Vietnam War in the year 1970 very much similar to the fate met by Pat. He was also appraised to the position of Corporal from that of a Specialist.
 
Pat Tillman was the person, who was awarded the Silver Star and Purple Heart medals. He had a wife called Marie. He came into the limelight due to his stay in Iraq and Afghanistan and the end of his life as a result. On the 28th May, 2004 it was reported by the Pentagon that Tillman died because of  a massive fire. However it was clarified many days after the memorial service by the Department of Defense with the view to save the reputation of the U.S. armed forces.
 
The father of Pat Tillman, who was professionaly a lawyer in San Jose discovered from the statements made by the various witness as well as the documents containing the army words that everything was hidden and manipulated purposely by the higher authorities. A week after the 27th July, 2007 the Associated Press found out from the military material received under the Freedom of Information Act that there were three bullets in Pat’s forehead. They also forced the higher officials to find out whether the reason behind his death was a crime but to no success.
 
According to the information received from the doctors who conducted Pat Tillman’s autopsy, it was found that M16 was used from a distance of nearly 10 yards (10 m) to kill him. The Army criminal investigation which was made was able to prove that he lost his life due to friendly fire but it was not that successful because of the lack of retention of the physical evidence like bullet fragments. Wikipedia

Pat Tillman Soldier Death In Afganistan War Related Articles

• CPSC Security Against Serious Injury Or Death
The CPSC or the US Consumer Product Safety Commission is bestowed with the protection of the common man from risks of serious injury or death with more than 15,000 types of consumer products.
• Christa Pike Youngest Death Row Convict
Christa Gail Pike is the youngest death row convict of America who has an innocent and peaceful face.
• Fidel Castro Death Recent Controversy
Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz, the current president of Cuba, was born on 13th August, 1926 in a Sugar plantation in Biran, to Angel Castro y Argiz, a Galician immigrant.
• A Death In The Family Famous Literary Work
A Death In The Family is a famous work in Literature and is listed as one of the best specimens in American Classic Literature.
• Alvin York Famous American World War I Soldier
Alvin Cullum York was a famous U S.
• Amity Kozak Death Mystery
On May 30, 2007 Amity Kozak’s body was found at an apartment off the Intracoastal Waterway, Palm Beach, Florida.
• Ashley Barnett Death Mystery
The death of Ashley Barnett is still a mystery.
• Arielle Newman Death Mystery
Arielle Newman was all of seventeen and a senior at the Notre Dame Academy and a brilliant sportstar in her own right.
• Cathy Lynn Henderson Death Row For Murder Of A Baby
Cathy Lynn Henderson is an American woman who shot into news in 1994 when she was charged and convicted of the abduction and murder of a three month old boy in Temple, Texas.
• Myspace Hoax Death Of A Teenage Girl
The recent Myspace Hoax, resulting in the suicide of a thirteen-year-old Missouri girl, Megan Meier,  has created much rage among the audience.

Have Your Say: Pat Tillman Soldier Death In Afganistan War By M16
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Ron Paul is needed to end the war

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

Many have speculated what will happen if Rep. Ron Paul is not elected president. The obvious answer is that nothing will change; that is, nothing regarding our present circumstances will change and most likely will only get worse.

So, by eliminating the fact that there are no good alternative candidates in the event that Ron Paul is not our next president, we will need to focus on our nation’s future degradation that will result from the continuation of the neoconservatives’ status-quo of legislative and foreign policies - regardless of which party wins the presidency.

Ancient Roman statesman and orator, Cicero (42 B.C.) stated:

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself … A murderer is less to be feared.”

Today, almost 2,050 years later, the world is faced with this dilemma, where we are fighting an invisible enemy in a perpetual “War On Terror.” Our nation is also facing the removal of our constitutional liberties and freedoms through two Patriot Acts and various House Resolutions that have effectively turned the table against a citizen’s free speech rights to voice dissent against a costly and unconstitutional war.

Essentially, any U.S. citizens who exercise their constitutional right to voice their objections against their government can be branded as an enemy of the state, or a “Homegrown Terrorist” (see House Resolution 1955).

We now understand that the U.S. neoconservatives created lies to invade and occupy two sovereign Middle East nations. The fact that President Bush now claims that our military must remain there to fix something that we unlawfully broke, is at best, insanity.

This war, which was proposed to be a slam-dunk, pre-emptive strike that will only cost the taxpayers a few billion dollars, has now exceeded $1 trillion. Based on the projection that this “War on Terror” might continue for another 20 years, coupled with the devaluation of the U.S. dollar, it is understood that the future costs of this war will eventually bankrupt our country.

The taxpayer is paying to have our honorable military forces blow up another nation’s infrastructure and then pay to have private U.S. contractors rebuild that infrastructure - while our bridges and highways at home are falling apart.

The expense of this endless war has greatly inflated the price of energy and the overall cost of living. This war has also desecrated the priceless commodity of families all over the world through the countless deaths of loved ones.

After evaluating the Democratic and Republican candidates, Ron Paul is the only candidate who has expressed his pledge to end this costly, unconstitutional war on terror now, end our failed foreign policy of imperialist nation-building and bring our troops home from all over the globe.

Rather than postulating what will happen if Ron Paul is not elected, we should reflect on the history and sacrifice that built our once great republic, how we arrived at our present state and how we can change direction to bridge hope for our nation’s future.

If you have Internet access, please Google: “Ron Paul” and you will find 55.8 million links to this candidate’s 2008 presidential platform. If you do not have Internet access, you may call the Ron Paul campaign headquarters at 703-248-9115. They will direct you to one of the 1,000-plus national Ron Paul volunteer groups. Ron Paul is truly the best and only hope for America.

Darren Andrews Gary Brown

Larry Simons

Hagerstown

Have Your Say: Ron Paul is needed to end the war
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

NIE report final nail in Bush coffin

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

Former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, attacks a recent intelligence report that discredited Washington for its policies on Iran.

US intelligence services were seeking to influence political policy-making with their assessment that Iran had halted its nuclear arms program in 2003, Bolton told the Der Spiegel magazine.

The surprise report was ‘a quasi-coup against the president,’ the former UN ambassador said.

“This is politics under the guise of intelligence reporting,” he claimed.

The hawkish Bolton was referring to the recent US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran which confirms that Tehran is not developing nuclear weaponry.

Some experts say the release of the report was the final nail in the Bush doctrine and that Washington’s hands are now tied as they are unable to wage war on Iran.

A previous NIE report that was released in October 2003 claiming that Iraq had nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, gave Bush the necessary support to pursue his warmongering policies in Iraq.

Bolton is a staunch supporter of Bush and believes that the US must either wage war on Iran or topple Tehran’s government to counter the so-called threat of the Islamic Republic.

Bolton has also fiercely criticized remarks by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), for declaring the non-diversion of Iran’s nuclear program.

MT/AA/MG

Have Your Say: NIE report final nail in Bush coffin
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Obstruction of Justice in 9/11 Investigation

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

By now you’ve heard that the CIA destroyed videotapes of interrogations of alleged Al Qaeda members. The interesting part of this story is that the 9/11 Commission claimed that it obtained most of its information about the attacks from these interrogations (and then only indirectly as reported by the military to the Commission; the Commission never met the alleged detainees, was not allowed to submit questions to them directly, nor was it allowed to question the alleged interrogators to assess their credibility).

The New York Times confirms that the government swore that it had turned over all of the relevant material regarding the statements of the people being interrogated:

“The commission did formally request material of this kind from all relevant agencies, and the commission was assured that we had received all the material responsive to our request,” said Philip D. Zelikow, who served as executive director of the Sept. 11 commission ….

“No tapes were acknowledged or turned over, nor was the commission provided with any transcript prepared from recordings,” he said.

But is the destruction of the tapes — and hiding from the 9/11 Commission the fact that the tapes existed — a big deal? Yes, actually. As the Times goes on to state:

Daniel Marcus, a law professor at American University who served as general counsel for the Sept. 11 commission and was involved in the discussions about interviews with Al Qaeda leaders, said he had heard nothing about any tapes being destroyed.If tapes were destroyed, he said, “it’s a big deal, it’s a very big deal,” because it could amount to obstruction of justice to withhold evidence being sought in criminal or fact-finding investigations.

This isn’t the first evidence of obstruction of justice by the government regarding the 9/11 investigations. For example:

• The 9/11 Commissioners concluded that officials from the Pentagon lied to the Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements (although they never bothered to tell the American people about that fact)

• The tape of interviews of air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 was intentionally destroyed by crushing the cassette by hand, cutting the tape into little pieces, and then dropping the pieces in different trash cans around the building as shown by this NY Times article (summary version is free; full version is pay-per-view) and by this article from the Chicago Sun-Times

• Investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House

• A former FBI translator who Senators Leahy and Grassley, among others, have claimed is credible, and who the administration has gagged for years without any logical basis — has stated that “this administration knowingly and intentionally let many directly or indirectly involved in that terrorist act [September 11th] go free – untouched and uninvestigated”

• The FBI long ago found and analyzed the “black box” recorders from the airplanes which hit the Twin Towers, but has consistently denied that they were ever found

• The former head of the fire science and engineering division of the agency now investigating the world trade center disaster, who is a professor of fire protection engineering, wrote that evidence necessary to determine the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Centers was being destroyed

• In addition, the official investigators themselves were denied access to the site and the evidence contained there, or even access to such basic information as the blueprints for the world trade center . The blueprints for the world trade center are apparently STILL being withheld from reporters and the public, and the government agency in charge of the investigation has grossly mischaracterized the structure of the buildings.

Indeed, there are even indications that false evidence may have been planted to deflect attention from the real perpetrators.

Of course, even had the government told the truth to the 9/11 Commission, the Commission was set up as a whitewash anyway.

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/12/more-evidence-of-obstruction-of-justice.html

Have Your Say: Obstruction of Justice in 9/11 Investigation
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

8 Senior Republican Appointees Challenge 9/11 Story

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

Eight Senior Republican Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 - “Not Possible”, “a Whitewash”, “False”

Eight former senior Republican administration appointees have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and several have called for a new investigation. “I find the facts against the official story of the [WTC] buildings’ collapse more compelling than the case that has been made in behalf of the official story. I would like to see the issue debated by independent scientists and engineers,” wrote Paul Craig Roberts, PhD, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan. “A real investigation is needed to find an explanation consistent with the evidence, even if it doesn’t reassure the public,” said Dr. Roberts [1], frequently referred to as the “Father of Reagonomics.”

“Over the past six years, the ranks of distinguished skeptics of the 9-11 storyline have grown enormously. The ranks include distinguished scientists, engineers and architects, intelligence officers, air traffic controllers, military officers and generals, including the former commanding general of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, former presidential appointees and members of the White House staff in Republican administrations, Top Gun fighter pilots and career airline pilots who say that the flying attributed to the 9-11 hijackers is beyond the skills of America’s best pilots, and foreign dignitaries.” [2] Dr. Roberts currently serves as Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Previously he was the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University. He also served as a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and as Associate Editor of The Wall Street Journal.

In a 2004 interview by Dennis Bernstein on the Flashpoints radio show, Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of Housing under President George H.W. Bush (41) said “The official story could not possibly have happened. In other words, what the administration has put forward is essentially a conspiracy theory that does not conform to the facts. It’s not possible. It’s not operationally feasible … The Commission was a whitewash.” [3]

Catherine Austin Fitts

Prior to her appointment to the first Bush administration, Ms. Fitts served as Managing Director and Member of the Board of Wall Street investment bank, Dillon, Read & Co. She previously was President of The Hamilton Securities Group. In a 2004 essay, Ms. Fitts wrote, “Much has transpired since September 11, 2001. … We have emerged deeply disturbing unanswered questions of 9-11 through global Internet media. We have worked with [Paul Thompson's Complete] 911 Timeline and realized that the official explanation of events is conspiracy theory, not conforming to documented fact.

We have watched the U.S. government suppress facts and restrict of the 9-11 Commission’s access to information. We have watched the 9-11 Commission fail to answer the unanswered questions and concede to official suppression of information. We have watched the leaders of the national security infrastructure richly rewarded for their failure to protect America on 9-11. We have noted the material omissions of the corporate media. Something does not add up. Someone has something to hide. … The Administration has something to hide. Rather than lose time and resources getting lost in the White House fog, let’s follow the alleged advice of one of the 9-11 Commissioners, Fred Fielding …”Follow the Money.” [4]

Morgan Reynolds, PhD

In a 2006 video interview with Alex Jones, Morgan Reynolds, PhD, former Chief Economist of the U.S. Department of Labor under current President George W. Bush said, “I first began to suspect that 9/11 was in inside job when the Bush-Cheney Administration invaded Iraq. … We can prove that the government’s story is false.” [5] Prior to his appointment to the Bush administration, Dr. Reynolds was Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. He is also Professor Emeritus of Economics, Texas A&M University. And in a 2005 essay, Dr. Reynolds wrote, “It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the Twin Towers [each 1300+ feet tall, 110 stories] and Building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely [to] prove to be sound.” [6]

WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories. It would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11. However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission’s “full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.” Watch the collapse video here. And six years after 9/11, the Federal government has yet to publish its promised final report that explains the cause of its collapse.

Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan. He’s a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). He was also appointed by President George H. W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 – 1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. He was Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. (1990 – 1994).

Col. Ronald D. Ray

In an interview on Alex Jones’ radio show on June 30, 2006 [7], Col. Ray described the official account of 9/11 as “the dog that doesn’t hunt”, meaning it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. In response to Alex Jones’ question, “Is it safe to say or is the statement accurate that you smell something rotten in the state of Denmark when it comes to 9/11?” Col. Ray replied, “I’m astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that that’s accurate. That’s true.”

Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Mary Schiavo. Appointed under the administration of President George H. W. Bush, Ms. Schiavo served as the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Transportation from 1990 - 1996. Ms. Schiavo and her staff secured more than 1,000 criminal convictions and uncovered billions in waste and abuse at the U.S. DOT. Since leaving the Transportation Department, Ms. Schiavo has represented passenger and crew families in every major U.S. air crash, as well as pilots and passengers on private planes.

Mary Schiavo

In an article written by Gail Sheehy that appeared in the New York Observer on Feb. 16, 2004, Ms. Sheehy wrote, “Ms. Schiavo sat in on the commission’s hearing on aviation security on 9/11 and was disgusted by what it left out. ‘In any other situation, it would be unthinkable to withhold investigative material from an independent commission,’ she told this writer. ‘There are usually grave consequences. But the commission is clearly not talking to everybody or not telling us everything.’ ” [8]

In a press conference on June 10, 2002 regarding the events of 9/11, Ms. Schiavo stated, “First of all, the question is not ‘What they [the U.S. government] should have known?’ And I believe I can show you in just a few seconds the question is, ‘What did they know?’ And believe me, they knew a lot. The second thing to emphasize is that in every single aviation disaster, whether there was intervening criminal activity or not, in every single one in the course of modern aviation history it has been followed by, not only were it necessary, a criminal investigation, but also a National Transportation Safety investigation into what went wrong in the aviation system. And the reason for that is so that it never happens again.”

Ms. Schiavo continued, “This is the first time, and this is the worst disaster, but this is the first time that families have been attempted to be silenced through a special fund, which I believe is about silence more so than about money. Why? … And from my rounds on the Hill to find these facts and others, I found that the airlines approached members of Congress and the Senate to get their bailout and their immunity and their protection starting on 9/11. They sent their first lobbyist up to the Hill on 9/11. And this has been confirmed to me personally by Senators and members of Congress. Now to me that’s very shocking but to me it raises another question, Why? Why did they have to rush to the Hill to change the law? … So in the wake of September 11, 2001, when we heard the carriers and governments alike saying, ‘Oh, no one could have foreseen this. No one knew that this was coming. No one knew that there was any risk like this in the world,’ is absolutely false. … In the last thirty years we have had 682 hijackings. 682. Here’s an interesting statistic. When we had the United States saying, ‘Oh, we couldn’t have known this.’ ” [9]

Barbara Honegger

Another critic of the official account of 9/11 is Barbara Honegger, who served as Special Assistant to the Chief Domestic Policy Adviser to President Ronald Reagan and as a White House Policy Analyst. “The US military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11,” she wrote. [10] “A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, steep, high-speed 270- to 330-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Dulles Air Traffic Controllers were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens that morning. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the “Friendly” signal needed to disable the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building. Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response systems on 9/11.”

Ms. Honegger also served as Project Director of the Attorney General’s Anti-Discrimination Federal Law Review at the U.S. Department of Justice in Reagan’s administration. She is a graduate of the Naval War College master’s program in National Security Decision Making and for over 12 years has served as Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the U.S. Navy’s and the Defense Department’s premier science, technology and national security affairs university.

Ms. Honegger has become a prominent critic of the official account of 9/11 as a private researcher, author and speaker at conferences. This is not Ms. Honegger’s first experience with allegations of serious executive branch misconduct. In 1983, she resigned from the Reagan administration in protest to planned domestic policy decisions. In 1989, she authored the pioneering Irangate expose October Surprise, which led to a full-subpoena-power U.S. House of Representatives investigation. Her book alleged that prior to the 1980 Presidential election, members of the Reagan campaign cut a secret deal with Iran to delay the release of the 52 American hostages, in order to prevent President Jimmy Carter from arranging their release and prevent him from winning the November election. The hostages were released on the day of Ronald Reagan’s inauguration, after 444 days in captivity.

Edward Peck

Shortly after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, a group of over 100 prominent Americans signed a petition [11] urging Congress to immediately reinvestigate 9/11. In addition to four prominent former CIA officials [12], the signers included Catherine Austin Fitts (mentioned above), Edward Peck, and Morton Goulder. Edward Peck served as Deputy Director of the White House Task Force on Terrorism under President Ronald Reagan. Mr. Peck, a 32-year veteran of the U.S. Foreign Service also served as Deputy Coordinator, Covert Intelligence Programs at the State Department and as U.S. Ambassador and Chief of Mission in Iraq (1977 - 1980).

Morton Goulder

Morton Goulder was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Warning under President Richard Nixon and continued in that capacity under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. In World War II, he served as a Lt. Commander in the U.S. Navy. He is a co-founder of Sanders Associates, a billion dollar defense contractor, now a division of BEA Systems.

The petition stated, in part, “We want truthful answers to questions such as:

1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?

2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?

3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?

4. Why hasn’t a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?

5. Why haven’t authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?”

These questions and many others still remain unanswered three years after the petition was submitted and six years after the terrible events of 9/11. As the statements of these eight senior Republican Administration appointees show, the need for a new thorough, and independent investigation of 9/11 is not a matter of partisan politics, nor the demand of irresponsible, mentally ill, or disloyal Americans. It is instead a matter of the utmost importance for America’s security and the future of the entire world.

Statements questioning the official account of 9/11 and calls for a new investigation by more than 800 credible individuals can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com

Additional information on skeptics of the official account of 9/11 can be found in the author’s other articiels on this subject.

Sept. 23, 2007 - Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report - Official Account of 9/11 a “Joke” and a “Cover-up” featured statements by CIA veterans Raymond McGovern, William Christison, Melvin Goodman, Robert Baer, Robert David Steele, Lynne Larkin, and David MacMichael.

Sept. 5, 2007 - U.S. Navy ‘Top Gun’ Pilot Questions 9/11, featured the statement of Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy ‘Top Gun’ pilot.

Sept. 4, 2007 - Former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member Calls for New Investigation of 9/11 featured the statement of Joel S. Hirschhorn, Ph.D., who served for 12 years as a Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and later as Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources for the National Governors Association.

Aug. 27, 2007 - National Academy of Sciences Member Calls for New 9/11 Investigation featured the statment of Lynn Margulis, Ph.D., world renowned scientist.

Aug. 21, 2007 - Former Chief of NIST’s Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation featured the statement of James Quintiere, Ph.D., one of the world’s leading fire science researchers.

July 16, 2007 - Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement featured the statement of J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission.

Endnotes [1] Is American Democracy Too Feeble to Deal with 9/11? By Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2006 http://www.vdare.com/roberts/060910_911.htm [2] 9/11, Six Years Later by Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2007 http://www.vdare.com/roberts/070910_911.htm [3] Interview of Catherine Austin Fitts by Dennis Bernstein on the Flashpoints radio show Sept. 9, 2004 http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=4024 [4] 9/11 Profiteering by Catherine Austin Fitts on March 22, 2004 on GlobalResearch.ca http://globalresearch.ca/articles/FIT403A.html [5] Video interview of Morgan Reynolds, PhD, by Alex Jones June 2, 2006 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8180123292618944278 [6] Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse? by Morgan Reynolds, PhD on LewRockwell.com June 9, 2005 http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html [7] Radio interview of Col. Ronald D. Ray by Alex Jones, June 30, 2006 (Subscription required.) Summarized in July 1, 2006 article on propagandamatrix.com http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2006/010706doesnthunt.htm [8] Stewardess ID’d Hijackers Early, Transcripts Show by Gail Sheehy, New York Observer, Feb. 15, 2004 http://www.observer.com/node/48805 [9] Press conference with Mary Schiavo June 10, 2002 Video: http://www.propagandamatrix.com/multimedia/mary_schiavo.html Transcript: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0206/S00159.htm#mary [10] “The Pentagon Attack Papers” by Barbara Honegger, published in The Terror Conspiracy by Jim Marrs 2006 http://physics911.net/pdf/honegger.pdf [11] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11 Signed by Over 100 Prominent Americans Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633 [12] Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report by Alan Miller, Sept. 23, 2007 http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_070922_seven_cia_veterans_c.htm

Have Your Say: 8 Senior Republican Appointees Challenge 9/11 Story
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Israeli minister ‘in fear of arrest’ cancels UK visit

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem

A senior Israeli minister has turned down an invitation to visit Britain because of fears he could have been arrested on war crimes charges arising from the assassination of a top Hamas military commander five years ago.

The Israeli foreign ministry advised Avi Dichter, the Public Security minister, that what it described as an “extreme leftist” group was likely to file a legal complaint over the July 2002 bombing attack in Gaza on Saleh Shehadah which killed at least 13 civilians.

Mr Dichter, who had been due to speak at a seminar in King’s College London, was at the time head of the domestic intelligence agency Shin Bet, which helped to plan the attack. The bombing, which was internationally criticised – including by the US – because of the civilian loss of life, was described after an internal Israeli investigation as a “mistake”.

While Mr Dichter is the first minister to have cancelled a trip for such reasons, the official advice to him followed other cases in which senior generals have refrained from visiting Britain because of similar fears of private legal actions leading to the issue of an arrest warrant.

Asked about the Shehadah bombing in an interview with The Independent in 2005 before he entered politics, Mr Dichter said it had never been intended to kill civilians and insisted that several previous attempts on the life of the Hamas leader were postponed because of intelligence that “he was surrounded by innocent people”. In the event the victims included Mr Shehadah’s wife and three children.

Have Your Say: Israeli minister ‘in fear of arrest’ cancels UK visit
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Cynthia McKinney Announces Presidential Aspirations

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

Cynthia McKinney Announces Presidential Aspirations

Eric Dondero just called me from Houston to inform us that former Democratic congressional representative Cynthia McKinney has just announced her intention to run for President on the Green Party ticket.

According to Dondero, around sixty people attended an event this evening at the library of Texas Southern University. Dondero indicated that McKinney was sharply dressed and very articulate but concise when giving her short speech. Following the speech, McKinney held a brief Q&A session.

One issue McKinney addressed, according to Dondero, was her intent to achieve 51 state ballot access. Dondero also noted that McKinney indicated that the Green Party platform speaks well to members of the African-American community.

There was one local news team present, along with several unidentified cameras, Dondero reported. He estimates there were approximately sixty people attending the event.

McKinney served in the House of Representatives from 1993 to 2003 and from 2005 to 2007 as a Democrat in Georgia’s CD4.

Have Your Say: Cynthia McKinney Announces Presidential Aspirations
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

UK Guantánamo four to be released

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

· Foreign Office took up cases after policy change
· Amnesty questions why one man must stay in jail

Ed Pilkington in New York, Alexandra Topping
The Guardian

Four British residents held without charge at the American detention camp for suspected terrorists at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba are to be released, reducing the UK involvement with the camp to just one inmate.The four men have all lived in Britain after being granted refugee status or temporary immigration status. They have struggled to have their cases heard because until recently Britain refused to represent them on the grounds that they were not UK citizens.

Three of the men - Jamil el-Banna, Omar Deghayes and Abdenour Samuer - are to be allowed to return to the UK by Christmas. A fourth, Shaker Abdur-Raheem Aamer, will be sent back to his home country, Saudi Arabia.

That leaves one UK resident, Binyam Mohammed al-Habashi from Ethiopia, still in Guantánamo. The Pentagon claims he is particularly dangerous and it is determined that he stays to face one of the military commissions established to prosecute prisoners at the camp.

News of the imminent release of the four men came three months after the UK reversed its previous policy and decided to represent the men.

Until August the official Foreign Office position was that the prisoners were not entitled to representation because they were not British nationals.

But David Miliband, the foreign secretary, responded to criticism of the government’s position and agreed to take up their cases. He wrote to his US counterpart, Condoleezza Rice, requesting their release.

The Foreign Office would not confirm reports last night that the men would be released and said discussions were ongoing. A spokesman said: “We have held detailed discussions with the Americans…

“We considered the circumstances of each case with the US and we are in contact with the families and the legal representatives of the five.

“Whilst the discussions are ongoing we are not going to make further comment.”

Officials acknowledge that the fact Habashi remains in Guantánamo means the detention without charge of inmates at the camp will continue to be a point of tension between London and Washington.

Amnesty International said it would seek to establish why Shaker Aamer is to go to Saudi Arabia, Habashi would remain in detention and another former UK resident, Ahmed Belbacha, has not been mentioned in the reports.

Neil Durkin, Amnesty’s UK spokesman said: “We’ve always said that Guantánamo is a travesty of justice and that detainees should either be given proper trials or released to safe countries.”

Banna has been the subject of intense legal and political campaigning in recent months. His Brent East MP, Sarah Teather, in February called on the US authorities either to charge him or send him home.

Teather said she hoped the men could be back before Christmas. “Jamil has been held without any charges being brought against him for five years, he was cleared for release in March this year,” she said. “The US has accepted that he is not a threat and he belongs at home with his family.

“Since the government has taken up the cause it has done everything in its power to secure his release but it is a disgrace that it took them four and a half years to take up the cause.”

A Jordanian, Banna was on a business trip to Gambia in November 2002 when he was picked up, handed over to the Americans and flown to Guantánamo.

The freed men

Jamil el-Banna

Banna, 45, a father of five from London, was seized by the CIA in 2002, and flown to Guantánamo after MI5 wrongly told the US that his travelling companion was carrying bomb parts on a business trip to Gambia. MI5 had attempted to recruit him as an informer days earlier

Omar Deghayes

Born in Libya, Deghayes, 37, came to the UK as a child after his father was murdered. He studied law at Wolverhampton University and in Huddersfield. His family say he has condemned terrorism. He alleges he was by left blind in one eye after a US soldier poked his finger into it.

Abdenour Samuer

Samuer fled to the UK from Algeria and was granted asylum in 2000. He went to Afghanistan after 9/11. He says he was captured on the Pakistan border. He told US interrogators that in 2001 a man at Finsbury Park mosque gave him money to go to Afghanistan

Shaker Abdur-Raheem Aamer

Aamer, 38, is a Saudi national with a British wife and four British children living in Battersea, London. He was applying for British citizenship when he took his family to Kabul and was seized by troops fighting alongside US forces. He will return to his native Saudi Arabia.

Have Your Say: UK Guantánamo four to be released
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Call for criminal inquiry as CIA destroys torture tapes

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

By Leonard Doyle in Washington

 

Senior US senators and congressmen are pressing for a criminal investigation of the CIA for obstruction of justice after it admitted destroying two videotapes showing apparently abusive interrogations of al-Qa’ida suspects in 2005.

The digital recordings apparently show a team of CIA agents subjecting Abu Zubayadh, the agency’s first detainee, and another suspect to abusive interrogation. The tapes were apparently destroyed because CIA officers feared prosecution for torture, which is a felony under US law.

“We haven’t seen anything like this since the 18-minute gap on the tapes of Richard Nixon,” said Senator Edward Kennedy who accused the CIA of “a cover-up.” He called on the Attorney General Michael Mukasey to investigate.

Congresswoman Jan Harman said that in early 2003, she had warned the CIA not to destroy any videotapes dealing with interrogation practices.

“To my knowledge, the Intelligence Committee was never informed that any videotapes had been destroyed,” Ms Harman, said.

Senator John Rockefeller, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said there must be a review of “the full history and chronology of the tapes, how they were used, and the reasons for destroying them”.

White House officials declined to comment.

A US expert on torture said he believed the digital recordings show CIA interrogation teams carrying out torture including waterboarding or partial drowning of al-Qa’ida suspects in detention centres not on US soil. The interrogations probably took place in Jordan or Egypt where the US has close relations with the national intelligence agencies, said Malcolm Nance who advises the Department of Homeland Security on terrorism.

Mr Nance, who has conducted anti-torture training sessions, said the interrogations would have been relayed live by video link to the CIA’s directorate of operations in Langley, Virginia. They would have been observed by the director of the CIA, along with a team of interrogation experts including, a psychologist and doctor, he said.

“They start by slapping the prisoner around, putting him in stress positions and finally strapping him on the waterboard where he is bound down and has water poured into his lungs,” he continued. “It’s very hard to watch people going through this form of torture,” he said. “They get hysterical and whatever they say is of no value anyway.

“Typically a camera is focused on the detainee’s face to watch for signs that he is cracking; another camera shows the interrogation team in operation,” he said.

The New York Times reported that the CIA destroyed at least two videotapes of the interrogation of two al-Qai’da operatives in the midst of Congressional and legal investigations into its “black site” secret detention programme.

The CIA director, General Michael Hayden, said the decision to destroy the tapes was made “within the CIA” to protect the safety of the agents involved.

Senators and congressmen now want an inquiry into whether CIA officials deliberately withheld information from them as well as the courts and the September 11 Commission.

General Hayden’s explanation was dismissed as unbelievable by Mr Nance. “There are ways of hiding the identity of those involved,” he said.

Have Your Say: Call for criminal inquiry as CIA destroys torture tapes
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

US: Immigration Detention Practices Endanger Life

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

The New York Times reported today that in 2005, the CIA destroyed at least two videotapes showing its operatives subjecting terror suspects to harsh interrogation practices in 2002. Officials said the CIA destroyed these tapes to protect agency operatives from legal consequences. The destruction of these tapes appears to be part of an extensive, long-term pattern of misusing executive authority to insulate individuals from criminal prosecution for torture and abuse, the American Civil Liberties Union said.The ACLU is in the midst of a legal challenge calling for the release of three documents issued by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that are believed to have authorized the CIA to use extremely harsh interrogation methods. The memos, which were written in May of 2005, were not included in the government’s response to the ACLU’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for all documents pertaining to the treatment and interrogation of detainees in U.S. custody. The government also withheld the documents from key senators during a congressional inquiry.

The following can be attributed to Jameel Jaffer, Director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project:

“The destruction of these tapes suggests an utter disregard for the rule of law. It was plainly a deliberate attempt to destroy evidence that could have been used to hold CIA agents accountable for the torture of prisoners. Both Congress and the courts have repeatedly demanded that this evidence be turned over, but apparently the CIA believes that its agents are above the law.”

Have Your Say: US: Immigration Detention Practices Endanger Life
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Blackwater Contracts, Short on Detail

Saturday, December 8th, 2007

 By Robert O’Harrow Jr. 

The State Department has released copies of its contracts for private security services with Blackwater Lodge and Training Center and Blackwater Security Consulting. It’s a hefty 323-page stack, and it comes with a catch:

About 169 of the pages are blank or mostly blank.

Released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, the contracts — worth up to $1.2 billion — have been heavily redacted by the government. A State Department spokesman said the officials responsible for the cuts are simply trying to protect sensitive information that might put individuals at risk. He declined to say what kind of information was cut.

In a cover letter, the department notes that it “gave full consideration” to deletions recommended by Blackwater officials.

A close look at the pages that have not been cut reveals some choice tidbits. The “statement of work” on Page 13 explains why Blackwater was needed. “As a result of conflicts, wars, political unrest and more recently, terrorist activity, these areas have become extremely dangerous places in which to live and work,” the document says. “The Bureau of Diplomatic Security is unable to provide protective services on a long-term basis from its pool of Special Agents.”

Page 35 specifies that “All Contracting employees working under this contract should: Be well proportioned in height and weight,” among other qualities.

One unnumbered item includes a long list of things. But because it’s surrounded by blank pages, it’s hard to know what the list means. Among the items mentioned: battery carrier tool, quick booster kit, heavy-duty work bench, distilled water and WD-40.

A “standards of conduct” section warns that “abusive or offensive language, quarreling, intimidation by words, actions, or fighting, is considered unacceptable performance under this contract.”

To see a sample of the redactions and a more complete account, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/governmentinc.

Have Your Say: Blackwater Contracts, Short on Detail
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Related News

• VIDEO: Rare Footage - Flight 93 crashes
• White House press corps plane detained in China
• Only Tools and Forces…
• Fake Soldiers Used In RNC Video
• ENDGAME: Ron Paul

This entry was posted on Saturday, December 8th, 2007 at 11:56 pm and is filed under 9/11 Truth, Latest News, Media News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.