 |
||||
|
|
September 11, 2006Cheney, 9/11 and the Truth about IraqFrom my "Capital Games" column at www.thenation.com.... Dick Cheney commemorated the fifth anniversary of 9/11 by sticking to the MO that he and his running-mate used to lead the nation into the current mess in Iraq. Appearing on Meet the Press on Sunday, Cheney encountered a decent grilling from host Tim Russert, who pressed him on how Cheney and George W. Bush had justified the war in Iraq. "Based on what you know now, that Saddam did not have the weapons of mass destruction that were described, would you still have gone into Iraq?" Russert asked. Yes, indeed, Cheney said, hewing to the company line. And he pointed to what appeared to be evidence that supported that no-regrets stance: Look at the Duelfer Report and what it said. No stockpiles, but they also said he has the capability. He'd done it before. He had produced chemical weapons before and used them. He had produced biological weapons. He had a robust nuclear program in '91. All of this is true, said by Duelfer, facts. Well, let's look at the report of Charles Duelfer who headed up the Iraq Survey Group, which was responsible for searching for WMDs after the invasion. (Duelfer took the job following David Kay's resignation in late 2003.) It just so happens that in our new book, Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War, Michael Isikoff and I quote from that report, and it noted that Saddam's WMD capability was essentially destroyed in 1991. That is the opposite of what Cheney told Russert the report said. Cheney went on to remark, Think where we'd be if [Saddam] was still there...We also would have a situation where he would have resumed his WMD programs. Yet Duelfer reported that at the time of the invasion, Saddam had no plan for the revival of WMD. Cheney even justified the invasion of Iraq by citing an allegation that was just debunked in a Senate intelligence committee report released on Friday. Claiming there was a significant relationship between Saddam's regime and al Qaeda, he cited the case of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (who was recently killed in Iraq). After the US attacked the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Cheney said, Zarqawi fled and went to Baghdad and set up operations in Baghdad in the spring of '02 and was there from then, basically, until basically the time we launched into Iraq. The implication here is that Baghdad sanctioned the terrorist activity of Zarqawi, a supposed al Qaeda associate. But the Senate intelligence committee report--released by a Republican-run panel--noted that prior to the invasion of Iraq Zarqawi and his network were not part of al Qaeda. (That merging came after the invasion.) More important, the report cites CIA reports (based on captured documents and interrogations) that say that Baghdad was not protecting or assisting Zarqawi when he was in Iraq. In fact, Iraqi intelligence in the spring of 2002 had formed a "special committee" to locate and capture him--but failed to find the terrorist. A 2005 CIA report concluded that prior to the Iraq war, the [Saddam] regime did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates. So why is Cheney still holding up Zarqawi as evidence that Baghdad was in cahoots with Osama bin Laden? If he knows something the CIA does not, perhaps he should inform the agency. During the Meet the Press interview, Cheney blamed the CIA for his and Bush's prewar assertions that Iraq posed a WMD threat. That's what the intelligence said, Cheney insisted. Our book shows that this explanation (or, defense) is a dodge. There were dissents within the intelligence community on key aspects of the WMD argument for war--especially the charge that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Cheney dwelled on that frightening possibility before the war, repeatedly declaring that the US government knew for sure that Iraq had revved up its nuclear program. Yet there was only one strong piece of evidence for this claim--that Iraq had purchased tens of thousands of aluminum tubes for use in a centrifuge that would produce enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb. And that piece of evidence was hotly contested within the intelligence community. One CIA analyst (whom we name for the first time in Hubris) was fiercely pushing the tube case. Yet practically every other top nuclear expert in the US government (including the centrifuge specialists at the Department of Energy) disagreed. This dispute was even mentioned in The Washington Post in September 2002. But neither Cheney nor Bush (nor national security adviser Condoleezza Rce) took an interest in this important argument. Instead, they kept insisting the tube purchases were proof Saddam was building a bomb. They were wrong. And the nuclear scientists at the Department of Energy (again, as our book notes) were ordered not to say anything publicly about the tubes. This is but one example of how the Bush White House rigged the case for war by selectively embracing (without reviewing) convenient pieces of iffy intelligence and then presenting them to the public as hard-and-fast proof. But Cheney is right--to a limited extent. The CIA did provide the White House with intelligence that was wrong (which the White House then used irresponsibly). The new Senate intelligence report, though, shows that this was not what happened regarding one crucial part of the Bush-Cheney argument for war: that al Qaeda and Iraq were in cahoots. Before the war, Bush said that Saddam "was dealing" with al Qaeda. He even charged that Saddam had "financed" al Qaeda. The Senate intelligence report notes clearly that the prewar intelligence on this critical issue said no such thing. The report quotes a CIA review of the prewar intelligence: "The data reveal few indications of an established relationship between al-Qa'ida and Saddam Hussein's regime." The lead Defense Intelligence Analyst on this issue told the Senate intelligence committee that "there was no partnership between the two organizations." And post-invasion debriefings of former Iraqi regime officials indicated that Saddam had no interest in working with al Qaeda and had refused to meet with an al Qaeda emissary in 1998. The report also augments the section in our book on Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a captured al Qaeda commander who was taken by the CIA to Egypt where he was roughly--perhaps brutally--interrogated and claimed that Iraq had provided chemical weapons training to al Qaeda. Though there were questions about al-Libi's veracity from the start, Secretary of State Colin Powell used al-Libi's claims in his famous UN speech to argue that Saddam and Osama bin Laden were partners in evil--that there was a "sinister nexus" between the two. Al-Libi later recanted, and the CIA withdrew all the intelligence based on his claims. In other words, the Bush administration had hyped flimsy intelligence to depict Saddam and bin Laden as WMD-sharing allies. The Senate intelligence report concluded that "Saddam Hussein was distrustful of al-Qa'ida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al-Qa'ida to provide material or operational support." What did Cheney tell Russert? Saddam, he insisted, "had a relationship with al Qaeda." When Russert pointed out that the intelligence committee "said that there was no relationship," Cheney interrupted and commented, "I haven't had a chance to read it." Perhaps he should beforehe talks about 9/11 and Iraq again. Posted by David Corn at September 11, 2006 08:51 AM | ||
Comments
Great post. Thanks David.
Do you know if there is video on the web of your weekend TV appearences? I'll have a look about.
Posted by: O'Reilly at September 11, 2006 09:03 AM
Mr. David Corn,
Great balls of fire! Will these lying slugs ever visit reality?
Seems like their disconnect from reality is permanent. Has anybody thought to check them for mad cow disease?
Thanks for all of your work
Kirk
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 09:05 AM
What did Cheney tell Russert? Saddam, he insisted, "had a relationship with al Qaeda." When Russert pointed out that the intelligence committee "said that there was no relationship," Cheney interrupted and commented, "I haven't had a chance to read it."
Perhaps he should beforehe talks about 9/11 and Iraq again.
Posted by David Corn at September 11, 2006 08:51 AM
Cheney reads one thing at a time and he's in the middle of reading "W"'s copy of my pet goat.
Posted by: O'Reilly at September 11, 2006 09:27 AM
Best wishes to all who lost friends, family and fellow citizens in the 9/11 attack and the wars that follow. May god bless Sharon and her family.
Posted by: O'Reilly at September 11, 2006 09:28 AM
It is naive of you to imagine that Cheney will ever acknowledge and/or delve into evidence that conflicts with his ideology. He is right and everyone else is at the very least mistaken. He is convinced that he firmly grasps reality and his detractors are deluded.
Cheney is by far the most evil and malicious man to serve in high public office in the USA. He has not a single democratic bone or sinew in his body. He is a royalist all the way so long as he picks and chooses who is in the royalty. Having stolen gobs of money from the American public and not been punished for it, he now believes that he is above the law as is his puppet, Bushbaby.
Posted by: Kal Palnicki at September 11, 2006 09:44 AM
Robert Scheer: Gaping Holes in the 9/11 Narrative
Five years out from the attacks, why do we still know so little about what really happened that day?
What we still don't know about 9/11 could kill us. By "we" I mean the public that has been kept in the dark for five years by a president who may know the truth but has chosen to ignore it. Instead of grappling with the thorny origins of that disaster, George Bush willfully turned the nation's attention and resources to a totally unrelated and disastrous imperial adventure in Iraq. Just how unrelated was definitively established last Friday with the belated release of the Senate Intelligence Committee's second report, which concluded that there not only was zero connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, but that Iraq was the one country in the region where Osama bin Laden could not operate.
Unfortunately, that was not true of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the two countries that had recognized and otherwise supported the Taliban government that hosted bin Laden during the run-up to 9/11. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, and yet there has been no serious investigation of the extended Royal family's roll in the recruitment of Bin Laden's "soldiers" and the ease with which they secured legal visas to enter the United States.
While funds for Al Qaeda emanated from the Saudi kingdom, the essential logistical support for Al Qaeda came from Pakistan. Now, five years later, Bin Laden and the remnants of his organization are assumed by the United States to have found refuge in Pakistan's unruly tribal region, where the Pakistan government recently has reduced its forces, conceding that it could not defeat local tribesmen sympathetic to the Taliban.
More HERE
*****end of clip*****
There should be an investigation. The truth should have been told years ago. I should be getting the truth (HUBRIS: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War) delivered today. I cannot wait.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 09:46 AM
Thank you, David. Cheney has to keep up the lies to protect himself. He and Bush have serious legal problems. The point that's missed about this whole WMD bit is twofold: A weapon that would be launched from Iraq and be able to hit the US or England would HAVE to be an ICBM (Intercontinetal Ballistic Missile) with a conventional or nuclear warhead. It would have to have First Strike Capability. There would have to the weapon, a silo and a control room. In order for there to evidence of WMDs in Iraq, there would have be weapons. The word evidence is used incorrectly. Hints, suppositions and other guesses are not evidence. There was NO evidence of WMDs or WMD production in Iraq before the war on Iraq. Bless us and may we be kept safe from our own government. Maude
Posted by: Maude at September 11, 2006 10:10 AM
Cheney, 9/11 and the Truth about Iraq
how about the truth about 9/11 for once?
this wtc2 is less than 1/2 of it's original height: poof!
where did the rest of it go?
10 seconds to poof
it was a poof down!
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 10:22 AM
Kal,
Sad but true.
These slugs cannot "come clean" they would melt like the wicked witch from Oz in a hot-tub.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 10:27 AM
now poof this!
"hey it's 1300 degrees (hot enough to poof steel?) in here but my hair isn't even singed!"
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 10:28 AM
Talk about paranoid delusion! Didn't bush recently admit saddam had nothing to do with 9/11? What is WRONG with these people?? Carol from the previous thread. I don't know how much of the commentary you have read over the past few weeks but Alan's comments have been progressively insulting and sarcastic. He resorts to demeaning and rude insults because we disagree with him on 9/11. I have not engaged in the same tactics, it only detracts from the debate. I have seen his arguments many times over, so to accuse me of refusing to see what he is bringing is inaccurate, I simply think he is dead wrong. Now he his making medical evaluations about people he has never met by claiming they are paranoid delusionists. When I apply that judgement to my husband, an engineering geologist with a very scientific mind, I can only laugh. This frist trick of giving a medical diagnosis of people never spoken to is the lowest blow yet. You may not know anyone who believes the govt. is lying about 9/11 but I know plenty and polls indicate that fully half the people in this country don't believe it either, maybe you need to get out more. I've even begun to see bumper stickers in my little red neck town saying 9/11 was an inside job, that is shocking. As I said, it isn't a prediction, it is happening. The latest MSNBC poll has the true believers at 30%. We are no longer the fringe. And the tide is turning against those despots. I am not pissed, I am HAPPY!
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 10:38 AM
I can't even stand reading Cheney's quotes.
David, I can't wait to read your book. I am sooooo glad this has come out before the elections. And I am so glad it came out at a time when Bush and Cheney are out in public trying to defend their crackpot logic.
Posted by: Jeanne at September 11, 2006 10:41 AM
Did anyone see the interview President Bush gave to Matt Lauer on the Today Show? The audio was screwed by the close proximity of Bush and Lauer, which left Bush sounding a lot like Darth Vader. The audio, connected with Bush's haggard appearance, was less than complimentary to the White House. In the interview Bush looks like a dangerous old pedophile being interviewed from behind bars.
Posted by: True Patriot at September 11, 2006 10:45 AM
Politics as drivers of action is negligible it is just a symptom of our problems. The coming problems will dewarf those egos ( not a small result) but it won't be solved by those egos, neither will it be solved, it will run it's course. The economy is not under control of politics they can neither make it boom nor collapse it, the coming global warming catastrophe is much closer than anyone realizes, and it won't be slowed by the politicians, they are just a distraction to the masses, keeping everyone's eyes focused on the circus instead of the fire consuming the tent. Yep, with global warming we are watching the release of massive quantities of methane and the show hasn't even started yet. Four years from now and our carbon readings in the atmosphere are going to be astronomical, what will it mean to humans? HOT!! So get your walking shoes ready if you can, if not then kiss your burnt ass good by, but it will benefit the planet the raping of this earth will cease and it will begin to recover. No there is not a magic bullet to fix this, enegies are moving that take decades to generate and are self reinforcing, so what to do? To hell with shrub and the rest of these guys, it won't matter a dimes' worth in a couple of years, keep your eyes open for a great event around the elections. MOre terror for the masses. But be afraid and give up your last freedoms and lliberty, that way your chances of survival go to zero. So with that in mind, enjoy your new lifestyle you are going to have to be pretty quick to make it out of this one. Good luck!!
Posted by: What the F**k at September 11, 2006 10:46 AM
Joe Conason: White House Guilt in CIA Leak Case Remains
The revelation the Richard Armitage first disclosed Valerie Wilson's identity as a covert CIA operative doesn't change the fact that it was Karl Rove and Scooter Libby who used that information in an attempt to punish Ms. Wilson for her husband's criticism of the Bush administration.
In this instance, Armitage says he was merely "gossiping" with Novak, who seems to have been primed to question him about the Wilson affair. But both Rove and Libby sought to undermine Joe Wilson's credibility and perhaps to victimize him and his wife by revealing her identity to two reporters. Rove gave that information to Time reporter Matt Cooper, who got confirmation from Libby. And Libby provided the same poisonous tip to New York Times reporter Judith Miller.
Almost from the beginning of his investigation, Fitzgerald has known about the blabby Armitage, who promptly came clean to his boss. But Fitzgerald understood that the Armitage confession was of limited relevance. It didn't discourage the special counsel from conducting a thorough probe that uncovered the secretive effort, emanating from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, to discredit Joe Wilson and use his wife's two decades of dangerous devotion to her country as a weapon against him. Indeed, the only reason Armitage knew about Valerie Wilson was that he had read a negative dossier on Joe Wilson prepared at Libby's behest.
Corn, the Washington editor of The Nation, has responded on his blog to pundits who now exonerate the White House. "Rove's leak (to Robert Novak and Matt Cooper) and Libby's leak (to Judith Miller and Cooper) were part of a campaign to discredit former ambassador Joseph Wilson," he wrote. "That's no conspiracy theory. The available evidence proves this point."
In an article published in The Nation on Sept. 5, Corn says the available evidence also proves that Valerie Wilson was not only a genuine CIA undercover officer, but that she was in charge of operations seeking proof of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Specifically, she ran the Joint Task Force on Iraq, part of the CIA's Counterproliferation Division. She worked overseas using a "nonofficial cover." By disclosing her identity, the Bush officials ruined her career and endangered the sources she had used in the president's service. "HUBRIS: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War
" also suggests strongly that her alleged role in dispatching her husband to Niger has been exaggerated.
More HERE
*****end of clip*****
I would not want anybody to miss this one.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 10:47 AM
Monday, September 11, 2006 CHENEY GIVES THE CLEAREST EXAMPLE OF THE DEFINITION OF CHUTZPAH YET!
In his interview yesterday with Tim Russert on the NBC News Meet the Press show, Vice-President Dick Cheney gave one of the clearest examples of the definition of classic Chutzpah yet. He told his audience that if the US had not removed Saddam Hussein then he, Saddam, would be sitting on top of a big pile of cash because he would have $65 and $70 oil.[1] Que??!!
Is not the reason oil is at $65 and $70 now because of the turmoil that exists in the Middle East as a direct result of removing Saddam Hussein in the first place?
Now that's what you call Chutzpah!
But, of course, the Chutzpah doesn't end there. There is a certain irony in the fact that as a direct result of ousting Saddam Hussein the only people that are sitting on top of big piles of cash are the big US-owned oil companies and the oil industries service providers like, well, Cheney's old company Haliburton.
One of the values that "they" hate "us" for is hypocrisy.
==========
Hypocrisy?? No Way!
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 10:48 AM
Democracy Now, Monday, September 11th, 2006
EXCLUSIVE...9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of "Debunking 9/11 Myths"
MORE HERE
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 10:50 AM
I am linking this site in memory of Michael Richards who died in World Trade Center. He had created a scupture for the Franconia Scupture Park in Franconia MN.
Michael Richards
For the Artist Michael Richards by Glenn Gordon
I hope you read the peace by Glenn Gordon. I saw this piece last Friday as I toured the park. It is so heartbreaking to know what we have lost.
Posted by: Jeanne at September 11, 2006 10:51 AM
Isn't it funny that I kept writing peace when I meant piece. PEACE...
Posted by: Jeanne at September 11, 2006 10:55 AM
I would like to remind people here that Cheney, Rummy, and Wolfowitz (among others) are/were also heavily involved with "defense" companies. Going to war meant trying out all the new toys they've been developing since the last gulf war. It also meant the US gov would use our tax dollars to pay for these toys and any other expenses. They stood to gain a whole lot from this. The sick thing is, they wanted us to believe we were getting something out of it, too. "Oh, you're scared shitless, are you? Well, we'll get these fancy weapons that melt flesh off and radioactive bullets that slice through the thickest armor to protect you." And somehow it worked. Was this a fair trade? We give you fear and the hope of protection from this (irrational) fear, and you give us a bunch of money and entrust us to keep the bad guys we made up away from you.
They don't believe me when I tell them this is the worst administration in American history. No length of time will make them look heroic in hindsight. The blunders, the lies, the violence, the manipulation, the lack of planning and responsibility, the blatant disregard for human life all culminate to be the shame of this country and its people. If we are to win the respect of the world again, we need to show these folks the door - and a few of them prison cells!
Posted by: goob at September 11, 2006 10:59 AM
#20
Oh so you're saying it was a protection Racket
A protection racket is an extortion scheme whereby a powerful organization, most often a criminal organization or gang, coerces individuals or businesses to pay protection money which allegedly serves to purchase the organization's "protection" services against various external threats, whereas usually the actual threat comes from the organization itself. Those who do not buy into the protection plan are often targeted by the organization and are harassed to try to force payment of the protection money.
------------
That's about right.
Posted by: Jeanne at September 11, 2006 11:09 AM
Interesting Democracy Now today
EXCLUSIVE...9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of "Debunking 9/11 Myths"
Posted by: Jeanne at September 11, 2006 11:16 AM
When Russert pointed out that the intelligence committee "said that there was no relationship," Cheney interrupted and commented, "I haven't had a chance to read it."
I can't tell you how much that arrogant quote infuriates me as it should infuriate every decent American. Cheney is a scoundrel of the worst sort. How can this man be trusted in any position of power? He is helping to make decisions that will affect our country for the next century, and he can't be bothered to read such an important report? What a piece of shit.
Posted by: Don at September 11, 2006 11:21 AM
oh the final effin poof!
(26 sec. wmv. - 5 min. loading for dial-up)
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 11:24 AM
Is there a requirement that politicians stayed informed of important findings? If not there should be, but if he wants to isolate himself in his undisclosed locations, why not try gitmo for a few years.
Posted by: What the F**k at September 11, 2006 11:27 AM
You may not know anyone who believes the govt. is lying about 9/11 but I know plenty and polls indicate that fully half the people in this country don't believe it either, maybe you need to get out more.
Carol did not say that, Saladin! She said she did not know anyone who thinks it is an "inside" job. She didn't say anything about the government lying or not lying. They can lie, but that does not necessarily mean it was an "inside" job.
You think you're not insulting? Well, from where I sit and IMO, you are. Telling Carol to "get out" more is very insulting and demeaning. (I could find innumerable examples of your insulting behavior if I were so inclined, predominately your insulting behavior towards Jews, of which I am one.) And PUH-LEEZE, do not harangue me for jumping to Carol's defense. She strikes me as full of moxie.
Posted by: caroline at September 11, 2006 11:28 AM
While difficult for Americans to accept, I believe many more have come to realize Bush-Cheney's Iraq invasion was a concocted international power play marketed to a vulnerable citizenry--led to believe that Iraqis were involved in the 911 atrocities. Did Bush-Cheney set us straight in this misunderstanding? Like master to dog, they led us down their fixed path of neocon fantasy.
Their fast track war on Iraq, to me, was obvious. Surely they displayed great motivation in turning their sights on Iraq. What a fiasco! Decades of geopolitical therapy and consequences to come--long after George and Dick are gone from this earth.
I think their actions are less political hubris than political crimes of agenda worthy of impeachment within the US Senate in November. With lies on his side, Cheney's only recourse is to repeat them.
Posted by: Doremus the Taliban Democrat at September 11, 2006 11:29 AM
Cheney is the assh*** behind this whole war. Bush is a puppet pea brain with no mind of his own. Cheney is just downright evil. Put him in the same catagory as Bin Laden, all they both want to do is kill.
Posted by: RJ at September 11, 2006 11:32 AM
speaking of sculptures - in the public square located in front of wtc7 there was an iron sculpture known as the calder -
unfortunately for the poor calder it melted and sagged into an unexplained little heap.
it must have been the energy from the incredible hatred of 19 evil muslims that caused that.
right poofter?
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 11:37 AM
I haven't had a chance to read it -
Of course, as Vice pResident, the only official job he has is as President of the Senate, and this was a Senate publication. What's he doing to earn his salary............?
Bush in jeopardy? Yes. The issue is torture, which George W. Bush authorized in a memorandum of February 7, 2002, in contravention both of the Geneva Accords and 18 US Code 2441, the War Crimes Act approved by a Republican-led Congress in 1996. That law incorporates the Geneva provisions into the federal criminal code. Heeding the advice of Vice President Dick Cheney's counsel, David Addington, then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, and Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, the president officially opened the door to torture in that February 7, 2002, memorandum. His remarks yesterday reflect the determination of Cheney and Bush to keep that door open and accuse those who would close it of being soft on terrorists.
The administration released that damning memorandum in the spring of 2004 after the photos of torture at Abu Ghraib were published. It provided the basis for talking points showing that the president wanted "humane" treatment for captured al-Qaeda and Taliban individuals. And - surprise, surprise - mainstream journalists like those of the New York Times swallowed the bait, clinging safely to the talking points, and missed altogether Bush's remarkable claim that "military necessity" trumps humane treatment. That assertion over the president's signature provided the gaping loophole through which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and then-CIA Director George Tenet drove the Mack Truck of officially sanctioned torture.
Using the arguments adduced by the Addington/Gonzales/Bybee team, Bush's February 7, 2002, memo made the point that the bedrock provision of Geneva - common Article 3 - does not apply to al-Qaida or Taliban detainees, but that the US would "continue to treat detainees humanely and, the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva." (Emphasis added.)
Sounding very much like Mafia lawyers, the president's legal troika felt it necessary to warn him that playing fast and loose with the US War Crimes Act (Section 2441) could conceivably come back to haunt him. The bizarre passage that follows is the best they could offer in terms of reassurance:
"is difficult to predict the motives of prosecutors and independent counsels who may in the future decide to pursue unwarranted charges based on Section 2441. Your determination would create a reasonable basis in law that Section 2441 does not apply, which would provide a solid defense to any future prosecution."
While the imaginative lawyering of Addington (now Cheney's chief of staff), Gonzales (now Attorney General), and Bybee (now a federal judge) may have qualified for a presidential "heck-of-a-job" at the time, Bush is learning the hard way that, while sycophants are fun to have around, they can do a president in. Between the lines of Bush's rhetoric yesterday lies belated acknowledgement that his decision to condone the torture of al-Qaeda and Taliban captives is now back to haunt him - big time. - Ray McGovern
************************************
So, in other words, whichever side of the debate today on Demcracy Now! seems more persuasive to you, Loose Change or Popular Mechanics, there is more than enough evidence to charge this group of thugs with crimes against humanity.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 11, 2006 11:40 AM
Check out c-Span Now. Push for a New 9-11 Investagation. Talking about the film 9-11 Press for Truth
Posted by: miker at September 11, 2006 11:48 AM
9/11 Remembrance: Ysidro Hidalgo-Tejada
With the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attack here, I wondered what I would write to honor those who lost their lives in the worst foreign attack on the homeland in almost two centuries. Plenty of stories have already been told about the victims and the heroes, and I wondered what I could add.
Not long ago, I received an invitation from the 2,996 Tribute Project. The organizers want bloggers to remember each one of the dead from that terrible day, and in order to ensure that no one gets forgotten, they assigned a victim to each blogger. The project assigned me Ysidro Hidalgo-Tejada, a food-service worker in the World Trade Center.
I tried doing some research on Ysidro. The messages at the website indicate that he had a family that loved him, a family that the Dominican Republic immigrant supported by working at the Windows On The World restaurant at the top of the North Tower. We have heard something about the situation that the people in the restaurant faced in their final minutes. The restaurant manager called several times to emergency workers, trying to get some assistance and eventually realizing that it would not come. The smoke and fumes were choking those trapped in the restaurant even before the tower fell, but they did their best to hold up until the very end.
We do not know how Ysidro spent those last desperate minutes. We do know that all three stairwells were severed by American Airlines Flight 11. Did he try to make his way out? Or did he die like he lived, helping others and supporting them even after hope ran out? In the end, we have no information on which to judge, just like I could find no information on the life Ysidro lived before the attack that killed him.
It's hard to do justice to Ysidro. I never knew him, his family, or even have an inkling of his life; all I have is his death, and not even enough of that to distinguish him from the other 2,996 victims of the attack. But in a way, Ysidro serves as an example of the people who died that day. All Ysidro did was work hard and support his family, serving the diners who made their way to the highest restaurant in the world in one of the greatest cities ever built. Everyone who died that day just wanted to help people and make life a little better for themselves and those around them.
Ysidro came to the United States because of the promise of freedom and the ability to make his own way in the world. He died because terrorists fear and hate that about America and the West. Ysidro stood for something they could not abide: the ability to make his own decisions and live life his own way. Ysidro deserves to be remembered far more than the lunatics who took his life and all the others.
Godspeed, Ysidro. I'm sorry we didn't get the chance to know you better. The terrorists stole that opportunity from us.
UPDATE: I found a brief portrait of Ysidro's life at the New York Times:
Ysidro Hidalgo-Tejada had a gentle touch that he applied to making dinner for his huge extended family, planting flowers, or taking care of his 90-year-old diabetic mother when he visited his native Dominican Republic.
Mr. Hidalgo-Tejada, who was 50, worked in food preparation at Windows on the World. Even though he worked around food all day, he would often go home and prepare something special for his wife and three daughters, said his eldest child, Anyela Hidalgo, 18.
"I miss him every day," Ms. Hidalgo said softly. "I'm not going to have my dad with me anymore. My little sisters, they don't want to talk about him much. One of the last things we did together was to go to the Statue of Liberty. We had to wait in line for a long time but my dad said it was worth it."
In his down time, Mr. Hidalgo-Tejada enjoyed playing dominos and watching the Discovery Channel. His family kept him busy, too; he had 10 siblings and more than two dozen nieces and nephews.
A gentle man, whose life was snuffed out by vicious and bloodthirsty terrorists. They could never hope to have Ysidro's value as a human being.
Ed Morissey
Captain's Quarters
Posted by: factchecker at September 11, 2006 11:48 AM
full of moxie! good one. i can think of someone else who is totally full of moxie!
mushroom cloud poof off!
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 11:52 AM
there is a terrorist behind every bush!
behind every terrorist there is a bush!
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 12:04 PM
Worried CIA Officers Buy Legal Insurance
Plans Fund Defense In Anti-Terror Cases
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 11, 2006; Page A01
CIA counterterrorism officers have signed up in growing numbers for a government-reimbursed, private insurance plan that would pay their civil judgments and legal expenses if they are sued or charged with criminal wrongdoing, according to current and former intelligence officials and others with knowledge of the program.
The new enrollments reflect heightened anxiety at the CIA that officers may be vulnerable to accusations they were involved in abuse, torture, human rights violations and other misconduct, including wrongdoing related to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. They worry that they will not have Justice Department representation in court or congressional inquiries, the officials said.
The anxieties stem partly from public controversy about a system of secret CIA prisons in which detainees were subjected to harsh interrogation methods, including temperature extremes and simulated drowning. The White House contends the methods were legal, but some CIA officers have worried privately that they may have violated international law or domestic criminal statutes.
***************************
If they didn't do anything wrong they shouldn't have anything to worry about, no?
After all, if you aren't a terrorist you shouldn't worry about warrantless intercepts, nevermind the history of political spying by the FBI/CIA/DIA....
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 11, 2006 12:12 PM
9/11 is today's JFK
The government was in on 9/11
From Ohio University:
More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East, according to a new Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll.
From a tipster, comes this unscientific MSNBC poll on 9/11 conspiracy threories: (picture at link)
Whatever the truth of 9/11, from active involvement to passive agreements to bungling to good ol' fashioned complexity and bureaucracy, one thing's for sure: the opacity of this administration is making more and more Americans distrust those who represent them. As we lose faith and a common reality we lose the mechanism of America that enables us to seek the life we want.
Which sucks.
More HERE
*****end of clip*****
Big time.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 12:15 PM
GOP continues bogus connection between 9/11 and Iraq
Republican Senator: Iraq insurgents "same enemy" who attacked on 9/11
Despite the release Friday of a Senate Intelligence Committee report showing that the Bush administration knowingly misled the nation about links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda -- in fact, the report shows that Hussein considered Al Qaeda a direct threat to his regime -- Senate Republicans on Friday showed their regret by continuing the misleading rhetoric.
Speaking in the Senate Friday morning, Senator Kit Bond (R-MO) used a floor speech ostensibly commemorating the five-year anniversary of the September 11 attacks to once again mislead and distort by linking those responsible for 9/11 with insurgents faced by U.S. troops in the Bush administration's war of choice in Iraq.
"On September 11, 2001, the American people learned there exists a group of killers, fueled by a twisted version of Islam, who want to destroy America," said Bond. "Today, we continue to fight the same group of killers not on an airplane over America but in a country in their own neighborhood, Iraq, and elsewhere in the Middle East and around the world."
"It is the same enemy, the same determination, the same goal," he continued. "But today we are fighting the radical Islamists on their own turf because we have a President who knows if America doesn't fight back, another September 11 is inevitable."
Bond then went on to trot out the same tired, old cut-and-run theme, suggesting that Senate Democrats who believe we need to leave Iraq and begin a real offensive against Al Qaeda are weak.
More HERE
*****end of clip*****
These politicians have bought into their own lies.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 12:19 PM
I don't know how much of the commentary you have read over the past few weeks but Alan's comments have been progressively insulting and sarcastic.
Watch her Carol, she's off the meds and predicting crazy things again. haha
She won't admit that I answered 'in kind' to smartazz posts by her and her delusional sidekick James. Like yesterday, nothing at all was directed to her and she popped in with another delusional post of predictions and a pissy comment to me. She had already been put in the same position as James in my book, so it doesn't matter personally to me what she says... but I do enjoy pointing out how silly her posts are. It's a chronic condition and it's covered a myriad of topics relating to 9/11. Things like "own footprints", "steel rushed off to Asia", "destroyed flight controller tapes", and many others... None are correct and she can't fathom that, and definitely won't admit that I proved her wrong. Not unlike the bushbots, just keep repeating it and hope it'll come true. That's delusional. Maybe she'll get help... and hopefully she'll tuck James under her arm and get him some help too.
lol
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 12:23 PM
The 9/11 Enigma, Revisited
Why do many Americans doubt the official narrative?
[..]
Bin Laden? 9/11? Forget it, buster that was just a pretext, a catalyzing event that allowed a well-organized network with a preexisting agenda to move quickly and with determination to implement its plan. The recently issued "phase two" of the Senate Intelligence Committee report Ð see here shows how this administration bent the facts and twisted the intelligence to lie us into war. It turns out the CIA warned the administration that there were no links to al-Qaeda, which we knew already, but the really devastating part of the report is the section dealing with the role of Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress.
That the INC was simultaneously an Iranian intelligence asset and an American client, and that we knew this and still sponsored Chalabi & Co., tells us all we need to know about this administration and its Bizarro World mindset. As the report notes, on March 3, 1995, "Chalabi made contact with Iranian intelligence officials to discuss Iran's positive support on the planned action [a coup against Saddam] and their support for possible action against Southern Iraq." He did so with American approval: our guy "was present outside the meeting space, was seen by the Iranians, and was aware that Chalabi intended for the Iranians to see him there as a signal of U.S. support."
Yesterday, we worked in tandem with the Iranians to overthrow Saddam Hussein, with our agent standing literally outside the door as Chalabi chatted with his Iranian handlers, and today we are ringing the alarm bells over the supposedly dire threat posed by Tehran. Our State Department routinely refers to Iran as the world's number-one exporter of terrorism, and yet here we have solid evidence of an American-INC-Iranian axis of convenience. We pride ourselves on never negotiating with purported terrorists, and yet we are apparently not above allying with them. If this is supposed to be some sort of Machiavellian deviousness, then it seems the Americans outwitted themselves: they are fighting a monster of their own creation.
More HERE
*****end of clip*****
Just a prefix.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 12:28 PM
David,
When might we see you and Cheney side by side on MTP? (Not a chance, I know.)
I am halfway through the new book. The folks at B&N had to go into the back room last friday and cut open a box to get the first copy to me. It is excellent.
Posted by: mogulman at September 11, 2006 12:29 PM
He is helping to make decisions that will affect our country for the next century, and he can't be bothered to read such an important report? What a piece of shit.
Posted by: Don at September 11, 2006 11:21 AM
Oh, he READ it. He read it before it was released. HE IS LYING. You won't see him on MTP until after the elections.
Posted by: O'Reilly at September 11, 2006 12:32 PM
here is wtc2 less than 1/2 it's original size: poof! where did the rest of it go? in order to have pancaking, a force is required to trigger the failure of the next floor. if the building above that floor has been pulverized, there can be no force pushing down. any pulverized material remaining over the footprint of the building will be suspended in the air and can't contribute to a downward force slamming onto the next floor.
only 10 seconds to poof
the poof! is in the pudding.
alan is a poofer wack!
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 12:40 PM
26, rehashing the anti-semite thing? Whatever. I will rephrase my statement, I know plenty of people who think 9/11 was an inside job and that the govt. is lying their ass off about it. 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other. By getting out more I meant widen her contacts in the area of 9/11 debate, maybe even go to a local 9/11 truth meeting where she can hear other opinions and express her own, it was not meant to be insulting or demeaning. Of course someone who thinks criticism of the Israeli govt. is anti-Jewish would take offense at just about anything. And please, show me where I have ever made an insulting comment about Jewish people. I have only criticized the extremist Zionist movement, both the Jewish and Fundamental Christian versions, both of which are racist and cruel. I can distinguish between the average Christion and Jew and these extremists, I also have several friends that are Jewish, one I work for, who agree with me 100% on the subject of Zionism and the grief it has caused the Jewish people. Robert, the neocons have lied about every single aspect of 9/11. They said they never would guess in a million years that anyone would use planes as missles to crash into buildings, even though that exact scenario in the form of military drills was happening at the exact same time as the actual hijackings, and in the exact same locations. No wonder the airforce and NORAD were confused. I guess the pentagon forgot to tell them about the drills. Maybe that's why cheney issued the mystery order that stood while Flight 77 was heading straight for them, the only question is, what WAS that order? It obviously wasn't to shoot the plane down even though it was still 50 miles out and was a known hijacking. So many lies, so few explanations. I would love to see a transcript of bush and cheney's testimony to the 9/11 commission, whoops, we never will, they wouldn't testify under oath, seperately, or allow any recording whatsoever. The honest and transparent behavior of someone telling the truth. Sure, I believe them, who wouldn't? Only people in the grip of paranod delusion would ever think to doubt the word of people who lie everytime they open their mouth, right?
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 12:47 PM
Terrorism got it's bang for a few bucks, leading us willy nilly down the path of self destruction. Hell, if we had an intelligent response to 9/11 we wouldn't be in this mess. But no, we had to cowboy off into an unknown world where our jerk president thought that he could bully the world. Typical overreach. Now we are finding out that the consequences of unleashed empire isn't exactly good for the citizens of that empire. We haven't even begun to get the pay back for this mess, just wait it won't be long. Plus, we have spent a huge amount of money to get the ones responsible haven't we. Have we got them? Nope, so all that money thrown away. I won't even bother mentioning the lives wasted and lost over this failed response. There are too many tears so the outcome of this can be fat wallets and over priced crap coming our way. Sure that makes a lot of sense. Our government is insane nothing less, not even a shred of sanity is left in washington DC. That needs to be declared a disaster area and cordoned off no one leaves and no one gets in, cut the power and hope it implodes. Until the american sheeple wake up and start to take some form of responsibility for their own lives and not let it be the province of their so called elected officials we are going to be in big trouble. I have no fear of any iraqi nor terrorist. I do fear un fettered government, and it's supporters. They are the real menace to our way of life and our future. But hey if it floats your boat get on board the waterfall is just around the bend.
Posted by: What the F**k at September 11, 2006 12:53 PM
"I do fear un fettered government, and it's supporters. They are the real menace to our way of life and our future."
No doubt. Well said.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 12:57 PM
Sal,
I have many questions about 9/11, and yes the neocons have lied about just about everything.
What I don't have is certitude about what did happen.
I do know however, that it is the neocons who gain when we argue amongst ourselves. We have more than enough to charge these bastards with capital crimes without charging them with 9/11. Al Capone was brought down for tax evasion, not bank robbery, but was put away all the same.
I want to know the truth, but I want to bring the fascists down more.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 11, 2006 12:59 PM
pilots for 9/11 truth
We have an animation of the entire flight77 provided by the NTSB.
We have determined based on the Flight Data Recorder information that has been analyzed thus far provided by the NTSB, that it is impossible for this aircraft to have struck down the light poles.
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 01:01 PM
Also, lest we forget, today is the anniversary of the Pinochet coup of Allende and Kissinger was originally selected to head the 9/11 Commission...
Jest sayin'
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 11, 2006 01:03 PM
Today's Headlines
Five Iraqi Soldiers Seized In Border Clash With Iran 9-11
Iraqi PM's trip to Iran postponed. He gave no reason for the delay. 9-11
Al Qaeda releases "Happy Anniversary" message 9-11
Top British Soldier Quits Over "Pointless" War In Afghanistan 9-11
9/11 Commission Chair: "There's No Question The War In Iraq Is Radicalizing". 9-11
US Marine intelligence assessment of Anbar province, Iraq: "We haven't been defeated militarily but we have been defeated politically -- and that's where wars are won and lost." 9-11
Fighting to make Iran and Al Qaeda stronger: "It's actually unfathomable -- for a country to fight a protracted and bloody war where the sole beneficiary is that country's worst enemy" 9-11
Cheney: "If We Had It To Do Over Again, We'd Do Exactly The Same Thing" 9-11
Thanks POAC!
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 01:05 PM
It is clear that Cheney's arrogance is exceeded only by his stupidity, which is exceeded by nothing.
Posted by: Dave at September 11, 2006 01:06 PM
It is clear that Cheney's arrogance is exceeded only by his stupidity, which is exceeded by nothing.
Posted by: Dave at September 11, 2006 01:06 PM
WTF and capt. a big AMEN to that!
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 01:07 PM
Truth is, President Bush said this withering thing in June of THIS YEAR ; conceRning the Iraq War :
" I believe in supporting a strategy that will work . Not work for some immediate political situation, but work for the good of the Iraqi people , and for ourselves, and equally important , help us win this War On Terror. "
----------------- President Bush, June 2006
Now, really, come on now, " for the good of the Iraqi people " ? The tens of thousands of D E A D Iraqi people ? The Iraqi people that left Iraq and are now living in Jordan, or someplace else ? Who, exactly, among the Iraqi people is having " good " done for them ?
President Bush, all this time after an awwwwwwful Tuesday morning in September 2001, still doesn't get it. WE DON' T
BELIEVE YOU, Mr. President. It's nothing to do with who you are as a person, how you treat your wife, or your kids. It's nothing to do with whether you honor God and go to church on Sunday. It is about whether you have the ( necessary ) courage to go about the business of this country without lyin' your lyin' ass away on a daily basis. WE DON ' T be LIE ve you, Mr. President. You've had more than 1200 days to prove you're serious about " good of the Iraqi people " ( phhhhft. )
and YOU AIN ' T Done It.
Game, set, match, Anderson Petition
www.warisaracket.org
Posted by: Anderson Petition at September 11, 2006 01:12 PM
Robert, I have no certainty beyond knowing for a fact they are lying, that's all I need to know. I don't care what takes them down as long as they go down. But 9/11 was far worse then bank robbery, and everything that has followed is on their hands as well. I really want to see them answer for this, in court, under oath in front of a thousand cameras looking into the eyes of the families of those people sacrificed to the God of greed and war.
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 01:14 PM
Absolutely Undeniable Evil by the Bush Administration
the cover-up of toxic dust at ground zero
One of the more toxic elements in the dust was ASBESTOS.
The same asbestos that were the reason that the WTC was slated multi billion dollar asbestos cleaning project.
I just have to wonder, by covering up how toxic the dust was, were they covering up the simple reminder of the asbestos?
Or was there something else in the dust they didn't want people to know about?
Like what may have been used to bring down the towers?
Or did they just simply not care if people suffered?
Or all of the above?
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 01:16 PM
the cover-up of toxic dust at ground zero
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 01:18 PM
DEN, thanks for posting the Democracy Now discussion. That was a good one.
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 01:19 PM
#46 I could not agree more, what is everybody waiting for, the evidence is everywhere to put these fascist thugs behind bars, yet here we are...waiting for the rider with the white hat to save our asses.
Aint happenin, nope.
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 01:19 PM
the REAL cover-up of toxic dust at ground zero
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 01:21 PM
Re: Democracy Now. Anybody else catch the Unpopular Mechanics dude mention David Corn who writes for the Nation, as part of the coverup of 9/11 at the end of the program. That was weird.
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 01:24 PM
September 11, 2006 5 Years Later . . . Still Demanding Truth & Justice Worldwide Events
Here is a list of events for anyone who is interested. Robert, there is one in LA from 4:00pm - 7:00pm Info: "We will be two lights east of Wilshire and Veteran, at the intersection of Wilshire and Westwood. We plan to meet at 4:00pm and spread throughout Westwood Village home of UCLA. Wilshire and Westwood will be home base, so someone will be there should you come late. E-mail Katy with any questions- katy1stteam@aol.com"
Don't know if this is practical for you or if you are even interested, but, just in case.
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 01:26 PM
Friday September 8, 2006
A. P. article by R. Rageh .
" More than 1,500 people died violently in BAGHDAD last month . "
" The Iraqi Health Ministry says its
final August 2006 tally of violent deaths in Baghdad was 1,536 . "
" Asked Thursday ( Sept. 7, 2006 ) about the Iraqi Health Ministry's figures , U.S. spokesman Lt. Col. Barry Johnson declined to provide an explanation. "
Please learn about a true American. Smedly Butler said " War is a racket. "
Rumsfeld proves it. A. Petition
www.warisaracket.org
Posted by: Anderson Petition at September 11, 2006 01:26 PM
Excellent short article in today's H-town Chronicle...
Win war on terror at home with shift in foreign policy
Current state of affairs is only creating new enemies
IT is now accepted by most experts and, according to the latest polls, 60 percent of Americans, that the decision to invade Iraq has increased the threat of terrorism. Five years after the twin towers crumbled in a horrifying spectacle, our government's foreign policy has done more to recruit terrorists and sympathizers than anything that Osama bin Laden could have imagined.
The United States today faces no real security threat from any country. Russia and China have nuclear missiles that could reach the United States, and theoretically they could use them. But so, too, could Britain or France. For now, at least, none of these countries has any significant probability of attacking the United States.
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 01:36 PM
Violence can only be concealed by a lie, and the lie can only be maintained by violence. ~Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 01:43 PM
Re: Democracy Now. Anybody else catch the Unpopular Mechanics dude mention David Corn who writes for the Nation, as part of the coverup of 9/11 at the end of the program. That was weird.
Yep, I caught that. The Loose Change idiots think David Corn is part of the government coverup. Anybody that isn't on the same delusional level as them would be added to the list of "in on it" conspiracists. It's now in the MILLIONS. hehe
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 01:46 PM
Path to 9/11 Trounced By Football, Ties CBS Rerun
Apparently, there isn't a big audience for myths about 9/11. Preliminary ratings information show that Path to 9/11 was not only trounced by Sunday Night Football, it only managed to tie a rerun of a CBS documentary about 9/11. A summary:
Looks like predictions that the effort to correct Path to 9/11's inaccuracies would improve ABC's ratings were wrong.
More HERE
*****end of clip*****
Seems people are more interested in the truth than a pack of lies. Serves ABC/Disney right.
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 01:50 PM
ABC
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 01:58 PM
I read about the PM claim that cell phones can broadcast 200 miles away and cell towers can cover 200 miles. But according to this letter to WRH:
...one point that made my ears pickup was the Popular Mechanics statement that a cell phone tower covers 200 miles, as someone who has worked building wireless carriers, I can tell you that is absurd. Cell Phone towers and their base station controllers normally have coverage of around 10 square miles, but more critically use sector antennas which are aimed at providing coverage only in a specific direction, say a 30 degree arc and do NOT point up in the air; the antenna wave path is mainly horizontal. Further, I'll state something that should be obvious to anyone, the tower transmits to the phone and naturally the phone has to transmit back, I would be extremely impressed to see a cell phone that can transmit 200 miles. Obviously the statement is false, it's a lie.
===========
I guess they also equate 9/11 skeptics with holocaust denial, pathetic. Let the rovian smear tactics commence!
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 01:58 PM
Aways Bad Coverage
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 02:00 PM
ABC=Always Bad Coverage..........whatta monday!
Sal, Cell phones have a FM signal which travels line of sight or parallel to the Earth, not to the sky.
I might believe the use of the inflight phones built into the seat headrests would work even though they were made by GTE(quality issues) called Airphones, NOT cellphones.
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 02:06 PM
PR Web Press release Newswire
Mary Maxwell, a Congressional candidate in the GOP primary, lectured yesterday on how to overcome the roadblocks erected by both Congress and the White House with regard to solving the crimes of 9/11. Maxwell lists some rarely used legal methods, and raises the possibility of the court-martial. of Air Force officers.
Concord, NH (PRWEB) September 5, 2006 -- Mary Maxwell of Concord, New Hampshire, who has a Ph.D. in Politics and is running for her state�s second district seat in the US House of Representatives, spoke on WKXL community radio yesterday. She observed that people are frustrated by the silence from the executive and legislative branches of government at a time when 43% of Americans suspect that 9/11 was an inside job. She points out that the third branch, the judiciary, plus the courts of the 50 states, may offer a way around this roadblock.
In her radio lecture she commented that "the murder of 2800 people on Sept 11, 2001 in New York has never undergone the investigation that is mandated by New York state law in all cases of death by foul play. Hundreds of thousands of people have signed a petition to New York State Atty Gen Elliot Spitzer to re-open 9/11 but so far to no avail."
Maxwell repeatedly emphasized that it is important to stay legal when looking for solutions. "One free-lance lynching," she said, "could bring chaos and we would be like the people of Iraq, not knowing who is in charge. With us it is clear -- the Constitution is in charge." And that document was written, she noted, "with an eye to the fact that government members would try their best to make mischief. The Founding Fathers knew all about monarchical power grabs and gave us the means to protect the nation from this routine sort of thing. It isn't anything to be embarrassed about."
==========
Another anti-war candidate who wants an end to this corruption. Left, right or middle, ending this murder spree against the middle east should be the #1 priority. I will support anyone for whom that goal is at the top the agenda.
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 02:16 PM
today is a national bushco holyday: patriot day.
did you guys know that portions of automobiles for many city blocks around the wtc melted, twisted and incinerated for some as yet unexplained reason? maybe that phenomenon was caused by the energy from the furious hatred that evil arabs felt towards the not-so-popular wtc? or maybe it was just gravity.
see figures 4abcd
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 02:19 PM
and then go poof yourself!
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 02:21 PM
DEN, I just thought it curious they would make such a statement, they must have know it was BS. As for the use of airphones, no doubt that would be the case for some, but they should make up their minds, If they mean airphones they shouldn't say cell phones, since, as you pointed out, they are different systems with different capabilities.
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 02:22 PM
MAYBE we should all go back and LISTEN to the events unfold five years ago today: http://polihale.com/display/30170 [and HOPEFULLY Howard Stern & Sirius won't shut down that site]
Posted by: EminemsRevenge at September 11, 2006 02:26 PM
Sal, This IS the smoking NIST gun as stated on their own site.
12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."
NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
Ok so if you did not test for these compounds, you have not done COMPLTETE testing, instead choosing to rely on "heresay evidence". WEASLES!!!
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 02:35 PM
David, I'm about 20 pages into Hubris. It's a good read so far. A real page-turner. I'm glad you made a chapter title of Andrew Card's "marketing a new product" quote. I've always felt that that told the whole story in a nutshell. I'm amazed, though, that you were able to get these CIA folks to go on the record in such detail. That's got to heat up the war between the CIA and White House.
Posted by: Drewp at September 11, 2006 02:39 PM
"A thing is not proved just because no one has ever questioned it. What has never been gone into impartially has never been properly gone into. Hence scepticism is the first step toward truth. It must be applied generally, because it is the touchstone."
~ Denis Diderot (1713 - 1784)
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 02:42 PM
"'I somehow got into the stairwell and there were more people there. When I began to try and direct down, another huge explosion like the first one hits. This one hits about two minutes later, although it's hard to tell, but I'm thinking, 'Oh. My God, these bastards put bombs in here like they did in 1993!'"
~~Lou Cacchioli, Firefighter in WTC 1
'"I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions."'
~~Craig Carlsen FDNY
"Many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but theyÕre afraid for their jobs to admit it because the Ôhigher-upsÕ forbid discussion of this fact." Paul further elaborated that former CIA director Robert Woolsey, as the Fire DepartmentÕs Anti-terrorism Consultant, is sending a gag order down the ranks. "There were definitely bombs in those buildings,"
~~Lieutenant Fireman and former Auxiliary Police Officer, Paul Isaac Jr.
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 02:46 PM
Wish You Were Here
So, so you think you can tell
Heaven from Hell,
Blue skys from pain.
Can you tell a green field
From a cold steel rail?
A smile from a veil?
Do you think you can tell?
And did they get you to trade
Your heros for ghosts?
Hot ashes for trees?
Hot air for a cool breeze?
Cold comfort for change?
And did you exchange
A walk on part in the war
For a lead role in a cage?
How I wish, how I wish you were here.
We're just two lost souls
Swimming in a fish bowl,
Year after year,
Running over the same old ground.
What have we found?
The same old fears.
Wish you were here.
Pink Floyd (Waters, Gilmour)
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 02:48 PM
The one episode in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq that never ceases to amaze me is the Bush Administration's reliance on the alleged "slam dunk" comment by George Tenet concering the intelligence on Iraqi WMD. On MTP, Cheney again cited Tenet's comment to defend the Administration's use of prewar intelligence. But the media always seems to miss the glaring weaknesses in the Administration's argument concerning their reliance on Tenet's comment in making their push for war.
According to Bob Woodward, the "slam dunk" comment occurred at a meeting of the Bush's war cabinet in the oval office in mid-December 2002 to review the intelligence on Iraqi WMD and that the comment was made by Tenet after Bush expressed suprise at the lack of solid information on WMD. Let me repeat: THE COMMENT WAS MADE IN A MEETING IN MID-DECEMBER 2002! That is months after Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice had begun their saber rattling. Months after Cheney made his "there is no doubt" speech to the American Legion. Months after Rice cited the Iraqi purchase of aluminum tubes as evidece of nuclear development. Months after Andy Card supervised the "roll out" the Administration's "new product" (the invasion of Iraq) in September 2002, just in time for the mid-term elections.
Am I missing something here? Certainly, the Bush Administration could not have relied on Tenet's comment in August and September 2002, when Cheney and Rice were issuing definitive assessments on Iraqi WMD, or in October 2002 when the vote on Iraq war was had in Congress. Why was the meeting with Tenet held so late in the game? Why was Bush, and presumably the others present at the meeting, surprised by the flimsy intelligence so late in the game? How does the media miss thes simple, yet gaping holes, in the Administration's argument?
Posted by: Dennis M at September 11, 2006 02:49 PM
patriot day is a national bushco holyday
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 02:49 PM
Ok so if you did not test for these compounds, you have not done COMPLTETE testing, instead choosing to rely on "heresay evidence". WEASLES!!!
Now DEN, you have to list the rest of the answer to put it in perspective. I bet they didn't test for nuclear explosions either. Or a photon beam from space, or any number of WACK things these people could think of. You have to have evidence or even a hint of something before you waste time and money exploring a dry hole. Here's the REST of the answer for #12...
The responses to questions number 2, 4, 5 and 11 demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.
Furthermore, a very large quantity of thermite (a mixture of powdered or granular aluminum metal and powdered iron oxide that burns at extremely high temperatures when ignited) or another incendiary compound would have had to be placed on at least the number of columns damaged by the aircraft impact and weakened by the subsequent fires to bring down a tower. Thermite burns slowly relative to explosive materials and can require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening. Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.
=================
Do you honestly thing people went upstairs to the impact floor while the building burned, set up THOUSANDS OF POUNDS of thermite, and held it in place to heat MANY MANY beams so collapse initation could start? Or, do you think THOUSANDS of POUNDS of thermite were pre-positioned at the correct floor where the plane would hit, but didn't go off by the fuel explosions, and waited for conpiracists to come up there and set them off??? You people have to THINK THROUGH some of the weird things you espouse. Iml-fkn-possible comes to mind.
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 02:51 PM
David, what we really need in this country is a venue for immediate rebuttal of such false claims as Cheney made on MTP. Obviously, Russert and most of the MSM talking heads are not up to this challenge. What can we do to be sure that lies such as these are exposed immediately, before the host is purposely drowned out and the viewers distracted?
Posted by: Via at September 11, 2006 02:53 PM
DEN, Dr. Jones IS conducting that very research, even though BYU is trying to shut him up. If the govt. is so sure of their story why don't they just give him what he is requesting and let him make a fool of himself? That seems the the best plan of action to me.
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 02:59 PM
'"I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions."' ~~Craig Carlsen FDNY
No, those weren't explosions from fuel cascading down the core in stairwells and elevator shafts or grounded out xformers , those were these new kind of demo charges that go off then wait about an hour for the results. LOL
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 03:08 PM
The responses to questions number 2, 4, 5 and 11 demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.
the responses by NIST demonstrate why NIST concluded....
bravo!
here is wtc2 less than 1/2 it's original size:
poof! where did the rest of it go? in order to have pancaking, a force is required to trigger the failure of the next floor. if the building above that floor has been pulverized, there can be no force pushing down. any pulverized material remaining over the footprint of the building will be suspended in the air and can't contribute to a downward force slamming onto the next floor.
only 10 seconds to poof!
the poof! is in the pudding.
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 03:15 PM
not eye said the blind man -
poofity poof!
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 03:17 PM
#83, Alan, You have a bit more thinking to do pal, There was a LABOR DAY WEEKEND prior to Tuesday Sept. 11, more than enough time to set charges with everyone out of town, OK?
Combine that with Israeli movers driving around town with a van with explosive residues inside getting busted and subsequently exported BACK to Israel seems a bit suspicious, NO?
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 03:21 PM
where did the rest of it go alan? 87
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 03:22 PM
#85 Sal, right on! (B rite bak)
Posted by: DEN at September 11, 2006 03:24 PM
Thanks for all this work and showing the truth
instead of all the lies we have been fed. I wish
so much that you could have included that this
Adm. also used a picture of Saddam and BinLaden
together (it was put all over the news when some
people in the know said there was no connection
between the two men.)Jan. 2003. This must have been a BIG LIE too (the picture) because how can you have two people on same picture who never met, and it was also said that they never liked each other.
That picture if found would really nail them if
proven to be faux.
Also i never hear about the fact that Dan Rather
went to meet with Saddam before the war broke
out and Saddam said he wanted to meet with Pres.
Bush and tell him the truth that he didn't
have weapons, etc. The same night ( a Sunday)
I watched the news and reporters asked Bush if
he watched (HE DID NOT) and it was very well
publicized. He was told that Saddam wants to
have a meeting with him. (BUSH SAID NO) no
diplomacy here (eventho Bush said he tried to
use diplomacy) Actually, I have yet to see him
use diplimacy with any of the countries we're
having problems with. So I feel very strongly
that it was like the whole Adm. had a "hot foot"
to get the war starteed. Then when they did
(March 19th, 2003) I clearly remember they said
they had excellent intelligence that Saddam,
his cabinet, sons, etc. were in a building so
they began by bombing that building and was
leading us to believe this was going to be
swift ~~ there was no one in building and no
tunnel to get away. (???) And look how long
we've been there and they still want to continue
their slaughter of our men and the civilian
people of Iraq. It's not right!! WE MUST
VOTE ~~ it's the most important vote I've
ever made. And is the cheating at the polls
going to stop this time?????????????????????
Posted by: Mickster at September 11, 2006 03:30 PM
#83, Alan, You have a bit more thinking to do pal, There was a LABOR DAY WEEKEND prior to Tuesday Sept. 11, more than enough time to set charges with everyone out of town, OK?
Combine that with Israeli movers driving around town with a van with explosive residues inside getting busted and subsequently exported BACK to Israel seems a bit suspicious, NO?
First part... so thermite was preplanted on the exact floor where the plane would hit? Ok, then why didn't the fuel explosion set it off? Seriously, even if a labor day weekend was enough time to set it up, how or what triggered the thermite an hour later?? What kind of rigging held the thermite to the beam it was used on? It doesn't quite work like a cutting torch, so that would be one hella problem to solve. A person couldn't hold it and direct it where you wanted to heat up beams, that's for sure.
Now, second part... you'll have to link me to something that says israelis had explosive residure in their van. If it wasn't thermite, then there goes the first part of your so-called rebuttal. I have read about some israelis going out to their van after the first tower was hit and started filming. I'd bet there were thousands of new yorkers that did the same. And maybe they were Mossad agents too, cause it insinuate they were tracking arabs. If so, that would be a public relations nightmare for AIPAC and the Israeli government so I can understand if they were whisked back to Israel after their cover was blown. But yeah, if you'll just link me to the explosive residue article... and I hope it explains just what kind of explosives it was. Thanks.
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 03:36 PM
We Best Honor Those Who Died Five Years Ago by Making Sure the Right People Are Brought to Justice
And the fact is, once you start looking carefully, little about the official 9/11 story seems right. For instance, just starting with the attack on the north tower--
what really happened?
blob 11 and what a real 767 at that focus would look like
(source)
Everything gets stranger and stranger from that point on.
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 03:37 PM
9/11'S QUESTIONS - TODAY'S HIGH ALERT
What a sad anniversary. The deaths of thousands are sorrowful enough. But what is almost as troubling is that there so many anomalies in the government explanations about who took the World Trade Towers down and why.
Thank God for the Internet and its alternative media, including millions of blogs. You can be sure that a good deal of Internet speculation will focus not on mainstream celebrations of government interpretations of 9/11 but on the fundamental questions behind 9/11.
Yes, grieving reader, there is an operative force call it the visible money elite wishing to bring together the West's disparate nation states into one large confederation with a consolidated currency. I have written about this in my book "High Alert" from High Alert publishing. In this book, I put forth the hypothesis that "money power" likely facilitated 9/11 in some sense of the word, for it has the most to gain, and may gain the most, from the towers takedown.
Why make such a "conspiratorial" statement? Because the "visible" money elite is busy at work even now attempting to consolidate the West's nation states into one big bunch a large scale industrial bouquet, if you will - with one currency and one central bank. Imagine the power this would give to those who controlled such a fragrant prize! There is evidence, almost too much of it, that there are some and they are named almost endlessly on the net - who will apparently do just about anything to obtain it.
The EU is an obvious outgrowth of this urge, is it not? The EU's leaders lied for 50 years about the nature of the "experiment." It was just a free-trade zone, they said. Nonsense. It was, and is, a continually more repressive political union one that many in Europe would reject, much as the French already rejected the EU constitution. Is it a conspiracy? Europe was lied to by its leaders, as was Britain. The lies continue even today, with EU's socialist front-men implementing their rejected constitution piecemeal, behind the backs of their citizens, since they cannot it get it honestly approved.
More HERE
*****end of clip*****
Some people lack the vision and critical mind or curiousity to question the most important things they read. Reading something does not make it true. Not even a reference book, non-fiction novel or a governmental report.
Tragic.
"Readers are plentiful; thinkers are rare." ~ Harriet Martineau (1802 - 1876)
capt
Posted by: capt at September 11, 2006 03:39 PM
Has everyone seen this yet?
Film depicts fictional killing of Bush
A controversial mock documentary showing the imagined assassination of U.S. President George W. Bush will debut at the Toronto International Film Festival next week and be aired on a British television channel next month.
Posted by: eyes_open at September 11, 2006 03:41 PM
First part... so thermite was preplanted on the exact floor where the plane would hit? Ok, then why didn't the fuel explosion set it off?
maybe thermite is beyond stable and needs to be purposefully set-off. maybe it takes an actual detonation cap or whatever they use and mere jet fuel (kerosene) isn't enough?
where did the rest of it go alan? @87poof
Posted by: spy on this! at September 11, 2006 03:41 PM
maybe thermite is beyond stable and needs to be purposefully set-off. maybe it takes an actual detonation cap or whatever they use and mere jet fuel (kerosene) isn't enough?
"Maybe?" Is that like "they say..."? lol Maybe you haven't taken your meds today too. hahaha I'll type this slow for you then... do you even remember the link YOU posted with the thermite demonstration? The guys lit it with a long fuse, very much like you'd light a firecracker.
Seriously Spy, you need help.
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 03:49 PM
spy, where did those monstrous beams come from? I thought those buildings, all three of them, were constructed from a flimsy truss system which made up a basically hollow tube held together by, possibly, a photon BEAM from outer space!
Posted by: Saladin at September 11, 2006 03:49 PM
DEN, are you back yet? I've got some work to do now, so I'll have to check back later or tonight for that link about the Israelis.
Posted by: Alan at September 11, 2006 03:52 PM
Thermite
Conventional thermite reactions require very high temperatures for initiation. These cannot be reached with conventional black-powder fuses, nitrocellulose rods, detonators, or other common igniting substances. Even when the thermite is hot enough to glow bright red, it will not ignite as it must be at or near white-hot to initiate the reaction. It is possible to start the reaction using a propane torch if done right, but this should never be attempted for safety reasons.
Often, strips of magnesium metal are used as fuses. Magnesium burns at approximately the temperature at which thermite reacts, around 2500 Kelvin (4000 ?F). This method is notoriously unreliable: magnesium itself is hard to ignite, and in windy or wet conditions the strip may be extinguished. Also, magnesium strips do not contain their own oxygen source so ignition cannot occur through a small hole. A significant danger of magnesium ignition is the fact that the metal is an excellent conductor of heat; heating one end of the ribbon may cause the other end to transfer enough heat to the thermite to cause premature ignition. Despite these issues, magnesium ignition remains popular amongst amateur thermite users.
The reaction between potassium permanganate and glycerine is used as an alternative to the magnesium method. When these two substances mix, a spontaneous reaction will begin, slowly increasing the temperature of the mixture until flames are produced. The heat released by the oxidation of glycerine is sufficient to initiate a thermite reaction. However, this method can also be unreliable and the delay between mixing and ignition