9/11 Bill of Rights - Voice of Freedom

Why is SOPA Bad?

2012-01-29T13:07:00.000-08:00

The January 18th “blackout” protest that featured censorship bars, full-screen warnings, or a blank homepage on popular websites such as Wikipedia, Wordpress and Reddit came as a surprise to some. The October, 2011 Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), introduced by an even mix of Republicans and Democrats, drew immediate and continuing public opposition and outcry.

After a December post to Reddit suggested moving away from Go Daddy, a major domain registering company that volubly supported both SOPA and PIPA- the Protect IP Act-, nearly 80,000 domain names were transferred to other services, according to Fight For The Future's SOPA timeline.

On January 20, 2012, Congress postponed voting indefinitely. However, SOPA and related copyright protection acts could easily return. Understanding how these bills fit into criminology precedents is important to anyone who uses and derives value from content found off the internet. Although the aim of SOPA is important, there are vast consequences to the bill. For example, a group of students creating a video for their online school project may decide to use a Kanye West song in the background of their original video. In response, Roc-A-Fella Records could accuse the students of copyright infringement and it could be taken down without due process.

The ostensible aim of SOPA was to reduce piracy and intellectual property infringement from foreign sites. To do so, it would remove access to their URL from search engines. While this could in fact have occurred, the wording of the proposed bill unfortunately allowed for severe violations not just to copyright infringers but also content creators who major corporations simply accused of copyrighting information.

For instance, according to First Amendment lawyer and Internet policy expert Marvin Ammori, “Any tool that helps anyone 'circumvent' the bills' remedies are illegal...any American sites that permit you to search for, or find, The Pirate Bay's new domain is potentially liable for circumvention.” This means that sites must subject their users to an arguably insupportable level of scrutiny to prevent a stray comment, Facebook status, social media tag, video response, or any of countless communication tools in constant use from jeopardizing their legal standing. An entire service must be responsible for all content of every user.

In addition, the State Department could order advertisers, domain name system (DNS) providers, and payment processors like Paypal to dissociate themselves from any site even accused of wrongdoing, resulting in millions of dollars in potential revenue loss for them all. Through the “market-based” system too-vaguely defined in SOPA, private entities such as entertainment companies could compile lists of offensive or even suspicious sites, and demand that they be cut off from financial support long before any possible legal hearing takes place.

Because due process is not required under SOPA, the potential for abuse is massive. And not only large businesses would face handicapping from this bill. Small business owners who make their livelihood from intellectual property, such as artists and photographers, are already suffering under language in the current Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) law. The DMCA has provisions that encourage baseless accusations of copyright infringement, resulting in scare tactics that bring down websites- often an individual artist's sole source of income- without formal charges. Like the DMCA, SOPA would allow media companies and lawyers to put pressure against competitors simply by accusing them of copyright infringement.

Protecting companies from copyright infringement is not intrinsically a bad thing. Online piracy is without question a problem that needs to be addressed. However, until proper language is formulated to protect free speech, the kinds of bills being proposed to attack piracy must have appropriate oversight to prevent misuse.

Silent Dawn of Open Fascism - U.S. Enabling Act of 2011: S.1867 (National Defense Authorization Act)

2011-12-13T01:13:00.000-08:00

ORIGINAL UPLOAD BY RT America Permission to repost granted.

Nov 29, 2011

There is a bill in the US Senate called the National Defense Authorization Act and it could be voted on as early as this week. This bill gives the president the authority to indefinitely imprison American citizens without a court hearing, both domestically and abroad. Senate Bill 1867 is bringing the battlefield to the homeland. Alex Jones, radio host of The Alex Jones Show, tells us what this could mean for America's future.

Obama has said he would veto this bill!

Major Wars and Suppression of American Freedoms Planned BEFORE 9/11BEFORE 9/11

2011-11-10T12:05:00.000-08:00

Posted on November 9, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog

Iran War Threats, Militarization of American Police and Spying on Americans All Started BEFORE 9/11

Many things which we’ve been told have only happened recently actually started a long time ago.
For example, the mainstream media claims that Iran is close to building a nuclear weapon. But the Christian Science Monitor notes that the U.S. has been claiming for more than 30 years that Iran was on the verge of nuclear capability.

And the decision to threaten to bomb Iran was made before 9/11.

As another example, journalists from across the spectrum have documented the militarization of police forces in the United States, including, CNN, Huffington Post, Forbes, Esquire, The Atlantic, Salon, and the Cato Institute.
Indeed, police shooting peaceful “occupy” protesters with rubber bullets, tear gas and other projectiles and brutally beating them has brought this issue to the attention of the American public. See this, this and this.
But the militarization of police started long before 9/11 … in the 1980s. As Radley Balko testified before the House Subcommittee on Crime:

Militarization [of police forces is] a troubling trend that’s been on the rise in America’s police departments over the last 25 years.
***
Since the late 1980s, Mr. Chairman, thanks to acts passed by the U.S. Congress, millions of pieces of surplus military equipment have been given to local police departments across the country.
We’re not talking just about computers and office equipment. Military-grade semi-automatic weapons, armored personnel vehicles, tanks, helicopters, airplanes, and all manner of other equipment designed for use on the battlefield is now being used on American streets, against American citizens.
Academic criminologists credit these transfers with the dramatic rise in paramilitary SWAT teams over the last quarter century.
SWAT teams were originally designed to be used in violent, emergency situations like hostage takings, acts of terrorism, or bank robberies. From the late 1960s to the early 1980s, that’s primarily how they were used, and they performed marvelously.
But beginning in the early 1980s, they’ve been increasingly used for routine warrant service in drug cases and other nonviolent crimes. And thanks to the Pentagon transfer programs, there are now a lot more of them.

Many other things which we’ve been told happened after 9/11 actually occurred beforehand as well.
For example:

The Afghanistan war was planned before 9/11 (see this and this)

The decision to launch the Iraq war was made before 9/11. Indeed, former CIA director George Tenet said that the White House wanted to invade Iraq long before 9/11, and inserted “crap” in its justifications for invading Iraq. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill – who sat on the National Security Council – also says that Bush planned the Iraq war before 9/11. Top British officials say that the U.S. discussed Iraq regime change even before Bush took office. And in 2000, Cheney said a Bush administration might “have to take military action to forcibly remove Saddam from power.”

Cheney apparently even made Iraqi’s oil fields a national security priority before 9/11. And the Sunday Herald reported: “Five months before September 11, the US advocated using force against Iraq … to secure control of its oil.” (remember that Alan Greenspan, John McCain, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, a high-level National Security Council officer and others all say that the Iraq war was really about oil.)

The Patriot Act was planned before 9/11. Indeed, former Counter Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke told Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig:

After 9/11 the government drew up the Patriot Act within 20 days and it was passed.
The Patriot Act is huge and I remember someone asking a Justice Department official how did they write such a large statute so quickly, and of course the answer was that it has been sitting in the drawers of the Justice Department for the last 20 years waiting for the event where they would pull it out.
(4:30 into this video).

Cheney dreamed of giving the White House the powers of a monarch long before 9/11

Cheney and Rumsfeld actively generated fake intelligence which exaggerated the threat from an enemy in order to justify huge amounts of military spending long before 9/11. And see this

The government’s spying on Americans began before 9/11 (confirmed here and here. And see this)

It was known long before 9/11 that torture doesn’t work to produce accurate intelligence … but is an effective way to terrorize people

And – sadly – America played dirty games to justify and win wars before 9/11

Note: 9/11 itself is beyond the scope of this essay, although the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 – and former head of the Senate Intelligence Committee – calls for a new 9/11 investigation, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg says that the government has ordered the media not to cover 9/11, and high-level officials are eager to spill the beans about what happened on 9/11 … but no one in Washington or the media wants to hear.

Demographics of Occupy Wall Street

2011-11-01T11:05:00.000-07:00

Occupy Wall Street began largely as a grassroots movement, initiated locally and spread globally through use of social media. It began relatively small: a group of activists were tired of seeing what the economic crisis has done to themselves, their friends and families, and the country at large. In mid-September, many little online communities received an invitation to take part in an event the main organizers were calling “Occupy Wall Street.”

The purpose of this event was to march on Wall Street and stage a manifestation in the symbolic ground zero of the economic meltdown that has engulfed not only our country, but much of the Western world. In the month or so since, many have organized similar events in their home cities, and the movement has gone global and found hundreds of thousands of participants.

The news media, online pundits, PhD commentators, and certain government officials have sought to paint Occupiers as everything from disgruntled, unemployed neo-liberals with no real agenda to hippies and college students with nothing better to do with their time. The catchphrase of the movement is "We are the 99 percent," referring to the statistical fact that the majority of the wealth in the United States (and indeed, most of the Western world) is held by one percent of the population.

However, there is still some confusion as to who the occupiers of Zuccotti Park and over 150 other communities throughout the United States, really are. According to a recent poll of 1,619 visitors to the official website of Occupy Wall Street, here is the statistical breakdown:

While 26.7 percent of the participants are current college students, eight percent only earned high school diplomas. More than half of the respondents are employed full time, and another 20 percent work at part-time jobs. The percentage of unemployed is 13.1, just above the official national unemployment figures. With regard to the charge that this movement is the left-leaning Democrats' answer to the Tea Party, 70 percent of those surveyed identify themselves as Independents.

To put a more human face on the movement, these are some of the people who make up Occupy Wall Street:

"Lauren" is an unemployed computer programmer and mother of four who works part-time as a banquet server. Her husband “Jack” is a contractor who has had to take odd jobs as a handyman since he lost his primary employment in 2008. They lost their four-bedroom home to foreclosure two years ago and now live in a two-bedroom apartment. Until the 2000 presidential elections, she voted a straight Republican ticket, and previously volunteered as an election official.

"Bradley" is a veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan who has been since been discharged from the army. He is currently seeking employment in the private sector, but has had no luck.

"Sara" is part of the one percent. She is 22 years old, and has inherited her wealth. She claims she supports Occupy Wall Street because she doesn't think it's fair that she gets a free ride because of luck, while so many others have to struggle to eat and pay their bills.

The answer to the question "Who are the people of Occupy Wall Street?" is simple. They are students, teachers, activists, parents, professionals, veterans, men and woman, black and white. They are your neighbors, your co-workers, your parents, your children, your friends. They are the face of America.

#Occupytimessquare 1 Marine vs. 30 Cops

2011-10-18T20:54:00.000-07:00

‎"I took an Oath that I live by. I am NOT anti-NYPD. I am anti- Police Brutality. I am no longer under contract with the USMC so I do NOT have to follow military uniform regulations. I DON'T affiliate myself with ANY GROUPS or POLITICAL ORG. I affiliate myself with the AMERICAN PEOPLE that's it. I REFUSE to affiliate with anything that SEPERATES. There is an obvious problem in the country and PEACEFUL PEOPLE should be allowed to PROTEST without Brutality. I was involved in a RIOT in Rutbah, Iraq 2004 and we did NOT treat the Iraqi citizens like they are treating the unarmed civilians in our OWN Country. No one was brutalized because our mission was to "WIN the hearts and minds", why should I expect anything less in my OWN Country.

Sgt. Shamar Thomas USMC Veteran. SEMPER FI"

Rush Limbaugh talks about Occupy Wall Street

2011-10-14T12:58:00.000-07:00

"Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Sacramento, Occupy Philadelphia, Occupy Washington, wherever they are, what exactly are the contributions to society these protestors have made? How many jobs have they created? How many jobs have they held? Have they built any homes for people? Have they invented any lifesaving drugs? These protestors, who are actually few in number, have contributed nothing. They're parasites."

Many of these protestors are bored trust fund kids, obsessed with being something, being somebody, meaningless lives, they want to matter. Others are just showing up for the fun of it to rabble-rouse."

OCCUPY WALL STREET WINS!

2011-10-14T09:54:00.000-07:00

Bloomberg backs down, protesters stay in New York city park.

I am the 99% Occupy Wall Street Tshirt gear

2011-10-13T22:16:00.000-07:00

Wear Occupy Wall Street, Tshirt and gear. Get ready!
http://www.cafepress.com/politicprotest.309642925#

The Relationship Between the American and the Other

2011-09-28T16:21:00.000-07:00

Hate always has and always will breed even more hate. Events like 9/11 are instances where Americans have been targeted because they are hated.

People are usually identify based on their citizenship, but we are really all human first no matter what nation we are from. It doesn't matter if you have a background in sociology or went to college for a criminal justice degree; everyone should understand other nations and look to others with an open mind.

As different as we may look, according to Carleton University no one can dispute that there are more differences within populations than between them and we can all trace our start to one family that lived 200,000 years ago. Creative and intellectual debate and exchange is important, but at the end of the day, we all are more similar than we think.

According to Benedict Anderson, an imagined community is that even though not every citizen will intimately know every other citizen, all citizens of that nation are connected through their citizenship. In Benedict Anderson's own work, the imagined community is not only what creates national identity and national pride, or nationalism, but it is how it spreads. This imagined bond creates an "us" mentality. For many Americans, democracy is the superior governing entity because of this collective national identity that is firmly rooted in American history.

If there is an “us” in nationalism there is also a “them” concept. For example, celebrated scholar, Edward Said, called his term of “them” as the “Other” in Orientalism. Emory University cites Said's use of the Other as, “a system of representations framed by political forces that brought the Orient into Western learning, Western consciousness, and Western empire. The Orient exists for the West, and is constructed by and in relation to the West. It is a mirror image of what is inferior and alien (Other) to the West.”

Even though Bachelor of Arts degrees are on the rise, Americans are still ignorant about issues at home and abroad. According to CNN in 2011 only 30 percent of Americans have passports. Meanwhile, 60 percent of Canadians and 75 percent of United Kingdom citizens have passports. Despite being more interconnected than ever, the Pew Research Center notes how despite earlier generations before them, Americans in 2007 could not name the Russian president or even their own vice president. While there are many implications for Americans being too comfortable and complacent, many will never experience or come close to understanding the political systems, religions or cultures of the Other.

As scholars Daniel Byrne and Anne Foster note in their research paper Holding the Line: Race, Racism, and American Foreign Policy, American foreign policy was built on officials' personal racist biases; a tradition that has its roots in slavery and imperialism. What can we do with the Other when we know so little about them? Often, an irrational fear that spurs hatred and fear can arise, also known as xenophobia. In order to protect ourselves from this Other, we militarize it to justify it. Instances like the National Geographic's show “Border Wars” or Former President Bush's rhetoric on “the war on terror” just spews the justification of hate.

Unfortunately, this type of hate is directed to human beings and can cause deep psychological, emotional, mental and physical traumas. In an increasingly globalized world, we can and must learn from each other. Let us open our minds and hearts and prove to ourselves and the world that Americans are not stupid, and above all, tolerant.

Angels and Yankees to Honor 9/11 Anniversary with Pregame Ceremony

2011-09-09T11:52:00.000-07:00

WHAT: The Angels and New York Yankees will recognize the 10th anniversary of the September 11th attacks by honoring the memory of the victims and recognizing the survivors with a special pregame ceremony.

WHEN: Prior to the start of the Angels’ game vs. the New York Yankees on Sunday, September 11th at 12:35 PM.

WHO: The ceremony will include six first pitch participants who will throw to Torii Hunter, Mike Scioscia, Jered Weaver, Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada and Mariano Rivera.

Joe Torillo is a retired New York Fire Department Lieutenant and a survivor of the attack on the World Trade Center. Robert Schiavone is currently a member of the Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff’s Department, but in 2001 he was a member of NYFD, Ladder Company 39. Schiavone was part of the rescue mission when the World Trade Center towers collapsed. Christopher Suprun is a first responder firefighter/paramedic from North Carolina who responded to the attack on the Pentagon. Suprun aided with the rescue and recovery in Washington, D.C. Navy Seals VR Mike Murphy, Eric Franssens and Chet Henderson, each of whom have served multiple tours of duty in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The national anthem will be performed by the Orange County Sheriff Bugle Corps. The Orange County Fire Authority Color Guard will present our nation’s colors while 250 local police, fire and military volunteers unfurl a giant American flag in the outfield.

Source: http://angelswinblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/angels-and-yankees-to-honor-911.html

PBS FRONTLINE: Investigation on 9/11 terrorists

2011-09-06T13:57:00.000-07:00

Watch the full episode. See more FRONTLINE.

9/11 firefighters more likely to get cancer: study

2011-09-02T10:45:00.000-07:00

Firefighters exposed to the World Trade Center attacks are more likely to get cancer, while 9/11 rescue workers still suffer high illness rates generally, according to studies published Friday.

In a 10th anniversary edition of medical journal The Lancet, scientists said however that death rates among emergency staff and civilians who survived the disaster were lower than those of the wider New York City population."The events of that day changed the historical trajectory of America and the world.

They have had -- and continue to have -- profound consequences for health," the Lancet journal said in an editorial.One study showed that New York City firefighters who rushed to the doomed Twin Towers a decade ago are 19 percent more likely to have cancer than their non-exposed colleagues and a comparable section of the city's population.

There were 263 cancer cases in the exposed firefighters compared with 238 expected from general population data, while from the non-exposed group there were only 135 compared with 161 expected from the general population.

The study, led by David Prezant, chief medical officer of the Fire Department of the City of New York (FDNY), and colleagues, looked at 9,853 male firefighters with health records dating back to well before 9/11.Another study in the Lancet showed a high burden of both physical and mental illness in the estimated 50,000 rescue and recovery workers involved in the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York by Al-Qaeda.Data gathered from more than 27,000 of those workers, who enrolled in a federally funded monitoring programme, showed that 28 percent had developed asthma, 42 percent sinusitis, and 39 percent gastrooesophageal reflux disease.

Twenty-eight percent had depression, 32 percent had post traumatic stress disorder and 21 percent had panic disorder, said the study by Juan Wisnivesky, of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York state."Our findings show a substantial burden of persistent physical and mental disorders in rescue and recovery workers who rushed to the site of the WTC and laboured there for weeks and months 10 years ago," the study said.But World Trade Center-exposed rescue workers and civilians have had lower death rates than New York City general population, a third study by researchers at the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

They said the fact that most of those exposed were employed and that they had volunteered for the study -- both employed people and study volunteers are largely healthier than the overall population -- could account for the result.

Source: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/09/02/911-firefighters-more-likely-to-get-cancer-study/

Why did 9/11 happen to the US?

2011-06-01T14:48:00.000-07:00

Question: In 2001, I was 11 years old in 7th grade and remember at 6am California time when I woke up first thing I did was turn on the TV. Since then I don't really know why the terrorist decided to attack us? I want to know their side and our side as well.

Answer: You probably need a little bit of a historical perspective to maybe understand it properly. For thousands of years countries have fought wars. Sometimes for land, wealth, differences in political beliefs and a lot of them have been over religion.

I would argue that the reason for the attack, as with similar attacks is part political and part religious. 6 to 700 years after the death of Christ for example the Muslim Conquests saw Islam playing a dominant force throughout the middle east, Asia and into Europe.

This played a large roll in the downfall of the Roman Empire which from about 300 years following the death of Christ had been important in the spread of Christianity.

Now jump forward a few hundred years and you have the Crusades which saw Christian warriors seeking to take back holy lands from the Muslims. Now although this was almost a thousand years ago, for the hundreds of years since then wars have been fought over lands and beliefs relating to this, Israel and Palestine being a perfect example. Now the 9/11 terrorists are Muslim and their beliefs are different from those of the US which is largely Christian. But more than that the are radical Muslims who take their beliefs to extreme points.

Because of this they disagree with the society that the US has, based on what they see as money, greed, sex etc. So just like the holy wars all those hundreds of years ago they seek to punish the USA for its beliefs by waging Jihad or holy war. In its extreme they will not stop fighting jihad until they take over all non Muslim countries and spread Islam and Islamic law all over the world, and they are willing to fight and die until this happens. This would be the religious aspect.

For the political aspect you have to jump back 10-years before you were born. Back then Russia (or the Soviet Union) was still a dominant power and sought to spread socialism throughout the world just as the US seeks to spread democracy throughout the world. As part of this process in 1979 the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.

With the Cold War between Russia and the USA in full swing the US had been seeking to undermine Soviet influence in Afghanistan by funding anti-Soviet factions as leadership at that time was pro-Soviet. It worked and in 1979 the pro-Soviet government was overthrown but naturally the Russians didn't like this and invaded. As part of the Reagan Doctrine, which basically said that anti-communist forces would be supported anywhere in the world, the US actually helped fund, arm and equip the Mujahideen (freedom fighters who formed the basis for the Taliban which included people like Osama Bin Laden, who were essentially CIA trained) to fight against the Russians. The problem is by 1989 when the Russians had been defeated and left Afghanistan the Taliban was a powerful force and developed a stronger religious ideology.

Without the Russians to fight they essentially cast their eyes further afield first of all seeking to totally dominate Afghanistan which resulted in the killing of a lot of innocent civilians. However even at this stage, due to previous support of the Taliban against Russia, the US didn't voice much if any opposition to the Taliban. Given the infighting between various groups in Afghanistan the US had still hoped the Taliban could bring some kind of order to the country but they were far too ruthless. There was as well already some bad feeling from the Afghan side that having used the Mujahideen to fight the Russians, America has essentially abandoned Afghanistan and didn't help to rebuild or support the country (one of the reasons why the USA attempted to learn from the experience and has tried to help rebuild Iraq).

But in 90s the US backed off from Afghanistan and then voiced opposition to the Taliban along with other international groups and governments. It also started to help track down and arrest Islamic terrorists and it was from this time that things began to escalate.

There were actually several Al Qaeda attacks before 9/11, a 1992 hotel bombing in Yemen, the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing in New York, in 1998 when terrorists associated with Osama Bin Laden bombed 2 US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. And as a result of this one however the US responded and launched a series of cruise missile attacks on several terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and Sudan, which in turn essentially moved the Taliban and Al Qaeda (which is the Taliban plus other like-minded international Islamic terrorist groups) into full Jihad against the US and its supporters. And in 2000 there was the attack on the US warship the USS Cole.

All this was the build up and eventual culmination in 9/11 attacks which had actually been planned since 1996. Unfortunately both sides are likely in a permanent stand off as the US and its allies cannot stop seeking to eradicate the terrorists, which is a tall order given it is such a loose and mobile organisation spread all over the world. And the Taliban and Al Qaeda won't stop their attacks until they're in a position where they can at least cause so much terror and fear that even global powers back down to their demands.

To this end there is no doubt that they will want to acquire nuclear or biological weapons to inflict casualties far in excess of those on 9/11, which is the really scary thing.

Yahoo Answers: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091123003505AAfLIeQ

United States Bill of Rights

2011-04-05T01:39:00.000-07:00

First ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America.
The very first Congress drafted 12 amendments to the states, 10 of which were ratified. The 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of religion, speech, and the press and grants the right to petition for redress and to assemble peacefully.

Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment 3
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment 4
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment 6
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment 7
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment 8
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Interview with Brett Smith, Creator of 9/11 Movie ‘Hypothesis’

2011-03-06T22:46:00.000-08:00

Posted by Abby Martin on March 6, 2011

This is an exclusive Media Roots Radio interview with Utah based documentarian Brett Smith, conducted by Abby and Robbie Martin on February 23, 2011. In 2006, Brett’s love of films drew him into taking a film class where he was required to make a 15 minute short. That 15 minute short later turned into 40 minute documentary called Hypothesis.

Hypothesis is a documentary that follows physics professor Steven E. Jones during a pivotal time in his life. In 2005, Jones went public with a theory about 9/11 that was so controversial, it resulted in everything from hate mail, threats, and even bribery to try to end his research. Despite the outside pressures, Jones vowed to never give up on his pursuit of the truth.

The above timeline is interactive. Scroll through it to find out more about the show’s music and to resources mentioned during the broadcast. To see a larger version of the timeline with clickable resources go to the soundcloud link below the player.If you would like to directly download the podcast click the down arrow icon on the right of the soundcloud display. To hide the comments to enable easier rewind and fast forward, click on the icon on the very bottom right.

To learn more about Brett’s movie Hypothesis, go to the Internet Movie Database.

For more information go to http://www.disinfo.com/2011/03/interview-with-brett-smith-creator-of-911-movie-hypothesis/

Revolution: Puppet Dictators, US Response & Coverage, or another Breaking Apart the Official 9/11 Coincidence Theory.

The Reflecting Pool - An investigation of the 9/11

2011-01-14T22:53:00.000-08:00

An investigation of the 9/11 events by a Russian-American journalist and a father of a 9/11 victim implicates the US government in the attacks. Alex Prokop, a successful journalist, receives a rare 9/11 video tape revealing new information about the attack.

The footage was sent by Paul Cooper, a driven researcher, whose daughter died on 9/11. Sensing a good story, Prokop travels with Cooper to New York and Washington, DC, where they uncover suppressed information implicating the US Government in the attacks. As Cooper introduces Prokop to key eye-witnesses, the facade of the “official story” begins to crumble.

Prokop hears accounts of underground explosions in the Twin Towers moments before their collapse and discovers that the firm providing WTC security was run by the President’s brother. We follow Alex and Cooper as they investigate the inexplicable collapse of the 47-story WTC Building Seven, disprove the implausible airliner “attack” on the Pentagon, and uncover the illegal destruction of physical evidence from Ground Zero. The pressure builds as the FBI intimidates Alex’s editor, McGuire, to reveal key sources - while the magazine’s corporate investors threaten to kill the entire story.

Plagued by the ghosts of his Communist childhood and trying to uphold the independence of American journalism, Alex’s search for the truth leads to a dangerous and shocking realization! The Reflecting Pool is an intense, sobering investigation into the most controversial tragedy of our time. Drawn from established sources and based on verifiable facts, The Reflecting Pool is a thought-provoking study of a search for truth and the profound consequences of not looking for it any further than the nightly news.

Wikileaks, 9/11 and the Bill of Rights

2011-01-06T17:09:00.000-08:00

"I presume this is in regards to the push by congress to make the internet a gov't ruled affair?

Get this... see if you can wrap your head around it.... there is speculation that Wikileaks is run by the CIA. Think about it... they create it,... set up a big fiasco... leak a bunch of really stupid stuff that clearly isn't all that mind blowing and blow it up to huge proportions via the web. Then they put some mysterious kid soldier in jail for leaking info to Wikileaks and 8 months later, nobody has seen him even once. They claim he is in extreme solitary getting 1 hour of daylight each day. No charges have been pressed to date. Does this person even exist? Hmmm... anyways... what would be gained by such an event happening? Well, it would make the vast majority of people say "well, yeah... I guess with stuff happening like that Wikileaks thing it makes sense to rule the web, okay... I wont make as big a fuss over it then".

It stands to reason that just like 9/11, the government has manipulated the public with an incident to bend their simple believing minds in their favor.

I for one actually lean towards this theory and will be very skeptical of Wikileaks for some time until they blow the lid off something major. And even then, I will be questioning the possibilities of why that story exists."

Scott Ewing Blog: http://myindystudio.blogspot.com/

Increased Tensions with Unresolved 9/11 Issues

2010-12-29T20:20:00.000-08:00

Several contentious issues still plague the US government and their version of the events of September 11, 2001. Those in political power along with media elites would like to see the ongoing grassroots debates surrounding unanswered 9/11 questions and discrepancies disappear, despite the mountains of evidence that suggest that American citizens were told little about the truth of the biggest single-day attack on their homeland in history. Nearly ten years after the events, many unanswered questions still exist: How did Building 7 fall? What caused the destruction of the twin towers? Where is Osama bin Laden? Are people that question the official story of 9/11 dangerous conspiracy theorists?

Student Researchers:

Mike Smith, Nolan Higdon, and Sy Cowie (Diablo Valley College)
Mikey Hemkens, Ryan Huffman, and Colin Doran (DePauw University)
Greg Bernardi (Sonoma State University)

Faculty Evaluators:

Mickey Huff (Diablo Valley College)
Andrea Sununu and Kevin Howley (DePauw University)
Rick Luttmann and Peter Phillips (Sonoma State University)

The academics and intellectuals who have tried to answer these questions have been ignored or derided by corporate mainstream (and even some progressive leftist) media, political pundits, and government officials who clearly intend to silence the so-called 9/11 Truth Movement, or anyone who questions the officially sanctioned government stance on the matter. However, the questions will not go away and increasingly beg for answers.

As of spring 2010, over 1,200 architects and engineers are calling for a new investigation into the events of 9/11. These building professionals and academics are motivated by the fact that the 9/11 Commission Report has been proven erroneous on multiple counts, scientific explanations have been flawed and contradictory, and the American people deserve a more fact-based explanation.

At the same time, new evidence of explosives that can be used in controlled demolition has been found in the dust traces of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers and Building 7 of the WTC complex. After careful examination of the official story about 9/11 (in which the commission never even mentioned Building 7), along with the forensic data omitted from official reports, these professionals have concluded that a new independent and transparent investigation into these massive and mysterious structural failures is needed.

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/14-increased-tensions-with-unresolved-911-issues/

Scott Brown justifies subsidizing a golf course over 9/11 rescue workers

2010-12-19T15:59:00.000-08:00

9/11 responders bill defeated by Senate GOP filibuster

2010-12-19T13:30:00.000-08:00

By the CNN Wire Staff

Senate Democrats failed Thursday to win a procedural vote to open debate on a bill that would provide medical benefits and compensation for emergency workers who were first on the scene of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The motion for cloture, or to begin debate, needed 60 votes to pass due to a Republican filibuster, but fell short at 57-42 in favor.

While supporters said they would try to bring the bill up again, either on its own or as part of other legislation to be considered, the vote Thursday jeopardized the measure's chances for approval in the final weeks of the current congressional session.

The House previously passed the bill on a mostly partisan 268-160 vote.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg reacted to Thursday's result by calling it "a tragic example of partisan politics trumping patriotism."

"I urge Senate Republicans to reconsider their wrong-headed political strategy and allow the bill to come to the floor for a vote," Bloomberg said in a statement.

Republicans complained that the $7.4 billion price tag was too high, while Democrats said the government had an obligation to help the first responders to the deadliest terrorism attack in U.S. history.

The James Zadroga 9/11 Health Bill -- named after a deceased New York Police Department detective who had worked in the toxic plume at ground zero -- seeks to provide free medical coverage for responders and survivors who were exposed to toxins after the attacks.

‘U.S.’ Chamber Of Commerce Lobbied To Help GOP Kill Bill To Provide Health Care To 9/11 First Responders

2010-12-18T23:38:00.000-08:00

Last night, the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart skewered Republicans for killing deficit neutral legislation to provide health care to the 9/11 first responders and emergency workers who suffered illnesses from working at Ground Zero.

He also mocked the celebrity-obsessed media that has completely ignored the story. Republicans, like Sen. John Thune (R-SD), filibustered the bill because they said tax cuts for the richest 2 percent were a higher priority for Congress.

While Republicans quietly snuffed out efforts to compensate 9/11 heroes, they were aided by a quiet lobbying campaign by the powerful lobbying front — the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The Chamber fought to help kill the 9/11 compensation bill because it was funded by ending a special tax loophole exploited by foreign corporations doing business in the United States.

The “U.S.” part of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a misnomer. As ThinkProgress reported, the Chamber represents dozens of foreign businesses in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, Bahrain, India, Brazil, and other countries. An investigation of the Chamber turned up recent fundraising documents from the Chamber soliciting foreign contributions to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6), the tax entity the Chamber used to run nasty campaign ads against Democrats earlier this year.

In September, the Chamber sent a letter officially opposing the 9/11 first responders bill, called the “James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010.” The Chamber warned that ending the tax loophole would “damage U.S. relationships with major trading partners” and “aggravate already unsettled financial markets.” A lobbying disclosure filed with the Senate confirms the Chamber contacted lawmakers to help kill the bill.

In typical fashion, the Chamber has not revealed which of its foreign members had asked them to kill the 9/11 bill. As the Chamber CEO explained to the Washington Monthly’s James Verini, the entire purpose of the Chamber is to provide “deniability” to corporations that want to affect the outcomes of elections or of public policy. In 2009, the Chamber secretly used a $86 million donation from the health insurance industry to fight health reform. At the time, the Chamber lied and claimed to the public that they were simply acting on behalf of the entire “business community.”

Republicans are continuing to protest any renewed attempts to pass the 9/11 first responders bill because of the tax issue raised by the Chamber. Yesterday, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) sent out a statement that mirrored the Chamber’s opposition to ending the foreign corporate tax loophole.

Daily Show: Senate Republicans 9/11 Worst Responders

2010-12-17T14:52:00.000-08:00

Senate Republicans filibuster the Zadroga bill but pass tax cuts for the wealthy, which is great news for firefighters who make over $200,000 a year.

9/11 responders react to the filibuster, and Mike Huckabee urges the GOP to vote for the Zadroga bill.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Worst Responders

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor & Satire Blog

The Daily Show on Facebook

Get 1 Million Real Visitors For Free!

2010-12-12T15:30:00.000-08:00

Never pay for your advertising again!

You can use our new marketing system to send over 1 million Guaranteed real visitors to your website totally free. There is absolutely no cost to you at any time.

Right now, you can stop struggling with your INTERNET marketing efforts, and more importantly, stop wasting money on advertising that doesn't work for you.

Simply sign up for our brand new, free professional marketing system, and let it go to work for you to exponentially grow the number of real visitors you get on your website.

This may be the only marketing tool you'll ever need.........and it's completely free!

This system can send over 1 million guaranteed REAL visitors to your site in as little as 30 days.

What are you waiting for?

Visit http://www.fwebtraffic.com/?rid=1306838 and let it go to work for you today.

Peace Through Truth: 9/11 and State Crimes Against Democracy (Podcast)

2010-12-05T18:58:00.000-08:00

Posted by Camron Wiltshire on December 4, 2010

Interchange — The Truth About 9/11: Graeme MacQueen and Laurie Manwell

Direct Download • RSS • Website

Graeme MacQueen and Laurie Manwell are prominent researchers in the national 9/11 Truth movement, seeking to educate the public regarding the facts of September 11, 2001 and calling for a new and independent investigation. Graeme MacQueen is founder of the Centre for Peace Studies at McMaster University and now a retired professor from that university. Laurie Manwell is a professor at Guelph University in Neuroscience and Applied Cognitive Sciences. MacQueen and Manwell were in Bloomington for a public presentation called “Peace Through Truth: 9/11 and State Crimes Against Democracy”. During their visit they sat down with local 9/11 Truth advocate Byron Bangert for an exploration of fact vs. fiction and how fear colors our perceptions.

Olbermann: If the Tea Party wins, America loses

2010-10-28T01:45:00.000-07:00

Olbermann: If the Tea Party wins, America loses.
The laws of the country will revert backwards because of its new government.

Now as promised a Special Comment on the madness of the Tea Party and the elections of next Tuesday.

It is as if a group of moderately talented performers has walked on stage at a comedy club on Improv night. Each hears a shout from the audience, consisting of a bizarre but just barely plausible fear or hatred or neurosis or prejudice.

And the entertainment of the evening is for each to take their thin, absurd premise, and build upon it a campaign for governor or congressman or senator. The problem is, of course, when it turns out there is no audience shouting out gags, just a cabal of corporations and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and political insider bloodsuckers like Karl Rove and Dick Armey and the Chicken Little Chorus of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

And the instructions are not to improvise a comedy sketch, but to elect a group of unqualified, unstable individuals who will do what they are told, in exchange for money and power, and march this nation as far backward as they can get, backward to Jim Crow, or backward to the breadlines of the '30s, or backward** to hanging union organizers, or backward to the Trusts and the Robber Barons.

Result: the Tea Party. Vote backward, vote Tea Party. And if you are somehow indifferent to what is planned for next Tuesday, it is nothing short of an attempt to use Democracy to end this Democracy, to buy America wholesale and pave over the freedoms and the care we take of one another, which have combined to keep us the envy of the world.

You do not think your freedom is at stake next Tuesday?

The Tea Party-and-Republican candidate for senator from Nevada, Sharron Angle, compared rape to, quoting, "a lemon situation in lemonade." She would deny an abortion even to a teenaged girl who had been raped by her own father.

The Tea Party-and-Republican candidate to be the only Congressman in Delaware, Glen Urquhart, said "there is no problem that abortion can't make worse. I know good friends who are the product of rape."

Mr. Urquhart also does not believe the phrase "separation of church and state" was said by Thomas Jefferson.

After GOP failure Katrina disaster inspires bans on gun seizures

2010-10-26T11:17:00.000-07:00

By Pauline Vu, Stateline.org Staff Writer

In the days after Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans police went door to door and confiscated guns from citizens in an effort to counter chaos and crime in the wrecked city.

But gun advocates saw the seizures as an infringement on constitutional rights and said never again.

The actions of the New Orleans police have inspired 13 states, including Louisiana, to enact laws to keep state and local officials from taking guns during a state of emergency, such as after a natural disaster or terrorist attack. President Bush also signed a bill in October that would penalize states financially for illegally confiscating guns during an emergency.

Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt (R) signed an emergency weapons bill on April 12 to become the 13th state with such a law on the books, joining Alaska, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia. A measure also is on the desk of Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano (D).

Similar bills were introduced in at least 14 other states this year.

“We can never too soon forget the injustice that went on in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, where law-abiding individuals’ firearms were taken away from them just when they needed to protect themselves the most,” said Julie Tanna, a spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association (NRA), a lobbying group that opposes gun control. The NRA successfully sued to get New Orleans’ residents their guns back and has vowed to push for state laws to block confiscations.

While several of the bills have sailed through legislatures with few no votes, law enforcers have raised objections. Critics complain the emergency gun bills are too broad and would hamper state leaders and law enforcement officials during an emergency.

State Rep. Beth Low (D) was one of the bill’s two dissenters in the Missouri House. “There’s a sincere desire to protect our communities and allow them to protect themselves. I don’t think anything’s wrong with that, but I believe there are unintended consequences to this legislation that could be very destructive in an emergency,” she said.

Among the problems Low has with Missouri’s new law: It doesn’t specifically define what an emergency is; it restricts not just the confiscation of weapons and ammunition, but also the transfer and sale of them; and it doesn’t expressly prohibit people from bringing their guns to an emergency shelter.

Charley Wilkison, the political and legislative director for the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT), agrees with that last concern. Although CLEAT backs people’s right to keep guns during an emergency, the group would support an amendment to a Texas bill that would ensure that people cannot bring their guns to emergency shelters, such as the New Orleans Superdome following Katrina.

“Can you imagine a massive gathering of humanity under the most horrible set of circumstances, where you’re hopeless, you’re afraid, you can’t locate members of your family, you don’t know if they’re alive or dead. … Then you add guns to that mix,” he said. “I think we’d be supportive of that being a gun-free environment.”

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) opposed a bill introduced this session because it included civil penalties for officers who improperly confiscate weapons. “It just doesn’t take into consideration the difficult conditions in emergencies that police are placed in, and having to decide who’s the good guy and who’s the bad guy,” said John Bankhead, the GBI’s legislative liaison. The bill failed to pass before crossover day, the last day a bill must pass at least one chamber in the General Assembly to be considered for passage.

But state Rep. Russell Pearce (R), sponsor of the Arizona bill, said other laws already give police the power to confiscate guns from people committing crimes. He said his bill simply ensures that people who aren’t committing crimes are protected from confiscation during an emergency – a time when they may need their weapons the most.

“We’re not a police state. You don’t go and abuse good citizens because of your concern for their safety,” Pearce said. “It’s a shame that we have to write a law to protect basic constitutional rights.”

Comment on this story in the space below by registering with Stateline.org, or e-mail your feedback to our Letters to the editor section at letters@stateline.org.

Contact Pauline Vu at pvu@stateline.org.

General of all American Intelligence: 911 was a fraud!

2010-10-23T01:10:00.000-07:00

Major General Albert "Bert" N. Stubblebine III, head of all intelligence says:
"Pentagon NOT hit by a plane
WTC 7 brought down by explosives
Media in America is controlled."

A terrible pilot hits pentagon accounting office holding records of missing 3 trillion in oil for money scheme & missing 2.3 trillion in DOD expenses

Pentagon debris a single 3 foot engine Proven not related to 757

FBI took all recordings & refuses to show

The FCC had all records on criminals like Paulson, Geithner, Ruben, Summers & others engaging in that illegal activity. But all the records of those illegal trades were destroyed when WTC 7 was brought down by thermite on 9/11!

911 was a public snuff film used to shock the public and enact the end of the Bill of Rights & invasion of oil bearing countries, & make money for private companies like Halliburton, (stock from 10 to 50 a share)!

By destroying the WTC, they were able to cover up theft of gold bullion & destroy illegal financial transaction records performed just prior to the attacks

Silverstein spends 140 million to make 7 billion almost over night; Silverstein said it was demolished by explosives, (pull it)

It reminds me of CIA man Byrd, the owner of TX School Book Depository, who turned a 2.5 million insider purchase into 26 million dollars thanks to JFK assassination!

House rejects bill to aid sick 9/11 responders

2010-08-10T21:37:00.000-07:00

WASHINGTON – A bill that would have provided up to $7.4 billion in aid to people sickened by World Trade Center dust fell short in the House on Thursday, raising the possibility that the bulk of compensation for the ill will come from a legal settlement hammered out in the federal courts.

The bill would have provided free health care and compensation payments to 9/11 rescue and recovery workers who fell ill after working in the trade center ruins.

It failed to win the needed two-thirds majority, 255-159. The vote was largely along party lines, with 12 Republicans joining Democrats supporting the measure.

For weeks, a judge and teams of lawyers have been urging 10,000 former ground zero workers to sign on to a court-supervised settlement that would split $713 million among people who developed respiratory problems and other illnesses after inhaling trade center ash.

The court deal shares some similarities with the aid program that the federal legislation would have created, but it involves far less money. Only the most seriously ill of the thousands of police officers, firefighters and construction workers suing New York City over their exposure to the dust would be eligible for a hefty payout.

But supporters of the deal have been saying the court settlement is the only realistic option for the sick, because Congress will never act.

"Ladies and gentlemen, you can wait and wait and wait for that legislation ... it's not passing," Kenneth Feinberg, the former special master of the federal 9/11 victim compensation fund, told an audience of ground zero responders Monday in a meeting on Staten Island.

Democratic leaders opted to consider the House bill under a procedure that requires a two-thirds vote for approval rather than a simple majority. Such a move blocked potential GOP amendments to the measure.

A key backer of the bill, U.S. Rep. Peter King, a Long Island Republican, accused Democrats of staging a "charade."

King said Democrats were "petrified" about casting votes as the fall elections near on controversial amendments, possibly including one that could ban the bill from covering illegal immigrants who were sickened by trade center dust.

If Democrats brought it to the floor as a regular bill, King said, it would have passed with majority support.

GOP critics branded the bill as yet another big-government "massive new entitlement program" that would have increased taxes and possibly kill jobs.

To pay the bill's estimated $7.4 billion cost over 10 years, the legislation would have prevented foreign multinational corporations incorporated in tax haven countries from avoiding tax on income earned in the U.S.

Bill supporters said that would close a tax loophole. Republicans branded it a corporate tax increase.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg called the vote an "outrage." He said it was clearly a tactic designed to stall the bill.

"This is a way to avoid having to make a tough decision," Bloomberg said, adding that the nation owes more to "the people who worked down at 9/11 whose health has fallen apart because they did what America wanted them to do."

John Feal, a ground zero demolition worker who has lobbied extensively for the legislation, expressed disgust.

"They pulled the rug out from beneath our feet," Feal said. "Whatever member of Congress vote against this bill, whether Republican or Democrat, should go to jail for manslaughter."

The bill would have provided up to $3.2 billion to cover the medical treatment of people sickened by trade center dust and an additional $4.2 billion for a new fund that would have compensated them for their suffering and lost wages.

The potential promise of a substantial payout from the federal government had caused some ground zero workers to balk at participating in the proposed legal settlement, which would resolve as many as 10,000 lawsuits against the city.

Initially, the bill would have prohibited people from participating in the new federal compensation program if they had already been compensated for their injuries through a lawsuit, but a change was made in recent days eliminating that restriction.

Nevertheless, with the House rejecting the bill and no vote scheduled on a similar Senate version, it appears almost guaranteed that there will be no new federal law by Sept. 8, the date by which ground zero workers involved in the lawsuits must decide whether to accept the settlement offer.

Under the terms of the deal, 95 percent of those workers must say yes for the court settlement to take effect.

The compensation system set up by the court would make payments ranging from $3,250 for people who aren't sick but worry they could fall ill in the future to as much as $1.5 million to the families of people who have died. Nonsmokers disabled by severe asthma might get between $800,000 and $1 million.

About 25 percent of the money would go to pay legal fees. Contested claims would be heard by Feinberg, who would act as an appeals officer.

Researchers have found that thousands of New Yorkers exposed to trade center dust are now suffering from breathing difficulties similar to asthma. Many have also complained of heartburn or acid reflux, and studies have shown that firefighters who worked on the debris pile suffer from elevated levels of sarcoidosis, an inflammatory disease.

Many of the workers also fear that the dust is giving people cancer, although scientific studies have failed to find evidence of such a link.

The exact number of sick is unclear. Nearly 15,900 people received treatment last year through medical programs set up to treat Sept. 11-related illnesses, but doctors say many of those people suffered from conditions that are common in the general public.

The House bill is named for James Zadroga, a police detective who died at age 34. His supporters say he died from respiratory disease contracted at ground zero, but New York City's medical examiner said Zadroga's lung condition was caused by prescription drug abuse.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100730/ap_on_re_us/us_attacks_health
By ANDREW MIGA and DAVID B. CARUSO, Associated Press Writers Andrew Miga And David B. Caruso, Associated Press Writers

The President of Iran's Letter To President Bush

2009-04-27T14:47:00.000-07:00

Translated by "Le Monde"
Posted 05/09/06

Mr George Bush,

President of the United States of America

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions
that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political
forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have
prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might
bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the great Messenger of God,

Feel obliged to respect human rights,
Present liberalism as a civilization model,
Announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs,
Make “War and Terror” his slogan,
And finally,
Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which
Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern,
But at the same time,
Have countries attacked; The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on
the slight chance of the … of a … criminals in a village city, or convoy for example the entire
village, city or convey set ablaze.

Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around
one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed,
close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens
broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions
of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of
thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away
from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much
psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide ant those returning home suffer
depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of aliments; while some are killed and
their bodies handed of their families.

On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples
of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to
begin with.

Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the
announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was
toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy
about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the … war on Iran Saddam was
supported by the West.

Mr President,

You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me how can theses actions be
reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of
Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness...

Full letter: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12984.htm

FBI says, “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”

2009-04-27T14:16:00.000-07:00

June 6, 2006 – This past weekend, a thought provoking e-mail circulated through Internet news groups, and was sent to the Muckraker Report by Mr. Paul V. Sheridan (Winner of the 2005 Civil Justice Foundation Award), bringing attention to the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist web page for Usama Bin Laden.[1] (See bottom of this web page for Most Wanted page) In the e-mail, the question is asked,

“Why doesn’t Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster make any direct connection with the events of September 11, 2001?”

The FBI says on its Bin Laden web page that Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. According to the FBI, these attacks killed over 200 people. The FBI concludes its reason for “wanting” Bin Laden by saying, “In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorists attacks throughout the world.”

On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11.

The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

Full story: http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html

Third plane WTC 911 - never seen

2009-04-26T12:08:00.000-07:00

New Democrat Donkey, Tshirts and gifts

2008-10-07T17:35:00.000-07:00

http://www.cafepress.com/PoliticProtest

Barack Obama, Buttons and stickers

2008-09-23T18:43:00.000-07:00

Get Barack Obama bumper stickers here.

http://www.cafepress.com/PoliticProtest

Provocateurs Call For Violence To Demonize Legitimate Protesters At DNC

2008-08-27T08:05:00.000-07:00

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, August 26, 2008

The spectacle of two individuals caught on camera calling for violence and then affiliating themselves with peaceful demonstrators in Denver has raised questions about who is behind apparent “agent provocateurs,” intent on demonizing legitimate protest groups at the Democratic National Convention.

Several news outlets reported that nationally syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones had “threatened” neo-conservative pundit Michelle Malkin during a confrontation between the two yesterday.

The same websites then claimed that people affiliated with Jones had screamed “Kill Michelle Malkin” and advocated violence against the columnist.

“Jones and his lackeys chased Michelle around the protest threatening to kill her!” claims the Gateway Pundit blog.

Other news sources, including People’s Press Collective and Political Byline, re-iterated the false charge and alleged that Jones had threatened Malkin.

In reality, the You Tube video of the incident shows two young men in court jester outfits approach Jones, claim they are fans of his and then put their arms around him for a photo opportunity. They then go off camera and advocate the murder of Malkin, continuing their threats despite the best efforts of Jones’ colleague Luke Rudkowski to make them cease their outburst.

Tellingly, the man in green (and Jones’ “lackey” according to the reports) also shouts, ”Alex Jones is a capitalist stooge.”

Impeachment not our business, council says

2008-08-27T03:47:00.000-07:00

Majority declines to support resolution asking Congress to act
By Robert Speer
roberts@newsreview.com
More stories by this author...

After listening to some 20 of his fellow Chicoans explain why they wanted Congress to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney, Councilman Larry Wahl, a former Navy fighter pilot who served in Vietnam, had a blunt reply.

“We’re at war, folks, with a bunch of Islamofascist extremists who want us dead or back in the ninth century,” he declaimed, adding emphatically that he supported the president and vice president in the war on terrorism.

But Wahl wasn’t the only veteran in council chambers Tuesday night (Aug. 19). Michael Pike, a former Green Beret captain who served in Vietnam and Laos, also spoke, and he gave a first-hand account of why he believed impeachment was appropriate.

As part of his Special Forces training, to prepare him in the event he was captured, he was waterboarded—twice. “I can tell you it was the most terrible thing I’ve ever gone through,” Pike said. He was willing to climb a 10-foot barbed-wire fence that shredded his hands rather than go through it again. He said he’d also been subjected to electroshock, and waterboarding was worse.

The U.S. government’s use of torture such as waterboarding was one of the reasons a group calling itself the Chico Impeach Team approached the council, presented it with petitions containing more than 1,000 signatures, and asked it to support a resolution calling on Congress to initiate impeachment. Several California cities—including Santa Rosa, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, Arcata and, naturally, Berkeley—have passed similar resolutions.

The Bush administration, with its warrantless wiretapping, suspension of habeas corpus, deceitful war-mongering, preemptive invasion of a sovereign nation (Iraq), secret “black sites” and use of torture, has shredded the Constitution and broken both American and international law, speakers charged.

In an initial PowerPoint presentation, Bill Donnelly, representing the Chico Impeach Team, argued that impeachment is a local issue because councilmembers take an oath of office to defend the Constitution. The Bush administration has put the Constitution in danger, and the council had a duty to act, he insisted.

Full Article: Impeachment not our business

Troops Deployed Abroad Give 6:1 to Obama

2008-08-15T05:10:00.000-07:00

Published by Luke Rosiak on August 14, 2008 9:52 AM

During World War II, soldiers crouching in foxholes penned letters assuring their sweethearts that they'd be home soon. Now, between firefights in the Iraqi desert, some infantrymen have been sending a different kind of mail stateside: two or three hundred dollars -- or whatever they can spare -- towards a presidential election that could very well determine just how soon they come home.

According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain's haul.

Despite McCain's status as a decorated veteran and a historically Republican bent among the military, members of the armed services overall -- whether stationed overseas or at home -- are also favoring Obama with their campaign contributions in 2008, by a $55,000 margin. Although 59 percent of federal contributions by military personnel has gone to Republicans this cycle, of money from the military to the presumed presidential nominees, 57 percent has gone to Obama.

Complete Article: The Center for Responsive Politics

Top CIA official confesses order to forge Iraq-9/11 letter came on White House stationery

2008-08-09T17:56:00.000-07:00

John Byrne
Published: Friday August 8, 2008

In damning transcript, ex-CIA official says Cheney likely ordered letter linking Hussein to 9/11 attacks

A forged letter linking Saddam Hussein to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks was ordered on White House stationery and probably came from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, according to a new transcript of a conversation with the Central Intelligence Agency's former Deputy Chief of Clandestine Operations Robert Richer.

The transcript was posted Friday by author Ron Suskind of an interview conducted in June. It comes on the heels of denials by both the White House and Richer of a claim Suskind made in his new book, The Way of The World. The book was leaked to Politico's Mike Allen on Monday, and released Tuesday.

On Tuesday, the White House released a statement on Richer's behalf. In it, Richer declared, "I never received direction from George Tenet or anyone else in my chain of command to fabricate a document ... as outlined in Mr. Suskind's book."

The denial, however, directly contradicts Richer's own remarks in the transcript.

"Now this is from the Vice President's Office is how you remembered it--not from the president?" Suskind asked.

"No, no, no," Richer replied, according to the transcript. "What I remember is George [Tenet] saying, 'we got this from'--basically, from what George said was 'downtown.'"

"Which is the White House?" Suskind asked.

"Yes," Richer said. "But he did not--in my memory--never said president, vice president, or NSC. Okay? But now--he may have hinted--just by the way he said it, it would have--cause almost all that stuff came from one place only: Scooter Libby and the shop around the vice president."

"But he didn't say that specifically," Richer added. "I would naturally--I would probably stand on my, basically, my reputation and say it came from the vice president."

"But there wasn't anything in the writing that you remember saying the vice president," Suskind continued.

"Nope," Richer said.

"It just had the White House stationery."

"Exactly right."

Later, Richer added, "You know, if you've ever seen the vice president's stationery, it's on the White House letterhead. It may have said OVP (Office of the Vice President). I don't remember that, so I don't want to mislead you."

Full article: The Raw Story

Flashback: Seven years ago today, Bush received ‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.’ memo.»

2008-08-08T15:48:00.000-07:00

Today marks seven years since the day President Bush received a President’s Daily Brief entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” (See the memo here.) At the time, Bush was vacationing at his ranch in Crawford, TX and stayed on vacation the rest of August 2001. Here’s how the administration reacted, according to the 9/11 Commission report:

"President Bush did not recall discussing the August 6 report with the Attorney General or whether Rice had done so."

"We have found no indication of any further discussion before September 11 among the President and his top advisers of the possibility of a threat of an al Qaeda attack in the United States."

DCI Tenet visited President Bush in Crawford, Texas, on August 17 and participated in the PDB briefings of the President between August 31 (after the President had returned to Washington) and September 10. But Tenet does not recall any discussions with the President of the domestic threat during this period.

The day after he received the memo, “Bush seemed carefree as he spoke about the books he was reading, the work he was doing on his nearby ranch, his love of hot-weather jogging, his golf game and his 55th birthday,” the Washington Post noted. Today — 2,557 days later — Bin Laden still remains free and “determined to strike in U.S.”

Article Source: Think Progress

Dick Cheney and 9/11

2008-08-02T11:32:00.000-07:00

How he planned a New Pearl Harbor

A New Strategy for a New World

2008-07-16T01:51:00.000-07:00

Barack will lead a new foreign policy based on restoring America's military strength and global respect, cooperating with allies, and reversing failed Bush policies. Scroll down for the full text of Barack's Speech.

Senator Barack Obama’s New Strategy for a New World

As Prepared For Delivery
Washington, D.C.
July 15, 2008

Sixty-one years ago, George Marshall announced the plan that would come to bear his name. Much of Europe lay in ruins. The United States faced a powerful and ideological enemy intent on world domination. This menace was magnified by the recently discovered capability to destroy life on an unimaginable scale. The Soviet Union didn't yet have an atomic bomb, but before long it would.

The challenge facing the greatest generation of Americans - the generation that had vanquished fascism on the battlefield - was how to contain this threat while extending freedom's frontiers. Leaders like Truman and Acheson, Kennan and Marshall, knew that there was no single decisive blow that could be struck for freedom. We needed a new overarching strategy to meet the challenges of a new and dangerous world.

Such a strategy would join overwhelming military strength with sound judgment. It would shape events not just through military force, but through the force of our ideas; through economic power, intelligence and diplomacy. It would support strong allies that freely shared our ideals of liberty and democracy; open markets and the rule of law. It would foster new international institutions like the United Nations, NATO, and the World Bank, and focus on every corner of the globe. It was a strategy that saw clearly the world's dangers, while seizing its promise.

As a general, Marshall had spent years helping FDR wage war. But the Marshall Plan - which was just one part of this strategy - helped rebuild not just allies, but also the nation that Marshall had plotted to defeat. In the speech announcing his plan, he concluded not with tough talk or definitive declarations - but rather with questions and a call for perspective. "The whole world of the future," Marshall said, "hangs on a proper judgment." To make that judgment, he asked the American people to examine distant events that directly affected their security and prosperity. He closed by asking: "What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?"

What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?

Today's dangers are different, though no less grave. The power to destroy life on a catastrophic scale now risks falling into the hands of terrorists. The future of our security - and our planet - is held hostage to our dependence on foreign oil and gas. From the cave-spotted mountains of northwest Pakistan, to the centrifuges spinning beneath Iranian soil, we know that the American people cannot be protected by oceans or the sheer might of our military alone.

The attacks of September 11 brought this new reality into a terrible and ominous focus. On that bright and beautiful day, the world of peace and prosperity that was the legacy of our Cold War victory seemed to suddenly vanish under rubble, and twisted steel, and clouds of smoke.

But the depth of this tragedy also drew out the decency and determination of our nation. At blood banks and vigils; in schools and in the United States Congress, Americans were united - more united, even, than we were at the dawn of the Cold War. The world, too, was united against the perpetrators of this evil act, as old allies, new friends, and even long-time adversaries stood by our side. It was time - once again - for America's might and moral suasion to be harnessed; it was time to once again shape a new security strategy for an ever-changing world.

Imagine, for a moment, what we could have done in those days, and months, and years after 9/11.

We could have deployed the full force of American power to hunt down and destroy Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, the Taliban, and all of the terrorists responsible for 9/11, while supporting real security in Afghanistan.

We could have secured loose nuclear materials around the world, and updated a 20th century non-proliferation framework to meet the challenges of the 21st.

We could have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in alternative sources of energy to grow our economy, save our planet, and end the tyranny of oil.

We could have strengthened old alliances, formed new partnerships, and renewed international institutions to advance peace and prosperity.

We could have called on a new generation to step into the strong currents of history, and to serve their country as troops and teachers, Peace Corps volunteers and police officers.

We could have secured our homeland--investing in sophisticated new protection for our ports, our trains and our power plants.

We could have rebuilt our roads and bridges, laid down new rail and broadband and electricity systems, and made college affordable for every American to strengthen our ability to compete.

We could have done that.

Instead, we have lost thousands of American lives, spent nearly a trillion dollars, alienated allies and neglected emerging threats - all in the cause of fighting a war for well over five years in a country that had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks.

Full speech: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newstrategy

Judiciary Members Demand Answers from Attorney General on 9/11 Surveillance

2008-04-06T18:49:00.000-07:00

For Immediate Release
Contact: Jonathan Godfrey
April 3, 2008

(Washington, DC) - Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee Chairmen Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Robert "Bobby" C. Scott (D-VA) sent a letter to United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey demanding answers about a recent public statement claiming there was a pre-9/11 call from a terrorist safe house in Afghanistan that was apparently not intercepted by federal authorities.

The members also followed up on previous requests for an October 2001 Office of Legal Counsel memo providing legal analysis about the president's war powers. The letter notes: “The notion that the president can claim to operate under 'secret' powers known only to the president and a select few subordinates is antithetical to the core principles of this democracy."

The full text of the letter

Senator Barack Obama: 'A More Perfect Union'

2008-03-19T17:28:00.000-07:00

Information will be free: Wikileaks still up, despite order

2008-02-21T12:09:00.000-08:00

By Nate Anderson Published: February 19, 2008 - 10:37AM CT

Swiss banks have always taken their privacy seriously, and the Bank Julius Baer is no exception. On Friday, the bank obtained a US temporary restraining order against the site Wikileaks, which currently hosts a clutch of documents alleged to come from inside the bank. In addition, the judge issued a permanent injunction against Dynadot, the registrar for wikileaks.org, demanding that the site's information be locked and its domain name scoured from the Internet.

Bank Julius Baer calls itself the "leading dedicated wealth manager in Switzerland," and it's not good for dedicated wealth managers to be linked with scandal. The bank was unhappy about material hosted on Wikileaks that appears to show corruption in the bank's Cayman Islands branch. It filed a federal lawsuit against the site in San Francisco and has so far been on a roll in the case.

On February 15, the bank obtained a permanent injunction against Dynadot that requires the registrar to "lock the wikileaks.org domain name" and to "disable the wikileaks.org domain name and account to prevent access to and any changes from being made to the domain name and account information." Wikileaks.org does not currently resolve.

The order isn't particularly effective (the site can be accessed simply by going to wikileaks.be, wikileaks.de, and wikileaks.cx, among others), but the fact that it can happen seems incredible. Rather than just put a hold on the particular documents in question, a judge has attempted instead to remove the entire site from the Internet. Wikileaks was not present at the hearing where the decision was made, saying that it was notified only by e-mail and given just a few hours' notice. As is common in such situations, the order was essentially written by the bank and then adopted by the judge.

In addition to the Dynadot block, Wikileaks itself is ordered to remove all documents from the bank that "are internal non-public company documents" and to do so "whether or not such documents and information are authentic, semi-altered, semi-fraudulent or forged."

Based on the correspondence between Wikileaks and a US lawyer representing the bank, the bank appears to be claiming copyright over these internal documents. A lawyer for the bank complained repeatedly about the lack of a designated DMCA agent for Wikileaks and warned the site, "You act at your own peril" and "govern yourselves accordingly." (Biggest question raised by the letter: real lawyers actually write this sort of stage villain stuff?)

The restraining order against Wikileaks is temporary, and in the order Judge Jeffrey White notes that the group can fight the block during a February 29 hearing. Wikileaks says that it has several lawyers in San Francisco willing to work pro bono on the case.
Further reading:

* Correspondence between Wikileaks and the bank's lawyers
* The case was filed in California's Northern District, and the case number is 3:08-cv-00824-JSW
* The case has even caught the attention of media outlets as large as the BBC

“Loose Change Final Cut” on Google Video

2008-02-07T05:23:00.000-08:00

We here at Louder Than Words and Alex Jones Productions are proud to officially release “Loose Change Final Cut” on Google Video in the highest quality possible. Encouraging people to copy these films and hand them out, as well as hold screenings in Coffee Houses and Churches was a good start, but has not been enough in the past.

Our success in spreading awareness about the truth behind September 11th, 2001 is in large part with our ability to share our films freely through internet. We are hoping that all of you who have not seen the Final Cut will not only watch it, but email it to everyone you know, embed it on your Myspace or personal website, blog it, and post it on forums worldwide.

With the former Italian President saying it is well known within the intelligence community that 9/11 was a CIA and Mossad Op, and the Prime Minister of Japan and his cabinet being questioned about Insider Trading and the implosion of World Trade Center 7 by the opposition party, global interest in 9/11 truth is exploding.

If you decide today to share this information with everyone, family members may finally recieve answers to their many questions, and those who were criminally complicit may be tried and exposed. Its as easy as sending a link folks. Loose Change Final Cut puts the official government fable of 9/11 to rest, it truly is the nail in the coffin if you decide to be the hand that holds the hammer.

LCFC is available in high-quality at www.prisonplanet.com and www.loosechange911.com.

New World Order, a world government is just the beginning

2008-02-05T16:36:00.000-08:00

US Air Force UFO Identification chart

2008-02-03T14:21:00.000-08:00

The FBI at the Super Bowl

2008-02-01T20:38:00.000-08:00

SUPER SUNDAY SECURITY
Behind the Scenes
02/01/08

Thousands of people are headed to Phoenix this week, but some are not in town to watch the big game. They are there to help protect the players and fans at Super Bowl XLII and related events.

We’re talking about the hundreds of FBI employees and other law enforcement personnel who have converged upon the Valley of the Sun in support of local police and public safety officials.

The Department of Homeland Security has designated the game a level one national security event, which allows federal agencies to bring in resources from across the country. Several federal agencies—including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; the Federal Emergency Management Agency; the U.S. Secret Service; and the Department of Homeland Security, just to name a few—are in Arizona to do their part. In all, more than 30 federal, state, and local agencies are involved.

Although local authorities are responsible for overall security, the FBI takes the lead in working to prevent terrorist attacks and in gathering, analyzing, and sharing intelligence related to potential threats. In addition to dozens of personnel responding from our Phoenix field office, we’ve sent more than 150 agents, intelligence analysts, bomb technicians, hazardous materials experts, SWAT professionals, crisis negotiators, police, and media representatives from across the country to the scene.

Like the two teams squaring off on Sunday, it has taken us months of planning and teamwork to reach this big day. Good luck to both the Giants and Patriots!

To read about our intelligence work at last year’s Super Bowl, see our story of July 13, 2007.

Cheney Impeachment Gains Traction in House Judiciary Committee

2008-01-21T15:43:00.000-08:00

Marjorie Cohn on 21 January, 2008 15:59:38

Common Dreams - Nine out of 23 Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee favor starting impeachment hearings against Vice-President Dick Cheney. Six of the nine are co-sponsors of H.R. 799, which contains three articles of impeachment.

Articles I and II of H.R. 799 accuse Cheney of purposely manipulating intelligence to deceive Congress and the American people about a fabricated threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, respectively. Article III charges Cheney with openly threatening aggression against Iran absent any real threat to the United States.

All three articles say Cheney’s actions have damaged our national security interests.

Three of the nine Judiciary Committee Democrats who advocate launching impeachment hearings against Cheney, Reps. Robert Wexler (D., Fla.), Luis Gutierrez (D., Ill.) and Tammy Baldwin (D., Wis.), co-authored an op-ed that appeared on December 27 in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

They wrote, “The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that, if proven, may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under the Constitution. The allegations against Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens.”

There is also credible evidence that policies set in Cheney’s office authorized the torture of prisoners in U.S. custody, in violation of three treaties the United States has ratified, as well as the U.S. Torture Statute and War Crimes Act. The policies on the treatment of prisoners emanating from Cheney’s office triggered the abuse and torture, according to Lawrence Wilkerson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff.

“It was clear to me that there was a visible audit trail from the Vice President’s office through the Secretary of Defense down to the commanders in the field,” Wilkerson, a former colonel, said on National Public Radio’s “Morning Edition.”

In November, the House of Representatives sent the impeachment resolution to the House Judiciary Committee for further proceedings. However many Democrats oppose impeachment, citing the year and a half of testimony about Bill Clinton’s personal relations. They think impeachment will detract from Congress’s other pressing business.

Yet, the three congresspersons noted, the Clinton impeachment “must not be the model for impeachment inquiries. A Democratic Congress can show that it takes its constitutional authority seriously and hold a sober investigation, which will stand in stark contrast to the kangaroo court convened by Republicans for Clinton.”

And, they argue, the hearings would “involve the possible impeachment of the vice president - not of our commander in chief - and the resulting impact on the nation’s business and attention would be significantly less than the Clinton presidential impeachment hearings.”

Seventy percent of American voters think Cheney has abused his powers and 43 percent say he should be removed from office, according to a Nov. 13 poll by the American Research Group. Organizations, including the National Lawyers Guild, have called for the impeachment of Dick Cheney.

Impeachment hearings against Cheney would not only fulfill the Constitution’s command that high officials who commit high crimes and misdemeanors be brought to justice. It would also deter the vice president from committing additional crimes that threaten the national security of the United States.

Any impeachment proceeding would have to start in the House Judiciary Committee. The nine Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee who favor impeachment hearings are: Robert Wexler, Fla.; Luis Gutierrez, Ill.; Anthony Weiner, N.Y.; Tammy Baldwin, Wisc.; Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas; Steve Cohen, Tenn.; Keith Ellison, Minn.; Maxine Waters, Calif.; and Hank Johnson, Ga.

Here is a list of the entire House Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.aspx

For information about the campaign to impeach Dick Cheney, see http://impeachcheney.org.
Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and President of the National Lawyers Guild.
Her newest book is Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law.
You can visit her blog or see archived articles at www.marjoriecohn.com

New Missouri bill thumbs its nose at federal Real ID Act

2008-01-21T10:47:00.000-08:00

By Lee Logan
POST-DISPATCH JEFFERSON CITY BUREAU
01/18/2008

JEFFERSON CITY — Missouri would defy federal drivers licensing requirements in the name of privacy under a bill filed by a crusading legislator Thursday.

Sponsored by Rep. Jim Guest, the bill would prohibit Missouri from complying with the Real ID Act of 2005.

Responding to security concerns after Sept. 11, Congress passed the program, which sets common licensing rules that essentially make it harder to falsely obtain a drivers license.

Since then, Guest, a Republican from King City in northwest Missouri, has been rounding up other states to oppose the law based on privacy concerns.

"We have a federal government that is out of control," Guest said.

The Legislature overwhelmingly passed a resolution asking the federal government to repeal the program last year; Guest's bill would go a step further by prohibiting the state from participating in the program entirely.

Guest said he has no problem with a common set of standards for drivers licenses, but he's worried about the provisions that require "machine-readable" technology in the cards, which could leave personal information in the wrong hands.

"It will make ID theft very easy in the future," he said.

Because Real ID would be required for so many common tasks, Guest said it amounts to a national identification card.

"Almost everybody would be affected by it," he said. "It is the first step to Big Brother watching you."

Nationally, the movement against Real ID has sparked wide-ranging fears that the next step might be microchipping citizens, or that the cards have a connection to the biblical prophesy of the "mark of the beast."

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security says the program provides a much-needed security boost, and that the department has worked with states on implementation.

"There's been a public outcry for more secure identification," department spokesman Russ Knocke said.

If a state decides not to comply, its citizens would be unable to use their drivers license to fly on airplanes and would need additional documentation, such as a passport.

The rules are set to take effect in May, though states have until December 2009 to fully implement the program.

The Missouri Department of Revenue would have to implement the licensing rules, which were released to states last week.

Spokesman David Griffith said the department is still reviewing the rules to determine the impact on Missouri. One of the key questions, he said, is calculating the program's cost for the state.

The Homeland Security department has estimated that the program will cost at least $3.9 billion nationwide.

More than 20 states have passed legislation or resolutions opposing the program, including several that have passed laws saying they will not participate — essentially calling the feds' bluff.

Despite the outcry, a few state legislators think Real ID isn't such a big deal.

Rep. Clint Zweifel, D-Florissant, was one of three lonely legislators to vote against the resolution last year.

"I just don't like the idea of thumbing your nose at a pretty modest security recommendation," he said, noting that the program was suggested by the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission.

Wexler's Goal Of 50,000 Signatures For Cheney Impeachment Surpassed In 24 Hours

2007-12-17T15:25:00.000-08:00

By: Logan Murphy on Sunday, December 16th, 2007 at 4:01 PM - PST

Blue Gal posted Rep. Robert Wexler’s video yesterday, asking for citizens to sign the petition on his website in support of impeachment hearings for Vice President, Dick Cheney. Wexler was hoping to get 50,000 signatures and it didn’t take long — it took just 24 hours to meet his goal and the signatures are still rolling in.

If you haven’t signed the petition yet, you can find it here.

More from OpEd News:

As of Sunday morning, 54,000 people had signed the petition at WexlerWantsHearings.com calling for action now. And names are being added at a rate of one every one or two seconds!

Wexler has said he wanted at least 50,000 signatures. But why stop there? If people get behind this, and if the impeachment movement spreads the word, he could easily get closer to 500,000 signatures over the next few days. Read on…

The more signatures Wexler gets, the more clout they’ll have with members of the Judiciary Committee who are on the fence. Let’s show Wexler the power of the netroots to get behind and support elected officials who are representing our values and desires.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Keith Olbermann video on Bush and Iraq - MSNBC

2007-12-10T14:27:00.001-08:00

How the End Began 6: Cheney, Bin Laden, and the CIA

2007-12-06T12:13:00.000-08:00

Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America

2007-12-01T22:44:00.000-08:00

Wednesday, November 28, 2007 by: Mike Adams

The end of Free Speech in America has arrived at our doorstep. It's a new law called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, and it is worded in a clever way that could allow the U.S. government to arrest and incarcerate any individual who speaks out against the Bush Administration, the war on Iraq, the Department of Homeland Security or any government agency (including the FDA).

The law has already passed the House on a traitorous vote of 405 to 6, and it is now being considered in the Senate where a vote is imminent. All over the internet, intelligent people who care about freedom are speaking out against this extremely dangerous law: Philip Giraldi at the Huffington Post, Declan McCullagh at CNET's News.com, Kathryn Smith at OpEdNews.com, and of course Alex Jones at PrisonPlanet.com

This bill is the beginning of the end of Free Speech in America. If it passes, all the information sources you know and trust could be shut down and their authors imprisoned. NewsTarget could be taken offline and I could be arrested as a "terrorist." Jeff Rense at http://www.rense.com/ could be labeled a "terrorist" and arrested.

Byron Richards, Len Horowitz, Paul Craig Roberts, Greg Palast, Ron Paul and even Al Gore could all be arrested, silenced and incarcerated.

This is not an exaggeration. It is a literal reading of the law, which you can check yourself here: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h1955_rfs.xml

Senate Bill 1959 to Criminalize Thoughts, Blogs, Books and Free Speech Across America

The Bill of Rights

2007-11-30T19:38:00.000-08:00

by Howard Zinn, 1991
from the Zinn Reader, Seven Stories Press

A few years back, a man high up in the CIA named Ray Cline was asked if the CIA, by its surveillance of protest organizations in the United States, was violating the free speech provision of the First Amendment.

He smiled and said: "It's only an Amendment."

And when it was disclosed that the FBI was violating citizens' rights repeatedly, a high official of the FBI was asked if anybody in the FBI questioned the legality of what they were doing.

He replied: "No, we never gave it a thought."

We clearly cannot expect the Bill of Rights to be defended by government officials. So it will have to be defended by the people.

If you do a bit of research into the origins of the Bill of Rights- and I had to do some because it is a job requirement of the historical profession-you will find that when the new government of the United States adopted the Bill of Rights in 1791, it did not do so with enthusiasm. The Bill of Rights was a political tool to quiet down critics of the Constitution. A Bill of Rights on paper comforts people. You don't have to take it seriously.

Like that CIA man, you can smile, and say, they're only Amendments.

Full article: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/BillRights_ZR.html

The Problem is Civil Obedience: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/CivilObedience_ZR.html

The End of America video

2007-11-29T19:01:00.000-08:00

Naomi Wolf

MAP OF SUPER HIGHWAY ROUTE THRU NORTH AMERICA

2007-11-27T18:32:00.000-08:00

IRAQ -- BUSH SIGNS DEAL FOR ENDLESS, UNQUALIFIED, 'ENDURING' MILITARY PRESENCE IN IRAQ

2007-11-27T08:40:00.000-08:00

Center for American Progress

November 27, 2007

The New York Times recently reported that the Bush administration has "scaled back" its benchmarks for political progress in Iraq, instead "focusing their immediate efforts on several more limited but achievable goals."

Yesterday, the administration announced one of its goals: an endless, unqualified, "enduring" presence in Iraq. President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki "signed the new U.S.-Iraq 'declaration of principles' during a secure video conference Monday morning."

The key principle in the agreement, according to the White House, is that "Iraq's leaders have asked for an enduring relationship with America, and we seek an enduring relationship with a democratic Iraq."

Iraqi officials told the Associated Press that "Iraq's government will embrace a long-term U.S. troop presence in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership." The White House's determination to establish a permanent presence in Iraq contradicts its long record of declarations against permanent bases.

In a press briefing yesterday, White House war czar Gen. Doug Lute said the new long-term occupation plan won't require Congress's approval.

"We don't anticipate now that these negotiations will lead to the status of a formal treaty which would then bring us to formal negotiations or formal inputs from the Congress," said Lute.

Cheney determined to strike in US with WMD this summer

2007-11-25T16:50:00.000-08:00

By Webster G. Tarpley
Online Journal Contributing Writer

Jul 23, 2007, 01:04

The greatest threat now is “a 9/11 occurring with a group of terrorists armed not with airline tickets and box cutters, but with a nuclear weapon in the middle of one of our own cities.” --Dick Cheney on Face the Nation, CBS, April 15, 2007

A few days ago, a group of lawyers from western Massachusetts met with the local congressman, Democrat John Olver. Their request was that Olver take part in the urgent effort to impeach Bush and Cheney. Olver responded by saying that he had no intention of doing anything to support impeachment. He went further, offering the information that the United States would soon attack Iran, and that these hostilities would be followed by the imposition of a martial law regime here.

According to reports in the British press, the Cheney war party has gained the upper hand in the secret councils of the Bush White House, pushing aside the purported hesitations of Miss Rice, Secretary Gates, and the NATO allies to chart a direct course towards war with Iran:

‘The balance in the internal White House debate over Iran has shifted back in favour of military action before President George Bush leaves office in 18 months, the Guardian has learned. The shift follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although the Bush administration is in deep trouble over Iraq, it remains focused on Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: "Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo." . . . at a meeting of the White House, Pentagon and state department last month, Mr Cheney expressed frustration at the lack of progress and Mr Bush sided with him. "The balance has tilted. There is cause for concern," the source said this week. . . ."Cheney has limited capital left, but if he wanted to use all his capital on this one issue, he could still have an impact," said Patrick Cronin, the director of studies at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.’

(“Cheney pushes Bush to act on Iran; Military solution back in favour as Rice loses out; President 'not prepared to leave conflict unresolved',” Guardian, July 16, 2007.)

How The Towers Fell

2007-11-25T16:27:00.000-08:00

McClellan points finger at President Bush and Karl Rove

2007-11-20T12:36:00.000-08:00

By: Mike Allen
Nov 20, 2007 01:05 PM EST

Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan names names in a caustic passage from a forthcoming memoir that accuses President Bush, Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney of being "involved" in his giving the press false information about the CIA leak case.

McClellan’s publisher released three paragraphs from the book “WHAT HAPPENED: Inside the Bush White House and What’s Wrong With Washington.”

The excerpts give no details about the alleged involvement of the president or vice president.

But McClellan lists five top officials as having allowed him inadvertently to mislead the public.

“I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the seniormost aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby,” McClellan wrote.

“There was one problem. It was not true.”

McClellan then absolves himself and makes an inflammatory — and potentially lucrative for his publisher — charge.

“I had unknowingly passed along false information,” McClellan wrote.

“And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself."

McClellan says he was in that position because he trusted the president: "The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”

In recent conversations and in his many public speaking engagements, McClellan has made it clear he retains great affection for the president.

But White House sources have long said that Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the vice president’s chief of staff, allowed McClellan to suggest day after day that they had no involvement in the publication of the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Later testimony showed that they did, although neither was the original source of the leak.

A federal jury found Libby guilty of on perjury and obstruction charges, and Bush later commuted his 30-month sentence.

In an appearance on CNN’s “Larry King Live” in March, the day Libby was found guilty, McClellan said Bush did not originally know about the involvement by his aides.

McClellan told King: “I spoke with those individuals, … and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. … said what I believed to be true at the time. It was also what the president believed to be true at the time based on assurances that we were both given. Knowing what I know today, I would have never said that back then.”

Friends say McClellan was privately bitter and hurt.

He and Rove had come to Washington from Texas together.

“Scottie,” as Bush called him, had worked in the Texas governor’s office, making him one of the president’s longest serving aides.

McClellan, an Austin native, was White House press secretary from 2003 to 2006. Before that, he was traveling press secretary for the Bush-Cheney campaign of 2000.

When McClellan announced his resignation in April 2006, he and the president embraced during a tearful appearance on the South Lawn.

Bush said: “I thought he handled his assignment with class, integrity. ... One of these days he and I are going to be rocking on chairs in Texas, talking about the good old days and his time as the press secretary. And I can assure you I will feel the same way then that I feel now, that I can say to Scott, 'Job well done.'”

Now they’ll have even more to talk about.

The 400-page hardcover, with a price of $27.95, is set for publication April 21.

"Kill the Cable!" The Ultimate Oil Leak

2007-11-20T08:47:00.000-08:00

"Kill the cable, kill the cable," shouted the security guard as he burst through the double doors into the media room at the Intercontinental Hotel in Riyadh, followed by Saudi police.

It was too late.

A private meeting of Opec leaders, gathered this weekend in Riyadh for the cartel's third meeting in its 47-year history, had just been broadcast to the world's media for more than half an hour after a technician had mistakenly plugged the TV feed into the wrong socket. The facade of unity that the cartel so carefully cultivates to a world spooked by soaring oil prices was shattered.

Sometimes, such innocent mistakes can have far-reaching economic and political consequences. Commodity and currency traders said this weekend that oil prices would surge again on Monday -- possibly breaking the $101 per barrel record set in the late 1970s -- while the already battered dollar would fall further on the back of the unintentional broadcast.

On Friday night, during what the participants thought were private talks, Venezuela's Oil Minister Venezuela Rafael Ramirez and his Iranian counterpart Gholamhossein Nozari, argued that pricing -- and selling -- oil using the crippled dollar was damaging the cartel.

They said Opec should formally express its concern about the weakness of the dollar when the cartel makes its official declaration at the close of the summit today. But the Saudis, the world's largest oil producers and de facto head of Opec, vetoed the proposal. Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister, warned that even the mere mention to journalists of the fact that leaders were discussing the weak dollar would cause the US currency to plummet.

Unfortunately his words and those of everyone at the meeting were being broadcast via a live television feed to a group of astonished reporters. "I couldn't believe it," said one who was there. "When I realised they didn't know they were being broadcast live, I frantically started taking notes."

ENVIRONMENT 'Final Warning To Humanity'

2007-11-19T08:57:00.000-08:00

"[T]he world's scientists have spoken, clearly and in one voice," said U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, on the most recent report of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). After a rigorous multi-stage review process that includes 2,500 scientific expert reviewers, 800 contributing authors, and 450 lead authors representing 130 countries, the IPCC warns that "all countries" will be affected by climate change if carbon emissions continue to spiral.

By 2100, global average surface temperatures could rise by between 1.1 and 6.4 degrees celsius, and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could lead to an eventual rise in sea levels of up to 1.40 meters.

With "strikingly" blunt language, the report reads like "a final warning to humanity," notes Time magazine. "What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment," declared IPCC chairman Dr. Rajendra Pachauri.

DEBATING WAYS TO BATTLE WARMING: This weekend, Grist and Living on Earth sponsored a presidential candidate forum to discuss ways to tackle climate change, in partnership with the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund, California LCVEF, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, and the Presidential Forum on Renewable Energy.

The event was attended by Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), former senator John Edwards, and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). "[R]educing oil dependence and global warming is the second most important issue among independent voters," states Daniel Weiss of the Center for American Progress.

With "little disagreement among them" on the urgency of climate change, Clinton and Edwards emphasized the need to reduce emissions by 80 percent by 2050, consistent with the goals of the IPCC, along with a mandatory cap on greenhouse emissions. Such plans to combat global warming can be undertaken with a very modest reduction in global annual GDP growth of 0.12 percent, notes Pachauri.

NSA approached Qwest more than six months before the Sept. 11

2007-10-15T12:35:00.000-07:00

Former CEO Says U.S. Punished Phone Firm
Qwest Feared NSA Plan Was Illegal, Filing Says

By Ellen Nakashima and Dan EggenWashington Post Staff Writers Saturday, October 13, 2007; Page A01

A former Qwest Communications International executive, appealing a conviction for insider trading, has alleged that the government withdrew opportunities for contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars after Qwest refused to participate in an unidentified National Security Agency program that the company thought might be illegal.

Former chief executive Joseph P. Nacchio, convicted in April of 19 counts of insider trading, said the NSA approached Qwest more than six months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to court documents unsealed in Denver this week.

Details about the alleged NSA program have been redacted from the documents, but Nacchio's lawyer said last year that the NSA had approached the company about participating in a warrantless surveillance program to gather information about Americans' phone records.

In the court filings disclosed this week, Nacchio suggests that Qwest's refusal to take part in that program led the government to cancel a separate, lucrative contract with the NSA in retribution. He is using the allegation to try to show why his stock sale should not have been considered improper.

Nacchio was convicted for selling shares of Qwest stock in early 2001, just before financial problems caused the company's share price to tumble. He has claimed in court papers that he had been optimistic that Qwest would overcome weak sales because of the expected top-secret contract with the government. Nacchio said he was forbidden to mention the specifics during the trial because of secrecy restrictions, but the judge ruled that the issue was irrelevant to the charges against him.

Bush's Backfire - Video

2007-07-28T14:55:00.000-07:00

Psi Wars - Is the Force real?

2007-07-27T18:52:00.000-07:00

Giuliani's 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

2007-06-27T13:43:00.000-07:00

NATIONAL SECURITY
by Faiz Shakir, Nico Pitney, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, and Matt Corley
June 27, 2007

During a speech yesterday at Pat Robertson's Regent University, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani indirectly blamed President Clinton for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Echoing arguments offered frequently by Bush administration officials, Giuliani claimed that Clinton treated the 1993 World Trade Center bombing "as a criminal act instead of a terrorist attack," which "emboldened other strikes" on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, Kenya, and Tanzania, and later on the USS Cole.

"The United States government, then President Clinton, did not respond," Giuliani said. "Bin Laden declared war on us. We didn't hear it." The claim that Clinton "did not respond" to global terrorism during his administration is demonstrably and flagrantly false. (Giuliani himself knows this.

Just last year, before he became a presidential candidate, he said, "The idea of trying to cast blame on Clinton [for the 9/11 attacks] is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don't think he deserves it.") Giuliani's fundamentally misguided approach to counterterrorism is evidenced not only by his dishonest smears of President Clinton, but by his embrace of the same national security strategy as President Bush, under whom global terrorism is rising, Osama bin Laden is resurgent, the Middle East is deeper in violent unrest, and the U.S. military is in the midst of a readiness crisis.

CLINTON'S TERRORISM RECORD: The Clinton administration's efforts to "thwart international terrorism and bin Laden's network were historic, unprecedented and, sadly, not followed up on." Richard Clarke, who served as counterterrorism czar for Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II, detailed Clinton's counterterrorism record after Vice President Cheney claimed in 2004 that the United States had "no great success in dealing with terrorists" during the 1990s: "It's possible that the vice president has spent so little time studying the terrorist phenomenon that he doesn't know about the successes in the 1990s," Clarke said. "There were many.

The Clinton administration stopped Iraqi terrorism against the United States, through military intervention. It stopped Iranian terrorism against the United States, through covert action. It stopped the al-Qaida attempt to have a dominant influence in Bosnia. It stopped the terrorist attacks at the millennium. It stopped many other terrorist attacks, including on the U.S. embassy in Albania. And it began a lethal covert action program against al-Qaida," including military strikes against al Qaeda targets. Giuliani claims Clinton "did not respond" to bin Laden.

In fact, Roger Cressy, former National Security Council director for counterterrorism, has written, "Mr. Clinton approved every request made of him by the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against bin Laden and al Qaeda."

TERRORISM AS A CRIMINAL ACT: Giuliani's criticism that the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was considered "a criminal act instead of a terrorist attack" shows a deeply flawed understanding of counterterrorism. In fact, the United States "has long regarded [terrorist] acts as criminal," according to the 9/11 Commission Staff Report.

This practice continues under Bush; last year, for example, Bush introduced a plan to "improve national legal and regulatory frameworks to ensure appropriate criminal and civil liability" for nuclear terrorists. However, it was under Clinton that terrorism was first treated as a national security threat. The 1993 World Trade Center attack, which occurred one month after Clinton took office, "called attention to a new kind of terrorist danger." Not until July 1995 did the U.S. intelligence community identify this "new terrorist phenomenon" characterized by "loose affiliations of Islamist extremists" who were "more fluid and multinational than the older organizations." Clinton had already taken action.

A June 1995 Presidential Decision Directive issued by Clinton for the first time emphasized concern about terrorism "as a national security issue," not just a matter of law enforcement. Clinton's directive declared that the United States saw "terrorism as a potential threat to national security as well as a criminal act and will apply all appropriate means to combat it." By 1997, U.S. intelligence confirmed "the existence of al Qaeda as a worldwide terrorist organization," and for the last three years of his presidency, Clinton "raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave."THE USS COLE MYTH: Giuliani has frequently repeated the claim that Clinton did not respond to the bombing of the USS Cole. "You know, we get attacked on the Cole.

We don't do anything about it," he told Fox News earlier this month. In fact, President Clinton was eager -- at the recommendation of top counterterrorism aides -- to retaliate against al Qaeda for the USS Cole. But that attack took place in October 2000. As Clinton explained in a 2006 interview, both the CIA and FBI "refused to certify that Bin Laden was responsible" for the attack on the Cole until early 2001, which foreclosed the possibility of a full response during the Clinton administration.

THE BUSH/GIULIANI COUNTERTERRORISM STRATEGY -- INVADE IRAQ: When President Bush came into office, his administration was warned that no foe but al Qaeda posed "an immediate and serious threat to the United States." Yet in May 2001, Bush declared that "today's most urgent threat" was not terrorism but "ballistic missiles" in the hands of rogue states, specifically Iraq.

In June 2001, Bush "outlined the five top defense issues" to NATO allies, and the "only reference to extremists was in Macedonia." Even as 9/11 occured, the focus remained on Iraq. On the day of the attacks, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told aides he wanted "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H." -- meaning Saddam Hussein. One day later, Bush "testily" told Richard Clarke and other aides, "Go back over everything, everything. See if Saddam did this."

Within three months, Bush began drawing up plans for the Iraq invasion. This singular, ideological focus culminated in a policy that has consumed countless resources that could have been used to eliminate global terrorist networks and bolster homeland security. Yet to this day, Giuliani remains supportive of Bush's approach. He said recently that invading Iraq was "absolutely the right thing to do," and claimed the war would "help reduce the risk for this country."

Reporter Arrested on Orders of Giuliani Press Secretary

2007-06-07T13:19:00.000-07:00

Charged with Criminal Trespass Despite Protest of CNN Staff and Official Event Press Credentials at GOP Debate in New Hampshire
Aaron Dykes & Alex Jones / Jones Report June 5, 2007

Manchester, NH - Freelance reporter Matt Lepacek, reporting for Infowars.com, was arrested for asking a question to one of Giuliani's staff members in a press conference. The press secretary identified the New York based reporter as having previously asked Giuliani about his prior knowledge of WTC building collapses and ordered New Hampshire state police to arrest him.

Jason Bermas, reporting for Infowars and America: Freedom to Fascism, confirmed Lepacek had official CNN press credentials for the Republican debate. However, his camera was seized by staff members who shut off the camera, according to Luke Rudkowski, also a freelance Infowars reporter on the scene. He said police physically assaulted both reporters after Rudkowski objected that they were official members of the press and that nothing illegal had taken place. Police reportedly damaged the Infowars-owned camera in the process.

Reporters were questioning Giuliani staff members on a variety of issues, including his apparent ignorance of the 9/11 Commission Report, according to Bermas. The staff members accused the reporters of Ron Paul partisanship, which press denied. It was at this point that Lepacek, who was streaming a live report, asked a staff member about Giuliani's statement to Peter Jennings that he was told beforehand that the WTC buildings would collapse.

Giuliani's press secretary then called over New Hampshire state police, fingering Lepacek.

Though CNN staff members tried to persuade police not to arrest the accredited reporter-- in violation of the First Amendment, Lepacek was taken to jail. The police station told JonesReport.com that Lepacek is being charged with felony criminal trespass.

Lepacek did receive one phone call in jail which he used to contact reporter Luke Rudkowski. According to Rudkowski, Lepacek was scared because he had been told he may be transferred to a secret detention facility because state police were also considering charges of espionage against him-- due to a webcam Lepacek was using to broadcast live at the event. State police considered it to be a hidden camera, which led to discussion of "espionage."

Wearing a webcam at a press event is not an act of espionage. Alex Jones, who was watching the live feed, witnessed Lepacek announce that he was wearing a camera connected to a laptop that was transmitting the press conference live at approximately 9:20 EST. When Lepacek announced that he was broadcasting live, Giuliani staff members responded by getting upset at his questions and ordering his arrest.

Freedom to Fascism reporter Samuel Ettaro was also dragged out after asking a question on Giuliani's ties with Cintra and Macquerie, two foreign contractors involved with the contentious Trans-Texas Corridor under development in Texas. The entire incident took place in a large press auditorium, apart from the debate stages where authorized media were able to question candidates and their handlers.

Since when do campaign operatives have the power to order state police to arrest someone on false charges or arbitrate who has the right to conduct journalism, a right guarded by the Constitution?

A warning to the press-- if candidates or police don't like your questions, you could be arrested for trespassing and even espionage in the new Orwellian America.

The state police in Goffstown, New Hampshire, where the arrest was made, confirmed that Lepacek is in custody on charges of criminal trespass. Police said information on who filed the trespass complaint was not yet available and would be filed in the police report.
It is clear from talking to multiple eyewitness, as well as the live webcam, that there could not have been a complainant who originated police action, because it happened spontaneously. The police need to be very careful about violating the Bill of Rights and falsely charging someone with a felony crime. This constitutes extreme official oppression and is a total violation of the reporter's civil rights. It would have been bad enough if the reporter would have just been thrown out, but to arrest him when he had a valid press pass and CNN protested his arrest is an outrage.

The arrest-- which clearly violated the First Amendment-- was recorded from two separate camera angles, including a live feed recorded remotely-- so the episode is on record in the event that police destroy or lose tapes seized from Lepacek in attempt to obfuscate the facts of the incident.

If you doubt that police would assault reporters, seize video equipment and act on political orders, then consider the experience Alex Jones had when Texas state troopers arrested him for asking George W. Bush a question during a press conference while he was governor. See video below.

Reporters Matt Lepacek and Luke Rudkowski, both members of WeAreChange.org , as well as freelance reporters for Infowars.com, have also been previously accused-- falsely-- of being terrorists with bombs and have undergone multiple episodes of harassment during peaceful demonstrations and attempts at exercising the right of free press .

HARPERS WEEKLY REVIEW

2007-06-05T14:01:00.000-07:00

Thirty-seven American soldiers were killed in Iraq, ending the deadliest month for U.S. forces in the past two-and-a-half years. U.S. military commanders were negotiating cease-fires with Iraqi militants, Turkish troops shelled northern Iraq, and in Baghdad the country's preeminent calligrapher was shot to death. Iraq was found to be the world's 121st least peaceful country out of 121 countries; the United States ranked 96, below Yemen but above Iran.

The crowd at the Miss Universe competition in Mexico City booed Miss America, and in Crawford, Texas, Cindy Sheehan resigned as the "'face' of the American anti-war movement." "Good-bye America," wrote Sheehan. "You are not the country that I love and I finally realized no matter how much I sacrifice, I can't make you be that country unless you want it."

Paris Hilton went to jail and, according to family members, "breaks down crying a lot because she can't deal with the reality and the pressure." Hundreds of men serving life terms in Italian prisons demanded to be put to death. "We are tired of dying a little bit every day," said the inmates in a letter to Italian President Giorgio Napolitano. "We have decided to die just once."

Jack Kevorkian was released from prison, and Damien Hirst unveiled a diamond-encrusted human skull valued at $100,000,000. Russian President Vladimir Putin threatened to point his country's missiles at Washington and Europe, China and India were preparing to race to the moon, and a Polish man who had been comatose since Communist rule awoke.

Adults and children in the European Union were getting fatter, and a judge in New Delhi ruled that government-employed air hostesses had to lose weight. "If by perseverance, the snail could reach the Ark," said Justice Rekha Sharma, "why can't these worthy ladies stand on and turn the scale"; farther south, in Agra, a mob of lawyers stripped a low-caste youth, tied him to a tree, shaved his head, spat on his face, and beat him. "No one," said Bar Council of India Vice President Rajendra Raghuvanshi, "can take law in their hands." Sex stimulants were banned in Australian prisons. Argentine researchers used Viagra to treat jet lag in hamsters, and in New York, a psychologist named Gordon Gallup announced that semen may be a powerful and addictive antidepressant for women.

An Italian doctor built vaginas for two women who lacked them due to Mayer-von Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome, Serb farmers were exchanging cows for penis-enlargement surgery, and an Egyptian jurist at Al-Azhar University was disciplined for issuing a fatwa that permitted women to breastfeed adult men.

Japanese engineers unveiled a gray-skinned child-android with the physical abilities of a toddler, and a robot was assigned to guard duty at a South Korean school. The robot, said DU Robo CEO Kang Jung-Won, "will alert officials when it detects someone trying to seduce a student." Duke University lost the the men's NCAA lacrosse championship.

Nazi-released raccoons continued to wreak havoc from the Baltic Sea to the Alps. "We like the United States of America," said retired German orthodontist Dieter Hoffmann, "but we do not like your Waschbaeren!"

Peruvian scientists were concerned that an itinerant penguin from Chile "could suffer discrimination" among Peru's penguins, a family in England claimed that they were being chased out of their neighborhood because they are redheads, and a family in Morocco were evicted from the toilet where they had lived for several years. "When he came home," said the mother of her son, "he would cry and asked me why we lived in the toilet.

"Elephants were fleeing war in Sri Lanka, while at least one elephant in eastern India was robbing motorists. Battalions of macaques were attacking the houses of Indian congressmen. "In the name of protection of monkeys," said an activist, "we cannot afford to be silent spectator to this perennial problem." Scientists in Des Moines, Iowa, talked to apes, who responded by pointing to lexigrams, and it was revealed that young sparrows learn their songs by eavesdropping. A group of men in New York City were accused of using GoogleEarth to plot a terrorist attack on underground jet-fuel lines, a hot-mud volcano in Indonesia had been erupting for one year, and in the midst of a bright, dusty lava-plain on Mars, astronomers discovered an immensely deep cavern from which no light escapes.

-- Rafil Kroll-Zaidi

NYC told Ground Zero air was unsafe after 9/11

2007-05-11T16:56:00.000-07:00

NEW YORK (CNN) -- The city allowed people to return to Manhattan after the collapse of the World Trade Center towers even though officials were told the air was not yet safe, according to an internal memo from a New York City Health Department official.

The October 6, 2001, memo states that the city Office of Emergency Management -- called OEM -- and the Department of Environmental Protection -- referred to as DEP --disagreed over the air quality following the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. But it suggests commercial interests trumped safety concerns.

Kelly McKinney, associate commissioner of the health department, wrote that the mayor's office was under pressure from building owners and business owners to open more of the "red zone."

"According to OEM, some city blocks north and south of Ground Zero are suitable for re-occupancy. DEP believes the air quality is not yet suitable for re-occupancy. I was told the mayor's office was directing OEM to open the target areas next week," McKinney wrote.

In a letter dated the day before the memo was written, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency told the city's health department that there were concerns about worker safety at the World Trade Center site.

"In addition to standard construction/demolition site safety concerns, this site also poses threats to workers related to potential exposure to hazardous substances," including building materials, hazardous materials stored in the buildings and combustion products emitted from the smoldering rubble, the letter states.

The two documents are proof that "EPA officials were aware of the severity of the danger at Ground Zero in contrast to their public statements at the time," said Joel Kupferman, an environmental lawyer with the Environmental Justice Project who obtained the documents through Freedom of Information Act requests.

Calls to the New York City Health Department were referred to the New York City Law Department.

Gary Shaffer, deputy chief of the department's World Trade Center unit, said in a statement that New York "stuck firm to requiring that before a site could be opened, there had to be two consecutive days of asbestos fiber counts below the DEP level of concern."

"All Mr. McKinney's memo shows is that even when these stringent standards were met, reopenings were still discussed before being finalized," the statement says.

The documents were made public two days after Mount Sinai Medical Center released a study showing that 70 percent of World Trade Center rescue workers have developed serious and persistent respiratory illnesses from exposure to toxic dust.
(Full story)

9/11 - Bush Saw First Plane Impact (Youtube)

2007-05-06T02:34:00.000-07:00

Giuliani warns of 'new 9/11' if Democrats win

2007-04-26T01:26:00.000-07:00

By: Roger Simon
April 24, 2007 08:29 PM EST
Updated: April 25, 2007 01:28 PM EST

MANCHESTER, N.H. —- Rudy Giuliani said if a Democrat is elected president in 2008, America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001.

But if a Republican is elected, he said, especially if it is him, terrorist attacks can be anticipated and stopped.

“If any Republican is elected president —- and I think obviously I would be the best at this —- we will remain on offense and will anticipate what [the terrorists] will do and try to stop them before they do it,” Giuliani said.

The former New York City mayor, currently leading in all national polls for the Republican nomination for president, said Tuesday night that America would ultimately defeat terrorism no matter which party gains the White House.

“But the question is how long will it take and how many casualties will we have?” Giuliani said. “If we are on defense [with a Democratic president], we will have more losses and it will go on longer.”

“I listen a little to the Democrats and if one of them gets elected, we are going on defense,” Giuliani continued. “We will wave the white flag on Iraq. We will cut back on the Patriot Act, electronic surveillance, interrogation and we will be back to our pre-Sept. 11 attitude of defense.”

He added: “The Democrats do not understand the full nature and scope of the terrorist war against us.”

After his speech to the Rockingham County Lincoln Day Dinner, I asked him about his statements and Giuliani said flatly: “America will be safer with a Republican president.”

Giuliani, whose past positions on abortion, gun control and gay rights have made him anathema to some in his party, believes his tough stance on national defense and his post-Sept. 11 reputation as a fighter of terrorism will be his trump card with doubting Republicans.

“This war ends when they stop coming here to kill us!” Giuliani said in his speech. “Never, ever again will this country ever be on defense waiting for [terrorists] to attack us if I have anything to say about it. And make no mistake, the Democrats want to put us back on defense!”

Giuliani said terrorists “hate us and not because of anything bad we have done; it has nothing to do with Israel and Palestine. They hate us for the freedoms we have and the freedoms we want to share with the world.”

Giuliani continued: “The freedoms we have are in conflict with the perverted, maniacal interpretation of their religion.” He said Americans would fight for “freedom for women, the freedom of elections, freedom of religion and the freedom of our economy.”

Addressing the terrorists directly, Giuliani said: “We are not giving that up, and you are not going to take it from us!”

Giuliani 9/11 remark draws angry Dem reply
The crowd thundered its approval.

Giuliani

Why did 911 occur?

2007-04-22T00:52:00.000-07:00

William Thomas

Why did 9 11 happen

Emphasizing the “humiliation and disgrace” Islam has suffered at the hands of infidels and their compliant Middle East rulers for nearly a century, bin Laden has long complained that the United States “wants to occupy our countries, steal our resources, impose on us agents to rule us.” Outraged by the presence of American troops desecrating Islam’s two holiest places: Mecca and Medina, in the 1990s bin Laden demanded that the United States leave the Persian Gulf, stop all sanctions against the Iraqi people and stop using Israel to oppress Palestinians - or else, “American civilians will no more be spared than military targets.”

How much advance warning did the White House have?
In the weeks leading up to Sept. 11, dozens of urgent, detailed warnings of attacks involving hijacked airliners and US landmarks came from German, French, Russian and Israeli intelligence, an Arab newspaper, several prisoners and members of New York’s Muslim communities.

Could US intelligence agencies have stopped 911?
In 1995, Filipino authorities alerted the FBI that Middle Eastern pilots were training at American flight schools to hijack a commercial jet and crash it into federal buildings. In July 2001, a “Phoenix memo” sent by FBI anti-terror Agent Kenneth Williams alerted his Washington superiors 2001 that eight bin Laden followers were training at an Arizona flight school. A fatwa edict commanded them to "Bring down their [USA] airliners.” In August, Moussaoui was arrested at a Minnesota flight school while learning to fly heavy aircraft.

Despite known links to al Qaeda and Boeing flight manuals in his car, Attorney General John Ashcroft blocked further investigations of Moussaoui. Another FBI informant lived with two of the hijackers. And FBI translator Sibel Edmonds says the FBI had “several specific information” on the coming Trade Tower attacks as early as April 2001. The National Security Agency says it routinely intercepted phone calls between bin Laden and his operatives in the United State. “Hundreds” of calls from ringleader Atta were also intercepted and traced.

What happened to US air defenses on Sept. 11?
According to an official Pentagon news release, US interceptors launched late from distant bases flew at a fraction of their top speeds. Two jets airborne near Manhattan could have intercepted both WTC-bound airliners, but were not notified of the attacks. Two armed “ready alert” jets routinely launched to intercept stray airliners from Andrews Air Force base just 10 miles from the Pentagon were held on the ground until after the attacks. A nationwide air defense drill on 911 also saw US air defenders looking over the North Pole for nonexistent “Soviet” attackers.

Is the war in Iraq related to 911?
The secular Saddam Hussein was a bitter enemy of radical Islamists, including al Qaeda. No evidence has ever been found linking his regime to the Sept. 11 attacks. Ironically, the US invasion and occupation of Iraq has brought top al Qaeda personnel flooding into that country, while driving thousands of outraged Arab youths to join the terrorists’ ranks.

Will there be more terrorist attacks against the United States?
Top terrorists heard US General Tommy Franks warn the world that another murderous attack on US soil in the coming months could see the “suspension of the Constitution” and the “imposition of a military government” in Washington. Which means, they win. But Osama bin Laden says he is directing “modern educated youths” using al Qaeda computers to “hack” “cracks inside the Western financial system” – and crash the United States’ economy beyond repair.

Full article
Al Qaeda

11 Remarkable Facts About 9/11

2007-04-20T17:28:00.000-07:00

CLICK TO ENLARGE PICTURE

http://911sharethetruth.com/CR3.htm

The New York Times Reports the End of the War

2007-04-20T16:40:00.000-07:00

9 - 11, November, 1918

LONDON, Nov. 9, 4 :40 P.M. -- Emperor William of Germany has abdicated.
COPENHAGEN, Nov. 9 -- German sailors have rebelled and have compelled their officers to leave the warships.

PARIS, Nov. 9 -- If the German answer is in the affirmative, an armistice will be signed at Senlis, headquarters of the Allied Generalissimo.

LONDON, Nov. 9 -- All the Allied armies on the British front are advancing.

PARIS, Nov. 9 -- French cavalry has crossed the Belgian border, north and east of Hirson.

WITH THE AMERICAN ARMY IN FRANCE, Nov. 9, 9 P.M. -- The message that the Kaiser has decided to abdicate reached the American front this afternoon. East of the Meuse Americans are advancing on Montmedy. We have just cleaned out Bois de Remoisville.

Special to The New York Times, By Edwin L. James

WITH THE AMERICAN ARMY IN FRANCE, Nov. 11 -- They stopped fighting at 11 o'clock this morning. In a twinkling, four years of killing and massacre stopped as if God had swept His omnipotent finger across the scene of world carnage and had cried "Enough."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special to The New York Times By Philip Gibbs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITH THE BRITISH ARMIES IN FRANCE, Nov. 11 -- Last night, for the first time since August in the first year of the war, there was no light of gunfire in the sky no sudden stabs of flame through darkness, no spreading glow above black trees where for four years of nights human beings were smashed to death. The Fires of Hell had been put out.

9/11 WTC World Trade Centers The Most Complete Story Part 1

2007-04-19T21:21:00.000-07:00

September 11, 2001: The French Knew Much About It

2007-04-17T09:00:00.000-07:00

By Guillaume Dasquié

Le Monde
Monday 16 April 2004

It's an impressive mass of documents. From a distance, one would imagine a doctoral thesis. On closer inspection: nothing of the kind. Red stamps "Confidential-Defense" and "Strictly National Usage" on every page.

At the top on the left, a royal blue logo: that of the DGSE, Direction générale des services extérieurs [General Directorate for Foreign Services], the French secret services. In total, 328 classified pages. Notes, reports, syntheses and summaries, maps, graphs, organization charts, satellite photos. All exclusively devoted to al-Qaeda, its leaders, its seconds-in-command, its hide-outs and training camps. Also to its financial supports. Nothing less than the fundamentals of the DGSE reports compiled between July 2000 and October 2001. A veritable encyclopedia.

At the end of several months of investigation of this very special documentation, we contacted DGSE headquarters. And on April 3, the present chief of staff, Emmanuel Renoult, received us there, within the confines of the Tourelles garrison in Paris. After thumbing through the 328 pages that we set on his desk, he can't keep himself from deploring such a leak, all the while allowing us to understand that the packet represents virtually the entirety of DGSE production on the subject for this crucial period. On the other hand, it was impossible to draw the least comment from him on the substance of the material. Too sensitive.

It's true that these secret services chronicles about al-Qaeda, with their various revelations, raise many questions. And at first, a surprise: The high number of notes devoted exclusively to al-Qaeda's threats against the United States, months before the suicide attacks in New York and Washington. Nine whole reports on that subject between September 2000 and August 2001, including a five-page summary entitled, "Airplane Hijacking Plans by Radical Islamists," and dated ... January 5, 2001! Eight months before September 11, the DGSE reports therein tactical discussions conducted between Osama bin Laden and his Taliban allies from the beginning of 2000 on the subject of hijacking American commercial airliners.

Pierre-Antoine Lorenzi, chief of staff to the DGSE director up until August 2001, and today the president of a company specialized in crisis and influence strategies (Serenus Conseil), reviews these 328 pages in front of us and also stops short when he comes to that memo. He hesitates, takes the time to read it and admits: "I remember that." "You have to remember," Mr. Lorenzi elaborates, "that in 2001, hijacking an airplane didn't mean the same thing as it did after September 11. At the time, it implied forcing a plane to land at an airport to conduct negotiations. We were used to dealing with that." A useful perspective to understand why that January 5 alert didn't provoke any reaction from its recipients: the pillars of executive power.

As of January 2001, the al-Qaeda leadership nonetheless showed itself to be transparent to the eyes - and ears - of French spies. The redactors even detailed disagreements among the terrorists over the practical modalities of the planned hijacking. They never questioned their intention. Provisionally, the jihadists favored capturing an airplane between Frankfurt and the United States. They established a list of seven possible companies. Two would finally be chosen by the September 11 pirates: American Airlines and United Airlines. In his introduction, the author of the memo notes, "According to the Uzbek intelligence services, the airplane hijacking plan seems to have been discussed at the beginning of 2000 during a Kabul meeting of representatives from Osama bin Laden's organization...."

Consequently, Uzbek spies informed French agents. At the time, the opposition of Muslim fundamentalists to the pro-American regime in Tashkent united the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the MIO. A military faction of this group, led by a certain Taher Yudachev, joined the Afghanistan camps and swore allegiance to Osama bin Laden, promising him he would export his jihad to Central Asia. MIO military leaflets and correspondence discovered in al-Qaeda's Afghan camps attest to that.

Alain Chouet remembers this episode. Until October 2002, he directed the Security Intelligence Service, a DGSE subdivision charged with following terrorist movements. According to him, the credibility of the Uzbek channel devolves from the alliances formed by General Rashid Dostom, one of the main Afghan warlords, himself of Uzbek ethnicity, who was then fighting the Taliban. To please his protectors in the neighboring Uzbek security services, Dostom infiltrated some of his men into the heart of the MIO, right up to the command structures of the al-Qaeda camps. That's how he informed his friends in Tashkent, knowing that the intelligence would then make its way to Washington, London and Paris.

Full Story: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041707J.shtml

Two Pentagon Videos

2007-04-13T02:17:00.000-07:00

Footage From Two Pentagon Security Cameras Showing Moments of Attack

On May 16, 2006, the Department of Defense released, through JudicialWatch.org, footage from two cameras that captured portions of the attack at 9:37 on the west side of the Pentagon. One of the two cameras was the source of the five frames of video leaked in 2002.
The two clips have the following approximate characteristics:

The videos were supplied in the form of Flash video clips. We extracted pairs of frames, one from each clip, for various times, to make the following table.

Security Cameras Showing Moments of Attack

September Eleventh; Should the truth be revealed or concealed?

2007-04-11T23:24:00.001-07:00


David Ray Griffin, 9/11 Lecture, Copenhagen September 41. 2006 David Ray Griffin, 9/11 foredrag, København 14. September 2006 http://www.1192001.dk/ The Black Diamond, Denmark,Den Sorte Diamant, Danmark world trade centre, nine eleven konspirationsteorier, konspiration 911truth WTC 2001 conspiracy, osama bin laden

WTC

Bush - Nazi connection

2007-04-11T23:05:00.000-07:00

Is it high treason or just a simple case of dereliction of duty?

2007-01-12T17:03:00.000-08:00

Muckraker Report : by Maher Osseiran

January 11, 2007 -- All the available information indicates that at least one of these crimes was committed and the finger points squarely at the Bush administration.

On Dec. 13, 2001, the Pentagon released a tape of Bin Laden in which he confessed to his visitor, Khaled Al-Harbi, of prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks.

The tape was billed as the smoking gun that proves Bin Laden’s guilt and in order to remove all suspicion of fowl play; the Pentagon released the tape in its entirety.

If Bin Laden, through his own words, implicated himself in the planning of the 9/11 operations that took 3,000 innocent lives, the rest of the tape, which is a Bin Laden family home video of a downed Special Forces helicopter, implicates the Bush administration in a premeditated act that resulted in the loss of thousands of innocent lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other corners of the world.

A detailed analysis of the tape, the only one of its kind, was summarized in an article published by counterpunch.com, “Osama’s Confession; Osama’s Reprieve”. The article shows that the tape was the result of a two-part sting operation run by U.S. intelligence with the help of Saudi intelligence. The first part of the sting was to tape Bin Laden. The second part of the operation was to capture him.

The Bush administration was the closest ever to Bin Laden and could have captured him on September 26, 2001, the date of the taping; intelligence operatives were feet from him, had 4 days advance notice of the date of the meeting, 24 hours advance notice of the exact location, and knew that Bin Laden would be there for at least 3 hours if not longer since his family and his favorite son Hamza lived in that village and Bin Laden was very likely to stay overnight.

This scripted opportunity to capture him, barely two weeks after 9/11 and ten day prior to invading Afghanistan, was squandered in favor of taping him confessing; that can only be considered dereliction of duty in time of war.

There is no telling how the war on terror would have evolved with Bin Laden in custody, but, if captured on September 26, there would have been no justification to launch military operations against Afghanistan ten days later; the civilians who died in Afghanistan as a result are no longer unfortunate collateral damage, they were murdered.

The article also shows that Bin Laden’s capture was deferred to a future unknown date with little or no advance notice and little control over the capture operation parameters.

The technical analysis of the tape places a member of the sting team that did the taping, in the village up until November 5, 2001. Based on events and the variety of U.S. assets that converged on that little village on November 2, 2001, the sting team member's duty was to alert the Special Forces of when Bin Laden returned to visit his family.

On that date, a Special Forces helicopter crashed on a hill near the village. The Pentagon tells us that the helicopter was on a rescue mission to retrieve a wounded soldier and that it crashed in bad weather. A second helicopter on that mission rescued the crew while an F-14 destroyed the disabled helicopter shortly thereafter. The Pentagon gave 1:30 pm ET as the time of the helicopter crash, 11:00 pm local.

On that same date, the Pentagon reported that a Predator went missing at 2:15 pm ET, 11:45 pm local.

When the counterpunch article was published, I had not made a connection to the Predator. However, there was one loose item in my analysis that I filed away thinking it did not effect my article's conclusions. This item was a four cylinder, air cooled reciprocating engine with a Garrett turbo charger. At the time, I knew it was not large enough to run the main rotor of a military helicopter and assumed it was an auxiliary power unit (APU) that a variety of aircrafts use.

Approximately two weeks ago, I decided to revisit that item. I approached my investigation from a different angle and, after two days of work, was able to identify the engine as a Rotax 914. The only aircraft that uses this engine is a modified Predator of which the Air Force had only two examples on the date of the crash.

The Bin Laden family home video tapes the Predator engine as part of the helicopter wreckage. Further viewing of the video reveals that among other wreckage footage, the camera housing of a Predator was taped and erroneously identified as part of the helicopter.
Rest of the story>http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id339.html

Missile Hit Pentagon

2006-11-02T11:59:00.000-08:00

Radiation Expert Claims High-Radiation Readings
Near Pentagon After 9/11 Indicates
Depleted Uranium Used
By Greg Szymanski

Two high profile radiation experts concur Pentagon strike involved use of a missile. Geiger counter readings right after the attack shows high levels of radiation 12 miles away from Pentagon crash site.

A radiation expert and high-ranking Army Major, who once headed the military's depleted uranium project, both contend the Pentagon was hit by missile, not a commercial jetliner, adding high radiation readings after the strike indicate depleted uranium also may have been used.

"I'm not an explosives or crash site expert, but I am highly knowledgeable in causes and effects related to nuclear radiation contamination. What happened at the Pentagon is highly suspicious, leading me to believe a missile with a depleted uranium warhead may have been used," said radiation expert Leuren Moret in a telephone conversation this week from her Berkeley, CA home.

Moret, who has spent a life time working in the nuclear field, first as a staff scientist at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory in California, is now a member of The Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP), a privately funded group studying the devastating effects of depleted uranium especially in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Regarding the missile theory, it is also backed up by retired Army Maj. Doug Rokke, a PhD educational physics and former top military expert banished from the Pentagon after the military failed to follow regulations regarding the use, clean up and medical treatment regarding the use of depleted uranium.

"When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile's impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile," said Maj. Rokke from his Rantoul, IL home this week. "And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile. Also, if you look at the WTC and the disturbing flash hitting the tower right before the impact of the airplane, it also looks like a missile was used."

Thinking radiation might be involved, she quickly asked Dr. Sherman, 77, a radiation expert and medical doctor who lived about 12 miles from the crash site, to get a Geiger counter reading.

What the pair of experts found is astonishing. What they found is not only astonishing but four years after 9/11, what's even more incredible is that their findings have been completely ignored by most everyone, including the Bush administration, the 9/11 Commission and the mainstream media, all who appear more interested in rubber stamping the official 9/11 story then getting at the real truth.

"Dr. Sherman was downwind from the Pentagon on 9/11 and her Geiger counter readings show an extremely high reading, a reading of more than eight to ten times higher than normal," said Moret, also an expert in the cause and effects of depleted uranium.

"Dr. Sherman, who is well-respected radiation expert herself, then went about contacting the proper authorities in order to try and alert emergency responders of the radiation risk at the Pentagon crash site. And we have also kept photos of the Geiger counter readings in order to verify what Dr. Sherman found 12 miles away."

Feds Investigate Voting Machine ties to Venezuela

2006-10-30T11:05:00.000-08:00

By Tim Golden
The New York Times
Sunday 29 October 2006

The federal government is investigating the takeover last year of a leading American manufacturer of electronic voting systems by a small software company that has been linked to the leftist government of President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela.

The federal inquiry is focusing on the Venezuelan owners of the software company, the Smartmatic Corporation, and is trying to determine whether the government in Caracas has any control or influence over the firm's operations, government officials and others familiar with the investigation said.

The inquiry on the eve of the midterm elections is being conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or Cfius, the same panel of 12 government agencies that reviewed the abortive attempt by a company in Dubai to take over operations at six American ports earlier this year.

The committee's formal inquiry into Smartmatic and its subsidiary, Sequoia Voting Systems of Oakland, Calif., was first reported Saturday in The Miami Herald.

Officials of both Smartmatic and the Venezuelan government strongly denied yesterday that President Chávez's administration, which has been bitterly at odds with Washington, has any role in Smartmatic.

"The government of Venezuela doesn't have anything to do with the company aside from contracting it for our electoral process," the Venezuelan ambassador in Washington, Bernardo Alvarez, said last night.

McNerney Leads Pombo in Latest Poll in CA-11!

2006-10-27T19:50:00.000-07:00

For the first time in a while, Kos actually posted an article on the Pombo-McNerney race, and it’s very, very good news. Kos reports this morning that Greenberg Quinlan and Rosner now have Jerry McNerney ahead of Pombo, 48 to 46, with 6 percent undecided, and a MoE of 4.9%. With the MoE, the race is clearly a dead heat, as this analysis points out.

» Fifty-two percent think Pombo “puts corporate interests over the people’s interests.”

» Forty-six percent think Pombo “is too close to lobbyists ,” while 29 percent say he’s not.

» Forty-three percent think Pombo “is too close to oil and gas companies ,” while 31 percent think he is not.

“Pombo remains in poor standing with voters in his district. Voters in California’s 11th Congressional distric t do not like their Congressman. As a result, they continue to support the Democratic challenger over the incumbent. With time running out, Pombo is in real jeopardy of losing his seat.”

That’s the biggest smackdown I’ve ever seen from a POLLSTER!

The Right to Ignore the State

2006-10-20T14:34:00.000-07:00

by Herbert Spencer
It is a mistake to assume
that government must
necessarily last forever.

Thus, as civilization advances, does government decay. To the bad it (government) is essential; to the good, not. It is the check which national wickedness makes to itself, and exists only to the same degree. Its continuance is proof of still-existing barbarism. What a cage is to the wild beast, law is to the selfish man. Restraint is for the savage, the rapacious, the violent; not for the just, the gentle, the benevolent.

The time was when the history of a people was but the history of its government. It is otherwise now. The once universal despotism was but a manifestation of the extreme necessity of restraint. Feudalism, serfdom, slavery, all tyrannical institutions, are merely the most vigorous kinds of rule, springing out of, and necessary to, a bad state of man.

The progress from these is in all cases the same — less government. Constitutional forms means this. Political freedom means this. Democracy means this. In societies, associations, joint-stock companies, we have new agencies occupying big fields filled in less advanced times and countries by the State.

With us the legislature is dwarfed by newer and greater powers — is no longer master, but slave. "Pressure from without" has come to be acknowledged as ultimate ruler. It bids fair to become a trite remark that the law-maker is but the servant of the thinker. Daily is Statecraft held in less repute.

Even the "Times" can see that "the social changes thickening around us establish a truth sufficiently humiliating to legislative bodies," and that "the great stages of our progress are determined rather by the spontaneous workings of society, connected as they are with the progress of art and science, the operation of nature, and other such unpolitical causes, than by the proposition of a bill, the passing of an act, or any other event of politics or of State."

The institution that marks a certain stage of civilization — is natural to a particular phase of human development. It is not essential, but incidental. Already has it lost something of its importance.

Excerpts taken from: Herbert Spencer's, The Right to Ignore the State (1820-1903)

Ohio Lawsuit to Reinstate Hundreds of Thousands of Purged Democratic Voters

2006-10-19T16:26:00.000-07:00

Rob Kall
OpEdNews
Thursday 18 October 2006

Ohio voting rights activist and attorney, Bob Fitrakis, says the Ohio elections may have already been won, responding to reports of massive voter purges in Democratic precincts.

Dr. Fitrakis, told OpEdNews, "Essentially, by purging these rolls, the Republicans, by shrinking the electorate, have already won in Ohio. If they can't win, which is what the polls show among registered voters, the way to win is to use their nuclear option- to target black voters, young voters and the working poor- by purging them so they can't vote.

Reports indicate that starting as early as shortly after the 2004 presidential elections, but particularly recently, hundreds of thousands of voters- mostly urban apartment dwellers (likely black) and students- who are primarily Democratic- were sent notifications that they would be purged from the eligible voter lists if they did not respond the letter. But, reportedly, the letter was designed to be easily overlooked, perhaps treated as junk mail. Failure to send in a response caused the voter to be removed from the voting roll.

Abramoff and Pombo

2006-10-11T23:50:00.000-07:00

Records Suggest Abramoff-Pombo Lobbying Contacts
Tuesday 10 October 2006

California Rep. Richard Pombo has insisted he was never lobbied by Jack Abramoff. Records show the disgraced lobbyist billed a client for at least two contacts with Pombo a decade ago.

The lobbying records released by the Northern Mariana Islands show that Abramoff billed once for calls to Pombo, chairman of the House Resources Committee, and a second time for a discussion with him, while lobbying in 1996.

On more than two dozen other occasions from 1996 through 2001, Abramoff associates called or met with members of Pombo's staff, including his chief of staff, the records indicate. As the contacts picked up, Pombo voted Abramoff's way on a bill important to Abramoff's clients.

Pombo spokesman Brian Kennedy disputed the reported contacts, saying direct lobbying by Abramoff "never happened" and the staff-level contacts were "greatly inflated." Abramoff, who pleaded guilty in a congressional corruption investigation, is "an admitted felon" who can't be trusted, Kennedy said.

Still, the records put in question Pombo's campaign-trail assertions that he barely knew Abramoff and was never lobbied by him. Pombo is running against Democrat Jerry McNerney and is favored to win an eighth term representing California's Central Valley.

The Mercury News, one of the largest newspapers in California and read by thousands of voters throughout the 11th Congressional District, did not mince words, calling Richard Pombo "a national disgrace to the Republican Party."

A Washington watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, put Pombo on its list of the 13 most corrupt Republicans and Democrats in Congress.

9/11 Bill of Rights supports Jerry McNerney for US Congress!

Lincoln Weeps

2006-10-06T20:00:00.000-07:00

By Bill Moyers
TomPaine.com
Tuesday 03 October 2006

If democracy can be said to have temples, the Lincoln Memorial is our most sacred.

You stand there silently contemplating the words that gave voice to Lincoln's fierce determination to save the union - his resolve that "government of, by, and for the people shall not perish from the earth."

On this latest visit, I was overcome by a sense of melancholy. Lincoln looks out now on a city where those words are daily mocked. This is no longer his city. And those people from all walks of life making their way up the steps to pay their respect to the martyred president - it's not their city, either. Or their government.

This is an occupied city, a company town, and government is a subservient subsidiary of richly endowed patrons.

Once upon a time the House of Representatives was known as "the people's house." No more. It belongs to K Street now. That's the address of the lobbyists who swarm all over Capitol Hill. There are 65 lobbyists for every member of Congress.

They spend $200 million per month wining, dining and seducing federal officials. Per month!

Of course they're just doing their job. It's impossible to commit bribery, legal or otherwise, unless someone's on the take, and with campaign costs soaring, our politicians always have their hands out. One representative confessed that members of Congress are the only people in the world expected to take large amounts of money from strangers and then act as if it has no effect on their behavior.

This explains why Democrats are having a hard time exploiting the culture of corruption embodied in the scandalous behavior of DeLay and Abramoff. Democrats are themselves up to their necks in the sludge. Just the other day one of the most powerful Democrats in the House bragged to reporters about tapping "uncharted donor fields in the financial industry" - reminding them, not so subtlely, of the possibility that after November the majority leader just might be a Democrat.

Read the full story here...Truthout: Lincoln Weeps

October 5 2006: No Work. No School. Protest in the Streets!

2006-09-25T16:18:00.000-07:00

On October 5, people everywhere will walk out of school, take off work, and come to the downtowns & townsquares and set out from there, going through the streets and calling on many more to join us - making a powerful statement: "NO! THIS REGIME DOES NOT REPRESENT US! AND WE WILL DRIVE IT OUT!"

Incomes have dropped over the past six years

2006-09-21T19:26:00.000-07:00

Click to Enlarge

Here's a handy map showing how far median incomes have dropped over the past six years. And it's good news for most of you: Compared to Michigan and North Carolina you're not doing so badly after all. So stop your sniveling.

UPDATE: This map is wrong. Median incomes have dropped over the past six years, but not by this much. Corrected data is here.

Rebuild a Looted U.S. Economy

2006-09-16T11:15:00.000-07:00

LYNDON LAROUCHE WEBCAST
January 11, 2006

English Video-high: Download(440.8 MB)
English Video-Low: Download(48.5 MB)
English Audio only: Download(23.9 MB)

Spanish
Español Videobanda ancha: Bajar(174.7 MB)
Español Video modem: Bajar(48.5 MB
Español Audio solamente: Bajar(23.5 MB)

LYNDON LAROUCHE.com

LaRouche's pre-9/11 Warning

2006-09-15T18:47:00.000-07:00

Given the hysteria and fear-mongering that the Bush Administration, and its supporters are engaged in around the 9/11 anniversary, largely as a desperate pre-election ploy, it's worth noting the warning that Lyndon LaRouche issued 8 months before 9/11 about the nature of the then-incoming regime.

LaRouche focused on the nomination of John Ashcroft to be attorney general, not so much because of the particularities of the Confederate flag-loving Ashcroft, but because of what his nomination indicated about how the Bush regime would respond to a crisis, and the underlying crisis was, and still is, the disintegration of the global financial system, similar, though different in magnitude, to what was happening in the 1930's.

Here is what LaRouche said, on Jan. 3, 2001:
"First of all, when Bush put Ashcroft in, as a nomination for the Justice Department, he made it clear, the Ku Klux Klan was riding again. That's clear. Now, maybe Bush didn't know what he was doing. But somebody in the Bush team did. And a lot of them had the voice to say something about it. Ashcroft was an insult to the Congress. If the Democrats in the Congress, capitulate to the Ashcroft nomination, the Congress is finished..."

Read the rest of the story here: Which way to the future?

A special comment on 9/11

2006-09-14T13:14:00.000-07:00

The only positive on 9/11 and the days and weeks that so slowly and painfully followed it was the unanimous humanity, here, and throughout the country. The government, the President in particular, was given every possible measure of support.
See the Video: Alternet

Those who did not belong to his party—tabled that.

Those who doubted the mechanics of his election—ignored that.

Those who wondered of his qualifications—forgot that.

History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics.

It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation’s wounds, but to take political advantage.

Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.

The President—and those around him—did that.

They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, “bi-partisanship” meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused; as appeasers; as those who, in the Vice President’s words yesterday, “validate the strategy of the terrorists.”

They promised protection, and then showed that to them “protection” meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken, a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee hated Al-Qaeda as much as we did.

The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had ‘something to do’ with 9/11, is “lying by implication.”

The impolite phrase is: "impeachable offense."

Comments? Email KOlbermann@msnbc.com
Watch “Countdown” each weeknight at 8 p.m. ET on MSNBC TV

The Coverup Exposed By The 9/11 Families

2006-09-01T13:55:00.000-07:00

"They lied, they all lied." --Patty Casazza (one of the "Jersey Girls")

"We don't know the whole story, not at all" -- Lorie Van Auken (one of the "Jersey Girls")

"9/11 was the biggest 'don't ask-don't tell" --Sally Regenhard, lost Firefighter son.

Although independent investigations began within weeks of both Pearl Harbor and the Kennedy assassination, the same was not true of the attacks of September 11th. Most are unaware that formation of the 9/11 Commission was strongly opposed by many in Washington, including the Bush administration. It was only due to pressure from the 9/11 families, led by a particular twelve calling themselves the Family Steering Committee, that, fourteen months after the attacks, the first hearing finally began. These twelve remained active in monitoring the Commission’s investigation, providing a list of hundreds of specific, well-researched questions to the Commissioners. In the end, the 9/11 Commission Final Report failed to answer seventy percent of them.

In 9/11 PRESS FOR TRUTH, five of the most prominent members of the Family Steering Committee, including interviews with three of the "Jersey Girls," tell their story for the first time, providing the most powerful argument yet for why 9/11 still needs investigation. Adapting Paul Thompson's definitive Complete 9/11 Timeline (published by Harper-Collins as The Terror Timeline), the filmmakers stitch together rare, overlooked news clips, buried stories, and government press conferences, revealing a pattern of official lies, deception, and spin.

Get the DVD 9/11 PRESS FOR TRUTH

Day 1,800 on the Osama Clock

2006-08-22T14:22:00.000-07:00

Of all the things that George W. Bush has done to exploit our nation's tragedy on September 11, 2001, none brought him more political capital than his macho posturing in the weeks and months following the attacks. He stood on the rubble of the fallen World Trade Center and declared that the terrorists who attacked us would "hear all of us soon." A few days later, he invoked imagery of the Old West and, with steely resolve, said that he was committed to getting Osama bin Laden "dead or alive."

And here we sit, exactly 1,800 days later with a civil war in Iraq, the Taliban still killing American troops in Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden very much alive and running free to podcast threats against our country from a Dick Cheney-like undisclosed location.

President Bush seems to have missed one of the central tenets of being a real tough guy: That you're able to back up your words with action and, once you boast that you're about to open a can of whoop-ass on someone, that it actually happen. . .Read the full story >here

Source= BobGeiger.com

From an interview with Herman Goring

2006-08-22T12:56:00.000-07:00

An early member of the Nazi party, founder of the Gestapo, and one of the main perpetrators of Nazi Germany:

Goring: "Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.
But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."

Gilbert: "There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

Goring: "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

See if this sounds familiar...

Feb 27, 1933 - Nazis burn Reichstag building to create crisis atmosphere.
Feb 28, 1933 - Emergency powers granted to Hitler as a result of the Reichstag fire.
March 24, 1933 - German Parliament passes Enabling Act giving Hitler dictatorial powers.

Sources=Martian Anthropologist & The History Place

Jerusalem has too much power?

2006-08-11T16:46:00.000-07:00

Click to Enlarge

9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Says They're Gaining Momentum

2006-08-08T11:29:00.000-07:00

Fifth Anniversary Of Attacks

Aug. 6 -
Kevin Barrett believes the U.S government might have destroyed the World Trade Center. Steven Jones is researching what he calls evidence that the twin towers were brought down by explosives detonated inside them, not by hijacked airliners.

These men aren't uneducated junk scientists: Barrett will teach a class on Islam at the University of Wisconsin this fall, over the protests of more than 60 state legislators. Jones is a tenured physicist at Brigham Young University whose mainstream academic job has made him a hero to conspiracy theorists.

Five years after the terrorist attacks, a community that believes widely discredited ideas about what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, persists and even thrives. Members trade their ideas on the Internet and in self-published papers and in books. About 500 of them attended a recent conference in Chicago.

The movement claims to be drawing fresh energy and credibility from a recently formed group called Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

Sept. 11 panel doubted officials

2006-08-06T13:05:00.000-07:00

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Sept. 11 commission was so frustrated with repeated misstatements by the Pentagon and FAA about their response to the 2001 terror attacks that it considered an investigation into possible deception, the panel's chairmen say in a new book.

Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton also say in "Without Precedent" that their panel was too soft in questioning former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani —and that the 20-month investigation may have suffered for it.

The book, a behind-the-scenes look at the investigation, recounts obstacles the authors say were thrown up by the Bush administration, internal disputes over President Bush's use of the attacks as a reason for invading Iraq, and the way the final report avoided questioning whether U.S. policy in the Middle East may have contributed to the attacks.

Kean and Hamilton said the commission found it mind-boggling that authorities had asserted during hearings that their air defenses had reacted quickly and were prepared to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93, which appeared headed toward Washington.

9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes

2006-08-05T11:51:00.000-07:00

By MICHAEL BRONNER

How did the U.S. Air Force respond on 9/11? Could it have shot down United 93, as conspiracy theorists claim? Obtaining 30 hours of never-before-released tapes from the control room of NORAD's Northeast headquarters, the author reconstructs the chaotic military history of that day—and the Pentagon's apparent attempt to cover it up.

Tucked in a piney notch in the gentle folds of the Adirondacks' southern skirts—just up from a derelict Mohawk, Adirondack & Northern rail spur—is a 22-year-old aluminum bunker tricked out with antennae tilted skyward. It could pass for the Jetsons' garage or, in the estimation of one of the higher-ranking U.S. Air Force officers stationed there, a big, sideways, half-buried beer keg.

As Major Kevin Nasypany, the facility's mission-crew commander, drove up the hill to work on the morning of 9/11, he was dressed in his flight suit and prepared for battle. Not a real one. The Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), where Nasypany had been stationed since 1994, is the regional headquarters for the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the Cold War–era military organization charged with protecting North American airspace.

As he poured his first coffee on that sunny September morning, the odds that he would have to defend against Russian "Bear Bombers," one of NORAD's traditional simulated missions, were slim. Rather, Nasypany (pronounced Nah-sip-a-nee), an amiable commander with a thick mini-mustache and a hockey player's build, was headed in early to get ready for the NORAD-wide training exercise he'd helped design. The battle commander, Colonel Bob Marr, had promised to bring in fritters.

See the rest of this article at Vanity Fair

TERRORSTORM

2006-07-05T19:32:00.000-07:00

TERRORSTORM is only available for a limited time.
TERRORSTORM examines September 11th, national ID cards, Big Brothers, the Iraq War, the 7/7 Bombings in London, and the invasion of Iran to reveal exactly how are they all connected.

National polls show that most Americans and westerners believe the official story of 9/11 to be a fraud, and a large part of that majority believe that 9/11 was an inside job, but the establishment press continue contest any alternative view concerning 9/11.

TERRORSTORM begins with a look at historical events that are not contested. Events where the fact of government sponsered terror is not debated but in fact openly admited to by western governments.
This powerful documentary explores the mindset of the average brainwashed westerner and delves deeply in to those systems of control which have been designed to imprison their minds and keep their eyes closed to the realities of the world around them.