Enver Masud: 9/11, Waterboarding, a Confession and the Iraq War

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62sWJKloSbY

Enver Masud was one of the speakers at a "Demand Accountability for Torture" rally, on June 25, 2009, in John Marshall Park, in Washington, D.C. He questioned how Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was" waterboarded 183 times by the CIA," and then confessed to being the "mastermind of 9/11," can get a "fair trial"in this country. Mr. Masud connected the dots between 9/11, the waterboarding of a detainee, a so-called "confession," and the Iraq War. Mr. Masud is the founder and CEO of "The Wisdom Fund" and the author of "The War on Islam."

Court won't hear Sept. 11 claims vs. Saudi Arabia

June 29, 2009
News.Yahoon.com

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has refused to allow victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to pursue lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and four of its princes over charitable donations that were allegedly funneled to al-Qaida.

The court, in an order Monday, is leaving in place the ruling of a federal appeals court that the country and the princes are protected by sovereign immunity, which generally means that foreign countries can't be sued in American courts.

The Obama administration had angered some victims and families by urging the justices to pass up the case.

In their appeal, the more than 6,000 plaintiffs said the government's court brief filed in early June was an "apparent effort to appease a sometime ally" just before President Barack Obama's visit to Saudi Arabia.

On June 27th, 2009, Mark from Truth Action Ottawa interviewed Cosmos, founder of the international 11th Of Every Month Campaign and the truthaction.org website. The hour-long conversation covers a wide range of topics relating to 9/11 activism and celebrates the upcoming July 11th actions, which will be the 30th since the campaign began.

9/11 Family Members Maureen Hunt and Manny Badillo, and First Responders Charlie Giles of the Feal Good Foundation and Bill Gleason of the World Trade Center Rescuers Foundation arrived at the City Clerk's office to deliver the petition and speak on behalf of all the proud and concerned citizens who deserve an unbiased, nonpolitical investigation of the tragedy that has affected us so deeply.

Thank you for getting us this far! City Council now has until August 24 to approve the placement of the referendum on the November 3 ballot. As hundreds more 9/11 family members, first responders and survivors join NYC CAN's campaign for a new investigation, lobbying their council members to support the petition, our chances grow.

Commentary on White House "trial balloon" news from WaPo by former constitutional law and civil rights litigator in New York ...

by Glenn Greenwald
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Salon.comWhen Obama first unveiled his "preventive detention" policy, many defenders praised him (and claimed he was different than Bush) because of his vow that -- as he put it -- "my Administration will work with Congress to develop an appropriate legal regime." But now, relying exclusively on three Obama officials speaking behind a veil of anonymity, Peter Finn and Dafner Linza of The Washington Post and ProPublica report that the White House is "crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely." TPM calls this "the latest installment in the Obama administration's tendency to mimic the Bushies on war on terror tactics." And the article itself points out the obvious: "Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war." Revealingly, the article quotes two Bush national security officials justifying the need for detention without charges.

Anonymous trial balloon articles like this one are difficult to comment on because it's obviously designed to announce that a certain policy is being considered before it's actually written, and so none of the key details is known. Would Obama's new detention powers apply only to current "War on Terror" prisoners at places like Guantanamo and Bagram, or would they also apply to future, not-yet-abducted detainees as well? Would these powers apply to detainees picked up anywhere in the world, far away from "war zones"? Would there be any judicial review or other meaningful oversight provisions so that -- even in theory -- this was something other than the unilateral, unchecked presidential power to detain indefinitely without charges? None of these important details is known (though the article notes that, under one White House proposal, "ongoing detention would be subject to annual presidential review"; the Emperor, sitting alone, will decree once a year whether they must remain in a cage).

by Prof. Peter Dale Scott
June 10, 2009
GlobalResearch.ca

In his remarkable speech at Cairo University on June 4, President Obama promised "a new beginning." In the words of the Israeli commentator Uri Avnery, the speech offered "the map of a new world, a different world, whose values and laws he spelled out in simple and clear language -- a mixture of idealism and practical politics, vision and pragmatism."¹

Much of what Obama had to say was new, and warmed the hearts of observers like myself, who had become increasingly concerned about the new president's fidelity to the financial and military policies of the previous Bush-Cheney administration. But while Obama broke new ground on Israel-Palestine issues, he glossed over troubling issues pertaining to the US presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also glossed over one of the fundamental issues alienating the Muslim world: America's relentless efforts to preserve its threatened financial status by moves to dominate the region's oil resources. Here his careful ambiguity was ominously reminiscent of the Bush era.

The speech reaffirmed a complete withdrawal of US forces from Iraq by 2012, as the U.S. committed itself to do in a signed agreement last December. In addition Obama asserted that "we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan... We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and now Pakistan."

But Obama's remarks did not address the statement on May 26, 2009, by Gen. George Casey, Army chief of staff, that, despite the agreement with Iraq, the United States would continue to have fighting forces in Iraq and Afghanistan beyond 2012. The reality, Casey said, is that "we're going to have 10 Army and Marine units deployed for a decade in Iraq and Afghanistan."²

Nor is it clear that Obama's promise to withdraw "troops" from Iraq would also cover private military contractors (PMCs) . Jeremy Scahill, author of a book on the notorious firm Blackwater, said on the Bill Moyers show that what we're seeing in the Cairo speech "is sort of old wine in a new bottle. Obama is sending one message to the world," he told Moyers, "but the reality on the ground, particularly when it comes to private military contractors, is that the status quo remains from the Bush era."³

By Matthew Hickley
Last updated at 10:25 PM on 25th June 2009
Dailymail.co.uk

A British man spoke publicly for the first time yesterday to accuse MI5 officers of forcing him to confess to masterminding the July 7 bombings.

Jamil Rahman claims UK security officers were behind his arrest in 2005 in Bangladesh.

He says he was beaten repeatedly by local officials who also threatened to rape him and his wife.

Mr Rahman, who is suing the Home Office, said a pair of MI5 officers who attended his torture and interrogation would leave the room while he was beaten.

Call for public inquiry into 7/7 from former head of counter-terrorism

June 20, 2009
Sean O’Neill, Crime and Security Editor
TimesOnline.co.uk 

An independent public inquiry should be held into how suicide terrorists were able to carry out the July 7 bombings, Scotland Yard's former head of counter-terrorism says.

Andy Hayman, who was Assistant Commissioner for Special Operations at the time of the bombings in 2005, is the first figure from the security establishment to break ranks and call for an open inquiry.

Friday, June 26, 2009
By Dafna Linzer and Peter Finn
ProPublica and Washington Post Staff Writer

The Obama administration, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close Guantanamo, has drafted an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.

Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that bypassing Congress could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.

After months of internal debate over how to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, White House officials are growing increasingly worried that reaching quick agreement with Congress on a new detention system may prove impossible. Several officials said there is concern in the White House that the administration may not be able to close the facility by the president's January deadline.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt did not directly respond to questions about an executive order but said the administration would address the cases of Guantanamo detainees in a manner "consistent with the national security interests of the United States and the interests of justice."

June 25, 2009
http://tortureaccountability.webs.com/

The highest officials in our government have trampled on our traditional ideals of making America a nation of laws, not of men, by illegally narrowing the scope of torture and authorizing waterboarding, walling and other inhumane interrogation techniques. In doing so, they violated the Anti-Torture Act, the War Crimes Act, the Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment.

In order to enforce our laws and restore the free society that our forefathers envisioned, citizens must demand accountability for abuses of the laws pertaining to torture. In the tradition of the Civil Rights movement, change will not occur unless citizens stand up for their rights under the law.