by Richard Asmus
April 28, 2005
Delegates from 911Truth attended the Oklahoma City Bombing Investigation Committee’s (OKBIC) convention commemorating the 10th anniversary of the April 19, 1995 bombing. They found startling similarities between the tragedies of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building and the World Trade Center. Both attacks have many common signs of federal government involvement and cover-ups.
The most compelling problem at the Oklahoma City site was that first viewers on the scene, who were not associated with the federal government, found several un-detonated explosives. To their astonishment and grief, Federal agents halted rescue efforts to remove large volumes of evidence. Later, explosive experts discovered that it was impossible for the explosion of the rented van in the front of the building to have caused such severe damage. Further investigation conclusively revealed that explosive charges had been detonated inside the building.
Evidence in the form of structural steel and other materials were removed from both Oklahoma and World Trade Center sites and destroyed, before further investigations could be made. And in both cases, Congress shortly after passed previously written legislation that would not have gained public approval had the citizens of the United States not been given evidence of need, as caused by the attacks.
The OKBIC Convention, held at the Cox Center in Oklahoma City, featured several prominent figures in the bombing investigations. The event was hosted by Charles Key, a former Republican state representative for 12 years, who founded the OKBIC after receiving from constituents a plethora of information that was grossly contradictory to official government reports.…Continue reading
To whom it may concern:
I writing to tell you that I will not be attending any more of your
protest actions, and although that fact is admittedly insignificant, the
reason behind it certainly isn’t, because the reason is shared by hundreds
of political activists, and millions of political dissenters.
Much in the way that the mainstream media has become marginalized as a
source of information, your organizations have become marginalized in the
arena of political protest, and much for the same reasons.
You’re sticking to old routines in a world that’s changed, and you refuse
to honestly address the real problems we face today. Our government has
promised us a war we won’t live to see the end of, and your organization
seems to be convinced that marching in circles behind humiliating metal
fences is going to change that. What your organization achieves actually
helps the opposition, because it convinces the public that protests are
futile, and dissenters only get beaten and arrested without ever changing
Your willingness to oppose our criminal government is obviously restrained
by your fear, or your money, or both, but whatever the case may be, your
opposition is worse than ineffective, because it wastes the time and
effort of activists and dissenters who work and assemble with the hope of
improving our world. Although you claim to be fighting to stop war, your
organization refuses to address the issues of 9-11, which happens to be
what’s making endless war possible.
Because of 9-11, most Americans will not vehemently oppose any war that
can be even remotely (or racially) attributed to “fighting terrorism.”
Because of 9-11, Americans are being taught to accept a violent and racist
world-view that justifies the slaughter of millions for empirical
A “Call for Art” has been issued by the Northern California 9-11 Truth Alliance “to encourage artists to think deeply and creatively about the defining event of this century, to shine truth on the biggest lies of our time, which have been used to launch immoral, illegal, unjustifiable wars, and to help light the path towards peace and justice.
“Art, film, truth, music, and courage have birthed the 9-11 Truth Movement. We hope this contest will encourage people to become more engaged in shaping our collective future, recognizing their own power, and helping us to merge the 9-11 Truth Movement with the Peace and Justice Movements, for the benefit of all people and all life.”
They are offering over a thousand dollars in cash awards as well as many other prizes including DVDs, CDs, videos, books, and bundles of ” Deception Dollars .”
Deception Dollars, have helped fund the 9-11 Truth Movement, and have been passed out at rallies and protests throughout the US. Over 6,000,000 are now in print. Deception Dollar artist, Blaine Machan, will be one of the judges.
Entries are due by July 1st and will be announced on the Northern California 9-11 Truth Alliance website. Winning entries will be published in Global Outlook, HopeDance and Left Curve Journal, and may also be reproduced on posters, buttons, postcards, flyers by the sponsors and the Peace Resource Project for educational and promotional purposes.
Co-sponsors include many book publishers, radio producers, Project Censored, the Media Education Foundation, 911truth.org, MUJCA-NET (Muslim, Jewish & Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth), and David Ray Griffin, whose explosive new deconstruction of the Kean Commission, ” The 9-11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions ,” has become the most powerful literary tool in the truth movement’s hands.…Continue reading
By Charles Shaw
May 03, 2005
Last February United for Peace and Justice, the largest representative coalition within the American “anti-war movement”, emerged from their second annual Assembly with a 2005 “action plan” that effectively caged the “anti-war” debate exclusively within the Iraq conflict to achieve partisan ends on behalf of the pro-war Democratic Party and their Neoliberal corporate benefactors. Their “action plan” refused to address any of the core issues of US Foreign and Defense policy, which are the root causes of a pervading culture of war and militarism that has taken over the nation in the years since WWII.
These decisions are part of a larger pattern of “regulated resistance”, a system by which dissent is carefully managed and constrained by self, overt, or covert censorship; denial-based-psychology; fear of personal or professional criticism and reprisal; and pressure from powers above including elected officials and those establishment foundations which flood millions into the not-for-profit activist sector.
This establishment money, and the access it grants, has caused many ostensible resistance leaders to suddenly and dramatically abandon long-held ideological positions and shift their behavior towards doing what can clearly be seen as the bidding of those in power whose views and values are in direct contravention to the established mores of peace and justice movements throughout history.
These “resistance leaders” of the “Left” act as “Gatekeepers”–influential “progressive” figures who use their resources and visibility to regulate the debate, tactics, and rhetoric of the “anti-war” and other “progressive” movements.
The Gatekeepers of the So-Called “Left”
“The press is the hired agent of a moneyed system, set up for no other reason than to tell us lies where their interests are concerned.” — Henry Adams
In his shocking investigative report “The Left Gatekeepers”, journalist Bob Feldman researched purportedly “Left” activist and media organizations that receive substantial funding from large establishment foundations with known ties to the CIA, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and even the much-maligned Carlyle Group, the arms dealing “investment fund” featured in Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, of which GHW Bush, the Saudi royal family, and, at one time, the Bin Laden family, are all equity partners.…Continue reading
“Intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy.”
Never in our wildest dreams did we think we would see those words in black and white—and beneath a SECRET stamp, no less. For three years now, we in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have been saying that the CIA and its British counterpart, MI-6, were ordered by their countries’ leaders to “fix facts” to “justify” an unprovoked war on Iraq.? More often than not, we have been greeted with stares of incredulity.
It has been a hard learning–that folks tend to believe what they want to believe.? As long as our evidence, however abundant and persuasive, remained circumstantial, it could not compel belief.? It simply is much easier on the psyche to assent to the White House spin machine blaming the Iraq fiasco on bad intelligence than to entertain the notion that we were sold a bill of goods.
Well, you can forget circumstantial.?Thanks to an unauthorized disclosure by a courageous whistleblower, the evidence now leaps from official documents–this time authentic, not forged.? Whether prompted by the open appeal of the international?Truth-Telling Coalition or not, some brave soul has made the most explosive “patriotic leak” of the war by giving London’s Sunday Times the official minutes of a briefing by Richard Dearlove, then head of Britain’s CIA equivalent, MI-6.?Fresh back in London from consultations in Washington, Dearlove briefed Prime Minister Blair and his top national security officials on July 23, 2002, on the Bush administration’s plans to make war on Iraq.…Continue reading
- I worry that I’m turning into a conspiracy theorist
OK, I’m paranoid and depressed. My new government of troglodytes, murderers and spivs barely elongates the customary scream I give upon waking. What troubles me more is our rulers’ inevitable recommencement of the war on terror bollocks.
To begin at what we’re told is the beginning, we have 9/11 – the one in the US, not the earlier one in Chile when covert US government intervention killed thousands of innocents and handed the country to a commerce-friendly, torture-loving, far-right junta. Now if 9/11/2001 is so important, why is it so hard to find out what happened?
The FBI, as we know, blocked all manner of investigations into the plot in the run up to its execution, whether these involved highly specific warnings from its own agents or from government sources in Afghanistan, Argentina, Britain, the Cayman Islands, Egypt, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Morocco and Russia.
Meanwhile, I worry why the nearest military aircraft weren’t scrambled to intercept any of the hijacked flights when this is standard procedure and why, when more distant jets were finally aloft, they flew at less than half speed, thus failing to prevent the impacts at the twin towers and then, it would seem, managing to shoot down Flight 93 when its passengers may already have overcome its hijackers.
It would, of course, be easier to know what happened to Flight 93 if there weren’t – according to educated estimates – three minutes of the cockpit recording missing.…Continue reading
By Sibel Edmonds
May 14, 2005
“Those of you who still think this case, my case, is about covering up some administrative blunder or bureaucratic mismanagement, please think again… What were [my] core allegations, and who did they involve… They would not go to this length to protect some nobody criminal or terrorist.” – Sibel Edmonds
The Appeal Court’s decision on Sibel Edmonds’ Case is out: ‘Case Dismissed;’ no opinion cited; no reason provided. The Court’s decision, issued on Friday, May 6, has generated a string of obituaries; “another major blow, maybe the last one, to Sibel Edmonds, a woman who has faced an unprecedented level of government secrecy, gag orders, and classification.” Well, dear friends and supporters, Sibel Edmonds may be gagged, but she’s not dead.
On October 18, 2002; three months after I filed my suit against the Department of Justice for unlawful termination of my employment caused by my reporting criminal activities committed by government officials and employees, John Ashcroft, the then Attorney General, invoked a rarely invoked privilege, the State Secrets Privilege. According to Ashcroft,everything involving my case and my allegations were considered state secrets, and whether or not I was right in my allegations, the United States District Court had to dismiss my entire case without any questions,hearings or oral argument; period. According to Ashcroft, the court had to grant his order and dismiss the entire case with no hearings solely based on the fact that he, Ashcroft, said so. After all, our government knew best.…Continue reading
by Dr. David Ray Griffin
Note: This lecture was delivered at the University of Wisconsin at Madison on April 18, 2005, and first broadcast by C-Span2 (BookTV) on April 30. Although this text does not correspond exactly to the lecture as orally delivered, all the differences are trivial except that, of course, the oral presentation had to get along without footnotes. – DRG
I will begin by unpacking the key terms in the title of my talk: “9/11,” “American empire,” and “religious people,” beginning with the last one.
1. RELIGIOUS PEOPLE
Although I am a Christian theologian, I am in this talk addressing religious people in general. I am doing so because I believe that religious people should respond to 9/11 and the American empire in a particular way because of moral principles of their religious traditions that are common to all the historic religious traditions.1 I have in mind principles such as:
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors’ oil.
Thou shalt not murder thy neighbors in order to steal their oil.
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbors, accusing them of illicitly harboring weapons of mass destruction, in order to justify killing them in order to steal their oil.
This language is, of course, language that we associate with the Abrahamic religions-Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. But the same basic ideas can be found in other religious traditions.
I turn now to “American empire,” which has been a highly contentious term.
2. AMERICAN EMPIRE: DIVERGENT VIEWS
In his… Continue reading
by Matt Everett
The Journal of Psychohistory Volume 32, No. 3
If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind bars.
- Andreas von Bülow, former German government minister and author of “Die CIA und der 11. September”
At the beginning of the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld promised: “What will follow will not be a repeat of any other conflict. It will be of a force and scope and scale that has been beyond what has been seen before.” The invasion that ensued was, like all wars, destructive and resulted in the loss of thousands of lives. Yet Baghdad fell in a mere three weeks and just six weeks after the invasion commenced, President Bush announced: “Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.” Despite the death and destruction, it was hardly a war of a ‘force,’ ‘scope’ and ‘scale’ beyond what had been seen before.
Extensive excerpt from Everett’s absorbing psychohistorical analysis of movers and motives behind the 9/11 tragedy. Everett is a research colleague of Paul “Terror Timeline” Thompson and documents his work with painstaking rigor.
However, before it began, there were indications that some people wanted a far more destructive war than that which ensued. For example, ridiculous as it may now sound, it was suggested that Britain and America might use nuclear weapons against Iraq. As The Guardian reported at the time:
… Continue reading
“From last year’s US defence review and the testimony of the Defence Secretary, Geoffrey Hoon, to the defence select committee last March it was clear that a major change in the US and UK nuclear policy was taking place.For the first time Britain and America were contemplating using nuclear weapons against an enemy using only chemical or biological weapons.
David Ray Griffin’s historic April 18th speech to the “Muslim, Jewish & Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth” at the University of Wisconsin in Madison is now available here in DVD and CD format. Entitled “9/11 and the American Empire: How Should Religious People Respond?” this ovation drenched speech was broadcast by C-SPAN three times and marked the first time the full case for 9/11 truth has ever been presented to a national audience. Help spread it far and wide.
BUY YOUR OWN HERE! and distribute them to friends, local activist groups and indie media.
1 – $15
5 – $50
10 – $70
20 – $100
1 – $10
5 – $35
10 – $50
20 – $80
DVDs include entire speech and Q&A plus best WTC7 excerpts from Eric Hufschmid’s “Painful Deceptions”) – copyright-free for use at group presentations and on local public access TV
CDs include entire speech and Q&A – perfect for local radio use and commuter education
Created for 911truth.org by 911busters.com
How Ideologues on the Left and Right Theorise Vacuously to Support Baseless Supposition
- A Reply to ZNet’s ‘Conspiracy Theory?’ Section
by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
Acceptance of the official narrative of what happened on September 11, 2001 has become widespread, not merely on the right, but also on the left. In this paper, I take issue with the writings of several commentators who attempt to forcefully argue firstly that acceptance of the official narrative is justified, and secondly that certain kinds of inquiry into anomalies and inconsistencies in that narrative are illegitimate and unnecessary. The main bulk of this writing is available online at a new section at the well-known progressive website ZNet, and is somewhat representative of the mainstream approach to 9/11. 
In reviewing the work of these commentators on 9/11, I analyse in detail the failure of the U.S. intelligence community in preventing the Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks; the casual repression and/or misrepresentation of facts related to 9/11; the failure of U.S. defence measures on 9/11; the historic and institutional basis for skepticism about the official narrative; and some salient facts which illustrate the need for proper research into the linkages between U.S.…Continue reading
Dear Democratic Elected Officials of the United States (with damn few exceptions),
I am writing this open letter to call your attention to the remarks made yesterday, May 17, 2005, to the United States Senate, by British MP George Galloway of the independent Respect Party. I do this because he serves as an example of why your party should be abandoned by the U.S. working class, by U.S. women, by oppressed nationalities in the United States, and by anyone who professes to be a progressive or a leftist.
George Galloway did that for which you have proven incapable; he spoke as an opposition. Since there seems to be a great dark space in the middle of your heads where the notion of opposition should be — a void filled by parliamentary molasses and the pusillanimous inabilty to tell simple truths — I suggest you all review the recordings of Galloway’s confrontation with Republican Senator Norm “Twit” Coleman to see exactly how effortless it is to stand up to these cheap political bullies. While you are at it, you can watch your colleague Carl Levin demonstrate exactly what I mean about most of you and your party, as he alternately hurls petulant cream-puff insults at Galloway and kisses Coleman’s stunned, clueless ass to give that toothy dipshit some comfort in the wake of Galloway’s verbal drubbing.
Galloway didn’t have to walk up to the docket and slap the cowboy shit out of Coleman — though I admit I still struggle with my own secret urges to do just that with most of the air-brushed, combed-over, Stepford meat-puppets who now people the United States Congress.…Continue reading
Hollywood Strikes Back
Rolls Out Big-Budget 9/11 Truth Movie.
by John J. Albanese
May 22, 2005
I couldn’t believe my eyes. Star Wars III — Revenge of the Sith is a 9/11
(For those who do not want to know the plot of this film, read no
It came as a complete surprise. My wife and I went to see this film
somewhat reluctantly, and with some misplaced sense of obligatory
nostalgia for a franchise that harkened back to our youth. How could we
NOT? But, we fully expected to be moderately entertained at best, with
perhaps some of the familiar lingering disappointment we felt over the
last two installments in the series.
What we found instead was a big-budget major blockbuster of a film that
had me literally squirming in my seat with the desire to jump up and
scream at the audience, “Are you people getting this!!!?”
Yes, this movie goes where no major commercial film has gone before. This
film dares to suggest that 9/11 was an inside job.
We have all heard the rumors that this film draws some interesting
parallels between the Bush administration and the dark side of government
depicted in this film. Seeking to strengthen security during wartime,
Chancellor Palpatine persuades the Senate to give up civil liberties.
“So this is how liberty dies — to thunderous applause,” Senator Amidala
There are the obvious lines.
Darth Vader: “If you’re not with me, you’re my enemy.”
Samuel L. Jackson emotionally… Continue reading
by Dr. David Ray Griffin
In discussing my second 9/11 book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, I have often said, only half in jest, that a better title might have been “a 571-page lie.” (Actually, I was saying “a 567-page lie,” because I was forgetting to count the four pages of the Preface.) In making this statement, one of my points has been that the entire Report is constructed in support of one big lie: that the official story about 9/11 is true.
Another point, however, is that in the process of telling this overall lie, The 9/11 Commission Report tells many lies about particular issues. This point is implied by my critique’s subtitle, “Omissions and Distortions.” It might be thought, to be sure, that of the two types of problems signaled by those two terms, only those designated “distortions” can be considered lies.
It is better, however, to understand the two terms as referring to two types of lies: implicit and explicit. We have an explicit lie when the Report claims that the core of each of the Twin Towers consisted of a hollow steel shaft or when it claims that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down order until after 10:10 that morning. But we have an implicit lie when the Commission, in its discussion of the 19 alleged suicide hijackers, omits the fact that at least six of them have credibly been reported to be still alive, or when it fails to mention the fact that Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed.…Continue reading
by Matthew Rothschild
July 2005 issue
When Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee last year, he was asked whether he “ordered or approved the use of sleep deprivation, intimidation by guard dogs, excessive noise, and inducing fear as an interrogation method for a prisoner in Abu Ghraib prison.” Sanchez, who was head of the Pentagon’s Combined Joint Task Force-7 in Iraq, swore the answer was no. Under oath, he told the Senators he “never approved any of those measures to be used.”
But a document the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) obtained from the Pentagon flat out contradicts Sanchez’s testimony. It’s a memorandum entitled “CJTF-7 Interrogation and Counter-Resistance Policy,” dated September 14, 2003. In it, Sanchez approved several methods designed for “significantly increasing the fear level in a detainee.” These included “sleep management”; “yelling, loud music, and light control: used to create fear, disorient detainee, and prolong capture shock”; and “presence of military working dogs: exploits Arab fear of dogs.”
On March 30, the ACLU wrote a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, urging him “to open an investigation into whether General Ricardo A. Sanchez committed perjury in his sworn testimony.”
The problem is, Gonzales may himself have committed perjury in his Congressional testimony this January. According to a March 6 article in The New York Times, Gonzales submitted written testimony that said: “The policy of the United States is not to transfer individuals to countries where we believe they likely will be tortured, whether those individuals are being transferred from inside or outside the United States.” He added that he was “not aware of anyone in the executive branch authorizing any transfer of a detainee in violation of that policy.”
“That’s a clear, absolute lie,” says Michael Ratner, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, who is suing Administration officials for their involvement in the torture scandal.…Continue reading
The 9/11 Commission v. 19 Named Muslims:
A Trial in Absentia
Gary Wenkle Smith1
[This article first appeared in The Warrior, the official journal of the Trial Lawyers College (www.triallawyerscollege.com) and is reprinted here with permission.]
Within a few hours after the 9/11 attacks, our government named a group of 19 Muslim men as the principal players in the most devastating attack on this country–even more so than Pearl Harbor, as it was mostly civilians who were murdered on 9/11, unlike the mass murder of our sailors by another military power. Further, in addition to approximately 3,000 murders, there could easily be many counts of attempted murder2 charged, as well. Assuming an indictment is issued, there will undoubtedly be dozens of kidnapping charges, some major theft counts, destruction of public and private property, and sundry other charges arising out of the death and destruction of that day’s events. Of course, the principal charge will be the conspiracy to commit these crimes. The 9/11 Commission Report, frequently referred to as the Kean-Zelikow Report3, has concluded that the 19 named Muslims were the operatives of Osama bin Laden, and that they conspired to hijack airliners and commit the atrocities of 9/11.
I will proceed with this article as though I had… Continue reading
by Tom Engelhardt
June 2, 2005
Remember the Cheney/Rumsfeld/PNAC call for this militant metastasis in 2000? Or their realistic complaint that this “transformation” would take forever “absent a cataclysmic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor”? Or that Darth Cheney still holds 433,333 stock options in Halliburton, which is making more money off this imperial oil grab than any firm on earth? Map the bases, chart the profits, connect the dots. – Ed.
The last few weeks have been base-heavy ones in the news. The Pentagon’s provisional Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) list, the first in a decade, was published to domestic screams of pain. It represents, according to the Washington Post, “a sweeping plan to close or reduce forces at 62 major bases and nearly 800 minor facilities” in the United States. The military is to be reorganized at home around huge, multi-force “hub bases” from which the Pentagon, in the fashion of a corporate conglomerate, hopes to “reap economies of scale.” This was front-page news for days as politicians and communities from Connecticut (the U.S. Naval Submarine Base in Groton) and New Jersey (Fort Monmouth) to South Dakota (Ellsworth Air Force Base) cried bloody murder over the potential loss of jobs and threatened to fight to the death to prevent their specific base or set of bases (but not anyone else’s) from closing – after all, those workers had been the most productive and patriotic around. These closings – and their potentially devastating effects on communities – were a reminder (though seldom dealt with that way in the media) of just how deeply the Pentagon has dug itself into the infrastructure of our nation.…Continue reading