On Friday, November 24 at 4:00 pm and Saturday, November 25 at 3:30 am and at 10:00 pm
9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out
David Ray Griffin, Peter Dale Scott, Peter Phillips, Kevin Ryan, Ray McGovern
Description: Editors and contributors to the book, “9/11 and American Empire,” assess the Bush administration’s responsibility for the attacks on 9/11, arguing that key administration officials either purposefully ignored the threats leading up to the attacks or were complicit in the planning them. The panelists say that the administration has used the attacks to enact long established plans to expand American empire. The participants are: David Ray Griffin (co-editor/contributor), Peter Dale Scott (co-editor/contributor), Peter Phillips (contributor) and Kevin Ryan (contributor). Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern moderates the discussion. The event was hosted by Berkeley, California-based Pacifica radio station KPFA (www.kpfa.org).
Author Bio: David Ray Griffin, professor emeritus of philosophy and theology at the Claremont School of Theology, is the author of “The New Pearl Harbor” and “The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions.” Peter Dale Scott, former Canadian diplomat and former professor of English at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author of “Deep Politics and the Death of JFK” and “Drugs, Oil, and War.” Peter Phillips, professor of sociology at Sonoma State University and director of the Project Censored media research program, is most recently the co-editor of “Censored 2007: The Top 25 Censored Stories” and “Impeach the President: The Case Against Bush and Cheney.” Kevin Ryan is a former site manager with Environmental Health Laboratories.…Continue reading
November 15, 2006
THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION
Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor
By Sibel Edmonds
In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington warned that America must be constantly awake against “the insidious wiles of foreign influence…since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
Today, foreign influence, that most baneful foe of our republican government, has its tentacles entrenched in almost all major decision making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government machine. It does so not secretly, since its self-serving activities are advocated and legitimized by highly positioned parties that reap the benefits that come in the form of financial gain and positions of power.
Foreign governments and foreign-owned private interests have long sought to influence U.S. public policy. Several have accomplished this goal; those who are able and willing to pay what it takes. Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying influence in Washington DC. They have the required recipe down pat: get yourself a few ‘Dime a Dozen Generals,’ bid high in the ‘former statesmen lobby auction’, and put in your pocket one or two ‘ex-congressmen turned lobbyists’ who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve.…Continue reading
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
November 9, 2006
It only took six years for Americans to comprehend George Bush and the Republican Party and to realize that the Republicans were not leading America in any promising directions.
Exit polls and interviews with voters across the country by CNN political analyst Bill Schneider show that the November 2006 election was a vote against both Bush and the war in Iraq. Schneider reports that voters did not even know the name of the Democrats for whom they voted. Voters said: “I am going to vote Democrat, because I don’t like Bush, I don’t like the war. I want to make a statement.”
I believe that voters recognized that the peril of one-party rule is that political accountability exists no where except at the ballot box. With the Republican built and programmed electronic voting machines, even accountability at the ballot box was disappearing.
Americans realized that they had made a serious mistake giving power to one party, and they rectified it.
With Republican control of the legislative branch ended, Pentagon Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was immediately swept from power. With the troops, generals, and the service newspapers calling for Rumsfeld’s head, only the delusional warmonger, Vice President Richard Cheney, wanted to keep Rumsfeld in power.
It was a battle that Cheney lost. Cheney’s defeat is an indication that reality has elbowed its way back into Republican consciousness, pushing hubris and delusion away from the control they have exercised over political power.
The lust for unbridled power proved to be too strong a temptation for normally cautious Republicans.…Continue reading
November 11, 2006
In honor of our veterans, we call for truth
Anniversaries cause us to instinctively pause and reflect, just as our leg jolts forward after a well-positioned tap on the knee. In honor of our veterans — to whom we owe a debt we can never repay — the least we can do on this Veteran’s Day is look back at the decisions made that sent our troops into battle, and the roles we played in those decisions. Perhaps upon reflection, our reaction may change.
The fifth anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001 served as the reflex hammer touch to the knee of American conscience. As the country attended memorials and revisited painful memories of 9/11, the reflection also opened our collective mind once again to the many unanswered questions, legitimate concerns and conflicting evidence in the official description of those events.
For us at the Daily Tidings the event served to open discussion among us about this complex subject, about the conspiracy theories that abound in Internet chats, blogs and so-called investigative reports and most importantly, the questions regarding the media’s role in this ongoing issue.
A month later we have found very little we all agreed on. We especially disagree on the role of the media. Since the Tidings doesn’t cover New York City, Washington, D.C. or the federal government, the ambiguity is shaded with absolution.
Nevertheless we are each members of the fourth estate, an essential conglomeration of individuals who adhere to professional guidelines, and who care passionately about this demanding and often thankless opus.…Continue reading
by Bob Fitrakis/Harvey Wasserman
On Election Day 2006, the American people will almost certainly vote to give the Democratic Party one or both houses of Congress.
We will vote to restore at least some of the checks and balances written into the Constitution of the United States. We will vote to end the reign of terror and error imposed on the nation and world since the stolen election of 2000. State by state, governorships and legislatures should return to the opposition party.
True to form, the corporate media is already starting to tell us that the polls are starting to slip back to the Republicans. This is the classic precursor to a coming fix.
In fact, all the instincts of credible students of American politics, indicate a massive shift away from the GOP. Anyone familiar with the history of the American electorate can be reasonably certain that the issues of war, deficits, economy, environment, scandal, sexual imposition and more will overwhelmingly favor a traditional rejection of the party in power, and then some.
But in 2006, the party in power has installed a nationwide system of election theft. And the outcome of tomorrow’s election may depend on the ability of the grassroots American citizenry to overcome this infernal machine.
The GOP engine of vote theft is built primarily on two pillars:
First is the massive disenfranchisement of mostly urban Democrats, including millions of people of color. Second is the simultaneous inflation of mostly rural and suburban Republican votes, including the mythological influx of “last-minute evangelicals” who may well exist primarily in the memory cards of rigged electronic machines.…Continue reading
Panelists raise doubts over 9/11
Speakers at CU say government deceiving citizens
By John Aguilar
Monday, October 30, 2006
The idea was to turn the concept of a conspiracy theory on its head.
A panel of scientists and scholars, gathered in a classroom Sunday afternoon at the University of Colorado at Boulder, suggested to several hundred vocal supporters that the true conspiratorial types when it comes to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, are the federal government and the mainstream media.
“They pounded a script into our heads that we now know is backed by zero evidence,” said Kevin Barrett, a professor of Islamic studies at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.
Barrett was one of a trio of speakers who came to CU to lay out their case that the World Trade Center towers didn’t collapse as a result of jet fuel melting and softening of the buildings’ steel structure, but rather from a deliberate demolition effort perpetrated by the United States government to justify its invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and assert its power around the world.
“Three thousand lives were lost at the World Trade Center as a means to global domination,” Barrett said.
He characterized the 9/11 attacks as a “false flag operation” carried out by the United States with the intention of stirring up the passions and buying the allegiance of its people.
“A false flag operation is a contrived event — shocking and spectacular — used to achieve political ends, start wars and justify suppression,” he said.…Continue reading
By Bill Conroy
Posted on Sat Oct 28th, 2006
U.S. government lawyers have reached for the ultimate weapon in the House of Death mass murder cover-up: National Security.
Once that label is successfully applied to any aspect of the case, it is a sure bet the full truth of the U.S. government’s complicity in the murders will forever be suppressed.
And just what is being hidden under the trench coat of national security?
Between August 2003 and mid-January of 2004, a dozen people were kidnapped, tortured, butchered and then buried in the backyard of the House of Death — located at Calle Parsioneros 3633 in Juárez. The killers were Mexican police in league with a narco-trafficker named Heriberto Santillan Tabares, who was a top lieutenant in the Vicente Carrillo Fuentes organization.
The murders were carried out with the help of a U.S. government informant — a former Mexican cop who had attained high standing in Santillan’s organization. The informant, Guillermo Ramirez Peyro, was under the watch of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and an Assistant U.S. Attorney in El Paso, Texas.
When the informant’s role came to light, after his activities nearly cost the lives of a DEA agent and his family, rather than investigate the callous activities of U.S. law enforcers who allowed the informant to commit murder under government cover, the leadership of the U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, chose to bury the facts along with the bodies.…Continue reading
Within the last few months, you’ve given a lot of attention to the 9/11 Truth Movement. In rare circumstances, we’ve even gotten a “fair shake.”
However, your guests have consisted of Dylan Avery, Corey Rowe, Jason Bermas, James Fetzer, Kevin Barrett, Dave Von Kleist, Charlie Sheen, Alex Jones, Dr. Robert Bowman, Michael Berger, Paul Thompson and Dr. David Ray Griffin.
We don’t know if you’re aware or not (you haven’t reported on it), but the original members of the 9/11 Truth Movement have been busy as of late.
On August 4th, 2006, 9/11 family members Lorie Van Auken, Patty Casazza, Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle released a statement that questioned the “entire veracity” of the 9/11 Commission’s report.
On September 5th, 2006, a documentary endorsed by the families that fought for the creation of the 9/11 Commission was released entitled, “9/11: Press For Truth.”
On September 11th, 2006, at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., family members Donna Marsh O’Connor, Michelle Little, and Christina Kminek asked for, “a new investigation into the events of September 11th, and this time, a truly bipartisan, global, with families invested from the beginning, middle, and throughout the end.”
On October 14th, 2006, Monica Gabrielle, Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg, and Patty Casazza released a petition that calls for, “the immediate declassification and release of all transcripts and documents relating to the July 10, 2001 meeting that took place between former CIA Director George Tenet and then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice”… Continue reading
BY ANDREW O. SELSKY
October 10, 2006
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) – An anti-Castro militant now in a Texas jail warned the CIA months before the 1976 bombing of a Cuban airliner that fellow exiles were planning such an attack, according to a newly released U.S. government document.
The document shows that Luis Posada Carriles – who had worked for the CIA but was cut off by the agency earlier that year – was secretly telling the CIA that his fellow far-right Cuban exiles opposed to Fidel Castro’s communist government were plotting to bring down a commercial jet.
The document does not say what the CIA did with Posada’s tip. A CIA spokesman said he had no comment on Monday, a federal holiday.
The CIA had extensive contacts with anti-Castro militants and trained some of them, but has denied involvement in the bombing.
The documents were posted online Thursday by the National Security Archive, an independent research institute at George Washington University that seeks to declassify government files through the Freedom of Information Act.
The Cubana Airlines plane, on a flight from Venezuela to Cuba, blew up shortly after taking off from a stopover in Barbados on Oct. 6, 1976, killing all 73 aboard, including Cuba’s Olympic fencing team.
The bombing remains an open wound in Cuba. Weeping relatives of the victims met in a Havana cemetery on Friday, the 30th anniversary of the bombing. They demanded that Posada – who is now 78 and in a Texas detention… Continue reading
by 9.11 Blogger
WNY Media Network
Bob Woodward’s State of Denial provides evidence of the politicization of the 9/11 Commission’s investigative process, conclusions, and certain omissions from its report, as well as then national security advisor Condoleezza Rice’s likely role in burying unflattering, damning evidence through the appointment of Bush/Rice loyalist Philip Zelikow as the Commissions’ chief investigator and Zelikow’s reward (perhaps) of a top senior-level position in the State Department, which Rice now heads. First, some background.
One of the burning questions in newspapers, cable TV news, and blogs is why the 9/11 Commission report did not mention the July 10, 2001 meeting called by then-CIA Director George J. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, with then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice. Tenet and Black hoped to impress on Rice the compelling need to act immediately against bin Laden because there was “a huge volume of data” suggesting strongly that a major attack was imminent.
“But both men came away from the meeting feeling that Ms. Rice had not taken the warnings seriously,” writes Woodward.
The July 10 meeting between Tenet, Black and Rice went unmentioned in the various reports of investigations into the Sept. 11 attacks, but it stood out in the minds of Tenet and Black as the starkest warning they had given the White House on bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Though the investigators had access to all the paperwork on the meeting, Black felt there were things the commissions wanted to know about and things they didn’t want to know about.…Continue reading
Barrett, Fetzer Discuss Attacks
by Joanna Pliner
October 2, 2006
University of Wisconsin lecturer Kevin Barrett and University of Minnesota-Duluth professor James Fetzer took time Sunday afternoon to explain their Sept. 11 theory that has been the source of recent widespread media attention and legislative debate.
Barrett and Fetzer belong to a group called Scholars for 9/11 Truth, whose members believe the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by the Bush administration. The duo presented pictures, videos and sound bites as evidence throughout their lecture to support their point of view.
“If our research is correct,” Fetzer said, “The American government has been practicing terrorism on the American people.”
The UW folklore department sponsored the lecture, which attracted several media outlets. Director of the UW folklore program Jim Leary said he originally felt like he went out on a limb sponsoring Barrett and Fetzer’s lecture, but is ultimately happy with his decision.
Leary said he “got some heat” from state Rep. Steve Nass, R-Whitewater, and even went so far as to challenge Nass’ legislative aide to a fight.
However, Leary said Barrett and Fetzer’s lecture was interesting from a folklorist’s point of view.
“Any time you have governments or corporations who are putting out official stories, there are also unofficial commentaries that circulate through jokes and rumors,” Leary said. “And so folklorists are interested in how people use their cultural resources to communicate ideas.”
Barrett shared Leary’s sentiments on the study of folklore, and said the “insider-outsider split” between people who believe the information in the 9/11 Commission Report and those who challenge it could be solved with a “couple of stiff drinks” to get people talking.…Continue reading
David Ray Griffin
September 4, 2006
A significant stir was created by the publication in Vanity Fair of “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes” by Michael Bronner, the first journalist to be given access to these audiotapes–which NORAD had provided, upon demand, to the 9/11 Commission in 2004. The public impact of Bronner’s essay was increased greatly by the availability of snippets from these tapes (which could be accessed from the online version of the article) to be played on TV and radio news reports about the article.1
The stir was caused primarily by Bronner’s report of the charge by members of the 9/11 Commission–which had played excepts from these tapes during hearings in 2004–that the military had made false statements to the Commission, perhaps knowingly. This stir was increased by the publication at the same time–the first week of August 2006–of Without Precedent, a book by Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton–the chairman and vice chairman of the Commission, respectively–in which this charge is also made.2
The charge primarily involves the military’s pre-2004 claims about the responses of NEADS–the Northeast Air Defense Sector of NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defense Command)–to two flights: AA (American Airlines) 77 and UA (United Airlines) 93. (There is also, although Bronner does not deal with it, a serious discrepancy with regard to UA 175.) These claims are contradicted by the tapes, with “tapes” here meaning not only the NORAD tapes, to which Bronner refers in his essay’s subtitle, but also what he calls “the parallel recordings from the F.A.A.,”3which he used in conjunction with the NORAD tapes.…Continue reading
- Near Majority Support, Powerful New Tools, and Energized Activism Promise Endgame Soon
September 11 Press Release
September 11, 2006 (PRWEB) — The year leading up to the fifth anniversary of the September 11 attacks has been marked by an unprecedented upsurge in public mistrust of the official story portrayed in the 9/11 Commission Report. Respected national polling firms Zogby and Scripps Howard have shown that less than half the public believes in the conclusions or integrity of the 9/11 Commission, and 36% of Americans now think the administration was actively complicit in the attacks to advance its preplanned Mideast war agenda.
This outburst of popular skepticism has come in spite of five years of lockstep support for the official 9/11 narrative by the national press, broadcast media, and both major political parties. The mounting distrust spans the political, religious and ethnic spectrums, and has been largely driven by compelling new films, books, whistleblower reports, and escalating grassroots activism. Collectively these resources and constituencies not only offer the country hope for a fresh and truly honest 9/11 probe, but also a potent new base for radical political reform.
Activating the Newly Awakened
To mobilize the 70+ million voting age 9/11 skeptics identified by Zogby, 911truth.org has organized “Politics 911,” a national effort to identify congressional candidates who would demand an honorable new 9/11 inquiry and then help generate support for their election. This campaign has started polling candidates nationwide and is currently recruiting grassroots poll volunteers at http://www.911truthgroups.org/911Truth.…Continue reading
- Re Local Calm amid the ‘Path to 9/11′ Uproar
By W. David Kubiak
September 9, 2006
This last week 911truth.org has received many emails and phone calls asking why we are not at the frontlines of the protests against ABC’s fictitious Clinton smear, The Path to 9/11. I don’t pretend to speak for the organization, but having been close to the heart of this debate I’d like to offer a few answers of my own.
The bad answer is schadenfreude.
Many of us are in fact rather ironically enjoying the uproar as Democratic Party defenders of the 5-year cover-up are now finding their own ox gored. You will notice that most of the ruckus is not about 9/11 truth at all, but whose political mythology will prevail.
Once the GOP Rove clones recognized how easily they and their corporate media pals could sell the 9/11 Commission fantasy to protect their ass and defend their assaults on international law and the Constitution, what on earth could stop them from using that reality-fabricating power offensively to destroy a few measly Democrats?
Betrayals among criminal cliques are usually conducted at the point of a gun. Our ruling corporate parties seem to prefer media assassinations to get the same job done. Once the Democrats bought into the 9/11 lies and actually helped confect and sell the official story, they stepped over to the dark side where the strictures of truth, law and decency no longer are enforced. The Path to 9/11 mÃªlée is… Continue reading
by Sibel Edmonds & Bill Weaver
National Security Whistleblowers Coalition
Published in CommonDreams.org
September 5, 2006
A wag once famously said that Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot was a play where nothing happened . . . twice. The two former co-chairmen of the 9-11 commission report, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, have released a new book, “Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9-11 Commission.” This book goes Beckett one better — it is the third act of veneer over substance, self-aggrandizement over serious analysis, and cliché over perspicacity. It is another calculated attempt by the former commissioners to place themselves in the media spotlight, and to overcome the humiliation of their widely criticized and mostly debunked report. It is a vapid and substanceless attempt to claim moral high ground and present the co-chairmen as heroes of honesty. It would be a farce, except that it has no story line, save the aggrandizement of the authors. At least they are consistent in doing nothing and proclaiming that to be a sign of their devotion to the country and the government. Beckett once said that “habit is the ballast that chains the dog to its vomit,” and by this measure the chain restraining Kean and Hamilton is a short one indeed.
New book: 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out
Edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott
Olive Branch Press (Interlink Books)
Pre-pub Review (more follow…)
“This is the most important book of our time. Distinguished national and international scientists and scholars present massive evidence that The 9/11 Commission Report is a hoax and that the 9/11 “terrorist attack” has been manipulated to serve a hegemonic agenda in the Middle East. The book’s call for a truly independent panel of experts to be empowered to bring out the true facts must be heeded or Americans will never again live under accountable government.” — Paul Craig Roberts, Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury during the Reagan administration
1. 9/11, the American Empire, and Common Moral Norms
David… Continue reading
Will the Democrats Be Ready for Rove’s 2006 October Fright Fest?
August 24, 2006
Everyone knows it’s coming.
Rove doesn’t deviate from his playbook; and it’s his third time around with this one.
So what’s going to the terrorist fright just before the election? Will Osama be taken out of deep freeze? Will a videotape suddenly be “found” in which Osama declares that he wants a Democratic Congress? Will a terrorist cell be broken up the week before the election, allegedly plotting to fly planes into 12 American cities and bomb the Super Bowl with Weapons of Mass Destruction that Saddam gave them from his cell in Iraq?
Who knows exactly what it will be, but we know it will be some extraordinary fright fest.
The only fuel the GOP has left to run on is fear, otherwise their car will sputter to a stop on a country road with no gasoline station in sight.
So the Dems know they are going to get another round of terrorist scares – and this one is going to be quite imaginative, you can be sure.
The question is: Who, if anyone, in the Democratic Party is thinking how to pre-empt the upcoming Rovian plan to terrorize America into voting Republican (for the third campaign cycle of voting by fear)?
Because if we go through another election where the Dems act all shocked when Rove pulls the same bogeyman stunt all over again, the Dems will lose.
Have they learned by now that the Busheviks will do anything, even if it jeopardizes national security, to play the terror card?…Continue reading