by Andrew Buncombe
Friday, February 11, 2005
Washington – Federal officials were repeatedly warned in the months before the 11 September 2001 terror attacks that Osama bin Laden and al-Qa’ida were planning aircraft hijackings and suicide attacks, according to a new report that the Bush administration has been suppressing.
Critics say the new information undermines the government’s claim that intelligence about al-Qa’ida’s ambitions was “historical” in nature.
The independent commission investigating the attacks on New York and Washington concluded that while officials at the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) did receive warnings, they were “lulled into a false sense of security”. As a result, “intelligence that indicated a real and growing threat leading up to 9/11 did not stimulate significant increases in security procedures”.
The report, withheld from the public for months, says the FAA was primarily focused on the likelihood of an incident overseas. However, in spring 2001, it warned US airports that if “the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable”.
Kristin Bretweiser, whose husband was killed in the World Trade Center, said yesterday the newly released details undermined testimony from Condoleezza Rice, the former national security adviser, who told the commission that information about al-Qa’ida’s threats seen by the administration was “historical in nature”.
She told The Independent: “There were 52 threats that were mentioned. These were present threats – they were not historical. There were steps… 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
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
Press Advisory — September 9, 2005
Contact: John Judge 202-225-1605
On September 23 and 24, Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus will host two ?brain trust? panels at their annual legislative conference to be held at the Washington Convention Center, 801 Mt. Vernon Avenue, NW, Washington, DC on the topic of what was omitted from the 9/11 Commission?s Final Report, unanswered questions that remain and their inadequate recommendations which have failed to make the country safer, to address the true sponsors and causes of the attacks and to properly balance civil liberties and secrecy, security and war. The event is free and open to the public. Members of Congress, academicians and authors will present information on the road that led to 9/11, the response that followed, and the unexamined evidence and assumptions that framed the official report. Speakers will include John Cooley (author of Unholy Wars). C. William Michaels (author of No Greater Threat), Richard Falk (author of The Great Terror War), David Ray Griffin (author of 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions), Barbara Rosenberg (molecular biologist), James Bamford (author of A Pretext for War), Rep. Curt Weldon (on Able Danger), Benjamin Barber (author of Fear’s Empire), Natsu Saito (author of Confronting the Crime of Silence), Athan Theoharis (author of The FBI and American Security) and James Ridgeway (author of 5 Unanswered Questions About 9/11). There will be a showing of related documentary films on Saturday.… Continue reading
by Dr. David Ray Griffin
Testimony at the Congressional Black Caucus Annual Legislative Conference 2005 (September 21-24, Washington Convention Center, Washington, DC) for the session, ?The 9/11 Omission: What the Commission Got Wrong,? September 23, 2005, sponsored by Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA):
There have been two main theories about 9/11, each of which is a conspiracy theory. The official conspiracy theory says that the attacks were planned and carried out entirely by al-Qaeda. The alternative theory says that the attacks could not have succeeded without the involvement of forces within our own government.
In examining The 9/11 Commission Report, I have focused on how it dealt with evidence supportive of the alternative theory. I have found that it did so by distorting or simply ignoring this evidence. This is no surprise, because the man running the Commission, Philip Zelikow, was essentially a member of the Bush-Cheney administration. But it is a fact that needs to be brought to light.
Because there are so many omissions and distortions—in my book I identified at least 115—I can point to a significant percentage of them only by moving through my representative list quite quickly.
Flights 11 and 175
I will begin with the question of how hijacked airliners could have struck the Twin Towers.
The Commission?s answer was the third answer we have been given to that question. The first answer, given by military leaders the first few days after 9/11, was that no fighter jets were sent up until after… Continue reading
by Les Jamieson
Dr. David Ray Griffin spoke to packed audiences this weekend, in two engagements sponsored by NY911truth.org, WBAI, and MUJCA-NET. Griffin’s presentations, focusing on the collapse of the WTC towers, are summarized here, including ten charactistics of the collapses that bring the “official story” into further question.’, ‘
Even after four years, controversy over the events of 9/11 continues to surface in the news. We recently witnessed the honest questioning of the official account by a FDNY Muslim chaplain which gave rise to a storm of intolerance and deflection of any actual and legitimate inquiry into the official account of the attacks. Even more recent was the refusal by the CIA Director, Porter Goss, to investigate people within the agency who played key roles and should have acted on important information but didn’t.
In the wake of these developments, on Oct. 15th and 16th, New Yorkers filled two venues to hear a prominent theologian and author of two books on 9/11. David Ray Griffin, gave a presentation titled “The Destruction of the Trade Towers: A Christian Theologian Speaks Out.” Dr. Griffin has continued to blaze a trail of courage, leading where media and elected officials except for a mere handful have feared to tread. His presentation went straight to the core of one of the most powerful indictments of the official story, the collapse of the towers including WTC 7.
He included excerpts from the firemen’s tapes which were recently released as a result of a prolonged court… Continue reading
From: Elias Davidsson
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:27:45 +0000
Subject: Good news
I have good news to announce.
The Biannual Congress of the Icelandic Green-Left Party just closed. About 400 delegates attended. The Congress passed a resolution on 9/11. It was passed by the General Assembly of the Congress by acclamation, without opposing votes. I urge you to disseminate it to Green and Leftist organisations and parties wherever possible, as well as within the 911 movement.
Here is a rush translation of the resolution.
Resolution on the Events of 9/11
The Congress of the Green-Left Party held in Reykjavik, 21-23 October 2005 calls on the Goverment of Iceland to produce the evidence on alleged responsibility of persons in Afghanistan for the terrorist acts of 11 September 2001, on which the Government based its support of the U.S. aggression and occupation of that country. The Congress urges the Parliamentary faction to act on this matter.
The Congress highlights that four years have passed since the commission of the terrorist acts of 11 September 2001, acts which
shattered the world. These terrorists acts were crimes against humanity which were used by the governments of certain countries to
initiate wars, increased surveillance of the population, to justify torture and greatly increase military expenditures.
The Congress wishes to convey its solidarity with the struggle of victims’ families for the truth and supports the demand for an
independent, international inquiry on these terrorist acts.
Adopted on 23 October 2005… Continue reading
Adapted from: georgewashington.blogspot.
Dear 9/11 Truth Activists,
The New York Times is under fire for letting Judith Miller work as a member of the White House Iraq Group to spread disinformation, and then covering up Miller’s role and refusing to fire her. It has become obvious to fair-minded observers that the Times has been part of the Iraq disinformation campaign.
NOW is the time to contact the Times, to urge i’s management to “step up to the plate” on 9/11 as part of its need to “repair its reputation” after the Miller scandal.
Please copy the letter below or write your own (please remain respectful) and fax it to the Times, so that the Libby Indictment does not bury Dr. Griffin’s challenge in people’s minds. Please also email the letter to firstname.lastname@example.org.
* * *
Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., Publisher
Janet L. Robinson, CEO
Leonard P. Forman, CFO
Scott Heekin-Canedy, President
Bill Keller, Executive Editor
Jill Abramson, Managing Editor
John M. Geddes, Managing Editor
RW Apple, Chief Correspondent
Bernard Gwertzman, Editor (Times on Web)
Carl Lavin, News Editor
Gustave Niebuhr, Religion Reporter
Ray Bonner, Investigative Correspondent
Byron Calame, Public Editor
Laura Chang, Science Editor
The New York Times
229 West 43rd St.
New York, NY 10036-3959
FACSIMILE: (212) 556-7614
RE: Judith Miller and 9/11
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Times,
As the nation?s leading paper, the New York Times has the resources and talent to investigate stories of significance. On 10/21/05, Executive Editor Bill Keller stated that the Jayson… Continue reading
On Oct. 15th and 16th, New Yorkers filled two venues to hear the prominent theologian and author of two books on 9/11 give a presentation entitled “The Destruction of the Trade Towers: A Christian Theologian Speaks Out.” Dr. Griffin has continued to blaze a trail of courage, leading where most media and elected officials have feared to tread. His presentation went straight to the core of one of the most powerful indictments of the official story, the collapse of the towers and WTC 7.
Dr. Griffin included excerpts from the firemen’s tapes which were recently released as a result of a prolonged court battle led by victim’s families represented by attorney Norman Siegel and reported in the NY Times. He also included statements by many witnesses. These sources gave ample testimony giving evidence of explosions going off in the buildings. A 12 minute film was shown for the audiences, who saw for themselves the undeniable evidence for controlled demolition.
Dr. Griffin listed ten characteristics of the collapses which all indicate that the buildings did not fall due to being struck by planes or the ensuing fires. He explained the buildings fell suddenly without any indication of collapse. They fell straight down, into or at least close to their own footprints (rather than falling over), and at virtually free-fall speed, meeting virtually no resistance as they fell–a physical impossibility unless all vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing the core columns. The towers were built to withstand the impact… Continue reading
We have transcribed a brief portion of those comments, which follow:
Thanks for coming out today. Reluctantly, I stand to provide further info on the Able Danger situation.
When I first started this effort back in June, when the full Able Danger story came to my attention, I said it could be anything from gross incompentence to a coverup bigger than Watergate.
I, today, will tell you after months of looking at this issue that there is a coverup that’s taken place and continues to take place, and therefore I am asking for a criminal investigation as of this date.
I just finished an hour and a half meeting with the Inspector General at the Department of Defense; four employees went into extensive briefings and they advised me there had been two other requests, besides mine, of their office, including a request from the Senate and the other a request from the House.
So there are three separate requests for an Inspector General investigation specifically on Able Danger, and the deliberate persecution, intimidation and the ruining of Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer’s career. It is absolutely outrageous what’s occurred, because an Army Lt Col, a Bronze Star recipient, has been punished and had his career ruined for telling the truth.
The handling of Tony by the Defense Intelligence Agency is an abomination. The Agency needs to be held accountable. They… Continue reading
I want to start off on my discussion about the FAA and NORAD on the day of 9/11 with a quote from Senator Mark Dayton. Last year he read the 9/11 Commission report and was quite outraged, let me tell what he had to say, NORAD and the FAA have covered up “catastrophic failures” that left the nation vulnerable during the 9/11 hijacking “for almost three years now, NORAD officials and FAA officials have been able to hide their critical failures that left this country defenseless, during two of our worst hours in history. NORAD officials lied to the American people, they lied to congress, and they lied to your 9/11 Commission to create a false impression of competence, communication and protection of the American people.”
He calls NORAD and FAA’s failures “the most gross incompetence, dereliction of responsibility and negligence in those extreme circumstances, that I’ve witnessed in the public sector.”
Now, what exactly is he talking about? What are these failures that were so grave? Let me just start real briefly in mentioning what was happening before 9/11, what the standard procedure was? NORAD, (if you don’t know that’s the military organization that defends the skies over the U.S.), and the FAA, they had established standard procedures for air traffic controllers to contact NORAD whenever civilian aircraft strayed from their pre-arranged flight course, or when they lost contact with air traffic control.
When NORAD was contacted, they would typically send a fighter up to intercept the plane and… Continue reading
When William Rodriguez was a young man, the Amazing Randi hired him as an assistant–but not for help with his magic act. Randi enlisted Roudy, the aspiring magician’s stage name in his native Puerto Rico, in his cause: exposing faith healers and psychics. Rodriguez, as Benjamin Smith explained in a New York Sun article, proved adroit at insinuating himself into the good graces of Randi’s targets and eliciting incriminating information.
Two decades later Rodriguez’s life has come full circle and once again he’s taken on the task of unmasking what he sees as the truth behind a spectacle. This time it’s the grand opera that was 9/11–along with its libretto, the 9/11 Commission Report. Yes, Rodriguez is among the legions that question its conclusions. But before attempting to transform himself into a truthteller, Rodriguez had established his credentials with a fearsome display of physical courage.
A custodian at the World Trade Center, Rodriguez shepherded a number of those who worked there out of the basement. Also, accompanying firefighters up the stairs, he unlocked doors for the firefighters until they turned him back. He may, in fact, have been the last man out of the North Tower.
However, not content to bask in his 9/11 hero status, he had to go and muddle matters by morphing into a gadfly. Still, whether in spite of or because of the twin sets of tracks on which his courage travels, Rodriguez stands poised to break out in 2006.
An eloquent man with an outsized… Continue reading
“Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Richard Shelby, both members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, appear on CNN’s “Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer”, and warn of potential attacks by Osama bin Laden. “One of the things that has begun to concern me very much as to whether we really have our house in order, intelligence staff have told me that there is a major probability of a terrorist incident within the next three months,” Feinstein said.“
And what has the White House said regarding intelligence about Iraq?
That members of the House and Senate “had access to the same intelligence“.
Doesn’t that work both ways? If Senators Feinstein and Shelby were aware of an impending “terrorist incident” prior to 9/11, doesn’t that mean the President should have known? Doesn’t the President have “access to the same intelligence”? Granted, they didn’t have access to the same intelligence prior to the war. The September 21st, PDB for one. However, the Senators were aware something was going to happen. A couple of weeks before the infamous August 6th, PDB.
If the President “has access to the same intelligence”, that means he was aware of the threat of an impending “terrorist incident” prior to August 6th, 2001. That means the August 6th, PDB, in and of itself, was just one of many warnings.
Another warning was given to John Ashcroft that prompted him to no longer fly commercial aircraft.
As an expression of support for those who are attempting to expose the truth about the events of 9/11 for the benefit of the American people, I am posting the penultimate version of a chapter I have submitted to David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott for publication in their volume, 9/11 AND THE AMERICAN EMPIRE (forthcoming). I stand with Steve Jones, Professor of Physics at Brigham Young, David Ray Griffin, Professor Emeritus of Theology at Claremont, and other students and scholars of 9/11, who believe that extraordinary times require extraordinary measures. Further discussion may be found at NIST’s Evasion.
Dec. 17, 2005:
By Bill Conroy
(Published originally on Sat Dec 17th, 2005 at 06:14:22 PM EST at
What do two of the biggest national-security news stories of the century — the Valerie Plame leak scandal and the legal case of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds — have in common?
They both are being presided over by the same federal judge in the District of Colombia, Reggie Walton, a Bush appointee to the federal court and a man who appears to have a few well-kept secrets of his own.
All federal judges are required under ethics rules to file what is known as “financial disclosure reports.”
The disclosure statement filed by Walton, which was obtained through the dogged efforts of a conservative watchdog group called Judicial Watch, is curious in what it does not reveal. Remember, this judge is arguably handling two of the most sensitive and potentially far-reaching challenges to the free press and the public’s right to know of our times.
In the Plamegate case, a top White House aid, Scooter Libby, has already been indicted and additional indictments may be forthcoming (Karl Rove?). In addition, a bevy of insider journalists in the media-center establishment have been subpoenaed to testify in the case, and one, New York Times reporter Judith Miller, has already done jail time for her initial refusal to identify her sources on the story.
Edmonds was fired from her job as an FBI translator after blowing the whistle on alleged espionage being carried out… Continue reading
Posted 12/31/05 at MSNBC.com.
Do you believe President Bush’s actions justify impeachment? * 183943 responses
Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial. 86%
No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching “high crimes and misdemeanors.” 5%
No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching. 8%
I don’t know. 2%
Not a scientifically valid survey. Click to learn more.
* * * * *
Spying, the Constitution ? and the ?I-word?
2006 will offer up Nixon-era nastiness and a chorus of calls to impeach Bush
By Howard Fineman
Updated: 4:01 p.m. ET Dec. 21, 2005
WASHINGTON – In the first weeks and months after 9/11, I am told by a very good source, there was a lot of wishing out loud in the White House Situation Room about expanding the National Security Agency?s ability to instantly monitor phone calls and e-mails between American callers and possible terror suspects abroad. ?We talked a lot about how useful that would be,? said this source, who was ?in the room? in the critical period after the attacks.
Well, as the world now knows, the NSA ? at the prompting of Vice President Cheney and on official (secret) orders from President Bush ? was doing just that. And yet, as I understand it, many of the people in the White House?s own Situation Room ? including… Continue reading