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.

On 1/8/2008, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that "a huge lawsuit against the government of Saudi Arabia and key members of its royal family was put to a crucial test today as lawyers for victims of the 9/11 attacks urged a federal appeals court to reinstate the government of Saudi Arabia as a defendant." The Cozen O'Connor law firm in Philadelphia "was the first to file suit against the government of Saudi Arabia in 2003, charging that the desert kingdom bears responsibility for the attacks because it permitted Islamic charities under its control to bankroll Osama bin Laden and his global terror movement." The lawsuit "suffered a setback in 2005 when New York federal district court judge Richard Conway Casey ruled that the federal foreign sovereign immunity act barred lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and members of the royal family."

On 11/13/2008, it was reported that "thousands of victims of the 9/11 attacks appealed to the Supreme Court yesterday, asking it to overturn a lower court decision barring lawsuits against Saudi Arabia for supporting acts of terrorism."

by David Chandler
June 17, 2009
Journalof911Studies.com

Greening vs. Chandler and Newton’s Laws

The occasion for Frank Greening’s letter is correspondence with several physicists, chemists, and engineers discussing arguments I made in a video posted on the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth YouTube page:

This is my response to his letter. ------------------------------

FG: Chandler concludes that the block was subject to a net force of 0.64M(upper)g. Prior to the collapse of WTC 1, the lower portion of the building was perfectly capable of holding up the upper block which we know exerted a downward force equal to M(upper)g. So why, once the collapse started, was the lower section of WTC 1 not able to support a load of 0.64M(upper)g?

Response: You are confused on this point. It was the net force on the upper block which was 0.64g downward. The net force consists of the downward force due to gravity combined with the upwardly directed normal force. For the net force to come out 0.64g, the normal force had to have been 0.36g.

GILLIBRAND, SCHUMER, LAUTENBERG, MENENDEZ TO INTRODUCE JAMES ZADROGA 9/11 HEALTH AND COMPENSATION ACT IN THE U.S. SENATE

First Time Comprehensive 9/11 Health Legislation Will Be Introduced In Senate

Mayor Bloomberg and Representatives Maloney, Nadler, King, and McMahon to Join Gillibrand to Help Provide Treatment for Community Members, First Responders Suffering From 9/11-Related Health Effects

Joseph Zadroga, Fire Lt. Marty Fullam, Others Affected by Rescue and Clean-Up Efforts to Tell Their Stories

Washington, D.C. -- U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand will be joined by Senators Charles E. Schumer, Frank R. Lautenberg, and Robert Menendez and Representatives Carolyn Maloney, Jerrold Nadler, Peter King and Michael McMahon, along with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and 9/11 first responders, construction workers, clean-up workers and community members who have suffered from the long term health effects of working at Ground Zero to introduce the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act -- the first comprehensive 9/11 health legislation to ever be introduced in the U.S. Senate.

Thousands were lost on the morning of September 11, 2001, but today, thousands more -- including first responders, area residents, workers, students and others -- are sick and getting sicker from exposure to toxins released from the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers.

Aidan Monaghan
June 22, 2009
911blogger.com

According to a Freedom of Information Act reply from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), the last known pre-9/11 flights for three of the four aircraft involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 took place in December, 2000, nine months before the attacks, while no pre-9/11 final flight information was provided for American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA).

However, a discovered searchable online BTS database produces the following search results for three of the four 9/11 aircraft on September 10, 2001:

Remo Conscious is a revolutionary-minded wordsmith, rap artist and producer from the East Bay in Oakland, California with seven rap songs now playing on No Lies Radio. Remo talks to Teri about the writing of his 9/11Truth hit songs Lies, We Know and Loose Change. Loose Change is also a 9/11 film by Dylan Avery and Remo talks about his latest collaboration with Dylan on the newest version, which will be coming out soon. Please support Remo by visiting his website and webstore here.

BackStage: Teri Perticone of No Lies Radio interviews 9/11Truth Movement musical rap artist Remo Conscious

Listen here, Sunday at 3pm Pacific - 6pm Eastern - 23:00 GMT

By James Risen and Eric Lichtblau
June 16, 2009
New York Times

WASHINGTON -- The National Security Agency is facing renewed scrutiny over the extent of its domestic surveillance program, with critics in Congress saying its recent intercepts of the private telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans are broader than previously acknowledged, current and former officials said.

The agency's monitoring of domestic e-mail messages, in particular, has posed longstanding legal and logistical difficulties, the officials said.

Since April, when it was disclosed that the intercepts of some private communications of Americans went beyond legal limits in late 2008 and early 2009, several Congressional committees have been investigating. Those inquiries have led to concerns in Congress about the agency's ability to collect and read domestic e-mail messages of Americans on a widespread basis, officials said. Supporting that conclusion is the account of a former N.S.A. analyst who, in a series of interviews, described being trained in 2005 for a program in which the agency routinely examined large volumes of Americans' e-mail messages without court warrants. Two intelligence officials confirmed that the program was still in operation.

Both the former analyst's account and the rising concern among some members of Congress about the N.S.A.'s recent operation are raising fresh questions about the spy agency.

By Stephanie Gaskell
Wednesday, June 17th 2009
NYDailyNews.com

A New Jersey hospital that treats sick 9/11 first responders got a last-minute reprieve Tuesday when the feds vowed to send cash to keep it open through September.

The Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences Institute at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick had told its 1,800 patients it wasn't sure it could stay open past next month.

Federal funding had been held up over an accounting dispute, but late Tuesday the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health said it was sending $575,000 to cover summer expenses.

John Feal, founder of the Fealgood Foundation, which pushes for health care for 9/11 workers, said the money isn't enough.

Feal said, "$575,000 is like putting a Band-Aid on a machine-gun wound.

"Funding for three months is a joke when 9/11 first responders will need treatment for the rest of their lives."