by Bill Simpich tr u t h o u t | Report
The Congressional anthrax hearings of September 16-17 revealed that public pressure is keeping the doors open in the anthrax case. FBI Director Robert Mueller promised that the FBI will provide their evidence to a panel of experts for scientific evaluation. The battle will now turn to the independence of this panel, and whether “all evidence” or merely “scientific evidence” will be under review.
During the hearings, Mueller found himself under fire by Senator Patrick Leahy and Congressman John Conyers for not having answers to their questions. Republican Arlen Specter was furious at Mueller for his unwillingness to assure them that Congress would have a role in determining the panel’s composition.
Meanwhile, new evidence shows just how deeply wrong ABC and Washington Post reporters have been over the years on their coverage of the anthrax attacks. They can’t have it both ways: Either they made repeated “mistakes” by relying on their sources, or several people deliberately lied in order to advance war on Iraq.
In his recent book Taking Heat, former White House secretary Ari Fleischer wrote that Bush was more shook up by the anthrax attacks than by any other event. White House officials repeatedly pressed Mueller to prove it was a second-wave assault by al-Qaeda or Iraq. After days of provocative statements designed to scare the American people, Cheney himself believed that he had been exposed to anthrax. Although the test… Continue reading
by Dr. David Ray Griffin
September 19, 2008
According to the official account of 9/11, Wedge 1 of the Pentagon was struck by Flight 77, which was a Boeing 757. If so, there surely would have been debris from the plane to support this claim. But, it appears, there was not. People who inspected Wedge 1 shortly after the attack almost universally reported an absence of the kind of debris that would have been left by the crash of a large airliner. I will give several examples.
F-16 pilot Dean Eckmann, who was asked to fly over the Pentagon and report on the extent of the damage, said that he suspected that the damage had been caused by “a big fuel tanker truck because of the amount of smoke and flames coming up and … there was no airplane wreckage off to the side.”1
I knew it was a crash site before we got there, and I didn’t know what it was going to look like. I couldn’t imagine because the building is like rock solid. I expected to see the airplane, so I guess my initial impression was, “Where’s the plane? How come there’s not a plane?” I would have thought the building would have stopped it and somehow we would have seen something like part of, or half of the plane, or the lower part, or the back of the plane. So it was just a… Continue reading
New rules for national security investigations will help protect Americans
from terror attacks, FBI Director Robert Mueller told lawmakers Tuesday, even
if they single out people from the Middle East.
By LARA JAKES JORDAN
Associated Press Writer
New rules for national security investigations will help protect Americans
from terror attacks, FBI Director Robert Mueller told lawmakers Tuesday, even
if they single out people from the Middle East.
Skeptical Democrats clashed with Mueller, who told the House Judiciary Committee
that FBI agents would no longer need solid evidence or allegations of wrongdoing
to spy on Americans even before opening investigations. Democrats also expressed
doubts that the Justice Department and FBI would protect civil liberties and
privacy rights after years of previous abuses and stymied congressional oversight.
During nearly two hours of testimony, Mueller described the tentative rules
– known as the attorney general’s guidelines – as a proactive way to prevent
The new rules would ensure that suspicious behavior is investigated, Mueller
said, citing a July 2001 memo from an FBI agent in Phoenix who noted a rising
trend of Middle Eastern men taking flight lessons. The agent’s warning was ignored,
and the 9/11 Commission later said it could have served as a clue to al-Qaida’s
“It is that kind of threat and identification of a very suspicious circumstance
that would warrant further investigation,” Mueller said. Additionally,
he said current guidelines make it “very difficult” for agents to
look into people believed to be traveling to terror hotspots, such as training
camps in Pakistan.…
By Tod Fletcher
September 11, 2008
In THE NEW PEARL HARBOR REVISITED , David Ray Griffin provides a brilliant and much-needed companion to his path-breaking and movement-building book on 9/11, The New Pearl Harbor (NPH; 2004). Now, on the occasion of the seventh anniversary of those horrific events, Griffin surveys in detail all the main lines of evidence against the official account of 9/11 to have emerged during the last four years. THE NEW PEARL HARBOR REVISITED (NPHR) has been designed as volume 2 of a two-volume set with NPH as volume 1; together they provide a thorough and up-to-date case against the official conspiracy theory (they can be bought separately, of course).
Griffin has already published four other books that provide in-depth analysis of most of the evidence to have emerged since 2004. NPHR’s main purpose is to provide an easily accessible survey of all of the new evidence, so that it is now possible for a beginner to the subject (including journalists and members of Congress) to master its enormous complexity simply by reading two books. NPHR is structured identically to NPH; each chapter in NPHR comments and builds on the corresponding chapter in NPH. Much of the content is entirely new; there are many facts and analyses in NPHR which Griffin presents for the first time, and which literally make the book an up-to-the-minute statement of the case.
In the Preface, Griffin explains why he undertook to “update” The New Pearl Harbor . In the Introduction he… Continue reading
by Sam Vaknin
An Interview with David Ray Griffin
On September 11, I entertained a couple of house guests, senior journalists from Scandinavia. I remember watching in horror and disbelief the unfolding drama, as the United States was being subjected to multiple deadly attacks on-screen. I turned to the international affairs editor of a major Danish paper and told her “This could not have been done by al-Qaida.” I am an Israeli and, as such, I have a fair “sixth sense” as to the capabilities of terrorists and their potential reach.
Enter David Ray Griffin. I was introduced to him by a mutual acquaintance. He is emeritus professor of philosophy of religion and theology at Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University. He has published over 30 books, including eight about 9/11, the best known of which is “The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé.”
On the face of it, his credentials with regards to intelligence analysis are hardly relevant, let alone impressive. But, to underestimate him would be a grave error. Being a philosopher, he is highly trained and utterly qualified to assess the credibility of data; the validity and consistency of theories (including conspiracy theories); and the rationality and logic of hypotheses. These qualifications made him arguably the most visible and senior member of what came to be known as the 9/11 Truth Movement.
In our exchange, he proved to be tolerant of dissenting views, open to debate, and invariably possessed of… Continue reading
by P. Devlin Buckley
September 5, 2008
The American Monitor
Law firms representing victims of the 9/11 attacks in an ongoing legal dispute with wealthy Saudis suspected of financing al-Qaeda have recently turned their attention to two individuals with unique ties to the U.S. government.
Lawyers for victims of the attacks, as well as insurance companies of property owners in New York, have filed a motion of discovery in federal district court in Manhattan targeting the Saudi-owned National Commercial Bank (NCB) and two of its former executives, Khalid bin Mahfouz and Yassin al-Qadi.
Both Mahfouz and al-Qadi have a murky history that includes alleged ties to the CIA, the White House, the Bush family, al-Qaeda, and organized crime on a global scale.
The discovery motion, if granted, would advance the case by requiring both sides to disclose and exchange all available pertinent facts regarding the defendants. The motion comes just days after a circuit court ruled members of the Saudi government are immune from terrorism lawsuits in the United States, a setback in the plaintiffs’ case against Saudis suspected of financing al-Qaeda in the years leading up to 9/11. There are some defendants, however, the ruling does not protect, including Khalid bin Mahfouz, Yassin al-Qadi, and the NCB.
Government documents, expert testimony, and media reports dating back several years suggest Mahfouz and al-Qadi have raised millions of dollars for al-Qaeda and other militant groups. Evidence indicates some of the defendants’ activities were sanctioned by the U.S. government.
During the late… Continue reading
(Sept. 5, 2008, New York, NY) A solid base has now been established to create
a public referendum known as the NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative. This campaign is
to enable the voters of NY City to create a new, independent, impartial 9/11 Commission
that would conduct an authentic, comprehensive investigation of the most momentous
event of our time. This effort is unique because if passed by the voters of NY
City, the Commission would have subpoena power and its findings would have full
A dedicated team of citizens are about to cross the threshold of 30,000 petition
signatures. This is the minimum required to submit the Initiative to the NY
City Clerk and NY City Council for their review. There is now official confirmation
from the City Clerk’s office that all existing signed petitions will be valid
for the mayoral election in 2009. Upon reaching this milestone of 30,000, efforts
will continue to obtain as many as 75,000 signatures or more in the coming months
as well as create alliances with various organizations which will serve as a
coalition advocating for passage of the Initiative. With substantial numbers
and support showing there is a serious mandate from the voters, it is actually
possible that NY City Council can be moved to introduce and pass the Initiative
on their own. This is the current strategy which organizers and petitioners
here in NYC have every intention of pursuing.
Another vital piece of information has come to light. Back in the… Continue reading
Charles E. Lewis
Although I was no longer employed at LAX on September 11, 2001, I had worked there until about two months before as the Quality Control Manager for Kiewit Pacific Construction on the Taxiway “C” project. A large part of my work involved security in the Air Port Operations, or APO (but now called the “Airport Operations Area,” or “AOA”), which is where the planes are. On the morning of September 11, 2001, I listened with great interest to LAX Security officials in the APO discussing the attacks and trying to get more information.
“LAX Security” involves the Los Angeles World Airport Police Department, the Los Angeles Police Department, and sometimes the FBI and/or the California Highway Patrol. I can, incidentally, testify that LAX Security performed very professionally on 9/11. Despite extreme pressure, confusion, and fear (they had received information that LAX was a target), they executed the emergency procedures flawlessly.
After describing what I heard while listening to LAX Security, I will suggest ways in which my account could be corroborated.
On the morning of 9/11, I was working as Deputy Inspector representing the City of LA Building and Safety Department for the seismic retrofit of the LA Hilton Towers Hotel, only a few minutes by car from where I had worked at LAX. When I realized, after the second strike on the WTC, that the country was under attack, I decided that I should go to the APO, because I was one of only a few persons who would know how to fix certain parts of the new security systems if problems developed.…Continue reading
by Luke Ryland
September 5, 2008
In last Monday’s New York Times, David Sanger and William Broad wrote a front-page article about the CIA’s involvement in the nuclear black market.
The article demonstrates (again) that the New York Times, Sanger & Broad in particular, has simply become a mouthpiece for the government (see my previous articles 1, 2, 3) but they did let one fact slip through to the readership. I can only presume that the slip was accidental, because they don’t appear to have understood the ramifications of what they reported:
The US Government is covering up the fact that US citizens and entities are involved in the nuclear black market.
Three members of the Tinner family in Switzerland were key suppliers to AQ Khan’s nuclear black market ring. They were arrested in 2004 and have been awaiting trial but the US government has been trying to sabotage the Swiss trial because “compromising and embarrassing information about the CIA’s activities with the Khan network” would be exposed if the trial were to proceed.
The New York Times reported that in July 2007, the Swiss Justice Minister came to the US to discuss the case with high-level US officials, apparently to find a mutually-acceptable arrangement regarding how to deal with the Tinner case.
According to an anonymous former Bush administration official:
“The State Department wanted the bomb plans destroyed as a way to stem nuclear proliferation, while the C.I.A. wanted to… Continue reading
One of the most active projects this week is the newly-established Iran-Contra Timeline, where there is more about kidnappings by Iranian-backed terrorists, missile shipments to Iran, and money movements to the Contras. You can also find out about CIA Director William Casey’s illness, attorney general Ed Meese’s investigatory prowess, and Ronald Reagan’s coherence.
Due to the increasing amount of material about the anthrax attacks, a dedicated timeline has been set up to cover this, and it will have separate categories, including ones for suspects Ayaad Assaad, Steven Hatfill, and Bruce Ivins. Newly added entries cover Ivins’ drinking, the letter implicating Assaad–just a coincidence according to the FBI–and an unpublished novel Hatfill wrote about a false-flag bio-terror attack.
The 9/11 timeline yet more about 9/11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow, who assumed control of a key commission team, tried to prevent staff members talking to commissioners, and appointed a CIA officer to lead the investigation of the CIA.
Material has been added to the A. Q. Khan nuclear smuggling ring timeline covering lenient sentences handed down to Khan associates and western knowledge of his network.
Finally, the Decision to Invade Iraq Timeline has a couple more entries about Republican presidential candidate John McCain and his war cheerleading.
In addition to the entries being posted, we are still working on the site redesign, and donations of all amounts will be of great assistance:
Click here to donate
You can share your… Continue reading
At the Ron Paul Rally for the Republic held at the Target Center in St. Paul, Minnesota a few blocks from the Republican National Convention, former Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura questioned 9/11 to a crowd of nearly 10,000 people and received an overwhelmingly positive response.
“I’m going to move on to another subject that a lot of people don’t want to discuss today,” he said, “I know when I discuss it, it’s amazing, I get attacked!” The crowd listened intently as he went on, “And that’s something called 9/11!” The crowd erupted into spontaneous applause. Ventura continued and discussed the fact that on the FBI’s most wanted terrorist page, Osama bin Laden is not wanted for 9/11. He asked why expressed disgust with the Bush Administration’s stonewalling any investigation into the attacks.
Below is the video of Ventura’s 9/11 remarks, as well as his response to reporters when asked about the subject backstage after his speech:
Source URL: http://www.jamartell.blogspot.com/
August 31, 2008
The assertion that 9/11 passengers lists “contained no Arab names” is frequently seen in the 9/11 truth movement.  For example, this article by Enver Masud is headlined, “Why are there no Arab names on the passenger list for the planes used in the September 11, 2001 attack…?”  The 9/11 website 9/11 Hard Facts claims, “[On] officially released passenger lists provided by the airlines to the media, no Arab names appear on any of the four passenger lists.”  In David Ray Griffin’s 9/11: The Myth and the Reality , he repeats the claim that, “[Their] names should be on the flight manifests. But the flight manifests that have been released contain neither the names of the alleged hijackers nor any other Arab names.”  John Leonard, Webster Tarpley and Kevin Barrett’s publisher, repeats the claim that “Scholars [for 9/11 Truth]… report things like ‘there were no Arabs on the passenger lists’”  As well, Michael C. Ruppert, citing Gary North wrote, “Another easy and non-debatable hole is with the passenger lists and the hijackers. Gary North, Ph.D. – a history professor… relied on lists published by CNN… Official reports state that there were only 19 hijackers.…Continue reading
August 30, 2008
by John Byrne
As the nation focuses on Sen. John McCain’s choice of running mate, President
Bush has quietly moved to expand the reach of presidential power by ensuring
that America remains in a state of permanent war.
Buried in a recent proposal by the Administration is a sentence that has received
scant attention — and was buried itself in the very newspaper that exposed
it Saturday. It is an affirmation that the United States remains at war with
al Qaeda, the Taliban and "associated organizations."
Part of a proposal for Guantánamo Bay legal detainees, the provision before
Congress seeks to “acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains
engaged in an armed conflict with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated organizations,
who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us and who are dedicated
to the slaughter of Americans.”
The New York Times‘ page 8 placement of the article in its Saturday
edition seems to downplay its importance. Such a re-affirmation of war carries
broad legal implications that could imperil Americans’ civil liberties and the
rights of foreign nationals for decades to come.
It was under the guise of war that President Bush claimed a legal mandate for
his warrantless wiretapping program, giving the National Security Agency power
to intercept calls Americans made abroad. More of this program has emerged in
recent years, and it includes the surveillance of Americans’ information and
"War powers" have also given President Bush cover to hold… Continue reading
Welcome to Firefighters for 9/11 Truth. My name is Erik Lawyer, and I am the
founding member. I am currently a full time firefighter, and have been assigned
to 3 Truck in the City of Seattle for the last 12 years. Before that I was with
the City of Sacramento as a Firefighter Paramedic. I first began working in
Emergency Services in 1988 in the Sacramento area with a 911 private paramedic
ambulance company. I have 20 years experience in Emergency Services. I earned
my pilot’s license in 1987, and have been recreationally flying since. I graduated
with a Bachelor’s of Science in Mathematics from the University of California
at Davis in 1993, with 2 years of elective Engineering courses, and a Minor
I would like to share my story concerning September 11, 2001 and the events
that led to the creation of Firefighters for 9/11 Truth. I, like most Americans,
remember exactly where I was when I saw the attacks and had the overwhelming
urge to take action. I was shocked, outraged, scared and confused. I called
my Battalion Chief and asked if Seattle would be sending any teams to help.
I was a member of the MMST, and figured we would be needed and I wanted to know
where to report. Due to the nature of the incident we were not called up, and
instead USAR teams, including Seattle’s, were sent.
I first visited Ground Zero in October of 2001 with several firefighters from
Mon Aug 18, 2008
Last week, Scott Horton interviewed (audio) investigative journalist Joe Lauria. Lauria was one of the co-authors of the three-part (1, 2, 3) series on the case of former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds for the UK’s Sunday Times.
Scott Horton Interviews Joe Lauria
In the interview, Lauria says that he spoke at length to the three FBI agents who were Sibel’s immediate bosses at the FBI and that they “corroborated in general terms, that this story is true.”
Lauria describes how he recently interviewed one of the FBI agents at his home for 90 minutes, and met another of Sibel’s former bosses several times outside his house. The agents are unwilling to provide detailed corroboration on a lot of the details in the case because they fear being sent to prison, but their willingness to speak to Lauria about the case, and their supportive statements that “She’s not crazy,” provide… Continue reading
By Mark H. Gaffney
The following is an excerpt from Mark H. Gaffney’s forthcoming book, THE 911 MYSTERY PLANE AND THE VANISHING OF AMERICA, to be released in September 2008.
15/08/08 “ICH” — Regrettably, there is considerable evidence that elements of the Bush administration were complicit in the 9/11 attack, and may even have helped stage it. Let us now examine some of what I regard as the most compelling evidence. However, the following discussion makes no claim to be comprehensive.
We know that within minutes of the “worst terrorist attack” in US history, even before the collapse of WTC-2 at 9:59 am, US officials knew the names of several of the alleged hijackers. CBS reported that a flight attendant on AA Flight 11, Amy Sweeney, had the presence of mind to call her office and reveal the seat numbers of the hijackers who had seized the plane. FBI Director Robert Mueller later said, “This was the first piece of hard evidence.” In his memoirs CIA Director George Tenet emphasizes the importance of the passenger manifests, as does counter-terrorism czar Richard A. Clarke. All of which is very strange because the manifests later released by the airlines do not include the names of any of the alleged hijackers. Nor has this discrepancy ever been explained.
According to MSNBC, the plan to invade Afghanistan and “remove Al Qaeda from the face of he earth” was already sitting on G.W.… Continue reading
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
St. Paul, Minnesota — August 12, 2008 — Impeach for Peace (IfP), along with others looking to demonstrate at the Republican National Convention (RNC), filed a lawsuit Friday with the help of the ACLU of Minnesota in Ramsey County District Court demanding our right to free speech. Plaintiffs include: Jodin Morey and Mikael Rudolph of Impeach for Peace, Colleen and Ross Rowley, and Ron Deharporte.
Impeach for Peace is a grassroots, nonpartisan organization based in Minnesota with chapters in twelve states throughout the country working to achieve the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney and holding them and future elected officials fully accountable under the Rule of Law.
The RNC is having their election year convention in St. Paul, Minnesota at the Xcel Energy Center. During this event, the St. Paul Police have decided to relegate most speech activities in what they call the ‘Primary Event Area’ to an inadequate ‘Designated Public Assembly Area’ or free speech zone. The ‘Primary Event Area’ remains to be fully defined by the police, making it impossible for people to know where in St. Paul they can exercise their rights to freedom of expression and assembly. At the convention, members of congress, mayors, governors, the President and Vice-President of the United States are expected to be in attendance. This provides IfP and other potential demonstrators with a unique opportunity to express their political messages to these governmental officials.
The lawsuit alleges that the St. Paul City Council and police have created guidelines for the RNC which restrict free speech to areas that are “inadequate and unacceptably small.”
The ACLU also alleges that the City Council/Police denied IfP their due process rights as stipulated in the Minnesota State Constitution by failing to give notice of their plans regarding free speech restrictions, which would have allowed for public comment and a public hearing.…Continue reading
August 8, 2008
Assuming the federal government has, after almost seven years, finally identified
the perpetrator of the anthrax attacks in 2001–admittedly a generous assumption
given that for most of those years, it pursued, hounded, embarrassed, and ruined
the career of the wrong man–larger dangers remain. As is normally the
case with issues surrounding terrorism, the average citizen will probably be
shocked to learn that their government is often a bigger threat than the terrorists.
Remember the CIA’s creation of the 9/11 threat by supporting the most
radical Islamist groups fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan during the 1980s
and then the U.S. government’s provocation of terrorist attacks from those
same militants by its non-Islamic military presence in Islamic Persian Gulf
countries in the 1990s, which had continued unnecessarily subsequent to the
first Gulf War.
Similarly, in the case of bioterrorism, the threat from the government is greater
than from foreign groups such as al Qaeda. Although U.S. intelligence has created
fear among the U.S. public by saying that al Qaeda has made efforts to obtain
biological weapons, the capabilities of small terrorist groups to make, handle,
weaponize, and disperse biological agents is very limited. Even Aum Shinrikyo,
a well-funded Japanese terrorist group that hired Ph.D. scientists, could not
successfully carry out a biological weapons attack. (Even their chemical attacks,
which are technologically easier to accomplish, were ham-handed and did not
result in mass deaths.) The sophisticated weaponization and dispersion of biological
agents are difficult for technologically… Continue reading