by David Ray Griffin
“The Commission” by Philip Shenon has performed a great public service, letting the world know that there are good reasons to be suspicious of “The 9/11 Commission Report.” The main problem is the fact that the Commission was almost entirely under the control of Philip Zelikow, who was closely connected to the Bush White House. Although my book “Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11″ revealed some of the facts about Zelikow that showed him to be one of the worst possible choices for the Commission’s executive director, Shenon has revealed even more facts.
It was already known that Zelikow had been on the National Security Council (NSC) with Condoleezza Rice during the administration of the first President Bush; that he wrote a book with her while the Republicans were out of power; that he helped her make the transition from the Clinton to the Bush NSC; and that he wrote at her request the 2002 version of “National Security Strategy of the United States of America” (NSS 2002), which enunciated a new doctrine of preemptive war that was used, in Shenon’s words, to “justify a preemptive strike on Iraq.”
But now Shenon reveals more: that in applying to Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, for the position of executive director, Zelikow failed to reveal some of his conflicts of interest, especially his authorship of NSS 2002 and his role on the transition team; that he continued, contrary to his promise,… Continue reading
by Peter Dale Scott
In August 2007, Congressman Peter DeFazio, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, told the House that he and the rest of his Committee had been barred from reviewing parts of National Security Presidential Directive 51, the White House supersecret plans to implement so-called “Continuity of Government” in the event of a mass terror attack or natural disaster. ( 1 )
Norm Ornstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institute, commented, “I cannot think of one good reason” for denial. Ornstein added, “I find it inexplicable and probably reflective of the usual, knee-jerk overextension of executive power that we see from this White House.” ( 2 )
The story, ignored by the mainstream press, involved more than the usual tussle between the legislative and executive branches of the U.S. Government. What was at stake was a contest between Congress’s constitutional powers of oversight, and a set of policy plans that could be used to suspend or modify the constitution.
There is nothing wrong with disaster planning per se. Like all governments, the U.S. government must develop plans for the worst contingencies. But Congress has a right to be concerned about Continuity of Government (COG) plans refined by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld over the past quarter century, which journalists have described as involving suspension of the constitution. ( 3 )
In the 1980s, a secret group of planners inside and outside the government were assigned, by an Executive Order, to develop a response to a nuclear… Continue reading
April 4, 2008
by Jeff Cohen
Soon after Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday became a federal holiday in
1986, I began prodding mainstream media to cover the dramatic story of King’s
last year as he campaigned militantly against U.S. foreign and economic policy.
Most of his last speeches were recorded. But year after year, corporate networks
have refused to air the tapes.
Last night, NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams enthused over new color
footage of King that adorned its coverage of the 40th anniversary of the assassination.
The report focused on the last phase of King’s life. But the same old
blinders were in place.
NBC showed young working-class whites in Chicago taunting King. But there was
no mention of how elite media had taunted King in his last year. In 1967 and
‘68, mainstream media saw Rev. King a bit like they now see Rev. Jeremiah
Back then they denounced King’s critical comments; today they simply
While noting in passing that King spoke out against the Vietnam War, mainstream
reports today rarely acknowledge that he went way beyond Vietnam to decry U.S.
militarism in general.
“I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed
in the ghettos,” said King in 1967 speeches on foreign policy, “without
having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world
today – my own government."
In response to these speeches, Newsweek said King was “over his head”
and wanted a “race-conscious… Continue reading
by Bill Douglas
Last Monday, March 31st, a historic event occurred. A conference call was held that involved a list of great American heroes, who have put everything on the line to protect their nation’s democracy. It was meaningful this occurred the same month as HBO’s release of John Adams.
A decision was made — April 16-22nd will be a WEEK of TRUTH !!
All are invited to get involved, by spreading the word on this event, as well as participating in the national “buy-in for truth week,” to finally break thru the corporate media blockade of 9/11 questions, at www.WeekofTruth.org
“. . . they [the majority of Americans] shall come to realize what I now realize… that the 9/11 Truth Movement are the real patriots in 21st century America!”
– Steve Alten, New York Times Best Selling author of “The Shell Game”
“Alone we can do so little . . . together . . . so much.”
– Helen Keller
This auspicious group came together to strategize how to collect the many powerful aspects of the growing movement pushing for answers to the endless unanswered questions around 9/11′s attacks, into one mass focused week of action. The goal . . . to break through the years of frustration with the (media) fourth estate’s betrayal of American democracy through their ongoing censoring of the questions regarding the increasingly obvious official myth of 9/11, which defies physics, logic, and FAA/DOD protocol.
As I sat in on this historic… Continue reading
By Eli Lake
April 10, 2008
WASHINGTON — A new U.N. Human Rights Council official assigned to monitor
Israel is calling for an official commission to study the role neoconservatives
may have played in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
On March 26, Richard Falk, Milbank professor of international law emeritus
at Princeton University, was named by unanimous vote to a newly created position
to report on human rights in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian
Arabs. While Mr. Falk’s specialty is human rights and international law, since
the attacks in 2001, he has devoted some of his time to challenging what he
calls the "9-11 official version."
On March 24 in an interview with a radio host and former University of Wisconsin
instructor, Kevin Barrett, Mr. Falk said, "It is possibly true that especially
the neoconservatives thought there was a situation in the country and in the
world where something had to happen to wake up the American people. Whether
they are innocent about the contention that they made that something happen
or not, I don’t think we can answer definitively at this point. All we can say
is there is a lot of grounds for suspicion, there should be an official investigation
of the sort the 9/11 commission did not engage in and that the failure to do
these things is cheating the American people and in some sense the people of
the world of a greater confidence in what really happened than they presently
Mr.… Continue reading
By George Washington
April 15, 2008
One of the top investigative journalists in the country, Larisa Alexandrovna
(the lead journalist at Raw Story), says the following
concerning her attempts to determine whether or not the U.S. is still officially
in a state of emergency, such as would justify the continuation of Continuity
of Government (COG) Plans implemented on 9/11:
“Well, I have called around… believe it or not, no one seems to have
an answer as to this simple question: ‘are we in a state of emergency?’ “
(see comments following essay).
Keep in mind that Alexandrovna has broken many top stories, later picked up
by the New York Times and other mainstream publications, and has developed
a broad network of contacts. And yet she couldn’t find an answer.
“Consistent with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50
U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency I declared
on September 14, 2001, in Proclamation 7463, with respect to the terrorist
attacks at the World Trade Center, New York, New York, the Pentagon, and aboard
United Airlines flight 93, and the continuing and immediate threat of further
attacks on the United States.
Because the terrorist threat continues, the national emergency declared
on September 14, 2001, last extended on September 5, 2006, and the powers
and… Continue reading
By Greg Palast
April 21, 2008
Psst! George Bush has a secret
While you Democrats are pounding each other to a pulp in Pennsylvania, the President has snuck back down to New Orleans for a meeting of the NAFTA Three: the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of Mexico.
You’re not supposed to know that — for two reasons:
First, the summit planned for the N.O. two years back was meant to showcase the rebuilt Big Easy, a monument to can-do Bush-o-nomics. Well, it is a monument to Bush’s leadership: The city still looks like Dresden 1946, with over half the original residents living in toxic trailers or wandering lost and broke in America.
The second reason Bush has kept this major summit a virtual secret is its real agenda – and the real agenda-makers. The names and faces of the guys who called the meeting must remain as far out of camera range as possible: The North American Competitiveness Council.
Never heard of The Council? Well, maybe you’ve heard of the counsellors: the chief executives of Wal-Mart, Chevron Oil, Lockheed-Martin and 27 other multinational masters of the corporate universe.
And why did the landlords of our continent order our presidents to a three-nation pajama party? Their agenda is “harmonization.”
FEMA Trailer ParksHarmonization has nothing to do with singing in fifths like Simon and Garfunkel.
Harmonization means making rules and regulations the same in all three countries. Or, more specifically,… Continue reading
A PENTAGON CAMPAIGN Retired officers have been used to
shape terrorism coverage from inside the TV and radio networks.
By David Barstow
Sunday, April 20, 2008
In the summer of 2005, the Bush administration confronted a fresh wave of criticism
over Guantánamo Bay. The detention center had just been branded “the
gulag of our times” by Amnesty International, there were new allegations
of abuse from United Nations human rights experts and calls were mounting for
The administration’s communications experts responded swiftly. Early
one Friday morning, they put a group of retired military officers on one of
the jets normally used by Vice President Dick Cheney and flew them to Cuba for
a carefully orchestrated tour of Guantánamo.
To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens
of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts”
whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments
about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information
apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news
coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by
The New York Times has found.
The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this
day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a
powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors
vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.…
4/20–Amazon.com suddenly raised the price of this book nearly $10! One alternative for purchase, which still counts toward numbers collected by NYTimes, is from Barnes & Noble online, here:
4/19 – 9am (CDT):
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #62 in Books
Popular in these categories:
#1 in Books > Literature & Fiction > Genre Fiction > War
#3 in Books > Literature & Fiction > United States
#4 in Books > Literature & Fiction > World Literature
4/14: ‘James Bond’ Actress Lana Wood supports Week of Truth: See video below.
This is the first in a series of Week of Truth events, coordinated by scores of people within the truth movement, to coalesce the power of the national movement by focusing on a specific action for a set period of time. Following this initial Week of Truth action, we will work together to draw attention to two major 9/11 conferences in the Northeast in May, and future Week of Truth actions are being discussed on many forums and among truth activists around the world.
For decades the federal government has been developing a highly classified plan that would override the Constitution in the event of a terrorist attack. Is it also compiling a secret enemies list of citizens who could face detention under martial law?
By Christopher Ketcham
In the spring of 2007, a retired senior official in the U.S. Justice Department sat before Congress and told a story so odd and ominous, it could have sprung from the pages of a pulp political thriller. It was about a principled bureaucrat struggling to protect his country from a highly classified program with sinister implications. Rife with high drama, it included a car chase through the streets of Washington, D.C., and a tense meeting at the White House, where the president’s henchmen made the bureaucrat so nervous that he demanded a neutral witness be present.
The bureaucrat was James Comey, John Ashcroft’s second-in-command at the Department of Justice during Bush’s first term. Comey had been a loyal political foot soldier of the Republican Party for many years. Yet in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he described how he had grown increasingly uneasy reviewing the Bush administration’s various… Continue reading
April 30, 2008
A variety of current and former high-level officials have recently warned that the Bush administration is attempting to instill a dictatorship in America, and will itself carry out a fake terrorist attack in order to obtain one.
FBI agents, Time Magazine, Keith Olbermann and The Washington Post and Rolling Stone have all stated that the administration has issued terror alerts based on scant intelligence in order to rally people around the flag when the administration was suffering in the polls. This implies — as an initial matter only — that the administration will play fast and loose with the facts in order to instill fear for political purposes
More to the point, a former prominent republican congressman stated that the U.S. is close to becoming a totalitarian society and that the Bush administration is using fear to try to ensure that this happens.
Current U.S. Congressman Ron Paul stated, the government “is determined to have martial law”, and that the government is hoping to get the people “fearful enough that they will accept the man on the white horse”
And Daniel Ellsberg, the famous Pentagon Papers whistleblower, said “if there is another terror attack, “I believe the president will get what he wants”, which will include a dictatorship.
Terror on U.S. Citizens by American… Continue reading
by Aidan Monaghan
The following is a response from the U.S. Secret Service to a Freedom of Information Act request for the arrival time of U.S. vice president Richard Cheney at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) on September 11, 2001, as well as the names of all those granted entry there that day.
Reference is made to your Freedom of InformationlPrivacy Acts requests originally received by the United States Secret Service on April 17, 2008, for information pertaining to the following:
File no. 20080330: copies of documentation pertaining to the names of persons admitted entry into the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) located within the White House on September 11, 2001 ;
File no. 20080331: copies of documentation which reveal the time on September 11, 2001, Vice President of the United States Richard Cheney entered the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) located within the White House.
A review of the Secret Service’s systems of records indicated that there are no records or documents pertaining to your requests in Secret Service files. Enclosed is a copy of your original request.
If you disagree with our determination, you have the right of administrative appeal within 35 days by writing to Freedom of Information Appeal, Deputy Director, U. S. Secret Service, Communications Center, 245 Murray Lane, SW, Building T-5, Washington, D.C. 20223. If you choose to file an administrative appeal, please explain the basis of your appeal and reference the case number listed above.
Craig W. Ulmer Special Agent In… Continue reading
The History Commons has started two new timelines this week, both of which
cover overlaps between the site’s main projects. One of them deals with
the military analysts story. It has been garnering more attention since the
recent New York Times expose, but articles about it have dripped out over the
years and there is a wealth of material, which was previously split between
the Iran, Iraq Invasion, Iraq Occupation, and Detainee Abuse Timelines.
The second new timeline is called Neoconservative Think Tank Influence on
US Policies, and groups together entries that were previously split up between
the various Iran, Iraq, Detainee Abuse, and 9/11 projects.
Otherwise, the main additions to the History Commons this week were in the
9/11 Timeline and dealt with the 2002 Bali bombings, including some pretty specific
warnings, and al-Qaeda in Southeast Asia. In addition, there is more about the
time spent by two 9/11 hijackers in Thailand and the CIA’s seeming inability
to find them there, as well as extra material about British intelligence asset
and al-Qaeda recruiter Abu Hamza al-Masri.
The Invasion of Iraq Timeline has cross-posted entries from the military analysts
timeline that relate to Iraq. One thing about the press coverage that is interesting
is that while the major networks and the Washington Post got it wrong, and the
New York Times boasted the supreme talents of Judy Miller, Knight Ridder (now
McClatchy) actually got the story right, proving that it could be done.
Read… Continue reading
From Elizabeth Woodworth
June 8, 2008
Dear Mr. Barber:
I am a professional medical librarian who delivered “best evidence”
literature to the public health officers of the British Columbia government
for 25 years.
Your article, “The Truth is Out There,” is an “ad hominem”
approach to a critically serious matter, and it unfortunately fails to deal
with the evidence involved.
You will no doubt agree that 9/11 has changed the world. It is a seminal event
which has grossly undermined trust and erected enormous barriers between the
West and the Middle East. And it has led to widespread mayhem and death in that
region. Obviously, questions concerning our understanding of the event are of
the utmost importance.
The US government has steadfastly refused to release the evidence which it
claims to have. Evidence which, if in existence, would settle once and for all
the questions which are being raised, nearly seven years later, on the front
page of the Financial Times of London.
There were 85 cameras rolling outside the Pentagon, whose film could be offered
to save the Times the trouble of running these articles.
There are small, indestructible time replacement parts in all aircraft which
allow for positive identification, and these could be offered to silence critics
about Flight 77.
For several years NIST has been promising its imminent report on the strange
collapse of Building 7. This could be completed and released.
You say the 9/11 truth movement has taken over from the peace movement.… Continue reading
Tim Russert, Dick Cheney, and 9/11
by Prof. David Ray Griffin
Information Clearing House
While we are remembering Tim Russert and his years as moderator of “Meet the Press,” we would do well to recall his interview with Vice President Dick Cheney at Camp David on September 16, 2001, just five days after the 9/11 attacks. 1 In fact, Cheney himself, during an interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer the morning after Russert died, reminded us of that Camp David interview, saying: “I always, when I think of Tim and think of ‘Meet the Press,’ that’s the show that always comes to mind. . . . It was a remarkable moment in American history.” 2
Commenting that he himself “remember[ed] that interview vividly,” Lauer asked: “Anything stand out from that interview?” In his reply, Cheney said: “We went back and reminisced to some extent about what had actually happened on the morning of 9/11. So it was—it was a remarkable moment in my career.” 3
It was indeed. In reminiscing about his movements that morning, Cheney contradicted what was to become a crucial element of the account that the 9/11 Commission would give of those movements.
In praising Russert’s tenure on “Meet the Press,” Cheney said: “He would ask you tough questions, he would remind you of quotes you made previously in other settings or on earlier shows, so you never got away with anything going up vis-à-vis Tim.” 4
Given Cheney’s appraisal of his interview with Russert as… Continue reading
By Dr. William F. Pepper
As a friend and colleague of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., during the last year
of his life, James Earl Ray’s attorney, for the last ten years of his
life and, finally, lead Counsel for Dr. King’s family in the 1999 civil
trial which brought forward evidence from 70 witnesses over 30 days in Memphis,
I am compelled to comment, for the record, on the most recent documentary on
the assassination by CNN which is being aired on an ongoing basis. The fact
that my participation in the program was used to give it some credibility makes
this comment even more relevant.
It is one matter to distort the truth of how this great American prophet was
taken from us, but quite another to have mainstream media perpetuate disinformation
on matters of such public importance to the citizens of the Republic. An expert
witness, at the King family civil trial, William Schapp, set out the historical
use of government disinformation through mainstream media, dating back to the
The first half of the program was dedicated to James and his background and
history. While the program notably failed to provide a motive as to why this
escaped convict would even consider such an act, and racism had been excluded
by the earlier Congressional investigation, it was hinted at by a reference
of his refusal to go to a work farm attached to the Missouri prison because
of the number of blacks in that facility. In fact, James was afraid
of becoming tied into drug activity which was going on there and having his
Who Planned the Anthrax Attacks?
It’s the $5,800,000 question
by Justin Raimondo
Antiwar.com Behind the Headlines
July 4, 2008
You remember the anthrax
attacks — or do you? It often seems, to me at least, that this important
catalyst for the invasion of Iraq and our supremely wrong-headed
post-9/11 foreign policy has been flushed down the collective memory hole. For
all the attention that’s been paid to that spooky chapter in the history of
the “war on terrorism” in the intervening years, it may as well have
never occurred. That’s why news of the former prime suspect’s ultimate vindication
— and his victory in a $5.8
million lawsuit in which he accused the feds of unfairly targeting him as
of interest” (as John Ashcroft put it) — seems like a visitation from
another time, the ghost of 9/11 past, haunting and mocking us. It sends chills
down my spine — because, you see, the real culprits are still out there.
The FBI’s non-investigation of this heinous and sinister crime was a joke from
the beginning: after all, since when do FBI probes have official names, and
why such a silly one as “Amerithrax“?
Such brazen corniness has about it an unmistakable Keystone Kops air, which
was certainly evident throughout the long-playing media circus that will evermore
be known as the persecution of Steven
Hatfill, you’ll recall, is the long-suffering victim of this horror story,
a bio-weapons expert and “insider” who was… Continue reading
ACLU Announces Legal Challenge To Follow President’s Signature
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 675-2312, firstname.lastname@example.org or
(212) 549-2666; email@example.com
WASHINGTON ï¿½ Today, in a blatant assault upon civil liberties and the
right to privacy, the Senate passed an unconstitutional domestic spying bill
that violates the Fourth Amendment and eliminates any meaningful role for judicial
oversight of government surveillance. The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 was approved
by a vote of 69 to 28 and is expected to be signed into law by President Bush
shortly. This bill essentially legalizes the president’s unlawful warrantless
wiretapping program revealed in December 2005 by the New York Times.
‘Once again, Congress blinked and succumbed to the president’s
fear-mongering. With today’s vote, the government has been given a green
light to expand its power to spy on Americans and run roughshod over the Constitution,’
said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
‘This legislation will give the government unfettered and unchecked access
to innocent Americans’ international communications without a warrant.
This is not only unconstitutional, but absolutely un-American.’
The FISA Amendments Act nearly eviscerates oversight of government surveillance
by allowing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to review only
general procedures for spying rather than individual warrants. The FISC will
not be told any specifics about who will actually be wiretapped, thereby undercutting
any meaningful role for the court and violating the Fourth Amendment’s
protection against unreasonable search and seizure.
The bill further trivializes court review by authorizing the government to
continue a surveillance program even after the government’s general spying
procedures are found insufficient or unconstitutional by the FISC.…