Post-9/11 Memo Indicates View Around Constitution
Thursday, April 3, 2008
For at least 16 months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Bush administration
argued that the Constitution’s protection against unreasonable searches and
seizures on U.S. soil did not apply to its efforts to protect against terrorism.
That view was expressed in a secret Justice Department legal memo dated Oct.
23, 2001. The administration stressed yesterday that it now disavows that view.
The October 2001 memo was written at the White House’s request by John Yoo,
then the deputy assistant attorney general, and addressed to Alberto R. Gonzales,
then the White House counsel. The37-page memo has not been released.
Its existence was disclosed Tuesday in a footnote of a separate secret Justice
Department memo, dated March 14, 2003, that discussed the legality of various
interrogation techniques. It was released by the Pentagon in response to an
ACLU Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
“Our office recently concluded that the Fourth Amendment had no application
to domestic military operations,” the footnote in that memo states, referring
to a document titled “Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist
Activities Within the United States.”
Exactly what domestic military action was covered by the October memo is unclear.
Source URL: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040300067.html
2003 Justice Department memo justifies torture, presidential dictatorship
By Joe Kay
4 April 2008
On Tuesday, the Defense Department released a 2003 memo asserting the right
of the US president to order the military to torture prisoners.
The memo is signed by then-Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo and is
dated March 14, 2003, one week before the launch of the Iraq war.…
By Bill Locey
Sunday, April 6, 2008
There is an increasing number of Americans who believe that George Bush, Dick
Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and several of their toadies should be in prison, this
writer included. But to suggest that the Bush administration is somehow involved
in the 9/11 attacks seems to be a jaw-dropping and frightening stretch, but
not to the scores of interested folks who turned out to hear David Ray Griffin’s
talk March 28 at the Poinsettia Pavilion in Ventura. For those who get their
information from Fox News, such a charge is blasphemy, treason and worthy of
a perpetual Blackwater firing squad on YouTube. Griffin settled for frequents
bursts of applause.
The 9/11 tragedy is certainly not the first event in American history surrounded
by controversy and conspiracy theories, just merely the latest.
But as the pages blow off the calendar, witnesses die off, the trail grows
cold and interest wanes, assisted by the fact the American people have the attention
span of a butterfly sneeze.
But 9/11 is still fresh in everyone’s memory, partly because Bush can’t go
three minutes without playing the fear card and invoking the images of airplanes
flying into tall buildings. That memorable Tuesday morning happened less than
seven years ago and not only is it an annual school assignment, but many of
the participants and survivors are still alive with plenty of contradictory
stories to tell.
The new Pearl Harbor
Griffin has heard all of them. A retired theology and philosophy… Continue reading
by Tod Fletcher
March 15, 2008
9/11 CONTRADICTIONS by David Ray Griffin is the fifth of his books to examine
the official account of the events of September 11, 2001. This brilliant and highly
readable book takes a new yet simple approach to the truth about 9/11. It focuses
entirely on contradictory statements made by members of the Bush administration,
government departments and agencies, and official bodies such as the 9/11 Commission.
All the statements that Griffin examines are official claims in direct conflict
with other official claims. How could this be? Why would the government keep changing
“the official story”? The public, of course, is expected to take all
the statements as incontrovertibly true, yet they directly conflict with one another.
And why, if the government pronouncements are contradictory, haven’t members
of Congress and the mainstream media launched investigations to determine which
are true and which are false, and to ask why are obvious falsehoods about the
events of 9/11 being promulgated by the government? I say “obvious falsehoods”
because, as Griffin explains in the Preface, “If [Transportation Secretary
Norman] Mineta said “P,” that is a fact. If the 9/11 Commission said
“not P,” that is a fact. And it is a fact that “P” and “not
P” cannot both be true” (p. viii). The subtitle, “An Open Letter
to Congress and the Press,” indicates Griffin’s hope that the juxtaposition
of the contradictory claims the book provides will stimulate such investigations.
But the book is really intended for the public at large, and its clear focus
makes it the easiest to read of all Griffin’s books on 9/11.…
April 7, 2008
Even if you (unlike the military leaders, intelligence professionals, scientists,
engineers, and other highly-credible people who question 9/11) do not believe
that elements within the U.S. government intentionally aided and abetted the September
11 attacks, or let them happen on purpose, you have to admit that the government
failed to do its job of protecting the American people.
For example, 9/11 was completely foreseeable. U.S. and allied intelligence
services had penetrated the very highest levels of Al Qaeda prior to 9/11 and
heard the hijackers’ plans from their own mouths.
However, even the 9/11 Commission found that the Bush administration did nothing
to prevent the attacks. For example, 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said:
president says, if I had only known that 19 Islamic men would come into the
United States of America and on the morning of 11 September hijack four American
aircraft, fly two into the World Trade Center, one into the Pentagon, and
one into an unknown Pennsylvania that crashed in Shanksville, I would have
moved heaven and earth. That’s what he said.
Mr. President, you don’t need to know that. This is an Islamic jihadist movement
that has been organized since the early 1990s, declared war on the United
States twice, in ’96 and ’98. You knew they were in the United States.
You were warned by the CIA. You knew in July they were inside the United States.
You were told again by briefing officers in August… 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
Report: Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel
By Haaretz Service and Reuters
The Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv on Wednesday reported that Likud leader Benjamin
Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan university that the September 11, 2001
terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel.
“We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin
Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq,” Ma’ariv quoted
the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events “swung
American public opinion in our favor.”
Netanyahu reportedly made the comments during a conference at Bar-Ilan University
on the division of Jerusalem as part of a peace deal with the Palestinians.
Meanwhile, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cast doubt over the veracity
of the September 11 attacks Thursday, calling it a pretext to invade Afghanistan
“Four or five years ago, a suspicious event occurred in New York. A building
collapsed and they said that 3,000 people had been killed but never published
their names,” Ahmadinejad told Iranians in the holy city of Qom.
“Under this pretext, they [the U.S.] attacked Afghanistan and Iraq and
since then, a million people have been killed only in Iraq.”
Speaking Wednesday at a news conference on the Iran threat, Netanyahu compared
Ahmadinejad to Adolf Hitler and likened Tehran’s nuclear program to the threat
the Nazis posed to Europe in the late 1930s.
Netanyahu said Iran differed from the Nazis in one vital respect, explaining
that “where that [Nazi] regime embarked on a global conflict before it
developed nuclear weapons,” he said.…
More material has been added covering the NSA’s surveillance of Ahmed al-Hada, father-in-law of alleged Pentagon hijacker Khalid Almihdhar. Both President Bush and Vice President Cheney used the non-exploitation of calls between his phone in Yemen and the hijackers in the US to justify the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping program in January 2006. Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell attributed the failure to trace the calls to a 1981 executive order earlier this year, and Mukasey bizarrely then claimed that one of the calls was between the US and Afghanistan, rather than Yemen. This confused the media somewhat, and a group of congressmen asked Mukasey for an explanation.
There are additional entries about the day of 9/11. A senior official later disputed Richard Clarke’s account of the day’s events, some Pentagon security cameras did not show the crash site, and the fighters who later responded to the Pentagon attack attended anti-terrorism training earlier in the day. There is a dispute over which gate American 11 left from at Boston airport, where suspicious passengers arrived on September 10, when Larry Silverstein’s publicist cancelled an appointment at the WTC for 9/11. Other entries point out United 93′s autopilot was turned off, top air force officials continued with a meeting when they learned the WTC had been hit, and crew on United 93 had previously attended antiterrorism training. Pilots on American 77, American 11 and United 93, were allocated… 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.…
11.9- The truth movement is often laughed at for criticizing the Bush government’s answer to what happened on 11th September 2001. Now however, the recognized historian, Daniele Ganser gives legitimacy to the skeptics.
by Kristin Aalen
CONSPIRACY: Ganser has caused debate following the presentation of his view in an interview with the Swiss TV-channel, U1. There he repeated his arguments from an article he wrote in the Swiss newspaper, Tages-Anzeiger in Zürich in September 2006.
Ganser’s premise is that conspiracies are nothing unusual or new in the field of historical research. At least since the assassination of Julius Caesar in classical Rome more than 2000 years ago, conspiracies have been an element of the political fight for influence and power.
He defines a conspiracy as, “a secret agreement between two or more persons to engage in a criminal act.”
He continues: “As 9/11 was a criminal act which was definitively not planned and carried out by one single person alone but by at least two or more persons who agreed on the plan before it was implemented, 9/11 must be classified as a conspiracy.”
MOST CORRECT? “It is important to stress that all theories about 9/11 are conspiracy theories. Once we realize that none of the theories can be dismissed on the grounds that it is a ‘conspiracy theory’, the real question becomes: Which conspiracy theory correctly describes the 9/11 conspiracy?” asks Ganser.
The historian thereby is in disagreement with the many who laugh at the critics… Continue reading
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
An investigation of the 9/11 events by a Russian-American journalist and a father of a 9/11 victim implicates the US government in the attacks.
ALEX PROKOP (Jarek Kupsc), a successful journalist, receives a rare 9/11 video tape revealing new information about the attack. The footage was sent by PAUL COOPER (Joseph Culp), a driven researcher, whose daughter died on 9/11. Sensing a good story, Prokop travels with Cooper to New York and Washington, DC, where they uncover suppressed information implicating the US Government in the attacks. As Cooper introduces Prokop to key eye-witnesses, the faÃ§ade of the “official story” begins to crumble. Prokop hears accounts of underground explosions in the Twin Towers moments before their collapse and discovers that the firm providing WTC security was run by the President’s brother.
We follow Alex and Cooper as they investigate the inexplicable collapse of the 47-story WTC Building Seven, disprove the implausible airliner “attack” on the Pentagon, and uncover the illegal destruction of physical evidence from Ground Zero.
The pressure builds as the FBI intimidates Alex’s editor, McGUIRE, (Lisa Black) to reveal key sources — while the magazine’s corporate investors threaten to kill the entire story. Plagued by the ghosts of his Communist childhood and trying to uphold the independence of American journalism, Alex’s search for the truth leads to a dangerous and shocking realization!
THE REFLECTING POOL is an intense, sobering investigation into the most controversial tragedy of our time. Drawn from established sources and based on verifiable facts, THE… Continue reading
The Pentagon has dropped charges against a Saudi citizen alleged to have been
the "20th hijacker" in the 11 September 2001 attacks on the US.
Mohammad al-Qahtani was one of six Guantánamo Bay inmates charged with murder
and war crimes in February.
The Pentagon said the case against the other five defendants would proceed.
Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against the suspects in a case before
military tribunals at the US prison camp in Guantánamo Bay.
A Pentagon official said the charges against Mohammad al-Qahtani had been dropped
"without prejudice", meaning they could be reinstated.
The US military gave no reason for its decision.
But lawyers for the defendant say they believe the charges were dropped because
he "was tortured" under interrogation.
The decision could have implications for the other five suspects, whose lawyers
claim that similar treatment was meted out to them, the BBC’s Adam Brookes reports
Authorities say Mr Qahtani failed to take part in the 9/11 attacks because
he was denied entry into the US by an immigration official.
He was refused entry at Orlando in Florida in August 2001 and returned to Dubai.
He was later detained in Afghanistan and transferred to Guantánamo Bay.
In 2006, he recanted accusations he had made against fellow detainees of having
links to al-Qaeda.
His lawyer told Time magazine the statements had been extracted under torture.
The Saudi was reportedly submitted to stress positions, sleep deprivation and
humiliation at Guantánamo.
Officials said he had been subjected… Continue reading
By Kristina Borjesson
Here we go again. President Bush goes to Israel. He talks to the Israeli Knesset
about standing "together against terror and extremism." He cites the
example of Osama bin Laden teaching that "the killing of Jews and Americans
is one of the biggest duties." The next day, yet another unauthenticated
bin Laden tape surfaces. "In a tape marking Israel’s 60th anniversary,"
reported the BBC, "the speaker pledged to continue fighting the Israelis
and not give up a ‘single inch of Palestine.’" Once again,
the lead was followed by what has now become the standard second line, "The
tape’s authenticity could not be verified." Once again, the timing
is interesting. Bin Laden’s message was just in time to help President
Bush make his point.
The BBC’s May 16, 2008 report continues with this: "The last messages
attributed to Bin Laden were aired in March." Those messages couldn’t
be verified either.
The last clear videotape of bin Laden was released to al Jazeera on December
27, 2001. The CIA released one two weeks earlier that they claimed had been
shot the month before, but the video is very fuzzy and the purported bin Laden
in the tape doesn’t altogether look like the bin Laden in authentic photos and
videos. A couple of other videos were released in 2004 and 2007, both of which
were fuzzy enough to raise questions. The 2007 video looked exactly like the
2004 video, except that the purported bin Laden’s beard was black in… Continue reading
By Thomas D. Williams
The Public Record
May 26, 2008
US Air Force Reserve Maj. Thomas “Buzz” Rempfer, a 43-year-old Connecticut native, is hoping he is nearing the end of nearly a decade’s perpetual and unprecedented battle with the Pentagon over the legality, safety and effectiveness of mandatory anthrax vaccinations.
His and others’ efforts have already netted favorable federal court rulings. They invalidated the original Department of Defense mandate and the vaccine’s initial licensing.
Now Rempfer, formerly of West Suffield, Connecticut, and now of Tucson, Arizona, awaits a ruling from the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. The board could award him back pay for lost time and promotions in the Air National Guard. If the board does not, he is likely to appeal back to the federal court. It was that court which decided in his favor by forcing another ruling from the Air Force panel.
However, much more significant to Rempfer is a broader public service goal. Rempfer and his deceased close friend, US Air Force Reserve Maj. Russell “Russ” E. Dingle, both pilots, fought their battle for others adversely affected by the vaccine. It was their belief that any victory, legally, must become a crucial military servicewide precedent, clearing all other vaccine-resisting veterans from punishment. Rempfer is acting as a representative of Dingle’s estate.
In more than five years of research, Dingle and Rempfer concluded the anthrax vaccine was improperly licensed and ineffective. They found it created thousands of adverse reactions and was unnecessary. The… Continue reading
By Andrew O. Selsky
May 29, 2008
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — Defense lawyers accused the government of
rushing the Sept. 11 defendants to trial at Guantánamo to influence the U.S.
presidential elections, and asked the military judge to dismiss the case in
a court filing obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.
The filing also shows that the former chief prosecutor at Guantánamo, who resigned
in October over alleged political interference, was sanctioned by the military
on May 23 after testifying for the defense in a Guantánamo hearing.
The former prosecutor, Air Force Col. Morris Davis, wrote that the action will
discourage any other military members from providing information about the controversial
war-crimes tribunals. The tribunals’ legal adviser, Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas
Hartmann, told the AP Davis was sanctioned because of poor job performance and
not because he testified.
Military lawyers for alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and
four co-defendants revealed that prosecutors are seeking a Sept. 15 trial date
— weeks before the Nov. 4 election.
The five men accused of mounting the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that killed almost
3,000 people are to be arraigned June 5 at the U.S. Navy base in Guantánamo
Bay, Cuba — the most high-profile of the military commissions, as the
war-crimes proceedings are called.
"It is safe to say that there are senior officials in the military commission
process who believe that there would be strategic political value to having
these five men sitting in a death chamber… Continue reading