George Bush could be next on the war crimes list
March 6, 2009
New Zealand Herald
THE HAGUE — George W. Bush could one day be the International Criminal
Court’s next target.
David Crane, an international law professor at Syracuse University, said the
principle of law used to issue an arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir could extend
to former US President Bush over claims officials from his Administration may
have engaged in torture by using coercive interrogation techniques on terror
Crane is a former prosecutor of the Sierra Leone tribunal that indicted Liberian
President Charles Taylor and put him on trial in The Hague.
Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Programme at Human Rights
Watch, said the al-Bashir ruling was likely to fuel discussion about investigations
of possible crimes by Bush Administration officials.
Congressional Democrats and other critics have charged that some of the harsh
interrogation techniques amounted to torture, a contention that Bush and other
The prospect of the court ever trying Bush is considered extremely remote,
The US Government does not recognise the court and the only other way Bush
could be investigated is if the Security Council were to order it, something
unlikely to happen with Washington a veto-wielding permanent member.
By Robert Parry
March 8, 2009
“It’s also not true that any investigation is always better than
no investigation. I have witnessed cover-up investigations that not only failed
to get anywhere… Continue reading
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 5, 2009
POLITICAL LEADERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH LAUNCHED TODAY
Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth (pl911truth.com) is today being launched as
the latest formal group calling for a new investigation into the events of September
11, 2001. The organization is headed by Councilor (Senator) Yukihisa Fujita
of Japan and former Senator Karen Johnson of Arizona.
This initiative is formed around a petition asking President Obama “to
authorize a new, truly independent, investigation to determine what happened
Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth thus joins other concerned citizens’ groups calling for a new investigation, including Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Lawyers for 9/11 Truth, Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, and Veterans for 9/11 Truth.
Independent researchers from these professions have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that the official investigations have been cover-up operations.
Senator Yukihisa Fujita explains the new initiative: “Thus far there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or in other capitals around the world. Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth has been formed to encourage such a response.”
The organization is being launched with 20 charter members, including a former US governor, a former US senator, former US representatives, and former and present members of the British, German, Japanese, Norwegian, and European parliaments.
Charter member Robert Bowman, former head of the “Star… Continue reading
by Melissa Rossi
Author, What Every American Should Know about the Middle East (Plume/Penguin,
February 10, 2009
Patrick Leahy has a point when he urges President Obama to open investigations about the Bush administration. However, he’s not pointing at the issue that we need to start with. Namely, September 11th. What really happened? More than a few people know – and I am not alone in calling for those who know to start talking and fess up. Let’s not let this go the way of the JFK assassination – and whether with subpoenas or on their own volition, I demand that Dick Cheney, George W. Bush – both of whom refused to testify under oath during the 9/11 Commission proceedings — Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, Larry Wilkerson, George Tenet, Robert Mueller and the rest – as well as Bill Clinton and Al Gore (both of whom also refused to testify under oath) — start talking, and in a public arena. And I’m calling on the Obama administration to open up a probe and unravel the web of deceit.
Before we tuck the Bush administration into bed and hiss, “Nighty Night, you lying scoundrels,” before we go on to lock the door on that heinous era of American history, we do indeed need to probe what happened under their watch. But the event that most concerns me is what happened on Tuesday, September 11, 2001. Oh yeah, that’s history, old news, the 9/11 Commission figured it all out, right?…Continue reading
Introductory text at Religious Leaders for 911 Truth:
The religions of the world share universal values of love, truth, and justice,
and believe in helping those who are oppressed or otherwise in need. Many religious
persons try to engage in activities to make the world a better place, and they
trust in a Higher Power to assist them.
When faced with actions that conflict with the universal moral principle that
we should not do to others what we would not want done to ourselves or our loved
ones, members of faith communities have a responsibility to voice their opposition
to those actions. Many religious leaders throughout history have publicly challenged
morally unacceptable practices—recently, for example, in the civil rights
and anti-apartheid movements.
A significant moral challenge has emerged due to glaring discrepancies between
the official version of the events of September 11, 2001, and the results of
extensive independent research by individuals with relevant scientific or professional
“Independent” here means independent from the U.S. administration
that was in power at the time of the 9/11 attacks. The official reports about
9/11 were not independent in this sense. The 9/11 Commission was run by its
executive director, Philip Zelikow, who was closely associated with the Bush
administration. The official reports on the World Trade Center were produced
by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which, as an agency of
the U.S. Commerce Department, was run by people employed by the Bush administration.
The independent research, which has led… Continue reading
David Edwards and Stephen C. Webster
Thursday February 5, 2009
When the New York Times explored the political beliefs of Daniel Sunjata, an actor on the FX network’s show “Rescue Me,” it was under the banner of a “sinister theory.”
The “sinister theory” that a group of neoconservative politicians may have colluded to allow, or bring about, the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
On Thursday’s Fox and Friends, Greg Gutfield, provocative host of Fox’s late night program Red Eye, called individuals like Sunjata, who question the events of 9/11, “mentally ill.”
“[Sunjata] believe that 9/11 was a preemptive strike by a neoconservative government,” said Gutfield. “I think that means Bush. What angers me about this is people are treating it with respect.”
The 9/11 issues are major plot lines in the first 10 episodes of Rescue Me season 5, set to air in April.
“The New York Times ran a piece about it,” said Gutfield. “They interviewed the producer — the producer described the actor, the actor believes this stuff, that the actor is well-read, very passionate about it.
“They say this sort of thing about conspiratorialists all the time, but they never say these people are idiots, they’re mentally ill, they shouldn’t be treated with respect.
“It’s an insult to people that were victims of 9/11 and their families. It’s an insult to firefighters. I am surprised they are doing this.”
Of course, Gutfield, as a professional media water and commentator, shouldn’t be surprised at all.… Continue reading
December 8, 2008
by Carol Brouillet
December 8, 2008 – Pearl Harbor Day
Sixty-seven years ago, on Sunday, December 7, 1941 the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, killing over two thousand people and wounding over a thousand. The attack enabled FDR to enter World War II, and prompted huge numbers of Americans to volunteer for military service. In the book
Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor (2000), Robert Stinnett unveiled a memo outlining an 8 point plan to provoke Japan into attacking the US.
Admiral Kimmel, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet, was removed from office and demoted, taking the blame for the losses at Pearl Harbor soon after the attacks. Researchers over the course of many years believe that critical information was withheld from Kimmel and that he was unjustly punished. One of those researchers was his grandson, Manning Kimmel IV, who persuaded the U.S. Senate in 1999 to pass a nonbinding resolution exonerating Admiral Kimmel and Army Lieutenant General Short.
In addition to shifting public opinion and gaining popular support for the US entry into World War II, Pearl Harbor was the justification for the passage of the National Security Act of 1947; the creation of the National Security Council, the CIA, and the Department of the Air Force; and the reorganization of the Department of War and the Department of the Navy into the Defense Department. Manning Kimmel IV, who worked for the FBI and the CIA, noted that emblazoned on the CIA’s walls is the reminder that the CIA was created “To Prevent Another Pearl Harbor.”
Philip Zelikow, author of the US “Pre-Emptive War Doctrine,” has studied and written about the use, and misuse, of history in policymaking, including “beliefs thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty)”…“Searing events that take on ‘transcendent’ importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experiencing generation passes from the scene.” In 1998 he co-authored the article Catastrophic Terrorism: Elements of a National Policy, which speculated that if the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had succeeded,
“the resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe it.…
This is a news item pertaining to the Complete 911 Timeline investigative project, one of several grassroots investigations being hosted on the History Commons website. The
data published as part of this investigation has been collected, organized, and published by members of the public who are registered users of this website.
9/28/2008: Pentagon on 9/11, Shoe Bombing, Bin Laden in the Soviet-Afghan War and More – Additions as of September 28, 2008
This week, a massive amount of new entries have been added to the timeline, dealing with a whole range of different issues. We will start with the day of 9/11, in particular the Pentagon, which a fire chief warned could be a target nearly 20 minutes before it was hit. The attack itself created confusion by setting off 300 fire alarms, although some medical workers thought the ensuing evacuation was a drill. After wandering about outside the building, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld refused to follow the established emergency plan and evacuate, instead sending deputy Paul Wolfowitz to an alternate military command center, where the computers and communication systems did not work.
The first fighter was seen arriving over the Pentagon at around 10:40 a.m., the FAA sent the White House incorrect details of the hijacked planes in the early afternoon, and astronauts viewed the devastation in New York from space. Meanwhile, the FBI established a command post near the Pentagon and limited the evidence that needed to be photographed there.
The… Continue reading
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
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
by Jon Gold
Recently, Mike Berger from 911Truth.org was interviewed by the “Conscience of Kansas” Conservative Paul Ibbetson. During the interview, Mike mentioned the alleged bribery of the 9/11 Commission by Pakistan to omit any incriminating information about them. I figured a lot of people weren’t familiar with this story, so I was inspired to write this “recap.”
Over the years, there have been many allegations of Pakistani involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Apparently, Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed, the head of the Pakistani ISI, someone who met with U.S. elected and appointed officials in the weeks before 9/11, on the day of 9/11, and in the days after 9/11, ordered possible MI6 Agent Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta. The 9/11 Families’ submitted a question to the 9/11 Commission about this incident.
Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, John S. Pistole stated that their investigation “has traced the origin of the funding of 9/11 back to financial accounts in Pakistan, where high-ranking and well-known al-Qaeda operatives played a major role in moving the money forward, eventually into the hands of the hijackers located in the US.”
In January 2002, during a visit to India, FBI Director Robert Mueller was told about Saeed Sheikh’s involvement in the 9/11 attacks by Indian Investigators.
Apparently, “on the eve of the publication of its report, the 9/11 Commission was given a stunning document from Pakistan, claiming that Pakistani intelligence officers knew in advance… Continue reading
FISCAL COMMENTARY: Follow the Money? God forbid.
Why was the cashing out of billions of dollars just before the 9/11 attacks never investigated? by Jim Hogue
From the Baltimore Chronicle’s Fiscal Commentary pages…
Had an investigation been done into the crime of failing to file the “currency transaction reports” in August 2001, then we would know who made the cash withdrawals in $100 bills amounting to the $5 billion surge. It’s been over six years since 9/11, but U.S. regulatory entities have been slow to follow through with reports about the complex financial transactions that occurred just prior to and following the attacks. Such research could shed light on such questions as who was behind them—and who benefited—and could help lay to rest the rumors that have been festering.
Warning bells about anomalies in the fiscal sector were sounded in the summer of 2001, but not heeded. Among those who has since raised questions was Bill Bergman. As a financial market analyst for the Federal Reserve, he was assigned in 2003 to review the record of July and August of 2001. He noticed an unusual surge in the currency component of the M1 money supply (cash circulating outside of banks) during that period. The surge totaled over $5 billion above the… Continue reading
David Ray Griffin
June 1, 2008
Although I was not able to be present at the rally either in person or by telephone,
I wanted to express my strong support for the NYC
9/11 Ballot Initiative.
There has never been a better time to get such an initiative on the ballot, because
the 9/11 Truth Movement’s case against the official account of 9/11 is now extremely
strong—much stronger than it was just two years ago.
For example, new evidence has been brought forth to show that the official account
of the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 cannot possibly be true. The NIST
Report has been shown to be completely inadequate, and a former employee of NIST
has spoken out to verify what we already suspected—that NIST has become totally
politicized, so that its scientists are little more than “hired guns.”
Besides the fact that the NIST Report has been discredited, so has The 9/11
Commission Report. Philip Shenon’s book has made public what we in the movement
have long known, that the 9/11 Commission was controlled by a man, Philip Zelikow,
who represented the Bush-Cheney White House. Shenon even shows that Zelikow had
outlined the whole report before the Commission’s staff had begun its work.
Moreover, some central pillars of the official account have been demolished by
the FBI. It has said it has no hard evidence that Osama bin Laden was responsible
for the attacks, that there were no cell phone calls from passengers… Continue reading
“Government complicity in the OKC Bombing and the 9/11 attacks has been proven not only by the obstruction of justice but by the use of terrorist dupes, be they willful dupes or not. And by all indications, these actions continue. Apparently some have failed, others will not…”
Key to the Truth in Oklahoma 4.19.95 and 9.11.01
by Holland Van den Nieuwenhof
I Oklahoma seems to attract more attention in the news than seems due to your typical Great Plains State such as Kansas or Nebraska or North Dakota. I once asked a visitor from North Dakota if anything had ever happened in his state since being reasonably informed on current events and history, I was unaware of that state ever making it into a national headline.
Perhaps it is due to our curious mix of the offspring of renegade Indians, blacks and whites alike. Once known as Indian Territory, Oklahoma was the last state admitted into the continental United States and was once the home of various outlaws and escaped slaves seeking freedom in one of the last places in the land that was without established law or authority. That heritage carried over at least a couple of generations. During WWI a large group of farmers tried to organize an armed march onto Washington D.C. to stop the Nation’s entry into the war. Known as the Green Corn Rebellion, it was finally put down by the local authorities with the help of vigilante posses. During the desperate days of the… Continue reading
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
February 6, 2008
As someone also motivated by the need for the truth about 9/11, as well as aware of the way conflicts of interest have a way of covering up truth, let me add my thanks to Philip Shenon on the release of his new book. Also let me share this recent comment forwarded to me by Monica Gabrielle of the September 11th Advocates:
Philip Shenon’s new book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, serves to justify our suspicions and the concerns of the Family Steering Committee, that we attempted to publicly air during the course of the 9/11 Commission’s tenure.
One of the most egregious revelations put forth by Mr. Shenon is the fact that Philip Zelikow was hired as the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, despite his direct ties to the Bush administration. In 2000-2001 he served as a member of Condoleezza Rice’s National Security Council (NSC) transition team, where he was allegedly the “architect” of the decision to demote Richard Clarke and his counter terrorism team within the NSC. Furthermore he was a member of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) from 2001-2003, where Zelikow drafted most of the 2002 “National Security Strategy of the United States,” creating the pre-emptive Iraq war strategy. These areas were within the scope of the Commission’s mandate and as such were of critical importance to determine what, if any, impact they had on the government’s ability to prevent the 9/11 attacks.
As the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Philip Zelikow was given the responsibility for choosing the entire direction of the Commission’s investigation.…Continue reading
February 07, 2008
EXCLUSIVE: Former 9/11 Commission Chief Philip Zelikow on Allegations
He Secretly Allowed Karl Rove & White House to Influence 9/11 Probe
Earlier in the week, we spoke to Philip Shenon, author of “The Commission:
The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation.” Shenon suggested
that Philip Zelikow–the executive director of the 9/11 Commission–sought
to minimize the Bush administration’s responsibility for failing to
prevent the September 11th attacks. Shenon also revealed that Karl Rove repeatedly
called Zelikow during the probe. Today Zelikow responds in his first broadcast
interview since the publication of Shenon’s book.
Philip Zelikow, served as executive director of the 9/11 Commission. He
is now Professor of History and Director of the Miller Center of Public Affairs
at the University of Virginia.
Related Democracy Now! Stories:
Book Alleges 9/11 Commissioner Philip Zelikow Minimized Scrutiny of Bush Admin
Failure to Prevent al-Qaeda Attack (2/5/2008)
February 07, 2008
The 9/11 Commission & Torture: How Information Gained Through Waterboarding
& Harsh Interrogations Form Major Part of 9/11 Commission Report
A new analysis by NBC News reveals that more than a quarter of all footnotes
in the 9/11 Commission report refer to controversial interrogation techniques.
Yet, Commission staffers did not question the CIA about its techniques. They
even ordered a second round of interrogations in early 2004 to get more information
from the detainees.
CIA Director Michael Hayden acknowledged Tuesday that the Agency had… Continue reading
By HOPE YEN
February 4, 2008;
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Sept. 11 commission’s executive director had closer
ties with the White House than publicly disclosed and tried to influence the
final report in ways that the staff often perceived as limiting the Bush administration’s
responsibility, a new book says.
Philip Zelikow, a friend of then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice,
spoke with her several times during the 20-month investigation that closely
examined her role in assessing the al-Qaida threat. He also exchanged frequent
calls with the White House, including at least four from Bush’s chief political
adviser at the time, Karl Rove.
Zelikow once tried to push through wording in a draft report that suggested
a greater tie between al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and Iraq, in line with
White House claims but not with the commission staff’s viewpoint, according
to Philip Shenon’s "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11
Shenon, a New York Times reporter, says Zelikow sought to intimidate
staff to avoid damaging findings for President Bush, who at the time was running
for re-election, and Rice. Zelikow and Rice had written a book together in 1995
and he would later work for her after the commission finished its job and she
became secretary of state in 2005.
The Associated Press obtained an audio version of Shenon’s book, which is to
go on sale Tuesday.
Reached by the AP, Zelikow provided a 131-page statement with information he
said was provided for the book. In it, Zelikow acknowledges… Continue reading