This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
U.S. Officials Guilty of War Crimes for Using 9/11 As a False Justification for the Iraq War
U.S. Officials Created a False Link Between Iraq and 9/11
5 hours after the 9/11 attacks, Donald Rumsfeld said “my interest is to hit Saddam”.
He also said “Go massive . . . Sweep it all up. Things related and not.”
And at 2:40 p.m. on September 11th, in a memorandum of discussions between top administration officials, several lines below the statement “judge whether good enough [to] hit S.H. [that is, Saddam Hussein] at same time”, is the statement “Hard to get a good case.” In other words, top officials knew that there wasn’t a good case that Hussein was behind 9/11, but they wanted to use the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to justify war with Iraq anyway.
Moreover, “Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the [9/11] attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda”.
And a Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy.
And yet Bush, Cheney and other top administration officials claimed repeatedly for years that Saddam was behind 9/11. See this analysis. Indeed, Bush administration officials apparently swore in a lawsuit that Saddam was behind 9/11.
Moreover, President Bush’s March 18, 2003 letter to Congress authorizing the use of force against Iraq, includes the following paragraph:
(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
Therefore, the Bush administration expressly justified the Iraq war to Congress by representing that Iraq planned, authorized, committed, or aided the 9/11 attacks.
Indeed, Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Ron Suskind reports that the White House ordered the CIA to forge and backdate a document falsely linking Iraq with Muslim terrorists and 9/11 … and that the CIA complied with those instructions and in fact created the forgery, which was then used to justify war against Iraq. And see this.
Suskind also revealed that “Bush administration had information from a top Iraqi intelligence official ‘that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – intelligence they received in plenty of time to stop an invasion.’ ”
Cheney made the false linkage between Iraq and 9/11 on many occasions.
For example, according to Raw Story, Cheney was still alleging a connection between Iraq and the alleged lead 9/11 hijacker in September 2003 – a year after it had been widely debunked. When NBC’s Tim Russert asked him about a poll showing that 69% of Americans believed Saddam Hussein had been involved in 9/11, Cheney replied:
It’s not surprising that people make that connection.
And even after the 9/11 Commission debunked any connection, Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime , that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties.
Again, the Bush administration expressly justified the Iraq war by representing that Iraq planned, authorized, committed, or aided the 9/11 attacks. See this, this, this.
On December 16, 2005, Bush admitted “There was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the attack of 9/11″ (and see this video). However, Bush and Cheney continued to frequently invoke 9/11 as justification for the Iraq war. And see this. (Cheney finally admitted in 2009 that there was no link.)
A bipartisan Senate Report from 2006 found that Bush misled the press on Iraq link to Al-Qaeda.
The administration’s false claims about Saddam and 9/11 helped convince a large portion of the American public to support the invasion of Iraq. While the focus now may be on false WMD claims, it is important to remember that, at the time, the alleged link between Iraq and 9/11 was at least as important in many people’s mind as a reason to invade Iraq.
Indeed, the false claims about Iraqi WMDs probably would not have gained traction if it wasn’t for the anti-Arab hysteria after September 11th. And the government policy of torture would not have been tolerated if we weren’t misled into thinking that Saddam and Al-Qaeda had formed an unholy, all-powerful alliance on 9/11, and had to be stopped at any cost. Thus, the Saddam-911 deception was a necessary precursor to the administration’s WMD lies and torture policies.
And 2006 polls show that almost 90% of the troops in Iraq are under the mistaken belief that the U.S. mission in that country is “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks.” In other words, our kids are fighting and dying because of this lie.
U.S. Officials Launched a Systematic Program of Torture Using Specialized Techniques Which Produce False Confessions … to Justify the Iraq War
Not only did Bush, Cheney and other top government officials lie about us into the Iraq war by making a false linkage between Iraq and 9/11, but they carried out a systematic program of torture in order to intentionally create false evidence of that allegation.
Indeed, the entire purpose behind the U.S. torture program was to obtain false confessions.
And the torture techniques used were Communist techniques specifically designed to produce false confessions.
Senator Levin, in commenting on a Senate Armed Services Committee report on torture in 2009, dropped the following bombshell:
With last week’s release of the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinions, it is now widely known that Bush administration officials distorted Survival Evasion Resistance and Escape “SERE” training – a legitimate program used by the military to train our troops to resist abusive enemy interrogations – by authorizing abusive techniques from SERE for use in detainee interrogations. Those decisions conveyed the message that abusive treatment was appropriate for detainees in U.S. custody. They were also an affront to the values articulated by General Petraeus.
In SERE training, U.S. troops are briefly exposed, in a highly controlled setting, to abusive interrogation techniques used by enemies that refuse to follow the Geneva Conventions. The techniques are based on tactics used by Chinese Communists against American soldiers during the Korean War for the purpose of eliciting false confessions for propaganda purposes. Techniques used in SERE training include stripping trainees of their clothing, placing them in stress positions, putting hoods over their heads, subjecting them to face and body slaps, depriving them of sleep, throwing them up against a wall, confining them in a small box, treating them like animals, subjecting them to loud music and flashing lights, and exposing them to extreme temperatures. Until recently, the Navy SERE school also used waterboarding. The purpose of the SERE program is to provide U.S. troops who might be captured a taste of the treatment they might face so that they might have a better chance of surviving captivity and resisting abusive and coercive interrogations.
Senator Levin then documents that SERE techniques were deployed as part of an official policy on detainees, and that SERE instructors helped to implement the interrogation programs. He noted:
The senior Army SERE psychologist warned in 2002 against using SERE training techniques during interrogations in an email to personnel at Guantanamo Bay, because:
[T]he use of physical pressures brings with it a large number of potential negative side effects… When individuals are gradually exposed to increasing levels of discomfort, it is more common for them to resist harder… If individuals are put under enough discomfort, i.e. pain, they will eventually do whatever it takes to stop the pain. This will increase the amount of information they tell the interrogator, but it does not mean the information is accurate. In fact, it usually decreases the reliability of the information because the person will say whatever he believes will stop the pain… Bottom line: the likelihood that the use of physical pressures will increase the delivery of accurate information from a detainee is very low. The likelihood that the use of physical pressures will increase the level of resistance in a detainee is very high… (p. 53).
McClatchy filled in some of the details:
Former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the interrogation issue said that Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld demanded that the interrogators find evidence of al Qaida-Iraq collaboration…
For most of 2002 and into 2003, Cheney and Rumsfeld, especially, were also demanding proof of the links between al Qaida and Iraq that (former Iraqi exile leader Ahmed) Chalabi and others had told them were there.”
It was during this period that CIA interrogators waterboarded two alleged top al Qaida detainees repeatedly — Abu Zubaydah at least 83 times in August 2002 and Khalid Sheik Muhammed 183 times in March 2003 — according to a newly released Justice Department document…
When people kept coming up empty, they were told by Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people to push harder,” he continued.”Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s people were told repeatedly, by CIA . . . and by others, that there wasn’t any reliable intelligence that pointed to operational ties between bin Laden and Saddam . . .
A former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, told Army investigators in 2006 that interrogators at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility were under “pressure” to produce evidence of ties between al Qaida and Iraq.
“While we were there a large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between al Qaida and Iraq and we were not successful in establishing a link between al Qaida and Iraq,” Burney told staff of the Army Inspector General. “The more frustrated people got in not being able to establish that link . . . there was more and more pressure to resort to measures that might produce more immediate results.”
“I think it’s obvious that the administration was scrambling then to try to find a connection, a link (between al Qaida and Iraq),” [Senator] Levin said in a conference call with reporters. “They made out links where they didn’t exist.”
Levin recalled Cheney’s assertions that a senior Iraqi intelligence officer had met Mohammad Atta, the leader of the 9/11 hijackers, in the Czech Republic capital of Prague just months before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
The FBI and CIA found that no such meeting occurred.
In other words, top Bush administration officials not only knowingly lied about a non-existent connection between Al Qaida and Iraq, but they pushed and insisted that interrogators use special torture methods aimed at extracting false confessions to attempt to create such a false linkage.
The Washington Post reported the same year:
Despite what you’ve seen on TV, torture is really only good at one thing: eliciting false confessions. Indeed, Bush-era torture techniques, we now know, were cold-bloodedly modeled after methods used by Chinese Communists to extract confessions from captured U.S. servicemen that they could then use for propaganda during the Korean War.
So as shocking as the latest revelation in a new Senate Armed Services Committee report may be, it actually makes sense — in a nauseating way. The White House started pushing the use of torture not when faced with a “ticking time bomb” scenario from terrorists, but when officials in 2002 were desperately casting about for ways to tie Iraq to the 9/11 attacks — in order to strengthen their public case for invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 at all.
***
Gordon Trowbridge writes for the Detroit News: “Senior Bush administration officials pushed for the use of abusive interrogations of terrorism detainees in part to seek evidence to justify the invasion of Iraq, according to newly declassified information discovered in a congressional probe.
Indeed, one of the two senior instructors from the Air Force team which taught U.S. servicemen how to resist torture by foreign governments when used to extract false confessions has blown the whistle on the true purpose behind the U.S. torture program.
As Truth Out reported last year:
Jessen’s notes were provided to Truthout by retired Air Force Capt. Michael Kearns, a “master” SERE instructor and decorated veteran who has previously held high-ranking positions within the Air Force Headquarters Staff and Department of Defense (DoD).
Kearns and his boss, Roger Aldrich, the head of the Air Force Intelligence’s Special Survial Training Program (SSTP), based out of Fairchild Air Force Base in Spokane, Washington, hired Jessen in May 1989. Kearns, who was head of operations at SSTP and trained thousands of service members, said Jessen was brought into the program due to an increase in the number of new SERE courses being taught and “the fact that it required psychological expertise on hand in a full-time basis.”
Jessen, then the chief of Psychology Service at the US Air Force Survival School, immediately started to work directly with Kearns on “a new course for special mission units (SMUs), which had as its goal individual resistance to terrorist exploitation.”
The course, known as SV-91, was developed for the Survival Evasion Resistance Escape (SERE) branch of the US Air Force Intelligence Agency, which acted as the Executive Agent Action Office for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Jessen’s notes formed the basis for one part of SV-91, “Psychological Aspects of Detention.”
***
Kearns was one of only two officers within DoD qualified to teach all three SERE-related courses within SSTP on a worldwide basis, according to a copy of a 1989 letter written Aldrich, who nominated him officer of the year.
***
The Jessen notes clearly state the totality of what was being reverse-engineered – not just ‘enhanced interrogation techniques,’ but an entire program of exploitation of prisoners using torture as a central pillar,” he said. “What I think is important to note, as an ex-SERE Resistance to Interrogation instructor, is the focus of Jessen’s instruction. It is exploitation, not specifically interrogation. And this is not a picayune issue, because if one were to ‘reverse-engineer’ a course on resistance to exploitation then what one would get is a plan to exploit prisoners, not interrogate them. The CIA/DoD torture program appears to have the same goals as the terrorist organizations or enemy governments for which SV-91 and other SERE courses were created to defend against: the full exploitation of the prisoner in his intelligence, propaganda, or other needs held by the detaining power, such as the recruitment of informers and double agents. Those aspects of the US detainee program have not generally been discussed as part of the torture story in the American press.”
***
Jessen wrote that cooperation is the “end goal” of the detainer, who wants the detainee “to see that [the detainer] has ‘total’ control of you because you are completely dependent on him, and thus you must comply with his wishes. Therefore, it is absolutely inevitable that you must cooperate with him in some way (propaganda, special favors, confession, etc.).”
***
Kearns said, based on what he has read in declassified government documents and news reports about the role SERE played in the Bush administration’s torture program, Jessen clearly “reverse-engineered” his lesson plan and used resistance methods to
abuse “war on terror” detainees.
So we have the two main Air Force insiders concerning the genesis of the torture program confirming – with original notes – that the whole purpose of the torture program was to extract false confessions.
Indeed, the top interrogation experts from U.S. military and intelligence services say that all torture is lousy at producing actionable intelligence, the only things it is good for are (1) producing false confessions, (2) creating more terrorists, and (3) itself acting as a form of terrorism.
And false confessions were, in fact, extracted.
For example:
- A humanitarian aid worker said: torture only stopped when I pretended I was in Al Qaeda
- Under torture, Libyan Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi falsely claimed there was a link between Saddam Hussein, al-Qaida and WMD
- President Bush mentioned Abu Zubaydah as a success story, where torture saved lives. Zubaydah was suspected of being a high-ranking al-Qaida leader. Bush administration officials claimed Zubaydah told them that al-Qaida had links with Saddam Hussein. He also claimed there was a plot to attack Washington with a “dirty bomb”. Both claims are now recognized to be false, even by the CIA, which also admits he was never a member of al-Qaida.
- One of the Main Sources for the 9/11 Commission Report was Tortured Until He Agreed to Sign a Confession that He Was NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO READ
- The so-called 9/11 mastermind said: “During … my interrogation I gave a lot of false information in order to satisfy what I believed the interrogators wished to hear” (the self-confessed 9/11 “mastermind” falsely confessed to crimes he didn’t commit)
(Indeed, the 9/11 Commission Report was largely based on a third-hand account of what tortured detainees said, with two of the three parties in the communication being government employees. And the government went to great lengths to obstruct justice and hide unflattering facts from the Commission.)
Again, this essay is not focused on questioning the government’s statements about Al Qaeda and 9/11 … it focuses on the false testimony and coercion post-9/11 to justify war against Iraq.
Did Government Officials Have Any Motive?
When criminal prosecutors look assess whether or not a suspect is likely guilty, they determine whether or not he had motive, means and opportunity.
The means and opportunity for top U.S. officials to carry out the war crimes of lying us into war based upon a false linkage between Iraq and 9/11 and to torture people into giving false confessions is a given. Specifically, top government officials such as President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld had power to take such actions, if they had wanted to.
It has been extensively documented that the White House decided to invade Iraq before 9/11:
- Former CIA director George Tenet said that the White House wanted to invade Iraq long before 9/11, and inserted “crap” in its justifications for invading Iraq. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill – who sat on the National Security Council – also says that Bush planned the Iraq war before 9/11. Top British officials say that the U.S. discussed Iraq regime change even before Bush took office. And in 2000, Cheney said a Bush administration might “have to take military action to forcibly remove Saddam from power.” And see this.
- Cheney made Iraqi’s oil fields a national security priority before 9/11. And the Sunday Herald reported: “Five months before September 11, the US advocated using force against Iraq … to secure control of its oil.” (remember that Alan Greenspan, John McCain, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, a high-level National Security Council officer and others all say that the Iraq war was really about oil.)
Indeed, neoconservatives planned regime change in Iraq – and throughout the Middle East and North Africa – 20 years ago.
This provides evidence of motive by top American officials to create false justifications for a war against Iraq.
In addition, Cheney and Rumsfeld made false claims exaggerating the threat posed by Russia’s weapons in the 1970s to justify huge increases in military spending. Prosecutors look at previous lies as evidence that the defendant is intentionally lying now. Similarly, Cheney and Rumsfeld’s lies about WMDs in the 1970s add to the mountain of evidence that government officials intentionally lied about Iraqi WMDs.
Moreover, Saddam allegedly offered to leave Iraq:
“Fearing defeat, Saddam was prepared to go peacefully in return for £500million ($1billion)”.
“The extraordinary offer was revealed yesterday in a transcript of talks in February 2003 between George Bush and the then Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar at the President’s Texas ranch.”
“The White House refused to comment on the report last night. But, if verified, it is certain to raise questions in Washington and London over whether the costly four-year war could have been averted.”
According to the tapes, Bush told Aznar that whether Saddam was still in Iraq or not, “We’ll be in Baghdad by the end of March.” See also this and this. If true, this adds additional circumstantial evidence that U.S. officials were committed to a war in Iraq even if Saddam Hussein voluntarily left.
But Are They Guilty of War Crimes?
The Nuremberg Tribunal which convicted and sentenced Nazis leaders to death conceived of wars of aggression – i.e. wars not launched in self-defense – defined the following as “crimes against peace”, or war crimes:
- (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
- (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i)
The Tribunal considered wars of aggression to be the ultimate war crime, which encompassed all other crimes:
To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.
Judgment of October 1, 1946, International Military Tribunal Judgment and Sentence, 22 IMTTRIALS, supra note 7, at 498, reprinted in 41 AM. J. INT’LL. 172, 186 (1947).
Given that Iraq had no connection with 9/11 and possessed no weapons of mass destruction, the Iraq war was a crime of aggression and – under the standards by which Nazi leaders were convicted by the Nuremberg Tribunal – the American leaders who lied us into that war are guilty of war crimes.
Benjamin Ferencz, a former chief prosecutor for the Nuremberg Trials, declared:
A prima facie case can be made that the United States is guilty of the supreme crime against humanity — that being an illegal war of aggression against a sovereign nation.
The Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court - Luis Moreno-Ocampo – told the Sunday Telegraph in 2007:
That he would be willing to launch an inquiry and could envisage a scenario in which the Prime Minister and American President George W Bush could one day face charges at The Hague. Luis Moreno-Ocampo urged Arab countries, particularly Iraq, to sign up to the court to enable allegations against the West to be pursued.
As a Japan Times Op/Ed noted in 2009:
In January 2003, a group of American law professors warned President George W. Bush that he and senior officials of his government could be prosecuted for war crimes if their military tactics violated international humanitarian law.
Eminent legal scholars such as former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clarke and Dean of the Massachusetts School of Law and a professor of law Lawrence Velvel have since stated that high-level Bush administration officials did commit war crimes in relation to the Iraq war.
Torture is – of course – a violation of the Geneva Conventions, which make it illegal to inflict mental or physical torture or inhuman treatment. It is clearly-established that waterboarding is torture. The torture was, in fact, systematic, and included widespread sexual humiliation, murder and other unambiguous forms of torture.
Velvel and many other legal experts say that the torture which was carried out after 9/11 is a war crime.
Colin Powell’s former chief of staff stated that Dick Cheney is guilty of war crimes for overseeing torture policies.
Matthew Alexander – a former top Air Force interrogator who led the team that tracked down Abu Musab al-Zarqawi – notes that government officials knew they are vulnerable for war crime prosecution:
They have, from the beginning, been trying to prevent an investigation into war crimes.
A Malaysian war crimes commission also found Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and five administration attorneys guilty of war crimes (although but the commission has no power to enforce its judgment).
The United States War Crimes Act of 1996, a federal statute set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 2441, also makes it a federal crime for any U.S. national, whether military or civilian, to violate the Geneva Convention by engaging in murder, torture, or inhuman treatment.
The statute applies not only to those who carry out the acts, but also to those who ORDER IT, know about it, or fail to take steps to stop it. The statute applies to everyone, no matter how high and mighty.
18 U.S.C. § 2441 has no statute of limitations, which means that a war crimes complaint can be filed at any time.
The penalty may be life imprisonment or — if a single prisoner dies due to torture — death. Given that there are numerous, documented cases of prisoners being tortured to death by U.S. soldiers in both Iraq and Afghanistan, that means that the death penalty would be appropriate for anyone found guilty of carrying out, ordering, or sanctioning such conduct.
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 limited the applicability of the War Crimes Act, but still made the following unlawful: torture, cruel or inhumane treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, intentionally causing serious bodily harm, rape, sexual assault or abuse.
Postscript: A similar analysis could potentially be carried out for Afghanistan and other countries which America has invaded since 9/11. And indiscriminate drone strikes may well be war crimes … even in countries against which we haven’t officially declared war.
»
- advertisements -
Hang Donald Rumsfeld
he concocted the same bullshit on WMD and he did previously with the deliberate over-hyped threat of the USSR
all to enrich the corporate MIC no doubt
he's a serial liar (to his democracy) and a traitor to the American people
He also has backdoor Monsanto connections. Is there an evil industry he hasn't touched?
the poison dwarf is probably skimming from every industry, he's a professional liar, always in great demand in Washington amongst corporate lobbyists
That's what I call a "known known."
The poison dwarf. Very cute. Wonder if the wife will let me dress our eight year old on the 31st?
The 911 full investigation is much more important for American future than all the QE scheisse.
You can recover quickly from hyperinflation or artificial depression. But 911 broke your back and took all your real chance to impact society as citizens (as planned by perpetrators) and dictatorship is your future. Forget money. Once their goal is finished you will not need them ( and you wil not have it anymore)
It should be no surprise that the toughest battles by TPTB have ALWAYS been in the countrysides, against the peasant farmers. And take note, peasant farmers are still holding on; in the long-run they'll persist (they're closer to physical reality).
There is no system to save. A big/great turning is coming.
Manage food and stay your (literal) ground...
You're right it's not 911 that broke our back, its our inability to investigate it. We have lost all moral, legal and human compass.
I keep my fingers crossed for you! As almost all europeans.
we need to listen to our world brothers and sisters. You guys have had thousands of years of governments lying, killing and screwing their own people. We're so new to the game that we forgot (ironically) that's one of the reasons we left on boats in the first place.
"We're so new to the game that we forgot (ironically) that's one of the reasons we left on boats in the first place. "
Those who "left" were wealthier folks. The battle with the British was over claims on the "free" riches "found." Of course, some pesky terrorists, er a.. "Indians" needed to be put in their place (graves), but all in all it was for a more "noble" cause...
What we don't want to acknowledge is that ALL wars are about resources. And to calm the problems of immorality (killing babies and such), the name of god(s) are championed (helps incite the programmed masses). No, I highly doubt that we're up to facing the real truths...
Again, more non-truth. You're probably getting your info from Howard Zinn? (who didn't even bother with sourcing his material). Actually hundreds of thousands of poor Euros were forced to the "new land" and lived out their lives in slavery in those early times. Their children were also sold on the block into slavery.
Of course, that is just the European population. Then you have millions coming in from all over the world. My paternal side came in from the Levant (xtian folks of course), but the assumption is that Americans are all European (or maybe its like the European Americans are all that matter to some of you??). My other side is European (the blonds)...and they have been traced back to the white American slaves before the revolution.
You might want to brush up on your history. The native Americans are still with us. Zinn followers like to announce the beginning numbers of native American compared to the present count....But they don't take into account the many natives who mixed and blended with the Europeans. Unfortunately, Zinn's book is being taught in American classrooms, along with his marxist ideology.
Damn! My grandmother was born into end of monarchy, then republic, fascist protectorate and war, communism in three phases and democracy turning into oligarchy and EU fascism again in one life.
She said "they are all the same".
But you are not alone now. If anything, you will get big support from the world. You should not worry!
(coz we all are in the same mess)
All the same... because, power corrupts and BIG = FAIL!
No way can we truly "move forward" until we see a new independent, full-supoena criminal investigation into 9/11. We must invalidate and expunge any and all figures in our government [acroos probably the last four administrations] who, whether passively or actively, participated to bring about 9/11 and horrendous war crimes that followed. Once we have that Truth, we will be in a much better position to restore our Constitution because it will make null and void such draconion measures as the Patriot Act and NDAA, and it will expose and lead to the downfall of alot of international banksters.
Fully funded Federal Grand Jury with subpeona power.
Be specific what you ask for...no wiggle room for the crooks.
Knock, knock... "Sorry, nobody can respond as that is a national security issue."
And in related news, Honey Boo Boo endorses Obama, and wants to ride Nessy, the sea monster.
I thought her mom was the sea monster.
And let's not forget the current cabal who continues these same policies.
What does it benefit us to prosecute only a piece of the whole ? How about adding both Clintoons, ObamaJanet Napolitano, Eric Holder etc etc.
Make it a bipartisan effort and we get rid of the croooks, opportunists and traitors at the heart of our misery. Any less and the remainder of the team will simply carry on.
"Make it a bipartisan effort and we get rid of the croooks, opportunists and traitors at the heart of our misery. "
It's a linked rat line. The people with the MOST POWER are NOT in elected office; THEY ARE IN CHARGE OF THE MEDIA. If you want to really arrest the criminal inertia, you need to go after the editors and their bosses in ALL the largest circulation newspapers and television corporations and put them on trial for war crimes. You go after the lackeys afterwards.
Roger Ailes is one of the top war criminals in the US. Make an example of him and the other top media filth and this evil shit stops. You would also have to go after the fake left controlled opposition like Amy Goodman that won't touch 9/11 with a ten foot pole.
We need a general media housecleaning in this country.
More of the same old boring trite moral relativism from the usurper of a great man's name.
Sure trot out Busch when the TOTUS is looking at treason, but 'usurping a great mans name'.
You get green arrows for comedy.
Don't be so hard on yourself. Bugs Bunny forgives you
These kind of articles, which are many, insure that nobody will ever be brought to justice for perpetrating 9/11 on Americans. You can't get the bad guys by compartmentalizing the crime. The entire war crime of Iraq, Afghanistan, torture, rape, etc can only be brought to justice when ALL THE PEOPLE WHO PLANNED, ORGANIZED AND EXECUTED 9/11 are brought to account. That will only happen with a completely honest Independent investigation, that looks at all the evidence, with physicists, engineers, witnesses, etc.
This article left out some of the prime masterminds behind 9/11, Iraq, and all the horrors that go along with it. Lets see, there is Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Levine, Cohen, Dov Zakeim, and Larry Silverstein. Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Bolton were only part of this puzzle.
You can't solve this crime by leaving big chunks of the puzzle out. There is a Jewish element that is ignored in this, although you will see some references to Israel and the Mossad...but we have Jews in the U.S. in powerful organizations that were behind this as well. The Jews were not the only ones involved but they are one of the prime reasons people on the Liberal left/progressives won't touch 9/11 as an inside job (or if they do its just regurgitating the same info over and over like this article is doing). They know that any amount of focus on 9/11 as an inside Job inevitably leads to many of their own people behind it.
Its amazing how people will protect their own "group" to the point that they allow 1 million people to be exterminated for a crime they did not commit. The liberal left/progressives have a lot to answer for. They want to be known for their "good" works in anti-war stuff, but they won't touch the 9/11 inside job proof.
Another Jew, Alyssa Rosenberg, just wrote another article (PLEASE Don't let these people control the debate...) putting down Woody Harrelson and Martin Sheen's new movie coming soon about 9/11. Alyssa Rosenberg, in her article (http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2012/10/22/1053811/september-mor/?mobile=nc), is busy changing the 9/11 narrative by explaining to her readers that 9/11 movement began in "Movies". LOL She's an idiot. But typical progressive Jew destroying our chances of bringing mighty men to justice.
An investigation is never going to happen. The only way that these criminals will be brought to justice is if the American people take care of it themselves, on an individual by individual basis. Otherwise, these people WILL get away with their crimes...
this needs clarification
jewish not equal zionist. the only element i see is the zioninst element
Like I said to WTF x10, it is not just a zionist problem. Yes, zionists involved, but there are plenty of Jewish people who will not allow a 9/11 debate, fearful of the exposure of Jewish complicity in 9/11. Many of positions on the Web Journals and other places to make a difference in exposing 911 truth but they won't do it.
You can't just pin this on "Zionists" (which includes all the xtian right, too).
The reason there is no resolution is because of the Liberal left/progressive wing that refuses to publish all work by physicists, etc or have any reasonable debates on 9/11. This includes many many Jews on the Left. They are busy writing and publishing their "opinions" all over the Internet, but they are major Gate Keepers on 9/11.
Jews are more protective of their group/tribe and less individualistic than others in the u.s. So they aren't touching 9/11, especially when they see all those Jewish names involved. So, no, this is not just a zionist thing. And we need them to start talking about 9/11 inside job. Jews like to let everyone know how smart they are, yet almost all of them believe George Bush's conspiracy theory on 19 cave guys?
This could be a big Jewish moment; to come together and expose the 9/11 lies of Bush and expose the whole kit and kaboodle, including the Jewish elements involved. Maybe it is true about their Talmud that they cannot expose the crimes of other Jews? Unless that Jew was criminal on them? Well, this was a crime against Humanity, because it not only killed 3000 that day, but over a million more including U.S. military.
Don't give all Jews a bad reputation. ZIONIST JEWS are the ones that need to BE outed and exposed for what they believe in and promote. You don't have to be a Jew to be a Zionist but thats what their leadership hides behind. Anti-semite? NO, ANTI-ZIONIST YES
Many, if not most, Jews on the Liberal left/Progressive do not consider themselves Zionists. But they are neglecting to give people the chance to debate the 9/11 inside job proof. Thousands of websites have popped up on the internet after 9/11 to promote Anti-War, and MANY are being promoted by Jews. Yet, few are speaking out about 9/11 truth and exposing the people behind it, many of which are Jews. It wasn't entirely carried off by Jews at all...but I'm saying they own a big part of the puzzle.
There's only one young Jewish guy I've seen with a Website that is talking about 9/11 and he's targeted Larry Silverstein. I'm sure there are a few more out there, but overall the Jewish community is keeping a lid on 9/11 truth; Obviously they must know that many of the names associated with 9/11 inside job are Jewish.I'm thinking of big progressive websites and names that are associated with liberal left, Jewishness, and anti-war...(although many of these promoted Obama's Libyan "humanitarian intervention"...thats what liberals call it when they bomb the bejesus out of a nation).
We need the Jewish people in the U.S. to stop hiding the crimes of their people and realize that they need to step out of their group and look at the nation as a whole, instead of through Jewish lens. This is crazy stuff. Over a million people are dead, but NPR is gonna keep talking about the "holocaust" in Germany.
I'm sorry to piss people off and you can bring up your "anti-semit" backlash all you want, but in the end the World knows what happened and we got a lot of Jewish names involved. I have no problem acknowleging the Christian Whites involved in this....so why the fuck do you have a problem acknowledging Jews involvement? I WANT SOME FUCKING JUSTICE FOR THIS HEINOUS CRIME. One way to get to justice is for the Jewish left to start publishing questions about 9/11.
A big part of the puzzle? Only the currency, the congressional leadership, the dominance of American foreign policy, all major media corporations including Hollywood and our publishing houses, most all the official key financial positions, and such a headlock on the Executive Branch that a presidential candidate debate features a contest on who can serve, not America, but Israel best.
It’s getting to the point where the definition Zionist just doesn’t cover it. And the term “criminal” is a copout. I ask, just who are these people? Germans?
For the true debate topic, Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com has it. Here’s a sample of Raimondo’s columan yesterday on Debate Summary: Israel, Israel, Israel, Israel. It begins:
One striking impression of this debate was that out of some 17,000 words uttered by both candidates and the moderator, about half of them were about domestic policy. Neither candidate wanted to talk about foreign policy — because the differences between them are negligible. Out of this half, about 1500 words were devoted to the subject of Israel — around 20 percent. And it’s not as if the candidates disagreed: indeed, they competed for the role of Israel’s Best Friend. Obama was first to pledge allegiance to Tel Aviv, less than ten minutes after the starting bell. Outlining the foundations of his foreign policy, he averred:
“What I’ve done throughout my presidency and will continue to do, is, number one, make sure that these countries are supporting our counterterrorism efforts; number two, make sure that they are standing by our interests in Israel’s security, because it is a true friend and our greatest ally in the region.”
According to the President, Israel’s security is our number two priority not only in the region, but also in a much broader sense, second only to going after our own enemies. That’s an odd way to define our hierarchy of foreign policy values: what about the security and prosperity of the region as a whole? The Israel-pandering was obsessive and I’m not the only one who noticed it.
No aspect of our Middle Eastern policy was discussed without reference to how it might play in Israel. When Syria came up, Obama made a point of saying that although “Syrians are going to have to determine their own future,” our efforts to aid the rebels are being carried out “in consultation with our partners in the region, including Israel, which obviously has a huge interest in seeing what happens in Syria.” Romney chimed in:
“Secondly, Syria’s an opportunity for us because Syria plays an important role in the Middle East, particularly right now. Syria is Iran’s only ally in the Arab world. It’s their route to the sea. It’s the route for them to arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of course, our ally Israel… We need to make sure as well that we coordinate this effort with our allies and particularly with — with — with Israel.”
Never mind what the people of Syria want: it’s all about what Israel wants. This duet was sung in many variations. On Egypt, the President warned:
“They have to abide by their treaty with Israel. That is a red line for us, because not only is Israel’s security at stake, but our security is at stake if that unravels.”
This wasn’t enough for Romney, however, who came back with:
“We have to also stand by our allies. I think the tension that existed between Israel and the United States was very unfortunate.”
Not to be out-Israeled, the President struck back:
“Our alliances have never been stronger. In Asia, in Europe, in Africa, with Israel where we have unprecedented military and intelligence cooperation, including dealing with the Iranian threat.”
After all that, Bob Schieffer decided it was time to “move on to the next segment: red lines, Israel, and Iran.” A visitor from Mars might be forgiven for being confused at this point: didn’t the last segment cover that territory? We earthlings understand, however, that when it comes to foreign policy, one can never kowtow too long or too low in the direction of Tel Aviv, and so Schieffer gave the candidates yet another opportunity to prostrate themselves before King Bibi…
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/10/23/debate-summary-israel-israel-israel-israel/
I quit donating to Raimondo's site when he continues to call 9/11 truthers crackpots. Why does he have a problem with physics? Really, I can expect this to come from non-independent National Petroleum Radio (NPR), but Antiwar.com?
Quote by Antiwar’s J. Raimondo, who has been barred as a columnist from the Huffington Post because he told the truth about Israel, from his article, The Meaning of 9/11:
"I was warned, before raising the possibility of an Israeli connection to 9/11, that I was touching a live wire, that my career – such as it is – would be destroyed, and that I would be banished to the hinterlands, where various obsessives trade conspiracy theories and argue over whether it’s the Bilderbergers or the Illuminati who control the world.
"It hasn’t happened, but I wouldn’t care if it did. As Ayn Rand once said: I’m not brave enough to be a coward – I see the consequences too clearly. We see the consequences of 9/11 all around us, in the hate-wrinkled face of the Koran-burning preacher, in the shrill shrieking of Pamela Geller whose anti-Muslim rallies in the vanished shadow of the Trade Towers are as ugly as she is: we see it in the faces of Pakistani refugees, huddled in disease-infested camps, as they flee the US invasion of death-dealing drones."
Raimondo, besides many articles on 9/11, is the author of The Terror Enigma: 9/11 and the Israeli Connection.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Terror-Enigma-Israeli-Connection/dp/0595296823
It sounds like you have alredy convicted the Zionists. I'm not saying one way or the other, but the trail of how the pilots got their training leads directly to Saudi intelligence.
I want a Federal Grand jury inquiry, but I don't want someone on the panel who has already made up their mind who done it.
I have to laugh at any notion that the Saudis would have any real ability to pull off anything like 9/11. That Saudi intel could even be compared to Mossad is laughable. I would not rule it out that the Saudis were in on it, but I suspect they were more passive participants (and perhaps continuing to sell their souls- forced to sell out their people [oil] else the ruling family is left to the wolves).
Laugh all you wish, but that is exactly where the evidence points. Google "The Big Bamboozle", written by a 20 year airline pilot with captain ratings on the Boeing 727, 737,747,757, and 767.
OK, just to show that I'm not evading ANY info, I admit that there is a possibility of a stronger Saudi connection:
http://rense.com/general68/alq.htm
But... I stand by the FACT that Saudi Intel can't even compared to Mossad. At best the Saudis bought into the bigger plan (perhaps being firewalled from the actual details).
Well, the ISI had something to do with it too. Of course everyone is "innocent until proven guilty" but most of these people will be proven guilty.
Then again, We didn't use the "innocent until proven guilty" for the Afghans or Iraqis did we? No, we just started bombing within a month...No investigation, nothing. But we'll give the criminals a fair trial before we hang 'em (like Saddam).
Pretty sicko if you ask me. And these people are still at it. Go visit some of the "think tank" websites, like cfr.org, that hosts some of these characters we've all become accustomed to seeing on
talk shows, etc. They do the same thing with Syria, Iran, and even Lebanon again.
Steve Lendman is an older Jewish guy and he has been telling the truth about the whole stinking predatory criminal mess of flase flags for wars for Wall Street and Israel for decades.
Here's a recent article:
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2012/10/ship-to-gaza-activists-brutalized.html
It is nice to see the Jewish people like Lendman exposing Israeli crimes against Palestinians. But does he talk about all the Jewish men involved in 9/11? I will have to look and see. I haven't heard him talk about that.
A lot of the Jews in the U.S. speak out against Israel. But I want to see the Liberal Left/progressives Anti-war Jews speak out against the perpetrators of 9/11, which includes many Jews. They have some power in this issue and we need them. If that political wing united with the 9/11 truth movement we could easily begin the process of legal action against all those involved.
That group of people has quite a bit of power in the U.S. and they have control of large portions of the media as well as growing control over the internet.
The 911 Truth Movement is fast losing credibility. They have already decided the buildings were rigged for demo and not only refuse to consider evidence which does not support their theory, they bully anyone who dares bring up such evidence. They also use an abundance of false and misleading statements. I for one, no longer claim affiliation with the "truth movement"
"They have already decided the buildings were rigged for demo".
SAY WHAT!!? THEY have NOT decided ANYTHING! THEY have EVIDENCE that explosives brought the buildings down, you prevaricating disinformation bullshit artist.
I'm sure a free energy tooth fairy could bring the buildings down with a giant zapper lazer and hologram a few aircraft into the picture but THAT is NOT a credible scenario. THAT is the current horseshit from people like you trying to "get in front of the story" (an old PR technique) to taint and undermine Occam's razor by pushing fantastic and ridiculous theories to avoid the OBVIOUS path of responsibility AND accountability for this crime that leads DIRECTLY to the Mossad, Rumsfeld and Cheney.
You just outed yourself. Time to get a new handle (sosoome is kind of lame anyway - try lazerbrain or something peppy- LOL).
LOL...you help make my point.
Question. Have you bothered to comb the debris for structural evidence? Tons of raw footage is now available for your perusal.
Not sure who you lump under that banner but... no matter what any group does or does not do that does in no way invalidate the FACT that one of the biggest crimes ever to be committed occurred on 9/11.
Your comment is plagued with generalizations. Would be good to provide something with teeth.
As for myself, I will ALWAYS be a member of any movement for truth (though I sign up to no groups).
Me too, if it actually seeks truth.
But if you try to show any of the "truth" groups the buildings could have come down just as we saw, due to the airplane strikes, they start the bully routine.
To be more specific, AE911 Truth misleads followers by showing only the upwind, north side of 7, and fail to show that parts of the building were fully involved at different times of the day. They also claim it "came straight down into it's own footprint". The building was leaning to the south on the way down, which is consistent with south side damage from the collpae of 1WTC. But there is more. 7 actually twisted as it started down, and it is likely the Tower cores were still attached at collapse initiation. Proffessional architects and engineers just happened to miss those crucial items? I could go on. those are just a few of the specifics.
So:
1) You're saying they're all working for Saudi Intel?
2) There's footage available of which you speak?
3) Demolitions are never botched?
The motive angle is still a bit problematic. PNAC and all... have to admit that the cover of financial crimes (including Rumsfeld's missing trillions from the Pentagon), bailout of airline sector (and "defense" sector?) and a justification for latching on to oil production in Iraq (and pipelines through Afghanistan are quite a bag... But, perhaps the Saudi+Architects' alliance angle has more to it...
Fuck, three steel-framed skyscrapers succumbing to fire in one day. That's some kind of record is it not?
I don't buy the notion of incompetency. Yeah, there's a LOT of bureaucratic infighting, but the scale of failure here just cannot be explained as such.
Well, we know PNAC benefited wildly from 911, and we know the Bush Administration was loaded with it's signatories. Can't rule that out regarding motive. It's possible the motive was originally as were told (OBL), but then hijacked by intel. Conjecture though. I think facts alone will lead to the perps. We do know the 19 were mostly Saudi. We also know Saudi financing was likely, and we know the Adm blocked this part of the 911 Commission.
I know, 3 buildings in one day. There's got to be a first for anything (hate using that cliche, but it applies). I've heavily reviewed the debris and structural elements. It all says structural failure for the Twin Towers...no getting around it.
As for incompetency, I strongly recommend The Big Bamboozle. It's only 10 bucks on Amazon, and it takes you inside from the perspective of a professional airline pilot who has spook experience as well. He makes a very good case our defense systems were not incompetent that day, but were poorly led from the top.
You help make my point by asking such a silly question (1).
The point sir, is an organization which claims truth needs no embellishment to their story. Deal with facts.
Not even Zionist Jews. Let's call these people what they really are: criminals.
That works even better because criminals do not deserve a race, nationality, or religion to hide behind.
Sorta like terrorists.
"And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that."
John Dalberg Lord Acton
“Truth hurts. Maybe not as much as jumping on a bicycle with a seat missing, but it hurts.”
-Naked Gun