New to 9-11 Research? 
> Top 40 Reasons to Doubt the Official Story of September 11th, 2001
> 9/11 Victims' Families' Review of 9/11 Commission Report
> 9-11 Research: An Attempt to Uncover the Truth About September 11th, 2001 (Outstanding, well- organized, solid research)
> Nanothermite information Why were military-grade explosive chips found in the towers' dust throughout Lower Manhattan? Peer-reviewed paper, more information and summary.
> Beginners' Guide to 9/11 Truth from Journal of 9/11 Studies
> Complete 9/11 Timeline and Loss of Civil Liberties Since 9/11, Searchable database resources from 'mainstream' sources
> A Quick Course on the shortest paths to 9/11 truth...
> Architects & Engineers for 9/11Truth'
> Justice For 9/11 Complaint and Petition filed with NY Attorney General Elliot Spitzer November, 2004. The complete legal case, as of that date.
> 9/11 Commission -- One Year Later PDF Report of 7/05 Hearings sponsored by Rep. Cynthia McKinney
> Who's asking questions? ... Patriotsquestion911.com
> Information, disinformation, misinformation... this, this and http://www.rediscover911.org/ will help.
> Mission Statement and Editorial Policy of 911Truth.org
Support 
PLEASE DONATE TODAY!
2010 to date:

We will not be able to continue this work without you ... Please support 911truth.org. Thank you.


Professionals for 9/11 Truth 
Alternative Media Links 
9/11 NEWS/FORUMS
>911blogger.com
>Truthaction.org Forum >Globalresearch.ca
>RigorousIntuition Forum

NEWSWIRES
>Information Clearinghouse
>Citizens for Legitimate Government
>BoilingFrogsPost.com
dailycensored.com

BLOGS
>George Washington's Blog
>911debunkers.blogspot.com
>Scott Ford
>Mark Crispin Miller--News From Underground Blog
>GlennGreenwald 'Unclaimed Territory'
>Austin Fitts 'Mapping the Real Deal'
>Nafeez Ahmed 'The Cutting Edge'
>BeatTheChip - Stop RealID/PASS

RADIO/AUDIO/VIDEO

electric politics

>Guns & Butter ... Investigating capitalism, militarism and politics, Wed., 1pmPacific
>Law and Disorder Radio: The great civil liberties attorney Bill Kunstler saw it coming. "The police state is emerging," he warned. "It's coming piece by piece and at a certain point it will be irreversible."
>Free Speech Radio News
>Global Research News Hour, M-F 10am Central
>Tell Somebody!, Tue., 6pmCentral on KKFI Community Radio



COMIC RELIEF

Comic News

9/11 Movement 
History, strategies, growth
Developing... 
Breaking news & ongoing
stories of special import
In the Media 
When 9/11 truth slips thru
9/11 Consequences 
The downstream battles for
peace, rights and solvency
9/11 Precedents 
How it's done again & again
White House Drafts Executive Order to Allow Indefinite Detention of Terror Suspects
There seems to be much back and forth over whether this has actually been completed, the consensus being that the White House has "floated" the particulars in order to elicit public opinion. Politics as usual.

Jun 26 2009, 6:02 pm by Marc Ambinder
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/06/obama_moving_towards_detention_order.php

Is Obama Moving Toward An Executive Order On Detention Policy?

“The Washington Post and Pro-Publica [ed note: collaboration!] report that the White House counsel’s office has drafted an executive order authorizing — or, rather, asserting, that the President has the inherent authority to detain certain classes of people indefinitely. (Update: Ben LaBolt, an Obama spokesperson, flatly denied the report to me. “There is no executive order. There just isn’t one.”) “

Update: June 27, 2009 14:32 EDT
Don't miss Glenn Greenwald's excellent analysis; Saturday June 27, 2009 05:28 EDT
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/27/preventive_detention/index.html
– Ed.

Friday, June 26, 2009
By Dafna Linzer and Peter Finn
ProPublica and Washington Post Staff Writer

The Obama administration, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close Guantanamo, has drafted an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.

Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that bypassing Congress could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.

After months of internal debate over how to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, White House officials are growing increasingly worried that reaching quick agreement with Congress on a new detention system may prove impossible. Several officials said there is concern in the White House that the administration may not be able to close the facility by the president's January deadline.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt did not directly respond to questions about an executive order but said the administration would address the cases of Guantanamo detainees in a manner "consistent with the national security interests of the United States and the interests of justice."

One administration official suggested the White House was already trying to build support for an executive order.

"Civil liberties groups have encouraged the administration, that if a prolonged detention system were to be sought, to do it through executive order," the official said. Such an order could be rescinded and would not block later efforts to write legislation, but civil liberties groups generally oppose long-term detention, arguing that detainees should either be prosecuted or released.

The Justice Department has declined to comment on the prospects for a long-term detention system while internal reviews of Guantanamo detainees are underway. The reviews are expected to be completed by July 21.
ad_icon

In a May speech, President Obama broached the need for a system of long-term detention and suggested that it would include congressional and judicial oversight. "We must recognize that these detention policies cannot be unbounded. They can't be based simply on what I or the executive branch decide alone," the president said.

Some of Obama's top legal advisers, along with a handful of influential Republican and Democratic lawmakers, have pushed for the creation of a "national security court" to supervise the incarceration of detainees deemed too dangerous to release but who cannot be charged or tried.

But the three senior government officials said the White House has turned away from that option, at least for now, because legislation establishing a special court would be both difficult to pass and likely to fracture Obama's own party. These officials, as well as others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about internal deliberations.

On the day Obama took office, 242 men were imprisoned at Guantanamo. In his May speech, the president outlined five strategies the administration would use to deal with them: criminal trials, revamped military tribunals, transfers to other countries, releases and continued detention.

Since the inauguration, 11 detainees have been released or transferred, one prisoner committed suicide and one was moved to New York to face terrorism charges in federal court.

...

Read the full story at Washingtonpost.com: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062603361.html

discuss at twitter   Share on Facebook   newsvine   digg this!   Stumble It!   reddit   del.icio.us   google   yahoo   icerocket   magnoliacom
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author, who is solely responsible for its content, and do not necessarily reflect those of 911Truth.org. 911Truth.org will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.
Fair Use Notice
This page contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political issues relating to alternative views of the 9/11 events, etc. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
home   |   about us   |   contact   |   research   |   store   |   grassroots   |   calendar   |   links   |   search   |   email signup