Tuesday, September 20 2011   -   Legal Response to 9/11

By Susanna Kim
September 15, 2011
ABCNews.go.com

After the 10-year anniversary of Sept. 11 and six months after the death of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, questions still remain regarding who funded the attacks that led to thousands of deaths and billions of dollars in damages.

The latest legal pursuit is that of an insurance syndicate of British insurer Lloyd's, which says the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, its banks and various charities should be financially responsible for the $215 million it paid in insurance settlements to 9/11 victims' families.

William Doyle's family is one of the families determined to find those who funded the attacks on 9/11. Doyle's son, Joseph, was killed in the north tower of the World Trade Center.

William Doyle told ABC News there are "concrete facts" showing the majority of the hijackers' funding originated from Saudi Arabia. He said the government helped "shield" some of that evidence when the joint congressional committee investigating the attacks published a report in December 2002 and redacted about 28 pages.

Doyle and others believe names of Saudi financiers and companies have been removed.

Photo: ABCNews, courtesy William Doyle.

 

Tuesday, September 20 2011   -   9/11 Commission

19 September 2011
BoilingFrogsPost.com

Punitive Actions Are Once Again Being Taken Against the Wrong People

In Boiling Frogs Post's recent interview with Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy, Sibel Edmonds questioned the timing of former Counter-Terrorism Czar, Richard Clarke's willingness to speak out about alleged 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar, and the CIA's knowledge of their whereabouts after the January 2000 Malaysia "terrorist summit." Sibel asked Ray and John, "why now?" We would like to note that the interview with Clarke was actually recorded two years ago, in October 2009. As such, the "why now" question should actually be posed to Ray and John. The real questions for Clarke should be, "why then?" Why then and not during his testimony before the 9/11 Commission, when it would have been meaningful to the Commission's investigation? In addition, in his October 2009 interview, Clarke revealed pertinent insight into information sharing at high levels, which would clearly counter the misleading findings of the 9/11 Commission regarding the "failures" of communications between the FBI and CIA.

It is extremely troubling to us that the former Counter-Terrorism Czar, for both the Clinton and Bush Junior Administrations, as well as chair of the Counter-Terrorism Security Group for Bush Senior (essentially working in an anti-terrorism related capacity since about 1992), took so long to speak out about why the CIA would intentionally fail to share such critically important information with the FBI. If nothing else, he should have mentioned in his testimony before the 9/11 Commission in 2004 that information sharing was not a problem between intelligence agencies themselves or with the Executive Branch. Clarke was clearly well aware of how he, and the FBI, received raw data from CIA sources and had to be keenly aware that the Commission was basing many of their recommendations on this misinformation. Clarke did not bother to clear that up during his testimony or immediately afterwards.

 

Friday, September 16 2011   -   Other Important News

September 15, 2011
by Sibel Edmonds
BoilingFrogsPost.com

CIA's Maneuver: A Case of Bluffing? Buying Time? Or Something More?

Last week we broke the story of the CIA issued legal threats against producers Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy on their discovery of the identities of the two key CIA analysts who executed the Tenet-Black-Blee cover-up in the case of two key 9/11 hijackers. The analysts were referred to only by first names initially, but were going to be fully named in a follow up segment. It appears the story is still developing, but we now have further details on the case, an analysis by an expert producer, and a few comments on assessing the nature and possible implication of this move by the CIA.

I asked Mr. Nowosielski how the CIA was informed about the schedule and the content of their upcoming segment, and he provided us with the following details:

We emailed CIA Public Affairs on Thursday morning telling them of our intention to name two current agents in our journalism piece and explained the context of their use -- the things they were accused of. We also explained that their names had been deduced through open-source materials and that our sources had told us they were working from headquarters.

As for the CIA's reaction and response Mr. Nowosielski recounted the following:

Their media spokesperson called back almost immediately. After a brief discussion, we emailed him the script for official reply. We also requested an interview with the two to ensure that we were telling the full story accurately. The reply email began, "This is off the record:" and then informed us that we may be violating federal law by including those two names. When we asked him to cite the law, we were told it was the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. This and follow up calls occurred on Thurs, Fri, and Sat, until we explained that we were not recognizing "off the record" in our official interactions with the Agency. We have heard nothing further since.

 

Wednesday, September 14 2011   -   Truth Movement News

September 14, 2011
SecrecyKills.com

While producing our investigative podcast "Who Is Rich Blee?", intended to be released on Sunday, our team managed to deduce the likely identities of two CIA employees at the heart of a notorious failure in the run up to the September 11th tragedy.

Savvy internet searches based on minimal background details helped us determine candidates for the two CIA employees. When the names were used by our interviewers repeatedly during interviews and never corrected by the interviewees, we began to feel more certain. Ironically, it was the response from CIA that provided final confirmation.

On Thursday, we submitted our script to CIA along with a request to interview the two employees. We wanted to be fair in giving them a chance to tell their sides of the story. Instead, the Agency sent us a message threatening that if we went forward with the names included in the piece that it would be a potential violation of federal criminal law.

 

Wednesday, September 14 2011   -   In the Media

12 September 2011
BBC.co.uk

[Ed Note: 3:35 video available at this link' unofficial transcript below.]

A former FBI agent has told the BBC that he is being prevented from telling the truth about the events of 9/11 and what has happened since.

Ali Soufan alleges that crucial intelligence was not passed on from the CIA before the attacks in 2001.

He has written a book detailing some of his claims and has been speaking to the BBC's Security Correspondent Gordon Corera in his first on camera interview on the subject.

In response to the allegations in this report the CIA issued a statement to the BBC that said: "Any suggestion that the CIA purposely refused to share critical lead information on the 9/11 plots with the FBI is baseless."

"The suggestion that the Central Intelligence Agency has requested redactions on this publication because it does not like the content is ridiculous."

The CIA decline to comment on the record about the accusations regarding waterboarding and interrogation.

 

Wednesday, September 14 2011   -   9/11 A/V Galleries

September 14, 2011
Comment from Janice Matthews
Regarding video, "9/11: A Conspiracy Theory," described as "Everything you ever wanted to know about the 9/11 conspiracy theory in under 5 minutes."

Bravo! Kudos! Congratulations!! Thanks to independent journalist James Corbett for producing this outstanding video, now complete with transcript linking key facts to evidence. Really ... go to The Corbett Report, take five minutes and watch this.

The video has also been posted at YouTube, which is embedded below. I highly recommend you go straight to the source, however, for the video with transcript and links.

James has also posted the video at YouTube, which is embedded below. I highly recommend you go straight to the source, however, for the video with valuable transcript and links.

 

Wednesday, September 14 2011   -   In the Media

Former minister says group was prepared to see bin Laden put on trial prior to 9/11, but US was not interested.

September 11, 2011
Aljazeera.net

The Taliban government in Afghanistan offered to present Osama bin Laden for a trial long before the attacks of September 11, 2001, but the US government showed no interest, according to a senior aide to the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar.

Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil, Taliban’s last foreign minister, told Al Jazeera in an exclusive interview that his government had made several proposals to the United States to present the al-Qaeda leader, considered the mastermind of the 2001 attacks, for trial for his involvement in plots targeting US facilities during the 1990s.

"Even before the [9/11] attacks, our Islamic Emirate had tried through various proposals to resolve the Osama issue. One such proposal was to set up a three-nation court, or something under the supervision of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference [OIC]," Muttawakil said.

"But the US showed no interest in it. They kept demanding we hand him over, but we had no relations with the US, no agreement of any sort. They did not recognise our government."

The US did not recognise the Taliban government and had no direct diplomatic relations with the group which controlled most of Afghanistan between 1996 and 2001.

But proposals by the Taliban were relayed to the US through indirect channels such as the US embassy in Pakistan or the informal Taliban office for the UN in New York, Muttawakil said.

Robert Grenier, the CIA station chief in Pakistan at the time of 9/11, confirmed that such proposals had been made to US officials.

 

Wednesday, September 14 2011   -   9/11 A/V Galleries

KPFA Special Broadcast for September 11, 2011

911's Footprint on America ten years later - September 11, 2011 at 4:00pm
KPFA --Hour Two of debate -- moderator Mickey Huff on The Science around the Twin Towers collapse.
Browse other online episodes of this show
More information about this show

911's Footprint on America ten years later - September 11, 2011 at 3:00pm
KPFA -- Hour One of debate -- moderator Peter Phillips 911 Commission Report
Browse other online episodes of this show
More information about this show

 

Wednesday, September 14 2011   -   In the Media

September 12, 2011
By Barbara Liston
Reuters

The former co-chair of a Congressional inquiry after the September 11, 2001 attacks called on the U.S. government to reopen its investigation following a news report linking the hijackers to a Saudi Arabian couple who lived in Florida.

Former U.S. Senator Bob Graham said he has no reason to doubt the news report, which said the Saudi Arabian couple abruptly abandoned their luxury home in Sarasota two weeks before the attacks, leaving behind a full refrigerator, clothes, furnishings and a new car in the driveway.

The report was published by BrowardBulldog.org., a nonprofit Internet news site and was simultaneously published on the news website of the Miami Herald.

If true, it reveals another Saudi terrorism connection that was never disclosed by the FBI to the public or to the 2002 joint Congressional intelligence committee investigating the attacks, said Graham, who was co-chair of the committee.

The FBI office in Tampa issued a statement on Monday saying the Sarasota case was one of many leads that "were resolved and determined not to be related to any threat nor connected to the 9/11 plot."

Graham called the Sarasota case "eerily similar" to the FBI's failure to tell the intelligence committee about a former Saudi civil servant, Omar al-Bayoumi, who supported two hijackers while they were living in San Diego. Graham said an investigator for his committee independently unearthed the information about al-Bayoumi.

 

Tuesday, September 13 2011   -   Editorials

By Paul Craig Roberts
September 11, 2011
Information Clearing House

In the US on September 11, 2011, the tenth anniversary of 9/11, politicians and their presstitute media presented Americans with "A Day of Remembrance," a propaganda exercise that hardened the 9/11 lies into dogma. Meanwhile, in Toronto, Canada, at Ryerson University the four-day International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001, came to a close at 5pm.

During the four days of hearings, distinguished scientists and scholars and professional architects and engineers presented the results of years of their independent research into all aspects of 9/11 to a distinguished panel consisting of the honorary president of the Italian Supreme Court who was an investigative judge who presided over terrorism cases and three distinguished scholars of high renown and judgment. The distinguished panel's task is to produce a report with their judgment of the evidence presented by the expert witnesses.

The Toronto Hearings were streamed live over the Internet. I was able to watch many of the presentations over the four days. I was impressed that the extremely high level of intelligence and scientific competence of the witnesses was matched by a high level of integrity, a quality rare in US politics and totally absent in the American media.

As I stressed in my recent interview about 9/11 with Jim Corbett and Global Research, I am a reporter, not an independent researcher into 9/11. I pay attention when the fact-based community finds problems with the official propaganda. Perhaps this reflects my age. My generation was raised to believe in evidence and the scientific method. George Orwell and other writers warned us of the consequence of succumbing to government propaganda as a result of disinterest in the truth or government manipulation of one's patriotism.

 

Tuesday, September 13 2011   -   In the Media

A congresswoman demanded details be revealed to the public about FBI investigation into Saudi family with ties to hijackers in Sarasota.
By Dan Christensen
Special to The Miami Herald

A decade after the FBI found ties between a Saudi family living quietly near Sarasota and the 9/11 hijackers, a Florida Democratic congresswoman is calling on the House Intelligence Committee to investigate whether agents revealed their findings to Congress.

Kathy Castor said she was troubled over reports that federal agents discovered a luxury home where the family was living was visited by vehicles used by the hijackers and phone calls were linked between the home and the terrorists, but Congress was not told of the discovery.

Senator Bob Graham:

 

Tuesday, September 13 2011   -   Resources and Materials

HistoryCommons.org has been offline the last few days, including the Complete 9/11 Timeline, as we reported early morning 9/11 as part of our story about the CIA threatening the "9/11: Press for Truth" filmmakers. It is a relief to report this morning that the site is once again available.

If you have not been aware or taken advantage of this astounding research tool, or participated in the development of this "experiment in open-content civic journalism," I encourage you to do so. The 32 individual timelines hosted at HistoryCommons offer an astounding wealth of information drawn from the media on subjects such as the events on 9/11, it's environmental effects, anthrax, Iraq war, neocon influences on US politics, George W. Bush's treatment of American troops, electoral politics, and much more.

Students often write to me asking where and how to start researching on some aspect of 9/11 or related matter for class projects and research papers; HistoryCommons.org is where I tell them to start. Not only is the information presented in a comprehensible manner, every single entry is thoroughly sourced. I challenge anyone to review what's at HistoryCommons.org and maintain their belief that people asking questions are lunatics or morons.

Thank you, Paul Thompson and all of you who dedicate your time, voluntarily, to civic journalism and assembling this incredibly valuable historical record. I know our posterity will thank you, as well. Welcome back!

 

Tuesday, September 13 2011   -   In the Media

September 12, 2011
Source: 9/11 Truth News

30+ 9/11 Truth Hit Pieces In 2 Weeks

For the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attack, the mainstream media has offered an unprecedented level of apparent bias against reasonable people invested in justice for the victims of 9/11. The majority of articles below imply that "truthers" are driven by a fear of chaos and uncertainty to draw comfort from misdirected rage. Most of the articles make sweeping generalization about those involved while others are outright insulting.

9/11 Truth Hit Piece #1 -- CNN World
"Conspiracy theories are for losers"

The Author: Dr. Joseph Parent and Dr. Joseph Uscinski

The Setup: "The world is awash in conspiracy theories. ["9/11 "truther" beliefs"] [...] The "birther" conspiracy theorists [...] Obama is a secret Muslim intent on instituting Sharia Law [...] the president blew up the Deepwater Horizon [...] Osama bin Laden is not dead [...] the Holocaust never happened [...] the world is run by the Council on Foreign Relations, the Freemasons or the Federal Reserve. The list sprawls on."

The Premise: "When Republicans are in power, right-leaning villains such as big business dominate conspiracy theorizing. When Democrats are in power, left-leaning villains such as socialists become the top peril."

Misdirection: "Although conspiracy theories have anti-democratic aspects, in this respect they are very fair: All of us get to play the villain eventually."

 

Tuesday, September 13 2011   -   Editorials

September 11th, 2011
by Michael Meacher MP
published at Meacher's Blog

9/11 remains one of the most misunderstood events in modern history. The first myth is that it came out of the blue on an unsuspecting America. In fact it is known that 11 countries provided advance warnings to the US about the 9/11 attacks, including Russia and Israel which sent 2 senior Mossad experts to Washington in August 2001 with a list of terrorist suspects that included 4 of the 9/11 hijackers, none of whom was arrested. Moussaoui, now thought to be the 20th hijacker, was arrested in August 2001 after an instructor reported he showed a suspicious interest in learning how to steer large airliners, and Newsweek later revealed (20 May 2002) that an agent had written that month that Moussaoui might be planning to crash into the Twin Towers. Richard Clarke, counter-terrorism chief in the White House, has since said that "50 CIA personnel knew that al-Hamzi and al-Mihdhar (2 of the hijackers) were in the US in July-August 2001, including the Director", but never passed the information to the FBI. And the former US federal crimes prosecutor, John Loftus, has stated that "the information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence".

Second, 9/11 is portrayed as acts of unprovoked aggression perpetrated without cause other than wilful violence. In fact Osama bin Laden repeatedly demanded in the 1990s that the US should end its occupation of Saudi Arabia containing the two holy cities of Islam, should stop retaining in power Arab tyrannies in order to preserve Western interests in the Middle East particularly oil, and should cease its indiscriminate support for Israel against the Arab world -- all of which demands were ignored by the US. Of course that does not conceivably condone or justify an appalling atrocity like 9/11 which killed nearly 3,000 people, including 67 Britons. But nor does it justify the following decade-long wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan which the US Brown University estimates 'very conservatively' cost the deaths of 137,000 civilians (which the Lancet calculated at a million) and created more than 7.8 million refugees.

 

Monday, September 12 2011   -   Truth Movement News

September 12, 2011
by Hereward Fenton
ThePunch.com.au

On this sad anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in post-war history I am reminded of the prophetic words spoken by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address to the nation in 1961: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

Eisenhower was the supreme commander in western Europe who had led America to victory against one of the most evil regimes in history, a man who had witnessed the depths of human depravity, and wanted finally to warn us that the war machine which had been created to defend freedom in WWII could equally be used for the opposite purpose, and that it was up to the American people to guard against this possibility.

Eisenhower coined the phrase "military industrial complex" which became the catch-cry of the anti-war movement of the 1960s, describing an economic and political fusion of power involving armaments manufacturers, construction companies, banks, democratic governments and puppet dictatorships.