HomeMembers LoginLatest NewsRefer A LawyerMessage BoardOnline StoreAffiliatesAbout UsContact Us
Who's A Rat - Largest Online Database of Informants and Agents Worldwide!
Site Navigation
Visit Our Store
Refer A Lawyer
Affiliates
Link To Us
Latest News
Top Secret Documents
Make A Donation
Important Case Law
Members Login
Feedback
Message Board
Legal Information
Advertise your AD, Book or Movie

Informants and Agents�Who's a Rat Message Board
Forum Hosting, Guestbook Hosting, or Website Poll for your website.
Show Printable Version
Search This Thread

Advanced Search
WhosaRat.com


Register | Login | Search | Chat



Who's A Rat > Message Board > YOU CAN COMMIT THE ALMOST PERFECT CRIME........


Username:
Password:

Remember Me?




Thread Tools | Search This Thread

Reply

Author Comment

View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


07/23/08 at 11:13 AM Reply with quote #51
couple of reads one with FBI spin

1st read

Richmond Riedel’s realistic film, Target Practice
Movie Director throws spotlight on terrorist training camps in Target Practice
By Judi McLeod Wednesday, July 23, 2008

imageThe military compounds training terrorists on American and Canadian soil, that everyone talks about but no one seems to do much about, has made it to the silver screen.

There is no doubt that director Richmond Riedel’s realistic film, Target Practice takes you there.

Starring in a timely topic, Target Practice gives new meaning to the description of art imitating real life.

Fast-paced and intense, the film has the distinction of premiering in two high-profile film festivals in the Los Angeles area on the same night.

On Friday, July 25, Target Practice premiers at the 11th Annual Dances With Films Independent Film Festival (DWF). Ditto for the 4th Annual Action On Film International Film Festival (AOF).

The writer, producer, director and editor of Target Practice, Riedel is the author of another dozen screenplays, having also written the original screen play for the Indie film Charades, starring C. Thomas Howell, Karen Black, Erika Eleniak, James Rosso, Jack Scalia and James Wilder.

The timely Target Practice will have theatregoers sitting on the edges of their seats.

Gooseflesh is no stranger to those who know that compounds training “homegrown” terrorists are springing up on isolated terrain across North America.

Trailers show that Target Practice drags terrorist training camps out of isolation and throws them up on the big screen.

“Regular guys” running into terrorists-in-training is a worry of the times we live in.

Target Practice is being described as “an intelligent but raw, visceral, extremely tense outdoors thriller with an emphasis on character as much as action”.

The story line centers on 5 blue-collar friends on a weekend fishing trip—and the hell that’s unleashed upon these regular guys when they almost run into a car that’s been abandoned in the middle of an isolated mountain road. Doing the right thing by stopping to see if anyone needs their help, they inadvertently stumble into the middle of an undercover operation involving a CIA agent and a hidden training camp for homegrown terrorists.

If this sounds familiar, it’s meant to. The story is molded after “real-life, recent discoveries in both the U.S. and Canada,” says Riedel.

“It’s an independent film that I put together with my own financing, but it was a project that I felt very strongly about, as did all of the actors and others involved,” he told Canada Free Press (CFP) from L.A. last night.

“First and foremost, I wanted to make an intense, entertaining thriller, and I’ve always been a big fan of films like Deliverance and I wanted to do a film in a similar vein, that sort of man-versus-man-in-the-woods genre,” he said.

This is one writer/producer/director rooted in the reality of contemporary times: “At the same time, there’s been a cascade of news about evidence of terrorist camps being found in isolated areas in the U.S. and Canada, or evidence of people trying to form such camps. The cell with their camp outside Toronto. The school bus with the bullet holes outside Marion, Alabama. The aborted attempt outside Blythe, Oregon, etc., etc.”

(One can almost hear the rah-rahs! from Northeast Intelligence Network director Doug Hagmann and Day of Islam author Paul L. Williams, both of whom traipsed through suspected military training compounds such as Islamburg and got only threats from radical Imams for their trouble.)

“I don’t pretend to be an expert,” says Riedel, “but this topic of concern certainly lent itself well to the man-versus-man-in-the-woods genre that I was looking to write my script in. “And it’s not just the conventional image of the “Islamic jihadist” that is a cause for concern, Timothy McVeigh wasn’t an Islamic jihadist. As I read somewhere, an FBI spokesman said that one of our greatest challenges from this point forward is simply going to be BOGS, “Bunch of Guys”, or GOGS, “Group of Guys”. Anyone with a chip on his shoulder or a grudge, put him together with a couple of other guys getting organized…they don’t even have to be on the same page ideologically, but it’s a case of `The enemy of my enemy is my friend’. And right now, we’re that enemy.”

Target Practice cast and crew includes Joey Lanai as Paul; Eltony Williams as Albedeen; Bill Elverman as Dave; Sean Christopher, stunt coordinator; Solomon Hoilett as Ron; Eric Dean as Mark; Aaron Hawk as Steve and Richard DeGuilio as Jeff.

Riedel, who plays one of the homegrown militants, makes chills run down the spine.

Target Practice has been nominated for 3 AOF Awards: Action Film of the Year, Best Action Sequence Feature and best Special Effects.

The film website, including trailers, production stills, and cast and crew information, can be found at Target Practice.

Target Practice the movie is an idea whose time has come!

Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.


2nd read
Terry Nichols Alleges FBI Played Role In Oklahoma City Bombing ...
Feb 22, 2007 ... Nichols named gun dealer Roger Moore and Potts as ... Trentadue, a Salt Lake City attorney, has been involved in litigation against the U.S. ...
intelwire.egoplex.com/2007_02_22_exclusives.html - 38k - Cached - Similar pages
Oklahoma City Bombing: Terry Nichols Claims Midwest Bank Robber ...
Nichols told Trentadue he has been prevented from talking with the press, .... Texas Reserve Militia · 2/4/92: Letter From FBI's Larry Potts to US Army ...
intelwire.egoplex.com/2006_11_05_exclusives.html - 42k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from intelwire.egoplex.com »
Terry Nichols - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Terry Nichols contends a high-ranking FBI director, Larry Potts, ... 2007 that Trentadue can question and videotape David Paul Hammer and Terry Nichols. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Nichols - 40k - Cached - Similar pages
Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nichols contends a high-ranking FBI director, Larry Potts, directed Timothy ... Trentadue's death a few months after the April 19, 1995, bombing was ruled ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh - 90k - Cached - Similar pages
Deseret News | Nichols says bombing was FBI op
Feb 22, 2007 ... Trentadue claims his brother was killed during an interrogation by ... Potts retired from the FBI under intense pressure and criticism for ...
deseretnews.com/dn/view/1,1249,660197443,00.html - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
Deseret News | Nichols says bombing was FBI op
Trentadue claims his brother was killed during an interrogation by FBI agents ... anger that he was taking instruction from former FBI official Larry Potts. ...
http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660197443,00.html - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
Nichols says bombing was FBI op | Deseret News (Salt Lake City ...
Trentadue claims his brother was killed during an interrogation by FBI agents when ... in a fit of rage, McVeigh mentioned Potts' name, Nichols wrote. ...
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20070221/ai_n18626763/pg_1 - 42k - Cached - Similar pages
Political Friendster Connection - Larry A. Potts connected to ...
Connection between Larry A. Potts and Terry Lynn Nichols .... Trentadue said he plans to seek that deposition of Nichols, but "I expect one hell of a fight ...
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnect ... 1&id2=7079 - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
Richard123
Registered: 08/05/08
Posts: 7


08/06/08 at 01:35 PM Reply with quote #52
If you are interested this topic, and it is very important, please see http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
by Michael Rivero
However, I am not sure this is the best forum for WTC and other government conspiracy issues. YouTube has lively discussions on all those topics.



__________________
-Richard
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/06/08 at 05:25 PM Reply with quote #53
Note to Reader: The Muckraker Report stands by the Jersey Widows in their fight to learn the truth about 9/11. We encourage you to sign their petition, which you can either do HERE, or at the link at the end of this article. As Lorie Van Auken puts it below, “if we were to get 15,000 names on this petition, we’d take it to Washington.” Due to polls suggesting that nearly half of the country has doubts about the official story of 9/11, however, we at the Muckraker Report expect far more than 15,000 signatures.


Joseph Murtagh

9/11 Widows Keep on Asking the Tough Questions



February 12, 2007 -- When it comes to 9/11, America right now is divided between two camps, those who trust the official account of the attacks, and those who, well, have questions. It’s occasionally the case that the first camp will publicly denounce the second camp as a bunch of nutcases, and when this happens, it’s usually the rowdier section of Camp Two, the Loose Change, bullhorn-wielding, “death to the New World Order” crowd, that takes the most heat.



What tends to get ignored, however, is the quieter section of Camp Two, and especially a group of widowed mothers from New Jersey and New York who over the last six years have worked harder than just about anyone to protect the country from terrorism. Few people realize that had it not been for the tireless efforts of the “Jersey girls” – Mindy Kleinberg, Kristen Breitweiser, Lorie Van Auken, Patty Casazza, and Monica Gabrielle – not only would the 9/11 Commission never have happened, but there most likely never would have been any investigation into what was the worst loss of life on American soil since the Civil War. No inquiry into our failed military defenses, or the collapse of the towers, or just why it was that President Bush sat in that Florida classroom for a full seven minutes after the second plane struck. No scientific reports, no effort to discover what went wrong, no hearings of any kind. No attempt to figure out the details of the whole who, what, where, when and why of the attacks. And again, what few people realize is that today, six years later, the Jersey girls are still fighting the exact same fight they were fighting on September 12, 2001, and for the same reason: to keep you, and me, and everyone we know, safe from terrorism.



“The story of how we got started with this is really simple,” says Mindy Kleinberg, who lost her husband Alan in WTC I. “After my husband was killed, I got involved with a support group that included family members of the victims of Pan AM 103 that blew up over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. And I realized that if the government had only hardened cockpit doors like those family members had demanded prior to 2001, the 9/11 hijackings never could have taken place. And I felt terrible, personally responsible for not having spoken up sooner. But it also made me realize that there are practical steps people can take to keep horrible things like this from happening. So that’s why we went to Washington. It was a moral obligation. There was no agenda, nothing political. We just wanted to do whatever needed to be done to make sure the country would be safe for our kids.”



Long before the Jersey girls ever began appearing on national TV, they were leaving their children with friends and relatives and making repeated trips to Washington, where they went from office to office, pressuring Congress into establishing an official investigation into the attacks. The 9/11 Commission was largely the work of the Family Steering Committee, a group formed by the Jersey widows along with several other 9/11 families who, after reading everything they could get their hands on about 9/11, drew up a voluminous list of questions they wanted to see answered, the goal being to provide the 9/11 Commission with every piece of information it would need to do a solid investigation.



The questions covered everything from the president’s actions on the morning of 9/11, to why hijacked airplanes were permitted to fly around for nearly two hours in U.S. airspace without any military response, to why no one at any level of the government has ever been held responsible for the many failings leading up to the attacks. The widows had high hopes for the 9/11 Commission Report, but when it was published in July of 2004 they were bitterly disappointed. While the public moved on, widely assuming 9/11 to be a bygone issue, the widows were stuck with the frustrating realization that the investigation they’d worked so hard to achieve had utterly failed to meet their expectations.



“It was a pathetic excuse of a report,” says Lorie Van Auken, whose husband Kenneth was killed in WTC I. “Seventy percent of our questions went unanswered. The legislation gave the Commission eighteen months to do the investigation, and even though they had subpoena power from the start, they waited a full ten months to use it and then only reluctantly. Also, anyone who appeared for questioning, from Rudy Guliani to George Tenet, was handled with kid gloves and lauded with accolades. The Commissioners would say, ‘You’re fabulous, you did a fantastic job on 9/11,’ and they would run out the clock. We couldn’t understand what the point was in having a hearing if no substantive questions were being asked or answered.”



Particularly frustrating for the widows was the way the White House initially responded to the idea of an investigation, and they were astonished to find the Bush administration stacking the odds against them. Vice-President Cheney answered their call for legislation by personally phoning congressmen to voice his opposition, and he publicly stated that “an investigation must not interfere with the ongoing efforts to prevent the next attack, because without a doubt a very real threat of another perhaps more devastating attack still exists.” But it was the widows’ opinion that another attack couldn’t be prevented without first knowing what had gone wrong. Caving under political pressure in the end, the White House grudgingly agreed to cooperate, appointing Henry Kissinger as Chairman of the Commission. Kissinger later stepped down when he was unwilling to release his confidential client list and was replaced by former New Jersey governor Tom Kean.



But the widows’ struggles were far from over. The White House named Philip Zelikow, a Bush-appointee who served on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, Executive Director of the Commission. A close friend of Condaleeza Rice’s, Zelikow had co-authored a book with her and helped in drawing up the plans for the invasion of Iraq. Based on these conflicts of interest, the Jersey widows called for his resignation, but their request was ignored.



“It’s hard for us to come to any other conclusion than that the 9/11 Commission was a political cover-up from the word go,” says Patty Casazza, who lost her husband John in WTC I. “We were so naïve, we had no idea we were going to run into this kind of fight. We just wanted an investigation into the attacks, for safety reasons. And yet it took President Bush fourteen months to agree to the 9/11 Commission. This was the man I’d voted for in 2000, and all of a sudden he was my biggest adversary. I look back, and I think, well, at least we got them to put down their version of the events on record, so you can see where they weren’t being thorough. It was supposed to be a complete account, but it was anything but. If my husband had been run over by a car I’d know more.”



I asked the widows their opinions on the legislation recently passed through Congress implementing several of the 9/11 Commission recommendations.
why.”



I asked the women what their plans are for the future, if they are seeking another investigation.



“Not if it was anything like the last one,” says Kleinberg. “We’d be for congressional hearings, but only if they were held like a trial, with real legal authority exercised. We hope the 110th Congress sees fit to do so. We’re not giving up.”



“My hope is that September 11,” says Gabrielle “might force more Americans to realize they have to pay attention, participate in civic affairs, and hold their government accountable. It doesn’t matter who is in power, whether it’s the Democrats or the Republicans, you really need to hold their feet to the fire. People can be so complacent. We were guilty of it too, before our husbands died. But that’s a mistake we can never afford to make again.”



“It’s absolutely exhausting, what we’ve been through,” says Casazza. “We had to go down to Washington to try and make our country safer, at a time when no one in our country felt safe, especially in D.C. We entered into this world few ordinary Americans ever see, and it’s nothing like they teach you in civics class. It astonished me that we had to take our binders full of empirical evidence and educate and convince so many in Congress that there were actually procedures broken on 9/11, only to have them stare blankly back at us and deny the need to support legislation authorizing a full investigation into what had happened. The lack of urgency we witnessed from the White House on down defied every expectation we had of the way things worked in Washington. I never would have imagined that we’d have to push so hard during the worst time of our lives for something that was so obviously needed. I only wish that people would take it upon themselves to go to Washington, instead of just writing about what ought to be done by others. We’ll go back, if we have to, because we know it’s the right thing to do. We’re not going away.”

Your donations sustain the Muckraker Report Archive. Please donate.

Joseph Murtagh's intellectual heroes include George Orwell, Friedrich Nietzsche, Albert Camus, and Hannah Arendt. Politically, he wonders whatever happened to Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party because he'd love to join. He's also a big fan of Tolstoy, the poetry of Walt Whitman, and the essays of David Foster Wallace.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/08/08 at 12:45 PM Reply with quote #54
FBI public relations department at the Washington Post spins a new FBI disinformation hit....
Another FBI assisted plane crash and more
a read before your 1st read
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKboggs.htm





couple of reads

1st read
Ford Told FBI of Skeptics on Warren Commission

By Joe Stephens
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 8, 2008; Page A05

Confidential FBI files released this week to The Washington Post detail the inner workings of a secret back channel that Gerald R. Ford opened in 1963 between J. Edgar Hoover's FBI and the Warren Commission's independent investigation into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The existence of the private conduit has long been known, first disclosed in documents released 30 years ago. Now, newly obtained, previously classified records detail one visit Ford made to one of Hoover's deputies in December 1963 -- three weeks after being named to the commission.

Declassified FBI memos on Ford's interactions with the bureau are among scores of documents in the FBI's previously confidential file on the former president, , who died in December 2006. At the request of The Post, the FBI this week released 500 pages of the bureau's voluminous file.

2nd read
Gerald Ford - Warren Commission Kennedy Assassination Coverup
Later, in 1971 and '72, Boggs said that the Warren Report was false and that J. Edgar Hoover's (freemason 33 degree) FBI not only helped cover up the JFK ...
http://www.saveourwetlands.org/fordfreemason.html - 26k - Cached - Similar pages
Chapter 11, Nixon and Ford -- The Pardon and the Tapes, "THE ...
Ford purposefully covered up the conspiracy of the PCG in the JFK assassination and also covered up the fact that Oswald was a paid informer for the FBI. ...
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/ToAchp11.html - 28k - Cached - Similar pages
Chapter 2, The Power Control Group, "THE TAKING OF AMERICA, 1-2-3 ...
Warren, Dulles McCloy and Ford all knew the truth; Cooper, Boggs and ... show how Gerald Ford, for example, led the cover-up in the JFK conspiracy than it ...
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/ToAchp2.html - 9k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.ratical.org »
Hale Boggs - Warren Commission Member and Critic
Boggs became frustrated with the panel's total reliance on the FBI for information. ... Gerald Ford's Role in the JFK Assassination Cover-up ...
haleboggs.tripod.com/index.htm - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
Thomas Hale Boggs: Biography
Boggs originally agreed that John F. Kennedy and J. D. Tippit had been killed by .... Boggs also charged that he had discovered that certain FBI agents had ...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKboggs.htm - 65k - Cached - Similar pages
Gerald Ford
Ford realized that this provided a serious problem for the single bullet theory. As Michael L. Kurtz has pointed out (The JFK Assassination Debates): "If a ...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAfordG.htm - 187k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk »
informationliberation - Gerald Ford's Role in the JFK ...
Dec 28, 2006 ... Congressman Hale Boggs had ‘strong doubts. ..... Gerald Ford was so close to Hoover that he served as the FBI director's informant while he ...
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=19071 - 53k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK Lancer - Government Investigations
Representative Hale Boggs. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's attempts to .... of the Gerald Ford Presidential Library when Congress passed the JFK Act.6 ...
http://www.jfklancer.com/Investigations.html - 27k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK LANCER - ASSASSINATION INVESTIGATION LINKS
Hale Boggs, Democratic Representative from Louisiana and majority whip ... FBI Memos on Warren Commissioner Gerald Ford secret agreement to leak to the FBI. ...
http://www.jfklancer.com/Articles.html - 44k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.jfklancer.com »
Ford 'memoir' fuels JFK plot buffs - Latest News - The Grand ...
Mar 23, 2008 ... Gerald R. Ford, R-Grand Rapids; Rep. Hale Boggs, D-La.; Sen. ... There was no complicity on the part of the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, ...
blog.mlive.com/grpress/2008/03/ford_memoir_fuels_jfk_plot_buf.html - 40k - Cached - Similar pages
Diary Entry - Dulles
A. We did in case of fingerprint experts to double-check on FBI. ... Russell runs Committees, so do Boggs, Ford, Cooper, McCloy and I know these type ...
http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diary/dulles.htm - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
Diary Entry - McCloy
So I believed it was possible Connally was hit by same bullet as JFK, but I can't be definite. ... Clearly, he held Ford and Boggs in low regard. ...
http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diary/mccloy.htm - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.edwardjayepstein.com »
Oral History Project - John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum
List of interviews with individuals associated with John F. Kennedy. ... Special Investigative Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); ...
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Oral+History+Project/ - 429k - Cached - Similar pages
Summaries - John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum
BOGGS, ELIZABETH (Monroe) 1913-1996 Member, President's Panel on Mental ...... Attorney for John F. Kennedy Library, Inc. and the John F. Kennedy Library ...
http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Summaries/ - 234k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.jfklibrary.org »
John F. Kennedy Library: Archives and Manuscripts
Files on the development of the John F. Kennedy Library, including memorandums, reports, studies, site plans, photographs, and maps. 1 foot. FORD FOUNDATION ...
http://www.cs.umb.edu/~serl/jfk/arcnms.htm - 178k - Cached - Similar pages
[PDF]
HOME Gerald Ford's Role in the JFK Assassination Cover-up A
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Al en Dulles, Senator John Sherman Cooper, and Representative Hale Boggs. ..... Gerald Ford was so close to Hoover that he served as the FBI director's ...
http://www.nogw.com/download/2006_ford_role.pdf - Similar pages
King-Kill 33: Masonic Symbolism in the Assassination of John F.Kennedy
Representative Hale Boggs, the only Catholic on the commission, ... Secret Society machinations of the FBI and may very well have been pharmacologically or ...
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/kingkill33.html - 50k - Cached - Similar pages
Category:Jfk Assassination Deaths - Eurêka
3 man in FBI, worked on JFK investigation, died of an heart attack, June 1977. .... Hale Boggs, later killed in plane crash. (7)Gerald Ford Rep. ...
http://www.ultralingua.com/eureka/index.php/Category:Jfk_Assassination_Deaths - 48k - Cached - Similar pages
WHO KILLED J.F.K.? JUST ONE ASSASSIN - TIME
So, too, has the recent admission by the FBI that it secretly destroyed a threatening ... the commission included Congressmen Gerald R. Ford and Hale Boggs, ...
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,913720,00.html - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
WHO KILLED J.F.K.? JUST ONE ASSASSIN - TIME
WHO KILLED JFK? The jolting question glares from bumper stickers, intrudes from ... the commission included Congressmen Gerald R. Ford and Hale Boggs, ...
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,913720,00.html?iid=chix-sphere - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.time.com »
JFK Assassination
The Warren Commission relied on the FBI and other agencies, particularly the CIA, ..... Gerald Ford's Role in the JFK Assassination Cover-up, by Don Fulsom. ...
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/JFK_Assassination - 77k - Cached - Similar pages
Warren Commission
Hale Boggs complained that "Hoover lied his eyes out to the Commission" before ... See Gerald Ford's Role in the JFK Assassination Cover-up, by Don Fulsom. ...
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Warren_Commission - 43k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.maryferrell.org »
Collection Register
16 Boxes; Warren Commission Documents Reviewed by the FBI for the House Select .... Search JFK Database under "boggs papers"; Dallas Police Department ...
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/finding-aids/register.html - 39k - Cached - Similar pages
Findings
The committee concluded from its lengthy study of the roles of the FBI, ...... House of Representatives, Hale Boggs, Democrat of Louisiana, and Gerald Ford, ...
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1d.html - 138k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.archives.gov »
Files on JFK - Google Books Result
by Wim Dankbaar - 2005 - Biography & Autobiography - 604 pages
1 Wim Dankbaar 2005 Trafford Publishing ca-print-trafford ISBN141206516X 141206516X ISBN9781412065160 9781412065160 OCLC63124948 Biography & Autobiography ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=141206516X...
John F. Kennedy Assassination White House - Air Force One Recordings
President Johnson asks FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover if he should have a bullet proof car. Continuing JFK's agenda. Tributes to JFK. ...
http://www.accesshistory.com/jfk_assassination_tapes.html - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
Assassination of President John F. Kennedy - encyclopedia article ...
Within a matter of weeks it was reworked by Ford Motors and became the official vehicle for President Johnson. President Johnson instructed FBI Director J. ...
en.citizendium.org/wiki/Assassination_of_President_John_F._Kennedy - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
John-F-Kennedy.net - 16 Questions On The Assassination by Bertrand ...
Meanwhile, the F.B.I., the police and the Secret Service have tried to silence key ... Senator Russell of Georgia and Congressman Boggs of Louisiana, ...
http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/16questions.htm - 84k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK (1991)
Himself - Warren Commission, behind Boggs (archive footage) (uncredited). Walter Cronkite ... Himself - Interviewing JFK / Announcing His Death (archive ...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102138/combined - 235k - Cached - Similar pages
[PDF]
John F.Kennedy on Leadership
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
John F. Kennedy on Leadership. famous men such as Henry Ford and William ...... grand jury to investigate the steel industry, and FBI agents appeared at the ...
topmdi.com/cerita/sejarah/JFKennedyOnLeadershipTheLessonsAndLegacyOfAPreside nt.pdf - Similar pages
Sherman Skolnick's Report
Ford in 1964, had been a member of the infamous Warren Commission, falsely proclaiming a "lone assassin" killed JFK. Ford was a spy, for J.Edgar Hoover, ...
http://www.skolnicksreport.com/ootar42.html - 29k - Cached - Similar pages
codshit.com: A History of America's National Reconnaissance Office
"The commission member Ford opposed criticizing the FBI for having failed to inform ... When Boggs made a second speech on April 22, 1971 against Hoover, ...
codshit.blogspot.com/2006/09/history-of-americas-national.html - 180k - Cached - Similar pages
Covert Action Teams -- Murder; Airplane Sabotage
Clay Shaw, key figure in JFK murder investigation by District Attorney Jim Garrison. ... [Gerald] Ford member of Warren Commission whitewash. FBI top honcho ...
http://www.theconspiracy.us/vol10/cn10-57.html - 11k - Cached - Similar pages
Who do you think killed J.F.K. ?, page 1
Later, in 1971 and '72, Boggs said that the Warren Report was false and that J. Edgar Hoover's FBI not only helped cover up the JFK murder but blackmailed ...
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread13204/pg1 - 72k - Cached - Similar pages
..::John F. Kennedy Assassination::.. - Page 1 of 3
Joe Giorlando JFK And You Will Know The Truth and The Truth Will Make You ... the Warren Commission; Hale Boggs Representative from Louisiana (Democrat); ...
http://www.youposted.com/index.php?topic=17162.0 - 162k - Cached - Similar pages
LBJ in the Oval Office
Boggs reports on efforts to start a House investigation of the ... LBJ discusses the release of the FBI report and floats the idea of Russell's service on a ...
http://www.hpol.org/lbj/warren/ - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage :: FAQ
Your question isn't listed here? Mail it to http://www.jfk-assassination.de ..... Gerald Ford (who leaked information to the FBI during the Warren investigation). ...
http://www.jfk-assassination.de/faq.php - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage :: Warren Commission ...
... Representative Hale Boggs, Representative Gerald R. Ford, ... If you do not count Mr. Gopadze and the FBI interpreter, I have not been in contact with ...
http://www.jfk-assassination.de/warren/wch/vol1/page59.php - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.jfk-assassination.de »
BUSH 41 REVIVES LINKS TO JFK WARREN COMMISSION OBSTRUCTION
Jan 13, 2007 ... George Bush Sr. cites JFK Warren report at Ford funeral despite evidence ...... FBI memo, photo link Bush Sr to JFK Dallas murder scene ...
http://www.stewwebb.com/bush_41_revives_links_to_jfk_warren_comission_obst ruction.htm - 58k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK Asaassination witness page
Boggs, Lindy, ARRB Testimony, Wife of Warren Commission member Hale Boggs ... Brehm, Charles, FBI Report, Witness at assassination scene ...
mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/wit.htm - 125k - Cached - Similar pages
Assassination Records Review Board Testimony
Oliver Stone's movie JFK, which so badly mangled the evidence about the .... Thousands of records from the FBI's core and related assassination files ...
mcadams.posc.mu.edu/arrb/ - 20k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from mcadams.posc.mu.edu »
Sixteen Questions on the Warren Report
The F.B.I. held a series of background briefing sessions for Life magazine, ... Why has the F.B.I. refused to publish what could be the most reliable piece ...
karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/russell/Sixteen_questions_Russell.html - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
"The War For Space"! Ford "Faked" Warren Commission Report To Hide ...
Feb 19, 2008 ... Boggs: "When the FBI taps the telephones of members of this body and ... p://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/JFK/ford.html ...
memes.org/president-ford-faked-warren-commission-kennedy-assassination-protect-identity-2nd-shooter - 128k - Cached - Similar pages
Questions on plane crashes JFK + Spooks at Holyok
JFK was not aware of the fake assassination plan, but high-ranking officials in the government and his administration were. Military intelligence, the FBI ...
911review.org/Alex/jfk_wellstone_crash.html - 56k - Cached - Similar pages
DejaVu
JFK negotiates with Russia, despised by warhawks; Bobby Kennedy busts hundreds of ... outspoken Democrat Hale Boggs disappears in plane crash just before ...
http://www.punkyamerica.com/dejavu.html - 41k - Cached - Similar pages
Bartrcops JFK
Hale Boggs (later was killed in a plane crash), and Rep. Gerald Ford (future president). Since the Warren Commission had no investigators of its own, ...
http://www.geocities.com/verisimus101/investigations.htm - 25k - Cached - Similar pages
LBJ, JFK, & The American Coup d'etat of Nov. 22, 1963
On Nov 29, 1963, President Johnson met with J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI Director, to discuss the list of ... Gerald R. Ford, R-Mi; Rep. Hale Boggs, D-La; Sen. ...
educate-yourself.org/cn/proutyJFKmurderandLyndonJohnson.shtml - 131k - Cached - Similar pages
Political Friendster - John F. Kennedy JFK - Connections
hi hellow, this is a comment for the fbi headquarters, this is to talk about the .... Members were Earl Warren, Chairman, Hale Boggs, John Cooper, Allen. ...
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=2744&name=John-F-Kennedy--JFK - 55k - Cached - Similar pages
Political Friendster - Rate Connection - Bertrand Russell ...
Rate the Bertrand Russell - John F. Kennedy JFK connection ... It consisted of two Democrats, Senator Russell of Georgia and Congressman Boggs of Louisiana, ...
http://www.politicalfriendster.com/rateConnection.php?id1=3825&id2=2744 - 40k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from http://www.politicalfriendster.com »
How Five Investigations into JFK's Medical/Autopsy Evidence Got it ...
Gerald Ford, Rep. Hale Boggs, Sen. Richard Russell, Chief Justice Earl Warren, .... an FBI agent who witnessed JFK's autopsy, showing a rear head wound. ...
http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong.htm - 60k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK's assassination
After Oswald died, FBI 's Director determined that Oswald were the lone gunman in the JFK assassination and concluded that all gun shots were fired by him. ...
members.aol.com/alanyu5/part2c.htm - 78k - Cached - Similar pages
Documented evidence implicates Hoover, Johnson and cronies like ...
During WWII, President Roosevelt expanded the FBI's reach charging Hoover .... He said in the House he might try (Hale) Boggs and (Gerald R.) Ford and in ...
surftofind.com/document - 33k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK Videos, JFK Clips, and JFK Quotes
FBI Agent at Airport (credited on Director's Cut) .... Himself - Warren Commission, behind Boggs ... Himself - Interviewing JFK/Announcing His Death ...
celebrity.elle.com/movie-cast-JFK - 88k - Cached - Similar pages
http
Gerald Ford: “Under your authority from the President, the authority which gave you the FBI, the responsibility to conduct this investigation it is not an ...
http://www.newsmakingnews.com/vmmbletterhouseassass.htm - 81k - Cached - Similar pages
Spitire InfoTech - Dave Emory - For The Record #579 - Gimme a ...
“Months before Richard Nixon set Michigan congressman Gerald Ford on the path ... Boggs had just taken to the House floor saying that FBI Director J. Edgar ...
spitfirelist.com/f579.html - 57k - Cached - Similar pages
Marina Oswald testimony 2-4-64
Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper; Representative Hale Boggs; Representative Gerald Ford; John J. McCloy; Allen W. Dulles ...
http://www.maebrussell.com/The%20Warren%20Commission/Outline%20of%20Marina%20Oswald's%20testimony%202-4-64.html - 9k - Cached - Similar pages
WowEssays.com - Jfk Life
... Representatives Hale Boggs of Louisiana and Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, ... In addition, though the FBI had obtained considerable information about ...
http://www.wowessays.com/dbase/ae4/lmy144.shtml - 39k - Cached - Similar pages
The Warren Commission - The Education Forum
Dec 14, 2007 ... McCloy became concerned about the nature of JFK’s wounds. ...... Whether Boggs believed the FBI's surveillance of him was based on the fact ...
educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8568 - 180k - Cached - Similar pages
The Education Forum > Stacking the Deck
Congressman Hale Boggs; Congressman Gerald R. Ford; ... seven months before the assassination of John F. Kennedy, shot at Major General Edwin Anderson ...
educationforum.ipbhost.com/lofiversion/index.php/t2732.html - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
More results from educationforum.ipbhost.com »
Essay on History. College Papers, Research Papers on The ...
College Papers on The Assassination Of John F. Kennedy. ... Representatives Hale Boggs of Louisiana, Gerald Ford of Michigan, Allen W. Dulles and John J. ...
http://www.dreamessays.com/customessays/History/8628.htm - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
Warren Commission: Information and Much More from Answers.com
The assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas, on November 22 ... Hale Boggs of Louisiana and Gerald R. Ford of Michigan; Allen W. Dulles, ...
http://www.answers.com/topic/warren-commission - 98k - Cached - Similar pages

YouTube - Goodman/Rather confronted about Bilderberg Group
FBI picked him to 1st preview JFK Zapruder headshot. ... Koki ...
5 min -

Rated 4.9 out of 5.0









http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MBf2-5JCxo
Conspiracy Theories and Conspiracies in American History and ...
Lecture outline -- JFK: History of the Conspiracy Theories ... Members: Chief Justice Earl Warren, House leaders Hale Boggs & G. Ford, Senators R. Russell ...
area214a.blogspot.com/2005/10/lecture-outline-jfk-history-of.html - 26k - Cached - Similar pages
NationMaster - Encyclopedia: President's Commission on the ...
Thomas Hale Boggs Sr. ... The Democratic Party is one of two major contemporary ... The last surviving member of the Warren Commission, Gerald Ford, ...
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/President's-Commission-on-the-Assassination-of-President-Kennedy - 73k - Cached - Similar pages
VideoDB - JFK
John Sherman Cooper: Himself (Warren Commission, behind Boggs) (archive footage) (uncredited). Walter Cronkite: Himself (interviews JFK, announces his ...
video.markusvoss.com/show.php?id=134 - 94k - Cached - Similar pages
PBS/American Experience TONIGHT "Oswald's Ghost" --JFK ...
Jul 27, 2008 ... Daniel Marvin reports evidence that William Pitzer may have been killed because he had seen the JFK medical records. FBI agent killed: ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2684526 - 108k - Cached - Similar pages
The man who wanted JFK...
Gerald R. Ford, R-Mi; Rep. Hale Boggs, D-La; Sen. ... written by Hoover on that date and copied for eight of his senior FBI deputies, Lyndon Johnson, ...
http://www.prouty.org/johnson.html - 22k - Cached - Similar pages
The Radical Right and the Murder of John F. Kennedy: Stunning ... - Google Books Result

Commissioner Hale Boggs' son Thomas said that his father was intimidated by ... But the FBI withheld many facts. The WC staffers could not understand why ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=1412229030...
[PDF]
The JFK Assassination Medical Reference: Part 2
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
the FBI men were certain that Greer DID state that he turned around and. saw JFK hit, something Greer would go on to deny; ...
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v4n2/v4n2part2.pdf - Similar pages
John F Kennedy Half Dollar
October 16, 1972: House Majority Leader Hale Boggs, D-Louisiana and Rep. .... 9+2=11 Then she called the F.B.I. That was 2 hours before the plane went down. ...
bazaar.go.no-ip.net/john-f-kennedy-half-dollar/ - Similar pages
Master Researcher Directory 1999 Edition
BOGGS, HALE...................................... 057 171 BOLDEN, ABRAHAM. ...... JFK: FBI INVOLVEMENT.................. 018 019 020 042 052 148 167 220 ...
cuban-exile.com/doc_051-075/doc0068.html - 112k - Cached - Similar pages
Term Paper on History: World. Essays, Research Papers on John F ...
Free Essay on John F. Kennedy . We offer free example essays on History: World, ... Representatives Hale Boggs of Louisiana and Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, ...
http://www.customessaymeister.com/customessays/History:%20World/4774.htm - 59k - Cached - Similar pages
Assassinations / JFK
A number of books on the JFK assassination are indexed in NameBase. .... He infiltrated the Cubans for his FBI handler, and, unknown to Oswald, ...
http://www.namebase.org/books03.html - Similar pages
[CTRL] Plane Crashes
For example, Boggs had served on the Warren Commission, which was created to investigate the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. ...
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg98228.html - 34k - Cached - Similar pages
Bush-43 "Gaslights" America. Gaslight misinformation psychological ...
Jul 31, 2007 ... Interestingly, the JFK murder investigation was totally controlled by Masons, and the one Catholic on the Warren Commission, Hale Boggs, ...
http://www.doewatch.com/gaslight.html - 65k - Cached - Similar pages
Dirty Politics — Nixon, Watergate, and the JFK Assassination ...
The FBI Director was told that the files were “political dynamite and clearly should not see the .... Gerald Ford’s Role in the JFK Assassination Cover-up ...
hidhist.wordpress.com/assassination/dirty-politics-nixon-watergate-and-the-jfk-assassination/ - 151k - Cached - Similar pages
Notes on the Warren Report
Hale Boggs all expressed doubts about certain of the conclusion; language had ... and the JFK Records Act that the last of the Commission files were opened. ...
spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/31st_Issue/wc_notes.html - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
Warren Commission - The Black Vault Encyclopedia Project
When on the phone with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, a week after the ... The Assassination Records Review Board was created in 1992 by the JFK Records Act ...
http://www.theblackvault.com/wiki/index.php/Warren_Commission - 36k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK TIMELINE: Context to a Coup; Tribute to a Revolutionary Leader
Richard B. Russell Democrat from GA, John Sherman Cooper Republican from KY; US Representatives Hale Boggs Democrat from LA, Gerald R. Ford (FBI informant) ...
http://www.jfktimeline.com/ - 401k - Cached - Similar pages
Live By the Sword: The Secret War Against Castro and the Death of JFK - Google Books Result
by Gus Russo - 1998 - History - 617 pages
It has been known for years that Boggs, like much of the public, was suspicious of stonewalling by the FBI and CIA. What has not been known is that Boggs, ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=1890862010...
16 Questions on the Assassination
The F.B.I. held a series of background briefing sessions for Life magazine, ... According to the F.B.I., Oswald purchased his pistol in September 1963. ...
http://www.solstice.us/russell/16questions.html - 27k - Cached - Similar pages
DealyPage10
U.S. Representatives Boggs (Dem.) and Ford (Rep.) U.S. Senators Russell (Dem. ... The FBI, by itself, conducted over 25000 interviews for the investigation. ...
http://www.cannet.com/~reesedw/DealyPage10.html - 19k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK Assassination Trivia - JFK Assassination Quotes - JFK ...
The Definitive Compendium of JFK Assassination Trivia. ... for keeps and that they should call the FBI in and say that . . . that we wish for the country, ...
http://www.alternativereel.com/conspiracy/JFK_Assassination_Trivia.php - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
Who Killed JFK?
He wasn't really of course, but it was enough for the CIA and the FBI not to ..... were Gerald Ford, Thomas McCloy, John Cooper, Thomas Boggs and... well, ...
havetstorm.tripod.com/currentaffairs/id7.html - 84k - Cached - Similar pages
Jon Christian Ryter -- The Gangster President, Part 3
Sep 19, 2007 ... Commission Chairman Earl Warren, and members Gerald Ford, Allen W. Dulles, John J. McCloy, John S. Cooper and Thomas H. Boggs agreed. ...
http://www.newswithviews.com/Ryter/jon193.htm - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK assassination
According to an aide, Warren Commission member Hale Boggs, thought F.B.I. director Hoover himself "lied his eyes out to the Commission – on Oswald, on Ruby, ...
hometown.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/GHOSTSofNOVEMBERupdate2001.html - 99k - Cached - Similar pages
ABC News: Book Excerpt: 'A Simple Act of Murder: November 22, 1963 ...
A Book About Murder of President John F. Kennedy. May 10, 2006 ... Relying first on the investigative reports of the FBI, the Secret Service, and Texas law ...
abcnews.go.com/GMA/Books/story?id=1941755 - Similar pages
THE FEDERALIST PAPERS - THE WAR OF 1812 - CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Allen W. Dulles had been Director of the C.I.A. until JFK fired him. Louisiana Democratic Congressman Hale Boggs, who later publicly expressed doubts about ...
http://www.greatdreams.com/amndmnts.htm - 59k - Cached - Similar pages
The Impious Digest - The JFK Assassination: It Was Johnson
[John] Connolly, to ride with him instead of in JFK's car – where...he would have been out of ... How Lyndon Johnson used JFK's enemies to assassinate him; ...
impiousdigest.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=149 - 219k - Cached - Similar pages
Article: 468 of sgi.talk.ratical From: dave@ratmandu.esd.sgi.com ...
He said in the House he might try (Hale) Boggs and (Gerald R.) Ford and in the ... Johnson, President Lyndon B. Assassination of President John F. Kennedy ...
wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Library/Fringe/Conspiry/hoover.wc - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK Files: Lee Harvey Oswald Was An American Hero? Paul Kuntzler ...
Gerald Ford was a forceful member of the cover-up and acted as an FBI ... but Congressman Hale Boggs had his papers eviscerated by the FBI and he was ...
jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/lee-harvey-oswald-was-american-hero.html - 98k - Cached - Similar pages
A Kuntzler For All Seasons :: Stop Smiling Magazine
Aug 8, 2007 ... Anthony Frewin On A Recent Strain of JFK Conspiracy Theories ..... but Congressman Hale Boggs had his papers eviscerated by the FBI and he ...
http://www.stopsmilingonline.com/story_detail.php?id=866 - 48k - Cached - Similar pages
Probe V5N6: The Sins of Robert Blakey
These would include Blakey, his deputy on the JFK side, Gary Cornwell, ... in the Louisiana delegation, headed by former Warren Commissioner Hale Boggs. ...
http://www.ctka.net/pr998-blakey.html - 24k - Cached - Similar pages
[PDF]
Microsoft PowerPoint - Out031808 JFK History of the CTs.ppt
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
1. JFK:. History of the Conspiracy Theories. 2. I. Overview and Analysis. JFK’s death began a new era in conspiracy theory: ...
pasleybrothers.com/conspiracy/outlines/Out031808%20JFK%20History%20of%20the%20CTs.pdf - Similar pages
BUSH 41 REVIVES LINKS TO JFK WAR
Because Jerry Ford put his name on it and Jerry Ford's word was always good. .... "George H. W. Bush" who telephoned the FBI's Houston office within hours ...
http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/bush_41_revives_links_to_jfk_warren%20com.htm - 65k - Cached - Similar pages
Washington Decoded: The JFK Files:Cuba, Kennedy, and the Cold War
The 1990s opened with the film JFK, a reprise of New Orleans District .... [2] Dulles, McCloy, Representative Hale Boggs, then-Representative Gerald Ford, ...
http://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2007/04/the_jfk_files_c.html - 122k - Cached - Similar pages
piscesallmedia.com :: View topic - JFK
Jul 18, 2006 ... North says that Hoover had earlier attempted to blackmail Kennedy with FBI evidence of his philandering, including JFK's sharing of a ...
http://www.piscesallmedia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1175 - 316k - Cached - Similar pages
AGETI : Message: Novi porast JFK brijacine po Internetu
Subject: Bush Sr. cites JFK Warren report at Ford funeral despite evidence .... Cooper, and Congressman Hale Boggs. 'Here's Johnny' and the photos ...
groups.yahoo.com/group/AGETI/message/7626 - 35k - Cached - Similar pages
JFK versus 9-11
But Hoover had also apparently done JFK's bidding in shutting down a CIA-anti-Cuban op in .... Gerald Ford's Role in the JFK Assassination Cover-up ...
http://www.takeoverworld.info/jfk911.html - 69k - Cached - Similar pages
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/09/08 at 08:59 PM Reply with quote #55
Jerry Ford, Junior G-Man
Lew Rockwell, CA - 7 hours ago
It's long been known that Gerald Ford was an FBI spy and manipulator within the Warren Commission, and even altered the location of one of JFK's wounds in ...
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/12/08 at 01:48 PM Reply with quote #56
August 12, 2008 at 07:41:02

"A Country That Has Fallen Into the Hands of the Rule of Men,"

by Charlie Delgado Page 1 of 7 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com



At the moment, I am penniless and happy, although I have reason to believe I have been subjected to political surveillance by the Bush administration and harrassed by nosy people from the FBI, the CIA, the Pentagon, and foreign intelligence services.

I am an American citizen of good legal standing. Up until recently, I was pursuing a career in fincancial services, providing insurance, mutual funds, mortgage refinancing, and notarial services. Five events changed my life focus: The 2004 "election;" the invasion of Iraq; the events of September 11, 2001; the passage of the Patriot Act; and the atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the ongoing crimes against humanity in Iraq.


As an American citizen, I have long believed in the great principles upon which this nation was founded as embodied in the U.S. Constitution. As a Notary Public, I had taken an oath, not only to refrain from participating in the armed overthrow of the United States government, but to uphold the Constitution of the United States and to defend the Constitution "against all enemies."

By March of 2005, in light of several discoveries I had made about the events I just mentioned, I made the unprecedented decision to inquire into these matters myself, and to pursue justice, as grandiose as that is. In attempting to expand my knowledge on each of these "discoveries," I visited the bookstore and the public library. As I had done as a student at Columbia, I began to "immerse myself in the books" once more.

Today, in 2007, America is not a democracy. It is a sham and a disgrace to the world and to the people of the United States where human life has no intrinsic value whatsoever. In the eyes of many people around the world, the United States has become "the evil empire."

After doing research online into the events of the 2004 election, 9/11, and Abu Ghraib, I reached several conclusions.

I am willing to grant that our government is run by human beings, and "human beings make mistakes," but none of these five events were "mistakes." After doing research online and reading about fifteen books on the 2004 election, 9/11, the invasion of Iraq, and Abu Ghraib, I have reached several conclusions. The 2004 election was rigged and fraudulently carried out, as was the 2000 election. The 9/11 attacks were carried out with the full knowledge and assistance of top officials "across the board" at the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the FAA, the U.S. military, both United Airlines and American Airlines, and the Bush administration, operating in concert with al Queda. Al Queda was created by the CIA during the Arab-Afghan war. 9/11 was orchestrated by the United States federal government for the purpose of providing a pretext to invade Iraq and so that Bush could declare that the country is "at war," and thus seize complete control of the federal government, which he did by instituting "Continuity of Government" (COG) on September 11. "Continuity of Government"/ "Continuity of Operations" has been in force and in effect since September 11, 2001, completely bypassing the Congress --even though most U.S. Senators and Congressmen are unaware of this. (--See Richard A. Clarke's book: Against All Enemies; also see A Pretext for War, by James Bamford; and see Worse Than Watergate, by John W. Dean, III). Ever since 9/11, the federal government of the United States has been run in secret out of "Site R." The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was from the beginning, and continues to be, a "War of Aggression" as defined by the United Nations Charter. It is a war based on lies to the American people and to the United States Congress that the U.S. Congress never authorized. The invasion and occupation is a "Crime Against the Peace" as defined by the Nuremberg Charter, the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Convention, and the Kellog-Briand Pact, and it is also a "Crime Against Humanity" and a violation of numerous statutes of international law and of the U.S. Constitution. (--See Destroying World Order, by Constitutioal Law professor Francis A. Boyle.) The abuses and torture (as well as murders) at Abu Ghraib were intentional and officially sanctioned at the highest levels of the United States government by sick and twisted criminals in the White House and at the highest levels of the United States military. Once again, these are not "mistakes." These are intentional acts, and there is "a method to the madness."

At this point, the whole world should know that over a million Iraqi civiliians have died as a result of the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, and there's ongoing genocide. The invasion annd occupation has created a humanitarian crisis. As of July 2007, Oxfam International reported that eight million Iraqis were in need of emergency aid. (You can also look this up on the internet.) In August, an outbreak of Cholera was discovered in northern Iraq. This could lead to a worldwide epidemic and can be viewed as biological warfare. Thirteen million Iraqis do not have adequate drinking waterand are thus at serious risk of death. This also is a direct and intended result of the U.S.-led military invasion and occupation. The Tigris and Euphrates rivers are completely polluted. Iraq today is a humanitarian crisis, a human tragedy, and an ongoing modern-day holocaust.

First Discovery: The 2004 Election.


What “tipped the scales” for me was that farce we called “the 2004 Election.” That was my starting point. It may be that there never was a 100% legitimate, or fair, or above-board election in the United States. But in 2004, there was simply no excuse for not having a 100% legitimate, fair, above-board, and legal election in the United States of America. Not only was George W. Bush never ELECTED President (in 2000), HE WAS RE-ELECTED only by the most extraordinary manipulation of both the electorate and the election process.

This cannot be democracy. This is an embarrassment. Whether President George W. Bush and his junta like it or not, we live in a transparent world, where any information is instantly available --everywhere. What has become of the United States is nothing short of shameful. The United States has become a mockery. But as I say, what got me going was the 2004 election. That was when I started looking into these events, and this is what I found. The scary and pathetic part of it is, President George W. Bush and his cabinet not only expect the American people to believe the drivel they dish out, --they expect the entire world to believe it as well. Incredible.

The 2004 election would be bad enough. But as if that weren't enough, neither one of the latter two branches of the United States government are now providing any check whatsoever on the executive branch. The disheartening thing is that taken as a whole, US Senators and Congressional Representatives have evidenced that they behave en masse like a herd of lemmings --they will go wherever the President leads them --even over a cliff. The Judiciary is just as bad. As a group, our federal Judges have no respect for The US Constitution upon which all the laws in the United States are based.

I had watched the run-up to the 2004 US Presidential Election very closely via the Internet. There were numerous inconsistencies between the votes reported and the exit-poll surveys taken immediately after the ballots were cast. There were other reliable sources: Numerous polls had been conducted leading up to immediately prior to the election: The New York Times Survey and The Annenberg Survey, for example. I had also watched the daily changes in the "2004 US Presidential Winner Takes All Market" on the University of Iowa's website, under the subheading, "Iowa Election Markets." There were early indications of election fraud and ballot tampering in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, as well as possibly other states. It appeared that, even though John Kerry SHOULD have won, a combination of illegal tactics, including impeding and obstructing voter access to the polls, manipulation of ballots and voter registries, and ballot count irregularities, had made the determination that Bush was President for a second term. Subsequently, although there were law-suits pending in several states, Kerry had simply "dropped out." I decided to do further research.

The exit poll report for the 2004 election was released on January 19, 2005 -on the eve of the Presidential Inauguration. It revealed AN EIGHT MILLION VOTE DISCREPANCY between exit poll totals and actual vote counts. The exit poll report stated that "the difference between exit polls and official tallies was far too great to be explained by sampling error. [Thus,] a systematic bias is implicated." The probability of margin for error made this a "statistical impossibility." The report, provided by the National Election Pool, revealed a higher discrepancy in the swing states, and it was especially prominent in the precincts regarded as "Bush strongholds." OVER ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND CASES OF IMPROPRIETIES OR POSSIBLE ELECTION FRAUD were recorded in Ohio. Sure enough, Professor Aviel Rubin of Johns Hopkins has written a book, entitled Brave New Vote, detailing how easily results from electronic voting systems can be manipulated. The obvious vulnerability of punch-card voting systems to tampering needs no explanation.

In Franklin County, Ohio, which includes the state capital of Columbus, Ohio, numerous improprieties and skewed results were reported. One machine registered 4,258 votes for Bush in a precinct where only 638 people voted. 29 percent of the precincts had fewer voting machines than in the 2000 election. Fewer electronic voting machines were used in 2004 than in 2000 --and many were held back --even though there was a 25% increase in voter turn-out. Many voters had to wait in line for three hours, and then had only five minutes to cast their votes, "as required by the Republican-run Board of Elections." "Caging lists," rosters of thousands of minority voters, used to target individuals and prevent them from voting on election day, were traced to Republican National Committee Headquarters. Black voters were, as in 2000, purged from voter rolls. In addition, more than a million African-American votes were cast and not counted.

Much of the official record is consistent with allegations of voter fraud, racially-targeted disenfranchisement of voters, and violations of several federal statutes, as well as the minimum requirements for international voting standards. As one writer characterized it, "we have an apartheid voting system in this country, denying African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans the assurance that their votes will [even be counted.] Worse, America has an apartheid media which denies racial disenfranchisement a seat on the front of the news bus." Functionally, we do not have a democracy in the United States --certainly not a democracy that is "of the people, for the people, and by the people." (Source: Censored 2006, Peter Phillips, Editor.)
George W. Bush was never democratically elected. Not even in 2000. (See Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election by Jeffrey Toobin). Yet, he was RE-elected in a rigged election. (See Censore 2006.). Over a million African Americans were disenfranchised. Not only did the US not have a democracy in 2004, it doesn't have one in 2006 either. The US is a de facto totalitarian state, with a leadership that has no regard for law or human rights.


Second Discovery: September 11.


The CIA is --and has been for over fifty years --an organization specifically in the businesses of carrying out murders, coups, and acts of terror --all around the world --with impunity --and without the knowledge of the American people. Some of these murders have been in violation of U.S. law. On September 11, the American people got caught in the crossfire of a “shadow war.”

Most people would agree that September 11 should never have happened. I maintain that it therefore had to have been allowed to happen. This is just common sense. For some reason however --and not immediately evident to me at the time, this common sense did not seem to register in the consciousness of the American people.


As Americans, we all deal with “cherished notions” about the presidency and about our government. It is our intransigent and stubborn clinging onto these beliefs that holds us back from seeing real possibilities as the truth. this is the way John W. Dean, III refered to the American reaction to 9/11 in his book Worse Than Watergate.

Cognitive dissonance, first defined by Leon Fetinger in 1958, is a thought disturbance that occurs when new information conflicts with what a pereson already thinks, knows, or believes to be "true." Two things happen when cognitive dissonance occurs, Festinger said. First, a person's natural and immediate reaction is to reduce the dissonance. Second, the individual will avoid situations in which this dissonance might occur again. In situations of extreme cognitive dissonance, the person experiencing it acts on reflex. The person simply refuses to give the new information "even a moment’s thought," preferring instead to "put it out of one's mind." He or she just "tunes it out" and then gets away from the source of this "negative thinking" a fast as possible.

"For many Americans, there is a deep psychological desire for the 9/11 tragedy to be over. The shock of the day is well remembered and terrorist alerts from Homeland Security serve to maintain lasting tensions and fears.... There is a natural resistance to nay-sayers who continue to question the U.S. government's version of what happened on September 11, 2001. The resistance is rooted in our tendency toward the inability to conceive of people we know as evil; instead, evil ones must be "others" --very UNLIKE ourselves... As adults, there are still dark closets in our socio-consciousness that make it difficult to even consider the possibility of certain ideas. These fearful ideas might be described as threshold concepts, in that they may be on the borders of discoverability, yet we deny even the possibility of their veracity --something so evil that it is completely unimaginable.... The idea that someone in the Government of the United States may have contributed support to such a horrific attack is inconceivable to many. It is a threshold concept so frightening that it conjures up a state of mind akin to complete disbelief."

This was the way David Ray Griffin described it in Another Pearl Harbor. And that leads to the second reason why so many Americans don’t “get it” that September 11 had to have been allowed to happen: programming. To be specific, on a cognitive level this is something called neuro-linguistic programming. But on a much more basic level, this is the programming we all get when we watch TV. It's the programming we get from the mass media. This is sometimes referred to as mass manipulation in the field of social psychology.

All Americans --especially those who watch a lot of commercial network news television --are constantly being programmed. It is even true that when TV shows are scheduled in the Fall of each year, the schedule is called "network programming." So what's in our programming? Part of programming is “the news.” Some, including Amy Goodman, have asserted in her book Static that the media is not doing its job, and that instead of “covering power” it has been “covering for power.” Sometimes this programming actually comes from our government. Some would call that propaganda.

What happened on Septpember 11?

On September 11, Richard A. Clarke, the White House Counterterrorism Security Chief, instituted Continuity of Government (COG). He says so in his book, Against All Enemies. When Continuity of Government was instituted, corporate media became PART OF the executive branch. COG is a secret, underground Executive-Branch-run government that was designed to go into operation under emergency situations when the United States would be under attack. In a time of Continuity of Government, there is no such thing as propaganda; all news is subject to White House approval. The consequesnces of Continuity of Governemnt on controlling the media is described in detail in James Bamford's A Pretext for War.

What were the warning signs leading up to September 11?

In 1989, a group of men who later came to be known as the "Calverton Shooters" were observed by the FBI I at a rifle range in Calverton, Long Island. One of the men who were observed in 1989 at this rifle range went on to murder Rabbi Mier Kahane a year later, (El Sayyid Nosair). All of the men were connected to both Osama bin Laden and al Queda. On that rifle range in 1989, the men happened to be firing AK-47’s as well as other semi-automatic weapons at the time. Peter Lance, in 9/11 Cover-Up, points out how much the FBI actually knew about the Calverton Shooters.

Richard A. Clarke, in his book Against All Enemies, points out that during the late ’80’s and early ’90’s, al Queda was formulating its objectives.

“The ingredients al Queda dreamed of for propagating its movement were a Christian government attacking a weaker Muslim region, allowing the new terrorist group to rally jihadists from many countries to come to the aid of their religious brethren. After the success of the jihad, The Muslim region would become a radical Islamic state, a breeding ground for more terrorists, a part of the eventual network of Islamic states that would make up the new Caliphate, or Muslim empire… What was buried in CIA and FBI was not a matter of one sparrow falling from a tree --red lights and bells should have been going off. They had specific information about individual terrorists from which one could have deduced what was about to happen. None of that information got to me or the White House.”


In 1992, according to Clarke, CIA officials knew that Bosnian funding and mujahedeen fighters were coming from bin Laden's training camp in the Sudan. So, why didn’t the United States government eliminate bin Laden back then --back in 1992? The only logical answer to this question is that the Central Intelligence Agency was protecting both Usama bin Laden and al Queda while they were both in Sudan in 1992. But at the same time, Clarke maintains that both the CIA and the FBI were telling him, as White House Counterterrorism Security Chief, that they had "never even heard of al Queda."
In January of 1995, al Queda plans --which included a “blueprint for the September 11 attacks” --were confiscated in a raid on an apartment complex called the Doña Josefa Apartments by Manila Police. The plans were immediately turned over to the CIA and the FBI. Matthew Brzezinski, the son of former Secretary of State Zbigniew Brzezinsksi, has written a book called Fortress America, which was published in 2004. In that book, he tells us that, soon afterward, the “blueprint” was found to belong to the cell leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, a Mr. Ramzi Yousef. Also found in the apartment were “a cornucopia of explosive ingredients” that amounted to a small chemical bomb-making laboratory. At the time of the raid on the Manila apartment, Ramzi Yousef’s roommate was taken into custody. His name was Abdul Hakim Murad. So, in January of 1995, both CIA and FBI officials had in their possession al Queda plans that included “a blueprint for the September 11 attacks," and these were linked to the cell leader of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, who again had managed to escape. Yet, the blueprint failed to prevent September 11 from taking place. This is not attributable to “turf wars,” or “mistakes,” or “bad intelligence.”

There was an historical "logic" for 9/11 from a governmental standpoint. Since the 1980’s, there have been many within academia and government in the United States who have advocated "another Pearl Harbor" for the purpose of accomplishing a “regime change” in Iraq. Among those were Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, and Richard Perle, all of whom have held, or now hold, the highest positions in our government in the areas of national security and defense. Initially, one of the proposed ways of accomplishing this regime change in Iraq was to have the invasion of Iraq carried out by either Israel or the United States. The relevant document here was called " A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm." Starting in the late 1980’s, and becoming more and more vociferous in the early ’90’s, many of the individuals mentiioned above --and people of like mind --advocated that a regime change should be carried out exclusively by the United States. Many scholars who have examined the events of September 11 have reached the conclusion that this is indeed what September 11 was: "another Pearl Harbor." This was finally articulated in both the official policy recommendations of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and the 2000 National Security Strategy of the United States.


There were historical precedents for September 11 being launched as an inside job in Nazi Germany and in the attack on Peal Harbor itself. The American people have always been opposed to going to war without having an adequate reason to do so. Such was the case in World War II. By 1941, even though Adolf Hitler had invaded Germany two years prior, the United States had not entered the war. It wasn't until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor that the US did enter the war. History shows that Pearl Harbor was intentionally allowed to happen so that the United States would enter the war against Nazi Germany in 1941. Similarly, many scholars have maintained that September 11 was allowed to happen as “another Pearl Harbor” --needed in order for the United States to invade Iraq. And it was for that reason that 9/11 took place.

As Dean says in Worse than Watergate, "I am making an indictment."

I have reason to believe that Treason and murder have been committed by agents and individuals within the federal government in the most heinous crimes of wanton murder that shock the conscience in the history of the United States. Such actions included, but are not limited to: a grave breach of the “due process of law” clause of the Fifth Amendment; harboring known felons; harboring known terrorists, including those who have engaged in terrorist activities against the United States and terrorists who have threatened attacks against, or the overthrow of, the United States; failing to uphold the Constitution of the United States; failing to faithfully uphold and execute the laws of the United States; failing to perform the sworn duty to protect the Constitution of the United States against all enemies; failing to perform sworn duties to guard and protect the people of the United States, and safeguard, their lives, their liberties, their property, and their rights as American citizens; aiding and abetting terrorists while engaged in an attack against the people and the governmebnt of the United States; conspiring with intent to defraud; conspiring with intent to aid and abet malicious and violent acts; conspiring to commit other crimes, including launching, or aiding and abetting attacks against the United States and against the People of the United States; conspiring to launch such attacks; obstruction of justice; the abusing of power; engaging in crimes under the color of law; conspiring to commit crimes; committing high crimes and misdemeanors; providing false testimony before a Congressional Hearing (Perjury); engaging in federally-sponsored propaganda campaigns which intentionally and willfully distorting and falsifying official government documents of the United States government to the people of the United States; intentionally suppressing and withholding evidence in criminal investigations; and committing numerous wanton acts of murder in the first degree (with knowing, willful, and malicious intent and reckless disregard for human life, and intent to cause serious loss of life and property.) --to name only a few.


Third Discovery: The USA "Patriot Act."

In addition to the reckless disregard for human life our President exhibited by allowing September 11 to take place, and therefore directly participating in its occurrence, and then using September 11 for his own personal political gain, George W. Bush has intentionally, progressively and systematically subverted the Constitutional rights of all Americans. This was symbolically and concretely manifested in passage of the USA Patriot Act. With the passage of the USA Patriot Act, ordinary political dissent has become something which can incur threats, intimidation, citations, police brutality, arrest, jail, and charges of domestic terrorism. Thanks to the Patriot Act, now strengthened by the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the political demonstrations that took place in the late 60's in this country in response to the Vietnam War would now be classified as "domestic terrorism."

I discoverd that our government is engaging in “political surveillance.” This was, and is currently, being conducted on law-abiding American citizens in good legal standing, right here in the United States. So who can be targeted for this kind of thing? Not only can "anyone be suspect," but I was being targeted for this unlawful activity myself, and this surveillance had increased simply because I wanted to inform myself about the events surrounding September 11, the 2004 election, and what has been going on in Iraq since the US-led invasion and occupation, especially at Abu Ghraib. While in the bookstore and the library, I felt like I was being watched. Moreover, I was repeatedly approached by what I would characterize as "nosy people," who wanted to know "what I was doing." The current administration does not have probable cause to engage in this activity with respect to my personal affairs.

I also learned that political surveillance is an unlawful governmental activity, in violation of “equal protection of the laws” under the Fifth Amendment, and the prohibition against intentional discrimination by the government on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or political belief accorded under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. At no time have I ever posed, nor do I pose, any physical threat to the national security of the United States, nor to the government of the United States, nor to any government official within the current administration of the United States government. Based on this fact, I came to learn that, absent showing probable cause, it is both unlawful and a violation of my constitutional rights for agents and individuals of the federal government to engage in political surveillance of my personal affairs. Political surveillance does have a "chilling effect" on the democratic process. It stifles one's ability to inquire intellectually and to engage in unobstructed thinking and research. I would not say that this stopped me from pursuing my quest. On the contrary, I became more determined than ever to discover the truth behind the five events I mentioned. Moreover, the Pentagon now has the authority to --independently and without explanation --determine on its own volition that any given individual is "a potential terrorist threat" --and proceed to "detain" that individual without due process of law, without the right to an attorney, and hold that person in a secret location disclosed to no one outside the federal government for an indefinite period of time, where the person can be subjected to the most scientifically proven cruel and inhuman forms of torture imaginable. Welcome to "America's disappeared."


Fourth Discovery: The Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.

Mass genocide appears instantly --all around the world --as what it is: mass genocide. There is no sweeping it under the rug, no arguing it away by diplomatic gestures and overtures. There is no excusing it or justifying it as some sort of “noble cause.” It is what it is, pure and simple.

Immediately after Bush invaded Iraq, my "gut feeling" was that this would turn out to be another Vietnam. I knew instantly that hundreds of thousands of innocent people would die. It’s bound to fail, I thought to myself. Sixteen permanent military bases under construction at the time of the invasion made this a PERMANENT occupation from the start. Andrew Bacevich called my attention to the sixteen permanent military bases in a 2005 Article in Foreign Affairs magazine.

In fact, The Invasion and occupation of Iraq was designed to fail. It was even likened to the Peloponnesian War well in advance of its execution by one of Kagans, Donald Kagan. But this doesn't come to dubya's attention, even now.

Even though the Bush administration KNEW Iraq WAS NOT a military threat to the United States --or to Israel, (as illustrated in Clarke's Against All Enemies), the United States invaded Iraq ANYWAY--and is now paying for it with the"blood and treasure" of American citizens. As a footnote, Iraq, though not a military threat to Israel, was a military rival of Israel, and a sworn enemy of israel. But an analogy of the rivalry would be like the rivalry between a kid with a rock (Iraq) and a fully-armed Special Forces Commando (Israel).

Saddam Hussein was not in ANY way connected to the September 11 attacks. Nor was Saddam Hussein in any way connected to bin Laden, the "real culprit behind the attacks" --or was he? Nor did Saddam Hussein have any WMD's. OUR PRESIDENT KNEW ALL OF THIS BEFORE U.S. forces INVADED!

Conveniently, "the intelligence and the facts were being fixed around the policy," as we learned from the "Downing Street memo." Yet, these very same "moving target" rationales for invading Iraq were used as justifications to the American people --AND TO THE U.N., for our president launching Operation Iraqi Freedom on March 19, 2003. In pure and simple terms, the US invasion was AND IS an act of aggression in violation of the United Nations Charter, and thus, the US Constitution --notwithstanding the fact that our president later attempted to brush all of this aside and blame it on "bad intelligence." The president has declared himself above the law, and launched an unnecessary war.
Then it dawned on me that this is not a war with Iraq at all. This is a war to strengthen both al Queda and Iran, and to draw both al Queda and Iranian Hezbollah into "the game." --The United States military is NOT occupying Iraq to bring democracy to the Middle East --as the American people have been told by our President. The United States military is occupying Iraq to bring CHAOS to the Middle East --IN THE NAME of democracy --so that the US can later "be forced" to restore order. And that is exactly what the US military presence in Iraq is doing: bringing chaos to Iraq and the Islamic world, and drawing al Queda and Iran into "the game" against the United States.

In June or July of 2004, Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, who is also a lawyer and a Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, sent me an email containing several video clips. One of those video clips was of a then-recent lecture givenon the invasion of Iraq by a former professor of mine: Professor richard Williams Bulliet. Recalling Professor Bulliet's course, I had learned in 1981 that a US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq would literally turn Iraq "upside down." Second, such an invasion and occupation would provide an invitation for Iran, an all-Shi'a country next door to Iraq, to come to the aid of the Shi'a majority in Iraq. This is exactly what the US invasion and occupation is doing, in addition to strengthening al Queda.


My research revealed that both 9/11 and the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq were intended to accomplish several objectives for the benefit of several interest groups. Both events were planned far in advance and in tandem with one another. In "Realpolitik" terms, the only real benefits in war are measured in terms of sheer power. The rawest form of sheer power is the application of physical force to alter the physical world, often referred to as strategic-military power.

In "Realpolitik" terms, THE ONLY REAL BENEFIT OF THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF IRAQ WAS TO THE SOVEREIGN NATION OF Israel. The same can be said of 9/11.

Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was considered militarily to be an enemy of Israel by Israeli military and security forces –-ALTHOUGH NOT A THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES --OR ISRAEL –in strategic-military terms BY THE UNITED STATES MILITARY. ONCE SADDAM’S REGIME WAS TOPPLED, THAT ENEMY --OF ISRAEL --was removed.

There was a second immediate benefit for the nation of Israel from 9/11 and the invasion and occupation of Iraq in purely strategic-military terms. Both 9/11 AND THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF IRAQ succeeded in pulling of Anti-Israeli Arab terrorism away from Israel, and directing that Arab terrorism instead at the United States and the American people. This can be viewed as a banefit to Israel because now, the Arabs are an enemy of --not just Israel, --but the United States as well. Obviusly, directing Arab-sponsored terrorism toward the united Staes is CONTRARY to the benefit of the United States in strategic-military terms. In real terms, the United States then takes over or assumes Israel's role in battling the Arabs. The United States then fights Israel's battles for Israel, and takes up Israel's "crusade" against the Arabs for israel.

A COMMON MISTAKE is to assume that STEALING IRAQ'S OIL is a strategic-military BENEFIT to the United States. IN FACT, IT IS JUST THE OPPOSITE. IT MAY BE A SHORT-TERM STRATEGIC ENERGY BENEFIT, BUT THIS IS ONLY TEMPORARY --------BECAUSE -- WE -- STOLE -- IT --AND ANY TEMPORARY ENERGY BENEFIT IS FAR OUTWEIGHED BY THE REAL STRATEGIC MILITARY COSTS TO THE UNITED STATES --THE COST OF DECLARING THE UNITED STATES THE NEW INTERNATIONAL TYRANT IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW --BY TAKING THESE ACTIONS.

TO ACCOMPLISH these strategic-military benefits –TO ISRAEL –AND CONTRARY TO THE UNITED STATES -- two very important --and harmful --actions were implemented BY U.S. FORCES:

1) the absolute, systematic, and across-the-board humiliation and debasement of Iraqis and all Arabs, (and all Muslims as well by reference); and,

2) the brutal and malicious assault, torturing, and massacring of Iraqis in the most barbaric and savage ways imaginable. These and other abominable acts were inflicted (and continue to be inflicted) upon Iraqi aged, women, and children --many of them while asleep in their beds, as well as upon the rest of the unarmed Iraqi civilian population.

Both of these harmful actions in turn, were intended to, and did in fact, create a new generation of young American-hating Arabs in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. These are, of course, the Iraqi children who, years from now, will have been fortunate enough to "escape death" during their childhoods and grow to maturity. This new generation of Iraqi children will live the rest of their lives suffering from the childhood traumas of witnessing and being subjected to countless bloody atrocities, violence and humiliation, at the hands of US forces.

Studies in the field of psychology have shown that when these types of traumatic childhood events are compounded by repressed anger, (forbidding the child the right to express feelings of anger, sadness, or pain) --these repressed feelings usually surface later in life in the form of what is known as "splitting off and projection," and "the unconscious compulsion to repeat" --usually in adolescence and early adulthood. The net effect is that the victim becomes a "violent person." The United States military occupation is now creating a new generation of angry, violent-prone Arab and Islamic youth who are now being intentionally molded into warriors for a new jihad --about 10 million or so in Iraq alone --with al Queda attracting Sunni Arabs and Hezbollah attracting Shi'a Muslims--against the United States. When they are old enough, we can predict that these kids will, more than likely, seek to exact their revenge upon the people of the United States. With constant and continuing terror inflicted upon these kids by US forces while they are growing up in a military-occupied state, resulting in guaranteed repressed anger --now compounded and aggravated by prolonged punishment and repression --we can predict revenge in fifteen to thirty years from these Iraqi children --as soon as they are old enough to carry it out. The threat of revenge, however, will remain as long as these kids are alive. Moreover, beyond a shadow of a doubt, this "unsettled score" will be passed-on "from generation to generation," until it is finally avenged. Each traumatized child will have his own personal score to settle. This is a formula for a "jihad without end" against America and all Americans. Thus, we have a new Arab jihad against America. What I have just described is known as "the cycle of violence." This cycle of violence is --right now, --on a grand scale, being INTENTIONALLY inflicted upon the Iraqi people --and by association, upon ALL Arabs by US forces, so that the Iraqi people, in turn, can later inflict revenge on the people of the United States when they are old enough. The subsequent acts of "terrorism" (revenge) which we can expect in retaliation from these new jihad warriors will then provide future "justifications" for US forces to engage in a prolonged process of systematic eradication and annihilation of Iraqi Arabs, acting our of "self-defense." We will have brought this upon ourselves. The US military presence in Iraq is actually CAUSING the chaos (something the CIA is famous for doing)--so that, in time, the US military can later (are "forced" to) "restore order." This will spread to an even larger --and longer --campaign against all Arabs. All of this taken together will result in a US military presence in the Middle East "for the foreseeable future" under the guise of "the war on terror." So, now we've created a "jihad without end," and simultaneously along with it, a "war on terror without end." Some have advocated this scenario under the banner, "the balance of terror." Many still occupy the highest elected and appointed offices in the United States. My research revealed that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was, and is, designed to facilitate or accelerate the collapse of every one of the Arab and Islamic Middle-Eastern countries. This is because the US invasion and occupation of Iraq will contribute to an endless string of civil wars, rebellions, and wars, both between and within Arab and Islamic countries, and also involve Iran. The resulting US military involvement in a succession of wars in the Middle East may well last a hundred years or more. It will also result in the deaths of TENS UPON HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of innocent people --not only in Iraq, but throughout the Middle East –ALL OF THEM ARABS OR SEMITIC MUSLIMS, as this process runs its course.

What the Bush administration is doing in Iraq is also an old trick known as "poisoning the well." No matter what happens, the administration of George W. Bush has literally made things so bad in Iraq that any President that follows him will have to deal with the "mess" Bush has created before the US forces can get out --whether that presence actually helps the Iraqis or, whether US forces continue slaughtering them.

The occupation was designed to fail. How so?

(1) The United States invasion and occupation has effectively turned the country over to a newly formed Shi’a puppet government created by agents and representatives of the United States. The Iraqi Shi’a lack the necessary skills to run their own country without help. The Sunni won’t help. Neither will the Kurds. So, the Shi'a-dominated government of Iraq will turn to the Shi’a --in Iran --for help.

(2) As Victor Navasky, Editor-In-Chief of The Nation magazine has pointed out, "imposing democracy is an oxymoron." That means it’s a self-defeating proposition for the United States to be occupying Iraq right now, and at the same time "making" Iraq into a democracy. True enough, there was reportedly a “democratic election.” Sure, --with armed foreign (US) invader/occupying troops standing next to tanks and armored vehicles right outside the voting booths. Sounds pleasant, but does anyone know how many Iraqis ACTUALLY VOTED in that election? We were told that a certain percentage of the entire Iraqi population participated in the election. This is both misleading and not true. Is that the same thing as saying that a certain percentage of the entire Iraqi population actually voted --and their votes were counted --and those counts were reflected in the election results? No, it is not. Was the voting system used in that election vulnerable or susceptible to manipulation of the results? Yes, it was. No foreign power can "make" another country into a democracy. Democratization requires self-determination.
(3) The election itself was declared to “contain some fraud” by an independent team of international election auditors. In other words, it was a fraudulent election.

(4) If NOW, the newly "elected" Shi’a-dominated "Iraqi" government actually WANTS the United States to stay, --guns, tanks, and all, --would THEY be doing what WE want, or are we doing what they want by staying in Iraq? I think it would be safe to say that they are doing what we want --and we intended it that way, and THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is what you call a “puppet government." Puppet governments, being illegitimate to begin with, are BOUND to fail.


(5) We were “told” that an Iraqi Constitution was “hammered out” after a series of “meetings.” We were told that representatives of the United States "provided assistance" at these meetings --but 'only in a “brokering” capacity.' If a country is under foreign military occupation, and foreign "advisors" from the occupying military power are "brokering" a new constitution, would that be considered a democratically created constitution? It’s not their constitution at all. A country can only achieve its own constitution without outside interference. And finally,

(6) "the new Iraq" also has Chalabi, the criminal, wanted for extortion, embezzlement, and bank fraud in Jordan; the "fair-haired boy" of Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, David Wurmser, Douglas Feith, Donald Rumsfeld, PNAC, and Dick Cheney, and their designs for "regime change," which preceded 9/11; the man who was, with the CIA's help, providing false "intelligence" to the Pentagon and to the American people via CIA-paid reporters like Judith Miller at the New York Times (about Iraq's purported, trumped up and fictional WMD's before we invaded); who retired general Anthony Zinni described as "one of the guys in London wearing expensive suits and Rolex watches," and who, other than that wasn't even taken seriously by the intelligence community. THAT CHALABI is now governing Iraq, although not as the sole and omnipotent ruler, as the neocon cabal mentioned above had hoped. So to sum it up, the very idea of a foreign occupying power imposing a "democracy" --by creating a fraudulently elected, "foreign," incompetent, untrained, uneducated, unskilled, pro-Iranian, "Shi’a"-dominated "puppet government" --with a foreign-imposed constitution, a foreign-imposed currency, a foreign-imposed economy, and a foreign-imposed system of laws --after that same foreign occupying power has engaged in, and continues to engage in, countless atrocities, murders, and humiliation of the Iraqi people --all of this, in an atmosphere of understandably rabid hatred toward the foreign occupying power --just doesn't make sense. All of this, taken together, is a formula for disaster and a formula for chaos, any way you look at it.

Although it boggles the mind, it was also part of the initial US military planning for the invasion and occupation of Iraq to be a drain on the US economy, as it has indeed become. The US economy would then become a "war economy." Although this "war economy" model was effectively sold to the President for multiple military campaigns in the Middle East starting with the war in Iraq, it is flawed. The United States economy is no longer a "production economy" as it was prior to World War II. It is now a "consumption economy." Our greatest national products are now in the "service-related industries," whereas during World War II, they were in "hard goods."

The parallel with World War II is not at all the same. In World War II, the American people did not know that FDR had allowed --or even provoked --the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor in order to be able to enter the war against Germany in Europe. In contrast, the American people (indeed the whole world) now know that Bush allowed September 11 happen because it would provide a pretext for him to be able to launch a war with Iraq. What's the major factor? The planners --or Bush --did not anticipate the Internet.

You can only bullshit people for so long.

Bush is having a really tough time "building morale" among the American civilian population, the American troops, and of course, the Iraqi people --in spite of prohibitively expensive and incessant propaganda and psychological warfare deployed on all three fronts. Nevertheless, the planners of this "New World Order" either did not see the whole plan through. Either that, or they simply did not provide Bush with "complete disclosure" of the flaws in their plan. Both the President and The United States Congress failed to subject the plan to tough scrutiny before Bush approved the plan and pushed it through the Congress.

In September of 2006, a report was released showing that a mean figure of 655,000 Iraqi civilians had died as a result of acts of violence attributed to military actions by Coalition forces after the US-led invasion. This figure was published in The Lancet, a respectable British medical and public health journal. It reflected a study done by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Researchers involved in the study also included the Columbia University School of Nursing and Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad." The Lancet study concluded that, "the researchers found that the majority of deaths were attributed to violence, which were primarily the result of military actions by Coalition forces. Most of those killed by Coalition forces were women and children." However, the researchers stressed that "they found no evidence of improper conduct by the Coalition soldiers." US forces have not killed several thousands of "terrorists" --as our major news media happily broadcasts our President claiming.

I MAINTAIN that US FORCES HAVE KILLED SEVERAL MILLIONS OF IRAQI CIVILIANS. All one has to do to see this is look at the military tactics that were employed at the time of the invasion, and the numbere of large civilian populations that were targeted. Let's look at some of these military tactics.

In March 2003, 20,000 cluster bombs were dropped on Iraqi civilian targets. The majority of those cluster bombs did not explode on impact. They remained as land mines. EIGHT MAJOR CITIES IN IRAQ WERE BOMBED --ONE OIF THEM, FALLUJAH In November of 2004, --TO THE GROUND. During the bombing campaigns, ALL VITAL SERVICES AND UTILITIES WERE INTENTIONALLY TAKEN OUT: natural gas and electric utilities, water treatment facilities, food storehouses, HOSPITALS, sewage treatment facilities, telephone and TV towers, communication systems, and train stations and railways. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO DIE WITHOUT MINIMUM SUBSISTENCE REQUIREMENTS LIKE FOOD AND WATER.

Based on this information, it is realistic to conclude that US forces have caused deaths IN THE MILLIONS AMONG THE IRAQI CIVILIAN POPULATION as a result of the U.S. led invasion.

There is a word for this: genocide. The United States of America and the American people will be held accountable for the deaths of Iraqi civilians caused by US forces --EVEN THOUGH THIS INFORMATION HAS BEEN KEPT FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE --in the exact same way that the German people were held accountable for the Nazi holocaust against the Jews --even though many Germans claimed they did not know what was happening.

Apart from the HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq has already cost the taxpayers of the United States, (which will take at least three generations of taxpayers' dollars to recoup), "the worst is yet to come." The Bush administration has put the people of the United States in the position of being "forced" to be the "policeman" (read: military "attack-dog") of the Middle East (read: "FOR ISRAEL").

With the atrocities and the barbarity that have been committed so far at the hands of "Coalition" (US) forces, the United States military is well on its way to creating this new "balance of terror" --even if the United States occupation forces were to withdraw from Iraq today, in March of 2007. These actions by US forces will have succeeded in pulling anti-Israeli Arab terrorism toward the United States, a strategic-military benefit to Israel. Anti-Israeli acts of terrorism committed by Palestinians however, or by those sympathetic with the Palestinian cause, are seen by many as something that will continue, due to the fact that many see acts of terrorism as their only recourse to ongoing Israeli crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide, in violation of international law. (For more on this, see Francis A. Boyle, Destroying World Order.)


Fifth Discovery: Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, and the ongoing crimes against humanity being committed in Iraq.
The same is true for torture: it is what it is. There is no explaining it away, no denying it, no pretending to the contrary, and no pleading it away. There is no sweeping it under the rug, no arguing it away by diplomatic gestures and overtures. There is no excusing it or justifying it as some sort of “noble cause.” It is what it is, pure and simple.

Not long after September 11, I met a German lady at a church group gathering at The Old Mission Santa Barbara. What was going on in this country, the "rallying around the flag," reminded this woman of Adolf Hitler's rise to power in Nazi Germany. It scared her. She had seen this before, she said.


On the scale of the Nazi atrocities of World War II, what US forces have done and are doing right now in Iraq is a hundred times worse. The war crimes committed at Abu Ghraib Prison and on the streets of Iraq at the hands of US forces were officially sanctioned by Donald Rumsfeld, General Sanchez, Alberto Gonzales, and George W. Bush. These people should be held accountable for their actions.

Initially, my primary sources were my Internet sources; among them: Dahrjamail.com, Commondreams.com, GNN, AlterNet.org, The Guardian online, antiwar.com, Mother Jones online, and several other websites accessible via links from these websites. There have since been many books on the subject of Abu Ghraib and atrocities committed at the hands of US forces, including, In The Name of Democracy, by Jeremy Brecher, Jill Cutler, and Brendan Smith; The Torture Papers: The Road to Abu Ghraib, by Karen J. Greenberg and Joshua L. Dratel; and Not One More Death, a collection of short essays. Other authors include James Bamford, Richard A. Clarke, Peter Lance, Matthew Brzezinski, David Ray Griffin, Gregory Palast, Tom Engelhardt, and former White House Counsel John W. Dean, III. Most recently, Professor Philip Zimbardo has published a book called The Lucifer Effect.


Analyses and Conclusions.

Problem #1: We do not have an elected President in the United States; we have an appointed President.

Problem #2: We have an un-elected Vice President running the country instead of a President running the country.

Problem #3: The unelected President and Vice President who are running the country should be in jail for election fraud, securities fraud, insider trading, conducting illegal business with terrorist countries (including Iraq under Saddam Hussein), lying to Congress, lying to the American people, war profiteering, war crimes (including mass genocide), engaging in wanton acts against the American people, mass murder, and treason.

Problem #4: The unelected criminals who are running the country are bankrupting the US economy, getting Americans killed in Iraq, and creating a new Islamic jihad against America that will last FOR THE FORSEEABLE FUTURE (AT LEAST THREE GENERATIONS) and destroy the constitutional freedoms of all Americans.

Problem #5: These same executive officers are making the United States less safe by the day.

Does anybody have a problem with any of this?

Here is the sequence of the events I have described: (1)"Election 2000;" (2) September 11; (3) The Patriot Act; (4) The invasion of Iraq; (5)"Election 2004;" (6) Abu Ghraib and the ongoing crimes against humanity in Iraq and throughout "America's network of gulags." Each one of these events is related to one another. They are all tied together. They were all planned in tandem with one another. At present, in addition to seeking to justify and rewrite these events, the Bush Administration is planning on bombing Iran. And this admininstration will succeed in doing that --because apparently, and to all appearances, neither the people of the United States, nor the Judiciary branch, nor the Congress can stop them.

In evaluating the circumstances which made the above scenarios possible, it is beneficial to take a look at the organizational structures within our government and see and how they operate.

When most people are asked, “How many branches of our government are there?” most people will say, “Three.” Of course, they will be referring to what most of us learned in grade school and high school in our American Government, American History, and Civics classes. The United States Constitution spells out that our federal government will be divided into three branches: The Legislative Branch, the Judicial Branch, and The Executive Branch.

I maintain however, that there are over ten branches of our government, and most of these are contained within the Executive Branch. These are what we know of as Agencies, Bureaus, and Departments within the federal government of the United States. What are some of the names of these branches within our government? In addition to the three branches we were all taught there are in the United States, I would also include The Army, The FBI, The Navy, The NSA, The Office of the President, The Air Force, The IRS, The Pentagon, The DIA, The Department of Energy, The CIA, The NRO, and The GSA.

The first problem is that these bureaucracies function outside the control of the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch. The only time any one of the Three Branches of our government get involved is when a problem rises to the surface. Over time, these bureaucracies have grown to enormous sizes. And as bureaucracies, each has its own set of goals, objectives, and purposes. The second problem is that, in Washington politics, in order for these bureaucracies to continue to function, and in order for the people who run them to keep their jobs, they have to constantly create new areas of involvement or "new frontiers" of organizational behavior for their staffs to be eligible for funding. The third problem is, every organization will be inclined to behave in a manner that is designed to increase the size of its budget, its functions, and its power in terms of its scope, capability, and the resources that it has at its disposal. The fourth problem is that each of these bureaucracies will tend, by its own inertia, to become a "runaway freight train."
On September 11, the American people were hit by such a runaway freight train. On March 19, 2003, the people of Iraq were hit by such a train. And in 2000, in order to make all of this possible, the people of the United States suffered a head-on collision with one of these unstoppable runaway freight trains.

There is hope however. Anyone know how to stop a runaway freight train? The United States no longer operates under the rule of law. The United States is now in the hands of the rule of men.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/13/08 at 11:54 AM Reply with quote #57

Cat burglar rats out his techniques for Los Angeles police




Thief makes a 70-minute training video explaining how he chose his victims and talked his way out of close calls.

By Andrew Blankstein, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 13, 2008


Serial burglar Ignacio Pena Del Rio gave up his tools of the trade, and on Tuesday had six months shaved off his prison sentence.

Pena Del Rio, known as one of Los Angeles' most industrious and prolific cat burglars until his arrest in 2006, agreed to authorities' unusual request. He starred in a 70-minute video in which he disclosed all his techniques for a Los Angeles Police Department training video.

Pena Del Rio, who came to the United States with hopes of becoming a professional mixed martial arts fighter and earned a business degree from the University of San Diego, was convicted of stealing more than $16 million in loot.

The Spanish national was sentenced Tuesday to 7 1/2 years behind bars for the two-year crime spree that targeted scores of victims in Burbank, Glendale, Los Angeles, Pasadena and Simi Valley.

Pena Del Rio was originally arrested in connection with a string of burglaries that netted fine art, jewelry and other items, including a $10-million Edgar Degas painting.

Later, Pena Del Rio offered to help detectives find more of his stolen goods. He drew up a "treasure map" purportedly showing where he buried expensive jewelry, including gold necklaces and a canary diamond ring estimated to be worth up to $400,000. Detectives were skeptical of the map but eventually found the booty buried in plastic piping on a vacant lot near the White Oak Avenue exit of the 118 Freeway.

In the unedited, documentary-style interview, Pena Del Rio covered subjects such as how he chose his victims and how he talked his way out of a jam, according the lead investigator on the case, veteran LAPD Det. Bill Longacre.

"We let him ramble," Longacre said. "And he gave up a lot of good information."

There are the standard victims of residential property crimes, people who advertise their absence by keeping their porch lights on or letting the newspapers pile up, Longacre said.

But Pena Del Rio gave police a more comprehensive look at a burglar's thinking, insights that Longacre hopes might reduce losses or lead to quicker arrests.

Older victims in well-kept homes were an easy mark, not so much because they were vulnerable, Longacre said, but because he reasoned they accumulated more expensive things.

Pena Del Rio sought out those who were angry and distrustful of institutions like banks, essentially the mattress-money set who he rightly bet would keep cash, precious metals or other lucrative goods within easy striking distance.

Even though he had access to more sophisticated tools like hydraulic pry bars, rappelling ropes and blowtorches, he used gloves and a screwdriver in about 90% of his crimes.

Pena Del Rio tried to blend in to the normal activities of a neighborhood, scouting his targets while going on walks in an expensive jogging suit. He also rehearsed his exit strategy, adhering to the rule to never panic or run when confronted.

When things went wrong, he would claim to be a utility company employee whose job was to look out for trees growing over power lines or say that he had been in a car accident days earlier and was looking for witnesses.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/15/08 at 08:10 PM Reply with quote #58
You don't think FBI agents had New York Times reporter Daniel Pearl wacked?

Nah.........

couple of reads for the uneducated and the uneducable

1st read

PART 1

Undergrads identify Pearl murder suspects after FBI gave up
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Friday August 15, 2008


MSNBC's Rachel Maddow reported on Thursday that a group of college students may have succeeded where the FBI failed in identifying the killers of journalist Daniel Pearl.

Although four men were convicted of Pearl's murder in Pakistan in 2002, there were thought to be as many as 19 more suspects.

A year after the murder, CBS reported, "Authorities are reluctant to discuss the murder. Suspects disappear or are found dead. Crucial dates are confused. Confessions are offered and then recanted. There is agreement on one point: Nobody who physically carried out the killing has been convicted. None of the four men sentenced is even believed to have ever been at the shed where Pearl was held. Three of the convicted men never met Pearl at all."

But now, says Maddow, "A group of undergrads at Georgetown University, led by a professor who was a colleague of Pearl's at the Wall Street Journal, have themselves figured out the real identities of 15 of those 19 at-large suspects. The professor, Asra Nomani, says, 'The FBI says this is an open investigation, but in talking to officials it's clear there's no work being done on the ground.'"

"This is what you call a war on terror?" asked Maddow.

According to the Georgetown website, Nomani and Associate Dean Barbara Feinman Todd "assembled a team of 32 graduate and undergraduate students over the course of two semesters to pursue the unanswered questions surrounding the slain journalist's kidnapping and murder. They are continuing the project through the fall semester 2008, and they plan to publish the results of the investigation in spring 2009."

Nomani, who was a close friend of Pearl's, recently told an interviewer, "We were both children of immigrants. His parents moved here from Israel; mine came from India. He was Jewish, and I'm Muslim, so our stories are different, but still, he helped me find my identity. He helped me understand that I could be an American and a Muslim. When I told him I'd never been to a prom because I was a good Muslim girl, he threw me a prom and invited all our friends."

The interviewer also found that "Nomani has an unusual résumé: A former travel reporter for the Journal, she has also written a book about tantric sex, in addition to a memoir about her pilgrimage to Mecca, Islam's most sacred city, as an unmarried Muslim mom. The New York Times has compared her to Rosa Parks for her gutsy brand of feminism. For inspiration, she carries around Nancy Drew's Guide to Life in her backpack."

2ND READ

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP209A.html
3RD READ
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...xt=va&aid=5116
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/16/08 at 11:19 PM Reply with quote #59





Email Print Text Size
Defense wants informant details in 1970S South Dakota AIM slaying





Protestors Call King's Debate Stance "Chicken"

Problems downloading video
Fatal Fire
Sioux City Airport Recieves Federal Funding
New Non-Surgical Weight Loss Program
Thunderous Request
Riverside Shooting
Morning House Fire
Siouxland Man Sentenced For Armed Robbery

Associated Press - August 16, 2008 2:35 PM ET

RAPID CITY, S.D. (AP) - A man charged with a decades-old murder wants the U.S. government to disclose details of payments to informants and the name of 1 who said the victim was alive days before she died.

John Graham stands trial starting October 6 in Rapid City federal court on first-degree murder for the slaying of fellow Canadian Anna Mae Pictou Aquash (PEEK'-too AHK'-wash) on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.

Graham's lawyer filed a motion to make prosecutors give details of FBI payments to informants Serle Chapman and Darlene "Kamook" Nichols along with the dates of 2 letters Chapman wrote asking for payment.

And Graham wants the name of an informant who said Aquash was alive in February 1976 -- two months after prosecutors said she was killed.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/17/08 at 11:49 AM Reply with quote #60
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2310
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/17/08 at 07:44 PM Reply with quote #61
Would the organization who helped assassinate President Kennedy and Martin Luther
King let Hitler escape?


Adolf Hitler's Secret FBI Files
Timothy W. Maier

For almost 30 years, J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI maintained a detailed dossier on Adolf Hitler and closely investigated any report that indicated he still was alive.

Adolf Hitler lives -- in cyberspace, that is, where 734 pages of Hitler's raw FBI file can be downloaded from the Internet. The files contain speeches, rare photographs, old newspaper clippings, details about discovery of the Fuhrer's personal notes and chinaware and assassination plots -- as well as an extensive 11-year probe into the possibility that Hitler faked his own death with a bogus suicide in 1945.

At times these files read like a supermarket tabloid, with outrageous conspiracy theories that remind readers that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was a suspicious man. At other times, the files reveal how serious the FBI considered allegations that one of this century's most evil despots may have escaped his Berlin bunker.

The records begin with President Franklin Roosevelt becoming enraged upon learning of a 1933 New York conspiracy to kill Hitler and continue into the fifties with a Western Union telegram declaring, "I have positive proof that Hitler is living."

There are seven volumes of these records. A photographic exhibit of Hitler in uniform dominates the final volume. Scattered throughout are clippings from newspapers. The last story is a 1956 article about the plans of Hitler's sister, Paula Wolf, to write a book about her brother to "set some facts straight" as soon as a Munich court declares her brother dead. "The readers will forgive me," she says, "if I abstain from depicting my brother at all costs as a wicked character just for the sake of profit." An accompanying Associated Press article noted boldly, "He Is Officially Alive 'Til Court Issues Certificate."

As for that Western Union tipster, the FBI never tracked down the sender nor did it ever identify the members of the 1933 conspiracy plot to kill Hitler. But that plot sure kept Hoover's G-men busy. The file reveals that the plot began when the German Embassy asked the State Department to initiate an investigation based upon a letter signed by a "Daniel Stern," which said that unless FDR rebuked Hitler for his outrages against Jews, then "I notify you that I shall go to Germany and assassinate Hitler."

The State Department handed off the probe to the FBI, which never found Stern. But the probe opened the door for Hoover to look at pro-Nazi organizations. Don Whitehead, one of the few authors to research the plot, wrote about it in his book, The FBI Story, A Report to the People. He calls it a "diplomatic fumble" by the German ambassador in Washington, who probably wished he never had called the State Department. That's because Hoover's investigation ultimately became "a valuable reference when the Department of Justice requested additional investigations. And Hoover passed the information to the president," Whitehead observes.

All of this is in Hitler's FBI file -- even Whitehead's observations -- and now is available at http://www.fbi.gov. Between the poor copies -- some nearly impossible to read because, says FBI Freedom of Information Officer Linda Gloss, the copies were not made from originals -- and the heavy black ink blocking out what today still is considered classified, there rests a fascinating tale of the FBI's role during the World War II era.

For example, deep in the files are a series of memos written by Hoover on Oct. 5, 1939, reviewing intelligence from a confidential informant. The Hoover memos to various U.S. military-intelligence agencies and the president's chief of staff warned of future Japanese aggression and Germany's attack on France. "The Japanese will attack British Indochina and other colonies without warning, simultaneously with the German advance on France," Hoover wrote.

And there is ample evidence in the files to undermine rumors that Hitler's personal physician tried to poison him or "administer narcotics that might have contributed to the impairment of Hitler's health" or that "Hitler inherited certain [psychophysical] traits in his childhood and later on, and that these might account for his crimes and other actions," according to an FBI investigation into the matter.

The FBI's Hitler files have been available for some time to anyone who cared to schedule an appointment at FBI headquarters in Washington, but few have done so. Two recent critically acclaimed books, Hitler: Diagnosis of a Destructive Prophet by Fritz Redlich and Explaining Hitler by Ron Rosenbaum, fail to mention the FBI files -- although some of the records used to support these authors' opinions, such as Hitler's medical records, are duplicated in the files from other sources.

Redlich and Rosenbaum may have avoided Hitler's FBI file because some of the information there concerns allegations that border on the absurd -- for instance, that Hitler survived the war. Historians generally accept that Hitler committed suicide April 30, 1945, in a Berlin bunker as Allied troops closed in on him. The Soviets recently made available forensic proof of this in their possession since the war's end. But there was no such certainty in the West 50 years ago when opinion polls showed that two of every three Americans believed Hitler indeed was alive. Hoover didn't rule it out but never concluded that the Nazi dictator was dead. Besieged with letters from witnesses swearing they had spotted the defeated Nazi dictator, the files show, the Hitler hunt began.

Some tips were considered credible. One of these came from a doctor who claimed to have treated Hitler for an intestinal disorder in St. Louis -- an alarming story because the FBI obtained Hitler's classified medical records and verified that Hitler suffered from a similar condition. That information was not publicly known at the time.

Other reports simply were bizarre. A 77-year-old man claimed to have found a letter written by Hitler in 1947. "Call it a Hitler hoax, if you will," the man wrote Hoover, "and believe its delivery in German over a USA radio would be the most startling sensation since Orson Welles' attack of the Martians."

During an FBI interview with the elderly man, he admitted to "perpetrating this hoax to create a sensation," according to the interrogating agent's notes. "He seemed to be a psychopathic case" the agent wrote. And that was far from the only nut to roll out of the barrel. Others told tales of Hitler dining in a Washington restaurant in 1946; jumping out of a New Orleans train in 1948; purchasing 8,960 acres of land near Kit Carson, Colo.; and finding work as a butler in London in 1946.

Most of the letters had one thing in common: suspicions and allegations but no proof -- such as this Oct. 15, 1945, letter from a New York man who wrote, "I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut that Hitler is located right in New York City. There's no other city in the world where he could so easily be absorbed. No doubt you have considered this possibility, but I mention it for what it is worth anyway."

As incredible as all of this sounds now, the FBI treated such matters very seriously. If the G-men couldn't chase down the tip, they made every effort to find the tipster and either expose a mistake or identify a prankster or mental case. For instance, on Oct. 10, 1948, a Washington woman who operated a boardinghouse wrote to the FBI, claiming one of her borders was Hitler. She mostly was worried about whether she might be prosecuted for harboring him and wanted to know if any "action could possibly be taken against her." The FBI dismissed the complaint with the note: "She is obviously demented."

But while some sightings were dismissed without an intense investigation, others weren't. The files show that Hoover's G-men conducted a massive manhunt for Hitler on a scale not seen since Charles Lindbergh's baby was kidnapped and murdered, with agents trekking to the four corners of the globe in search of the Nazi leader.

The most frequent sighting was in South America -- a notoriously safe haven for Nazi war criminals, according to the FBI files. And so the FBI dispatched a team of G-men to investigate reports from newspaper articles (many contained in the FBI file) and independent witnesses apparently claiming Hitler was in Argentina.

The Argentina stories intrigued Hoover. In 1944, a year before Hitler's reported death, Hoover received a tip that Hitler would receive refuge in Argentina, according to a Sept. 4, 1944, memo written by an FBI agent. The memo noted that Argentine political leaders had plans to conduct clandestine meetings with Hitler "for the arranging of importing arms and technicians into Argentina." The memo notes that bicycle factories there had been converted to plants for manufacturing munitions and that a "large wealthy German colony in Argentina affords tremendous possibilities" as a refuge for Hitler and his henchmen. "One of the members [of the postwar German planners], Count Luxburg, has been mentioned as operating a ranch which would serve in providing a haven."

Within a year witnesses began flooding the FBI with Hitler sightings in Argentina. Some of these, the FBI rationalized, resulted from tabloid press reports claiming Hitler had escaped and was waiting for war to break out between the Soviet Union and the United States before emerging as a leader in the new world. And there were outspoken Nazi sympathizers such as Otto Abetz, Germany's wartime ambassador to France, boasting that Hitler "is certainly not dead" and was "not a coward -- I believe one day he will return."

The most sensational story appeared June 20, 1948, in El Tiempo, a Spanish newspaper published in Colombia, claiming Hitler had escaped via submarine to Bogoth. The paper provided a detailed account of Hitler's supposedly cowardly flight and fueled dozens of similar stories around the world. Many of those appeared in the FBI files as clippings ranging from obscure magazines to the Associated Press.

One such story claimed that the Swedes observed a mysterious yacht moving in and out of inlets on the North Sea or a Brazilian ship reportedly sunk by an unidentified submarine transporting a woman some claimed to be Eva Braun, Hitler's wife. Braun landed from that submarine off the coast of Argentina, one article claimed. The same article suggested a Japanese navy staff officer had volunteered details of a plan to evacuate Hitler and Braun to Japan after the fall of Germany.

Closer to home a mysterious submarine reportedly was seen about 1,300 miles north of Catalina, Calif., in a location where Theodore Donay, a wealthy Detroit importer, disappeared. According to wire reports, Donay was convicted in 1943 as a traitor for aiding Hans Peter Krug, an escaped Nazi, and never was found.

But none of these reports apparently could be directly linked to Hitler and the FBI repeatedly concluded they were baseless rumors. One agent expressed shock in the files that the Chicago Times carried such rumor and innuendo and chastised an unnamed writer. "His reputation is extremely poor and he is generally considered to be a journalist of the most sensational and unreliable nature."

One reason that Hitler's death was not believed for so long was that the Russians deliberately withheld information, writes Redlich. In fact, it wasn't until Russian journalist Lev Bezymenski wrote a book translated into English in 1968 that the West learned that the Russians performed autopsies on corpses recovered May 2, 1945, in shallow graves in a garden near the Berlin bunker. The bodies were believed to be Hitler, his wife and their two dogs.

The United States was angered by the slow Russian revelations -- but the Russian government defended its actions, saying 30 years was customary for declassification of secrets. Meanwhile, at the Yalta conference in 1945, Stalin declared that Hitler had escaped.

Further adding to continuing suspicions are the autopsy reports concerning a missing testicle and superficial accounts of main body organs. Indeed, Bezymenski since has acknowledged that the autopsy reports were false, casting more mystery on Hitler's death. Redlich says, "This only confirms what Western historians and forensic experts suspected: that the Soviet investigation was fraught with deceit, secrecy and incompetence."

Compounding the mystery was how Hitler died. It generally was believed by historians that Hitler bit down on a glass ampoule containing potassium cyanide while shooting himself in the head on April 30, 1945. But Redlich observes, "The question can be raised as to whether Hitler's Parkinson's tremor would have allowed him to follow this procedure." Proving that theory ended after it was learned that Hitler's remains had been transferred nine times from one burial site to another and, finally, to the Lefortove prison in Moscow where they were cremated.

It wasn't until 1973 when two Western experts in forensic dentistry compared Russian medical reports and X-rays of Hitler's teeth that it became evident that the corpse found outside the bunker indeed was the Fuhrer. For Redlich and others that is enough proof. "It is certain that Hitler, who at present would be over 100 years old, is dead and that he died by suicide. No serious student of history maintains that he escaped with the help of his paladins."

Meanwhile, the definitive proof that the X-rays of the corpse provided by the Russians to that forensic dentistry team are legitimate, rests in a Russian classified vault. What's inside that archive? Hitler's lower jawbone. At least that's what the Russians claim. Such details no doubt are being added to Hitler's FBI file even now.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/23/08 at 11:22 AM Reply with quote #62
08/23/08

Permalink 04:56:09 am, Categories: Voices, 3379 words

NTSB Flight Data: Flight 77 Could Not Have Crashed into the Pentagon
Len Hart




NTSB flight data indicates Flight 77 never dropped below 273 feet! Therefore, Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon, only 71 feet tall.


Data released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request by Pilots for 911 Truth are nothing less than the raw "block box' file, the official 'flight data' recorded from Flight 77. It's a digital record of everything that happened on that flight from take off. Additionally, altitude and position are confirmed by the beacon at nearby Reagan National Airport.


The data proves that the US government is lying to us about 911. The data is consistent with those who suspect that 911 was engineered by a Bush cabal who continues to exploit 911 for geo-political reasons, the acquisition of foreign oil by conquest and the suppression of dissent.


All the documentation for this article as well as the video by Pilots for 911 truth is from the US government or official agencies of the US government, specifically the FBI and the NTSB.


The Flight data recorder is the FA2100 Solid State Flight Data Recorders, a product of L3 Communications. The purpose of a flight data recorder is to record precisely what happens to a plane during the course of the flight. According to Calum Douglas, Pilots for 911 Truth requested and eventually received a 25 megabyte .fdr file in response to its FOIA request.


Some of the more interesting findings conflict with the 'official conspiracy theory', mass media accounts, and official statements by Bush, Rumsfeld et al.

1. Last recorded altitude figure is 273 feet! The height of the Pentagon is 71. There is, in fact, no credible explanation of just how Flight 77 could possibly have crashed into the Pentagon. According to Pilots for 911truth.org: "After take-off Flight 77 never went below 273 ft". Their assertion is based entirely upon official data released to them by the NTSB.
2. Flight 77 could not have knocked over or damaged light poles on either side of the motorway beside the Pentagon. Flight 77 data indicates that the flight was at the wrong angle of approach and much to high. The lowest altitude recorded by is 273 feet. The light poles are about 40 feet high. Flight 77s path varies by some 20 degrees a path that would caused pole damage before striking the Pentagon at the point at which it was, in fact, struck by something. According to flight data, Flight 77 was never 'anywhere near' any of the damaged poles at any time.
3. Radar altitude data from NTSB confirms the recorded flight data that Flight 77 could not have knocked over the poles. It's another hole Bush's 'official conspiracy theory'.

Among the many inconsistencies that are made clear upon the analysis of the raw data, is the fact that Flight 77 could not have struck the poles, as we have been told. Two witnesses, uniformed employees of the Department of Defense [DOD] claimed to have seen Flight 77 as it approached the Pentagon. But the said witnesses could not have seen whatever it was that struck poles. Whatever struck the poles would have been on a flight path behind the witnesses and would have been unseen by them.

The only plausible explanation is that whatever struck the Pentagon approach by way of the light poles and at an altitude that, in fact, allowed it to strike and damage the poles. I suspect that this was a missile. Certainly, Flight 77 approached from another angle, an angle that would have completely missed the poles EVEN if had been a the lower altitude.


This is a critical point. A single aircraft could not have damaged both the poles AND the Pentagon. Flight 77 was, in fact, too high at 273 feet and would not have been glimpse by DOD employees. The DOD witnesses, in fact, did not, could not have seen whatever it was that struck the poles.


The light poles, only about 40 feet high, are about 50 meters from the Pentagon. At this point the 'Reagan [airport] beacon' and the raw flight data confirms Flight 77 altitude was never lower than 273 feet. The speed of Flight 77 at some 50 meters out was over 500 mph. Even if Flight 77 had been on a trajectory to strike the poles, it's altitude was much to high. Could it have leveled off? Bluntly --no! Flight 77 had only a half second to two seconds in which to dive a couple of hundred feet and then level off thus accounting for both the light pole damage and the hit into the Pentagon. [Aerodynamics Simulation Software] Such a maneuver is outside manufacturers specifications, simply, impossible in that aircraft.


Calum Douglas presents his investigation into the flight data recorder from Flight 77 - the Indian YMCA in Fitzroy Square, London on 8th June 2007.


Flight 77 might have crashed into the Pentagon IF it had been capable of descended from an altitude of about 273 to an altitude of about 15 feet within about one half of a second. The experienced pilots state flatly that that maneuver is 'completely outside the performance envelope' of a 757. It is also 'outside the performance envelope' of one Hani Hanjour who 1) trained on a simulator and, in fact, had never set foot inside a 757; 2) was to obtain pilot certification; 3) was said by the Washington Post to have never board Flight 77 in the first place. He didn't have a ticket! His name was not on the original flight manifest. Flight manifests are not official. They are simply a head count done by staff. It is doubtful that a flight manifest would be admissible in court. A coroner's report, however, is considered to be evidence. Hani Hanjour, who was in fact reported by the Washington Post not to have been on board Flight 77, is not listed among those who were autopsied. In fact, according to the official, admissible autopsy report, NO arabs were autopsied and no arab names appear on the list of passengers who were autopsied. Every other ticketed passenger appearing on the flight manifest appears also on the autopsy list! But NOT --Hani Hanjour nor any other 'Arab' that Bush partisans have said hijacked the flight.


According to Pilots for 911truth.org, "it's physically impossible for the plane [flight 77] to have caused the damage to the building [Pentagon]". It was never closer than 273 feet. It's time to reassess the famous blurry, inconclusive GIF animation of something 'scooting' across the Pentagon lawn at an altitude of about fifteen feet or even less --NOT 273 feet! The GIF shows a craft that was level as it struck. Flight data indicates that Flight 77 was not only not level at that point it was much too high. It would have had to descend from 273 feet and level to some 15 feet within less than a second. Such a maneuver is outside manufacturers specifications, simply, impossible in that aircraft.


Missing from the alleged Flight 77 crash site are items that one would expect to find at a crash site: airline seats, bodies, luggage, victims clothes, arab hijackers. The only wreckage that may be immediately identifiable a single rotor that is about one third the size of one of two rotors that would have been found in the wreckage of any crashed 757 wreckage. The explanation is simple if you ignored the unproven assumptions. The explanation is that it was NOT a 757 that crashed into the Pentagon.


The rotor that was found is, in fact, the same size as the rotor of a Rolls-Royce engine that is found in the US Global Hawk! Anyone not burdened by official orthodoxy, lies and unproven assumptions need only look at the available evidence. That is, that single rotor could most certainly have been traced to a US Global Hawk --not to a 757 which, in fact, is equipped with two such rotors of diameters about three times that of the Global Hawk rotor. Besides --when NTSB data indicates that Flight 77 was never lower than some 273 feet, it is highly unlikely that it would have dropped but one of its two rotors down onto the Pentagon lawn!!


The Pentagon brass including Rumsfeld himself were safe on the opposite side of the building. Those killed were for the most part, auditors trying to locate some 2.3 trillion dollars gone missing inside the PENTAGON BLACK HOLE, in fact, a theft of some 2.3 trillion dollars from the people of the US who have paid their taxes in good faith! The American people have been betrayed, defrauded, screwed over and lied to --crimes aggravated by the loss of life at the Pentagon. The word for this is high treason, typically and historically a hanging offense! The question not if but WHO do we hang!


People are often murdered for much less than 2.3 trillion dollars. Some unfortunate souls have been done away with for a buck or two. Among the very evil, namely those calling themselves 'our' government, life is cheap at any price and well worth wasting in order to get rid of the onus of a missing 2.3 trillion dollars. The murder of US citizens by the US government will be remembered among the most heinous crimes ever perpetrated by any arch fiend in world history. Certainly --those who perpetrated this act of mass murder, this fraud, its continuing cover up should hang, publicly, so that it cannot be covered up|!


Every crime is defined by method, motive and opportunity. This article merely summarizes a method which can be re-created in some detail now and even more so when a complete investigation is begun. We have at least one very strong fiduciary motive. The US government is likewise in possession of an ideal weapon with which to murder our fellow citizens: the Global Hawk.


The opportunity was manufactured. What are the odds that Dick Cheney, as you may recall, just happened by chance to be 'gaming' a 'scenario' in which arab terrorists would crash airliners into the WTC and the Pentagon? Cheney may call it 'gaming' the 'scenario'. I call it 'supervising the mass murder of US citizens by its own government!'

Four decades ago, the novel (and movie) "Seven Days in May" was a popular political thriller about a military coup d'etat in the United States against a President who sought to scale back the Cold War. In this story, a military cabal schemed to topple the government under the guise of a military communications exercise. This "war game" was to have been used as the cover for toppling the government and installing a General as President who would stop arms control treaties with the Soviet Union.

A different fictional treatment of the use of a "war game" to perpetrate covert objectives was described in "The Lone Gunmen," a television show aired on Fox TV in March 2001. In that show, a small cabal within the military-industrial complex used a war game scenario as cover for remote control hijacking of a commercial flight and crashing it into the World Trade Center in order to boost military spending for the permanent war. This show was so close to the most likely scenario for 9/11 that it is plausible that this information was deliberately leaked in order to discredit the idea as merely part of a bad television drama, thereby inoculating people from contemplating the probability that 9/11 was a covert operation using remote controlled planes under the guise of a war game.

Lone Gunmen script excerpt:

BYERS: We know it's a war game scenario. That it has to do with airline counter-terrorism. Why is it important enough to kill for.
BYERS SNR: Because it's no longer a game.
BYERS: But if some terrorist group wants to act out this scenario, then why target you for assassination?
BYERS SNR: Depends on who your terrorists are.
BYERS: The men who conceived of it the first place. You're saying our government is planning to commit a terrorist act against a domestic airline?
BYERS SNR: There you go again. Blaming the entire government as usual. In fact, a small faction ...
BYERS: For what possible gain?
BYERS SNR: The Cold War's over, John. But with no clear enemy to stockpile against, the arms market's flat. But bring down a fully loaded 727 into the middle of New York City and you'll find a dozen tinpot dictators all over the world just clamoring to take responsibility, and begging to be smart-bombed.
BYERS: I can't believe this. This is about increasing arms sales?

On September 11, at least five different "war games" were being conducted by the military and intelligence agencies. These exercises included simulations of 9/11 type events, a plane into building scenario near Dulles Airport in Virginia, and deployment of fighters to northern Canada and Alaska (which reduced the number of fighters that were available to protect the US?). It seems that these exercises were the means used to paralyze the air defenses, thereby ensuring the success of the "attacks." The British Navy was conducting exercises in the Indian ocean near the Middle East. A biowar exercise was also about to start in New York City.

Who has the power to coordinate all of these exercises? Osama bin Laden? Saddam Hussein? Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah? Dick Cheney and the White House National Security Council?


It is difficult to believe that it is a bizarre "coincidence" that the military and CIA were conducting war games similar to 9/11 on September 11, 2001. While it seems likely, if not blatantly obvious, that these war games were one of the means used to confuse the air defense system for sufficient time to allow the World Trade Center to be attacked, the war games do not answer the question of how the air defenses were suppressed for another half hour after the second tower was hit (at which time everyone knew that an attack was in progress). The Air Force had another half hour after the second tower to scramble interceptors to defend the Capitol (the plane that is alleged to have hit the Pentagon made its 180 degree turn over Ohio to head back toward DC about the time that the second tower was struck).


--9/11 War Games by the US military & CIA



Former Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta confirmed that Dick Cheney ordered a 'stand down' on 9/11, as Dick Cheney was 'gaming the scenario'.

"During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President…the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?

--Former Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, 911 Commission Hearing


[See: Minetta tells 9/11 Commission Cheney knew exact flight path of Flight 77]



Mineta Testifies to 911 Commission


Journalists covering the hearing verified Mineta's testimony after the hearing. The exchange raises the question: if Cheney were willing to allow what Mineta thought was a 'hijacked' aircraft to strike the Pentagon, would compunction would have prevented Cheney from ordering or agreeing to allow a US Global Hawk to accomplish the same thing with more certainty? At the very least, Dick Cheney is guilty of high treason. At worst --high treason and mass murder.


Any government employee at any level elected or civil service who supports, plans, participates in such a crime should be subject to charges of high treason, murder, accessory, seditious conspiracy, to say nothing of violations of this administration's 'own' US Patriot Act which makes it unlawful to disseminate false information about 'terrorism'. The act of ramming a missile into the US Pentagon is an act of terrorism whether that 'missile' (as Rumsfeld called it) is a Global Hawk or a 757. Every member of the Bush administration who has lied about 911 in any way is therefore prosecutable as a 'terrorist' under the US Patriot Act! There is, in fact, a Federal Grand Jury that is investigating the many crimes of 911. I hope that the members of this panel are paying attention. I would hope that they are doing their patriotic duty to their country, to the truth, and to justice! Let the charges be issued and the trial begin! Those planning and directing this heinous crime should stand trial for their very lives.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/27/08 at 11:58 AM Reply with quote #63



couple of reads about G-Men wearing white hoods





http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=ICYT4oT93zQC&dq=informant+may&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=h0UQ5pMoNN&sig=soJJmp4ze-wPRPRwlxTHVZrMMkI&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result


Books
The Informant
The Informant: The FBI, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Murder of Viola Liuzzo
by Gary May
Yale University Press

2nd read
Eyes to My Soul: The Rise or Decline of A Black FBI Agent

by Tyrone Powers



" One of the most readable and important of [recent African American autobiographies]....Powers is a compelling writer."

William Jelani Cobb - Washington City Paper

" The significance of this literary masterpiece has compelled me to violate my most sacred rule: never expose your battle plan to the enemy...with this work of art by Mr. Powers, my collection is now complete."

James Wm. Morrison, Esq., Civil Rights Attorney
About Eyes to My Soul

Former FBI Special Agent Tyrone Powers, a veteran of the Maryland State Police, spent nine years as an FBI agent, with posting in Cincinnati and Detroit. He resigned in August 1994.

The picture of the country's top law enforcement agency that emerges from Powers' eloquent prose reveals an organization beset by the same problems of racism that plague the rest of American society. Powers describes sheet -clad students at the FBI Academy impersonating Ku Klux Klansmen. He reports on FBI agents in Detroit raising funds for white Detroit policemen charged with (and later convicted of ) second degree murder in the death of Black motorist Malice Green.

White agents according to Powers' narrative, urinated on photographs of President Bill Clinton and Vice-President Al Gore. Powers provides eyewitness evidence of the agency's extra- legal harassment of African American Mayors Coleman Young (Detroit) , Marion Berry ( Washington, DC) and Harold Washington (Chicago).

last read

Morris Dees' persecution of the Nation of Islam

Once again, Black people are confronted with the "hate" agenda of a segment of politically and economically powerful white folks whose passion is the perpetual enslavement of the Black man and woman. Last week, the Southern Poverty Law Center of Alabama added the Nation of Islam to its list of 474 "hate groups," which includes the likes of the "skinheads," the militias, and the Ku Klux Klan. You would think that one had to actually do or say something "hateful" in order to make such a list, but the question one must ask is, "Who is the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and who authorized them to assign such labels to Black freedom organizations?"

In 1971, Morris Seligman-Dees (left, who has dropped the Seligman from his name) and Joseph Levin (right), founded the non-profit SPLC which they claim to be "dedicated to seeking justice." Seligman-Dees and Levin are white Alabama "civil rights" attorneys which, they believe, qualifies them to grant titles like "hate group" to Black organizations. But Seligman-Dees's own history of hate has only recently been exposed and questioned. His deceitful and unprincipled attack on an esteemed Black attorney and true legal freedom fighter plainly disqualifies Seligman-Dees as self-appointed overseer of negro interests.

The Hon. Fred D. Gray was more than a civil rights attorney of the highest caliber, he was the lawyer for Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study victims, and the Selma marchers, among many other front-line legal duties. When President Jimmy Carter nominated Mr. Gray for a U.S. District judgeship in 1979, his legendary record drew praise and respect from even former enemies in the deep South. Coretta Scott King, Rosa Parks and Parren Mitchell were among the movement's heroes testifying at the Senate hearing on behalf of this legal giant. Then came Seligman-Dees. Atty. Gray describes the incident:

The greatest disappointment, which was totally unexpected, was Morris [Seligman-] Dees's appearance and testimony in opposition to my nomination....I felt betrayed...

Gray was no stranger to Seligman-Dees. Gray had filed the lawsuit that integrated Seligman-Dees's own high school, and later, when Gray won a seat on the Alabama Legislature, the reception was at Seligman-Dees's home.

Gray, and the justice-starved Black community were denied the Gray judgeship, and Seligman-Dees has never been held accountable for his part in the loss of a powerful ally for legal justice in Alabama. His subsequent "apology" to Gray was strange: "I'm sorry events led me to be called in D.C. to testify," he wrote to Gray in 1991. What "events," Mr. Seligman-Dees? And, if you'll notice, he's not "sorry" for his testimony, just for "events."








Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


08/31/08 at 10:58 AM Reply with quote #64
8/31/08:
Exclusive Interview with Investigator Rady Ananda
Joan Brunwasser

http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/Exclusive-Interview-with-I-by-Joan-Brunwasser-080831-744.html




Rady Ananda began blogging in 2004, finally settling in at OpEdNews where she now volunteers as a Senior Editor. She has actively pursued election integrity since 2004, and several pieces of her research and analysis appear in three books on Ohio’s 2004 election. She continues to promote equal rights for the LGBT community, while honing her skills as an essayist and investigative journalist.

So, Rady, how did you get started in election integrity?

The first thing about elections that made me go, “hmm?” was the December 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision halting the Florida recount and appointing GWB president. I was in school at the time, so I didn’t get involved until after graduating college. In 2004, I started reading online news sites – WantToKnow, the Freep, and BBV. That internal “hmm?” warning started to elevate.

But then I got caught up in the Democratic Party’s Get Out The Vote efforts in 2004. Anybody But Bush was the motto. I took a classmate to see John Kerry and Bruce Springsteen at the Ohio State campus. We were totally pumped. From Kerry’s lips to my ears, “We will count every vote!” I had much to learn about the difference between campaign promises and actual behavior. He conceded the election on Nov. 3rd, and refused to provide any funds to our recount efforts.

On November 2, 2004, I got another friend to work with me for the local Dem Party. We went into four different precincts in Columbus, Ohio. In three of those precincts, black working class neighborhoods, we collected the numbers of voters who had shown up by 11 AM and 4 PM, as directed by the Dems. But we also visited a white wealthy Republican precinct. The difference was stark: not enough machines in the black precincts, and the lines went out the door, into the rainy weather where voters waited two hours; while voters in the wealthy white precinct waited ten minutes to access one of many machines.

Later we learned that Franklin County Elections Director Matt Damschroder had withheld over a hundred machines, providing fewer machines to certain neighborhoods than were provided in the 2004 primary. Of course the turnout for the general election was twice that of the primary. I studied the public records that Bob Fitrakis acquired, and saw with my own eyes the deployment figures. No one got in trouble for this blatant disenfranchisement of a targeted class of voters.

That election – on machines that the EVEREST study later revealed were easily and undetectably hackable – also resulted in Ohio’s constitutionally mandated same-sex marriage ban. Several of us in the Q community railed at our gay leadership who lacked the foresight to attack the proposed amendment en masse. Where were the bumper stickers? The rallies? The OpEd pieces? What did they do with all the money we had donated? After the election, they provided 600 of us with a bright yellow sweatshirt, and changed the name of their organization. I even attended the follow up meetings to develop new leadership, but the same leaders were voted in, and in later emails, they told us their process was top-down. Yeah, that worked real well the last time, didn’t it? Disgusted, I walked away.

After Nov. 2nd, I mainly focused on elections. I read the various lawsuits and mainstream press articles about how funny those machines acted on Election Day: vote switching, 98% turnout, tampering with the recount, etc. One precinct (Gahanna 1B) showed that of 638 total votes cast, 4,258 of them for Bush. I started keeping track, and eventually developed an EIR spreadsheet of all the election incident reports I could find in the public record. I submitted that spreadsheet to the Election Assistance Commission in 2005, and it’s been reproduced sans citations in the book, What Happened in Ohio: A documentary record of theft and fraud in the 2004 election, by Robert J. Fitrakis, Steven Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman, NY: New Press, 2006, at pp 116-123.

So I got tied into elections in three ways: shenanigans at the poll sites, shenanigans with the software, and an unconstitutional amendment discriminating against my tribe.

I know you’ve done a lot since 2004. What are some of the highlights?

(Laughing) Yeah, much has happened since 2004. In July 2005, Troy Semen, Jo Anne Karasek and I formed the first investigative team to photograph the 2004 ballots in Ohio. Over the next 13 months, I photographed thousands of ballots and led several teams into various counties. I burnt numerous copies of the digital records, to ensure the evidence was spread far and wide. This work appears in Richard Hayes Phillips’ book, Witness to a Crime: A citizens’ audit of an American election. That was amazing to work with so many people who care about democracy.

We plugged away at those photographs, often going into hostile counties, like Warren – which advised it received a Level Ten Terrorist Threat alert from the FBI on election night, so they “had to remove the ballots” to be counted in secret. Of course that was absolute hogwash, yet no one in Warren was ever indicted for this fraud that violated Ohio and local election laws.

We presciently suspected that our photographs would become the only extant record of those ballots. In September of 2006, despite a court order requiring preservation, 3/4 of all Ohio counties “lost” or destroyed the 2004 punch card ballots. No one’s been convicted of any wrongdoing.

After Kerry conceded on November 3rd, the Democratic Party crawled back into the woodwork and the Greens and Libertarians stepped up on behalf of all Ohio’s voters, organizing Ohio’s 2004 recount. I joined that 2004 recount effort, and observed two more recounts in 2006. But recounts of records that lack chain of custody; or that lack continual scrutiny by the public; or that are produced on undetectably mutable software are an exercise in futility. We have no rational basis for confidence in reported election results, or in recounts that fail Security 101 (provenance).

Two exciting legal opportunities arose in 2006. I provided legal support to two election cases that questioned the integrity of reported results: San Diego’s 50th Congressional District race between Francine Busby and Brian Bilbray; and Franklin County’s judicial race between Carole Squire and Chris Geer. For Squire, I organized and led a team of college graduates who audited the signature poll books, and I prepared a spreadsheet comparing our results to official numbers. I also testified on behalf of our findings.

While the Court found that irregularities did occur in that election (like using uncertified software), the Court also found that Plaintiff failed to prove that these “irregularities affected enough votes to change or make uncertain the election results.” Franklin used uncertified, undetectably mutable software that fails to produce evidence of how the ballots were counted or evidence of fraud. Yet the court ruled against us.

Of Ohio’s four parallel elections (citizen-run paper ballot elections), I organized two of them - the last one covering a 4-precinct polling site with over 3,400 registered voters. We had 24 volunteers on our team that day, and national media covered us. Marj Creech served as spokesperson, and bloggers wrote about it. That was exhausting and exhilarating. I have to thank several special people: Marj, my comadre; Teresa Blakely and her husband, Len Samuelson; Lisa Vallieri and her mate, Mel; and especially Kal Palnicki, a long-time and stalwart supporter of all my efforts in Ohio.

What are you working on now?

Now, I’m focusing on New York, which smartly still uses a mechanical lever voting machine. NY is the only state in the nation to provide a transparent, easily secured voting system. (There are small jurisdictions around the nation that do manually count the ballots on election night in front of many watchers of different political faith; and I trust this method.) But in 2005, NY passed the Election Reform and Modernization Act (ERMA), which replaces levers with computers.

Since passage of ERMA, some 50-plus scientific studies have been published that reveal how easy it is to hack into these vulnerable software systems, producing results that are so unreliable that manual counts are required. Alternative media has continually reported the problems that several states incur when using software driven voting systems.

Given these new facts, as they came to light, NY never implemented computerized voting systems, and so the Dept. of Justice sued NY in 2006. Now NY is under a 2008 court order to deploy them by 2009 in accord with their timeline. Yet NY is experiencing what the rest of the nation has already learned: software driven voting systems continue to fail in test after test.

Voters and taxpayers should ask, why bother using expensive, easily hacked, vote-counting devices when we have to manually count the ballots anyway? What really gets me about all this is the underhanded way our elections went from being fully and reliably counted to an audit that only samples a small percentage of all ballots cast. When and who decided we should stop reliably counting all the ballots? I cover this in more detail in Count Every Vote.

Attorney Andi Novick pulled me onto her team in NY, the Election Transparency Coalition, where we’re now gearing up for a legal contest. She lays out the case in her two-page summary of the Complaint. New York looks to me like the last battleground where US elections may be saved. Forty-nine other states hoodwink voters into believing they can secure a system that can be hacked remotely. Forty-nine other states have chosen the most expensive voting system ever devised, something taxpayers should think about when you consider that NY’s levers have lasted over 40 years.

So what’s your prognosis regarding election integrity?

“More people have been elected between sundown and sunup than ever were elected between sunup and sundown,” said Will Rogers. The only way we’re ever going to have honest elections is if citizens take over the process, simplify it (meaning, no software), and allow constant scrutiny by everyday people of all political faiths, or who are nonpartisan. No more favoring the two dominant parties. The ballots have to be counted on election night, at the polling site, before all who wish to observe, and the results announced immediately – before any precinct knows the results of any others.

NY has this set-up. What I learned under Andi’s tutelage was astonishing: prior to ERMA, New York protected the count from innumerable attacks, from insiders and outsiders, and insisted the count be fully completed on election night. Of course, every voting system can be hacked, but mechanical levers, along with all the laws and procedures NY enacted prior to ERMA, have convinced me this is one of the most, if not the most, secure voting system ever invented. To quote Professor Pfaffenberger, the nation’s foremost expert on levers:

[T]he lever machine deserves recognition as one of the most astonishing achievements of American technological genius, a fact that is reflected in their continued competitiveness against recent voting technologies in every accepted performance measure. With as many as 28,000 parts, their mechanisms reflect an agonizingly difficult period of development, spanning more than twenty years (1888-1919) in which interlocking mechanisms had to be developed that were capable of dealing with the enormous complexity and variety of American elections. The result was a machine that captures in its immutable mechanical operations the voting rules that the American people, in their wisdom, developed in order to capture the will of the people. (emphasis added)

Any final words of advice?

Get involved. In NY, we need bloggers, court jockeys, lobbyists, community liaisons, BOE buddies, pro-bono attorneys, fundraisers, event organizers and videographers. Check in at the ETC website for updates. The last battle has yet to be fought. The ship has not yet sailed. We need mass help to preserve election integrity in New York. Together, we can make the difference.


Joan Brunwasser is a co-founder of Citizens for Election Reform (CER) which exists for the sole purpose of raising the public awareness of the critical need for election reform. We aim to restore fair, accurate, transparent, secure elections where votes are cast in private and counted in public. Electronic (computerized) voting systems are simply antithetical to democratic principles.

CER set up a lending library to achieve the widespread distribution of the DVD Invisible Ballots: A temptation for electronic vote fraud. Within eighteen months, the project had distributed over 3200 copies across the country and beyond. CER now concentrates on group showings, OpEd pieces, articles, reviews, interviews, discussion sessions, networking, conferences, anything that promotes awareness of this critical problem. Joan has been Election Integrity Editor for OpEdNews since December, 2005.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/02/08 at 10:26 AM Reply with quote #65
FBI agents have been collaborating with members of the Mafia since the 1930's.
It was a taxpayer funded symbiotic relationship.
FBI agents protected the Mafia in turn the Mafia helped weaken and destroy American unions
for American corporations.
FBI agents employed the mafia in the assassinations of Martin Luther King and President Kennedy
as detailed in the books CONTRACT ON AMERICA and ACT OF STATE THE EXECUTION OF MARTIN LUTHER KING.
There were other back up assassins employed as detailed in the documentary video
THE GUILTY MEN.
google
barr mcclellan the guilty men you tube

The Teamsters Union is a template for what FBI agents did on behalf of American corporations.After all the main role of FBI agents is to protect corporations while masquerading as a law enforcement agency.
National Public radio is the official public relations arm of the FBI.
See if you can detect any spin.
After reading this pr piece google
angela clemente steve dresch devecchio
Also read the Murder Machine for a accurate assessment of the serial killers employed at the FBI and its surrogates in the Mafia.
Last google
whosearat forum FBI WATCH


Legal Affairs
Some FBI Agents Pay High Price For Using Snitches

by Dina Temple-Raston



Second in a three-part series.


*
Sep. 1, 2008
One Case Changed FBI's Role With Informants




Gregory Scarpa and his girlfriend, Linda Schiro, are shown here in a 1991 photo.

Gregory Scarpa and his girlfriend, Linda Schiro, are shown here in a 1991 photo. Schiro was the key prosecution witness in the murder trial of former FBI agent R. Lindley DeVecchio. Her testimony detailed Scarpa's 30-year relationship with the FBI and the close relationship he enjoyed with the defendant, going back to 1978. AP/Brooklyn District Attorney's Office



Morning Edition, September 2, 2008 · Agents call confidential informants a necessary evil and a vital part of crime fighting, but recent high profile court cases have some agents thinking twice about working with a high level snitch.

This time last year, former FBI agent Lin DeVecchio was in a Brooklyn courtroom charged with murder. His accuser was the longtime girlfriend of a mafia hitman named Greg "the Grim Reaper" Scarpa.

She said DeVecchio had given Scarpa — one of his confidential informants — information he needed to kill four people. It was a mob girlfriend's word against DeVecchio's. And then something unusual happened — two journalists came forward with a very key piece of information.

Mafia expert Jerry Capeci, who runs the Web site Gangland.com, and Village Voice reporter Tom Robbins had interviewed Scarpa's girlfriend, Linda Schiro, in 1997 for a book. Back then she had absolved DeVecchio of any involvement in the murders.

"There is no way that is what she told us back in 1997," Capeci says."And we felt we had to explain that is not the only story she told about those four killings."

Capeci and Robbins had Schiro on tape; she had changed her story when she was on the stand.

"Back in 1997, we asked her specifically if Lin was involved in the killing, and she said 'Oh, no absolutely not,'" he says.

After Schiro testified — and by doing so, she released the two journalists from their confidentiality agreements — they contacted the judge. Their tapes were subpoenaed, and a short time later, the Brooklyn district attorney withdrew the case against DeVecchio. Their key witness had been discredited.

While DeVecchio, once one of the bureau's most admired agents on dealing with informants, was vindicated, a 19-month investigation left him with $600,000 in legal bills and a familiar lament:"My question is, where do I go to get my reputation back?" he asked reporters after he was cleared.

Given how the story unfolded, it isn't surprising that agents are worried that they could be caught in the same web — that their top informants could implicate them in their crimes, or a victim will sue them for not preventing one.

A Cautionary Tale

Jim Kossler was the coordinating supervisor for organized crime for the FBI in New York — DeVecchio's boss. He says that what happened to DeVecchio has become a cautionary tale for agents in the field.

"I mean this story is so unbelievable," says Kossler."The fallout of it as it relates to how the bureau does its business in the future — it is going to have a great impact."

Kossler says agents can't help but think about what they put at risk — personally — when they tap a criminal to get them inside information. DeVecchio paid a heavy price. Among other things, he lost his reputation, and he even lost his business.

"He had a pretty good investigative business," says Kossler. "And he lost that whenever he got indicted. He couldn't work. When you get indicted like that, it is a harrowing experience. He handled it very well. I don't know if I could handle it."

Typically, when an agent is named in a lawsuit, they ask the Justice Department for representation. If the department determines the lawsuit relates to their FBI work, it assigns counsel or pays some government hourly rate for the defense. FBI general counsel Valerie Caproni said that's how it worked in DeVecchio's case.

"The department determined that the charges arose out of his work as an FBI agent, and therefore was prepared to pay for his defense and paid a substantial amount toward his criminal defense," she says.

But DeVecchio was worried the department lawyers wouldn't be strong enough. So he hired his own. The defense cost him $600,000 more than the Justice Department was willing to pay.

'A Little Kafkaesque'

If DeVecchio's case seems unique, consider former FBI supervisor Jim Ring.

The last civil case related to confidential informants that was brought against him was finally dismissed earlier this year — 18 years after he retired.

"It is a little Kafkaesque, where the legal system is being used against you, and they know exactly which buttons to push, and there is nothing you can do about it," he says.

In one case against Ring, attorneys tried to go after his assets and his house — all because he was supervising a case with a confidential informant.

"And someone said to me, 'After this happened to you, I would never touch an informant,'" he says.

Caproni, for her part, says these cases are the exception, not the rule. She says she hasn't seen a fall-off in the number of confidential informants the FBI is working.

But in interviews, half a dozen active agents said they were more much cautious now than before the DeVecchio episode.

There's a saying among agents: If your confidential informant doesn't get you in trouble, he's probably not a very good informant.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/05/08 at 01:37 PM Reply with quote #66
This article title is extremely misleading.
Taxpayer funded FBI agents were complicit in the planning, carrying out, and most important , cover-up of the 911 attacks. They were the perps of 911.Some FBI agents were the terrorists.
You don't want to hear that about your bodyguards.
That is the real issue here. Your bodyguards creating 911 with other members of the US Government.
Because you and your species have relied on protection from your bodyguards for so long
you have forgotten how to protect yourself.
You have been "BLACKWATERIZED'
One way to change this is for your species to start policing their own communities.
You and the community go out on patrol. You and the community make the arrests.You
and the community decide on how you want the crime resolved.
You and the community decide to police themselves because you and the community are cognizant of the fact that institutions created by the community shape the psychological evolution of the community.
Is the community ready to police itself?
Is the community ready for restorative justice?



September 4, 2008

Incompetent FBI Merely 'Assumed' Wreckage to be Hijacked Planes

by Len Hart Page 1 of 4 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com


t

The FBI has admitted, officially, that it cannot find any 'evidence' or documentation to support popular myths that some four airliners were hijacked by terrorists and used as weapons on 911. Their investigation, says the FBI, was based upon the never questioned assumption that the said flights had been hijacked. The Bush 'presidency' is not an administration; it is a criminal conspiracy!

This comes on the heels of my recent article in which I cited flight data released by the NTSB indicating that Flight 77 never dropped below 273 feet. That's a job the FBI should have done. The latest disclosure from the FBI, however, pull the rug from beneath a panoply of black-hearted lies by Bush and most of his administration. The official conspiracy theory of 911 is kaput!

There is not a shred of evidence in support of anything said by Bush about 911 at any time. Bush's official conspiracy theory is now proven to have been a tissue of lies from its inception! It is now proven to have been based, at least in part, upon mere assumptions by the FBI. It may be more accurate to conclude that Bush, his administration and enablers, would not have gotten away with it had the FBI done its job.

Let's put this another way: there is absolutely nothing to support Bush/Rummie/Powell/Rice assertions with regard to any aspect of 911. In short: Bush has absolutely nothing with which he may prove any statement ever made by him or his administration with regard to the crime of mass murder called '911' for short!

The following statement from David M. Hardy, Section Chief, Records, FBI, was posted on 911Bloggers.com:

The following is a statement by the Section Chief of the Record/lnformation Dissemination Section ("RlDS") of the FBI regarding the unsuccessful search for records or facsimiles of records, pertaining the 4 aircraft identified by the FBI and NTSB as being used during terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 or wreckage generated by them, including 2 flight data recorders.

This statement is a defense exhibit for use in an upcoming oral arguments hearing pertaining to a federal court case for records for the 4 aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

SEARCH FOR RECORDS RESPONSlVE

TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST

Plaintiff's original FOIA request sought "documentation pertaining to any formally and positively identified debris" from the aircraft used in the September 11th attacks. In response to this request, RIDS personnel at FBIHQ understood that any potentially responsive records would have been compiled for law enforcement purposes and would be located in a pending file because of an ongoing law enforcement investigation.

RIDS personnel therefore determined that any records would be withheld in their entirety pursuant to 5 U.S.C. ? 552(b)(7)(A).

The FBI then received a copy of plaintiff's complaint for injunctive relief, later amended, wherein plaintiff requested the FBI to "produce agency records, concerning documentation revealing the process by which wreckage recovered by defendant, from the aircraft used during the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, was positively identified by defendant (with the aid of the National Transportation Safety Board) as belonging to the said aircraft, presumably through the use of unique serial number identifying information contained by the said aircraft wreckage, that was collected by defendant and which defendant has improperly withheld from plaintiff."

In response to this request, RlDS conducted a search for potentially responsive records at FBIHQ on February 11, 2008. A search of the CRS was conducted using the following subjects: "Airline Debris," "Debris Identification," "Commercial Aircraft," "Aircraft Identification," "Aircraft Debris," "Aircraft Wreckage," "Aircraft," "Recovered Debris," "National Transportation and Safety Bureau," "National Transportation Safety Board," "NTSB," "American Airlines," "American Airlines Flight," "American Airlines Flight Eleven," "American Airlines Flight Number 11," "American Airlines Flight 77," "N334AA," "N612UA," "N644AA," "N591UA," "Flight 175," "Flight 11," "Flight 77," "Flight 93," "Identifying Aircraft Parts," "Factual Report Aviation," "Federal Aviation Administration," "Pentbomb," "Ground Zero," "Freshkills Landfill," and "Fresh Kills Landfill."

Despite this extensive and detailed search effort, RlDS has been unable to locate any FBI records responsive to plaintiffs request.RIDS' search efforts included a verification by the case agent for the investigation. The case agent stated that since the identities of the four hijacked aircraft have never been in question by the FBI, NTSB or FAA (evidence collected after September 11, 2001 has corroborated the fact that American Airlines Flight 11, United Airlines Flight 175, American Airlines Flight 77 and United Flight 93 were the aircraft hijacked), no records would have been generated responsive to plaintiffs request for documents.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ? 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, and that Exhibits A-J attached hereto are true and correct copies.

Executed this 8th day of August, 2008

David M. HARDY
Section Chief
Records/Information Dissemination Section
Records Management Division
Federal Bureau of investigation, Washington, DC


http://www.911Bloggers.comThere is no official documentation, evidence connecting any of the said flights to the events of 911. In other words, there is no proof whatsoever that any flight at any time did what the Bush administration has told the American people that it did. There is no evidence, for example, that Flight 77 struck the Pentagon. Indeed, this blog reported just days ago official NTSB flight data represented by NTSB to be from Flight 77. This information is directly contrary to the 'official conspiracy theory'. According to this NTSB data, Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon; after take off, it never dropped below 273 feet.

At this point, it may be well to sum up some previous posts.

High Treason: 'Pentagon Lied to the 911 Commission' ; Bush's Theory Falls Apart

911 Commission co-chairs claim that they were misled, perhaps deliberately, by the Bush administration and Pentagon brass. Because 911 was an act of mass murder overtly covered up by the Bush administration, the many lies by Bush amount to more than mere obstructions of justice or cover ups. They amount to high treason --a mechanism by which this administration seized power unconstitutionally. Holes in Bush's theories are holes in Bush's theories.

...
The NIST Tries to 'Repeal' the Laws of Entropy and the First & Second Laws of Thermodynamics

The NIST's latest theory ignores satellite thermal photos of ground zero indicating abnormally high temperatures for months after 911. The NIST theory du jour ignores this data and fails to explain it!

Under-estimating the intelligence of the American people, the NIST persists in papering over the endless holes in Bush's official conspiracy theories of 911. Openly declaring that its new 'report' will finish off critics of Bush's official conspiracy theory of 911, NIST has presumed to repeal laws of physics --the laws of entropy as well as the First & the Second Laws of Thermodynamics. Are we to expect Bush will now try repeal the equations of Galileo and Newton which describe precisely the free fall of sabotaged towers in New York? Perhaps Bush and his NEOCON co-conspirators will re-design the universe itself!

...

NTSB Flight Data: Official 'Explanation' of Flight 93 is a Criminal Fraud!

According to official NTSB Flight Data, Flight 93 could not possibly have crashed in the field in PA. The flight data flatly contradicts Bush's official conspiracy theory of 911. Guess which one is lying!

I recently posted NTSB data indicating that Flight 77 never dropped below 273 feet! Flight 77, therefore, could not have crashed into the Pentagon. The Pentagon is only 71 feet tall.

Secondly, according to the official flight data released by the NTSB, Flight 77 could not have damaged the light poles. 77 was much too high; the poles are only 40 feet high and on the wrong trajectory.

Damien, a regular contributor to this blog, has put together an exhaustive survey of equally disturbing holes in the official theories concerning Flight 93 which we have been expected to believe crashed in PA. Following is Damien's report --a damning critique and proof that the Bush cabal cover stories about Flight 93 are simply impossible and violate the recently discussed "Occam's Razor' by raising infinitely more questions than Bush's theories have been able to explain.Simply --any theory that raises more questions than it explains may be discarded. In this case, there are so many demonstrably deliberate lies, that one is justified in concluding that the Bush administration and the US military have deliberately lied to the American people about 911. The term for that is HIGH TREASON!

...
NTSB Flight Data: Flight 77 Could Not Have Crashed into the Pentagon

NTSB data indicates Flight 77 never dropped below 273 feet! Therefore, Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon. The Pentagon is only 71 feet tall. Secondly, according to the black box data, Flight 77 could not have damaged the light poles. 77 was much too high (the poles are only 40 feet) and on the wrong trajectory. Dare we hope that this is the wooden stake driven into the heart of vile, evil, official lies about 911?

Data released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request by Pilots for 911 Truth are nothing less than the raw "black box' file, the official 'flight data' recorded from Flight 77. It's a digital record of everything that happened on that flight from take off. Additionally, altitude and position are confirmed by the beacon at nearby Reagan National Airport.
Who lies about crimes? those who wish to cover them up!

What is the only motive for covering up a crime? to protect the guilty!


What is the primary motive for protecting a guilty person? if the one lying is the guilty party or is complicit with other guilty parties!

Who lied about 911? the entire Bush administration seems premised upon a gestalt of demonstrable lies about a highly improbable, most certainly fictitious conspiracy of incompetent Arab pilots enthrall to one Bin Laden, a CIA asset, said to have been the leader of 'Al Qaeda', a name given this 'conspiracy' by the CIA during the Soviet/Afghan war. It means "The Base".

The most prominent liar in the Bush administration is Bush himself, an habitual, psychopathic liar/murderer who is incapable of telling the truth even by accident! Others include Donald Rumsfeld who told the truth inadvertently when he referred to '...the missile that struck this building' [the Pentagon!]

. . Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them.

--Donald Rumsfeld, US Dept of Defense, Official Transcript

On another occasion, he referred to a 'missile' shooting down Flight 93. There is no indication that Rumsfeld intended to tell the truth. Chalk it up to senility! Other Bush admin liars include Colin Powell who deceived the entire world on Bush's behalf, basing his lies to the UN upon ten year old satellite photos and plagiarized student papers!

Ohter liars include, of course, Condoleeza Rice who said that no one could have foreseen that 'terrorists' would use airplanes to strike buildings. In fact, just such a scenario was the basis for G8 Summit security. Rice also warned San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown not to be flying on September 11th. Her warning preceded the attacks by about 3 days, as I recall. She knew and lied! Other liars inside an administration premised upon lies should not be difficult. Members of a federal grand jury reading this: you have your work cut out for you. Get to work. You have the authority to subpoena anyone you please about anything. Work your way up to Bush. You will be returning federal indictments till the cows come home!

Personal message to Bush: give it up, jack!

Resign!

Make yourself available for arrest by federal marshalls.

Get yourself a lawyer! We, the sovereign people of the United States, are going to try you and your complicit minions for the crimes of high treason, mass murder and the war of naked aggression against Iraq, itself a violation of US Codes, Title 18, Section 2441:

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 > ? 2441

? 2441. War crimes

(a) Offense.- Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.

Every civilian death in Iraq is a capital crime for which George W. Bush is personally responsible and culpable. Last time I checked the civilian death count as a result of the illegal US presence in Iraq is well over a million. The word for that is 'mass murder'. The so-called 'President' of the US is a mass murderer. I don't think that we, the people, should have to live with or put up with that intolerable situation. I don't think we should be supporting wars of aggression or mass murder with out tax monies. I don't think that the governance of the United States can be entrusted to a criminal cabal of defense contractors, brass, and blithering idiots like Michael Hayden. I don't think our tax monies are well-spent if they have enabled a psychopathic mass murderer like George W. Bush to hijack the awesome military power of the US.

The following comments were 'moderated' because, frankly, I sick to death of the stupidity these comments represent. But --because I am really a very nice guy and will often tolerate fools and idiots, here are the comments and my response:

If flight "77 never dropped below 273 ft." then where did it go, what happened to it?

That's a BIG HOLE in the official theory and, if Bush's official theory had been true, it would have been addressed. It wasn't! The point is: the official conspiracy theory is a lie. TRUE 'theories' explain observed events. The Bush theory DOES NOT explain observed events because it was a bald faced lie from the outset.

How do we have evidence concerning its altitude if we don't have the (remains of) the plane?

That has been explained numerous times in my article. The flight recorder data was released by the NTSB to the the pilot organization cite in response to an FOIA request. That fact that the flight data recorder was recovered is simply another glaring hole in the official theory will holds that Flight 77 was utterly vaporized. Obviously, if the government is releasing the details of the flight, details recorded as it was in flight, then the airliner in question was obviously NOT vaporized --now was it? It was also --obviously --NOT at the Pentagon.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/07/08 at 02:42 PM Reply with quote #67

Reported Cell Phone Calls from the 9/11 Planes
Further Reflections Evoked by a Critique

by Prof. David Ray Griffin

Global Research, September 7, 2008


Email this article to a friend
Print this article

0diggsdigg

StumbleUpon Submit

Earlier this year, Andrew Kornkven posted a comment and a blog critical of my discussion, in Chapter 17 of my book 9/11 Contradictions, of reported cell phone calls from the 9/11 airliners. In this reply, I respond to both of these criticisms, referring to former as his "Comment," to the latter as his "Blog." (All quotations are from the Blog unless otherwise indicated.) Although Kornkven's criticisms are based on confusions and other errors, my response to them has led me to report some information about this issue that I had not previously published, although much of it is in my most recent book, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited. This distinction means that, although many of my comments, especially in the first parts of this essay, consist of responses to confused criticisms (which the reader will probably want to move through quickly), this essay does, especially in its later parts, contain several points of great importance.

Kornkven begins his Comment by saying: "David Ray Griffin continues to put forth a misleading line of argument regarding the 'cell phone' calls." With the term "continues," he alludes to the fact that he had written an earlier critique, to which I wrote a reply. In that reply, I gave some reasons for being dubious of Kornkven's theory as to what really happened, which lies behind his criticism of my position. According to his theory, there really were hijackers on the planes, but they were not Arab Muslims, or even Muslims of any sort. He also holds that relatives of victims did not actually report receiving cell phones calls. Instead, this claim was invented by the corporate media to trick the foreseen 9/11 truth movement into denying that the calls occurred, because the calls had revealed real truths that the government did not want to be known.

Why, I wondered, if the hijackers were not really devout Muslims, expecting to receive a heavenly reward for their martyrdom, would they have volunteered to commit suicide simply to provide a pretext for a war against Muslims; Kornkven's only escape from this conclusion would seem to be to speculate, implausibly, that they bailed out of the planes at the last minute. I also wondered why, if the corporate media had falsely claimed that some of the families had reported receiving cell phone calls, the Internet carries no stories about complaints from these relatives published in local papers.

In the present essay, in any case, I do not argue against Kornkven's own thesis. I simply reply to his charge (in his Comment) that my discussion is "misleading" and to his charge (in his Blog) that it contains "serious logical errors."

The "Cell Phone Myth" The central target of Kornkven's critique is what he calls the Cell Phone Myth, which he defines in his Comment as "the idea, advocated by Griffin, that the majority of calls were made on cell phones." However, I do not believe that there were any cell phone calls from the planes.

Kornkven evidently stated his meaning more accurately in the first paragraph of his Comment, in which he said: "Despite Griffin's claims to the contrary in Chapter 17 of 9/11 Contradictions, neither the FBI nor the 9/11 [Commission] ever claimed that all, or even most, of the calls were made on cell phones." But I never said anything remotely similar to this.

With regard to the 9/11 Commission, I pointed out that its report mentioned cell phone calls, but without specifying how many such calls were allegedly made, only in relation to United Flight 93.

With regard to the FBI, almost all of my discussion is about its 2006 report to the Moussaoui trial, at which it said that there had been only two cell phone calls from all four flights combined. With regard to the FBI's position prior to then, I made only two comments. My first comment was a complaint that "the FBI had not discouraged the press or the 9/11 Commission from claiming that passengers had used cell phones to report the existence of hijackers on the planes." Although that statement said nothing about what the FBI claimed, something was at least implied by my second comment: Using the word "authorities" to refer primarily to the FBI, I spoke of "one of the chief elements in the story about 9/11 told by authorities and the press from the outset---that the presence of hijackers on the flights had been reported by means of cell phone calls from those flights." I clearly suggested that the FBI immediately after 9/11 was stating that hijackers were reported on cell phone calls. To say that, however, is not to say that the FBI claimed that "all, or even most, of the calls were made on cell phones." I said so little about the 9/11 Commission and pre-2006 FBI assertions because virtually all of my discussion in the chapter was about what was reported by the press and consequently widely believed. This feature of the chapter led to one of the strangest criticisms in Kornkven's Blog:

Griffin next presents a lengthy jumble of media reports claiming cell phone calls. It's hard to believe that a major figure in the truth movement would base his argument on stories appearing in The Washington Post, Newsweek, The National Review, and other pillars of the controlled media.

Kornkven's criticism would make sense only if I had been suggesting that these media reports were true. But I was not. I was simply documenting the point made in my opening sentence, namely:

A central element in the story of the hijackings of the four airliners, as it unfolded in the press . . . , was that passengers had reported the presence of Middle-Eastern hijackers on the planes by means of cell phone calls to family members and authorities.

Documenting this point required, of course, quoting the Washington Post, Newsweek, and other mainstream (corporately controlled) publications.

With that confused criticism dismissed, I turn now to the question of whether my discussion of the press exemplified the Cell Phone Myth: Did I claim that the press portrayed a majority of the calls as having been made on cell phones? Hardly.

What I stated was that, according to press reports, "there were at least eleven cell phone calls from United Flight 93" plus "two each from UA 175 and AA 77." As a result, "it has been widely believed that there were at least fifteen . . . cell phone calls."

According to the 2006 FBI report, there were a total of 64 calls (counting those from both onboard and cell phones) from the four flights. Prior to that report, it was widely believed that there were 40 or more calls. By portraying 15 of those (40 to 64) calls as coming from cell phones, the press did not come close to claiming that "most" or "the majority" of the calls from the flights were cell phone calls.

However, it is also true, as I pointed out, that many of the press stories gave special attention to the reported cell phone calls in providing evidence of hijackers on the flights. An early Washington Post story, for example, said: "Glick's cell phone call from Flight 93 and others like it provide the most dramatic accounts so far of events aboard the four hijacked aircraft." Another Post story about this flight said: "The plane was at once a lonesome vessel, the people aboard facing their singular fate, and yet somehow already attached to the larger drama, connected again by cell phones." Referring to such stories, I wrote: "cell phone calls were portrayed as a central---even the principal---means by which we had learned what happened on the planes." But I did not---as the figures in the previous paragraph show---portray the press as stating that the majority of the calls were made on cell phones.

Besides invalidly turning my statement that some cell phone calls were reportedly made into the claim that "most of the calls were cell phone calls," Kornkven sometimes even changes the most to all. He did this in one of the charges quoted above, namely: "Despite Griffin's claims to the contrary . . . , neither the FBI nor the 9/11 [Commission] ever claimed that all . . . of the calls were made on cell phones." Kornkven also did this in asking: "Why does Griffin want to turn away from this evidence by imagining that the calls were cell phone calls?"

In logic, even more basic than the distinction between some and most is the threefold distinction between none, some, and all. In an article in which he is accusing someone else of logical errors, Kornkven should have been careful not to commit such a basic one.

This error, incidentally, led to a bizarre charge against Dylan Avery. Discussing Loose Change 2, Kornkven wrote:

"At the 1:07 mark of that film, Dylan Avery asks,

"'next, what about the cell phone calls...?'

"Avery didn't seem to have even considered the possibility that some or most of the calls were made on airphones, which is peculiar since, a few minutes later in the film, while describing Mark Bingham's call to his mother from UAL93, he specifically mentions that Bingham twice told his mom that he was calling from an airphone. The damage to the truth movement by this oversight is incalculable. Was it truly an oversight, or something worse?"

Kornkven took the very fact that Avery mentioned (some) cell phone calls to mean that he was alleging that all of reported calls were made on cell phones. This inference was especially strange given Kornkven's recognition that, shortly thereafter, Avery pointed out that Mark Bingham reportedly "told his mom that he was calling from an airphone." Kornkven then, on the basis of his own theory---according to which the media conspired with the government to create the impression that all or most of the calls were made from cell phones in order to cause the sure-to-rise 9/11 truth movement, knowing that high-altitude cell phone calls were impossible, to reject the calls as faked, thereby missing the valuable information in some of them that contradicts the official story---compounded his crime by hinting that Avery might be part of this conspiracy. ("Was it truly an oversight, or something worse?") Such suggestions could give "conspiracy theorists" a bad name!

Not content with this, Kornkven proceeded to compound his error still further, saying:

"Avery seems to have tacitly admitted his assumption was wrong: Loose Change Final Cut contains no references to phone calls whatsoever. Why has Griffin decided to carry on such a dubious notion?"

In the first place, given the fact that the credits at the end of Loose Change Final Cut reveal that I was the Script Consultant, why would Kornkven assume that Dylan Avery and I had some difference on this issue? In the second place, my chapter points out that the 2006 FBI report said that only two of the calls from all of the flights combined were made from cell phones, and this is what Kornkven believes. So what "dubious notion" does he think I am carrying on?

Having dealt with Kornkven's myth of the Cell Phone Myth, I turn now to his charge that my chapter is misleading.

Misleading? Kornkven suggested that there are two ways in which my discussion is misleading. First, pointing out that I discuss "the difficulty of cell phone calls at higher altitudes," Kornkven wrote: "This is completely irrelevant because most of the calls were made on airphones." A more objective statement would be: "According to the 2006 FBI report given to the Moussaoui trial, most---all but two---of the calls were made from onboard phones." (Kornkven does not add the qualification because he accepts that FBI report as a statement of what really happened.) One might suspect that, given the fact that two of the calls were reportedly made from cell phones, the difficulty of calling from higher altitudes has not become completely irrelevant. However, the FBI report said that those two calls were made from United 93 at 9:58, when it was down to 5,000 feet (at which level cell phone calls might at least arguably have gone through). Kornkven would be right to call my discussion misleading, therefore, if I had mentioned the difficulty of high-altitude cell phone calls in order to argue against the position taken by the FBI in 2006. But I did not. Here is my statement:

"In saying that only the two 9:58 calls from United 93 were cell phone calls, the FBI avoided a problem briefly mentioned in Chapter 8 [of 9/11 Contradictions], namely, skepticism about whether high-altitude cell phone calls from airliners are possible, especially calls that stay connected long enough for a conversation to occur. The FBI, when it had to present its evidence in a court of law, avoided this problem, because at 9:58, when the calls from Lyles and Felt were reportedly made, the plane, according to official reports, had descended to about 5,000 feet."

As the reader can see, my reference to skepticism about the possibility of high-altitude cell phone calls was solely for the purpose of suggesting why the FBI in 2006 had changed its public claim. That is, after having at first described about 15 calls as cell phone calls (as I will argue below), the FBI in 2006 characterized only two calls, both said to have been made from 5,000 feet, as cell phone calls. I suggested that it did this to avoid claiming the occurrence of calls that would widely be regarded as impossible.

I turn now to Kornkven's second charge that my discussion is misleading: "Griffin is being misleading when he says the FBI say 'it didn't happen' regarding the phone calls." Actually, however, it is Kornkven who, by thus characterizing what I had said, was being misleading. He was referring to a letter in which I wrote: "It [the FBI] has said that there were no cell phone calls from passengers to relatives from any of the planes." Kornkven admits that this statement is "perhaps technically true." Although he does not explain why my statement is, in fact, true (or at least "perhaps" so), here is why: According to the FBI report, one cell phone call was made by passenger Edward Felt, who called 911, not a relative, and the other was made by CeeCee Lyles, who was a crew member, not a passenger. The FBI report did indicate, therefore, that "there were no cell phone calls from passengers to relatives." (The distinction between passengers and crew members is made in all official reports and at least most media stories.)

If this statement is true, why does Kornkven consider it misleading? He says in his Comment:

"The FBI exhibit does not label the cell phone calls from CeeCee Lyles (UAL93) and Renee May (AAL77) as cell phone calls; but neither are they labeled airphone calls. Griffin seems to be suggesting none of the calls took place whatsoever, a position which the FBI does not hold."

I am puzzled as to why Kornkven brought Renee May into the discussion. In his Blog, he quoted me as pointing out that it was only the call from Edward Felt and one of the calls from CeeCee Lyles that were said in the FBI's 2006 report to have been cell phone calls. His claims about the calls by Lyles and May are, in any case, false.

The FBI's graphic presentation on CeeCee Lyles does, contrary to Kornkven's statement, label one of her calls a cell phone call. It can, to be sure, be difficult to get to this and the other graphics on the US government website containing the information about phone calls from the flights, because one's computer must be able to open the zip file. Jim Hoffman, however, has helpfully made these graphics available on his website. The graphic for Lyles, in any case, clearly indicates that she made a "cell phone call" to a residential number at 9:58 AM.

The FBI report also explicitly labeled a 9:58 call from Edward Felt a cell phone call, although it is even more difficult to see this on the US government website. There is an easily accessible graphic about this call, which says, "call placed from bathroom," from which one can infer that it must have been made from a cell phone. One need not, however, rely on inference. There is also an expanded graphic, which says: "9:58 AM: Passenger Edward Felt, using his cell phone, (732) 241-XXXX, contacts John Shaw, a 911 Operator from Westmoreland County, PA." Although getting to this graphic (through a Flash expansion) can be difficult, it can easily be seen on Hoffman's website.

Given the fact that these two calls, and only these two calls, are said by the FBI's report to be cell phone calls, we can infer that the FBI intended the remainder of the calls to be understood to have been made from onboard phones. We can make this inference because of what was said in the FBI's oral report about phone calls from Flight 93 at the Moussaoui trial. A reporter wrote: "In the back of the plane, 13 of the terrified passengers and crew members made 35 air phone calls and two cell phone calls to family members and airline dispatchers, a member of an FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force testified Tuesday." As this statement shows, all of the calls from this flight, except the two that were explicitly indicated on the graphics to be cell phone calls, were said at the trial to have been made from onboard phones.

From this discovery about Flight 93, we can infer that, although Renee May's parents evidently believed that she had called from her cell phone, the FBI report implied, without specifically saying so, that she had used an onboard phone.

Accordingly, although Kornkven claims that "[c]alls made from Renee May on AAL77 and CeeCee Lyles on UAL93 were portrayed as being cell phone calls," the truth is that only the reported call from Edward Felt and one of the two reported calls from CeeCee Lyles were portrayed as cell phone calls.

In any case, in explaining why he calls my "perhaps technically true" statement---that the FBI report said that "there were no cell phone calls from passengers to relatives"---misleading, Kornkven wrote: "Griffin seems to be suggesting none of the calls took place whatsoever, a position which the FBI does not hold." Kornkven, in other words, thinks that I used my technically true statement to claim that the FBI said that there were no calls whatsoever. However, although I myself believe that none of the reported calls occurred, I made no such claim about the FBI. Rather, I pointed out that, according to the 2006 FBI report, most of the calls previously thought to have been cell phone calls were really made from onboard phones.

The Central Role Played by the Reported Cell Phone Calls Kornkven began his Blog, in which he claimed to be exposing "logical errors" in my chapter, by quoting my statement that "the reported cell phone calls . . . played a central role in establishing that the planes were hijacked by al-Qaeda operatives."

Kornkven said, in rebuttal, that "none of the evidence reported in the calls implicates al-Qaeda." The fact that this was true of most of the calls---although not quite all, as I will show below---is unsurprising. At that time, few Americans had heard of al-Qaeda. Those who fabricated the calls would not have been so obvious as to describe the terrorists as, say, wearing al-Qaeda T-shirts or otherwise indicating that they were members of al-Qaeda. Alternatively, if one believes, with Kornkven, that there were real callers on the planes speaking about real hijackers, the same point would hold: There would probably have been no basis for the passengers and crew members to describe the hijackers as members of al-Qaeda, whether they were or not.

In any case, the main point of my statement---as shown by my chapter title, "Were Hijackers Reported on Cell Phone Calls?"---was that "the reported cell phone calls . . . played a central role in establishing that the planes were hijacked." The point of my sentence would have been clearer if I had ended it there, without adding "by al-Qaeda operatives."

It is also true, however, that the reported calls played a central role in creating the myth that the planes were hijacked by members of al-Qaeda. To say that they played a central role is not, of course, to claim that they provided a sufficient basis for this myth. An essential role was also played by the claim that authorities found Mohamed Atta's luggage filled with his will and other incriminating evidence, which "proved" that the hijackers were members of al-Qaeda. Contributions to this myth were also made by the photos of some of the alleged hijackers at airports and the "discoveries" of the amazingly durable passports of some of these men at the various crash sites. And there were still other elements of the official story that contributed to this myth.

But the contribution of the reported calls---from both cell phones and onboard phones---should not be underestimated. Besides providing the only evidence that the planes had been hijacked, some of the callers, as Kornkven recognizes, described the hijackers as "Middle Eastern-looking men." Moreover, according to the husband of flight attendant Sandy Bradshaw, she, having gotten a close look at one of them, said: "He had an Islamic look." Given those descriptions, the ground was laid for the authorities to identify these Islamic-looking, Middle Eastern-looking men as al-Qaeda operatives.

A central role in creating the twofold myth---that the planes had been hijacked and that the hijackers were al-Qaeda operatives---was played by some of the reported cell phone calls in particular. For example, the conversation in which Sandy Bradshaw reportedly told her husband that one of the hijackers had "an Islamic look" was described by the local paper as a "cellular phone conversation." According to this story, which was surely based on her husband's account, she had also told him that "many passengers were making cell phone calls."

The most important reported cell phone call for creating this myth, however, was one that I did not discuss in 9/11 Contradictions (although it is discussed in The New Pearl Harbor Revisited). I refer to the reported call from American Flight 11 by flight attendant Amy Sweeney, in which she told Michael Woodward, the manager of the American Flight Services Office in Boston, that her flight had been hijacked. Besides telling him that hijackers were of "Middle Eastern descent," she reportedly gave their seat numbers, from which Woodward was able to learn the identities of three of them: Mohamed Atta, Abdul al-Omari, and Satam al-Suqami. Amy Sweeney's call was critical, ABC News explained, because without it, "the plane might have crashed with no one certain the man in charge was tied to al Qaeda."

Kornkven was wrong, therefore, when he claimed that "none of the evidence reported in the calls implicates al-Qaeda"---although he cannot be blamed for not having learned about this call from 9/11 Contradictions.

Did Family Members Describe Some Calls as Cell Phone Calls? Kornkven seems to state his central claim when he says: "the idea that most of the calls were cell phone calls was disseminated solely by our controlled media, and by Hollywood films." As we have already seen, his charge that I ever endorsed this idea---that most of the calls were cell phone calls---is groundless. As far as I know, moreover, no one else has advocated this idea.

However, if we remove the exaggeration from Kornkven's claim by changing "most" to "several," we would have a claim worthy of examination, namely, that the idea that several of the calls were cell phone calls was disseminated solely by the controlled media and Hollywood films. Put negatively, Kornkven claims that neither family members nor the authorities stated that some of the calls were made on cell phones. I will deal only with family members here, saving the authorities for the next section.

Arguing that the evidence I have given about family members is weak, Kornkven's first illustration involves the story about the reported calls from Peter Hanson on United 175. Having quoted my statement that "an Associated Press story . . . said 'a minister confirmed the cell phone call to [Peter Hanson's father], Lee Hanson,'" Kornkven wrote: "Can we really conclude the minister is verifying that the call was made on a cell phone, and not on an airphone? Isn't it more likely he is simply confirming that the call was made?"

For some reason, Kornkven eliminated from my statement the name of the minister---the Rev. Bonnie Bardot---an elimination that allowed him to refer to her as "he."

In any case, the important problem is that Kornkven has again misconstrued the nature of my argument. He assumes that I was using the story to prove that the family members and the minister really described the call(s) as made from a cell phone. What I was illustrating, however, was simply that the press had thus portrayed the calls---in this case by saying that both Peter Hanson's sister and a local minister referred to them as cell phone calls.

Nevertheless, the question pressed by Kornkven---whether the family members had themselves specifically said that they received calls from relatives using cell phones---is worth asking. And the answer, it would seem, is "Yes."

Bradshaw, Wainio, Britton, and Hanson: With regard to the story about Sandy Bradshaw, are we to suppose that Kerry Hall, the reporter for the Greensboro News & Record, simply made up the claim that Sandy and several passengers were using cell phones, rather than having gotten this information from her husband, pilot Phil Bradshaw, even though Phil lived there in Greensboro?

A Newsweek story about United 93 said: "Elizabeth [Honor] Wainio, 27, was speaking to her stepmother in Maryland. Another passenger, she explains, had loaned her a cell phone and told her to call her family." Can we believe that Newsweek, rather than getting this information from the stepmother, simply made it up?

A story about passenger Marion Britton began: "She called longtime friend Fred Fiumano, from whom she had borrowed a cell phone." The story, which quoted Fiumano, was surely based on an interview with him. Does Kornkven believe that the reporter---Jim McKinnon of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette---simply added the part about the cell phone?

Moreover, besides the fact that it would be implausible to claim that the people who received these calls did not describe them as cell phone calls, we have evidence that I did not mention in 9/11 Contradictions: the FBI's report about its interview with Lee Hanson, the father of Peter Hanson. This report says: "He [Lee Hanson] "believed his son was calling from his cellular telephone."

Deena Burnett's Testimony: Let us, however, focus primarily on the reported calls that Kornkven rightly described as the most important: those from Flight 93 by Tom Burnett to his wife, Deena Burnett. Kornkven began his argument by quoting this statement from me:

"Deena Burnett explicitly and repeatedly stated that these calls were made from Tom Burnett's cell phone. She knew this, she said, because the caller ID identified his cell phone as the source."

Kornkven then wrote:

"But did she? I have examined numerous media reports in the immediate years after the attacks, and have heard her state no such thing, explicitly or otherwise."

As evidence that she did, I had cited an article entitled "Widow Tells of Poignant Last Calls," published on the first anniversary of 9/11 by Greg Gordon of the McClatchy Newspapers. Gordon had written: "[A]nother call [came]. Deena's ID told her it was Tom." Kornkven wrote: "The article does mention Tom's cell phone, but not that Deena said it was such. . . . Perhaps she saw the same information as from earlier calls on an airphone, and therefore knew it was Tom." Is that plausible? Gordon's article began: "Deena Burnett clutched the phone. . . . She was at once terrified, yet strangely calmed by her husband's steady voice over his cell phone." Would Kornkven have us believe that Gordon might have written that line even though Deena had not told him Tom was using a cell phone?

In any case, I had cited not only Gordon's article but also Deena Burnett's 2006 book, in which she explicitly said that her phone's caller ID showed Tom's cell phone number. Kornkven, trying to cast doubt on this, quoted one sentence from the page I had cited---"I didn't understand how he could be calling me on his cell phone from the air" ---and then said, dismissively:

"This is the only example I could find of her 'repeatedly and explicitly' claiming the call was [sic; Deena had reported several calls] from a cell phone. . . . Did she actually write it? . . . [T]his single statement, coming in a ghostwritten book [sic; the book is by "Deena L. Burnett (with Anthony F. Giombetti")] published five years after the event, is meager evidence that the call was indeed from a cell phone."

One problem here is that Kornkven, as the final sentence shows, again confused two distinct issues. The question he had been discussing was whether Deena explicitly described the calls as cell phone calls. But in the final sentence, he shifted to a different question: Were the calls received by her really cell phone calls?

That distinction is, of course, not trivial: My whole argument is based on it. I had earlier argued that, although Deena Burnett was convinced that the call had been made from Tom's cell phone, it could not have been (because of the high-altitude problem). More recently (in the revised edition of Debunking 9/11 Debunking and then in 9/11 Contradictions), I have pointed out that, although Deena was convinced that the calls were from Tom's cell phone, the FBI report said that he had used an onboard phone.

In any case, the most important problem in Kornkven's argument here is that, in denying that Deena had explicitly described the calls as cell phone calls, he failed to quote the crucial sentence from the page I had cited. In the sentence I had in mind, Deena said: "I looked at the caller ID and indeed it was Tom's cell phone number."

So, unless the man who helped her write the book inserted this statement without her noticing it, then, yes, she did explicitly make it.

What about my statement that she said this repeatedly? Kornkven denied the appropriateness of this adverb on the basis of his (weak) argument that she perhaps did not really tell this to reporter Greg Gordon.

However, she also evidently said the same thing to the FBI. An FBI report of an interview with her on 9/11 itself, which began by stating that she "provided the following information," included these statements:

"Burnett was able to determine that her husband was using his own cellular telephone because the caller identification showed his number, [XXXXXXXXXX]. Only one of the calls did not show on the caller identification as she was on the line with another call."

Presumably, therefore, we can lay to rest the question of whether Deena Burnett reported that she saw her husband's cell phone on her caller ID.

This fact is of great importance for the thesis that the cell phone calls were faked. Although several other relatives reported that their loved ones had used cell phones to call them, anyone determined to reject the truth of these reports could claim that they were all based on faulty memory (even though the claim that several people had the same false memory would be rather implausible). But given Deena's explicit and repeated report---stated on 9/11 itself to the FBI, again (evidently) on the first anniversary of 9/11 to reporter Greg Gordon, and again five years later in her book---the only way to dismiss her claim would be to call her a liar.

Assuming that Kornkven would not resort to that tactic, and assuming that he accepts the 2006 FBI report, according to which the calls were not made from Tom's cell phone, I cannot see what option he has but to accept the idea that someone faked the calls to Deena, using a system that would fake Tom's cell phone number as well as his voice.

Moreover, if the call to Deena Burnett was faked, what should we assume about all the calls that were believed at the time to have been cell phone calls, because that is what the recipients of the calls were told, but are now said by the FBI to have been made from onboard phones? We should assume that these, too, were faked. If some of the calls had been genuine, reporting real hijackings, why would several people have been all set up with the equipment and information to fake some calls? This same reasoning applies to the reported calls from onboard phones, which were similar in nature. If some of the calls were faked, the presumption should be that they all were.

This is why Deena Burnett's story is so important. Unless people are willing to call her a liar or to reject the FBI's 2006 report, the calls she received cannot be explained except on the assumption that someone was prepared to fake several calls to her, pretending to be her husband calling on his cell phone. If even just one person was prepared to make such calls, this proves that the whole official story---that the airliners, to everyone's surprise, were taken over by hijackers---is false. The faked calls to Deena Burnett have thus turned out to be the Achilles Heel of the whole idea that real hijackers were reported by real phone calls from the airliners.

Were Cell Phone Calls Originally Reported by the FBI? To recall where I am in the argument: I am examining a modified form of Kornkven's claim about Hollywood and the controlled media, namely, that they invented the whole idea that some of the passengers and crew made cell phone calls (with the possible exception of the two calls from United 93 said by the FBI in 2006 to have occurred at 9:58). Having examined one implication of that claim---that no relatives of passengers or crew members ever claimed cell phone calls were made from any of the airliners---I now turn to the other implication: "The FBI," Kornkven states, "never made such claims."

In a longer statement, Kornkven wrote: "[N]o 'authorities' ever stated that airphone calls were made by cell phones. That was done strictly by our controlled media." This formulation is problematic, because it reflects Kornkven's presupposition that the calls really happened but that they were, as the FBI finally said in 2006, "airphone calls" (except for the 9:58 calls from Felt and Lyles). A more neutral formulation would be: No authorities (meaning FBI and other law enforcement officials) ever stated that any of the reported calls from the airliners were cell phone calls (except for the 9:58 calls from Felt and Lyles).

One problem with this claim is that, even if it were true, Kornkven would have no way of knowing this. It is simply a hypothesis on his part. But the more serious problem is that there are good reasons to consider it false, and to assume instead that the press, in reporting that several of the calls were made on cell phones, was in part reporting what it had been told by the FBI.

The FBI Reports on Hanson and Burnett: One reason to believe this is that, as we have seen, some of the FBI reports of its interviews with family members reported, without contradiction, their belief that they had been called on cell phones. The FBI report of its interview with Lee Hanson said: "He believed his son was calling form his cellular telephone." The report of the FBI's interview with Deena Burnett said, prior to the previously quoted statement:

"Starting at approximately 6:39 a.m. (PST), Burnett received a series of three to five cellular phone calls from her husband. . . . Approximately ten minutes later Deena Burnett received another call from her husband. . . . Approximately five minutes later she received another cell phone call from her husband."

These FBI reports would have been accepted by reporters as statements of the truth. By virtue of writing these reports, therefore, the FBI's behavior cannot be characterized as merely, in Kornkven's words, "passive acquiescence" in the idea that cell phones were used.

The Reported Call from Amy Sweeney: The strongest evidence that the FBI originally endorsed the occurrence of high-altitude cell phone calls involves the reported call of flight attendant Amy Sweeney from American Flight 11. Although no phone calls from passengers were reported from this flight, two flight attendants, Sweeney and Betty Ong, were said to have made calls. The importance of these calls for the official story is shown by the 9/11 Commission's comment that they "tell us most of what we know about how the hijacking happened." The importance of Sweeney's call in particular for our present topic is that it was originally said to have been a cell phone call.

According to the official account, Sweeney called Michael Woodward, the manager of the American Flight Services Office in Boston and talked to him for twelve minutes (8:32 to 8:44 AM). Stating that her plane had been hijacked, she also reportedly said, as mentioned earlier, that the hijackers were of "Middle Eastern descent" and gave their seat numbers, from which the identities of three of them were discovered.

The public information about this reported call---its content along with its very occurrence---was based entirely on FBI documents. For example, Eric Lichtblau, in recounting this story in a Los Angeles Times article a week after 9/11, cited "an investigative document compiled by the FBI." Since no one other than Woodward talked with Sweeney, this FBI document had to be drawn entirely from his statements. In 2002, for example, American Airlines spokesman John Hotard, referring to "Woodward's original notes of his conversation with Sweeney," said, "the FBI got a hold of them very quickly, and wrote a summary."

Lichtblau had to rely entirely on this FBI summary because, he learned from an American Airlines spokesperson, their employees were under orders from the FBI not to discuss Sweeney's call with the press.

The only other publicly available document testifying to the occurrence of the call was an affidavit by FBI agent James Lechner, dated September 12, 2001, which was also based on an interview with Michael Woodward.

It is this affidavit that shows that the FBI first described the call as a cell phone call. According to this affidavit, Woodward said that Sweeney had been "using a cellular telephone."

However, when The 9/11 Commission Report appeared in 2004, it said that Sweeney had used an onboard phone (which the Commission called an "airphone"). On what basis was this claim justified?

In June 2004, Amy Sweeney's husband was told that a previously unreported tape recording had been discovered. How had it been made? This is the story: Michael Woodward did not record Sweeney's call, because his office had no tape recorder. But he repeated what he was hearing from Sweeney to Nancy Wyatt, an American Airlines colleague who was in his office at the time, and she then repeated the account by telephone to Ray Howland at American headquarters in Fort Worth, who recorded Wyatt's third-hand account.

Amy Sweeney's husband, expressing some scepticism, asked: "Suddenly it miraculously appears and falls into the hands of FBI? . . . Why did it surface now?"

The answer to this question can be reasonably inferred from the fact that the original story, according to which Sweeney had called from a cell phone, was doubly problematic: Besides being made from too far up to be believable, the call also allegedly stayed connected for twelve minutes, which would be impossible in a plane traveling several hundred miles per hour. This twofold problem was solved by a piece of information on the newly discovered recording: that Sweeney, thanks to "an AirFone card, given to her by another flight attendant," had used a passenger-seat phone.

This new account, however, raised the question of why Lechner's FBI affidavit had stated that, according to Woodward, Sweeney had used a cell phone. Although people sometimes misremember events after a passage of time, it would be difficult to explain this particular change in these terms. According to the new story, Woodward must have told Nancy Wyatt that Sweeney had borrowed a calling card in order to use an onboard phone. But if so, how could Woodward a few hours later have told Lechner that Sweeney had been using a cell phone?

That being completely implausible, it seems likely that the Wyatt recording was created, rather than discovered, in 2004.

The supposition that there was no recording made on 9/11 of a call from Nancy Wyatt to Dallas would be in line with Eric Lichtblau's account on September 20, 2001, which said:

"FBI officials in Dallas, where American Airlines is based, were able, on the day of the terrorist attacks, to piece together a partial transcript and an account of the phone call. American Airlines officials said such calls are not typically recorded, suggesting that the FBI may have reconstructed the conversation from interviews."

Why would FBI officials have need to "piece together a partial transcript" if they had received a recording of Wyatt's verbatim account of Woodward's word-for-word account of what he was told by Sweeney?

Is it conceivable that American Airlines would have withheld the recording from the FBI? Hardly. Nor is it conceivable that American Airline officials could have quickly forgotten such a dramatic event.

Likewise, the dramatic scenario, in which Woodward relayed Sweeney's words to Wyatt, who in turn relayed them to Dallas, where they were recorded, would have been fresh in Woodward's mind when he talked with Lechner. He would surely have mentioned this recording to Lechner, who surely would have mentioned it in his affidavit.

For many reasons, therefore, we can safely conclude that the recording was not made on 9/11. It was most likely created just shortly before its "discovery," which was evidently first announced in June 2004.

My hypothesis is that it was created as part of a more general transformation of most of the reported cell phone calls---all except the reported 9:58 calls from Felt and Lyles---into calls from onboard phones, a transformation that was completed in time to prevent the 9/11 Commission from endorsing the occurrence of any high-altitude cell phone calls. As I pointed out in 9/11 Contradictions, the Commission, while not taking issue with the press's portrayal of certain calls from Flights 77 and 175 as cell phone calls, also did not positively endorse this portrayal. Likewise, the Commission did not endorse the view that any of the high-altitude calls from United Flight 93 were cell phone calls.

On this point, I had previously been in error. In 9/11 Contradictions, I wrote:

"It was passengers on United Flight 93 who were most explicitly said to have made cell phone calls. Even the 9/11 Commission, which had not specifically referred to any of the calls from other flights as cell phone calls, said, in discussing United 93: 'Shortly [after 9:32], the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones.'"

At 9:32, the plane would have been at a very high altitude, and I took that statement to mean that some of the calls that began shortly after 9:32 were cell phone calls, even though the statement did not explicitly say this. It appears, however, that this ambiguous---even misleading---statement allowed the Commission to avoid either challenging or endorsing the idea that many of the passengers, such as Tom Burnett, had used cell phones to call their relatives. The evidence that the Commission was not endorsing high-altitude cell phone calls from Flight 93 is contained in a document entitled "Staff Report, August 26, 2004," which I learned about only after the publication of 9/11 Contradictions. This document refers solely to the 9:58 AM calls by Lyles and Felt as cell phone calls. It agrees, therefore, with the report the FBI would submit to the Moussaoui trial in 2006. It would appear, accordingly, that although the 9/11 Commission did not inform the public of this fact, it knew in 2004 that the FBI had withdrawn support for the idea of high-altitude cell phone calls.

In any case, the FBI clearly changed its stance on the reported call from Amy Sweeney. Whereas the FBI affidavit in 2001 had said, on the basis of a reported interview with Michael Woodward, that Sweeney had used a cell phone, the FBI in 2004, on the basis of a "discovered" recording of Nancy Wyatt's verbatim report of Woodward's repetition of Sweeney's statements, said that Sweeney had used an "airphone."

Summary Kornkven's charges---that my discussion of reported cell phone calls has been misleading and characterized by logical errors---cannot withstand an examination of the evidence. The "Cell Phone Myth" of which he spoke is itself a myth. His critique proved useful, nevertheless, in providing the occasion for me to bring out several points:

(1) Reported cell phone calls were central to the creation of the claim that the airliners had been hijacked.

(2) The FBI had actively participated in the creation of this claim.

(3) The FBI, a few years later, renounced its endorsement of high-altitude cell phone calls and thereby had to make changes in its reports about several of the alleged calls---changes that are most obvious with respect to the alleged calls from Tom Burnett and Amy Sweeney.

(4) These changes constitute an implicit admission by the FBI that its original claims about cell phone calls from the planes were false.

(5) This admission should lead us to conclude that the whole story about phone calls was an elaborate fabrication.

David Ray Griffin is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by David Ray Griffin
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/12/08 at 06:27 PM Reply with quote #68
2 reads

1st read
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=9EBfJz086b0C&dq=cyril+wecht+jfk&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=0a6Uc96two&sig=hP24ABJtWYo1fvsIAw77rJwa51Q&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct=result

2nd read
September 12, 2008
Former judge working to resolve Wecht case
The Associated Press

PITTSBURGH—A former federal appeals judge has been working to resolve fraud and theft charges against former Allegheny County Coroner Cyril Wecht.

Former U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Timothy K. Lewis approached federal prosecutors several months ago "to engage in a confidential mediation" to resolve fraud and theft charges against Wecht, U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said Friday.

"We did not initiate the discussions, but agreed to participate in a good faith attempt to resolve this matter. If mediation is unsuccessful, we are prepared to proceed to trial," Buchanan said in a statement.

Lewis and a Wecht attorney did not immediately return messages for comment.

Wecht, 77, has earned millions investigating deaths, including those of JonBenet Ramsey, Elvis Presley and Vince Foster.

He was accused of using his former county coroner's staff to benefit his private business and of trading unclaimed county morgue cadavers for office and lab space at a university where he taught. Wecht was also charged with mail fraud for allegedly overbilling his private clients for bogus travel expenses.

His first trial lasted seven weeks and jurors had deliberated for more than 50 hours before they told U.S. District Judge Arthur Schwab on April 8 that they were "essentially deadlocked." Schwab then declared a mistrial.

Last week, Schwab was removed from the case by a three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, to help ease the
Advertisement
"rancor in the courtroom." The panel also found Schwab did not follow proper procedure in declaring a mistrial.

The panel refused to dismiss the 41 counts against Wecht. His attorneys had asked the court to dismiss the case on double jeopardy grounds.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/14/08 at 01:26 PM Reply with quote #69
2 reads
1st read


Rafael Robinson Named as Suspect in Suppressed 1996 FBI Report


June 18, 2008


Someone asked me to post the FBI interview that was released last week by the Des Moines Police Department. This document is part of the open file on the murder investigation of Rafael Robinson.

It appears to be a key piece of evidence for David Flores.
FBI interview
The interview took place on May 22, 1996 between Calvin Tyrone Gaines and FBI Special Agent Terry Bohle. The DMPD received the report on August 1, 1996.

Gaines is the third person to come forward and state that Robinson was person who killed Phyllis Davis on April 12, 1996.

David Flores is serving a life sentence without parole in the Iowa State Penitentiary.

You can get a copy of this document from the clerk at the Polk County Courthouse.


Some of the agents who were never disciplined include
those agents involved in creating the Martin Luther King
assassination; those agents who created 1 st World Trade center bombing; those agents involved in the national pedophile ring detailed in the book THE FRANKLIN COVER-UP,etc.
Yea , like we are going to believe the FBI disciplines its agents
when the agent in charge of disciplining FBI agents John Conditt, was just sent to prison for 12 years for pedophilia.
google john conditt fbi pedophile
Thursday, February 19, 2004 - Page updated at 12:00 AM


Capital Watch
FBI suppressed report detailing firing of agents
WASHINGTON — An internal FBI report kept under wraps for three years details dozens of cases of agents fired for egregious misconduct and crimes, including drug trafficking, attempted murder, theft, misuse of informants and consorting with prostitutes.

The report, released yesterday by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, found that about one in 1,000 agents was dismissed for serious misconduct or criminal offenses from 1986 to 1999. The average was between eight and nine per year.

Although the numbers were small, the FBI's attempts to prevent the report's disclosure since its completion in June 2000 is raising questions among FBI critics.

Grassley, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a letter yesterday to FBI Director Robert Mueller that he was concerned about "a lack of response to the findings and recommendations, a general lack of support for the project and even efforts to prevent its completion."

Grassley said the report "almost never saw the light of day." It was provided to lawmakers in July 2003, months after it was requested, and was accompanied by a Justice Department letter urging that it be kept confidential.

The FBI had no immediate comment.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/14/08 at 01:36 PM Reply with quote #70
2 reads

FBI suppressed video of TWA explosion


by Jack Cashill
August 30, 2007

More than six years after retired United Airline captain Ray Lahr launched his Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, petition into the fate of TWA Flight 800, the FBI has shown him –likely by accident – one seriously smoking gun.

The Boeing 747 blew up off the coast of Long Island on July 17, 1996. One of the FBI documents received recently by Lahr and his attorney, John Clarke of Washington, D.C., details a communication that took place six days after the crash:

“On Tuesday, July 23, 1996, a representative from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) advised [the FBI] that after a visual analysis of both the videotape as well as a number of still photographs taken from various portions of the tape, the phenomenon captured by [name redacted] appeared to be consistent with the exhaust plume from a MANPAD [Man-portable air-defense] missile.”
“The FBI guy who looked at this must not have read it, or not have realized what it would reveal,” says Lahr. “Otherwise he would have redacted most of it as before.”

Adding a new level of intrigue to the investigation is the fact that the video in question appears to have been shot on July 12, 1996, five days before the crash.

The earlier, unedited FBI document reports that a fellow and his friend on Long Island were attempting to videotape the sunrise when they saw and recorded “a grey trail of smoke ascending from the horizon at an angle of approximately 75 [degrees].”

So compelling was the visual that the fellow made a comment to his friend, heard on the tape, “They must be testing a rocket.” The fellow calculated that object was heading towards the Atlantic Ocean.

On the document Lahr first received, the story of the video ends right there. The next two paragraphs had been fully redacted.

This current unedited version shows that the FBI took the video seriously enough to bring in the DIA for further analysis. As mentioned above, the DIA found the video image to be “consistent with the exhaust plume from a MANPAD.”

What is shocking is that the authorities not only removed all reference to this video from the official record, but they also removed just about all reference to the DIA.

For the record, the DIA is a Department of Defense combat support agency and a serious player in the United States intelligence community. The agency has more than 11,000 military and civilian employees worldwide and describes itself as “a major producer and manager of foreign military intelligence.”

An important component of the DIA is the Missile and Space Intelligence Center, or MSIC, which is located in Huntsville, Ala., and is charged with gathering intelligence on enemy surface-to-air missiles and short-range ballistic missiles.

During a Senate inquiry in May 1999, the FBI’s number two man on the investigation, Lewis Schiliro, conceded that MSIC analysts had arrived on the scene in Long Island just two days after the July 17, 1996, crash of TWA Flight 800 and interviewed eyewitnesses.

“They reported to us,” Schiliro told the senators of the MSIC analysts, “that many of the descriptions given by eyewitnesses were very consistent with the characteristics of the flight of [surface-to-air] missiles.”

Despite Schiliro’s testimony, by 1999 the MSIC information was effectively moot. When FBI officials shut down the criminal investigation in November 1997, they publicly discredited the eyewitnesses and fully ignored the work done by the MSIC analysts.

At the final press conference, the FBI’s James Kallstrom discussed only two images of a possible missile captured in flight. Both were photographic stills, and he cavalierly dismissed these as well.

There was no reference at all to the video analyzed by the DIA. In fact, there was no public mention of the DIA. The MSIC analysis was relegated to a footnote.

Nor, of course, was there any mention of the video shot on the night of July 17. From the beginning, there has been ample evidence that an amateur video had been taken of TWA Flight 800’s destruction.

Although I have not seen the July 17 video, I have heard from scores, if not hundreds, of credible people who swear they saw it on television in the first hours after the crash. Some have described it to me and other independent investigators in perfect detail.

MSNBC, launched just two days prior to the disaster, seemed to have won the bidding war for the rights to the July 17 video. I say “seemed” because my source will not speak on record, nor will MSNBC follow up on queries.

What I have been told, however, is that late on the night of the crash, editors at MSNBC had the tape on their monitors when “three men in suits” came to their editing suites, removed the tape, and threatened the editors with serious consequences if they ever revealed its contents.

The threats worked all too well. Despite my repeated requests, my source, who was one of the MSNBC editors in question, will not go public, and this video too has disappeared from the official record.

The evidence of a suppressed video, or videos, correlates well with information that my investigative partner James Sanders had received in response to an earlier FOIA petition.

As Sanders’ documents reveal, on July 31, 1996, an FBI facility in Quantico, Va. sent back to the FBI office in New York “one original VHS-C Video Cassette Tape, 10 processed VHS video Cassette tape copies, 30 B & W video prints, 49 color video prints.”

Based on the notations on Sanders’ documents, these copies seem to be of the July 17th videotape. The newly un-redacted document in question does not confirm this video’s existence, but it does show the willingness of the authorities to suppress highly relevant video evidence.

The question remains: Evidence of what? If there is full agreement among independent investigators that missiles were fired on the night of July 17, 1996, there is no consensus as to who fired them or why.

The apparent July 12 video can be interpreted in two ways. The MANPAD reference by the DIA would seem to strengthen the case for terrorist-fired missiles. But the earlier date argues more strongly for a missile test than for a terrorist misfire.

What adds further intrigue to the plot is an eyewitness account on the same document page as the videotape reference. This witness on an excursion boat reported seeing, an hour before the TWA 800’s destruction, a small boat draped with a thick plastic cover.

Protruding through the cover was a “cylindrical tube which appeared to be as big as the boat itself.” At the helm of the boat was a man with dark hair and a mustache.
The mystery continues.




2nd read

FBI inspector general’s report: more evidence of government complicity in 9/11 attacks
By Patrick Martin
15 June 2005

Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

A report released June 9 by the FBI’s Office of the Inspector General raises new questions about the role of the US government in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The internal FBI study provides several important revelations about how US intelligence agencies ignored and even suppressed warnings in the period leading up to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that killed nearly 3,000 people.

Press accounts published within hours of the report’s release gave a very distorted picture of the document, which runs to more than 400 pages. No follow-up reports, based on a thorough study of the text, have yet appeared in the mass media.

The initial media commentary invariably voiced the now-standard claim that the FBI and CIA were guilty of a “failure to connect the dots,” due to bureaucratic lethargy, individual incompetence, inter-agency rivalries, even poorly performing software systems. This presentation of events is utterly unserious.

The US intelligence apparatus is the most powerful instrument for spying in the world, not a group of Keystone Cops. If it ignored warnings and suppressed information, a legitimate presumption is that it did so willfully. The question must be posed: did one or more agencies or high-level officials provide protection for known Al Qaeda associates who ultimately participated in the hijack-bombings?

Exactly who knew what, and at what level of the government, is not yet clear. But the political benefits of 9/11 for the Bush administration are undeniable. It used the terrorist attacks as a lever to swing American public opinion behind a major shift in policy, both foreign and domestic. Without 9/11, it would have been politically impossible for the government to embark on military interventions in Central Asia and the Middle East and launch an unprecedented attack on civil liberties at home.
The Phoenix memo

The FBI internal report examines the three best-known episodes in which the bureau, which is the lead agency for counterterrorist activities within the United States, missed or ignored important signals of the coming terrorist attacks. Two of the cases involved local FBI agents who voiced suspicions that were disregarded or suppressed by FBI headquarters. In the third case, the CIA deliberately kept the FBI in the dark—with the assistance of certain FBI officials.

The first instance is the electronic memo of July 10, 2001 from Kenneth Williams, an FBI agent in Phoenix, Arizona, noting the number of students with ties to radical Islamic fundamentalists enrolled at local aviation training schools, and suggesting that a nationwide canvass of these schools be carried out to determine if there was a pattern.

The second is the bureau’s response to the arrest of Zaccarias Moussaoui, an Islamic fundamentalist who was detained by the Immigration and Naturalization Service after his attempts to obtain training on a Boeing 747 aroused suspicions at a Minneapolis-area flight school. Moussaoui was detained on immigration charges in early August 2001, but FBI headquarters blocked efforts by Minneapolis agents to pursue an investigation that could have identified other Al Qaeda operatives at US flight schools.

The third is the case of Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, believed to have participated in the hijacking of American Airlines Flight 77, which hit the Pentagon on 9/11. Despite being on a CIA watch list because of connections to Al Qaeda, the two lived openly in San Diego, California for a year or more. The CIA only notified the FBI of their presence in the US on August 27, 2001, 20 months after their arrival, and only two weeks before September 11.

The chapter in the inspector general’s report on the Phoenix memo (called an Electronic Communication or EC, in FBI jargon), reveals that the document was sent to the attention of six people at FBI headquarters and two more at the New York Division. The recipients included personnel and leadership of both the Usama Bin Laden Unit and the Radical Fundamentalists Unit, the latter comprising a separate group of agents assigned to investigate Islamist militants not directly affiliated to Al Qaeda.

None of the agents who received the EC took any serious action. Several did not even read it. The report attributes the inaction and inattention to the lack of resources committed to anti-terrorist activities in the summer of 2001. For instance, there was only a single research analyst assigned to the FBI’s Bin Laden Unit in 2001, and she was transferred to another unit in July 2001.

One agent at a field office who was sent the Phoenix EC replied that it was “no big secret” that Arab men were receiving aviation training in the United States. (Williams’s concern, however, was not over “Arab men,” but rather individuals affiliated with radical Islamic fundamentalists who publicly justified terrorist attacks on US targets.) The FBI’s New York Field Office, which had the lead role in counterterrorism, flatly rejected Williams’s proposal for a more in-depth study of the flight school issue.

In passing, the inspector general’s report notes that there was already considerable information “contained in FBI files about airplanes and flight schools at the time the Phoenix EC was received at FBI HQ.” It mentions four examples, implying that many more could be cited.

One of these examples is the following: “In August 1998, an intelligence agency advised the FBI’s New York Division of an alleged plan by unidentified Arabs to fly an explosive laden aircraft from Libya into the World Trade Center.”

This previously unreported warning directly contradicts the claims, made repeatedly by Bush administration officials, especially Condoleezza Rice, that “no one could have imagined” hijacked airplanes being used as flying bombs against US targets.
The Moussaoui case

The entire chapter on Moussaoui, 115 pages long, is redacted from the version published last week, at the order of the federal judge who has been presiding over Moussaoui’s terrorism trial. Only a few references to Moussaoui survive in other parts of the report.

A fuller analysis of this episode awaits the release of the redacted chapter, after Moussaoui’s sentencing. But the gist of the situation is that local Minneapolis FBI agents asked for permission to conduct further inquiries, including searching Moussaoui’s computer, while supervisors at FBI headquarters cited the necessity for a warrant from a special court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The supervisors refused to apply for the FISA warrant, saying the case did not meet the court’s criteria.

In one passage, the inspector general’s report cites a top FBI lawyer’s statement that “he had never seen a supervisory special agent in Headquarters so adamant that a FISA warrant could not be obtained and at the same time a field office so adamant that it could.” The report also notes that the Minneapolis field office sought an “expedited FISA,” which “normally involved reports of a suspected imminent attack or other imminent danger.”

While FBI supervisors were blocking action on Moussaoui, a CIA liaison officer in Minneapolis was reporting his arrest to the CIA. George Tenet, the CIA director, was briefed on the matter.

By the end of August, French intelligence officials had provided the US government with information on Moussaoui’s connections to Islamic fundamentalist groups, but the FBI still took no action. Moussaoui, who was being held on immigration violations, was not even transferred from the Immigration and Naturalization Service to FBI custody until after September 11.
The San Diego hijackers

By far the most damning material in the FBI inspector general’s report relates to Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, two of the 9/11 hijackers who lived in the San Diego area for much of 2000 and 2001. The report details at least five instances during this period when the FBI could have or should have become aware of their presence and purpose.

The two men entered the United States on January 15, 2000, flying from Bangkok, Thailand to Los Angeles International Airport. Mihdhar was a participant at a January 5, 2000 meeting of Al Qaeda operatives in Malaysia, where he and others were photographed by an unnamed intelligence service. These photos were supplied to the CIA.

The US National Security Agency had separately identified Hazmi as an associate of Mihdhar. The two men were tracked by the CIA traveling from Malaysia to Thailand.

CIA cables contemporaneously discussed Mihdhar’s travel and the fact that he had a US visa in his Saudi passport. So intensive was the surveillance that agents obtained a photocopy of the passport and visa stamp and delivered it to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. Two months later, the Bangkok CIA station identified Hazmi as Mihdhar’s traveling companion and reported that he had traveled on from Bangkok to Los Angeles on January 15, 2000.

The most critical information about Mihdhar and Hazmi was withheld from the FBI for more than a year and a half. The FBI was informed about the Malaysia meeting as soon as it happened, and even about Mihdhar’s presence at it. But there was no mention of his passport with a multiple-entry US visa, giving him easy access to American territory, where the FBI had the principal responsibility for counterterrorism. Nor did the CIA tell the FBI that Hazmi had actually entered the country, which would certainly have triggered an alert. The CIA itself did not put either man on any other security watch list.

Two weeks after their arrival in Los Angeles, Mihdhar and Hazmi moved to San Diego, apparently at the urging of a new acquaintance, Omar Bayoumi, a man once under FBI surveillance and believed to be an operative or asset of the Saudi intelligence service. He invited the two newly arrived Saudis to San Diego, where they rented an apartment in the complex where he lived. Bayoumi co-signed the lease and even wrote a check for the rent because the two had only cash.

In May 2000, the two men rented a room from another San Diego man who was an FBI informant, and who reported their arrival and their first names to his handler. The handler did not ask the last names or show any other interest.

The informant is not named in the inspector general’s report, but he has been identified in previous press accounts as Abdussattar Shaikh, another Saudi immigrant. (Both Shaikh and his FBI handler, now retired, refused to speak with the FBI inspector general probing the bureau’s response to 9/11, a remarkable circumstance that is recorded in the report only in a footnote, and without explanation.)

The actions of Hazmi and Mihdhar strongly suggest that they were being protected and were themselves aware of it. They conducted themselves, not as underground conspirators, trying to keep one step ahead of the most powerful spy apparatus in the world, but as men seemingly indifferent to threats to their security.

According to the FBI report: “... they did not attempt to hide their identities. Using the same names contained in their travel documents and known to at least some in the Intelligence Community, they rented an apartment, obtained driver’s licenses from the state of California Department of Motor Vehicles, opened bank accounts and received bank credit cards, purchased a used vehicle and automotive insurance, took flying lessons at a local flying school, and obtained local phone service that included Hazmi’s listing in the local telephone directory.”

Even though this is not the first time the actions of Hazmi and Mihdhar have been detailed, one rubs one’s eyes in astonishment at this passage. Hazmi could only have made himself more obvious if he had taken out an ad in the Yellow Pages under “T” for terrorist. But the CIA, which knew who he was, chose not to expose him to the FBI.

In June 2000, Mihdhar left the US, not returning until July 4, 2001, when he flew into John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. Hazmi lived in San Diego for several more months, then moved to Phoenix and eventually the East Coast.

Following the bombing of the USS Cole in December 2000, interest in Mihdhar and Hazmi revived. A US intelligence source identified one of the participants in the January 2000 Malaysia meeting as the ringleader of the Cole attack, and the FBI, which had lead responsibility for the investigation, began to review all those who attended that meeting.

However, in discussions in January 2001 and again in May and June 2001, CIA officials did not tell the FBI that Mihdhar, now known to be associated with the suspected organizer of the Cole bombing, had a US visa, or that Hazmi, Mihdhar’s associate, had entered the United States.

Much of this material in the report is difficult to follow, partly because of bureaucratic complexities, partly because of the large amount of redaction, apparently to conceal the nationality of the intelligence agency that had monitored the Malaysia meeting (most likely the Israeli Mossad). The inspector general’s report cites cooperation by Malaysian, Thai and Yemeni security services without redaction.

The CIA finally told the FBI what it knew about Mihdhar and Hazmi on August 27, 2001, five days after the FBI had discovered independently, on August 22, that Mihdhar might be in the US, and the agency had opened its own investigation. The New York FBI office was notified, but the job of tracking down Mihdhar was assigned to a novice agent as his first intelligence case, an indication of the low priority given to the investigation. Only perfunctory steps to locate Mihdhar and Hazmi had been taken by September 11, when the two men boarded the American Airlines jet.
Indications of a CIA cover-up

The FBI inspector general’s report reveals for the first time that the CIA not only failed to inform the FBI about Mihdhar, but that CIA officials intervened to suppress a memorandum drafted by an FBI agent detailed to the CIA-run Counter-Terrorism Center (CTC), who wanted to notify the FBI about the suspected terrorist with a US visa. The blow-by-blow account of this incident in the FBI report strongly implies a CIA cover-up.

The FBI agent, dubbed “Dwight” in the inspector general’s report, drafted the memorandum, a Central Intelligence Report (CIR), on January 5, 2000, only hours after the Malaysia meeting had taken place. The same day, a CIA desk officer, dubbed “Michelle,” relayed instructions from her supervisor barring distribution of the CIR to the FBI.

Three hours later, “Michelle” drafted and circulated an internal CIA cable which summarized the information on Mihdhar, including his multiple-entry US visa. This cable declared that his travel documents had been copied and passed “to the FBI for further investigation.” This was a lie, which was later used by the CIA to substantiate its initial claim that it had notified the FBI about Mihdhar.

This cable could not possibly be an innocent mistake, since it was sent out after its author had relayed the instructions to “Dwight” that his memo to the FBI not be sent. Under questioning from the inspector general, no one at the CIA or the FBI could corroborate the claim in the cable by “Michelle” that the CIA had notified the FBI about Mihdhar—a claim that was diametrically opposed to what the CIA was doing in practice.

The report notes that the CIA initially withheld information about the existence of the January 2000 memorandum by “Dwight” from the inspector general’s office. Quoting from the report:

“In February 2004, however, while we were reviewing a list of CIA documents that had been accessed by FBI employees assigned to the CIA, we noticed the title of a document that appeared to be relevant to this review and had not been previously disclosed to us. The CIA OIG [Office of the Inspector General] had not previously obtained this document in connection with its review. We obtained this document, known as a Central Intelligence Report (CIR). This CIR was a draft document addressed to the FBI containing information about Mihdhar’s travel and possession of a US visa. As a result of the discovery of this new document, a critical document that we later determined had not been sent to the FBI before the September 11 attacks (see Section III, A, 4 below), we had to re-interview several FBI and CIA employees and obtain additional documents from the CIA. The belated discovery of this CIA document delayed the completion of our review.”

The aggrieved tone is unmistakable. First the CIA withheld the document from the FBI, then the CIA attempted to conceal the existence of the document from the FBI’s postmortem probe.

The cover-up was followed by a curious epidemic of amnesia. No one who worked on, received or read the draft CIR from “Dwight,” including “Dwight” himself, could remember anything about it. Again the report:

“When we interviewed all of the individuals involved with the CIR, they asserted that they recalled nothing about it. Dwight told the OIG that he did not recall being aware of the information about Mihdhar, did not recall drafting the CIR, did not recall whether he drafted the CIR on his own initiative or at the direction of his supervisor, and did not recall any discussions about the reason for delaying completion and dissemination of the CIR. Malcolm said he did not recall reviewing any of the cable traffic or any information regarding Hazmi and Mihdhar. Eric told the OIG that he did not recall the CIR.

“The CIA employees also stated that they did not recall the CIR. Although James, the CIA employee detailed to FBI Headquarters, declined to be interviewed by us, he told the CIA OIG that he did not recall the CIR. John (the deputy chief of the Bin Laden Unit) and Michelle, the desk officer who was following this issue, also stated that they did not recall the CIR, any discussions putting it on hold, or why it was not sent.”

Again, the tone of incredulity is clear. None of these people remember anything, and one of them actually refuses to be interviewed! And this is not about a minor matter, but concerns the first report on a man who was one of the 19 hijackers on 9/11.
A politically motivated whitewash

The FBI inspector general’s report is, like all previous official investigations into the events of 9/11, a cover-up for the state apparatus. These investigations share one common feature: they completely exclude, a priori, any question of government complicity in terrorist attacks. Instead, we have the familiar litany of breast-beating over mistakes, complacency, inattention and inadequate resources.

Despite the all-purpose explanation that “mistakes were made,” names are never named in any of these probes. No one is ever held accountable. No one is shamed or punished.

There is a definite reason for this: the US government does not want to generate a Watergate syndrome, in which punishment meted out at a lower level leads to people implicating higher-ups and focuses attention on the role of top officials.

There can hardly remain any serious doubt that a section of the American intelligence apparatus functioned as the guardian angels for at least some of the suicide hijackers. The question is: why?

Until there is an investigation of 9/11 by a genuinely independent body—one wholly free of the US military/intelligence apparatus—it is impossible to specify precisely the role of the government in these events.

But on the basis of a political analysis alone, it is clear that 9/11 did not come as a bolt from the blue. As in the investigation of any crime, a critical question to be posed is: who benefits? For powerful sections of the US ruling elite and its state apparatus, a major terrorist attack on US soil was anticipated, desired and, most probably, facilitated in order to provide the necessary climate of fear and patriotic fervor to implement a sweeping program of political reaction, both at home and abroad.

Without 9/11, there would be no US occupation of Iraq, putting an American army squarely at the center of the world’s largest pool of oil. Without 9/11, there would be no US bases across Central Asia, guarding the second largest source of oil and gas. And without 9/11, the Bush administration would have been unable to sustain itself politically, faced with a deteriorating economy and widespread opposition to its tax cuts for millionaires and social measures to appease the fundamentalist Christian Right.

The Democratic Party is deeply implicated, supporting both the war in Iraq and the cover-up of the role of the state in the 9/11 attacks. The Clinton administration sought to provoke a confrontation with Iraq in 1998, but had to back off in the face of public opposition to a new war in the Middle East—opposition that was only overcome in the wake of September 11. Moreover, the connection between US intelligence agencies and reactionary Islamic fundamentalists like bin Laden goes back nearly two decades, involving Democratic and Republican administrations alike.

Despite its tactical differences with the White House and squabbles over positions of influence, the Democratic Party accepts the basic program of the Bush administration. Should the Democrats return to power, they would not withdraw US forces from Iraq or Central Asia, nor rescind Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, nor repeal the USA Patriot Act or attacks on democratic rights.

See Also:
What the September 11 commission hearings revealed
[22 April 2004]
Was the US government alerted to September 11 attack?
[16 January 2002]


Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/20/08 at 12:39 PM Reply with quote #71
September 20, 2008 at 09:54:48

Angela Davis says 'Omaha Two' are victims of 'repressive authorities" in 1971 COINTELPRO case and should be freed

by Michael Richardson Page 1 of 1 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com

0diggsdigg
vote
nowBuzz up!vote nowBuzz up!


Tell A Friend
SAVE FAVORITES
VIEW FAVORITES

(0.0 from 0 ratings) View Ratings | Rate It



Angela Davis, noted University of California professor and political prisoner advocate, travelled to Lincoln, Nebraska to tell a crowd of 300 justice, civil rights and peace advocates that the 'Omaha Two' were victims of "repressive authorities" and should be released from prison. Davis was talking about Ed Poindexter and Mondo we Langa (formerly David Rice) who are serving life sentences in the maximum-security Nebraska State Penitentiary.


Poindexter and Langa were convicted in 1971 for the bombing murder of Omaha police officer Larry Minard after being implicated by the 15 year-old confessed bomber, Duane Peak. At the time, the two leaders of Omaha's Black Panther chapter, called the Nebraska Committee to Combat Fascism, were targets of a clandestine operation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation code-named COINTELPRO.


Years after the conviction of the two men when the secret FBI files of COINTELPRO became available by Freedom of Information requests it was discovered that even before the murdered policeman was buried, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover had given the order to withhold evidence about the unknown caller who lured Minard to his death. Hoover wanted a case made against Poindexter and Langa regardless of what the crime laboratory reported.


Hoover's shocking command to suppress identification of Minard's killer was recorded by FBI Crime Laboratory chief Ivan Willard Conrad. The Omaha FBI Special-Agent-in-Charge sent a memo to Conrad recommending an informal, unwritten lab report on the tape recording of the fatal call. The Omaha Police wanted to identify the caller through vocal analysis of the tape but did not want to release results of the forensic examination to lawyers for Poindexter and Langa. Conrad spoke with Hoover after getting the unusual request to withhold evidence.


The FBI Crime Lab chief scrawled on his copy of the Omaha memo that Hoover approved of the request to not prepare a formal laboratory report on the crucial tape recording. "Dir advised telephonically & said OK to do." Conrad then initialed and dated the memo entry just two days after the bombing.


Omaha Asst. Chief of Police Glen W. Gates later had another memo sent to Hoover by way of the Omaha FBI office asking that no use of the tape be made because it might be "prejudicial to the police murder trial" of Poindexter and Langa. Peak claimed he made the call and placed the bomb under orders from Poindexter, however, the voice on the tape was not that of a 15 year-old but rather an older man thus leaving an unidentified accomplice on the loose and a gaping hole in the prosecution's case against the two Panther leaders.


Conrad followed Hoover's orders and kept quiet about the tape recording. The defense was never provided the tape at trial and the jurors that convicted Poindexter and Langa never got to hear the voice of the actual killer. Peak received a deal from prosecutors and got off with several years of juvenile detention while the two activists were sentenced to life in prison. Both men deny any involvement in Minard's death.


Angela Davis is no stranger to COINTELPRO tactics against the Black Panthers and herself was once a fugitive on the FBI 'Ten Most Wanted' list. Serving 18 months behind bars before being acquitted of participation in a California police-Panther shootout, Davis is sympathetic with targets of COINTELPRO prosecutions. Davis was cleared of her case just the year after Poindexter and Langa were convicted and has followed the Nebraska case ever since.


In 1975, Davis made a trip to Lincoln to raise money for a legal defense fund and attended a post-conviction court hearing. In 1982, she led a rally at the University of Nebraska at Omaha and declared, "We are going to continue to fight until the are both free."


Since 2000, Davis has made three trips to Nebraska to advocate for release of Poindexter and Langa and told the Lincoln Star during a 2006 visit, "It is important for people to understand the way in which two men could basically be framed up and kept in prison for 36 years even though they're innocent."


Davis more recently told an enthusiastic audience hosted by Nebraskans for Justice that "the revolution didn't come" and that activists ensnared by COINTELPRO remain imprisoned for crimes they did not commit.


"Our memories aren't as strong as those of the repressive authorities who still hold captive people of that era who fought to end racism, overthrow capitalism and to build a better world for all of us."


Poindexter has a new trial request pending before the Nebraska Supreme Court. Oral argument in the case is scheduled for October but no date for a decision has been set. Poindexter is seeking a new trial based on conflicting police testimony and withheld evidence.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/21/08 at 12:19 PM Reply with quote #72
Fort Bliss to start crisis exercise Monday
By Chris Roberts / El Paso Times
Article Launched: 09/21/2008 12:00:00 AM MDT


Military section | Community upload

FORT BLISS -- In 1999, emergency crews responding to a simulated chemical attack were confronted with challenges few of them had ever had to confront.

A fire engine rolled up with windows down, and police --faced with victims, played by soldiers, demanding immediate help -- climbed out of their vehicles to gain control of the crowd. Before the simulation could even develop, the rescuers were decimated, tapped by observers as casualties, dead from inhalation of the toxic chemicals.

That was the region's first mass-casualty exercise, and now Fort Bliss is in the midst of another -- the exercises are conducted at least once a year. The times have changed. Emergency responders are wiser now to threats that were unimaginable less than a decade ago. And even the equipment is more sophisticated, such as radiation detectors and other specialized technology.

The current exercise began last week with e-mails alerting key officials at Fort Bliss, with the city and with the county -- both fire and police -- that terrorist activity had been observed in South American countries. That activity was a warning that certain resources should be mobilized and ready to go in case of a local
Advertisement
Click Here!
attack, said Mike Lister, chief of Plans and Operations Division and chief of the Fort Bliss Installation Operations Center.

Monday, the situation will escalate, and a full-blown crisis will develop by Wednesday, Lister said, complete with 75 to 100 soldiers playing victims, covered with fake blood if the simulation calls for it. "No matter how they react, it's going to get ugly on Wednesday," he said. "We are making this as close to the real thing as we can without having an actual (toxic) agent of some type."

Lister won't say much more about the ongoing test -- which will happen entirely on Fort Bliss property but will require city and county involvement -- because he wants the emergency responders to have to think on their feet as the scenario develops.

"It's like (the television show) 'Law and Order'," Lister said. "It's taken out of the news, and we've just modified it to suit."

Even the FBI will have a presence. "The reason we participate in these kinds of exercises is that it brings together all the jurisdictions that may have to respond to some kind of major incident, either on the Fort Bliss facility or in the city or the county," said Special Agent Andrea Simmons, an FBI spokeswoman. "It gives us an opportunity to learn each other's capabilities and limitations and responsibilities and even just to put a face with a name."

El Paso was one of the first 120 cities chosen to receive federal training for regional responses to disasters, both natural and human-caused. Training included setting up incident commands and responding to spills of hazardous materials. The 1999 exercise, which was conducted at the Socorro Student Activity Center and simulated a chemical attack at a sporting event, emanated from that mandate, Lister said.

"These were powerful lessons learned," he said.

It became clear that procedure needed to be set up to protect first responders from chemicals and other toxic agents, and that there was a problem in detoxifying the victims of the attack. The detoxifying involved safely disposing of contaminated clothing and protecting the modesty of victims required to undress for the decontamination process.

A minor real emergency developed at that first exercise when one of the "victims" developed the early stages of hypothermia -- the exercise was conducted in early November -- after she was sitting wet with little protective clothing.

"There were those procedural lessons that we have learned," Lister said.

Since then, the exercises have included chemical releases from train wrecks, sniper attacks, hostage situations, explosive bombs and radiological "dirty" bombs. The sniper attack scenario involved snipers at UTEP shooting at chemical cars on nearby rail lines. Another scenario included multiple attacks of different types.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


09/24/08 at 01:58 PM Reply with quote #73
G-Man fresh out of ’consideration’

Peter Gelzinis By Peter Gelzinis
Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - Updated 6h ago
+ Recent Articles
Boston Herald Columnist


EmailE-mail PrintablePrintable Comments(0) Comments LargerSmallerText size ShareShare Rate(3) Rate


Long after a team of state police and DEA agents took him off the street back in January of 1995, Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi was certain his friend and FBI handler, John Connolly, would find a way to free this multiple murderer.

“Stevie wasn’t fazed by the arrest at all,” former State Police Col. Tom Foley recalled yesterday. “It didn’t matter to him that his buddy” - that would be James “Whitey” Bulger - “had hit the road. Stevie was convinced that Connolly and the FBI were going to come to his rescue.

“ ‘Consideration’ was the word he kept using with us,” Foley said. “Stevie would laugh and keep asking, ‘How ‘bout some consideration, fellas?’ ”

Click here to find out more!

These days, there is nothing Connolly can do for this geriatric mobster beyond flashing a scowl, or an occasional death stare, toward the witness box inside a Miami courtroom.

And there is nothing Stevie can do for Johnny except tell a transfixed jury how he and his partner, Whitey Bulger, were once free to commit every crime imaginable under the care and protection of their friendly G-man.

Now 74, and looking more like George Burns with every passing day, Stevie Flemmi knows he will die in prison. At the moment, the chances are at least 50-50 that his fellow racketeer Connolly will join him there.

“I’m hoping they’re getting it,” Tom Foley said, referring to a Miami-Dade jury that’s been treated to a crash course in the Byzantine world of Boston’s old gangster tribes. “And for the most part I think they are.”

Last Friday in that Miami courtroom, Foley made the transition from witness to lecturer and criminal historian. The veteran cop, who spent more than 15 years targeting Bulger and Flemmi, spoke directly to the jury about how two of Boston’s most notorious crime barons came to be so Teflon-coated. Simply put: by assuming the role of Connolly’s “high echelon informants,” Bulger and Flemmi were able to play the federal law enforcement forces like a pair of concert violinists.

The retired head of the state police provided essential context to the moral dilemma at the heart of this trial. Namely, how is a jury supposed to believe the crucial testimony of a contract killer like John Martorano, who’s confessed to putting 20 people in their graves and is now every bit as free as they are?

“I told that jury exactly what I believe in my heart and in my gut,” Foley said. “The deal we made with Johnny (Martorano) sickened me as much as it probably sickens them. But I made it quite clear that if John Connolly and the FBI had done their job, such a deal wouldn’t have been necessary.

“That deal, distasteful as it may be, helped us close the books on 50 murders,” Foley said. “We were able to unearth the remains of six people who’d been missing for 20 years or more. The shabby myth of Whitey Bulger as some kind of folk hero, who valued loyalty and kept drugs out of his town, was finally exposed for the lie it always was.

“And that deal finally made it crystal clear that what the FBI in Boston did was trade one set of gangsters, the Mafia, for another set of gangsters who were even more treacherous. Without that deal,” Foley sighed, “I told that jury we wouldn’t be here.”

In the sewer where John Connolly once flourished, there are no angels. There are just aging monsters with dead eyes like Stevie Flemmi, eager to complete the circle of betrayal by recalling the ugly truth.

It will be interesting to see if Connolly dares to deny Flemmi’s truth by taking the stand in his own defense. The rogue G-man declined to do that during his first trial, which is why he is now led into court by jailers.

But then, Stevie Flemmi didn’t testify in Johnny Connolly’s first trial either. He was waiting for the feds to come across with a little consideration.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


11/08/08 at 01:21 PM Reply with quote #74
Oh, the irony, as Zip cries: I was framed

Howie Carr By Howie Carr
Saturday, November 8, 2008 - Updated 3h ago
+ Recent Articles
Boston Herald Columnist


EmailE-mail PrintablePrintable Comments(12) Comments LargerSmallerText size ShareShare Rate(0) Rate


John Martorano said he couldn’t comment at length about the murder conviction of disgraced FBI agent Zip Connolly, but he did want to say one thing.

“I hate to see anyone go to prison, but in this case, what goes around came around,” Martorano told me over the phone yesterday.

Did it ever. Payback is indeed a bitch.

Click here to find out more!

Zip was convicted Thursday in Miami of setting up the 1982 murder of John Callahan, a Boston gangster wannabe.

Callahan had to go because Zip’s underworld paymasters, Whitey Bulger and Stevie Flemmi, were worried he would become a witness against them.

In the end, Zip’s defense came down to one thing. Everyone was lying about him.

Now that’s funny. A gangster like Zip, who framed other gangsters, was complaining that he was being framed . . . by gangsters.

They’re lying about me - that was Zip’s defense. Again, consider the irony. In 1982, his gangland boss, Whitey Bulger, murdered two guys on Northern Avenue. Zip knew who the shooter was. And he knew exactly what he had to do. He had to lie.

Zip began filing FBI reports on Whitey’s gangland hit. One day he claimed the killers were actually a crew from Charlestown. Then he said it was a hood from Winter Hill. The next day he said it was obviously the Mafia. Then it was the fault of the state police - that was the best whopper of all, as far as Zip was concerned, blaming the honest cops. If there was one thing Zip Connolly always hated, it was straight cops.

Lies? You want lies? After this murder Zip was just convicted for, Whitey again wanted to blame it on somebody else.

So even before Callahan was hit, Zip had begun dutifully typing out his 209’s, claiming Cuban drug dealers were stalking Callahan. Hey, it’s Florida, blame some Cubans.

Back in 1968, the FBI framed four North End guys for a murder they didn’t commit. Every couple of years in the 1980s, Peter Limone would come up for parole. And every time, Zip Connolly, “decorated” FBI agent, would show up before the Parole Board and talk about what a menace Limone was. Zip knew that Limone was innocent, but he didn’t care. He kept lying, because Limone’s release would have embarrassed his gangland crony Rico and everyone else in the unspeakably corrupt Boston FBI office.

When the lie that was his life began coming apart, Zip did the only thing he knew how to do. He lied some more. Johnny Martorano was going to testify against him? Well, did you know his nickname in Roxbury was “Bwana Johnny?” They called him “Machine Gun Johnny.”

They didn’t, of course, but what did Zip care? He was “decorated.”

The Globe worshiped him. He was writing a screenplay - “Only the Ghost Knows.”

But now, what goes around came around. Johnny Martorano wasn’t lying.
Loading...
View Member ProfileSend Private MessageSend EmailFind Member's Threads Find Member's Posts
joeb
Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 3,205


11/10/08 at 03:05 PM Reply with quote #75
4 reads
1st read
Wilkerson reportedly ID's FBI source
Cooperating witness called a longtime ally
Ron Wilburn has supported Dianne Wilkerson. Ron Wilburn has supported Dianne Wilkerson.
By Donovan Slack and Jonathan Saltzman Globe Staff / November 10, 2008

* Email|
* Print|
* Single Page|
* Yahoo! BuzzYahoo! Buzz|
* ShareThisShareThis

Text size – +

Only slivers of him are visible in grainy FBI surveillance photographs: the crisp white cuff of a dress shirt, a close-up of a palm, hands pressing neat folds of cash toward state Senator Dianne Wilkerson.
Discuss
COMMENTS ()
Related

* Wilkerson promises to resign, but won't say when
* Licensing chairman won't talk on scandal
* Crowd rallies to Wilkerson's support
* Agents want to question beverage agency head
* Waves of scandal rattle Beacon Hill
* Wilkerson denies lying in testimony on nephew
* Photos Wilkerson through the years

Officially, he is CW, or the "cooperating witness." Working with the FBI, he allegedly gave Wilkerson thousands of dollars ostensibly for help in obtaining a liquor license - all the while secretly videotaping and audiotaping the transactions, according to a 32-page government affidavit. The FBI has declined to disclose the individual's name.

But Wilkerson has confided to close associates that the figure who led the FBI to her is a man she knows quite well: He is 69-year-old Ron Wilburn, said three of those associates in separate interviews. If true, it creates a plot line rich with irony and tragedy.

Wilburn is a longtime friend and active political supporter of Wilkerson's; he is described as a minor entrepreneur and a "gentlemanly" presence in Boston's black neighborhoods; he has publicly said in the past that he feels it is his responsibility to help other minorities gain an advantage in life.

Yet in the twilight of his career, if Wilkerson is correct, his cooperation with authorities has led to the political downfall of the only black state senator in Massachusetts. At the same time, his believed role undermines one of Wilkerson's core assertions throughout her troubled career: that her legal and ethical issues are manufactured by forces outside her community.

"I don't know what you're talking about," Wilburn said in a brief telephone call with a reporter shortly after Wilkerson's arrest, before hanging up. Wilburn, who has not been charged with any crime in the case, did not respond to repeated requests for interviews, including messages left at the Revere apartment where he lives with his wife and daughter.

Wilburn is a longtime consultant to minority business ventures in Boston who was perhaps best known for his association in the 1980s with one of the city's most prominent black entrepreneurs, the late Bertram M. Lee. Wilburn later helped manage a nightclub in Roxbury, Mirage at Estelle's, where he hosted fund-raising events for Wilkerson.

With his slight build and what acquaintances characterized as an affable, polite manner, Wilburn is described as a steady family man with no criminal record. Often, the FBI recruits cooperating witnesses from the ranks of criminals. That makes Wilburn an unusual figure in an FBI sting.

Wilkerson, who announced Wednesday that she plans to resign from the Senate, did not return messages seeking comment. Among the questions that remain unanswered is what motivated the confidential witness to cooperate with the FBI and the office of US Attorney Michael J. Sullivan.

If the public corruption case against Wilkerson goes to trial in US District Court in Boston, the confidential witness would be unmasked so that a jury could assess credibility.

People who have known Wilburn over the years said nothing they were aware of would foreshadow a role in the 18-month federal investigation.

"Ron Wilburn, as I knew him, was what I'd call a serial entrepreneur," said Ronald A. Homer, former chief executive of Boston Bank of Commerce, who last saw both Wilburn and Wilkerson at a fund-raising event for US Senator John F. Kerry at Mirage at Estelle's in 2004.

Wilburn advised Sonesta International Hotels Corp. on integrating hotel management in the 1970s when such operations were almost exclusively white, said Jerry Dunfey, whose family owned the Parker House Hotel in Boston.

Wilburn was named in the early 1980s as one of several black shareholders in the parent company of a television station, WNEV-TV (Channel 7) in Boston, a CBS affiliate whose ownership was 13 percent black, believed to be the highest of any commercial station in the nation at the time. He evidently landed that position because of his relationship with Lee, who later bought a majority stake in the Denver Nuggets in the National Basketball Association.

In 1989, Wilburn represented Lee's BML Associates Inc., a Boston company that owned radio stations, in a deal to acquire an Atlanta-based ethnic hair-care firm.

But in recent years, Wilburn was involved in more modest ventures, including helping a young protege acquire and run Mirage at Estelle's. For 35 years, the nightclub was known simply as Estelle's and was a legendary black-owned club on Tremont Street in Lower Roxbury. Among those who performed there were Marvin Gaye, Gladys Knight & the Pips, and George Benson.

In 1999, Wilburn helped shepherd Felix "Manny" Soto through the process of buying a liquor license for the club, which added Mirage to its name when it opened soon afterward. People who worked at the club or danced there described Wilburn as the manager.

"I know him to be a . . . a very mature individual who has established roots in the community for many years," said Frank Williams Jr., whose father owned Estelle's from 1964 until his death in 1999. "He was a well-regarded gentleman in the community."

Wilburn's work at the club marked the second time he had assisted Soto. In 1992, he helped Soto, who was 21 at the time, obtain loans to open a car dealership, J & M Auto Sales, in Jamaica Plain. Wilburn also helped him obtain a city license to sell cars.

By 1996, Soto had built a car dealership with annual gross sales of more than $1 million, according to a Globe story that year. Wilburn said at the time that he felt it was his civic duty to help young minorities like Soto, who is Dominican-American.

"In these times, in this city, when it feels like we're moving backwards as far as affirmative action and everything else, I think it's the responsibility of established African-Americans like myself to nurture talent in the Latino community," Wilburn said at the time.

But Soto later got mixed up with the law. In January 2007 he pleaded guilty to drug charges and received seven years of probation after he was arrested by Boston police in 2005 when a passenger got out of his car with a Pop-Tart box stuffed with more than 200 grams of cocaine.

Wilkerson's associates say she met Wilburn while he was managing the Tremont Street nightclub. Wilkerson was a prominent state senator who, since her election in 1992, had staked her legislative reputation largely on civil rights issues and was popular in Boston's African-American neighborhoods. But she was also a polarizing figure with a track record of personal ethical and financial lapses, including failing to pay $51,000 in federal income taxes in the early 1990s.

Given the nightclub's location and popularity in Wilkerson's district, it was a natural venue for fund-raisers. Wilburn provided the club free of charge, and the senator only had to pay for food, said the associates who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing federal inquiry.

The FBI has not detailed what led to its relationship with CW. In early 2007, not long after Estelle's closed, the man identified in the FBI affidavit as CW made an allegation to agents. He told them that Wilkerson routinely took cash from constituents and others with business before the Senate. He told agents that he had personally witnessed two cash payments.

In June 2007, at the FBI's instruction, CW met with Wilkerson at Scollay Square, a restaurant near the State House, and paid her a $500 bribe for help in securing a liquor license for a nightclub called Dejavu, according to the FBI affidavit. A previous application for the club, on Melnea Cass Boulevard in Roxbury, had been denied in April of that year. It was the first of thousands of dollars in bribes that CW would pay Wilkerson, according to authorities.

After the second bribe, a payment for $1,000 at the restaurant No. 9 Park, cash that Wilkerson stuffed into her bra, according to the affidavit, CW told Wilkerson: "That's a thousand dollars, all right? You tell me what you want. If this goes through, you got it. You, you tell me your price. Okay? And I am not playing around."

All told, CW and an undercover agent he introduced her to paid Wilkerson $8,500 in bribes for the nightclub license, the affidavit said. Wilkerson allegedly accepted another $15,000 from undercover agents in a second sting operation for legislation to pave the way for a separate Roxbury development.

Wilburn lives in a sprawling tan apartment complex near the beach on Ocean Avenue in Revere with his wife, Joanne, and their daughter.

Joanne Wilburn is a former executive assistant to Dunfey, the hotelier, and helped organize the well-known New England Circle roundtable discussions that featured international luminaries. In 1990, she took a job as conference coordinator at the Institute of Politics at Harvard's Kennedy School, but she now works elsewhere, Dunfey said.

Dunfey said he was unaware that Ron Wilburn was said to be CW.

"All I know is positive things about him," he said. "I always knew him to be a wonderful man, a wonderful father, and a wonderful husband."

Colette Phillips, who runs a public relations firm in Boston and knew Wilburn through his wife's involvement in the New England Circle, said "he's been around for a long, long time, sort of on the periphery of black businesses and black ventures."

She said she was unaware he was said to have been involved in the Wilkerson sting.


No joy in this justice
By Kevin Cullen
Globe Columnist / November 10, 2008


A few hours after the jury came back, Dan Doherty and Steve Johnson were sitting at a sidewalk table outside a pub called Finnegan's Way on Ocean Drive in Miami's South Beach.


Along with prosecutor Fred Wyshak and FBI agent Jim Marra, Doherty and Johnson spent almost three months living a spartan existence in a modest hotel in quiet North Beach, which afforded a partial view of the Atlantic but little else.

But it was over. John Connolly, the corrupt FBI agent they had pursued like big game, was now a convicted murderer. So Johnson, a Massachusetts state cop, and Doherty, a DEA agent, and the rest of the prosecution team traveled 25 blocks south, to the bright lights.

They were entitled to crow. But they didn't. There was satisfaction, of course, toasts to a job well done and all that. But there was no great joy in all this. There were just too many bodies in the rearview mirror.

In a trunk in Miami, a father of two who got too close to the flame that was Whitey Bulger and Stevie Flemmi. In shallow graves along the Neponset River, women who were Flemmi's disposable lovers. Under a basement floor in South Boston, some mother's son. On the Southie waterfront, a father of three boys whose only mistake was to offer a ride to somebody who John Connolly and Whitey Bulger decided must die.

So many bodies.

"You think about the families ruined," Steve Johnson was saying. "So many families ruined."

Dan Doherty was also thinking of the honest cops and federal agents who tried to do the right thing, while Connolly and other FBI agents and supervisors were protecting a clique of sociopaths. Doherty, Johnson, and others won't believe they're done until all those who helped Connolly, anybody who wore a badge and took money from or a pass on Bulger and Flemmi, are in the dock.

One of those honest cops, Frank Dewan, a retired Boston police detective, was getting ready to go to the gym and had one sneaker on when he got the news. He never got the second sneaker on.

"My hands are shaking," he said, minutes after he learned that Connolly, who tried to ruin him, was going away forever. "I guess this is what vindication feels like."

Bob Long, a retired detective lieutenant with the Massachusetts State Police who led an effort to snare Bulger that was compromised by the FBI in 1980, was sitting in his office in Braintree on Thursday when he got a text message from Detective Lieutenant Steve Johnson: Guilty.

"A jury in Miami didn't buy the snake oil that was sold here for a generation," Long said.

Long and Dewan share a unique distinction. Connolly felt so threatened by their attempts to take out Bulger that he surreptitiously obtained stationery with Boston police and State Police letterheads and sent anonymous letters to their commanders, accusing them of being corrupt.

If Johnson represented every statie who tried to end Bulger's murderous reign, then Doherty was the link to DEA agents who debunked the myth that Whitey kept the drugs out of Southie.

Connolly's lawyers plan to fly people down from Boston next month to plead for leniency. Unlike the trial, which was sparsely attended, it could get crowded in Courtroom 4-1 of the Miami-Dade Circuit Court when Connolly is sentenced Dec. 4.

Dewan will be there. So will Tom Foley, the great state cop who did as much as anyone with a badge to make this happen, with his colleague, Tom Duffy. Long's going, and he's calling his crew - Rick Fraelick, Jack O'Malley, Arthur Bourque, and former prosecutor Tim Burke.

They're all going, those who took a swing and missed because Whitey owned so many. They are going, not to gloat. Not to sneer at John Connolly. But to be there. To bear witness. To see what justice looks like, after all these years.

2nd read
RADIO,TELEVISION AND THE PRINT MEDIA TEACH US TO BUY, NOT ABOUT THE TRUTH
TO BUY AND NOT TO TELL THE TRUTH IS THE QUESTION.

2 reads from the media who like to put a spin with the word rookie
read the book ABOVE SUSPICION

1st read

WHDH-TV
Justice in Miami
Boston Herald, United States - Nov 8, 2008
Yesterday a Miami jury found former Boston FBI agent John Connolly guilty of second degree murder in Callahan’s death. The jury accepted the argument ...
The FBI Was On Trial Hartford Courant
FBI agent who inspired Martin Scorsese movie convicted of murder Telegraph.co.uk
National Briefing | South Florida: EX-FBI Agent Convicted New York Times


2nd read

Phillip Noyc above "Suspicion" in crime drama
Mon Nov 10, 2008



LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Australian filmmaker Phillip Noyce will direct a true-crime tale based on a book by New York Times columnist.

"Above Suspicion" centers on the true story of the only FBI agent to be convicted of murder. Mark Putnam was a dutiful family man and ambitious rookie agent who embarks on a dangerous affair with an informant. When the affair threatens to unravel his career and marriage, it takes a turn for the worse. The story was turned into a book by New York Times columnist Joe Sharkey.

The project is setup at indie producer Bold Films. Noyce's credits include "Patriot Games" and "The Quiet American."

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter





Thomson Reuters is the world's largest international multimedia news agency, providing investing news, world news, business news, technology news, headline news, small business news, news alerts, personal finance, stock market, and mutual funds information available on Reuters.com, video, mobile, and interactive television platforms. Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
Loading...

Previous Thread | Next Thread
Page 3 of 4 < 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 >

Reply

Bookmarks
Digg Digg del.icio.us del.icio.us StumbleUpon StumbleUpon Google Google

� �
Copyright � 2001-2004 Who�s A Rat. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.


�