Editorial

The deep state does not respond to FOIA requests

Published in the September, 2009, Rock Creek Free Press

In an attempt to get to the bottom of what really happened on 9/11, citizen investigator Aidan Monaghan has filed dozens of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with federal agencies such as the FBI, SEC, Department of the Navy, and the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey.  Agency after agency has refused to comply with his requests, instead claiming that the information cannot be found, does not exist, was never properly filed, or even, from the FAA, that it was simply “not in a position to release said records at this time.”

The Freedom of Information Act was signed into law by President Johnson in 1966.  It mandates that information held by federal agencies must be made available to any citizen requesting it, unless that information is exempt.  The Act specifies nine reasons why any given piece of information could be exempt, such as invasion of personal privacy, trade secrets, anything related to the supervision or regulation of financial institutions, and anything that could compromise either law enforcement or national security.  In addition, the FBI has put an exemption on all of their 9/11 information and will release information only if compelled to do so by a lawsuit, of which Monaghan has filed two.

Despite the persistent stonewalling, Monaghan has turned up some interesting discrepancies.   While it was widely reported in the media, such as by USA Today, that the flight data recorder (FDR)  also known as the “black box,” for American Airlines flight 77 (the plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon on 9/11) was found at 4 am on September 14, 2001, the file containing the FDR data was dated over four hours earlier.  In other words, we are asked to believe that the data from the FDR was downloaded prior to the FDR being found.

Chemistry professor from the University of Copenhagen: we've found nano-explosives in the dust from the twin towers

The Fed Under Fire: new short film on the secrecy of the Federal Reserve

Researchers release 9/11 Pentagon Attack report

published in the July 2009 Rock Creek Free Press

Download July 2009 Rock Creek Free Press

Among 9/11 truth activists, there is little disagreement about what happened at the World Trade Center and at Shanksville. Although it’s not possible to know all the details of what transpired until there is an independent, impartial investigation, there is wide agreement among 9/11 researchers that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition, and that the hole in the ground that was presented to us as the crash site of flight 93 in Shanksville does not contain the remnants of an airplane.

But when it comes to the Pentagon, the truth community has yet to reach a consensus, and 9/11 forums are filled with bitter arguments from proponents of one view or another.  It is assumed by most savvy 9/11 activists that the truth movement has been infiltrated by intelligence agents tasked with crippling the movement in any way possible, and that many of the most strident arguments come, not from sincere researchers, but from disinformation agents intent on spreading confusion and discord.  These agents are in a position to know the truth about what happened, and can be expected to mount vigorous arguments against that truth, the better to keep the movement divided and to prevent a clear, cogent message about what happened at the Pentagon from reaching the masses. 

To many activists, the Pentagon attack stands as the single most incriminating feature of 9/11.  The official conspiracy theory (OCT) would have us believe that the world’s only superpower, with the most massive military that has ever existed, was unable to defend its own headquarters 51 minutes after the north WTC tower had been hit, 34 minutes after the south WTC tower had been hit, and 41 minutes after the FAA knew that there was an emergency aboard flight 77 (the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon).  Regarding flight 77, Wikipedia states: 

By 08:56, the flight was turned around, and the transponder had been disabled. The FAA was aware at this point that there was an emergency aboard the plane. By this time, American Airlines Flight 11 had already crashed into the World Trade Center, and United Airlines Flight 175 was known to have been hijacked and within minutes of also striking the World Trade center.

Where was America’s air defense during the 41 minutes after it was known that flight 77 was hijacked and before the Pentagon was attacked?  In highly incriminating testimony given to the 9/11 Commission, then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta stated that while he was in the bunker with Dick Cheney:

There was a young man who had come in and said 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?"

A few minutes later, the Pentagon exploded in flames, killing 125 unsuspecting workers in the building.  No evacuation order had been given.

Norman Mineta’s testimony was not included in the 9/11 Commission Report.  Download 911 Commission Report

Given these facts, plus many other anomalies about the OCT, it is no surprise that millions of people have concluded that the government is lying about what happened at the Pentagon.  With the scene of attack completely controlled by the primary suspect, and with all video of the attack confiscated from nearby businesses by the FBI within minutes of the attack, for years 9/11 researchers wondered about what had actually transpired at the Pentagon, with little hard evidence to guide them.

Frustrated with idle speculation, two men from Southern California, Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis, joined forces to form Citizen Investigation Team (CIT).  They traveled to the Pentagon and sought out eyewitnesses who saw the plane approach the Pentagon.  They interviewed their eyewitnesses, on camera, at the location where they had been standing on the morning of 9/11 when they saw the plane, and had all but a couple of the witnesses draw the plane’s flight path on a map and sign it. 

A pattern began to emerge, and the more witnesses CIT interviewed, the clearer the pattern became:  the plane had not taken the path claimed by the government, and the path that it did take proves that the plane did not hit the building.

CIT interviewed three Pentagon police officers, two of whom witnessed the flight path from the Citgo gas station (Officer William Lagasse, Officer Chadwick Brooks and Officer Roosevelt Roberts Jr.); five Arlington Cemetery workers (Darrell Stafford, Darius Prather, Donald Carter, William Middleton Sr. and George Aman); auto mechanic Edward Paik; Citgo gas station attendant Robert Turcios; air traffic controller Sean Boger (who was at the Pentagon Heliport at the time of the attack); Terry Morin, a project manager for Sparta (saw the plane from the Navy Annex); courier Levi Stephens (saw the plane from the Pentagon’s south parking lot); and Maria de La Cerda, a career musician with the Army band, who saw the plane from Arlington Cemetery.

Every one of these people clearly recalls seeing the plane take a path that disagrees with the government’s story.  Most of them saw the plane fly north of the Citgo station prior to the fireball at the Pentagon.  One witness, Roosevelt Roberts Jr., saw the plane after the explosion, banking low over the parking lot.  None of them report seeing the plane fly south of the Citgo station, where it would have had to have been to have caused the damage at the Pentagon.

Although there are other witnesses who claim the plane took the south path, they can be dismissed if they also claim absurd things, such as that the plane cartwheeled into the building, or if they were not in a position to see the things they claim to have seen. 

There is a zone of destruction heading towards the Pentagon, and into the building, that corresponds with a south side flight path.  Five light poles were destroyed, and the damage in the building lines up perfectly with those five light poles. 

Under most circumstances, physical evidence would trump eyewitness testimony.  But in this case, the crime scene was controlled by the primary suspect, tainting the credibility of the physical evidence.  In addition, there are many anomalies with the physical evidence. 

Right from the beginning, questions arose.  Where was the plane debris?  Photos taken immediately after the attack show no wings, tail or fuselage.  No luggage or bodies.  The damage to the building is inconsistent with the crash of an airliner with a 44 foot tall vertical stabilizer and 125 foot wingspan.

Even the downed light poles are suspicious.  Compared to a light pole that was knocked down by wind, and has a jagged edge where it broke at the base, the light poles downed on 9/11 appear to have been cut, neatly and cleanly.

This photo (below) clearly shows a long scratch mark on the asphalt where the 247 pound light pole -- that supposedly had been taken out of Lloyd England's windshield -- was dragged into position in front of his taxicab.

On top of this odd physical evidence, we now have 14 eyewitnesses who have stated that the plane was not where it would have needed to be to down the light poles and hit the Pentagon.

CIT is not the only group concluding that the plane didn’t hit the Pentagon.  Pilots for 9/11 Truth is a group of 200 aviation professionals who all agree that, according to the data released by the government, the government story is not correct. 

In August 2006, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released the Flight Data Recorder data for flight 77.  According to Rob Balsamo, founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, the last recorded altitude for the plane (one second before the alleged impact) shows an altitude of 480 feet above sea level.  The top of the Pentagon is 112 feet above sea level.  Given this data, the plane cleared the building with 368 feet to spare. The NTSB has refused to comment on this.  

For the contingent within the 9/11 truth movement that is convinced that a plane did hit the Pentagon, the most convincing evidence comes from the dozens of witnesses who believe they saw the plane hit the building.  Six of these witnesses are editors or reporters for USA Today, and all claim to have been on the same quarter mile stretch of Rt. 27, heading the same way at the moment of the attack, late to work at the USA Today building in Rosslyn, three miles away. 

In a ten minute video called “The USA Today Parade,” CIT has demonstrated that the Pentagon is not visible for most of that quarter mile stretch of Rt. 27.  With video taken in a car driving that same route, it is clear that the Pentagon only becomes visible at the point at which the plane would have been over or behind the car. For much of the route, the Pentagon is obscured by large, bushy trees.  CIT interviewed alleged witness to the Pentagon impact and USA Today editor Joel Sucherman on camera in his office.  Sucherman insists that he saw the Pentagon at a location which CIT’s video clearly shows does not have a view of the Pentagon. 

USA Today is owned by the Gannett company, which also owns Army Times, Air Force Times, Marine Corps Times and Navy Times.

In the 9/11 truth movement, CIT’s work has been controversial.  They are banned from posting on the largest 9/11 truth forum, 911blogger.  Recent threads demonstrate that 911blogger has a pronounced preference for the “yes, a plane hit the Pentagon” version of events, with frequent anonymous contributors vehemently defending that point of view. 

The primary criticism of CIT’s work is that all of their witnesses believe the plane impacted the building.  As I reported in my story about CIT in the April 2009 Rock Creek Free Press:

All of CIT’s witnesses also believe that the plane they saw hit the Pentagon, although this cannot be possible.  This fact has been used to dismiss CIT’s work as irrelevant, but it’s not a compelling argument.

Less than an hour earlier, America had been treated to the sight of the south tower of the World Trade Center being hit by a plane and exploding into a huge fireball.  Most people were aware that an attack was underway.  If they saw a jet heading directly towards the Pentagon, and next saw a massive fireball, it is doubtful that one person in a thousand would question whether the plane had crashed and caused the fireball.  To conclude that the fireball was caused by explosives pre-planted in one of the most heavily guarded buildings on the planet, in an intentional false flag attack to justify war, would require observers to have a degree of perspicacity that was extremely rare in the pre 9/11 world, and only slightly less rare now.

For those who actually saw the plane fly over the building, there was a convenient cover story:  the second plane that came along three mintues after the first and flew over the building.  Anyone who saw the truth of what happened would conclude that they were seeing the second plane. 

The attack at the Pentagon is best understood as a gigantic magic show.  How many of us have ever seen a fireball hundreds of feet in diameter?  I am sure that if I were to see one, my eyes would be riveted on it and for at least a few moments I’d be completely unaware of anything else in my environment.  This is the essence of the magician’s trade – with flourishes and fanfare, he makes you look where he wants you to look, so you never see him slip the card behind his ear or up his sleeve.  With the news media batting clean-up, only witnesses who confirmed the OCT were given airtime, and any doubters who were interviewed were simply edited out of the evening newscast. 

In an effort to hold media and government officials responsible for their evidence, CIT has created a new film, National Security Alert.  This 80 minute video compresses all of the CIT interviews into a concise and serious presentation (sans music) that summarizes their evidence clearly and soberly.  Their site will also contain a section where citizens can record which officials have received a copy of the video, and their response (or lack thereof).

CIT will be showing excerpts of National Security Alert and addressing the implications of their findings at a free conference in Arlington, VA called Deconstructing the Pentagon Attack. The conference will also feature Shelton Lankford, Lt. Col. USMC (retired), a fighter pilot with over 300 combat missions, 10,000 hours of flight time, and a recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross. As of publication, attendance by Rob Balsamo of Pilots for 9/11 Truth is unconfirmed.

Held at the NRECA Conference Center at 4301 Wilson Blvd, in Arlington, the event will run from 10 am to 2:30 pm on Saturday, July 11, and is sponsored by The Wisdom Fund. Both the conference and parking are free.

SCOTUS considers lifting limits on corporate campaign contributions

Even The New York Times calls this a "nightmare vision."  We just keep diving deeper and deeper into fascism, and if corporations are free to given unlimited quantities of cash to the candidates of their choice, we are past the point of even pretending to have free elections.

Of course this gets no attention on the Grey Lady's front page, where millions would see it.  Sexy pictures of Barack take precedence over the end of our republic.

The editorial in The New York Times starts:

With a little-noticed order last week, we fear the Supreme Court has set the stage for dismantling the longstanding ban on corporate spending in elections for president and Congress. If those restrictions are overturned, it would be a disaster for democracy.

The justices considered a case this term about an election-year documentary made by opponents of Hillary Clinton. The issue was whether the film could air in the 60 days before an election, a period during which the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law imposes particularly strict limits on election-related communication.

The case would have been easy to resolve on narrow grounds. Instead, the court declared that on Sept. 9 it would hear arguments on whether Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce — an important campaign finance precedent from 1990 — and parts of a more recent case should be overruled.

Austin upheld a law prohibiting corporations from spending their money to elect particular candidates. The Supreme Court rightly pointed out that corporations, as opposed to individuals, benefit from special laws, including tax advantages, that assist them in accumulating large amounts of money. The ban on their spending is needed to prevent the political process from being overwhelmed and corrupted. The Supreme Court has upheld the restriction repeatedly.

Continue here. 

Goldman Sachs: "great vampire squid... jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money"

There is no warm cranny in my heart for Matt Taibbi.  He penned one of the most viciously irrational hit jobs on the 9/11 truth movement ever.  But he has now written something of value:  a hit job on an operation that deserves it, Goldman Sachs.  Taibbi's article begins:

The first thing you need to know about Goldman Sachs is that it's everywhere. The world's most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.

Any attempt to construct a narrative around all the former Goldmanites in influential positions quickly becomes an absurd and pointless exercise, like trying to make a list of everything. What you need to know is the big picture: If America is circling the drain, Goldman Sachs has found a way to be that drain — an extremely unfortunate loophole in the system of Western democratic capitalism, which never foresaw that in a society governed passively by free markets and free elections, organized greed always defeats disorganized democracy.

Taibbi acknowledges that there's nothing the ordinary  (or even extraordinary) citizen can do about Goldman's massive rip-off of investors, homeowners, taxpayers and gasoline buyers.  Still, there is some satisfaction in knowing exactly how one is being screwed.  You're still being tortured, but the hood is off and you can watch while they disembowel you. 

The rest of this Rolling Stone article is here.

Webster Tarpley: Obama is more controlled by Wall St. than any previous president

Russia Today interviewed Webster Tarpley about Obama, the economic depression, and what we have to look forward to. (Spoiler: not much.)

Defense Department teaches that protests are terrorism

Anti-terrorism training materials used by the Department of Defense teach that public protests should be regarded as "low-level terrorism," according to a letter of complaint sent to the department by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, reports the Contra Costa Times.

Among the multiple-choice questions included in its Level 1 Anti-terrorism Awareness training course — an annual training requirement for all DOD personnel that is fulfilled through Web-based instruction — the department asks the following:

"Which of the following is an example of low-level terrorist activity?"

To answer correctly, the examinee must select "protests."

---

US News & World Report says to "round up hate promoters now..."

In an article titled "Round Up Hate-Promoters Now, Before Any More Holocaust Museum Attacks," US News & World Report writer Bonnie Erbe urges us to "round up promoters of hate before they kill again."

Does this include the institutionalized hatred of Muslims that is killing innocent Iraqis, Afghanis and Pakistanis by the hundreds of thousands?  Does this include blaming Muslims for attacking the Pentagon and World Trade Center on 9/11 when they did nothing of the kind?

Of course not.  The only hatred that Erbe cares about is hatred of Jews, which killed a man at the Holocaust Museum.  I am very sorry about his death, and condolences to his family.  But being in the wrong place at the wrong time does not make security guard Stephen Tyrone Johns a "national hero," and is no reason to institute a fascist dictatorship with the power to round up anyone who has expressed a view that the powers that be consider hateful. 

Clearly most Americans have no problem with the enormous hate crime of waging illegal and immoral war against innocent Muslims.  But one dead security guard?  Better dismantle the republic, and fast.

Did a plane really hit the Pentagon? These researchers say no, and their evidence is compelling.

For those who can't make the free presentation in Arlington on July 11, Citizen Investigation Team's evidence can be viewed here.

The Big Collapse Could Be Very Near

Passing along without comment.  I don't know enough about finance to verify the truth of what Wenzel says, but he sure sounds convincing.  Convincingly terrifying. 

from Global Research, by Robert Wenzel:

The end of the current financial system, as we know it, may be imminent. If you would have asked me even two weeks ago if collapse was imminent, I would have said it was highly unlikely, now I am saying it is possible. Bernanke may be able to patch things up short-term, if he is lucky, but in the long term the U.S. financial structure is in serious trouble. There is just too much Treasury debt that needs to be raised. An international panic out of Treasury securities, even a slow controlled panic, means the Fed will be the major buyer. This will ultimately mean record inflation.

And keep this in mind, we have never seen a collapse of a currency like the dollar. Even the hyperinflation during Germany's Wiemar Period can not serve as an example. Since the dollar is the reserve currency of most of the world, a panic out of the dollar means more dollars will return to the U.S. shores than any country has ever experienced.

Other countries have had collapsed currencies, but never in the history of world of finance has so much currency been held outside a country of issue that could come flying back, almost on a moments notice. If the panic out of the dollar starts, even if Bernanke stops printing money (unlikely), all the dollars flying back into the U.S. could cause a huge price inflation all on its own.

continue here.

Transcript of Richard Gage explaining controlled demolition on KMPH in Fresno

Is the dam beginning to break? 

In this seven minute interview, Richard Gage, an architect for 20 years, is given plenty of time to explain the overwhelming evidence that the World Trade Center buildings were not brought down by the impact of the planes and ordinary office fires.  Unlike the derision and condescension that typically greets 9/11 truth activists at mainstream outlets, these two anchors seem genuinely curious and open to the uncomfortable facts proving that explosives were detonated inside the Twin Towers. 

Transcript of Gage's entire interview on KMPH Fox 26 in Fresno, California is below:

Kim Stephens:  He’s an architect experienced in steel structures.  Now Richard Gage is touring the country with a controversial message about September 11. 

Kopi Sotiropulos:  Richard Gage is here to show us why he’s calling for a more thorough investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings.  Thank you so much for joining us.

Gage:  You’re very welcome, it’s great to be here.

Kopi Sotiropulos:  Well first of all give us a little bit more about your background.

Gage:  I’m an architect of twenty years, a member of the American Institute of Architects, and have been studying steel frame fire proof buildings for about that long. 

Kim Stephens: We ask that for clarification because as we get into this we want people to make sure that you’re not just somebody with a wacky idea, you come with some science to you.  What is the official reason for the collapse of the World Trade Center towers?

Gage:  Well we’re told that the planes hit the buildings, and there was an explosion and a fire, and about a hour and a half later, in the case of the north tower, the buildings collapsed due to structural weakening, due to the fires.  The problem is that we don’t have large gradual deformations associated with collapses.  And fires in high rises have never brought down a steel frame high rise building at all, ever.  And what we have, unfortunately, is the evidence in the twin towers and the third skyscraper to collapse that day, which most people don’t know anything about it.  We have the evidence of the ten key features of controlled demolition.  In the case of building seven, it collapses straight down into its own footprint, at free fall speed, in the first hundred feet.  It’s dropping, as you can see symmetrically, smoothly, at free fall speed, in the first hundred feet.  Two and a half seconds.  This is uncanny, there’s forty thousand tons of structural steel designed to resist this collapse. 

Bilderberg: Evil cabal or harmless old boys club?

Officially, the annual Bilderberg meeting doesn’t even happen.  There are no press releases, no coverage by the mainstream media, and no swarm of paparazzi outside the hotel door to catch the luminaries as they dash inside.  Timothy Geithners’s public schedule was oddly empty for two days, but if he was at Bilderberg, his staff is mum.

If Bilderberg really did happen in Greece last week, it should have been the media draw of the year.  When else can you find all the world’s richest people, plus all the world’s most powerful people, checking into a five star resort that is guarded by F-16s overhead and the Greek navy off the coast? 

(Yes, two intrepid reporters tried to get close to the action by taking the sea approach – only to be stopped three miles from shore by the Greek navy.)

Besides, if Bill Clinton, Ben Bernanke, Henry Kissinger, Condoleeza Rice, the King of Spain and the heads of Google, the Wall Street Journal and the World Bank did get together in one room, what on earth would they have to talk about?

It’s a question that has more than a few people concerned.

Mere fame will not bring an invite – you won’t find Britney Spears on the guest list.  Running a major corporation, university, media empire or a country – those are the kind of credentials required.

Legend has it that Bilderberg is a confab of rich and powerful conspirators plotting ways to fleece the unsuspecting public and thereby become even more rich and powerful.  There are reports that George W. Bush made an appearance at Bilderberg before taking office, as did Clinton prior to his successful bid for the presidency, and Tony Blair prior to becoming Prime Minister of Britain.  This has led to speculation that these leaders were not so much elected by the public, as appointed by the Bilderbergers. 

The Metropolitan of Glastonbury and Head of the British Orthodox Church believes the Bilderbergers represent a “criminal cabal of world Zionism and its efforts to set up a cruel world dictatorship under the headship of Lucifer.” 

But former British Cabinet Minister Lord Denis Healy, one of the founders of Bilderberg, said that was “crap,” and that the group’s aims were high-minded.  “Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless.  So we felt a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.”

A skeptical observer might note that after 55 years of Bilderberg meetings, wars and homelessness are still going strong.  What exactly has this coterie accomplished?  And if their goals are pure, why the overbearing secrecy?

One answer:  If anything more serious than who goes up next on the parasail is being negotiated, it’s a felony and a violation of the U.S Logan Act, which forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments.  A conviction, of which there have been zero, could bring a prison sentence of up to three years.   

There are reports that Bilderberg was responsible for both the EU and the Euro.  Paul Joseph Watson reported: “…Belgian viscount and current Bilderberg-chairman Étienne Davignon bragged that Bilderberg helped create the Euro by first introducing the policy agenda for a single currency in the early 1990’s. Bilderberg’s agenda for a European federal superstate and a single currency likely goes back even further. A BBC investigation uncovered documents from the early Bilderberg meetings which confirmed that the European Union was a brainchild of Bilderberg.”

There is also widespread speculation that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama met secretly at Bilderberg in Chantilly, VA last year.  Obama’s traveling press corps was loaded onto a plane that they assumed would also contain Obama; it wasn’t until the plane was heading down the runway for takeoff that the reporters realized they’d been conned.  They angrily confronted Obama’s spokesman Robert Gibbs, who stated obliquely: "Senator Obama had a desire to do some meetings, others had a desire to meet with him tonight in a private way and that is what we are doing."

Daniel Estulin, author of The True Story of the Bilderberg Group, reported that the 2009 discussion centered around a disagreement about how quickly the world economy should crash. According to Estulin’s sources, we are looking at “Either a prolonged, agonizing depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline and poverty … or an intense-but-shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable economic world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency.”

Estulin’s previous predictions, based on the same Bilderberg sources, have been eerily accurate.  He predicted the housing crash and the 2008 economic meltdown.  He says now that unemployment in the US will double by the end of the year, and that there will be another push to enact the Lisbon treaty, which is key to solidifying the power of the European Union as a superstate.  The Irish will be forced to vote on the treaty again in September or October, despite having already rejected it.

British comedy writer Charlie Skelton covered the 2009 meeting for the Guardian with daily dispatches from sunny Greece.  He started out in a light-hearted mood, captioning a photo of the car behind him with:  Tailed from the airport, by this and hundreds of other different cars at different stages. 

But his experience quickly soured, as he was followed, found evidence that his hotel room had been searched, and was arrested for taking a photo of the sea.  After repeated detentions and angry confrontations with Greek feds, he packed and fled the area.  In his final post, six days after his oh-so cheery beginning, he wrote: 

“My experience over the last several days in Greece has granted me a single, diamond-hard opinion…we must fight, fight, fight, now – right now, this second, with every cubic inch of our souls – to stop identity cards.

“I can tell you right now that the argument ‘If I've done nothing wrong, why would I worry about showing who I am?’ is hogwash. Worse than that, it's horse hockey. It's all about the power to ask, the obligation to show, the justification of one's existence, the power of the asker over the subservience of the asked.

“I don't care if you don't love liberty. For the love of yourself: fight identity cards. Don't let them happen. STOP IDENTITY CARDS. Stop identity cards. And while you're about it: stop identity cards. And that's all I have to say, you will be delighted to know, about Bilderberg 2009.”

A patriotic US Marine speaks out

He states "I always desired to serve my country, ensure basic freedoms and fight for justice and the American way. This had been my dream since childhood..."

Yet after his experiences in Afghanistand and Iraq, he concludes that none of the people he beat, harrassed and detained, none of the people whose bones he broke, were actually guilty of anything.  And now he has formed a group called Vets for Rethinking Afghanistan.  Here's his story:

I was on liberty in Australia, dancing at a club I can't remember sometime around midnight, when it happened. The music shut off and an announcement came on: "America is under attack. Head back to your ships." This was the worst--the impossible. This was September 11, 2001.

Back at my ship, ambulance sirens blared. Hundreds of Marines stood on deck, anxiously awaiting word. Someone said the Pentagon had been attacked. My platoon sergeant stood up and delivered a fiery speech filled with "No one [expletive] with America!" and "We're going to kick some ass!" Later that night, the same sergeant turned to me asked me if I was ready.

Without giving it a second thought, I replied, "This is what I joined for."

Flash forward to a few weeks ago, as I recalled those words testifying before Senator John Kerry and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I sat where a young Kerry was once seated as he awoke the nation to the grim realities of war in Vietnam. I explained to the committee that I always desired to serve my country, ensure basic freedoms and fight for justice and the American way. This had been my dream since childhood, a way to honor my Mexican immigrant parents who worked tirelessly to give my family a better life, a way out of an East Los Angeles neighborhood plagued by gang violence. Yet what I witnessed and experienced during a seven-month deployment in Afghanistan followed by another in Iraq has forever shattered this once noble ambition.

As an infantry rifleman in the Marines Corps, I saw so much of these wars through nightly patrols. We were trained to approach a point of interest on foot, coordinating with translators whose sole vested interest in supplying us intelligence was to earn money and aid. We would gather information that often proved faulty, and question locals to the point we felt comfortable conducting a raid. After receiving an order, we would ransack homes, destroying windows and doors, chairs and tables, families and lives--detaining and arresting anyone who seemed suspicious. The problem, of course, was that it was impossible to distinguish militant Taliban members or Al Qaeda from innocent civilians. Everyone became a suspect.

continue at Information Clearinghouse.

Video evidence that Lloyde England is lying to support the official story about the Pentagon attack on 9/11

For several years now, citizen investigators Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis have been laboring to alert the world to the truth about what happened at the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11/01.  My detailed article about their research is here. 

I reported last month that Ranke and Marquis (who call themselves Citizen Investigation Team, or CIT) were consolidating their hours of video evidence into a more concise format that edits all the lengthy interviews into a single 60 minute video called “National Security Alert.”

I spoke to Craig Ranke today; he told me that the new video is nearly complete.  As a bit of an appetizer, he has released a nine minute excerpt that focuses on the role of Lloyde England.  The new video has been posted at Rense as well as 911blogger and has already garnered 16,000 views on YouTube.

 

Here's some background from my previous post for those who need to be convinced that this video is worth their time to watch:

The most riveting segment in the CIT footage is of the interview with Lloyde England, a taxi cab driver who was photographed numerous times just after the attack.  In all the photos, England and his cab are on Route 27, on the bridge going over Columbia Pike.  The front windshield of his cab has a big hole in it and the cab is at a stop and straddling the lanes.  A broken light pole lies nearby. 

England’s story is that he was going 40 mph when he felt the jet go over head, and then the light pole came smashing through his front windshield.  He says he then skidded sideways to a stop, and that a stranger stopped and helped him remove the light pole from the windshield, and then left without ever giving his name, or even speaking a word.

England’s story is suspect because photos show the hood of his sedan untouched and gleaming like a mirror, although his front windshield was destroyed.  England is quite clear that it was not the smaller section at the top of the light pole that impaled his windshield, but the big, 40 foot, 247 pound pole.  He contends that after it pierced his windshield, with perhaps five feet of the top end of the pole inside the cab, that the other 35 feet stuck straight out into the air, not touching the hood of the cab. 

The question is, with the windshield destroyed, what held the pole up the in air?  CIT drove with England to his property in the country to inspect the cab.  They hypothesized that perhaps the narrow end of the pole had pierced the back seat or floorboards of the cab, holding it in place and not allowing it to touch the hood of the cab.  But their inspection showed that there was only an insignificant rip in the rear seat, and no damage to the floorboards.  Although the dashboard was damaged, no part of the hood, including the edge near the windshield, showed any damage.

What makes the story even more incredible is that England claims that as he was removing the pole from the windshield, he fell down, but managed, even as he was on the ground, to keep holding the pole in the air.  Remember that the pole is 40 feet long and weighs 247 pounds, while England appears to be about 65 years old. 

Pressed to explain how it can be that the pole never touched the hood of the sedan, England said only “The car speaks for itself.”  Unfortunately for England, the car seems to be saying that his account can not possibly be true.

In addition, with 13 witnesses saying that the plane went no where near those light poles, it seems clear that something else caused the damage to England’s windshield. 

The video with England validates CIT’s practice of keeping the camera rolling as much as possible, even during casual conversation, as the most damning statements from both England and his wife came out spontaneously and unexpectedly.  While Ranke and England’s wife were chatting at the Englands’ home, Ranke told her that they had determined that the jet never hit the Pentagon, but kept on going, and, amazingly, she agreed!  The audio is hard to hear and she then refused to say more, but her meaning was clear.  Mrs. England, who works for the FBI, also said that she knows why her husband’s car was not impounded as evidence, but wasn’t going to tell.

England spontaneously offered this damning statement:  “You gotta understand something.  When people do things and get away with it, you…eventually it’s gonna come to me, and when it comes to me, it’s gonna be so big, I can’t do nothing about it.”

CIT also kept the camera running during the 90 minute drive to see England’s car, and captured a few very interesting statements on tape.  Although England speaks generally and indirectly, in the context of a conversation about the attack at the Pentagon, his meaning is clear.  

England:  I wasn’t supposed to be involved with this, this is too big for me, man, this is a big thing.  This is a world thing happening, I’m a small man…I’m not supposed to be involved in this.  This is for other people, people who have money and all this kind of stuff. 

Ranke:  Your point that these people who have all the money… 

England:  This is their thing.

Ranke:  This is their event.

England:  This is for them.

Ranke:  Meaning they’re doing it for their own reasons…

England:  (with conviction)  That’s right.  I’m not supposed to be in it. 

-----------------------------

Ranke:  They must have planned it.

England:  It was planned.

-----------------------

England:  You know what history is?  It’s not the truth.  It’s “his story.”  Has nothing to do with the truth.

As someone who has been researching the 9/11 story for two years, and has experienced mockery, abuse and denials from the government and media, it was a thrill to hear someone who was directly involved in the cover-up to admit on tape that it was a big event, a world event, planned by rich people for their own reasons. 

Incredibly, once Ranke explained that 13 witnesses had all placed the jet at the north side of the Citgo station, on a trajectory that could not have knocked down the five light poles, England changed his story and declared that he was not where all the photographs show him to be, but actually well north of Columbia Pike – where no light poles were knocked down. 

Ranke showed England numerous photos of himself, his damaged cab and the downed light pole on the bridge over Columbia Pike.  Even faced with incontrovertible evidence of his exact location, England resolutely maintained that pictures don’t always tell the truth and that the accident with the light pole had taken place much further north.

After watching the 90 minute video of the interview with Lloyde England, the man is completely discredited.  Ranke points out that England may well be a victim himself, in that he may have been forced to tell the story of the pole impaling his windshield.  But his story is so incredible, and his protestations that he was not in the location where multiple photos and videos place him to be on that day are so absurd, that Lloyde England’s account now stands as perhaps the most vulnerable point in the edifice of lies that constitute the official story of the attack on the Pentagon.

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Map of the world with signatories to the Convention Against Torture. Dark green = signed and ratified.  Light green = signed but not ratified.  Grey = not signed.

This is the complete text of part 1.  Parts 2 and 3 deal with how the program is to be administered, and can be read here.

The USA is clearly in violation of this convention.  Who enforces it and what are they waiting for?

Article 1

1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

Article 2

1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

Army psychologist objects to participating in torture, a few days later she's dead

Alyssa Peterson worked only two nights in a torture facility in northwestern Iraq called "the cage," before objecting and being reassigned. 

A few days later, on September 15, 2003, she died from her own gun in what the Army is considering a suicide.  Her personal notebook, which was found with her body, was redacted (the contents not released). 

From Editor and Publisher:

"Army spokespersons for her unit have refused to describe the interrogation techniques Alyssa objected to. They say all records of those techniques have now been destroyed."

According to the official report on her death released the following year, she had earlier been "reprimanded" for showing "empathy" for the prisoners. One of the most moving parts of that report is: "She said that she did not know how to be two people; she ... could not be one person in the cage and another outside the wire."

Peterson was then assigned to the base gate, where she monitored Iraqi guards, and was sent to suicide prevention training. "But on the night of September 15th, 2003, Army investigators concluded she shot and killed herself with her service rifle," the documents disclose.

Her parents, who live in northern Arizona, stated that they never received any official documents corroborating the report issued by the Army. 

Alyssa was 27. 

Why won't the Army reveal the "techniques" that Alyssa objected to?  Why was her personal notebook redacted?   What are they afraid of?

The rich coughed up more dough under Reagan and Nixon than they will under Obama (graph)

Source: MoveOn.org

Who would have guessed that the most impassioned denunciation of torture would come from Fox News?

This clip of Shepard Smith moved me to tears.  After all the bullshit, all the lies, all the equivocating and justifying of those who intentionally inflicted extreme torment on those who have not been convicted of any crime -- after all that, to hear one man say definitively that "We are Americans, we do NOT torture," it was a glorious thing to hear.

In contrast, Cliff May, president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, comes off as lacking several crucial body parts:  spine, brain and heart. FDD is lousy with heartless neocons: Richard Perle, Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, Newt Gingrich. 

I hope Smith is not right now being tortured by Roger Ailes for speaking the truth.

Thank you Shepard Smith.

 

Journalist bets he can stand waterboarding for 15 seconds (Video)

A Playboy journalist bet he could withstand 15 seconds of waterboarding by a trained US soldier.  Watch to see how it turned out.