AG Holder Must Release Unredacted CIA I.G.Report

On page 51 of the CIA Office of Inspector General report on torture released today, we have this paragraph:





From the unredacted portion we can see that someone, in the course of interrogating Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, said "We're going to kill your children" if anything else happens in the US. Lest anyone think this was an idle threat, it should be noted that KSM was captured and interrogated in March, 2003. In that same month, this report appeared in The Telegraph:

Two young sons of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the suspected mastermind of the September 11 attacks, are being used by the CIA to force their father to talk.

Yousef al-Khalid, nine, and his brother, Abed al-Khalid, seven, were taken into custody in Pakistan last September when intelligence officers raided a flat in Karachi where their father had been hiding.

Since his children were captured about six months before he was, KSM would have known that the US had access to them.


The article continues:

Last night CIA interrogators confirmed that the boys were staying at a secret address where they were being encouraged to talk about their father's activities.

"We are handling them with kid gloves. After all, they are only little children," said one official, "but we need to know as much about their father's recent activities as possible. We have child psychologists on hand at all times and they are given the best of care."

Their father, Mohammed, 37, is being interrogated at the Bagram US military base in Afghanistan. He is being held in solitary confinement and subjected to "stress and duress"-style interrogation techniques.

We now know, of course, that KSM's "stress and duress" consisted of, among other things, being waterboarded 183 times.


But we can add even more context to the thought processes of those who orchestrated the torture of suspected terrorists. In 2005, John Yoo had this to say in a debate:

Doug Cassel: If the president deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?

John Yoo: No treaty.

 \

Doug Cassel: Also no law by Congress -- that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo...

John Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

Since Yoo authored some of the legal "justifications" for the interrogation processes and likely was aware of what was done with and to KSM's children, this statement becomes even more chilling. What is in the rest of the paragraph? Were the children hurt in any way? Was KSM forced to watch real or falsified mistreatment of them?

With so much of the relevant paragraph in the OIG report redacted, there is no way to know what else was discovered in the OIG investigation. It appears that the paragraph is based on a report from "an experienced Agency interrogator" who presumably was upset by what the other interrogators said. Note that each of the three times the other investigators are mentioned, there is a fairly long word in front of "investigators" that is redacted. The words "contractor" and "Blackwater" both seem about the right length and would fit the context of the paragraph. It appears that the large redaction in the paragraph begins with an additional statement attributed to one of the rogue interrogators. Was the interrogator telling KSM that the children were in US custody? If so, why was that redacted if that fact was already reported in the British press in 2003?


There will be no way to put this awful episode of torture behind us until we know where the children of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed are and if they have been mistreated while in US custody. As I pointed out this diary, two children of Aafia Siddiqui also are missing.

I call on Attorney General Holder to release the remainder of paragraph 95 of the OIG report and to provide a public report on the location and well being of all four children discussed here. No matter the crimes of their parents, innocent children should never be used as pawns by our government. The behavior disclosed so far is shocking and abhorrent. Unfortunately, the extensive redaction of this section and the continued silence from the government regarding these children raise the possibility that information that is significantly more shocking has been concealed.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

U.S. Interrogators In Favor of Crminal Investigation

The article below reflects what our source, a former Intel. operative, told us and it certainly fits with common sense which, unfortunately, isn't all that common in American anymore.

Support for a wide-ranging criminal investigation into the Bush administration's use of torture has grown to include a former top FBI interrogator and a career military intelligence officer with more than two decades of experience conducting interrogations.
   

Jack Cloonan, a former FBI security and counterterrorism expert who was assigned to the agency's elite Bin Laden Unit, and Col. Steve Kleinman, a career military intelligence officer recognized as one of the Defense Department's most effective interrogators, said ignoring clear-cut evidence of interrogation-related crimes would encourage more law-breaking in the future.

Cloonan and Kleinman, who conducted interrogations of terror suspects after 9/11, disputed claims by former CIA Director Michael Hayden and Republican lawmakers that a criminal investigation would damage intelligence gathering and could lead to another 9/11-type attack on the United States.

In an interview, Cloonan and Kleinman said Hayden and the lawmakers were sounding "false alarms" in an effort to keep serious crimes from being exposed. "What this is really about is cover your ass," Cloonan said. "To suggest [intelligence gathering] will come to a screeching halt if there were an investigation is not accurate."

   

Cloonan, who retired in 2002 after more than 25 years in the FBI, said he doesn't believe an investigation would lead to a terrorist attack. Kleinman, who most recently served as a senior adviser on a director of national intelligence-commissioned study on strategic interrogation, agreed.


"I'm a professional interrogator, I have 25 years of experience in this and I don't have any concern whatsoever that an investigation into how we conducted ourselves since 9/11 would in any way undermine our ability to continue gathering intelligence," Kleinman said.

Furthermore, Kleinman and Cloonan believe many of their colleagues in the intelligence community share their views. But many are unable to speak out publicly, Kleinman said, "because to do so is almost a career ender."

Kleinman and Cloonan added that the outside contractors and the interrogators, who lacked the training and experience, are the ones who saw the use of torture as a means to gain valuable information. Moreover, they are the ones who fear an investigation.


"The people who are true professionals don't see anything wrong with an investigation," Kleinman said. "I conducted interrogations in three separate military campaigns. I can look back if they called me in tomorrow and I would not even be thinking about getting liability insurance."

 

Investigation Opposed


Ex-CIA Director Hayden had a different view. At a panel discussion on the outsourcing of intelligence last Thursday, Hayden said an investigation, "no matter how narrowly defined," would undermine counterterrorism efforts.


"Continuing looking back, continuing to pull these good people through a knothole will teach people never to play to the edge, will teach people 'yeah I got an opinion from Justice and I know the President wants me to do it and the director [of the CIA] says it's a good thing and I know I'm capable of doing it but I just don't think so.'


"We will teach timidity to a workforce we need to be vigorous and active. And no matter how narrowly defined this look back might be it'll start pulling threads, you'll have a significant number of agency folks being pulled through this process, in my mind, to no good," he said.


A day earlier, nine Republican senators sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder saying a criminal investigation into the CIA's interrogation practices would jeopardize the "security for all Americans" and "chill future intelligence activities."


Cloonan, Kleinman and Matthew Alexander, who was the senior interrogator for the task force in Iraq that tracked down al-Qaeda-in-Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2006, sent a letter on Friday to the chairs of the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees calling for the creation of a bipartisan commission to "assess policy making that led to use of torture and cruelty in interrogations." ("Matthew Alexander" is a pseudonym used by the interrogator for security reasons.)


They wrote that a special counsel is an "important step forward" by reaffirming "the enduring power of our system of checks and balances."


"The prohibition on torture in this country is unequivocal," Cloonan, Alexander and Kleinman wrote. "To ignore evidence of criminal wrongdoing would incentivize future breaches of law."

However, they added that an investigation and the potential for prosecutions "of individuals who violated anti-torture statutes alone ... will not prevent policy makers from making similar mistakes in the future."

The veteran interrogators said an examination was needed into the problems created when "policy makers ignored the advice of experienced interrogators, counterterrorism experts and respected military leaders who warned that using torture and cruelty would be ineffective and counter-productive."

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers and his counterpart in the Senate, Patrick Leahy, have advocated a truth commission to look into the use of torture and other abuses that took place during the Bush administration.


But Leahy said he would not follow through on his plan without the support of Republicans, which he does not have, and Conyers's proposal never even gained the support of key Democrats. President Obama told lawmakers in closed-door meetings earlier this year that he did not support those efforts.

 
Heavy Costs


But Kleinman, Cloonan and Alexander said a serious investigation was needed because the Bush administration's policies "came with heavy costs."


"Key allies, in some instances, refused to share needed intelligence, terrorists attacks increased worldwide, and al Qaeda and like-minded groups recruited a new generation of Jihadists," they wrote.

"A nonpartisan, independent commission with subpoena power should assess the deeply flawed policy making framework behind the decision to permit torture and cruelty. Our system of checks and balances is designed to produce sound policy decisions which advance our strategic interests and are in accordance with our core values of due process."

Kleinman said he also was "disappointed" with a Washington Post op-ed by CIA Director Leon Panetta, who urged lawmakers to "move on" from talk of investigations and to resist focusing on the past.

"Every world-class intelligence organization look at where they come from to get better," Kleinman said. "I think it's critical a lot of people say this is a witch hunt. I think they're wrong."

Cloonan and Kleinman also doubted claims, like those made by Dick Cheney, that the use of torture produced actionable intelligence, the type that helped prevent another terrorist attack on US soil and "saved hundreds of thousands of lives," to quote the former vice president.

Cloonan said he had a "long conversation" with members of the Senate Intelligence Committee after he testified before the panel last year and was told that there isn't a smoking-gun document that will show torture was effective on any of the high-value detainees who were brutally tortured.


Kleinman noted that the news media reported over the weekend that the CIA's inspector general report will show that agency interrogators conducted a mock execution, brandishing a gun and a power drill during the interrogation of at least one detainee.


"I defy anybody in the intelligence community to bring forward the research, the thoughtful objective analysis that purports to support that mock executions is a consistent and effective means of getting accurate information from people," Kleinman said. "Show me the studies that say causing a great deal of fear is consistently successful in getting useful information. 'Cause there won't be.


"What people are doing is they're just scrambling because they don't know what else to do. They're scrambling for some sort of technique and they're just using things that they think 'well that will scare me so it must scare them. It would make me talk so it must make them talk.'


"Sure, they'll talk. But they're talking because they are afraid they are going to die. And they will say anything to keep from dying."

Read On »

---

By Jason Leopold, the editor in chief of The Public Record, www.pubrecord.org.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Sibel Edmond's Long Awaited Testimony.

Edmonds is considered highly credible even by Gopers lke Grassley.

By Brad Friedman on 8/25/2009 4:52AM  

SIBEL EDMONDS' DEPOSITION: VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT RELEASED

Long-gagged FBI whistleblower's full under-oath testimony from Ohio election case, details Congressional blackmail, bribery, espionage, infiltration, more...

[Ed Note: PART 1 of video now fixed. Earlier version wasn't playing correctly. Apologies.]


Just over two weeks ago, FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds was finally allowed to speak about much of what the Bush Administration spent years trying to keep her from discussing publicly on the record. Twice gagged by the Bush Dept. of Justice's invocation of the so-called "State Secrets Privilege," Edmonds has been attempting to tell her story, about the crimes she became aware of while working for the FBI, for years.


Thanks to a subpoena issued by the campaign of Ohio's 2nd District Democratic U.S. Congressional candidate David Krikorian, her remarkable allegations of blackmail, bribery, espionage, infiltration, and criminal conspiracy by current and former members of the U.S. Congress, high-ranking State and Defense Department officials, and agents of the government of Turkey are seen and heard here, in full, for the first time, in her under-oath deposition. Both the complete video tape and transcript of the deposition follow below.


Though there was much concern, prior to her testimony, that the Obama Dept. of Justice might re-invoke the "State Secrets Privilege" to keep her from speaking, they did not do so. Nor did they choose to be present at the Washington D.C. deposition.

The BRAD BLOG covered details of some of Edmonds' startling disclosures made during the deposition, as it happened, in our live blog coverage from August 8th. The deposition included criminal allegations against specifically named members of Congress. Among those named by Edmonds as part of a broad criminal conspiracy: Reps. Dennis Hastert (R-IL), Dan Burton (R-IN), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Bob Livingston (R-LA), Stephen Solarz (D-NY), Tom Lantos (D-CA), as well as an unnamed, still-serving Congresswoman (D) said to have been secretly videotaped, for blackmail purposes, during a lesbian affair.

High-ranking officials from the Bush Administration named in her testimony, as part of the criminal conspiracy on behalf of agents of the Government of Turkey, include Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Marc Grossman, and others.

During the deposition --- which we are still going through ourselves --- Edmonds discusses covert "activities" by Turkish entities "that would involve trying to obtain very sensitive, classified, highly classified U.S. intelligence information, weapons technology information, classified Congressional records...recruiting key U.S. individuals with access to highly sensitive information, blackmailing, bribery."


Speaking about current members of Congress during a break in the testimony, Krikorian told The BRAD BLOG that "for people in power situations in the United States, who know about this information, if they don't take action against it, in my opinion, it's negligence." (More video statements from Krikorian, Edmonds and attorneys from all parties, taped before, during, and after the 8/8/09 testimony, are available here.)


Edmonds' on-the-record disclosures also include bombshell details concerning outed covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson's front company, Brewster Jennings. Edmonds alleges the front company had actually been shut down in August of 2001 --- three years prior to Bob Novak's public disclosure of the covert operative's identity --- following a tip-off to a wire-tap target about the true nature of the CIA front company. The cover was blown, Edmonds alleges, by Marc Grossman, who was, at the time, the third highest-ranking official in the U.S. State Department. Prior to that, Grossman served as ambassador to Turkey. He now works "for a Turkish company called Ihals Holding," according to Edmonds' testimony.

An unclassified FBI Inspector General's report, released on her case in 2005, declared Edmonds' classified allegations to be "credible," "serious," and "warrant[ing] a thorough and careful review by the FBI." In 2002, Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), then the senior members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, co-wrote letters on Edmonds' behalf to Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert Mueller, and DoJ Inspector General Glenn A. Fine, calling on all of them to take action in respect to her allegations. And in a 2002 60 Minutes report on Edmonds' case, Grassley noted: "Absolutely, she's credible...And the reason I feel she's very credible is because people within the FBI have corroborated a lot of her story."

The 8/8/09 deposition was brought by Krikorian as part of his defense in a case filed against him before the Ohio Election Commission (OEC) by Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH). The 2nd district Congresswoman has accused Krikorian, an Armenian-American who ran against her as an independent in 2008, of "false statements" during the campaign last year alleging that she had accepted "blood money" from Turkish interests. Krikorian says that Schmidt, co-chair of the Congressional Turkish Committee, accepted more money from Turkish interests during last year's campaign than any other member of Congress, despite few, if any, ethnic Turks among her local constituency. He has suggested she may have been instrumental in helping to hold off a Congressional vote on a long-proposed, much-disputed resolution declaring the deaths of 1.5 million Armenians during WWI as a "genocide" by the Turks.


Edmonds herself happens to be a Turkish-American, though she was recently attacked by the Turkish Lobby, following her long-sought, long-blocked testimony.


The complete transcript of Sibel Edmonds' under-oath testimony, may now be downloaded here [PDF]. The complete video-taped testimony follows, in five parts, below...


PART 1 (appx. 51 mins) - Direct
{Ed Note: This video now fixed. Apologies for earlier, non-playing version!} PART 2 (appx. 35 mins) - Direct continues PART 3 (appx. 17 mins) - Direct continues PART 4 (appx. 43 mins) - Cross PART 5 (appx. 54 mins) - Redirect & Recross

* * *

Recently related at The BRAD BLOG...

• 8/5/09: Sibel Edmonds Subpoenaed, To 'Break' Gag Order
• 8/8/09: EDMONDS UNDER OATH: BLACKMAIL, BRIBERY, ESPIONAGE BOMBSHELLS
• 8/9/09: VIDEO: Whistles Blow - Scenes From Outside Deposition
• 8/12/09: House Candidate on Edmonds Depo, Google Blocks 'Denial' Ads
• 8/14/09: Turkish Lobby 'Declares War' on Sibel Edmonds Following Under Oath Deposition
• 8/14/09: Several Charges Dropped in OH Election Case After Tetsimony

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

When Will The GOP Get It?

 A policy of torture written and administered by the government of the U.S.A. has nothing to do with the actions of the terrorists accused but who can never be found guilty of terrorism, because they cannot be tried after they are tortured.

It says more about who we are than it does about those who stand accused of committing the crimes of 9/11. This is an issue of criminality and outrageous behavior by the highest elected and appointed officials in the U.S. government. For the sakes of our own souls we must demand accountability; REAL ACCOUNTABILITY, for crimes committed in our names and with our blood and treasure. 

Our laws are not just pretty words for good-times, to be shunted aside in times of national stress. It is during times of national stress that the people of the nation must keep a vigilant eye on power grabs which can easily be used to rob us of our Constitutional Rights.

Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona is one of nine senators who signed a letter sent to Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday urging him not to appoint a special counsel to investigate torture.
   

Nine Republican lawmakers sent a letter to Eric Holder on Wednesday saying the US could face a terrorist attack if the attorney general appoints a special prosecutor to investigate the CIA's use of torture against "war on terror" suspects.

If there is such an attack, these law-makers should be held an questioned, as they seem to have some kind of prior knowledge that they do not wish to share with the rest of us.

Holder is under pressure to resist launching a criminal probe, even one limited to rogue CIA interrogators. At the same time, he is facing mounting pressure from some prominent Democrats and civil liberties and human rights groups to not only sign off on a criminal investigation, but to expand it to include top Bush administration officials.

Take the investigation where it leads, Mr. Holder. In no way should underlings be held accountable if it is found that they were acting under orders they were led to believe were within the law.

The latest correspondence came on Wednesday in a letter to the attorney general that said an investigation into the CIA's interrogation practices, no matter how limited in scope, would jeopardize the "security for all Americans, chill future intelligence activities," and could "leave us more vulnerable to attack."


The senators resorted to fear-mongering, invoking the terrorist attacks on 9/11 to try and dissuade Holder:
   

"We are deeply concerned by recent news reports that you are 'poised to appoint a special prosecutor' to investigate CIA officials who interrogated al Qaeda terrorists. Such an investigation could have a number of serious consequences, not just for the honorable members of the intelligence community, but also for the security of all Americans," the letter said.


The letter was sent to Holder by Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona, Sen. Kit Bond (R-Missouri), vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and was also signed by Sens. Richard Burr (R-North Carolina), Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia), Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).


"The 9/11 Commission emphasized that keeping our country safe from foreign attack requires that the Justice Department work cooperatively with the intelligence community, but the appointment of a special prosecutor would irresponsibly and unnecessarily drive a wedge between the two ...


"We will not know the lost opportunities to prevent attacks, the policies to protect the nation left on the table, due to fear of future policy disagreement being expressed through an indictment. It is hard to imagine how the Justice Department could take that risk after September 11, given that the foremost duty of the Department is to protect Americans."


The timing of the letter coincides with the expected public release next Monday of a 2004 CIA inspector general's report that called into question the legality of the Bush administration's interrogation program.


Heavily redacted portions of Helgerson's 200-page report were released to the ACLU in May 2008 in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, but the ACLU appealed the Bush administration's extensive deletions and the Obama administration responded to that appeal with a promise to review the materials at issue and declassify, at the very least, portions of it to the civil liberties group.


The Justice Department has delayed turning over the report three times since then. Last month, a federal court judge gave the CIA until August 24 to declassify the report.


Amrit Singh, an ACLU staff attorney, said on Wednesday she believes the CIA will turn over the report next week, but she did not know whether it would be redacted yet again when released.


The secret findings of CIA Inspector General John Helgerson led to eight criminal referrals to the Justice Department for homicide and other misconduct, but those cases languished as Vice President Dick Cheney is said to have intervened to constrain Helgerson's inquiries.


His report reportedly says the techniques used on the prisoners "appeared to constitute cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, as defined by the International Convention Against Torture."


Holder started to consider the need to appoint a special counsel to conduct a criminal investigation after he read Helgerson's findings, according to published reports.


The Republican senators, in their letter to Holder on Wednesday, said the CIA IG report "has been available to the Justice Department for more than five years" and should not be used as a basis to "justify" the appointment of a special prosecutor.


The IG report has "been available to the Justice Department for more than five years," the senators wrote. "Three former Attorneys General and numerous career prosecutors have examined the findings of that report and other evidence and determined that that facts do not support criminal prosecutions.


"It is difficult to understand what rationale could drive the Justice Department to now reverse course, reopen a five-year-old matter, and tarnish the careers, reputations, and lives of intelligence community professionals ...


"The intelligence community will be left to wonder whether actions taken today in the interest of national security will be subject to legal recriminations when the political winds shift. Indeed, there is a substantial risk that the mere prospect of criminal liability for terrorist interrogations is already impending our intelligence efforts, as demonstrated from the fact that CIA officials increasingly feel compelled to obtain legal defense insurance."


The senators are wrong. Jane Mayer, in her book "The Dark Side," said there was a mountain of evidence to support prosecutions and a belief by some "insiders that [Helgerson's investigation] would end with criminal charges for abusive interrogations."


But top Justice Department officials, including former head of the criminal division Michael Chertoff, his deputy Alice Fisher and Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, allowed the cases to languish and may have even scuttled the probes to protect the Bush White House.


McNulty resigned in disgrace two years ago and is under scrutiny by a special prosecutor investigating the firings of nine US attorneys. McNulty faces obstruction of justice and perjury charges related to his February 2007 testimony to Congress about the ordeal.


In an interview with Harper's magazine last year, Mayer said Helgerson "investigated several alleged homicides involving CIA detainees, and that Helgerson's office forwarded several to the Justice Department for further consideration and potential prosecution.


"The only case so far that has been prosecuted in the criminal courts is that involving David Passaro - a low-level CIA contractor, not a full official in the Agency. Why have there been no charges filed? It's a question to which one would expect that Congress and the public would like some answers.


"Sources suggested to me that, as you imply, it is highly uncomfortable for top Bush Justice officials to prosecute these cases because, inevitably, it means shining a light on what those same officials sanctioned. Chertoff's role in particular seems ripe for investigation. Alice Fisher's role also seems of interest. Much remains to be uncovered."


Mayer also reported that another possible reason that the Justice Department investigations went nowhere was that Vice President Cheney intervened and demanded that Helgerson meet with him privately about his investigation. Mayer characterized Cheney's interaction with Helgerson as highly unusual.


Cheney's "reaction to this first, carefully documented in-house study concluding that the CIA's secret program was most likely criminal was to summon the Inspector General to his office for a private chat," Mayer wrote in her book "The Dark Side."


  "The Inspector General is supposed to function as an independent overseer, free from political pressure, but Cheney summoned the CIA Inspector General more than once to his office."
    "Cheney loomed over everything," one former CIA officer told Mayer. "The whole IG's office was completely politicized. They were working hand in glove with the White House."
   

In their letter, the senators also said "media reports also suggest that the interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), the mastermind of the September 11 attacks, would be a primary focus of the investigation that you envision."


Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in the span of a single month, far above the legal limit imposed by the August 2002 torture memos. Helgerson, Mayer wrote in her book, "had serious questions about the agency's mistreatment of dozens more, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed."


The Republican lawmakers said, "the interrogation of KSM, and others like him, produced information that was absolutely vital to apprehending other al Qaeda terrorists and preventing additional attacks on the United States."


They then go on to blame the Obama administration for failing to provide justice for the victims of 9/11.


"It is ironic that the Obama Administration, which has delayed justice for the victims of September 11 by suspending the trial of KSM, may soon be charging ahead to prosecute the very CIA officials who obtained critical information from him," the Republican lawmakers wrote. "That KSM's treatment is receiving more prompt attention from the Justice Department than his depraved acts cannot be justified."
   

On the other end of the political spectrum, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat and chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, said in a letter to Holder on August 4 that if he does appoint a special counsel to probe the Bush administration's program of torture, it must include the top officials who created and implemented the policy.
   

"There simply is no legal, moral or principled reason to insulate those who authorized the torture of detainees, either through legal reasoning or other policy directive, from investigation," Nadler wrote.


"First, such an investigation would fail to consider the possible violation of laws by high-ranking officials and lawyers who, through legal advice or otherwise, may have authorized torture," Nadler wrote.


"This country has been instrumental in establishing the principle that high-ranking officials and lawyers who use legal reasoning to justify or otherwise authorize war crimes can, and should, be held legally accountable. The ban on torture is absolute and we have a legal obligation to investigate torture and all of those who may have been party to its use."


Nadler, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and about a dozen other Democrats on the committee sent a similar letter to Holder earlier this year.


President Obama has already stated numerous times that he does not support a truth commission or any effort that would result in looking "backwards" into the Bush administration's policies.


Considering the backlash the Obama administration and Democrats faced from their Republican colleagues this month over a proposal to reform the health care industry, and the extreme partisanship over Obama's domestic policies in general, it's entirely possible that the fear-mongering in the letter sent to Holder on Wednesday could have an impact on his decision.


At the Netroots Nation conference last week in Pittsburgh, Nadler said, "As difficult and traumatic" a criminal investigation "may be for the nation we must proceed."

»

---

Jason Leopold is editor in chief of The Public Record, www.pubrecord.org.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Good Journey, Uncle Teddy

This morning, I awoke to the news that Teddy Kennedy had died. Even though this came as no shock, given his condition, his death did make for a sad day. As President Obama said, it was a day we all knew was coming.....a day we all dreaded.

At age 60, I cannot really remember a time when there wasn't a Kennedy in power. Before I was an independent, I was a Kennedy Democrat. When Bobby was killed, I became an independent but, nevertheless, a constituent-at-large of Teddy's. 

He heard from me far more often than senators of the many states in which I have lived. He always answered although I never lived in Mass. 

Teddy's death was the first of the Kennedy brothers' did not come as a shock, with the exception of Joe Jr., whom I never knew. 

Our very best to Vicki and the kids. We share your grief as we shared Teddy's when his brothers were killed. 

Without Teddy, I feel lost. 

I have a deadly cancer, squamous cell carcinoma. Though it is in remission, the prognosis is not good. When I awoke to the news of Teddy's death this morning, I said, "Good journey, Uncle Teddy, I will see you soon."

In many ways I hope that I will. Teddy never gave up. I doubt I have his courage or will. 

God bless you, Teddy. Thank you for standing up for us all these years. I do hope I will see you and your bothers soon.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Southern Povery Law Firm: Troubling Uptick In Militia Activity

There was a time that militias were necessary for the defense of our young country. Most of the militia activity in recent history threatens the national welfare and what we believe is soul of our country: equal rights under the constitution, for all Americans and legal residents of the nation among other truly moral issues. 

Equally troubling, is the racist tint of the current movement, ironically called the "patriot movement," caused, it is believed, by the election of a black president.  After what the heroes of the civil rights movement of the late '50s and 60s, both black and white, went through to try to guarantee simple human rights and civil rights under our constitution, such as the right to vote, this development is nothing less that nauseatingly frightening!

To those of us who were politically active in the civil rights movement this development causes feelings of anger and of being fed up with having to "fight" the same battles over and over again simply to fulfill the promises of the founding of a nation based on freedom and basic human rights. 

Our country was founded on such high principles that even the founders themselves could not live up to its promise. Over the decades, we have struggled to live as they could not; more in the light of our founding ideas and principles. We have, at times, failed and have, at other times, succeeded. 

Still, it is apparent that we must continue the struggle to move beyond fear and hatred. Yes, the struggle continues to live according to the whispering of the better angels of our nature. It is not always easy but it is essential not only for the soul of our nation but for our own spiritual well-being as well.

We should never forget the lesson of WWII Germany. If we are not willing to stand for the basic human rights of our fellow citizens, for their freedom, as well as our own, we will have only ourselves to blame when our very lives are threatened by the fear and hatred of others. 

We are either all free and are guaranteed the same civil rights or we are not. 

The Southern Poverty Law Firm has stood for freedom from intimidation, and worse, for many years now and they deserve our support in whatever form we can offer it.

	The Militia Movement The Second Wave The return of the militias and the larger anti-government 'Patriot' movement Nativists to 'Patriots' Nativist vigilantes increasingly adopting the ideas of the 'Patriot' movement Terror from the Right 75 plots, conspiracies and racist rampages since Oklahoma City Download the report (PDF) The 1990s saw the rise and fall of the virulently anti-government "Patriot" movement, made up of paramilitary militias, tax defiers and so-called "sovereign citizens." Sparked by a combination of anger at the federal government and the deaths of political dissenters at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and Waco, Texas, the movement took off in the middle of the decade and continued to grow even after 168 people were left dead by the 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City's federal building — an attack, the deadliest ever by domestic U.S. terrorists, carried out by men steeped in the rhetoric and conspiracy theories of the militias. In the years that followed, a truly remarkable number of criminal plots came out of the movement. But by early this century, the Patriots had largely faded, weakened by systematic prosecutions, aversion to growing violence, and a new, highly conservative president. They're back. Almost a decade after largely disappearing from public view, right-wing militias, ideologically driven tax defiers and sovereign citizens are appearing in large numbers around the country. "Paper terrorism" — the use of property liens and citizens' "courts" to harass enemies — is on the rise. And once-popular militia conspiracy theories are making the rounds again, this time accompanied by nativist theories about secret Mexican plans to "reconquer" the American Southwest. One law enforcement agency has found 50 new militia training groups — one of them made up of present and former police officers and soldiers.   Authorities around the country are reporting a worrying uptick in Patriot activities and propaganda. "This is the most significant growth we've seen in 10 to 12 years," says one. "All it's lacking is a spark. I think it's only a matter of time before you see threats and violence." A key difference this time is that the federal government — the entity that almost the entire radical right views as its primary enemy — is headed by a black man. That, coupled with high levels of non-white immigration and a decline in the percentage of whites overall in America, has helped to racialize the Patriot movement, which in the past was not primarily motivated by race hate. One result has been a remarkable rash of domestic terror incidents since the presidential campaign, most of them related to anger over the election of Barack Obama. At the same time, ostensibly mainstream politicians and media pundits have helped to spread Patriot and related propaganda, from conspiracy theories about a secret network of U.S. concentration camps to wholly unsubstantiated claims about the president's country of birth. Fifteen years ago, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote then-Attorney General Janet Reno to warn about extremists in the militia movement, saying that the "mixture of armed groups and those who hate" was "a recipe for disaster." Just six months later, Oklahoma City's federal building was bombed. Today, the Patriot movement may not have the white-hot fury that it did in the 1990s. But the movement clearly is growing again, and Americans, in particular law enforcement officers, need to take the dangers it presents seriously. That is equally true for the politicians, pundits and preachers who, through pandering or ignorance, abet the growth of a movement marked by a proven predilection for violence.   Page:  1   2   3

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

SPLC Report: Return of the Militias

The Militia Movement The Second Wave The return of the militias and the larger antigovernment 'Patriot' movement Nativists to 'Patriots' Nativist vigilantes increasingly adopting the ideas of the 'Patriot' movement Terror from the Right 75 plots, conspiracies and racist rampages since Oklahoma City Download the report (PDF) The 1990s saw the rise and fall of the virulently antigovernment "Patriot" movement, made up of paramilitary militias, tax defiers and so-called "sovereign citizens." Sparked by a combination of anger at the federal government and the deaths of political dissenters at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and Waco, Texas, the movement took off in the middle of the decade and continued to grow even after 168 people were left dead by the 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City's federal building — an attack, the deadliest ever by domestic U.S. terrorists, carried out by men steeped in the rhetoric and conspiracy theories of the militias. In the years that followed, a truly remarkable number of criminal plots came out of the movement. But by early this century, the Patriots had largely faded, weakened by systematic prosecutions, aversion to growing violence, and a new, highly conservative president. They're back. Almost a decade after largely disappearing from public view, right-wing militias, ideologically driven tax defiers and sovereign citizens are appearing in large numbers around the country. "Paper terrorism" — the use of property liens and citizens' "courts" to harass enemies — is on the rise. And once-popular militia conspiracy theories are making the rounds again, this time accompanied by nativist theories about secret Mexican plans to "reconquer" the American Southwest. One law enforcement agency has found 50 new militia training groups — one of them made up of present and former police officers and soldiers. Authorities around the country are reporting a worrying uptick in Patriot activities and propaganda. "This is the most significant growth we've seen in 10 to 12 years," says one. "All it's lacking is a spark. I think it's only a matter of time before you see threats and violence." A key difference this time is that the federal government — the entity that almost the entire radical right views as its primary enemy — is headed by a black man. That, coupled with high levels of non-white immigration and a decline in the percentage of whites overall in America, has helped to racialize the Patriot movement, which in the past was not primarily motivated by race hate. One result has been a remarkable rash of domestic terror incidents since the presidential campaign, most of them related to anger over the election of Barack Obama. At the same time, ostensibly mainstream politicians and media pundits have helped to spread Patriot and related propaganda, from conspiracy theories about a secret network of U.S. concentration camps to wholly unsubstantiated claims about the president's country of birth. Fifteen years ago, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote then-Attorney General Janet Reno to warn about extremists in the militia movement, saying that the "mixture of armed groups and those who hate" was "a recipe for disaster." Just six months later, Oklahoma City's federal building was bombed. Today, the Patriot movement may not have the white-hot fury that it did in the 1990s. But the movement clearly is growing again, and Americans, in particular law enforcement officers, need to take the dangers it presents seriously. That is equally true for the politicians, pundits and preachers who, through pandering or ignorance, abet the growth of a movement marked by a proven predilection for violence.   Page:  1   2   3
		Southern Poverty Law Center 400 Washington Ave. Montgomery, AL 36104 Unattributed reproduction of material from any SPLCenter.org page is strictly prohibited. © Copyright 2009 Southern Poverty Law Center Contact | Privacy Policy | Copyright Statement

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

9/11/01: Still there are valid questions

Pelican Independents have varying views on this issue, but everyone thinks there should be an independent investigation because we have seen enough evidence, over the ensuing years, to warrant such an investigation. Whatever the truth is, there is certainly enough evidence that top members of the Bush administration are, at least, guilty of criminal negligence before 9/11/01 and of using terror to further their political agenda after 9/11/01. 

None of us believes that Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda are innocent in the events of 9/11/01, yet no one believes they had anything to do with the anthrax attacks, which began only one week after the events of 9/11/01, though the public was not made aware of it.  Tom Ridge stated that the death of a Florida reporter was not a terror attack.


Judicial Watch, hardly a left-wing organization, had enough evidence that White House staffers, mostly staffers working for Dick Cheney and the V.P himself, began taking Cipro on the evening of 9/11/01. J.W asked the White House to confirm or deny those reports and were ignored. Cheney has yet to deny those accusations. The very fact that neither Cheney nor Bush could barely utter a sentence without the words 9/11 attacks for years after the attacks on NYC and the Pentagon but never mentioned the anthrax attacks, which were directed only at Democratic leadership in Congress and news media considered to the liberal by, probably, half of Americans, gives us pause. 

The anthrax sent to Democratic leadership was, indeed, weaponized. So, what we had was an attempt at assassination. Assassination attempts should be considered every bit as serious as the attacks on NYC and D.C., yet anthrax went unmentioned by the Bush administration with the exception of the DOJ going after an innocent man, wasting valuable time. None of us believe that the man finally blamed, a man who committed suicide and therefore cannot defend himself, had anything to do with the attacks, or if he did, he wasn't alone. We were impressed by the fact that all of his colleagues defended him and stated that they do not believe him guilty of sending weaponized anthrax to congressional leaders. A colleague of mine once said, "There is nothing more frightening than falling into the hands of one's own government." I would add, "crazy-making." Most Americans have no idea what it's like when the government comes after you, whether you are guilty or innocent. I'm sure that after what happened to the first man accused, the second man knew he didn't stand a chance.


The timing of the attacks on Congress is also interesting. They came at a time when Congress was debating the Patriot Act, one of the most anti-American Acts ever passed by Congress. Within a day or so after the attacks became public knowledge, senate offices were closed and members did not even have access to their offices before they had to vote on an Act of Congress, no small thing, that few even read. As the old saying goes, "timing is everything." 

It is in hindsight, after other politically convenient use of terror alerts and other actions have come to light, that we have a tendency to not believe anything various members of the Bush administration have to say about anything. 

Will we ever know for sure? I doubt it. If the truth ever does come out, it will be years from now and no one will care. Of course, if the 9/11 truthers are right, it will have been the Bush administration that caused the downfall of the U.S. as an empire ( a good thing) and probably as a nation (not a good thing).

9/11 mind swell

By Joel S. Hirschhorn Online Journal Contributing Writer Aug 14, 2009, 00:24

As we approach the eighth anniversary of 9/11 consider this paradox. In the post 9-11 years, the scientific evidence for disbelieving the official government story has mounted incredibly. And the number of highly respected and credentialed professionals challenging the official story has similarly expanded.

Yet, to the considerable disappointment of the international 9/11 truth movement, the objective fact is that there are no widespread, loud demands for a new government-backed 9/11 investigation. The 9/11 truth movement is the epitome of a marginalized movement, one that never goes away despite not achieving truly meaningful results, which in this case means replacing official lies with official truth. What has gone wrong?

Akin to the definition of insanity, the hallmark of entrenched but marginalized movements is that they continue to pursue exactly the same strategy and tactics that have failed to produce solid results. They indulge themselves with self-delusion, defensive thinking and acting as if the world at large must surely and finally wake up, see the light and embrace the Truth. Years and, potentially, decades go by, but this quixotic status quo remains embedded, as if set in intellectual concrete. There is no brain tumor to blame. Nor any mass hypnosis of true believers to prove. There is just monumental disinterest among the dominant culture, political establishment and the broad public that is far more engaged with other issues, problems and movements.

The 9/11 truth movement, at best, gets meager public attention when it is derided and insulted, used as an example of persistent conspiratorial insanity.

Make no mistake; I concluded a few years back, after using my professional engineering and materials science background to study the evidence, that the official government story is a lie. As a former full professor of engineering, I firmly believe that elements of the US government were involved with contributing to (not just allowing) the 9/11 tragedy, but that does not necessarily eliminate the role of those terrorists publicly blamed for the events. Science, logic, evidence and critical thinking told me this.

Who should we blame for the failure of the 9/11 truth movement to fix the historical record and, better yet, identify those in the government who turned 9/11 into an excuse for going to war, getting them indicted, prosecuted, and punished for their murderous acts?

It is too easy to blame the mainstream media and political establishment for refusing to demand and pursue a truly comprehensive and credible independent scientific and engineering investigation. President Obama with his tenacious belief in looking forward, not backward, exemplifies a national mindset to avoid the painful search for truth and justice that could produce still more public disillusionment with government and feed the belief that American democracy is weak at best, and delusional at worst.

Marginalized movements always face competition for public attention. There are always countless national issues and problems that feed new movements and distract the public. There have been many since 9/11, not the least of which was the last presidential campaign and then the painful economic recession, and now the right-wing attacks on health care reform. The 9/11 truth movement illustrates a total failure to compete successfully with other events and movements.

This can be explained in several ways. The 9/11 movement has not been able to articulate enough benefits to the public from disbelieving the official government story and pursuing a new investigation. What might ordinary Americans gain? Would proof-positive of government involvement make them feel better, more secure, and more patriotic? Apparently not. In fact, just the opposite. By its very nature, the 9/11 issue threatens many things by discovering the truth: still less confidence in the US political system, government and public officials. Still more reason to ponder the incredible loss of life and national wealth in pursuing the Iraq war. In other words, revealing 9/11 truth offers the specter of a huge national bummer. Conversely, it would show the world that American democracy has integrity.

The second explanation for failure is that the truth movement itself is greatly to blame. It has been filled with nerdish, ego-centric and self-serving activists (often most interested in pushing their pet theory) unable to pursue strategies designed to face and overcome ugly, challenging realities. The truth movement became a cottage industry providing income and meaning for many individuals and groups feeding the committed with endless websites, public talks, videos, books and paraphernalia. They habitually preach to the choir. Applause substitutes for solid results. In particular, it embraces the simplistic (and obviously ineffective) belief that by revealing technical, scientific and engineering facts and evidence the public and political establishment would be compelled to see the light. Darkness has prevailed.

Proof of this are the views expressed days ago on the truth movement by Ben Cohen on the Huffington Post: “I have done some research on the topic, but stopped fairly quickly into when it dawned on me that: 1. Any alternative to the official account of what happened is so absurd it simply cannot be true. 2. No reputable scientific journal has ever taken any of the ‘science’ of the conspiracy seriously. 3. The evidence supporting the official story is overwhelming, whereas the 9/11 Truthers have yet to produce a shred of concrete evidence that members of the U.S. government planned the attacks in New York and Washington.” Similarly, in the London Times James Bone recently said a “gruesome assortment of conspiracy theorists insists that the attacks on the US of September 11, 2001, were an inside job. It is easy to mock this deluded gang of ageing hippies, anarchists and anti-Semites.” Truthers continue to face a very steep uphill battle.

A common lie about the truth movement is that there have been no credible scientific articles in peer reviewed journals supporting it. But those opposing the truth movement will and do find ways to attack whatever scientific evidence is produced and published. It takes more than good science and facts for the movement to succeed.

Besides the movement having too many genuine crackpots (possibly trying to subvert it), a larger problem is what has been missing from it: effective political strategies. Besides pushing scientific results and more credible supporters, it did nothing successful to make a new 9/11 investigation a visible issue in the last presidential campaign. It did nothing effective to put pressure on a new, Democratic-controlled Congress to consider legislation providing the authorization and funding for a new, credible investigation. It seems that people who want to blame the government are often unable to also see the political path forward that requires the government to fund a new investigation.

To its credit, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth does have a petition aimed at Congress, demanding a new investigation, but has fewer than 5,000 signers. The petition effort in New York City to get a new investigation is commendable, with just under 75,000 signers, but national action is needed. Pragmatically, both efforts are unimpressive compared to other campaigns seeking political action. To get both media attention and political support, the movement needs a hundred times more documented supporters, willing to do a lot more than sign a petition.

The tenth anniversary of 9/11 will come fast. The opportunity is making 9/11 an issue in the 2012 presidential campaign. The least delusional and defensive in the truth movement should think deeply and seriously on what needs to change to accomplish the prime goal: having an official investigation that compels most people and history to accept the truth, no matter how painful it is, including the possibility that it finds no compelling evidence for government involvement.

 
Contact Joel S. Hirschhorn through delusionaldemocracy.com.

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......

The empire’s operatives exposed: The Krongards, 9/11, and Blackwater/Iraq

From the archives: Connecting the dots, those revealed in the past with those revealed recently:

By Larry Chin Online Journal Associate Editor Nov 19, 2007,

New bombshell testimony before Congress has revealed that Alvin B. “Buzzy” Krongard, the former CIA executive director connected to 9/11 insider trading, is a consultant and advisory board member of Blackwater USA, the New World Order’s leading intelligence-related corporate mercenary death squad now under investigation for war crimes, murder, arms smuggling, and fraud in Iraq.

“Buzzy” Krongard’s Blackwater role was confirmed by “Buzzy”’s brother, Howard “Cookie” Krongard, who (not ironically) is the Bush/Cheney administration’s State Department’s inspector general, and the official under fire for stonewalling and quashing attempted probes of Blackwater’s operations.

It was during the last Wednesday's hearing before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, chaired by Henry Waxman (D-CA), that “Cookie” Krongard denied, then confirmed later in the same testimony, the fact that his own brother was a Blackwater advisory board member throughout the period in which “Cookie” engaged in the cover-up of Blackwater. It is not known if “Cookie” Krongard lied, or was lied to, but he has now recused himself from “all matters having to do with Blackwater."

As thoroughly documented by Michael C. Ruppert in Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil, until 1997, A.B. “Buzzy” Krongard was the vice chairman of investment bank A.B.Brown (Alex. Brown). A.B. Brown and its previous incarnations have been involved with Bush family business ventures for generations, including deals with the Carlyle Group. It was also one of many major investment houses implicated for money laundering in congressional probes.

Brothers in illegal arms

Krongard joined the CIA in 1998 as the counsel to CIA Director George Tenet, and was named CIA executive director (the CIA’s #3 position) by George W. Bush in March 2001. The Deutsche Bank/Alex.Brown private banking operation headed by Krongard through 1998, and taken over by Krongard’s colleague Mayo Shattuck III, was one of the major hubs of 9/11 insider trading, where put options were purchased on United Airlines and other 9/11-related stocks. As written by Ruppert, “the trades could only have been made by people high enough in the US, Israeli and European intelligence community (including Russia) to know about the attacks and -- more importantly -- which of the many planned attacks were going to be successful.”

It is no surprise that Howard “Cookie” Krongard has, along with brother “Buzzy," enjoyed high official Bush/Cheney positions, and profits, from the “war on terrorism" -- apparently continuously from 9/11 all the way to the present Iraq occupation and quagmire.

These and other damning facts add to the multitude of direct lines leading from 9/11 to Iraq and beyond, and have been exposed piecemeal in recent years and months (in media reports that are largely ignored and misunderstood by the masses). They confirm and underscore years of exhaustive existing evidence about the true nature of the “war on terrorism," its imperial architects from across the international political spectrum, and its multinational universe of “soldiers” (exemplified by the Krongards), and intelligence proprietaries, cut-outs, and political and media fronts.

The New World Order’s “above the law” criminals -- from the Krongards and the entire Blackwater apparatus, to Bush, Cheney, Blair, and the entire membership of the Bilderberg Group -- have committed unprecedented atrocities out in the open, and have more than earned the kind of “interrogations” that they and their armed-to-the-teeth functionaries continue to inflict on political adversaries and innocent patsies in CIA prisons all over the world.

Tragically, particularly in the present milieu, it is more than likely that the Krongards will not be touched, any more than Bush, Cheney, et al will receive the punishment they deserve.

Not only have no “heads rolled” since 9/11, but virtually all of the 9/11/ “war on terrorism” criminals continue to hold the highest offices of power, brazenly committing new crimes in the open, while holding the people of world in contempt. The criminals, and their crimes, are on television, every hour on the hour. Witness the fact that Rudolf Guiliani, who was thoroughly exposed as a hands-on participant in the 9/11 operation in Mike Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon, is a leading 2008 presidential candidate. Senator Joe Biden, one of many members of Congress who enjoyed breakfast on 9/11 with Pakistani ISI chief and 9/11 “money man” Mahmoud Ahmad, is also running for president.

Given the bipartisan complicity of the US Congress, it is likely that the Blackwater probes, like all congressional “investigations” in modern history, are simply more limited hangouts, designed to strengthen, not expose, what remains a massive ongoing cover-up of imperial crimes.

In a time of open and unprecedented political lawlessness and corruption, and mass public ignorance and acquiescence, true investigation remains the bitter and tragic duty of a minority of courageous individuals willing to seek the facts. They are contained on the pages of this publication, and the following list of sources on the Krongards:

Michael C. Ruppert, Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil, Chapter 14: 9/11 Insider Trading, or “You Didn’t Really See That, Even Though We Saw It”

Suppressed Details of Criminal Insider Trading Lead Directly Into CIA's Highest Ranks

(Mike Ruppert, From the Wilderness, October 15, 2001

Profits of Death: Insider Trading and 9/11 (Tom Flocco, From the Wilderness, December 27, 2001)

Jeremy Scahill, Blackwater:The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
 

Email Online Journal Editor

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.


"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......