SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: HH who wrote (15980)9/19/2006 11:41:40 AM
From: Doug R  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 20039
 
justicefor911.org

9/11 Families and Survivors Group File
Expanded Complaint Urging New Spitzer-led
Investigations into 9/11

On November 19, 2004, the "Justice for 9/11" Steering Committee submitted a Citizens' Complaint and Petition to the offices of the Attorney General of New York State, Eliot Spitzer, citing probable cause for an independent grand jury investigation to examine unsolved crimes committed in connection with the events of September 11, 2001. We are publishing the complete Complaint and Petition online in this space as a living, growing document.

Nine members of September 11 families, Ground Zero first responders, and citizens of New York have signed on as the first complainants.



To: HH who wrote (15980)9/19/2006 11:48:35 AM
From: Doug R  Respond to of 20039
 
"The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were a crime against humanity."

The attacks on 9/11 were crimes against us all. WE, THE PEOPLE are calling for a new, fully independent investigation.

Howie Hawkins, the Green Party candidate for US Senate, today called for a new, independent investigation of the 9/11 attacks.

Hawkins cited a new poll by Zogby International of Utica that found that "42% believe there has indeed been a cover up" (with 10% unsure) and 45% think "Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success" (with 8% unsure).
[This number is growing]

An August 2004 Zogby poll of New Yorkers showed nearly half believe certain U.S. officials 'consciously' allowed the attacks to happen and 66% want a fresh investigation.

"Four years ago thousands of innocent people were murdered. in our state's largest city: and yet no one has been held criminally accountable for those actions. Why hasn't the terrorist support network who helped hijack the airplanes been uncovered and prosecuted? Why hasn't Governor Pataki and Senator Clinton demanded to know who financed these attacks, a question the 9/11 Commission dismissed as unimportant? Why did the Bush administration fail to heed numerous warnings about a pending attack from our own intelligence agents and foreign governments including Israel, Germany and Russia?" asked Hawkins. "We need a real investigation to answer the basic questions."

"The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 were a crime against humanity. Unfortunately, these events were callously seized upon the Bush administration, with the support of the Democrats like Clinton in Congress, to launch illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq instead of apprehending the perpetrators These invasions launched by the neoconservative hardliners of the Bush administration were intended to further tighten their control of oil in the Middle East and expand their global empire of foreign military bases. As they had previously stated in their Project for a New American Century policy documents, they were looking for a new Pearl Harbor and they found it in 9/11," noted Hawkins.

The Bush administration and Congress have resisted a full and open investigation into 9/11. While the family members of the 9/11 victims were finally able to force Congress to convene a panel, it became a bipartisan effort at damage control in protecting the foreign policy establishment. All of the members of the 9/11 Commission admitted they had conflicts of interests.

"We need an independent investigation of 9/11, including both what happened and why it was able to occur. Family members of the victims and others without an interest in protecting the President, Congress, or military and intelligence leaders should be in charge," added Hawkins.

"We don't know if 9/11 happened because the Bush administration was asleep at the wheel, inept or looking for an excuse to launch invasions for oil. We do know that the system failed. For example, under both the Clinton and Bush administrations, the Federal Aviation Administration refused under pressure from the airline companies to implement security measures recommended after the Lockerbie air disaster in 1988 that would have prevented the 9/11 airline takeovers. And given the US support for the repressive regimes in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, it is not surprising that the intelligence community leadership ignored Pakistani support for the Taliban and Saudi funding of Al-Qaeda in the lead-up to 9/11. An independent investigation may or may not find a conspiracy, but it surely will find systemic problems in our country's regulatory and intelligence structures."



To: HH who wrote (15980)9/19/2006 11:53:44 AM
From: Doug R  Respond to of 20039
 
What the 9/11 Families are Saying
One of the things that really bothers me is the marginalization of the 9/11 families, the people who lost their loved ones in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Not only have the families, and their call for an investigation even now, been marginalized by the Bush administration; they have also been marginalized by the 9/11 "truth" movement which has largely shown little interest in what the families have been saying.

More than anyone, it's been the 9/11 families who have been at the forefront of the ongoing campaign for an independent public inquiry into the attacks that might truly hold the authorities to account, and result in full disclosure of what happened, how and why. Indeed, one of the most powerful resources demonstrating how little we really know about 9/11 comes in the form of the huge list of 9/11 Unanswered Questions on the website of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Independent Commission. In all, there are, I believe, several hundred questions pertaining to virtually every single dimension of the terrorist attacks. (NOTE: by the way, when I cited 9/11 widow Lauri van Auken in my article below "Interrogating 9/11", although she spoke on behalf of many 9/11 families, she did not speak on behalf of the 9/11 Families Steering Committee as the latter had been disbanded in January 2005 already)

Readers familiar with my work on 9/11 in The War on Freedom and The War on Truth will note the numerous parallels between the lines of inquiry set out in those books, and the questions and anomalies raised by the 9/11 Families Steering Committee. Last year at the McKinney hearing in the House of Representatives, two of the Jersey widows, Mindy Kleinberg and Lauri van Auken, told me that The War on Freedom was quite literally the first book they had read offering a deeply critical perspective of the 9/11 official narrative. Very early on, my colleague Kyle F. Hence of 9/11 Citizens Watch had ensured that copies of the book were passed on to family members as well as Congressional representatives.

While the 9/11 Families Steering Committee website offers a litany of pounding questions that the 9/11 Commission ignored, those who want a no-nonsense factual reference point for understanding the extent to which the 9/11 official narrative is riddled with holes, would be well-advised to check out the work of Paul Thompson at the Centre for Cooperative Research, whose 9/11 Timeline inspired the Jersey widows and fed heavily into their new documentary film, 9/11 Press for Truth, for which Thompson was story adviser. I'm pleased to note that my research in The War on Truth is cited in a Cooperative Research Timeline project on "The use of Islamist militants by American and Israeli militarists - The War in Afghanistan to September 11 and beyond". Thompson's work is pivotal precisely because of its nature -- it's not theoretical, it's not hypothetical and its not speculation: it's purely and simply a chronological collection of continually updated raw historical and empirical data. My method of analysis is somewhat similar in that I avoid theoretical speculation as far as possible, and instead insist on discerning breaks, shifts, and interconnections in the data itself by which one can observe clear patterns and their implications.

One reason I bring all this up is to flag-up Thompson's data on the WTC investigations, in particular in relation to the burning question of the huge deposits of molten metal noticed by dozens of eyewitness -- fire fighters, scientists, and other experts -- for up to five weeks after the 9/11 attacks (appended below with this post)

A commentator has attempted to "debunk" the findings of molten steel at Ground Zero, which I mention in my article below, "Interrogating 9/11". There are a number of problems with this approach, first and foremost which is the overriding ideological predisposition to "prove" that no molten steel was found. This is a disingenious position, as looking at the data itself, the sheer volume of people who witnessed the molten metal demonstrates that the phenomenon did exist. The vast majority of observers insisted that this was actually molten steel, not any other kind of metal, which was often seen to be dripping either directly off steel beams, or from the cores where the beams were originally erected. Now looking at the data in its totality, the insistence that it was not molten steel in the face of this credible testimony is simply bizarre. The insistence is not founded in fact, but merely in the assumption that all the observers at Ground Zero were wrong. My position is simply this:

1. the data largely speaks for itself, and in the absence of convincing evidence to the contrary, should be taken at face value.

2. whereas a final conclusion may not be deductible on this basis, preliminary probable inferences are justifiable on the basis of the available data.

3. such inferences based on reasonable grounds indicate an unresolved anomaly in the official narrative.

The anomaly could be consistent with a variety of interpretations. What I don't understand is the desire of some, such as the commentator, to completely deny that any such anomaly exists. This is, indeed, exactly what the official NIST investigation did, pretend that there was never any molten metal. I can accept that the findings of molten steel have not been forensically confirmed, but this is precisely because, as Thompson also documents, the Bush administration deliberately ensured that the materials were collected and scrapped before any such investigation was possible. We are, therefore, forced to work solely with the data that we do have, which is overwhelming and credible enough to justify the conclusion that an anomaly relating to the WTC collapse persists, and that independent investigation is necessary.

It is such independent investigation that the 9/11 families continue to call for, not to support some preconceived lunatic fringe theories, but to get to the unsullied truth -- not simply for the sake of their own "closure", but because the phenomenon of terrorism since 9/11 continues to play an integral role in the international system, and continues to kill and maim innocent civilians around the world.

nafeez.blogspot.com