EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Nadler: Obama Violating Law By Not Investigating Bush
WASHINGTON - Even as the issue of torture appears likely to burst back onto the public agenda next week -- thanks to the much anticipated release of an internal CIA report -- one of the most progressive voices in Congress is arguing that the Obama White House has a legal obligation to investigate the Bush torture legacy.
President Obama and former President Bush in this file photo. New York Congressman Jerry Nadler, a senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, told the Huffington Post that he believed that President Obama would be breaking the law if he decided to oppose launching investigation into the authorization of torture. New York Congressman Jerry Nadler, a senior Democrat on the House
Judiciary Committee, told the Huffington Post that he believed that
President Obama would be breaking the law if he decided to oppose
launching investigation into the authorization of torture.
"If they follow the law they have no choice," Nadler said in an interview this past weekend.
The logic, for Nadler, is straightforward. As a signatory of the convention against torture, and as a result of the anti-torture act of 1996, the United States government is obligated to investigate accusations of torture when they occur in its jurisdiction.
The alternative, Nadler said, "would be violating the law. They would be not upholding the law; they would be violating it."
Nadler said that a special prosecutor should handle the task, because some of the likely subjects of such an investigation worked in the Justice Department. "There is an inherent conflict interest," said Nadler," which is why you must appoint a special prosecutor. But, again, you have no choice because that's the law."
Respected by his colleagues as one of the sharpest legal minds in Congress, Nadler has taken a leading role in pushing the Obama administration to investigate its predecessor. Beyond the legal requirements, he argues that there is a moral and political imperative - lest the precedent be set that potential illegalities go un-probed. In recent weeks, Attorney General Eric Holder has hinted that he would support a special prosecutor to look into the narrow issue of whether some interrogators exceeded their instructions. But Nadler is far from satisfied with what he's seeing from DOJ.
"[Holder] was strongly inclined to support a special prosecutor," he said. "But not for the lawyers who wrote the memos justifying the torture, and not for anybody who acted within the scope of those memos; only for some local level guy who acted beyond the scope of those memos, who waterboarded with too much water or whatever."
"You must not limit it that way," he added. "Again it would be
against the law to do it because you have got to investigate everybody
involved in torture or in a conspiracy to order torture."
But Nadler is no dupe. He recognizes that this matter is complicated by
politics. He says his major concern is not whether the Obama
administration sees the legal rationale for such an investigation, but
rather whether it has the political fortitude for tackling such a task.
"If you start prosecuting the Bush people," Nadler said, "you know what is going to be said? What's going to be said is, this is politically motivated payback for the Clinton impeachment. That is what they are going to say."
"And you know that if you do this, there is going to be a tremendous pushback starting with Fox News and everywhere else," he added, "not on the merits but on the political motivation of the Obama administration for vengeance... Who needs that? So from a political point of view it is the last thing you want to do. From a point of view of reestablishing justice in this country, it is essential."
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
113 Comments so far
Show AllHere we are arguing about what is considered torture when we should be investigating goals outlined in the "original" Project for the New American Century" as applied by the Bush Administration.
The BIG LIE, to the people, to deceive them into a war without end!
That's the BIG crime! First things First!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Project_for_the_New_American_Century
Video on PNAC:
http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=oSPqto796Lc
NMBill August 21st, 2009 2:16 pm..............Re-investigate 911.....there will be no peace and moving ahead without a new and independent investigation. This is a must. Please support NYC CAN.
If you mean including an investigation about what and when top people in the Bush administration knew about an Al Quieda plot, and the possibility that they let it happen that is fine. but if you are hoping for some kind of conclusion that the events on Sept. 11 were all a huge lurid Bush administration plot of remote controlled planes and secretly planted explosives - well, you have good company among the gun slinging "death panel" people.
The facts are a group of radical Arabs hijacked the planes and flew them into the symbols of US imperial power, and for some pretty obvious reasons. It was indeed a horrible tragedy, but it was a fully expected consequence of US foreign policy. It is that foreign policy that needs investigation.
Totally agreed.
Plus, I think they coined (and vigorously pursued) the term "never waste a crisis" way before Rahm Emanuel ever did.
Explain Bldg. 7, pjd412, and don't give me the insane story that it was those tiny fires.
I think there is plenty of room for you over at the nearest "death panel" meeting.
Go here:
http://www.debunking911.com/index.html
No, go here:
www.-
journalfor9/11studies.com, stj9/11.com, ae9/11truth.com, pilotsfor9/11truth.com, etc.
Go to books like, "Crossing the Rubicon," which was presented as case evidence by a former police detective, using forensics and investigation as if 9/11 were a crime, which it was.
If the truth were there, why wasn't OBL tried in absentia? Why hasn't he even been charged with this crime, even to the present day? Why haven't the confiscated DC hotel camera video tapes been released? Why was no explanation given to the fact that photographed in the Pentagon wreckage was a turbo-fanblade from an air-breathing cruise missile? Why hasn't a coherent explanation of the Unbelievable Total Lack of the survivability of the hidden massive-beam Inner-core backbone of not just one but BOTH towers addressed - if Those Giants crumpled so easily, then why isn't every steel-frame building shut down and razed as unsafe?
Why then, if the steel actually were 'melted' by the spectacular but brief and relatively harmless Hollywood-style air-blowoffs of most of the jet fuel, and then the resultant office furnishings-and-paper fires, did the towers not fall asymmetrically, as the fires were totally asymmetric as was the physical damage? Why have there been NO successful and enlightening trials of terrorists YET in this country (whatever happened to the 'terrorists' in Florida who asked their FBI handler/instigator if they could have some shoes first please?) And so on.
IF Americans were involved, most probably Bush and Cheney were not, directly; no reason for them to be, though it is tempting to read something into Bush's nonchalance the day of the attacks, sitting there as if he had been told that the plan had been executed, rather than the reported phrase that the nation was under attack... and then sitting there for seven more minutes and reading a kiddie book before someone finally decided to hustle him away as being a little TOO nonchalant... because he 'didn't want to scare the kids'... ya gotta be kidding.
No, IF Americans were involved (and it is not an established fact, just like all the other inconvenient facts, which is the problem), this would have to be done by something like a rogue CIA superblack cell. Nothing reported out of the box. Nothing evidenced as going into the box. Independent operation, no directives. All of it roped off from the politicians that had handed down the generalized clandestine initiatives (America doesn't torture... but maybe somebody does, wink, wink. And the President does not condone torture... but maybe someone will, wink, wink. And we have to work on the Dark Side... but how Dark well who knows WINK WINK. And according to PNAC if there were a new Pearl Harbor... but of some homemade kind WINK WINK. And if the Chicago Boys Gangleader Friedman thinks it would be great to perpetrate Shock Doctrine Treatment on Americans... maybe someting might will happen to dem WINK, WINK.)
And as far as keeping all this secret, well, the Manhattan Project was totally unknown to the American public at the time and the details unknown for decades, even after atomic bombs leveled whole cities, though thousands worked on the project. A 9/11 project wouldn't even need as much as a few dozen insiders, all of them silenced by their own high treason. Hey, just look at Bernie Madoff...can people keep a secret for years or what?
But the investigation of the most important single event on American soil of the past decade has been a shameful whitewash and bumsrush. I am not a 'truther'-cultist, I am a truth-searcher, as most questioners are. And the 9/11 investigation has been most obviously politically thwarted from the start, and still is. Let us investigate this major crime as a major crime, investigated by detectives not politicians, in public and in full, to wherever it may lead, as it is clear nobody now knows the full truth. Because the real opposite of the 'truthers' are the 'obstructionists'.
Excellent post Mr. Horn,
I was a pilot for many years and must tell you that there are a few disturbing accidents in the pilot community that do not add up at all.
They are:
• Colorado Springs. No evidence was ever recovered and no plausible causes ever determined. The yaw damper was eventually blamed via pressure to conclude the long running investigation, but none of us ever saw any transcripts of CVR or FDR printouts. Just a picture of a smoking crater like at the pentagon. We accepted it as: a high speed impact. But nobody reported a sonic boom in the area, which means it wasn't going fast enough to cause a supersonic crater like that. That close to the ground, with an object as big as a B737, somebody's windows should have been blown out.
• TWA 800. All B747 TWA pilots I have talked to, have told me that they feel the plane was hit by a missile. Much of the evidence was destroyed. It was well documented by the Mcgraw Hill publication Aviation Week and Space Technology, that the FBI interfered with the investigation (Director Louis Free) , and for the first time in history would not allow the NTSB investigators to see or photograph any of the wreckage until after the Navy yanked it up on deck. This destroyed any hope of figuring out which pieces came off first. Many were never recovered. Fuel pump wiring in the Center Fuel tank was blamed, even though for 40 years nothing like this has ever happened to a B747 before or since. Eyewitnesses on the shore claimed they saw a smoke contrail head for the plane and hit it.
• 911. Again, no transcripts were ever made available to the pilot community. Why? With these exceptions, since the advent of CVR and FDR devices transcripts were always released if the "black boxes", which are actually orange, are recovered. But even if all those were lost, (All four flights; what are the odds?) at least ATC radar data, showing direction and speed is released. Not this time. But controllers working that day claim that a NORAD exercise was underway that simulated false targets making it impossible for ATC to know what the hell was going on. No one, has ever been able to tell me what speed and bank angle the second aircraft hit at. The video is clear, that even an experienced pilot would have had trouble hitting the building from greater than a 45 degree bank angle. If the speed was over 250 knots it would have been even harder.
We have to know those two things to access whether it was likely that it was under human control. My guess is the guy was just lucky, (from his perspective) since he almost just clipped the corner and missed the building. Massive vacancies were in the building (from the 2000 recession) and the ownership had just changed. After the 1993 near collapse, insurance companies were concerned about the payout on a teetering building that would fall like a redwood and take out ten city blocks. A guy used to post here at CD that claimed there was an "operation Godzilla" mandated by FEMA to prewire tall buildings in case they got hit and threatened large adjacent buildings if they were not expected to collapse straight down. It's logical.
We need a real investigation, starting with Salem Bin Laden, GWB's financial business partner in Abusto Energy, and then with the hundreds of transactions between H.W.Bush's Caryle Group and the Bin Laden Brothers Construction for Industry.
Otherwise, this government doesn't want us to know what happened, and we're just pissing in the wind. All of the above, is just my opinion only.
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
double post
ThomasJefferson, Typical. Great Post!
'cept one thing, all you wrote ain't jus'
yer opinion sir; cuz I concurr.
Thanks Joe, feedback means a lot to me,
And I sincerely regret attacking you earlier in the year on environmental threads. I tend to automatically suspect that anyone who disagrees with me is a NeoCon troll! I need to work on that.
I hope you will forgive me.
TJ
pjd412 August 22nd, 2009 12:44 am.................Read David Ray Griffin's book, "Debunking 9/11 Debunking".....
1. Remote controlled planes exist. Were they involved in the WTC attacks? How should I know for sure. But maybe...it would explain the flying ace piloting that was involved in the attacks.
2. Hidden explosives. The evidence is strong and mounting that the WTC collapses were controlled demolitions. The clearest indication is WTC 7 which was not hit by any plane or damaged by large debris, but collapsed anyway into its own footprint as in a controlled demolition. Also a peer reveiwed Danish science journal published a study that found significant nano-thermite (a powerful military restricted explosive) residue in WTC debris.
Opportunity-The Bush family had tentacles that reached deeply into information about WTC security. With Cheney's, the plotters were able to be sure that there would be no air defense intercepts until it was all over.
Motive
Motive 1 - Excuse to invade Iraq. It's an historical fact that that Cheney & the Company pushed the false 9/11 - Saddam connection
Mtive 2 - Destroy Pentagon accounting records that would have shed light on the missing 3 trillion at the Pentagon= google Dov Zakheim.
Motive + Opportunity = Suspect
Arrest and Prosecute all War Criminals Now!!!
Go here:
http://www.debunking911.com/index.html
Im for a real investigation but all of your truth books are off on
" Hidden explosives. The evidence is strong and mounting that the WTC collapses were controlled demolitions. The clearest indication is WTC 7 which was not hit by any plane or damaged by large debris, but collapsed anyway into its own footprint as in a controlled demolition."
Here is why:
number 7 was heavily damaged from the tower debris falling on it and in fact it did not fall in its foot print as the damaged back side peeled away and fell back away from the front side as in the fall in movie clip you see.
All your cult books like leave out these facts.
Ask why your sources leave out the contradictory facts to what you are claiming.
Steel frames do not have to "melt" and the way you guys keep this melt crap up the more you show ...no Show.
Engineers know that structural steel begins to fail and warp under normal loads at only 1,000 degrees. F
After the explosions of the airplanes there were no normal loads on the damaged frames trying to hold the upper ends of the towers... they were big time heavy loads on hot reduced, damaged and weakened frames getting hotter by the second.
Any one who calls these fires "little fires" is out of touch with reality.
All these false claims have been proven false and the amount of "unburned thermite" claimed to have been found in the dust seems to be more than anything else stored in the building.... thermite does not go out.
why didn't it burn?
Because there was no thermite...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWpC_
1WP8do&feature=player_embedded
If Obama does not investigate these guys, He will not get reelected, and I might get so pissed, I'll write another protest song!
See ya
Jim Glover August 22nd, 2009 3:16 pm
Im for a real investigation but all of your truth books are off on
" Hidden explosives. The evidence is strong and mounting that the WTC collapses were controlled demolitions. The clearest indication is WTC 7 which was not hit by any plane or damaged by large debris, but collapsed anyway into its own footprint as in a controlled demolition."
Here is why:
number 7 was heavily damaged from the tower debris falling on it and in fact it did not fall in its foot print as the damaged back side peeled away and fell back away from the front side as in the fall in movie clip you see.........(What movie clip?...which link?...the one below?....nothing there about WTC 7. Get it together! If you have evidence, make it easily available. If you have seen a video from the rear of WTC 7, I would sure like to see it. No one else has. And any rear view has nothing to do with the controlled demolition of this building. Even experts who did not know this was WTC 7, have said this was absolutely a controlled demolition. Witnesses heard the countdown. Silverstein said, "Pull it". The damage from the falling tower was no place near enough to bring down the building. One must remember that a steel structured building has never collapsed from fire in the history of mankind. Yet, on that dreadful day, we are supposed to believe against unbelievable odds that THREE buildings collapsed on that day due to fire that could never have exceeded 600 degrees.)
All your cult books like leave out these facts........(What facts...you have presented NONE!)
Ask why your sources leave out the contradictory facts to what you are claiming....(Same as above...you have presented NO FACTS...only the illusion of facts...c'mon, you can do better than that!)
Steel frames do not have to "melt" and the way you guys keep this melt crap up the more you show ...no Show.....................( No, they may not have to melt...AND the temperature was not even high enough to "bend" them....600 degrees..PULease! There was also NO HEAT on the bottom structure below the supposed points of impact. Those girders were constructed to easily support the entire top structure whether or not it was collapsing due to the enormous heat you propose. Heat that was so enormous, that one of the firefighters said would take ONE HOSE to extinguish.
Engineers know that structural steel begins to fail and warp under normal loads at only 1,000 degrees. F......(Even if we accept your engineers hypotheseis that the temperatures were that hot, were they hot enough to vaporize FOUR titanium engines...which would normally melt at about 5000 degrees? Would that heat also turn the 100's of thousands of tons of concrete into nano particles of dust?? Would it set vehicles on fire eight blocks away.??)
After the explosions of the airplanes there were no normal loads on the damaged frames trying to hold the upper ends of the towers... they were big time heavy loads on hot reduced, damaged and weakened frames getting hotter by the second.....................(Steel is a great conductor and wouild therefore disipate the heat thrpoughout the building....what LITTLE HEAT THERE WAS!
Any one who calls these fires "little fires" is out of touch with reality.....................(Then, I guess the fireman (chief, I believe) that was on the scene did not know of what he spoke.....it's all on tape and has been replayed a million times)
All these false claims have been proven false and the amount of "unburned thermite" claimed to have been found in the dust seems to be more than anything else stored in the building.... thermite does not go out...........(What claims?....what have you proven?
why didn't it burn?
Because there was no thermite...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWpC_
1WP8do&feature=player_embedded
If Obama does not investigate these guys, He will not get reelected, and I might get so pissed, I'll write another protest so.................
((If you are truly interested in finding the truth for yourself, there is no need to be an engineer...the facts and research are readily available on many sites and on myriad DVDs. Even if you accept the pancake theory (which is total hogwash and has been disproved hundreds of ways and hundreds of times) you would still have a rubble piles tens of stories high. The concrete and everything else (bodies, desks, chairs, fixtures, TITANIUM ENGINES et al) would not have disintegrated in to nano particles of dust. Vehicles almost a half mile away would not have caught fire in strange patterns. Explosions witnessed in the basement BEFORE the buildings collapsed would not have occurred (recorded on seismograph readings). The truth is on it's way and cannot be stopped. And remember that in the history of mankind, steel structured buildings have never collapsed from fire...NEVER...and on that fateful day, three huge buildings came down from very short and small fires. WTC 7 was NOT hit by any plane.))
Free DVDs from the 911dvdproject.com
Other valuable sites that will lead you to many more and some excellent books:
ae911truth.org
911sharethetruth.com And please support NYC CAN
911weknow.com
stj911.org
911blogger.com
physics911.net
911research.com
infowars.com
wtc7.net
pilotsfor911truth.org
See ya!
Wow, you sound like an advertisement.
just this one site
http://www.debunking
911.com/
index.html
will show photos of many things that you think I am wrong on.
It is such a cliche this "And remember that in the history of mankind, steel structured buildings have never collapsed from fire...NEVER...and on that fateful day, three huge buildings came down from very short and small fires. WTC 7 was NOT hit by any plane.))"
Ya failed to mention none of the steel structured buildings that did not collapse were first hit by jet airliners and when the towers fell, the debris destroyed every building in the complex which is not too foot printy for me.
so tell me what this site prints about the Debunking and than you can debunk the debunkers on.
but I want proof that you got proof of anything that you can prove that proves what you are trying to convince me of.
So Maybe you can tell me what happened.
I saw all this fire and smoke commin outta huge holes an your gonna tell me they were little fires... there was more smoke visible than fire but the fire was a burnin and it was bending the beams a glowin according to the firemen in the helicopter observing the fire.
So Just the facts please... and questions don't quite equal facts.
Give up Jim, the loonies will go their graves believing in their nutty theory.
I am a civil engineer, and the most obvious evidence debunking their nonsense is simply that, when reviewing movies of the collapses, which clearly initiated at the floors where the impact and fire occurred, look absolutely, positively, NOTHING like any kind of building demolition using explosives, and everything like a progressive collapse. It is like someone pointing at a Cessna 150 and insisting that it is a Airbus A380. Well, yes, they are both airplanes, but otherwise are completely dissimilar. Same with the manner that these building collapsed, versus a explosive demolition.
And then ther is the Building 7 nonsense. Even if, for arguing, the collapse of Building 7 was enigmatic, (it wasn't) it is completely irrelevant to the other irrefutable facts. It is like dismissing an otherwise rick-solid case against a bank robber, because one of his accessory's has an alibi.
pjd412 August 22nd, 2009 11:07 pm...........Why not try to debate without your childish personal attacks.
If someone does not believe in what you believe, that does not make them loonie. It simply makes them someone with a different opinion.
Beliefs that have no roots in physical reality are not opinions. Saying the earth's sky is yellow is not an opinion.
pjd412
So now you're a civil engineer are you? How many professions could one screen name posses?
Answer this civil engineer:
What was the original specification of the world trade center? What was it designed to be able to absorb? ANSWER: an impact of a B707 just as nuclear containment building were from the 50's. Next question Mr engineer: Are the B707 weights the same weight class as a B757? Are they same fuel loads? I'll let you answer this one, because I suspect you don't know and are going to get the answer wrong.
What are the odds of two buildings, both designed to absorb and burn the fuel out of that class of airliner, failing to meet their design specification?
What are the odds that both of them, would fail symmetrically even though the impact on the south tower hit on the corner where the remaining fuselage exited the building (clear from one video I watched.)
What are the odds, that an insurance company would pick up the phone to FEMA and voice concern that adjacent buildings might go down if the failure occurred on one side first and the thing tipped over like a giant falling redwood tree taking out ten city blocks?
Would you scramble a team to blow the building to save the lives in the adjacent buildings?
I would.
TJ
p.s. Not only would I have done that, but after the near collapse in 1993, I would have planned for this eventuality and pre wired all tall buildings in accordance with prudent FEMA contingencies.
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
The odds are good when the building was not designed for airline hits plus catastrophic explosions and fire, and the design specifications were on paper but the cost cutting corners were in the rubble.
the Empire state building was made to take a hit and fire but the towers were not.
Even if you would have wired all tall buildings does not prove anything except your weirdness and you are no Thomas Jefferson.
Jim Glover August 22nd, 2009 6:08 pm..........Wow, you sound like an advertisement. .......(Cut the crap...just deal with the facts on all the sites I gave you. You are responding in generalizations. I've given you specifics. Here's another one about the Pentagon.....which says it is mathematically and physically impossible for that flight 77 to have hit the pentagon without disintegrating....please respond to this.....
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2009/0702-Flight77.html
just this one site
http://www.debunking
911.com/
index.html
will show photos of many things that you think I am wrong on.......(I refer you to David Ray Griffin's "Debunking 9/11 Debunking".
It is such a cliche this "And remember that in the history of mankind, steel structured buildings have never collapsed from fire...NEVER...and on that fateful day, three huge buildings came down from very short and small fires. WTC 7 was NOT hit by any plane.))".......(.It may have become a cliche, but that does not dismiss it as fact. Stick to the facts and please stop the diversionary remarks. )
Ya failed to mention none of the steel structured buildings that did not collapse were first hit by jet airliners and when the towers fell, the debris destroyed every building in the complex which is not too foot printy for me..........(I thought you said the fires destroyed the towers. Now, you are saying the impact destroyed the towers...which is it? The towers were built to withstand the impact of several airliners.
so tell me what this site prints about the Debunking and than you can debunk the debunkers on..........(What site?...Be specific!)
but I want proof that you got proof of anything that you can prove that proves what you are trying to convince me of..(What the hell are you saying. Again, stop the crap and stick to the facts.....
So Maybe you can tell me what happened.............(Do the research if you are interested in finding the truth instead of the lies of the official story. I did.) I've given you all the info. I am not here for you to pick MY brain. Do the work.
I saw all this fire and smoke commin outta huge holes an your gonna tell me they were little fires... there was more smoke visible than fire but the fire was a burnin and it was bending the beams a glowin according to the firemen in the helicopter observing the fire. .........(More smoke than fire...an oxygen starved situation, which means the temps could get no where near the degrees necessary to melt or compromise the steel. I did not say they were little fires...the chief did. If the fire was so hot, how could that woman standing in the opening stand the heat? Ever see that picture? Ever see the pics of the huge steel girders cut diagonally...only could be done with thermite or thermate.)
So Just the facts please... and questions don't quite equal facts...(.Nonsense...I've given you plenty of facts and there are many more on the sites. Do the research, read the sites...answer the FACTS I have presented.)
You have stated that you want a re-investigation of 9/11. You must have some doubt about the official story.
nevergiveup,
Since you suggested we "cut the crap".
You have not given me any facts and I don't think David Ray Griffin is an expert in the subject or science. He is into religion. That is his expert field of study and it shows.
.
You say:
"(I thought you said the fires destroyed the towers. Now, you are saying the impact destroyed the towers...which is it? The towers were built to withstand the impact of several airliners."
THE ENGINEER WHO SAID THE TOWERS WERE BUILT TO WITHSTAND IMPACT OF AIRLINERS ALSO FINISHED THE SENTENCE WITH, IT WASN'T DESIGNED TO TAKE A MASSIVE FIRE FROM THE IMPACT.
We can all see that the buildings stood for a while after the crash but the fires built up and could not be extinguished no matter how much you distort it.
You guys always cherry pick apart a statement and that is your crap.
You "thought", that is the problem you did not read correctly what I said. It was the fires that warped the beams including the weakened, and already damaged beams from the huge impact and explosiions. They go together no matter how you try to make it all one or the other. It is you guys who try to make it only a "little fire', you take a comment out of context and a single picture of an impact or exit explosion hole where some poor person was somehow able to get to, does not indicate the temperature of the beams and raging fire inside the towers. If i remember that photo the wind was blowing the smoke and fire away from that person by the hole. Tell the firemen who were there that it was a "little fire".
Most fires in big buildings well give off more smoke than fire but that does not mean the fire was not hot. More crap from YOU.
I gave you the site to debunk.
http://www.debunking911.com/
It takes all your crazy theories and puts them up to the light of reason and science, not religion which is the real expertise of David Ray Griffin, not science or fires.
Yes, I have a doubt about the official story. I doubt that the Bush was not aware that a suicide plane attack was in the works because many intel agencies knew and Bush called off the FBI from investigating the Saudi connections to the hijackers just before 9/11. Bush was planning on attacking Afghanistan for oil pipelines at the time.
The truth movement largely doesn't even believe there were hijackers so that gets Bush off the hook and puts him in your fantasy.
This article is about investigating Bush.
If by some miracle there is an investigation, if I was defending Bush you guys with your crazy theories would be the first witnesses i would call and the case would be dismissed from lack of any real evidence.
Bush would be off the hook. The best way to ruin a case is to bring sensational charges which have no proof.
I am familiar with all your charges and the demolition ones are false.
So are you prepared to testify under oath about what you are charging here?
Every cover-up needs these distractions to succeed and you are doin a swell job.
the alternative would be violating the law. this is news?
Nope. A "senior democrat" recognizing it publicly - now that's news!
This kind of public recognition and acknowledgement creates a motivation to prosecute - both the bushAdmin torturers and perhaps eventually 0.
THE OBAMA DEFENSE
I don't much like my next door neighbor, and I suspect he may be a terrorist. So tonight I'm going to torture and kill him.
I don't have to worry about facing prosecution. When they catch me I'll tell them it all happened in the past, and that we should only look to the future.
That's right, I'll call it "The Obama Defense."
In California we can't afford prisons anyway. Shouldn't the "forward looking" Obama Defense be reason enough to shut them down completely?
Thank GOD...
It will be to wait and see how far it goes.
If it isn't done, we won't have a moral leg to stand on on anything. We 50 somethings grew up with one total constant...nazis torture, barbaric inhumane governments torture, WE don't torture. It's a line you don't cross.
Amen, and damned straight, OnceAgain!
And 7 years ago, it was the 50 somethings (and slightly older) in the Bush administration that gleefully crossed that line. Some people of your generation didn't get that memo.
-- But Nadler is no dupe. --
Now why is this sentence here? Why is there the supposed need for the author to write this and then have to explain why Mr. Nadler is no 'dupe'? This is either sloppy writing or something more invidious.
"But Nadler is a realist" would say the same thing and not have any negative connotations, only positive.
genicon
The real crime was not sterilizing the Bush and Walkers beginning with Prescott's generation, what a better world it would have been.
Now all we can do is wonder what vermin with those names waits for its time to come.
perhaps a career change is in the making for. it goes like
this- push cart vendor in the dc area working between doj and
the whitehouse. product in demand? BALLS! GOT EM BY THE SET
DOZEN OR GROSS.free instillation included! lifetime guarantee!
need some focus group feed back here. what do you all think?
"From a point of view of reestablishing justice in this country, it is essential."
Yes, and from a moral point of view, it is also essential.
But justice and morality no longer seem to matter to the power elite who run this country.
You said it, Ed! If they don't indict and charge them with war crimes (not to mention crimes against the constitution, and for lying to the American people and the world) they owe every tyrant and war criminal ever prosecuted pardons, and/or apologies. The Lies and acts of Bush, Cheney, Rove and Ashcroft; to name a few, are as evil and wrong as any dictator or tyrant in modern times
Mr. Stein is in all seriousness entertaining the notion that Obama has political fortitude. Must be something wrong with that man Stein.
And when, exactly, has Obama, since winning the election, shown any regard for the law?
Talk is cheap, Mr. Nadler. Where's the action?
JUSTICE!.....It's that simple....JUSTICE......InternationaL and domestic laws have been broken. If you cannot live up to your OATH OF OFFICE, step down and let someone with COURAGE take the helm, Mr. Obama. This is not a choice because of political overtones.....IT IS MANDATORY THE LAW BE ENFORCED.
500,000 unnecessary deaths in Iraq some very backward, picky, over sensitve radicals might just possibly find a crime in that USA made hell.
Afghanistan is going the way of Iraq or worse,( less resources to rebound with and much longer warfare) might be a crime in those untold number of dead civilians and dead nationalist freedom fighters.
correct. as i do believe many others have noted many times during the last 8 years, the Nuremberg judges did declare that unprovoked invasion of other countries is the ultimate war crime.
this is certainly the case in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Obama is not stupid. He has crafted everything from running his campaign to his presidency today. He chose Holder to head up the justice dept because Holder worked at a Washington DC law firm that represented GWBush in the Rove missing email case. He defended the RNC against many suits like the phone jammbing case in New Hampshire.
Upon entering his presidency Obama chose Holder because he knew that it was very unlikely unless pushed he would go after the last administration. Obama said "look to the future" and I am passing this to dead end Holder.
However the spirit of justice that statue with the scales is blind folded. She is blind folded so that she can not see if the prosecuted is rich or poor, black or white, holds power or has none. Without the equality of justice and we are so very close to that even without this issue then the rule of law fails.
Obama not seeking prosecution of crime as is his sworn duty is braking the law and braking the back of the spirit of justice casting out the rule of law and replacing it with president as King. He may wish he was on the field with Martin Luther King but as we know by now he is not even in the same league.Will we allow him to be the other kind of King?
Accessory after the fact
http://www.gpln.com/accessory.htm
Heck, no one should obey the law, no one should pay their bills, every one should cheat and get as much as they can get no matter who you screw especially if it is the government ( taxpayer citizens) since that is the example our officials set. Excellent anarchy and chaos-just what the system needs to recover, make a 5 year plan and be able to anticipate the rules of the road ahead. Labour is in the same boat-they should know what to expect from experience by now-the shaft and few job opportunities. I feel more secure already.
Cheers,
RR
Give credit to Nadler for spelling out the "reality" that political considerations and anticipated public reactions TRUMP the national interest, the rule of law and justice. Nadler was in a position during the last Congress when "torture" was in the public domain along with numerous other violations of the Constitution by the Bush administration to move for an impeachment investigation. He did not -- and in my one conversation with the Congressman [January 2008 in NH], he seemed not to be knowledgeable about impeachment. Nadler apparently wants Obama to move -- I believe he is still in a postion as a member of the House Committee on Justice to do more than he is doing.
Peace,
Herb Hoffman
Yeah, like I know this guy, he murdered someone a few months ago. But hey, that's in the past and we must look forward. We can't be bothered by the 'rule of law' and other responsibilities.
Obama is a hypocrite just like previous Presidents.
Come on guys. Yea, I voted for Bush twice, and now wish I could have a do-over. I think he is going to go down in history as the most inept president in history. But I do not believe that we should be expending efforts to nail him for past bad decisions, and crush the CIA and FBI in the process. Bush bounced back from 9/11 in the best way he could. Let's bury this thing and move on to bigger and better things. Bush will get his due, but let's not be vindictive to the detriment of the country.
jlohman August 21st, 2009 5:41 pm..............Bush is a genocidal murderer. This is not vindictiveness. This is JUSTICE. The entire Bush criminal family is a pox on this earth. The CIA needs to be crushed. The FBI has some hopes. Tell your "moving on story" to the victims of the Bush regime....especially the tortured children and future victims of the use of DU in the ME.
9/11 was a false flag, so there was little to bounce back from.
Support NYC CAN for a re-investigation of 9/11.
I know I am wasting my time here, since you voted for Bush twice. Are you sure you are on the right website?
This is typical of former Bush voters, even when they see a thin beam of light years after it's too late to matter. It wasn't "bad decisions" Bush made that defrauded the country into invading Iraq. They were very deliberate, calculated lies meant to divide the country and create an opening for Bush as dictator, and they worked because millions like jlohman drank the kool-aid. Prosecuting this war criminal for heinous crimes against humanity has nothing to do with being vindictive. Failing to prosecute will only lead to the further detriment of the country, if you're really interested in the country's welfare. Ignoring 8 years of lies, deceit, chicanery and illegality cannot help but dig us deeper into the moral cesspool the Bush-Cheney years waterboarded the entire world into. But it's apparent you lack the basic moral equipment to detect this, having voted TWICE for this consummate idiot.
In addition to 500,000 dead Iraqis and 3 or 4 thousand dead Americans, and an ancient country in ruins with the intention to wipe out their history and culture...signing thousands of deregulations turning a blind eye to corporations and Wall Street leaving the country in financial ruin, not to mention torture, rendition, etc. etc.
...oh yes, let's just move on...let bygones be bygones...geeez.... what are you doing on CD after voting for Bush not only once, but twice...you are part of the problem and one of those neanderthals the rest of the world shakes their head in disbelief of so much ignorance ...