Flyby News Home - Flyby News Archives - Casinni NoFlyby - Flyby Links

Flyby  News

"News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era"

Oil Game * 9/11 * Obama Rose * Sertima

05 March 2008

"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison
without formulating any charge known to the law,
and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers,
is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of
all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist."

- Winston Churchill

Nov. 21, 1943

1) Iraq Oil US War Racket
- - WAR IS A RACKET – by General Smedley Butler
- - It's still about oil in Iraq
- - Nobel Laureate Estimates Wars’ Cost at More Than $3 Trillion
- - The $3,000,000,000,000 War is a Domestic Issue
- - Dying to die in Afghanistan
- - Rule by Fear or Rule by Law?
- - Brattleboro, Vermont, Votes to Indict Bush and Cheney
- - Tongue and ‘Cheek’ – Malene Espensen Sexy Protest
2) September 11 Advocates Uncover Lies and Unanswered Questions
- - Transcript For Lorie Van Auken’s Speech - NYC Ballot Initiative
- - The Shell Game newsletter
- - The Mother of All Lies About 9/11
- - Moussaoui appeals, calling plea invalid
- - ZERO : Europe for an Independent Inquiry into 9/11
- - Architects, Engineers & Scientists Examine the Evidence of 9/11 in LA
- - Whitewash cover on What Happened on August 30 Nuclear Bomb Incident
- - Corpus Christi 911 Truther Arrested for Askin B.Clinton 9/11 Question
- - Oscar-winning Marion Cotillard's 9/11 conspiracy theory
3) Naomi Wolf - Why Barack Obama Got My Vote
- - Charlie Rose Interview with Tom Daschle
- - It's 3 a.m. and Hillary's Dreaming
- - Ohio, especially Cleveland, under scrutiny for voting problems
- - UNCOUNTED: The New Math of American Elections
4) Beware leaks of radioactivity - error of judgment
- - Forward "Error of judgement" kills babies
- - Why nukes are not the answer to global warming!!
- - Tell NRC to deny license to import radioactive waste from Italy
- - Vermont Yankee clears key hurdle on license extension
5) Early America Revisited by Ivan Van Sertima
- - They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America
- - Van Sertima Responds to his Critics
- - Bart Jordan: Correspondences between Ancient Egyptian and Mexican Pyramids

Editor’s Notes:

This issue tackles a number of related subjects: the war-oil racket; September 11, 2001 (and campaigns to get the truth out); Naomi Wolf’s declaration on Why Barack Obama Got My Vote; the Charlie Rose–Tom Daschle interview. Daschle was one of the Democrat Party leaders receiving an Anthrax message, which originated from a US military laboratory. He is a strong supporter of Barack Obama, too. Based on precedent, one must be concerned about voting irregularities in Ohio. But beyond all the spin from Texas and Ohio, Hillary can only overcome Obama’s delegate lead by playing the dirty super delegate card where inside politics again overrides the majority of inspired delegate votes. Her campaign, using fear and terror, is an old trick, but what is real is that the Bush-Clinton-Bush administrations have dominated US politics for the last 20 years! Enough is enough; not that Obama is ideal. This issue shows why concerns remain about nuclear energy as a lose/lose situation in dealing with Global Warming or energy independence. It is time to turn back the nuclear Armageddon clock. This issue again broadens a perspective to revisit America with Ivan Van Sertima, who has shown evidence that the African people, too, visited America before Columbus. The conquerors must not control historic facts. Link to the section in Van Sertima’s book, “Notes on Correspondences between Ancient Egyptian and Ancient Mexican Pyramids” by Bart Jordan. There are many mysteries in this issue to explore, but I strongly recommend your reading The Shell Game to look into a possible future, while taking actions to divert it from happening.

Valley 9/11 Truth
A film presentation of David Ray Griffin at the
Media Education Foundation, Northampton, MA
Wednesday, March 12, 2008; 7:00pm

1) Iraq Oil US War Racket

- - WAR IS A RACKET – by General Smedley Butler
- - It's still about oil in Iraq
- - Nobel Laureate Estimates Wars’ Cost at More Than $3 Trillion
- - The $3,000,000,000,000 War is a Domestic Issue
- - Dying to die in Afghanistan
- - Rule by Fear or Rule by Law?
- - Brattleboro, Vermont, Votes to Indict Bush and Cheney
- - Tongue and ‘Cheek’ – Malene Espensen Sexy Protest

- - WAR IS A RACKET – by General Smedley Butler
War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. In the World War [World War I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted huge gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows. [Please note these are 1935 U.S. dollars. To adjust for inflation, multiply all figures X 10 or more]

Three steps must be taken to smash the war racket: 1) We must take the profit out of war; 2) We must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not there should be war; and 3) We must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.

I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war. Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had "kept us out of war." Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany. In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly? Money.

Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations, and had the press been invited to be present at that conference, America never would have entered the war. But this conference, like all war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off, they were told it was a "war to make the world safe for democracy" and a "war to end all wars." Very little has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was really the war to end all wars. Disarmament conferences don't mean a thing. At all these conferences, lurking in the background are the sinister agents of those who profit by war. They see to it that these conferences do not seriously limit armaments. So...I say, TO HELL WITH WAR!
Note: For more on corporate complicity in fomenting war exposed by a top U.S. general, click here.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - It's still about oil in Iraq
2006-12-08, Los Angeles Times

While the Bush administration, the media and nearly all the Democrats still refuse to explain the war in Iraq in terms of oil, the ever-pragmatic members of the Iraq Study Group share no such reticence. Page 1, Chapter 1 ... lays out Iraq's importance: "It has the world's second-largest known oil reserves." The report makes visible to everyone the elephant in the room: that we are fighting, killing and dying in a war for oil.

Recommendation No. 63 ... calls on the U.S. to "assist Iraqi leaders to reorganize the national oil industry as a commercial enterprise." This is an echo of calls made [by] the U.S. State Department's Oil and Energy Working Group, meeting between December 2002 and April 2003. Iraq "should be opened to international oil companies as quickly as possible after the war."

Its preferred method of privatization was a form of oil contract called a production-sharing agreement. These agreements are ... rejected by all the top oil producers in the Middle East because they grant greater control and more profits to the companies than the governments. For any degree of oil privatization to take place ... Iraq has to amend its constitution.

Recommendation No. 26 of the Iraq Study Group calls for a review of the constitution to be "pursued on an urgent basis." Petroleum Economist magazine later reported that U.S. oil companies considered passage of the new oil law more important than increased security. Further, the Iraq Study Group would commit U.S. troops to Iraq for several more years to ... provide security for Iraq's oil infrastructure. We can thank the Iraq Study Group for making its case publicly. It is now our turn to decide if we wish to spill more blood for oil.,0,4717508.story

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Nobel Laureate Estimates Wars’ Cost at More Than $3 Trillion
by Kevin G. Hall
Published on Thursday, February 28, 2008 by McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON - When U.S. troops invaded Iraq in March 2003, the Bush administration predicted that the war would be self-financing and that rebuilding the nation would cost less than $2 billion.0228 03

Coming up on the fifth anniversary of the invasion, a Nobel laureate now estimates that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are costing America more than $3 trillion.

That estimate from Noble Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz also serves as the title of his new book, “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” which hits store shelves Friday.

The book, co-authored with Harvard University professor Linda Bilmes, builds on previous research that was published in January 2006. The two argued then and now that the cost to America of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is wildly underestimated.

When other factors are added - such as interest on debt, future borrowing for war expenses, the cost of a continued military presence in Iraq and lifetime health-care and counseling for veterans - they think that the wars’ costs range from $5 trillion to $7 trillion.

“I think we really have learned that the long-term costs of taking care of the wounded and injured in this war and the long-term costs of rebuilding the military to its previous strength is going to far eclipse the cost of waging this war,” Bilmes said in an interview.

The book and its estimates are the subject of a hearing Thursday by the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

The White House doesn’t care for the estimates by Stiglitz, a former chief economist of the World Bank who’s now a professor at Columbia University.

“People like Joe Stiglitz lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure. One can’t even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9-11,” said White House spokesman Tony Fratto, conceding that the costs of the war on terrorism are high while questioning the premise of Stiglitz’s research.

“It is also an investment in the future safety and security of Americans and our vital national interests. $3 trillion? What price does Joe Stiglitz put on attacks on the homeland that have already been prevented? Or doesn’t his slide rule work that way?”

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., a decorated Marine Corp colonel and Vietnam veteran, welcomed the effort by Stiglitz and Bilmes to quantify how much the wars will cost taxpayers.

“It’s astounding that here we are about to mark the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and this administration still refuses to acknowledge the long-term costs of the war in Iraq,” he said.

By any estimate, the Bush administration’s predictions in March 2003 of a self-financing war have proved to be wildly inaccurate. Stiglitz cites operational spending to date of $646 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and, working off estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, presumes that spending on these wars over the next decade probably will amount to another $913 billion.

Pentagon officials had no immediate comment on Stiglitz’s book or his estimates.

Stiglitz and Bilmes first estimated war costs of $1 trillion in January 2006. Their research proved controversial and sparked debate about the costs of replacing equipment used by the regular armed forces and National Guard. In the new book, they offer a figure of $404 billion for replacing equipment, planes and tanks and bringing military hardware back from Iraq and Afghanistan.

In an interview, Stiglitz said that too much of the public debate had been over the wars’ operational costs while the real budget strains would show up only years from now.0228 03b

“The peak expenditures are way out,” he said, noting that the peak expenditures for World War II vets came in 1993.

The pair estimated that future medical, disability and Social Security costs for veterans of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan range from a best-case $422 billion to what they call a more probable long-term expense of $717 billion.

It’s why the two call in the book for creating a Veterans Benefits Trust Fund to set aside money in a “lock box” to pay for future health-care needs of Iraq and Afghanistan vets. Although veterans’ health care amounts to a future promise, they said, it isn’t an entitlement and instead is funded through discretionary spending. In the future, funding for vets will compete with other government programs.

“We should not have an unfunded entitlement program like this,” Stiglitz said. “This is more like deferred compensation. . . . We require corporations to put money away but we don’t require the government to put money away, and we should be doing that . . . so when the focus turns away to some other problem, veterans aren’t given the shaft.”

The book divides war costs into two main categories: budgetary and social. The budgetary costs are the more quantifiable spending on operations, equipment, future benefits paid to veterans and the like. In a best-case scenario they total about $1.7 trillion; in a more probable scenario almost $2.7 trillion.

The social costs that Stiglitz and Bilmes offer are more theoretical, and represent the thought-provoking part of their war-cost argument.

Truncated, for the complete article, see:
also posted:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - The $3,000,000,000,000 War is a Domestic Issue
By Arianna Huffington
March 3, 2008

As our seemingly endless primary process reaches the homestretch and the focus shifts to the general election, we need to pull the plug on the media's disturbing habit of acting as if foreign policy and domestic policy are completely separate entities -- a pair of high stakes board games that can only be taken off the shelf and played one at a time. To hear the media tell it, combining the two would make about as much sense as using your Monopoly pieces to play Risk.

But while there is almost nothing about the Iraq war that can be labeled a success, we can declare that it has been exceedingly successful in showing how intertwined foreign and domestic policy actually are. In the book The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, along with co-author Linda Bilmes, argue that, even using "conservative assumptions," the Iraq war will cost at least $3,000,000,000,000, and likely as much as $5,000,000,000,000.

Stiglitz also argues that the war has played a major role in the current subprime credit crisis and our long, hard slog toward recession. Because of the cost of the war, the Fed flooded the system with credit. "The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," Stiglitz told The Australian's Peter Wilson.

The book (excerpted here by the Times of London, and here's an interview with the authors at Democracy Now) notes that the cost is 60 times the $50 - 60 billion we were told the war would cost by Don Rumsfeld. The Iraq war is already the second costliest war in American history, trailing only World War II.

Stiglitz makes the case that no country can fight a protracted war without deep and long-lasting effects on domestic policy. Particularly a protracted war paired with tax cuts. Now this doesn't mean a war shouldn't be fought (see World War II), but it does mean that our leaders should be honest about what the real costs will be. And not just in terms of dollars and cents but also in opportunity costs.

The single defining constant of the war over its disastrous, almost-five-years has been the complete and total lack of honesty from those who got us into it and have championed its continued prosecution -- including head war cheerleader John McCain. And although the driver of the 100 Year War Express is fond of offering frequent, empty, and clichéd nods to "sacrifice," he somehow thinks that's all the discussion that's needed about the costs of the war. Note to McCain: your protestations about "out of control" government spending would carry more weight if they weren't accompanied by calls for making permanent the tax cuts you once opposed as "not appropriate" in a time of war.

Maybe Saddam Hussein's head was worth $3,000,000,000,000 -- $5,000,000,000,000, maybe it wasn't (like most of the country, I believe the latter), but if McCain wants us to be there for 100, or 1,000, or a million years, he should be forced to make the case that the benefits outweigh the costs -- foreign and domestic.

As Crooked Timber's Daniel Davies notes, "the cost of the Iraq War could have underwritten Social Security for fifty years."

Or, as Aida Edemariam puts it in the Guardian, it would have paid for "8 million housing units, or 15 million public school teachers, or healthcare for 530 million children for a year, or scholarships to university for 43 million students." Of course, as John McCain himself has told us, he "doesn't really understand economics." But foreign policy does not exist in an economics vacuum.

Yet does anybody doubt that the general election is going to feature article after newscast after editorial extolling McCain's "foreign policy expertise?" Even if he's asked about the cost of remaining in Iraq, McCain will likely respond with some version of the Bush spin. "People like Joe Stiglitz," said the White House "lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure. One can't even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9/11."

Ah, the well-worn 9/11 trump card -- up to now, always an effective debate-ender. Will it still work come this fall? To a large extent that will depend on whether the media are as cowed by it as they have been since the run-up to the Iraq invasion.

If the coverage of the "surge" is any indication, the odds aren't great there will be more truth telling this time. The media seem to have decided that the surge is already a notch on McCain's foreign policy belt. It's a notch the candidate will be able to finger long past November since, the way things have shaken out, the surge has only served to deepen our foothold in Iraq. In fact, many believe that was the point all along.

As Sam Brannen of CSIS notes, "The United States is now the thread that binds Iraq, and it is clear that a serious unraveling of the situation would occur were this thread suddenly to be pulled away." Which led Judah Grunstein to conclude: "In other words, instead of making it easier for us to leave Iraq, the Surge has made it more difficult. And if that doesn't qualify a military tactic as a failure, I don't know what does."

This, in turn, led Andrew Sullivan to say: "I'm not sure that the surge wasn't in retrospect a deliberate attempt to make it all but impossible for the US to leave Iraq any time soon. And less out of a genuine security worry, than in order to save face for Bush and Cheney."

So will John McCain be called to account for the surge, and the rising costs of the continuing occupation the surge has enabled? Not likely. Getting the media to avoid a full accounting of the costs of the war -- both in terms of dollars spent and lives lost or ruined -- was one of the primary goals of the surge. And, in that respect, it has been sadly successful.

The thing about $3,000,000,000,000 is that, at a certain point, it becomes hard to ignore. As the red ink from the approaching recession continues to spill, you can bet the media will be all over the story -- the economy headlined as America's top domestic worry. The question is, will the media connect the dots between the war John McCain loves so much and the economic devastation it's helped cause? The answer could determine who is the next president of the United States.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Dying to die in Afghanistan
By Jerry Mazza
Online Journal Associate Editor
Mar 3, 2008, 00:47

Yes, it's young Prince Harry who was dying to die in Afghanistan for the old and new Empires. He had to come home because he really is third in line to the throne. How boring is that?

Obviously so boring, the 23-year-old prince went off to Helmand Province with the British Army in December, while most of the British news media agreed to keep the news secret for “security reasons.” But the story was broken to little notice in January by the Australian weekly magazine, New Idea, which was unaware of the embargo, and caused a furor when the Drudge Report posted it online. Well, stiff upper lip, Harry.

You’ll have to watch it all in the movies. In fact, the Oscar just went to Alex Gibney’s Taxi to the Dark Side, which documents the real-life story of Dilawar, a young Afghan taxi driver, who on December 5 was brought to Bagram for questioning by US Troops. Five days after his arrival, he was dead. This is one of the more egregious abuses in the jolly old “War on Terror” sanctioned by the less than lustrous powers that be. This, old chap, is what you’re missing . . .

“There were these young soldiers,” an unidentified man says in the film, “very little training, just as the rules were changing, and they weren’t told what the rules were;” and as one PFC says, “the brass knew. They saw them [prisoners] shackled and hooded, and they said, ‘Right on! Y’all are doing a great job.’” And they told him [Dilawar] he had no right to a lawyer, no right to witnesses. He didn’t know what the charges were or what the “secret evidence” against him was. The unidentified man adds, “They saw an intentional decision taken at the height of the Pentagon to put out a fog of ambiguity.”

“Unidentified” previously mentioned “Interrogators were telling the guards, strip this guy naked, chain him up to the bed in an uncomfortable position, do whatever you can.” And they did, beating him to death.

As Gibney tells us about the men involved in the actual beating and death of this innocent driver, “Some were acquitted, some were convicted, some pled, guilty, some served prison time, some were demoted. No officers were ever charged, only the enlisted men. And it’s interesting, at the end of the film, you know, there’s a law that our Congress passed with the urging of the president called the Military Commissions Act. One of the things in that law is a -- what amounts to a ‘get out of jail free’ card for members of the administration who may have condoned or enabled some of the things that these lower-down soldiers were convicted for.”

Truncated, for the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Rule by Fear or Rule by Law?
By Lewis Seiler, Dan Hamburg
Published by the San Francisco Chronicle, February 4, 2008


Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of "an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."

Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations, or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike.

Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure "continuity of government" in the event of what the document vaguely calls a "catastrophic emergency." Should the president determine that such an emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he deems necessary to ensure "continuity of government." This could include everything from canceling elections to suspending the Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a single hearing on NSPD-51.

What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens?

The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.

For the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Brattleboro, Vermont, Votes to Indict Bush and Cheney
By David Swanson - Wed, 2008-03-05

Brattleboro, Vt., voted today in support of a measure calling on the town's police force to arrest and indict Bush and Cheney. The vote was 2012-1795.

Truncated, for the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Tongue and ‘Cheek’ – Malene Espensen Sexy Protest
Malenes Sexy Protest
Published by the Daily Star Sunday - 2nd March 2008
By Andy Lea

SEXY Malene Espensen has given the phrase political briefing a saucy twist…by flashing in some new anti-Guantanamo Bay knickers.

The Danish beauty, 27, has joined protests against America’s anti-terror prison by buying orange bikini briefs emblazoned with “Fair Trial My Arse”.

The protest pants were designed by racy underwear firm Agent Provocateur as part of a campaign to close the controversial jail in Cuba, where critics say suspects are denied proper legal rights.

The limited edition knicks, which come with a free set of handcuffs and are the same colour as detainees’ uniforms, made their catwalk debut last month in Vivienne Westwood’s London Fashion Week show.

A source at human rights charity Reprieve said: “It’s a very serious issue but the underwear is a light-hearted way to get the message out.

“And with gorgeous Malene joining in we’re sure people will take notice.”

For the article and photos, see:

2) September 11 Advocates Uncover Lies and Unanswered Questions

- - Transcript For Lorie Van Auken’s Speech - NYC Ballot Initiative
- - The Shell Game newsletter
- - The Mother of All Lies About 9/11
- - Moussaoui appeals, calling plea invalid
- - ZERO : Europe for an Independent Inquiry into 9/11
- - Architects, Engineers & Scientists Examine 9/11 in LA
- - Whitewash cover on What Happened on August 30 Nuclear Bomb Incident
- - Corpus Christi 911 Truther Arrested for Askin B.Clinton 9/11 Question
- - Oscar-winning Marion Cotillard's 9/11 conspiracy theory
- - New Global Outlook Now Available
- - Valley 9/11 Truth presents "9/11: Let's Get Empirical"

- - Transcript For Lorie Van Auken’s Speech - NYC Ballot Initiative
November 24, 2007

Lorie Van Auken | NYC Ballot Initiative

Thanks, my name is Lorie Van Auken, and my husband, Kenneth Van Auken, was killed on September 11, 2001. On the morning of 9/11, Ken left me a message that said, “I love you. I’m in the World Trade Center. The building was hit by something. I don’t know if I am going to get out, but I love you very much. I hope I see you later, bye”. Ken didn’t get out, and I never saw him again. From his message, I knew that he had survived the plane’s impact into his office building, WTC Tower One.

Six years after the event, that’s about all I know. I don’t know how Ken died. Perhaps he died in the fire of smoke inhalation, or maybe he was killed when the building collapsed, I suppose that I will never know. Since we didn’t receive any of his remains, Ken never had a funeral. It turns out that almost everything about 9/11 was out of the ordinary, including the fact that it was never properly investigated.

When Bill Pepper asked me to be a part of a real investigation into 9/11, I found it difficult to say no.

The reason that we need an investigation into 9/11 is because we never actually had one. Almost 3,000 people were killed on September 11th, and many more have gotten sick and died from working on “the pile” at the WTC after the attacks. Oddly, there has never been a real look into how 9/11 could have occurred.

The 9/11 Commission was not a real investigation. It was political theater, and not a scientific, forensic analysis of the available evidence. The 9/11 Commission was comprised of politicians, not scientists, and not experts in relevant fields.

The family members who were involved with the Commission, actually had more questions after the 9/11 “independent commission” was completed, than we had before it began.

Questions like: 1. What happened to America’s military on 9/11? Hijacked commercial aircraft flew around the skies of America for almost two hours without a response from our military. American Airlines Flight 11, the first plane hijacked on September 11th, had its transponder turned off between 8:14 and 8:20 AM. That event alone should have triggered the military’s “emergency response” protocols and procedures. But it didn’t. Emergency protocols, we later learned, are different from hijacking protocols. A plane without a transponder constitutes an emergency because of the potential danger posed by an errant plane flying around the crowded skies of the Northeast, or anywhere for that matter. Later on, when it became clear that the emergency was a HIJACKING, the military’s hijacking protocols should have gone into effect as well. Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania at around 10:06 Am. So from about 8:14 AM until 10:06 AM, on the morning of 9/11 America’s multi-billion dollar military was seemingly missing in action.

Question 2: NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command, told the 9/11 independent commission three different stories with regard to their response on 9/11. We still don’t know how NORAD and the FAA interacted or how they actually responded on September 11th. This is because we have never seen any evidence to support the testimony of NORAD and the FAA. All we have is their contradictory testimony which they presented in front of the 9/11 Commission. The almost complete lack of military response to the September 11th attacks has never been adequately explained. In fact, in the book Without Precedent, written by 9/11 Commission Chair Thomas Kean and Vice-Chair Lee Hamilton, they say that the discrepancies that were presented to them by the U.S. military have never been resolved. Thomas Kean has been quoted as saying “We to this day don't know why NORAD told us what they told us," ... "It was just so far from the truth...It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."

A real investigation into 9/11 would have revealed definitive evidence about the facts of what happened on that day. The loose ends should have been tied by now. Part of the reason for the lack of resolution was the limited time and funds allocated to the 9/11 Commission. The investigation into President Clinton’s exploits cost around $30 Million, while the investigation into 9/11 was allocated a mere $14 Million. Interesting priorities.

Question 3: Transportation Secretary, Norman Mineta, testified before the 9/11 Commission on May 23, 2003. He spoke of a curious conversation between VP Cheney and a “young man” that took place on the morning of September 11th in the PEOC, the Presidential Emergency Operations Center. This young man kept coming into the room to update Cheney on how far away American Airlines flight 77 was from the Pentagon. At the 9/11 Commission hearing, Mineta SAID: "During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the plane is 50 miles out...the plane is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??"

So, what were the orders? Mineta could only speculate because he hadn’t actually heard the orders. The only people that would know what the orders were, would be VP Cheney and this unknown young man. To my knowledge, no effort was made to find the “young man” and question him before the 9/11 commission. It should not have been hard to find this “young man” as he would have to have been cleared by the authorities in order to enter the PEOC on the morning of September 11th. It is common knowledge that Cheney and Bush appeared in secret before the commissioners. They took no oath to tell the truth and no recordings or notes were allowed to have been taken. Nothing about what they said behind closed has ever been revealed to the American public. Perhaps they asked Cheney about his orders to this unknown young man, but we will never know.

Question 4: What about all the military exercises that were being conducted on September 11th? The only war game mentioned in the 9/11 Commission’s final report is Vigilant Guardian, but we know that there were many others. At the final hearing of the 9/11 Commission, they played the tape of NEADS [Northeast Air Defense Sector] asking: Is this real-world or exercise? And we heard the FAA answering: No, this is not an exercise, not a test, recorded after flight 11 struck the World Trade Center’s North Tower – Tower One. Did the many military exercises cause unnecessary confusion and interfere with the military’s response on the morning of 9/11? Shouldn’t we investigate that? And shouldn’t the Commissioners have made a recommendation that would limit the number of war games allowed at any given time? Wouldn’t we want to avoid confusing the military into utter uselessness in the future, insuring that the skies of the United States are protected AT ALL TIMES?

Question 5: The Pentagon is probably one of the most protected buildings in the world. At 9:38 AM, about an hour and a half after the transponder of American Airlines Flight 11, was shut off, the Pentagon was struck by a third hijacked plane. The Pentagon has many video cameras keeping a close eye on the building, and its airspace, which is at the heart of America’s defense.

By the third plane, 9/11 was no longer a “surprise” attack, how was our military STILL so unprepared an hour and a half into the attacks? And where is the video footage of whatever struck the Pentagon? Why haven’t we been allowed to see it? Why is that evidence still being kept from the American public? If there is nothing to hide, and they are telling the truth, why not release the videos?

Question 6: And which one of Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s stories about his whereabouts on the morning of 9/11 is true? As Defense Secretary, Rumsfeld was a key person in the chain of command on 9/11. He has told the public several different versions of how his day went on September 11th. Evidence should be presented to clear up the discrepancies.

Question 7: Why did the President of the United States remain in a classroom of elementary students, reading a book about goats, while America was under attack? If the Secret Service had done their job properly, President Bush would have been “whisked off” like VP Cheney said he had been, during the attacks. The President’s whereabouts were published and therefore, public knowledge, and clearly he would have been a terrorist target. The children in that classroom were also put in an unnecessarily dangerous situation by keeping Bush there while the attacks were under way.

Question 8: A large part of the “9/11 story” has been shaped by phone calls made from passengers and flight staff on the hijacked planes. Have you ever tried to make a cell phone call from an airplane? I have tried many times. I have attempted to place a call during take-off, during the flight and upon descending. My calls have been unsuccessful. The closest I ever came to having a conversation with someone from an airplane, was about a month ago when I tried to call Mindy Kleinberg, another 9/11 widow, during take-off in an American Airlines plane – we have developed our own protocols, when she flies, she tries to call me, and when I fly, I try to call her. While on an American Airlines flight on October 16, 2007, upon my third try, the cell phone connection was made, and I spoke to Mindy for a few seconds before we were cut off. All I had time to say was “hi, I’m on the plane”. I could not have imparted any meaningful information to her in our very brief conversation. By the way, the American Airlines plane that I was flying on was a 767, the planes on 9/11 were allegedly 757’s and 767’s, and there were no GTE phones in the seat backs of my plane. How did the people who called out from the doomed planes on 9/11, manage to do it? My little experiments have all been failures. Despite our attempts to find out, we still don’t know which calls were claimed to have been from cell phones, and which were alleged to have been GTE operator calls. This information is a matter of record, easily subpoenaed for. Where are the experts who should have testified before the commission regarding cell phone technology in airplanes? Why is this information still being kept secret?

Interestingly, in a little noticed news item released in a BBC news article from 2004, Airbus said that it was planning to put in-flight mobile phone technology on its aircraft by 2006. To make it possible to use a mobile on a plane, Airbus installed a “picocell” that creates a small mobile phone cell onboard the aircraft. Calls via this base station were routed to mobile and fixed phones on the ground via Globalstar satellites. They also trialled several wireless network technologies such as Bluetooth, wi-fi and wideband CDMA. Airbus estimate[d] that by 2006 it will be possible to use mobiles during flights.

Wouldn’t that suggest that in 2001, the technology for cell phone usage from a plane was non-existent?

Question 9: What made World Trade Center 7 collapse neatly into its own footprint at 5:20 PM on September 11th? The 9/11 Commission is silent on the collapse of WTC 7, why? That building collapsed in exactly the same way that WTC Towers 1 and 2 did, but WTC 7 was not struck by a plane. In a PBS interview, Larry Silverstein, the building’s leaseholder, said:

"I remember getting a call from the Fire Department Commander telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is 'pull it'. And they made that decision to pull. And then we watched the building collapse."

Wouldn’t we all have liked to have seen Larry Silverstein sworn in before the 9/11 Commission in order to explain what he meant? After all, Mr. Silverstein signed a 99 year lease for WTC Towers One and Two, taking control of the buildings and insuring them in July of 2001, a mere six weeks prior to September 11, 2001. Why didn’t the 9/11 Commission ever call upon Larry Silverstein to publicly testify? Why didn’t the 9/11 Commission answer any of the questions about WTC 7, instead, ignoring it entirely?

Question 10: Who funded the 9/11 attacks? Wouldn’t a real investigation “follow the money” to find the perpetrators? Instead we were told by the 9/11 Commission, that the funding of the attacks were of no real consequence.

And, for the record, whatever happened to the investigation into the Anthrax attacks of October 2001?

I could go on and on.

No one has ever been held accountable for the disastrous failures of 9/11. The people in positions such as these are trained to handle emergencies by following established protocols and procedures so that no one has to think about what should be done during the emergency. These procedures are developed and practiced to make them automatic, so that lives can be saved. On September 11th, protocols were not followed, yet no one at any level, was said to have been responsible for those failures. The 9/11 Commission told us that it was all due to “a failure of imagination”.

September 11, 2001 has been used as the excuse for almost everything that the Bush Administration has done since they have been in office. From launching a preemptive war in Iraq, to the hastily passed Patriot Act resulting in the assault on the civil liberties of all Americans, to outrageous economic deficits, and extensive military spending, which have all been justified by 9/11 and perpetrated in the name of the victims of September 11th including my husband. I can tell you that Ken would not have supported what this administration has done.

We need a real investigation into September 11th that follows all of the evidence, wherever it might lead, and the people that failed to do their jobs should to be held accountable. We need a real investigation into the events of 9/11 because without one, the ramifications are dire. Without the facts, the Bush Administration was able to falsely conclude that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and invade that country. Without the facts, the EPA was able to falsely conclude that the air in lower Manhattan was safe to breathe when it wasn’t and instructed people to simply vacuum up the hazardous WTC debris from their homes and offices. In short, without a real investigation into 9/11, we get agendas imposed on us that are not in our interests. But most of all, we need a real investigation into September 11th, as a first step toward taking America back for ourselves and for the future of our children.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - The Shell Game newsletter
Steve Alten


Because the events of 9/11, perpetrated by our own government, represent a turning point in history, propelling our nation down a dark path outlined by the Neo-Conservative document: Project for a New American Century. This agenda, which has thus far led us into wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, is far from finished.

Over the last few weeks, several extremely disturbing plot points in the novel have come to light in real life and you need to be aware!

1. Two weeks ago, Michael Chertoff, head of Homeland Security, essentially told reporters that he fears the next 9/11, which could be a suitcase nuke. Then last week, in threatening to veto a waterboarding ban, Bush let slip, and I quote, "terrorists are planning new attacks on our country that will make Sept. 11 pale by comparison."

2. Now in place are Executive Orders NSPD51 & HSPD20 directives that would place the United States under total Martial Law and Military Dictatorship in the event of another attack. This Executive Order allows the President to declare a National Emergency and freeze everything including a national election. Congress is powerless to prevent such an Executive Dictatorship, as long as the President advises Congress in a timely matter.

For more on these frightening directives, click on: v=K3dAnSMzUlo&feature=related

3. It was also recently announced that Haliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root had been awarded a $385 million dollar contract by Homeland Security to construct detention and processing facilities in the event of a national emergency. (Over 600 camps have already been erected and staffed!) The language of the preamble to the agreement veils the program with talk of temporary migrant holding centers, but it is made clear that the camps will also be used "as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency." Under the enemy combatant designation anyone at the behest of the US government, even if they are a US citizen, can be arrested and placed in an internment facility as long as it is deemed necessary without trial.

Having read this, most of you who have NOT read The SHELL GAME will probably think I am either a) a conspiracy theorist b) just trying to sell more books (I am, but not for the reasons you may think) or c) Alten is seriously off his rocker. So I want you to look each point up for yourself, then read the book, and you will understand what is happening. What can you do? Simple: EXPOSE THE CON BEFORE IT HAPPENS. The SHELL GAME is a valuable tool to open the public's eyes because it factually details the parallels we are NOW going through in a fast-paced thriller. If The SHELL GAME hits top 10 on the NY Times best seller list, then grocery chains and drug stores do automatic buy-ins. Major media will be harder pressed to give us coverage (major networks have issued a blackout on all 9/11 truth related news).

Let's keep the fiction FICTION!

1. Read the book. Like so many others, you will see the power of the story.

2. Send the above info as an e-mail to everyone on your mailing list. URGE THEM to BUY MULTIPLE COPIES of the book give them out as gifts! They are a persuasive tool.

3. Please do everything you can to help us SPREAD THE WORD. If you have contacts in radio or newspapers let us know. Send a review to It all helps.

Let's change the world while we can.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - The Mother of All Lies About 9/11
Barbara Olson's "Phone Call" From Flight 77

[ed: The key to this story is that this is the first (2AM on 12 September) "eyewitness report" that there were 1) middle eastern 2) hijackers on board the planes. If this phone call was impossible, as well as the other "eyewitness" phone calls, where does that leave us? - no evidence of hijackers or of middle easterners???]

The Mother of All Lies About 9/11
Barbara Olson's "Phone Call" From Flight 77
Copyright Joe Vialls, 27 March 2002

This is a story about a little white lie that bred dozens of other little white lies, then hundreds of bigger white lies and so on, to the point where the first little white lie must be credited as the “Mother of All Lies” about events on 11 September 2001. For this was the little white lie that first activated the American psyche, generated mass loathing, and enabled media manipulation of the global population.

Without this little white lie there would have been no Arab Hijackers, no Osama Bin Laden directing operations from afar, and no “War on Terror” in Afghanistan and occupied Palestine. Clearly the lie was so clever and diabolical in nature, it must have been generated by the “Power Elite” in one of its more earthly manifestations. Perhaps it was the work of the Council on Foreign Relations, or the Trilateral Commission?

No, it was not. Though at the time the little white lie was flagged with a powerful political name, there was and remains no evidence to support the connection. Just like the corrupt and premature Lee Harvey Oswald story in 1963, there are verifiable fatal errors which ultimately prove the little white lie was solely the work of members of the media. Only they had access, and only they had the methods and means.

The little white lie was about Barbara Olson, a conservative commentator for CNN and wife of US Solicitor General Ted Olson. Now deceased, Mrs Olson is alleged to have twice called her husband from an American Airlines Flight 77 seat-telephone, before the aircraft slammed into the Pentagon. This unsubstantiated claim, reported by CNN remarkably quickly at 2.06 am EDT [0606 GMT] on September 12, was the solitary foundation on which the spurious “Hijacker” story was built.

Without the “eminent” Barbara Olson and her alleged emotional telephone calls, there would never be any proof that humans played a role in the hijack and destruction of the four aircraft that day. Lookalike claims surfaced several days later on September 16 about passenger Todd Beamer and others, but it is critically important to remember here that the Barbara Olson story was the only one on September 11 and. 12. It was beyond question the artificial “seed” that started the media snowball rolling down the hill.

And once the snowball started rolling down the hill, it artfully picked up Osama Bin Laden and a host of other “terrorists” on the way. By noon on September 12, every paid glassy-eyed media commentator in America was either spilling his guts about those “Terrible Muslim hijackers”, or liberating hitherto classified information about Osama Bin Laden. “Oh sure, it was Bin Laden,” they said blithely, oblivious to anything apart from their television appearance fees.

The deliberate little white lie was essential. Ask yourself: What would most Americans have been thinking about on September 12, if CNN had not provided this timely fiction? Would anyone anywhere have really believed the insane government story about failed Cessna pilots with box cutters taking over heavy jets, then hurling them expertly around the sky like polished Top Guns from the film of the same name? Of course not! As previously stated there would have been no Osama Bin Laden, and no “War on Terror” in Afghanistan and occupied Palestine.

This report is designed to examine the sequence of the Olson events and lay them bare for public examination. Dates and times are of crucial importance here, so if this report seems tedious try to bear with me. Before moving on to discuss the impossibility of the alleged calls, we first need to examine how CNN managed to “find out” about them, reported here in the September 12 CNN story at 2.06 am EDT:

Truncated, for the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Moussaoui appeals, calling plea invalid
Lawyers claim he pleaded guilty without seeing secret evidence
Associated Press
February 26, 2008

WASHINGTON — Lawyers urged Zacarias Moussaoui not to plead guilty to terrorism charges. They just couldn't tell him why.

In newly filed court documents, Moussaoui argues that court-imposed secrecy undermined his ability to present an adequate defense. His new lawyers say Moussaoui's guilty plea should be thrown out and a new trial should be convened for the man who once claimed to have been a part of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist plot.

Moussaoui was not allowed to see the classified evidence against him and was shut out from closed-door hearings in which that evidence was laid out.

Truncated, for the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - ZERO : Europe for an Independent Inquiry into 9/11

Post by February 27 2008 -
Two reports follow on the presentation last night, in Brussels, of the film "Zero" to the European Parliament. The first is from Mark Dermul, of, graciously provided in both English and Dutch, and the second from Dr. Eric Beeth. Photos of the event are available at Further information on the European Parliament is available at their website, with Mr. Chiesa's page here.
— Ed.

BRUSSELS, European Parliament, 26th February 2008.
Mark Dermul (http://www.911belgium) reporting.

On Tuesday 26th February, Europarliamentarian Guilietto Chiesa invited his colleagues and the press to attend the screening and debate of the Italian-produced documentary named ‘ZERO, an investigation into the events of 9/11’. Object of the screening was to create political awareness of the faulty official investigation into the events by the 9/11 Commission.

Besides Mr Chiesa, the panel consisted of Japanese parliamentarian Fujita, Dr David Ray Griffin, film distributor Tim Sparke & the director and producers of the film.

After his opening statements, Mr Chiesa welcomed his guest speakers. Then he pointed out that he was unable to find any distributor in his native country of Italy and was happy to find a company in the UK, led by Mr Tim Sparke, to handle worldwide distribution of this important film. ‘It is important to realize,’ he emphasized ‘that the movie was made thanks to contribution and donations of hundreds of citizens who feel a new investigation is more than warranted.’ No less than 450 people worked on this documentary on a voluntary basis. They never received any kind of payment. Their reward is the movie itself, which they feel is an instrument to create awareness and a means to provoke a political debate in Europe.

For the complete article:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Architects, Engineers & Scientists Examine 9/11 in LA
Cynthia McKinney Still Speaking Out for 9/11 Truth
Tuesday, February 26 2008 - Post by

"Architects, Engineers & Scientists Examine the Evidence of 9/11", held February 23rd at Immanuel Presbyterian Church in Los Angeles, featured Cynthia McKinney, Richard Gage, and Steven Jones.

Commentary on event from Prof. Steven Jones:
A great event came together very well Saturday evening, 23 Feb 2008, under the able leadership of Julia and Kristine (sp?) of KPFK - LA. Julia provided introductions followed by Richard Gage for about 35 minutes, then I spoke for about an hour, followed by Richard once more... Then Cynthia McKinney gave a powerful, motivating talk -- she is running for US President in the Green Party (USA). She is very 9/11-savvy. Finally, Q&A. It was fun -- a lot of energy at the meeting.

I presented new SEM/EDS data on the red/gray chips -- and explained further research that is being planned and done to finish this up. (Hopefully the video will be available soon.) I also spoke about areas where I/we actually agree with NIST scientists and engineers,

See article URL to link to a two-part video of Cynthia's presentation:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Whitewash cover on What Happened on August 30 Nuclear Bomb Incident
The Welch Whitewash: We Still Don't Know What That Aug. 30 Nuclear Incident Was About
Mon, 02/25/2008
By Dave Lindorff

A new report on the August 30 incident in which six nuclear-armed advanced cruise missiles were effectively “lost” for 36 hours, during which time they were, against all regulations, flown in launch position mounted on a pylon on the wing of a B-52H Stratofortress, from Minot AFB in North Dakota across the continental US to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana, has left unanswered some critical questions about the event.

Directed by retired Air Force Gen. Larry D. Welch, the task force’s Report on the Unauthorized Movement of Nuclear Weapons found plenty wrong with the way the US military handles its nuclear weapons, but appears to have dealt lightly with the specific incident that sparked the inquiry—only giving it a few paragraphs.

According to the report, when nuclear-capable missiles are placed onto a pylon assembly (in the case of the B-52, these pylons can hold six missiles), procedures call for a clear distinction to be made as to whether they are armed with nuclear weapons or with dud warheads. In the storage bunker, pylons with dud warheads are supposed to be encircled with orange cones like those used by highway repair crews, and placards announcing that the warheads are duds are supposed to be hung on all four sides. This reportedly was not done, leaving no distinction between one pylon containing six nuclear-armed missiles, and two others that had missiles carrying nukes.

For the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Corpus Christi 911 Truther Arrested for Askin B.Clinton 9/11 Question
Corpus Christi 911 Truther Arrested & Handcuffed
for Askin B.Clinton 9/11 Question
Mar 3, 11:58 PM EST
Bill Clinton campaigns in South, far West Texas on eve of primary
Associated Press Writer

EL PASO, Texas (AP) –


..Afterward, a protester was charged with disorderly conduct after yelling at Clinton. The Corpus Christi Caller-Times reported that the man was holding a sign saying the Sept. 11 attacks were an inside job as Clinton spoke. The man yelled at Clinton later as the former president shook hands with the crowd.

Police were approaching the man when someone in the crowd grabbed his sign and tore it in half. The paper says the unidentified man screamed at officers to protect his First Amendment rights. Police handcuffed the man and took him to a patrol car.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Oscar-winning Marion Cotillard's 9/11 conspiracy theory

Marion Cotillard's 9/11 conspiracy theory
By Peter Allen in Paris
Last Updated: 2:38am GMT 04/03/2008

Oscar-winning Marion Cotillard was facing embarrasment with her new American public last night after it emerged that she doubted the official account of the September 11 attacks.

For article, see:
London Telegraph

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - New Global Outlook Now Available
Barrie Zwicker | Global Outlook | Ian Woods

NEWS RELEASE: The long awaited Volume 1 of the “Greatest Crime of All Time” series from Global Outlook is finally here! Volume 2, which was published first, in November of 2006, won wide acclaim from such 9/11 researchers as David Ray Griffin: “This should really be considered one of the major 9/11 publications, to be mentioned alongside the leading books.”

Now Global Outlook has published its next ground-breaking new book: “9/11: Solving the Greatest Crime of All Time – The Best of Global Outlook, Vol. 1." It is the result of six years of collective efforts to expose the truth and lies about 9/11. In it, Global Outlook has pulled together all the best articles from the back issues (#1 through #10) of Global Outlook and complied them in this 352-page book which documents the march of 9/11 activists toward the revelation that 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB.

“Assembling all the best articles from 80 different contributors, over a four year period [2002 to 2005], in one dynamic compendium focusing on the 9/11 Truth movement, is unprecedented,” says editor, Ian Woods. “This book will open more than a few eyes, that’s for sure!”

Contributing editors include author Barrie Zwicker and 9/11 researcher Terry Burrows. This is not only a collector’s item, and a key reference manual for all 9/11 Truthers – new and seasoned, but it is also a new tool that can easily bring fence-sitters into the movement. Reasonably priced, in full color, and in large 8 X 10 inch format, “9/11: Solving the Greatest Crime of All Time” is going to be a sensational best-seller.

Purchase magazine here;

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Valley 9/11 Truth presents "9/11: Let's Get Empirical"


Valley 9/11 Truth - Presents a free film screening:
"9/11: Let's Get Empirical"

Wednesday, March 12, 2008; 7:00 PM
Media Education Foundation
60 Masonic Street; Northampton , MA 01060
Open discussions follow film.

Valley 9/11 Truth is an organization with about 100 members helping to expose the truth about the 9/11 crimes, and the massive cover-up by our government and media. The film, 9/11: LET'S GET EMPIRICAL, is of a David Ray Griffin presentation, based on information from his book, "Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory."

Focusing on empirical analysis, Dr. Griffin brilliantly shows that most objections to the alternative theory, according to which 9/11 was an inside job, are based on purely a priori arguments and a propagandistic use of the term "conspiracy theory," showing that if we get empirical about 9/11, we can quickly see that the official story cannot be true. This film of David Ray Griffin presenting a talk in Seattle, Washington, May 2007, recorded by videographer Ken Jenkins, illustrated with graphics and video clips.

Following the film there will be discussions. The next program with Valley 9/11 Truth at the Media Education Foundation will be on April 30, 2008. Valley 9/11 Truth will be meeting prior to the March 12th film presentation at 6:00 PM to vote on its next film presentation. All are welcome to participate. To sign up for forthcoming events and to learn more, visit To learn more about a grassroots campaign for an independent investigation of the 9/11/01 crimes, visit –

3) Naomi Wolf - Why Barack Obama Got My Vote

- - Charlie Rose Interview with Tom Daschle
- - It's 3 a.m. and Hillary's Dreaming
- - Ohio, especially Cleveland, under scrutiny for voting problems
- - UNCOUNTED: The New Math of American Elections

Why Barack Obama Got My Vote
by Naomi Wolf

I just flew back from Australia, where I was speaking about the erosions of our civil liberties. Believe me, the rest of the world is agog at our inaction as what makes us Americans is being set aflame; and they are more scared of what an unsheathed US could do to the rest of the world than we are.

They also get more news out in the rest of the world about these depredations than we do here in our media bubble.

For instance: As the Australian reported earlier this week, New South Wales Justice of the Peace Mamdouh Habib is suing the Australian federal government ­ which under the Howard administration had colluded with the US in committing various abuses against detainees and due process ­ for having allowed him to be arrested wrongly in Pakistan in 2001, kidnapped and sent illegally to Egypt. There this Justice of the Peace was illegally imprisoned and tortured for six months. After that the United States held him for FOUR YEARS in Guantanamo. His complaint notes that he is a law-abiding citizen who was swept up under false pretexts. “It turns out that Habib has incontrovertible proof of his good standing,” the Australian noted. “[H]e is a fully accredited Justice of the Peace in NSW. A search of the NSW Attorney General’s Department website reveals that not only Habib, but his wife Maha Habib, is a JP.” To become justice of the peace in New South Wales, the Australian added, “you have to be NOMINATED BY A MEMBER OF THE NSW PARLIAMENT and submit to a full character inquiry, including a criminal records check by NSW Police.” (ALL CAPS mine)

Get that? A justice of the peace in a developed-world democracy. Had you heard of that?

Me neither.

This gave me chills because, once again, it is so scarily predictable: when I first started trying to alert people about the ramifications of the Military Commissions Act, and how it gives the US power to seize innocent people off the street simply by the President’s naming them ‘enemy combatants’, I pointed out that nothing would prevent the US from rendering an EU minister off the streets of Belgium ­ and flying him or her to a `black site’ for torture ­ if he or she opposed a US pipeline plan, or was prosecuting US war criminals such as Rumsfeld in the Hague. And that the clear lesson of Germany and other closing societies such as Argentina is that once those ‘disappearances’ begin, that is it; few are then brave enough to object ­ and at that point objection is too weak to be effective anyway.

They rendered an Australian justice of the peace ­ and that rendition did not even make the US news. So how can we be sure there is something so sacred about an American justice of the peace or even a judge? Say, an American judge who ruled against the Military Commissions?

This kind of leap to the next level of threat to us as citizens seems implausible to many people because they assume that there is an orderly and effective democratic response to this kind of eruption of lawlessness ­ (oh gosh, actually it isn’t lawlessness any more, now is it) ­ or, I should say, to this kind of abrupt shift to a heightened level of state sadism; Well ­ someone would bring charges!, one assumes. Or: someone would sue! Or: surely the ACLU would do something!

But seriously, I ask you to consider: What would indeed happen as a countermove if a US justice of the peace or a judge was rendered? The Bar Association would protest? Scary. Intimidating.

I raise this as an urgent matter in part because of a recent conference call I participated in with Hamid Khan, the head of the courageous movement of Pakistani lawyers and judges. In the call, which he made in spite of great danger to himself and probably to his family, there was a moment when he described the internecine warfare and factionalism of the opposition to Musharraf. In his voice was the tired, frustrated sound I have heard so often in this country when groups on the left JUST CAN’T GET IT TOGETHER. No matter how urgent the need is. Whereas in Pakistan’s case they were having trouble getting the anti-Musharraf forces to act together ­ and there was so much at stake.

What became clear from that call is that we are fools to assume that if the government makes a dramatically violent move, which all the laws I have highlighted now make entirely possible, that anyone will know clearly what to do or how to implement what should be done in response. In Pakistan, it was clear, in spite of this powerful grassroots movement, no one had a clear Plan B when Musharraf declared a state of emergency and began rounding up the lawyers and arresting the judges. No one had an unquestioned leadership structure in place for the countermovement; no one had a subcontinent-sized phone tree or a nice big ­ oh, nation-sized ­ conference room in which to meet.

We need to consider this right now when we think about our own country: In a sudden sharp move on the part of the US government, even a `small’ one such as this imagined scenario of the rendition of a handful of US judges, there is nothing a democracy is prepared effectively to do; that is the nature of democracy. There is no War Room for democracy; no one has an organizational chart detailing who would do what; no one would have a master strategy.

When people think about the many laws that invite this kind of overreaching now in the US ­ the National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD 51), for instance, that would give the President control over all branches of government ­ executive, legislative, and judicial ­ in the event of an emergency ­ they just assume that, gosh darn it, WE WON’T TAKE IT. And it may well be that we wouldn’t want to take it and we would be willing in great numbers to run to the ramparts. But here is what I have to report to you, that the conference call made clear, and my Pakistani friend would confirm this: in a crackdown, even in the best-case scenario, NO ONE KNOWS WHERE THE RAMPARTS ARE.

Many people have expressed faith in the Military. I am sure most of our military are patriots and cherish freedom; but who would direct a resistance to such an edict? What would be the chain of command? What about ordnance? Many people have expressed faith in the courts, but if they went after the judges ­ just a handful of judges ­ as they did in Pakistan, would the judiciary prevail? How? All closed societies have judiciaries; the judges just know which way to rule.

Many others assume the media will cover such a depredation and rouse people; well, ideally ­ but just days ago we saw a curious blackout of a 60 Minutes report on Don Siegelman, the Democrat probably wrongly jailed in Alabama, by a TV affiliate with close ties to the White House.

Resistance? Sure, but how? The trouble with an aggressive move in any one of these directions on the part of the government is that THEY HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN and we have not. They aren’t surprised or shocked; we are. They have a plan; we don’t.

So surely, better to roll back these terrifying laws. Just in case.

I have noted it is always true that societies that begin by torturing people at the margins end up torturing members of their own citizenry. Consider again: the Oscar-winning documentary for this year, Taxi to the Dark Side, which proves that any of us can become a monster torturer, following orders, and proves also that the edict to torture was systemic and came from the very top, won’t be seen by most Americans. This is because the Discovery Channel bought it hoping to air it ­ but then backed out. (Its affiliates have close ties to the military-industrial complex.) Will the Oscar win get it on the airwaves? Doubtful. Watch it somehow and drag all your friends to see it. Then consider that what happened to Dilawar, an innocent Afghani taxi driver, could happen to you or me.

When I went to see it in a theatre there were six people present. So America can’t know in time what is being done to others to take steps to protect ourselves.

What is leadership? Leadership means getting out in front of where people are and waking them up. Right now, given these violent possible threats to us and our families, we are sleeping.

Which is why I am formally coming out of the closet with my support for Senator Barack Obama. Of all the candidates running now, he is the leader on understanding the threat to the Constitution and actually taking action, not just mouthing soundbites, on the need to deny torturers space in our nation and to restore the rule of law.

“Lawyers for Gitmo detainees endorse Obama,” read a recent headline on the Boston Globe’s political blog. In the article, reporter Charlie Savage notes that “More than 80 volunteer lawyers for Guantanamo Bay detainees today endorsed Illinois Senator Barack Obama’s presidential bid. The attorneys said in a joint statement that they believed Obama was the best choice to roll back the Bush-Cheney administration’s detention policies in the war on terrorism and thereby to ‘restore the rule of law, demonstrate our commitment to human rights, and repair our reputation in the world community.’”

The lawyers who signed this letter ­ prominent names on the list included Washington lawyer Thomas Wilner, retired federal appeals court judge John Gibbons, and retired Rear Admiral Donald Guter, who was the Navy’s top JAG officer from 2000 to 2002 ­ applauded Obama for having stood up in 2006 against aspects of the Military Commissions Act. Unfortunately, his fight was ultimately unsuccessful ­ which is why we are all still in danger. But unlike other candidates he truly fought and he understood the nature of the danger: “When we were walking the halls of the Capitol trying to win over enough Senators to beat back the Administration’s bill, Senator Obama made his key staffers and even his offices available to help us,” the lawyers wrote. “Senator Obama worked with us to count the votes, and he personally lobbied colleagues who worried about the political ramifications of voting to preserve habeas corpus for the men held at Guantanamo. He has understood that our strength as a nation stems from our commitment to our core values, and that we are strong enough to protect both our security and those values. Senator Obama demonstrated real leadership then and since, continuing to raise Guantanamo and habeas corpus in his speeches and in the debates.”

Senator Clinton also opposed the law. In 2006 she said: “If enacted, this law would give license to this Administration to pick people up off the streets of the United States and hold them indefinitely without charges and without legal recourse.” She gets the danger; many of her colleagues do too. But this issue requires bold language and action. Senator Clinton has not foregrounded the issue of the subversion of the rule of law in her appearances or speeches; and I am very VERY sorry to say that she did not oppose torture until she opposed it.

I say this with regret: She and her husband really know how to run a country; they delivered eight years of peace and prosperity. I know her to be a skilled politician and motivated by sincere love of country. Mrs. Clinton would be a terrific executive ­ in a stable democracy. But that is not enough right now. These are times that should try men’s souls ­ and women’s also. In a closing society, a leader has to be willing to face down evil, engage it and call it by its name.

Remember: when activists started to push hard to raise awareness of the dangers of torture and indefinite detention, many on the Hill were scared to join the fight because it was then politically unpopular. But to me, if you are not really against torture ­ always and under every political change in climate, and let us note that former torture victim and prisoner of war John McCain shamefully dropped his fight against the torture loopholes in the law as well ­ then you are not really, in my view, fit to be an American President.

Gender has nothing to do with it. Race has nothing to do with it.

Integrity has something to do with it.

That is why Barack Obama has my vote. Of all the leading candidates, he is the only one on these issues who has consistently acted like a true American.

And if I hear ­ as I am likely to ­ from legions of US feminists outraged at me for choosing this man over that woman, I will gladly sit down and explain why I am certain that these issues are so urgent that they overshadow absolutely everything else.

Anyway, the man is a feminist; he has a woman-friendly policy vision. And while it would be a thrill to see the first woman elected President, in the last analysis, a real feminist need not define people or support on the basis of gender. Certainly not when our house ­ with the precious Constitution held without representation within it ­ is burning down.

Naomi Wolf is the author of The End of America (Chelsea Green) and the co-founder of the American Freedom Campaign.

Copyright © 2008, Inc.
also posted

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Charlie Rose Interview with Tom Daschle
Monday, March 3
A conversation with Tom Daschle, Senate Majority Leader.

For a video, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - It's 3 a.m. and Hillary's Dreaming
Posted March 5, 2008 | 01:38 AM (EST)

To be a winner you have to win. And Tuesday night Hillary Clinton unreservedly won three out of four states. Barack Obama, however, has won twice as many primary and caucus states overall, leads substantially in the popular vote and continues to hold a mathematically insurmountable lead in elected delegates.

For two or three days, the Clinton campaign will spin itself -and the media--silly, breathlessly celebrating her overwhelming victories in Rhode Island and Ohio and her squeaker in Texas.

After the confetti is swept and the champagne bottles are tossed a more sober reality will take hold. Not just that her net gain of delegates this week will be, at most, in the single digits. But worse. There is no plausible scenario in which Clinton can win the nomination. At least not democratically.

Truncated, for the complete article, see:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Ohio, especially Cleveland, under scrutiny for voting problems
By THOMAS J. SHEERAN Associated Press Writer
Published on Tuesday Mar 04, 2008

With a surprisingly large role to play in the Democratic presidential race late in the primary season, Ohio had the daunting job Tuesday of running an election with new systems in many locations, particularly trouble-prone Cleveland.

In Cuyahoga County, which was ordered in December to make a fast-track switch from touch-screen voting to paper ballots, poll worker Bill Hallock in suburban Westlake said the printed ballots were easier for voters to understand, although they took a little longer to fill out.

"It was way more easy to vote," said Acy Streeter, 51, who voted in Cleveland. "All you have to do is blacken the oval under the candidate."

"I like this better, because I'm sure it is going to get counted," Cleveland voter Matt Wilson said of the paper ballots.

With 250,000 registered Democrats, Cleveland and Cuyahoga County could be critical to the primary campaigns of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

After some voter confusion about a removable stub on the ballots, the county sent a message to polling sites telling them to keep the stub attached because it is taken off later during tabulations.

Election officials around the state said the start of voting was generally smooth and polling sites were busy despite heavy rain, with some sleet in Cleveland. There were isolated instances of temporary delays getting polling sites running, but lines of voters mostly moved quickly.

Officials weren't predicting how long it might take to count the votes but it could last into Wednesday.

Jane Platten, Cuyahoga County elections director, said she had heard of just one polling place, in suburban Richmond Heights, that had trouble opening on time. She did not have any details.

Ohio's top elections official, Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat elected in 2006 with a promise to reform the system, said she would have preferred more low-profile election to make changes.

"We were really hoping that we would be under the radar, as it were, but as we find ourselves so often in Ohio, we're smack dab in the middle," the secretary of state said.

Peg Rosenfield, an election specialist with the nonpartisan League of Women Voters of Ohio, said conspiracy theorists will be out in force if the vote count drags into Wednesday. "Something will go wrong someplace," she said.

Brunner wants 53 other Ohio counties that use electronic voting machines to switch to paper. For the primary she only required them to make paper ballots available to voters who ask for them.

In Franklin County, all polling places opened on time, including one in Columbus at the Ohio State School for the Blind, where the electricity was out and voting machines operated on backup power, county elections board spokesman Ben Piscitelli said.

In Toledo, Lucas County elections board director Jill Kelly said polling sites opened promptly, even in precincts where two presiding judges failed to show up on time with memory cards for electronic voting machines.

"If you don't have that, you can't start the party," Kelly said. In one case, the sheriff's office was sent to retrieve the equipment.

Brunner wasn't making predictions on when all the primary votes would be counted. She urged patience in view of the paper-ballot option for voters skeptical of electronic voting.

In Cuyahoga County, voters are using their third voting system in recent years: punch-cards abandoned in 2005; then a touch-screen system that highlighted poll-worker training issues; and an old-fashioned fill-in-the-oval paper-ballot system debuting Tuesday.

Many poll workers were unprepared for electronic voting in the 2006 primary, and results were delayed five days in Cleveland amid a hand-count of absentee ballots. In November, vote totals were delayed until almost noon the day after the election because of computer problems.

Cuyahoga is counting its votes in one location, a former department store warehouse, instead of at each precinct, a move that prevents voters from being alerted if their ballots are improperly filled out.

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

- - UNCOUNTED: The New Math of American Elections
For a recommended educational resource, watch:
UNCOUNTED: The New Math of American Elections

UNCOUNTED is an explosive documentary that shows how the election fraud that changed the outcome of the 2004 election led to even greater fraud in 2006 - and now looms as an unbridled threat to the outcome of the 2008 election.

“The notion of stolen elections is something we assign to Third World countries but not this beacon of freedom and democracy that we like to view ourselves as.” ~Bernie Ellis, Election integrity activist

UNCOUNTED is a wakeup call to all Americans. Beyond increasing public awareness, the film inspires greater citizen involvement in fixing a broken electoral system. As we approach the decisive election of 2008, this film will change how you feel about the way votes are counted in America to inspire you to step in and add your energy to reverse the looming threat to our democracy.

To view a trailer or purchase the film, see:

4) Beware leaks of radioactivity - error of judgment

- - Forward "Error of judgement" kills babies
- - Why nukes are not the answer to global warming!!
- - Tell NRC to deny license to import radioactive waste from Italy
- - Vermont Yankee clears key hurdle on license extension

- - Forward "Error of judgement" kills babies
From: "Bob Nichols"

I Request Wide Distribution. Send it 'round to your friends and neighbors, please.

The following press release is from England; but. applies directly to most areas of the United States. There are 104 big power reactors and hundreds of smaller "research" reactors around the US. The so-called research reactors are very potent and use bomb grade uranium for nuclear fuel.

All the reactors leak all the time. The National Academy of Sciences has stated that there "is no safe level" of exposure to radiation.

Civic leaders and investors in each community have determined that a human sacrifice is an appropriate trade for some electricity, though.

Dr. Chris Busby is a part of Green Audit and an acknowledged specialist in radiation exposure and radiation poisoning. I recommend the report to you highly.


Bob Nichols
San Francisco

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Leaks and peaks
"Error of judgement" kills babies

Increased infant mortality after radioactive leak points to fault line in radiation risk model

A BBC Inside Out documentary broadcast yesterday (29th February 2008) features new research by Green Audit (sponsored by Stop Hinkley). Leaks of radioactivity from Hinkley Point nuclear power station near Burnham on Sea, Somerset, UK in 1994 preceded a peak in infant mortality. This is based on official health data.

Earlier studies in Burnham on Sea showed increased breast cancer after the accident.

The first leak was caused by corroded pipework. The second was caused by a failure to replace one part of the suspect pipe. When prosecuted for this "error of judgement" in 1995 station operators Nuclear Electric described the leaks as "insignificant" and "at the bottom of the scale".

The conventional radiation risk model predicts no discernible impact on cancer at such levels of exposure. Infant mortality is not officially considered as an effect of radioactive pollution.

Radiation is thought to cause anomalies in the sex ratios of births — the proportion of boy babies born compared with girls. Normally, in England and Wales five percent more boy babies are born. The Green Audit report studied sex ratios in the data for Burnham North, the ward nearest to the most contaminated mud in the study area. The sex ratio was found to be abnormal, with nineteen percent more boys born, similar to the ratios found in the Hiroshima atom bomb studies.

To view the 10 minute BBC report go to Scroll down to find the icon titled "West" on the right hand side. Click on the link Watch the latest edition in full to run the video on your computer. You can see Dr. Julia Verne, the current head of cancer registrations in south west England, claiming she found nothing when she re-tested the data "using the best methods". Her predecessor, Dr. Derek Pheby, disagrees: "This is a serious finding, and most unlikely to have arisen by chance. The likelihood is that something happened environmentally at the beginning of the period in question and it is very likely, although this would be difficult to prove, that the accidental releases of radioactive material in 1994 to which the authors [of the study] draw attention is implicated in this. Clearly this is a serious matter, which warrants further investigation. The South West Public Health Observatory [formerly the SW Cancer Registry] ought to take this seriously."

Julia Verne has denied the existence of radiation effects before and had ignored refutations of her flawed analyses. Curiously, after her earlier reports, she was appointed to COMARE, the UK Government's advisory Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment.

The Green Audit study is on

A local newspaper report of the 1995 trial of Nuclear Electric is on

Stop Hinkley report (Stop Hinkley sponsored the Green Audit study.)

Western Daily Press report

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Why nukes are not the answer to global warming!

Does nuclear energy produce no CO2 ?
by Dave Kimble at

Proponents of nuclear power always say that one of the big benefits of nuclear power is that it produces no Carbon dioxide (CO2).

This is completely untrue, as a moment's consideration will demonstrate that fossil fuels, especially oil in the form of gasoline and diesel, are essential to every stage of the nuclear cycle, and CO2 is given off whenever these are used.

Truncated, for the complete article and photos, see:

- - - - - - - - - - -
From -
If you haven’t yet signed the Simple Statement on Nuclear Power and Climate, please do so here: (but please don’t sign multiple times!). If you have signed, please pass this address on to your friends!

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Tell NRC to deny license to import radioactive waste from Italy

Oppose License to Import Nuclear Power Waste to US from Europe


From NIRS website:

In the US “low-level” radioactive waste includes all the commercial nuclear waste except irradiated fuel from nuclear reactors, the liquid and sludge from reprocessing and the solid into which that is converted. In most of Europe this same range of waste is considered “low” and “intermediate” level. Regardless, it includes the same long-lasting, deadly radionuclides as in high level radioactive waste and sometimes in even greater concentrations.

Despite no place or technology to isolate the waste as long as it is radioactively hazardous, the nuclear industry creates more and more.

UPDATE February 2008. A major US nuclear waste company, EnergySolutions, with a near monopoly on commercial nuclear waste treatment and disposal in the US, proposes large scale importation nuclear waste from Italy for processing and disposal in the US. This import license application is open for public comment until March 12, 2008. On February 28, 2008. over 50 national, state and local groups and individuals requested an extension of 90 days for public comment and requests to intervene and hold hearings.

Congressmembers including (Rep. Gordon and Rep.Matheson ), state legislators , a governor and newspapers have expressed concern and opposition.

A million cubic feet, 20,000 tons, and large amounts of radioactivity from the Italian nuclear industry facilities - what appears to be most of Italy’s “low” and intermediate level radioactive waste - could be brought around the globe to the US through the ports of Charleston, South Carolina and New Orleans, Louisiana. It would then go to Memphis and Oak Ridge Tennessee for “processing” and the remains transported to Utah for burial.

Comments submitted so far and the docket can be viewed on the NRC website and searching in the electronic library ADAMS under the docket # 11005711.

Comment to NRC ( re: Application No. IW023 by March 12, 2008; Contact NIRS ( to join requests for hearing(s) and to intervene.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Vermont Yankee clears key hurdle on license extension
AP Writer
Article Date: Tuesday, February 26, 2008

MONTPELIER, Vt. ‹ The staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff on Monday gave its blessing to the Vermont
Yankee nuclear plant's request to extend its license for 20 years beyond its currently scheduled 2012 expiration date…

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

VY and Vermont's energy future - February 27, 2008


To the surprise of virtually no one, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has decided that the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon is safe to run for another 20 years.

The main conclusion of the more than 800-page report from the NRC is that Entergy Nuclear, the plant's operator, has fulfilled all of the NRC requirements for relicensing . . . Now is not the time to give up on the idea of a nuclear-free Vermont.

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


Radiation and Public Health Awareness -- The Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP) was established by scientists and physicians dedicated to understanding the relationships between low-level, nuclear radiation and public health. The RPHP Tooth Fairy Project "..grew out of the work of Dr. Jay Gould, Director of the Radiation and Public Health Project and author of The Enemy Within: The High Cost of Living Near Nuclear Reactors. By analyzing 50 years of US National Cancer Institute data, Dr. Gould proved that.of the 3,000-odd counties in the United States, women living in about 1,300 nuclear counties (located within 100 miles of a reactor) are at the greatest risk of dying of breast cancer.." Before the Cassini-Earth-flyby, a Letter of Concern by Dr. John W. Gofman provided ample evidence showing why there is no safe dose for alpha particles emitted by the radioactive decay of plutonium. This concern has also been realized by the impact from the use of Uranium Munitions, which has caused much harm to soldiers and civilians, but especially to the young. For more resources and actions on these issues, see: Nuclear Information and Resource Service, New England Coalition, Citizens Awareness Network, Traprock Peace Center, and The Radiation and Public Health Project.

5) Early America Revisited by Ivan Van Sertima

- - They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America
- - Van Sertima Responds to his Critics
- - Bart Jordan: Correspondences between Ancient Egyptian and Mexican Pyramids

Early America Revisited
by Ivan Van Sertima

Van Sertima Responds to his Critics, May 20, 2005
By Jeffrey Carey

In the l970's Ivan Van Sertima came out with his ground breaking book "They Came Before Columbus." In this book he put forward the theory that Africans came to America before Columbus and the "European Age of Exploration" in two major waves. The first wave was when the Egyptian/Phoenicians crossed the Atlantic between 1200B.C-800B.C this wave influenced the "Mother Culture" in the Americas known as the Olmec Culture. The birth of pyramid culture and the African phenotypes found in the colossal stone heads bear witness to their arrival.

The Second Wave of Africans who came to America before Columbus were the Mandingos of Mali who set sail under the guidance of their king Abu Bakari the brother of the famous Mansa Musa. Abu Bakari set sail with a fleet of 2000 ships. This story is recorded in the rare Arab works "Al-Qalqashandi" and "Masalik el absar fir Mamelik el Amsar" this exploration took place around 1310A.D.

Many scholars rallied to attack Van Sertima for his unconventional theories. Out of all the scholars who attacked "They Came Before Columbus" three stand out they are Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, Warren Barbour, and Gabrial Haslip-Viera. Those interested in purchasing the book "Early America" be warned it is not a new version of "They Came Before Columbus." Early America was written as a response to criticism leveled against They Came Before Columbus.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America
by Ivan Van Sertima

­The Atlantic Monthly

“An immensely impressive book . . . well-written and clear.”

“I can’t praise this book enough! I kept shaking my head over its power.”
­Ishmael Reed

“Comprehensive and convincing . . . a big boost to black cultural history.”
­Publishers Weekly

By Jeffrey Carey
The first time I heard Dr. Ivan Van Sertima speak was at Lincoln University a small historically black college in Pennslyvania. Dr. Van Sertima gave a powerful lecture about the African Presence in America before Columbus, a topic I never heard of before and honestly doubted its validity. I thought I would leave the lecture only convinced that Van Sertima was a crank and his thesis was a fraud, but in fact the opposite happened. His speech was so articulate and his lecture so well researched and amazingly documented I decided I had to read his book and research the topic on my own. if skeptics think this book is solely for Afrocentrist they are wrong this book is very scholarly it gives botanical, cartographical, linguistic, artistic, and historical evidence in order to make a strong case for the African presence in America.

Van Sertima shows us african cotton found in America. He shows the written accounts of the conquistadors themselves, Columbus and Balboa record the presence of Africans already arriving in America, in fact Balboa eyewitnessed Africans in Central America fighting among the "Indian" population. He highlights the mysterious Piri Reis map that shows Antarctica mapped before it was covered with ice, when was the only time this could happen? 4,000 B.C., the point is ancient man had the nautical skill to travel the world at a very early date.

He touches on the journeys of Thor Heyerdahl and his ship the Ra successfully crossing the Atlantic, proving that ancient man could travel the high seas. I personally researched on my own the parallels between the Egyptian god(Osiris)and American god(Queztatcoatl)both are virgin born both are resurrection gods, it is amazing. Another enigma would be the cocaine found in the stomach of Rameses II and in many other Egyptian mummies how is it that a New World crop is found in Africa if contact was not made...scholars answer this evidenced with silence. One of course cannot leave out the colossal Olmec heads with clearly African features with braided hair, and of course the parallel of pyramids found in both cultures Africa and the Americas. Some say that the Olmec heads could be Pacific Islanders or people from South East Asia, but that does not explain all the other pieces of evidenced Van Sertima shows, like for instance the identical reed boats used on the Nile by Nubians and on the Amazon or the hieroglyphs and the sun worship. The parallels are almost to the point of exhausting. This book is hard to explain away, and I advise all serious researches and historians to read it....challenge yourself.

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

- - Van Sertima Responds to his Critics
May 20, 2005

..Van Sertima is very technical and meticulous in his book Early America, no stone is left unturned. In order to prove Africans made contact with the Americas before Columbus he provides many examples there are too many to mention here in this brief review, so I will touch on two or three. He has Bart Jordan a mathematician and child prodigy of Einstein show us the mathematical parallels between pyramids in America and those in Egypt. He also elaborates on the botanical evidence of South American cocaine found in African mummies made famous by the toxicologist Dr. Balabanova, New World crops found in the Old World before Columbus is only possible if contact was made between Africans and Americans. He also highlights African/Egyptian rituals that originated in Africa but are strangely enough found in America. We have the Egyptian "opening of the mouth" ceremony found on a wall painting in a cave at Juxtlahuaca. There is also the cross libation ritual found in a Mexican Codex this ritual is definitely Egyptian in origin all scholars know that the Gods Thoth and Horus always baptised the Pharoah with cross libations. The Egyptian use of the leopard skin (animal skin) in ritual is also found in Mexico as well as the double crown worn by the Pharoahs with the bird and snake the bird representing Upper Egypt and the Snake representing Lower Egypt. The mythos of bird attacking snake is an African mythos based on indigenous African animals like the Secretary Bird of Africa a famous snake killer one can see the parallel between this and the Mexican god Quetzacoatl when broken down linguistically Quetzacoatl means bird and snake.

Ivan Van Sertima is one of those rare under-appreciated scholars whose work is too advanced for its time. Van Sertima's scholarship will only be acknowledged in another lifetime by another generation of scholars much like Copernicus and Galileo followers of Van Sertima's theories will find out that convention is hard to change.

Resources -

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

- - Bart Jordan: Correspondences between Ancient Egyptian and Mexican Pyramids

Early America Revisited - Google Books Result
by Ivan Van Sertima - 1998 - Social Science - 209 pages
... Ivan Van Sertima ... Notes on Correspondences between Ancient Egyptian and Ancient Mexican Pyramids Bart Jordan was a child prodigy to whom Einstein granted special audience because of his phenomenal mathematical abilities. He has shown extraordinary correspondences between ancient Egyptian and ancient American pyramids.." For complete excerpt from Van Sertima’s books, see:

Notes on Correspondences between Ancient Egyptian and Ancient Mexican Pyramids

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

For FN’s updates and exclusive reports from Bart Jordan, see:
Evidence of Technologically Advanced Ancient Civilizations

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and not necessarily those of Flyby News.
A "Fair Use Policy" that describes FNs' use of copyrighted material is at
Feedback for story suggestions and networking Flyby News is appreciated.
You can write to the editor by email: -- flyby (at) --

Flyby News is nonviolent in focus, and has supported critical campaigns
for a healthy environment, human rights, justice, and peace,
since the launching of NASA's Cassini space probe in 1997.

=====News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era====>

= = = = = = = = = = =

Email address: