Posts Tagged ‘victims’

clipboard01.jpg

 

Statement of September 11th Advocates
Regarding President Obama’s Veto of JASTA
September 23, 2016


Today, President Obama vetoed Justice.

We are truly dismayed that President Obama has decided to protect terrorists and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia by vetoing The Justice Against Terrorism Act, (JASTA).

Our murdered husbands and the other 3,000 dead of 9/11 deserve better from this President.

President Barack Obama was a community activist, a Constitutional law professor, and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

President Obama now stands alone in protecting the terrorists who killed 3,000 innocent souls on American soil.

With his veto, President Obama turns a blind eye to the heinous acts of terrorists that wreck havoc and cause bloodshed around the globe.

We firmly believe that Congress will overwhelmingly override President Obama’s veto against JASTA.

This American Congress understands the importance of accountability and justice – because without these two tenets of civilized society, only chaos and terror can ensue.

We look forward to Congress – in a truly unanimous and bi-partisan manner – votingJASTA into law and protecting Americans against the terrorists who spread hate, violence, and murder around the globe.

We believe that Congress truly speaks for the will of the 9/11 families and the American public in sending the very clear message to the world – EVERY terrorist who harms or kills Americans on American soil will be held accountable and brought to justice, no matter who they are or what country they come from.

A vote for JASTA is a vote for Justice.

A vote for JASTA is a vote against the terrorists.

A vote for JASTA is a vote for America.
Please keep us safe from terrorist attacks.

Vote for America. Vote for Justice. Vote for JASTA.

Please vote to override President Obama’s veto of JASTA.

# # #

September 11th Advocates
Kristen Breitweiser
Monica Gabrielle
Mindy Kleinberg
Lorie Van Auken

d6eetp6akecnxf-evnbcvilmeumtlyyljnxwncv88y84isoryyquxgkt-zn4svfvjeyj1l22d65mpjxhpo4q6q.jpg

 

Alice Through the Looking Glass is more believable than today’s descent into corporatocracy:

Aurora shooting massacre survivors ordered to pay Cinemark theater chain $700,000

 

Bandar-300x188 (1)“Bandar Bush”

Kevin Ryan:
Saudi Ties to 9/11 Mean U.S. Ties to 9/11
  • When two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi, came to the U.S. in January 2000, they immediately met with Omar Al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi spy and an employee of a Saudi aviation company. Al-Bayoumi, who was the target of FBI investigations in the two years before 9/11, became a good friend to the two 9/11 suspects, setting them up in an apartment and paying their rent.
  • Al-Mihdhar and Al-Hazmi then moved in with a long-time FBI asset, Abdussattar Shaikh, who was said to be a teacher of the Saudi language. Shaikh allowed them to live in his home for at least seven months, later saying that he thought they were only Saudi students. In an unlikely coincidence, both Al-Bayoumi and Shaikh also knew Hani Hanjour, the alleged pilot of Flight 77. Although Shaikh was reported to be a retired professor at San Diego State University, the university had no records of him. He was then said to be a professor at American Commonwealth University but that turned out to be a phony institution. During the 9/11 investigations, the FBI refused to allow Shaikh to be interviewed or deposed. The FBI also tried to prevent the testimony of Shaikh’s FBI handler, which occurred only secretly at a later date. Despite having a very suspicious background, the FBI gave Shaikh $100,000 and closed his contract.
  • Journalist Joseph Trento claimed that an unnamed former CIA officer, who worked in Saudi Arabia, told him that Alhazmi and Almihdhar were Saudi spies protected by U.S. authorities.
  • After being appointed CIA Director in 1997, George Tenet began to cultivate close personal relationships with officials in Saudi Arabia. Tenet grew especially close to Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the United States. Bandar and Tenet often met at Bandar’s home near Washington. Tenet did not share information from those meetings with his own CIA officers who were handling Saudi issues at the agency. These facts are among the reasons to suspect that Tenet facilitated the crimes of 9/11.
  • Bernard Kerik, the New York City police commissioner at the time of 9/11, spent three years working in Saudi Arabia in the 1970s. He then spent another three years in Saudi Arabia in the 1980s as the “chief investigator for the royal family.” It was Kerik who first told the public that explosives were not used at the World Trade Center (WTC) in a news conference. It was also his police department that was said to have discovered a passport that fell from one of the burning towers, providing dubious evidence identifying one of the alleged hijackers.
  • After 9/11, former FBI director Louis Freeh, whose agency failed to stop Al Qaeda-attributed terrorism from 1993 to 2001, became the personal attorney for Tenet’s dubious cohort, Prince Bandar. Sometimes called “Bandar Bush” for his close relationship to the Bush family, Bandar was the Saudi intelligence director from 2005 to 2015.
  • The company that designed the security system for the WTC complex, Kroll Associates, had strong connections to Saudi Arabia. For example, Kroll board member Raymond Mabus, now Secretary of the Navy, was the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia in the 1990s. Control of WTC security speaks to the question of how explosives could have been placed in the three tall buildings that weredemolished on 9/11.
  • All four of the contractors that were involved in implementing Kroll’s security design for the WTC had done significant business in the Saudi kingdom. Stratesec, the company that installed the overall electronic security system at the WTC complex, had also managed security for Dulles airport, where Flight 77 took off, and for United Airlines, which owned two of the three other planes. For many reasons, the company’s managers should be primary suspects in the crimes of 9/11. Stratesec was in partnership with a large Saudi engineering and construction company to develop and conduct business in Saudi Arabia.
  • Another interesting connection between Stratesec and Saudi Arabia was that, in the years leading up to 9/11, Stratesec held its annual shareholders’ meetings in an office that was leased by Saudi Arabia. This was an office in the Watergate Hotel occupied by the Saudi Embassy (run by Prince Bandar).
  • The Bush and Bin Laden-financed Carlyle Groupowned, through BDM International, the Vinnell Corporation, a mercenary operation that had extensive contracts and trained the Saudi Arabian National Guard. Several of Stratesec’s key employees, including its operating manager Barry McDaniel, came from BDM. In 1995, BDM’s Vinnell was one of the first targets of Al Qaeda, in Saudi Arabia.
  • One of the two major contractors hired to manage the cleanup of debris at Ground Zero—Bovis Lend Lease—had previously built the Riyadh Olympic stadium in Saudi Arabia.
  • The other primary cleanup company at Ground Zero—AMEC Construction—had just completed a $258 million refurbishment of Wedge 1 of the Pentagon, which is exactly where Flight 77 was said to impact that building. AMEC had a significant presence in Saudi Arabia for decades, working for the national oil company, Saudi Aramco.
  • In the 1990s, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), run by Dick Cheney’s protégé Duane Andrews, trained the Saudi Navy and instructed Saudi military personnel at its company headquarters in San Diego. SAIC had a greater impact on counterterrorism programs in the United States than any other non-government entity and it profited greatly from 9/11.
  • While SAIC was training the Saudi Navy, the Carlyle/BDM subsidiary Vinnell Corporation was training the Saudi Arabian National Guard. Simultaneously, Booz Allen Hamilton was managing the Saudi Marine Corps and running the Saudi Armed Forces Staff College.
  • Salomon Smith Barney (SSB), the company that occupied all but ten floors of WTC building 7, was taken over by Citigroup in 1998 after Citigroup was taken over by Saudi Prince Alwaleed, in a deal brokered by The Carlyle Group. Donald Rumsfeldand Dick Cheney joined the advisory board for SSB just after Citigroup’s takeover and they only resigned in January 2001 to join the Bush Administration.
  • The Saudi government was sued by thousands of 9/11 victim’s family members due to the suspicion that Saudi Arabia helped to finance Al Qaeda. The Saudis hired the law firm of Bush Administration insider James Baker to defend them in that lawsuit.
  • The 9/11 families’ lawsuit against Saudi royals was thrown out on a technicality related to the ability to sue a foreign government and, later, the Obama Administration backed the Saudis during the appeal.
  • The world’s leading insurance provider, Lloyd’s of London, filed a lawsuit alleging Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Lloyd’s dropped the lawsuit just days later without explanation.
  • After 9/11, it became clear that Saudi officials were supporting terrorism. For example, in the case of a would-be “underwear bomber,” it was revealed that the suspect was working for the CIA and Saudi intelligence.
  • Saudi Prince Bandar has been accused of coordinating an international ring of terrorism in his role as Saudi intelligence chief. From Egypt to Libya, and now in Syria, evidence suggests that Bandar Bush has led a network of terrorists around the globe, with U.S. support.

1965-Indonesian-Massacre

Edward Herman:

Golden Silences in the U.S. Propaganda System

This is dramatically illustrated when we compare the treatment of “worthy” and “unworthy” victims, categories that Noam Chomsky and I stressed in Manufacturing Consent. (Chapter 2 is entitled “Worthy and Unworthy Victims”). Worthy victims are victims of enemy and target states, whereas unworthy victims are killed by us or one of our allies or clients. We gave details on the huge media attention to the murder of a Polish priest in Communist Poland in 1984, a single worthy victim who, as we showed, got more U.S. media attention than 100 religious victims of U.S. client states in Latin America (1965-1985), taken together. The latter were treated as unworthy by virtue of the client status of the killers, although eight of the 100 were actually U.S. citizens.

Nytimes_hq

“White House officials say the administration has undertaken a review on whether to release the [28 redacted] pages but has no timetable for when they might be made public.” -NY Times

A convincing case can be made that Barack Obama decided to protect the Saudi sponsors of the September 11th attacks as soon as he won the presidency in 2008:

Justice Dept. Backs Saudi Royal Family on 9/11 Lawsuit

Obama literally had his “Justice” (sic) Department aid and abet the Saudi terror financiers and stood against the American victims of the 9/11 attacks. Obama sided with Saudi terrorists over US victims of 9/11, in one of the most shameful displays in the history of this country, something I will “never forget,” nor forgive. Obama betrayed America, as proven beyond any shadow of a doubt in the above link from May 29, 2009. But many, many people also betrayed America. The president is not alone there.

Today’s Times:

“[Senator Bob] Graham has repeatedly said it shows that Saudi Arabia was complicit in the Sept. 11 attacks. “The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11, and they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier,” Mr. Graham said last month as he pressed for the pages to be made public.

NY Times, of course, allows Zelikow to LIE:

“Philip D. Zelikow, the executive director of the national commission that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks after the congressional panels, said the commission followed up on the allegations, using some of the same personnel who wrote them initially, but reached a different conclusion.”

Far from following up Zelikow FIRED a Commission staffer for simply getting a copy of the 28 pages and reading it. Where’s that part of the story, NY Times?

History Commons:

Two investigators on the 9/11 Commission, Mike Jacobson and Dana Leseman, compile a list of interviews they want to do to investigate leads indicating that two of the 9/11 hijackers, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, were linked to elements of the Saudi government. The list is submitted to Philip Zelikow, the commission’s executive director, for approval. However, a few days later Zelikow replies that the twenty interviews requested is too much, and they can only do half the interviews. Leseman, a former Justice Department lawyer, is unhappy with this, as it is traditional to demand the widest range of documents and interviews early on, so that reductions can be made later in negotiations if need be.
‘We Need the Interviews’ – Leseman tells Zelikow that his decision is “very arbitrary” and “crazy,” adding: “Philip, this is ridiculous. We need the interviews. We need these documents. Why are you trying to limit our investigation?” Zelikow says that he does not want to overwhelm federal agencies with document and interview requests at an early stage of the investigation, but, according to author Philip Shenon, after this, “Zelikow was done explaining. He was not in the business of negotiating with staff who worked for him.”
More Conflicts – This is the first of several conflicts between Zelikow and Leseman, who, together with Jacobson, had been on the staff of the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry and had researched this issue there. Shenon will write: “Leseman was that rare thing on the commission: She was not afraid of Zelikow; she would not be intimidated by him. In fact, from the moment she arrived at the commission’s offices on K Street, she seemed to almost relish the daily combat with Zelikow, even if she wondered aloud to her colleagues why there had to be any combat at all.” [SHENON, 2008, PP. 109-111]
Later Fired, Evidence Deleted from Final Report – Zelikow will later fire Leseman from the commission for mishandling classified information (see April 2003and (April 2003)) and will have the evidence of the Saudi connection gathered by Jacobson and Leseman’s successor, Raj De, deleted from the main text of the commission’s report (see June 2004).

The Hunger Games: The Official Illustrated Movie Companion

 

In a moment straight out of 1984, this propagandist imbecile pretends that bombed out Palestinians are Israelis.

 

The conflict is so lopsided and such a crime against humanity, spanning 70 years of land theft and mass murder, and yet corporate news can’t seem to grasp what’s going on with the US client state having now killed 70+ innocent civilians over the past couple of weeks.

original

ABC News’ Diane Sawyer Mistakes Stricken Palestinians for Israelis

 

dirty-harry-letter

 

[I didn’t know about this, and I have praised Allen’s films in the past (not him personally).  It is only right to hear this side of the story.]

 

dylan-link

Dylan Farrow

What’s your favorite Woody Allen movie? Before you answer, you should know: when I was seven years old, Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother’s electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we’d go to Paris and I’d be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.

For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didn’t like. I didn’t like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him. I didn’t like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didn’t like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didn’t like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldn’t keep the secret anymore.

When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. I also didn’t know the firestorm it would trigger. I didn’t know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me. I didn’t know that he would accuse my mother of planting the abuse in my head and call her a liar for defending me. I didn’t know that I would be made to recount my story over and over again, to doctor after doctor, pushed to see if I’d admit I was lying as part of a legal battle I couldn’t possibly understand. At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldn’t be in trouble if I was lying – that I could take it all back. I couldn’t. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.

After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut – due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the “child victim.” Woody Allen was never convicted of any crime. That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up. I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself. That torment was made worse by Hollywood. All but a precious few (my heroes) turned a blind eye. Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, “who can say what happened,” to pretend that nothing was wrong. Actors praised him at awards shows. Networks put him on TV. Critics put him in magazines. Each time I saw my abuser’s face – on a poster, on a t-shirt, on television – I could only hide my panic until I found a place to be alone and fall apart.

Last week, Woody Allen was nominated for his latest Oscar. But this time, I refuse to fall apart. For so long, Woody Allen’s acceptance silenced me. It felt like a personal rebuke, like the awards and accolades were a way to tell me to shut up and go away. But the survivors of sexual abuse who have reached out to me – to support me and to share their fears of coming forward, of being called a liar, of being told their memories aren’t their memories – have given me a reason to not be silent, if only so others know that they don’t have to be silent either.

Today, I consider myself lucky. I am happily married. I have the support of my amazing brothers and sisters. I have a mother who found within herself a well of fortitude that saved us from the chaos a predator brought into our home.

But others are still scared, vulnerable, and struggling for the courage to tell the truth. The message that Hollywood sends matters for them.

What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?

Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.

So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter.

Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?

saudi-bush-presstv

This is huge.

An attempt to [sue] Saudi Arabia in 2002 was blocked by a federal court ruling that said the kingdom had sovereign immunity. That ruling was reversed Thursday by a three-judge federal panel.

9/11 Families ‘Ecstatic’ They Can Finally Sue Saudi Arabia

 

Recall that Obama’s Justice (sic) Dept. helped the fucking Saudis weasel out of the lawsuit.  This put Mr. Slick firmly on the wrong side of the high treason question.  It remains to be seen what barriers will be erected next to thwart justice for the 9/11 attacks and to stop the truth from emerging.

From Globalresearch.

This is going to be very painful.  It exposes the outright, blatant fraud of this heinous war crime, perpetrated by Western mercenary terrorists on the civilians of Syria.  Led by the President of the United States, who has used these propaganda videos as alleged evidence to wage war.

Analysis of Aug. 21 Ghouta chemical weapons “evidence” suggests the victims may have been kidnapped hostages from Latakia who were brought to an abandoned section of Damascus, where a battle ground had been in progress and then gassed by a Syrian rebel terrorist faction.  Their bodies were moved around from staged location to location to film propaganda videos.

Analysis by International Support Team for Mussahala in Syria (ISTEAMS), led by Catholic nun Mother Agnes Mariam:

FULL 50 PAGE VIDEO ANALYSIS (PDF)

ghoura-video-analysis1yghoura-video-analysis2ghoura-video-analysis3ghoura-video-analysis-4

PS
As ridiculous and psychopathic, and stupid as these Al Nusra terrorists are, they were also caught using images from the Egyptian uprising as propaganda:
cairo-fakery

prey-2007-horror-movie-review-21294111

From Press Play:

I don’t go in for “torture porn,” and I don’t know if I agree with this series.  I’m still catching up with part 2 right now.  You can watch and decide for yourselves.

 

 

kristen-stewart-and-speak-gallery

This small film is a mixed bag, with some countercultural observations of high school and cliques, a la Heathers, but also with a slight MOW tameness to it.  And it features Kristen Stewart, pre-Twilight.  The pace starts slow, with some, what I would call, missed opportunities in the screenwriting and editing.

Based on the novel of the same name, I must have misread a description because I thought it was completely different, and similar to a project that I’m currently working on.  It isn’t.

So, Kristen Stewart becomes the school pariah, cast out of everything and having to endure various types of abuse.  Withdrawn, she has nowhere to turn, as long as she refuses to speak about what happened to her.

The film explores what speaking out entails, and what failure to speak also entails.  Sometimes both choices are bad but failing to speak is worse, as the unintended consequences of failing to make your case can mount.

It’s a YA story that isn’t juvenile and doesn’t pander.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLermZxL1wc