You are hereBlogs / Stephen Lendman's blog / Guantanamo Show Trial Begins

Guantanamo Show Trial Begins


By Stephen Lendman - Posted on 10 May 2012

  Guantanamo Show Trial Begins

 

by Stephen Lendman

 

At issue is prosecuting five 9/11 suspects: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM: the alleged mastermind), Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Walid bin Attash, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, and Mustafa al Hawsawi. 

 

Defense lawyer James Connell announced a tentative May 2013 trial date. A scheduled one hasn't been named. Army Brig. General Mark Martins expects months of defense motions delaying it.

 

"I am getting ready for hundreds of motions because we want them to shoot everything they can shoot at us," he said.

 

On May 5, their Guantanamo arraignment was held. It took 13 hours. They remained mute. They refused to respond to alleged charges for good reason. Serious questions remain regarding their guilt, including KSM. More on why below.

 

On April 4, 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder said:

 

"In November 2009, I announced that (KSM) and four other individuals would stand trial in federal court for their roles in the" 9/11 attacks."

 

"After consulting with prosecutors from the Department of Justice and Department of Defense and after thoroughly studying the case, it became clear to me that the best venue (was) federal court. I stand by that decision."

 

Months of inaction let Congress "intervene and impose restrictions blocking the administration from bringing any Guantanamo detainees to trial in the United States, regardless of the venue."

 

"(T)hose restrictions are unlikely to be repealed in the immediate future. And we simply cannot allow a trial to be delayed any longer....We must bring the conspirators to justice."

 

On April 4, a Department of Justice press release headlined, "Justice Department Refers Five Accused 9/11 Plotters to Military Commissions," saying:

 

"As the indictment unsealed today reveals, we were prepared to bring a powerful case against the 9/11 defendants in federal court, and had this case proceeded as planned, I'm confident our justice system would have" prevailed.

 

A 10 count, 80 page indictment accused them of: 

  •  
  • "conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries; 
  •  
  • acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries; 
  •  
  • conspiracy to commit violent acts and destroy aircraft; 
  •  
  • violence on and destruction of aircraft; 
  •  
  • conspiracy to commit aircraft piracy; 
  •  
  • aircraft piracy; 
  •  
  • murder of US officers and employees; 
  •  
  • destruction of property by means of fire and explosives; and 
  •  
  • conspiracy to kill Americans."

 

At the time, ACLU Director Anthony Romero called Holder's "flip-flop devastating for the rule of law." Military commissions have no legitimacy. They're kangaroo courts, not real ones.

 

The 2006 Military Commissions Act (MCA) authorized them. Congress enacted sweeping unconstitutional powers to detain, interrogate, and prosecute alleged suspects and collaborators (including US citizens). 

 

They can be tortured and held without evidence (charged or uncharged) indefinitely in military prisons. Habeas and other constitutional protections are denied. 

 

Those charged are guilty by accusation. Presidents have diktat power to try suspects in military commissions or detain them indefinitely uncharged. On March 1, 2003, KSM was arrested in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Some believe it was a year earlier in Karachi. 

 

Over 10 years later, his trial is tentatively scheduled to begin next year. It may be delayed further. Torture extracted evidence against him and co-defendants will be used. Throughout their detention, they were isolated with no counsel. KSM was horrifically treated.

 

He was isolated at black sites for over two years. He spent time at Afghanistan's "Dark Prison" near Kabul International Airport. It's infamous for its pitch darkness and brutalizing torture.

 

He was also held in a facility north of Kabul called the "Salt Pit." One detainee was stripped naked and left chained to the floor in freezing temperatures to die.

 

In Afghanistan, KSM was hog-tied, stripped naked, hooded, and tortured. He was kept in a prolonged state of sensory deprivation for months. He was waterboarded over 180 times.

 

He was chained naked to a metal ring in his cell in a painful crouch in intense heat and extreme cold. He was also bombarded with deafening sounds round the clock for weeks.

 

He was thrown against walls forcefully. The procedure is called walling. At other times, he was suspended from the ceiling by his arms so his toes barely touched the ground.

 

He was beaten with electric cables and given electric shocks.

 

He was forced to endure a variety of stress positions for extended periods. Excruciating pain was inflicted.

 

In 2006, he was sent to Guantanamo where torture continued. His co-defendants received similar treatment. The ICRC said high-level detainees were repeatedly tortured. To extract a confession, KSM was told:

 

"We're not going to kill you. But we're going to take you to the brink of your death and back."

 

After years of horrific torture, mistreatment, and deprivation, it's astonishing he's still alive to be tried. Doing so in military courts is scandalous. At issue is their illegitimacy. It's also about using torture extracted evidence.

 

Torture is prohibited at all times, under all circumstances, with no allowed exceptions. Evidence so obtained is unreliable and inadmissible. Civil courts won't allow it or shouldn't. 

 

According to MCA provisions, it's permitted. Appeals are prohibited. Convictions are certain. Executions will follow. Justice will be denied. The real 9/11 co-conspirators remain free. They're in charge of condemning innocent suspects to death.

 

Two earlier Supreme Court decisions ruled torture extracted evidence constitutionally inadmissible. In Brown v. Mississippi (February 1936), the court held:

 

"The rack and torture chamber may not be substituted for the witness stand." 

 

The ruling cited an earlier Fisher v. State (November 1926) High Court decision, stating:

 

"Coercing the supposed state's criminals into confessions and using such confessions so coerced from them in trials has been the curse of all countries." 

 

"It was the chief iniquity, the crowing infamy of the Star Chamber (the notorious 15 - 17th century English court), and the Inquisition, and other similar institutions." 

 

"The Constitution recognized the evils that lay behind these practices and prohibited them in this country wherever the court is clearly satisfied such violations exist, (and) it will refuse to sanction such violations and will apply the corrective."

 

In other words, confessions and alleged evidence obtained under torture are unreliable, suspect, and inadmissible. That was then. This is now. KSM and co-defendants face certain unjust convictions. 

 

On May 5, they stayed silent for good reason. Some call their proceedings the "trial of the century." Independent jurists call it a sham.

 

Defense lawyers raised issues of torture and mistreatment. Military judge Colonel James Pohl dismissed them. Also requests to wear civilian clothes was denied.

 

Attorney David Nevin said KSM won't address the court. "I believe he's deeply concerned about the fairness of the proceedings."

 

Lawyers were told earlier they're prohibited from raising torture accusations. They're central to the case but can't be introduced.

 

Nonetheless, Nevin asked Pohl whether KSM's "treatment during incarceration, which consisted of torture, is appropriate mitigation" for lesser punishment. Pohl declined to answer.

 

Nevin also asked if he had "any experience with the issue of torture of prisoners?" Pohl refused to use the word torture. He said only that he's been involved in detainee abuse cases after the Abu Ghraib scandal. Several low-level soldiers were prosecuted. Higher-ups ordering their behavior remain uncharged.

 

Bin Attash's attorney, Cheryl Bormann, said her client was forcibly dragged from his cell to the hearing. Scars on his arms bear testimony. Bin Attash tried removing his shirt to show them. He was ordered to keep it on.

 

Al-Shibh was the only one to speak. He interrupted an exchange between his lawyer and Pohl with comments on Muammar Gaddafi. When Pohl told him to be quiet, he continued in broken English, saying:

 

"Maybe they will kill me and say I committed suicide. Maybe you are not going to see me any more. This is the way that we are treated in this camp."

 

A handful of family members who lost loved ones on 9/11 were chosen by lottery to attend the proceedings. Those of defendants are considered non-persons. KSM and others are guilty before verdicts are rendered.

 

Long ago justice was compromised in US civil courts. Today, ordinary people haven't a chance. Imagine what's ahead for KSM and co-defendants. Executions will follow convictions. 

 

Given what they've been through with no possibility of freedom, they may yearn for ending their long ordeal. 

 

Between now and then, Washington will make it tough as possible on them. That's how police states operate. On a global scale, America's by far the worst.

 

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. 

 

His new book is titled "How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War"

 

http://www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html

 

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

 

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour.

Very fine article and I wholly agree with it.  And I'll add a little.

A 10 count, 80 page indictment accused them of: 

  • "conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries;
  • acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries; 
  • conspiracy to commit violent acts and destroy aircraft; 
  • violence on and destruction of aircraft; 
  • conspiracy to commit aircraft piracy; 
  • aircraft piracy; 
  • murder of US officers and employees; 
  • destruction of property by means of fire and explosives; and 
  • conspiracy to kill Americans."

There're some peculiar things about that list.  It begins by saying "conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism ...", followed by saying that the accused 5 committed acts of same kind of terrorism.  Next, it says "conspiracy to commit violent acts and destroy aircraft", followed by saying that they committed violence and destroyed aircraft.  We have the same thing for aircraft piracy.  Then we have "murder of US officers and employees" and it's not clear what employees are referred to.  I assume the US officers are any who were killed at the Pentagon, on the planes, or in the WTC towers, and if we're to understand the employees referred to as US employees, which might mean US govt employees, then what about the thousands of non-govt people killed in the WTC towers? What about the foreigners who were there?  And the last item in the list is "conspiracy to kill Americans", BUT there's no additional statement to say that the 5 killed Americans; if the 5 were truly guilty of involvement in the 9/11 attacks.

Conspiracies theories, or conspiracies?

Destruction using fire and explosives, heh?  Isn't that interesting.  I don't know what was destroyed by fire, besides office materials, chairs, and so on, and possibly some people burned alive, but the leading 9/11 truth researchers, scientists, engineers and architects, f.e., have been saying for years that explosives were used to destroy the WTC towers, including building 7, and these explosives had to be planted well enough in advance; something no Al Qaeda people could ever do.  For there to have been enough explosive used to destroy the huge towers, quite a lot of explosive would've been needed; albeit some of the GOOD research performed by some scientists found that nano-thermite or thermate was used and this substance isn't really explosive.  It doesn't blow up things.  Nevertheless, it's been well argued that cutter charges were also used, and both of these are used in demolition work.  Nano-thermate isn't always used, I believe to recall, but it sometimes is; and the purpose is to increase assurance of a proper implosion when the demolition is conducted, I also think to recall.

DavidChandler911, a channel at YouTube, and David is a physics teacher who's carefully examined destruction of WTC Towers 1, 2 and 7 in association with AE911Truth.org, which was founded by architect Richard Gage after he learned about WTC 7's destruction (around 5:20 p.m. on 9/11), has some good videos for his related analyses.  And this is for no. 7, as well as 1 and 2, or at least one of the latter.  And we can clearly see what he's talking about from the video-recorded footage he shows of the destruction of these massive buildings.

Anyway, the govt is talking about conspiracies, and isn't that funny, when many wacky supporters of the very bogus "official story" issued by the govt have been condemning "9/11 truth" researchers and many other "truthers" as wild "conspiracy theorists", including as if conspiracies don't exist, never happened and never do.  Truly wacky fools, or if they're not outright fools, then they're liars and foolishly think they can brainwash the whole lot of us.  The "official story" is not commonly called the greatest (and I'll add nearly worst) of all of the "conspiracy theories" about 9/11 that even several of the people who served as 9/11 Commissioners have denounced.  If in doubt about their reliability, but respecting Ray McGovern, then do a Web and a YouTube search for him about 9/11.

I don't know what the percentage is today, but around 36 to 38% of Americans didn't believe the "official story" several years ago and I imagine that the number of these people has increased. It surely hasn't decreased and I doubt that's it's remained stagnant.  Several years ago, around half of these people believed the govt was involved, like "inside job" involved, while the others believed the govt "only" allowed the attacks to take place.  Very comforting, heh?  I surely wouldn't feel better one way or the other.

I've believed "inside job" for years longer, though only beginning in either 2002 or 2003 after reading some good articles and beginning to think in logical terms, say, about what happened and what was going on since 9/11.  I've always been against war on Afghanistan, but at first believed that it was possibly possible that Usama/Osama bin Laden was involved in 9/11 and that if he was, or any foreigner was, then my question would be, f.e., "No about war, but why did these people commit these violent actions?".  After all, if anyone ever attacks the USA and it isn't Washington that's behind this, for once, then it's surely because of Washington's crimes; and I could never support war to defend criminality that causes retaliation that's due to a desire to inflict some justice, say.  I also could never support crimes against humanity.  And when our govts commit crimes against others, then yes, we OWE reparations and unfortunately can't undo the killing, dismemberment, burning, ... of people or other life forms.

Govt admits explosives were used:

Bush once admitted,  after some years of "9/11 truth" researchers and then many "truthers" saying explosives were used, that explosives were used and were carried on the planes that struck the towers.  That was the first time I'm aware of the govt having somewhat admitted that explosives were used in the destruction of the towers.  I doubt that explosives on the planes that hit very high up would've destroyed the towers to a point far below, but certainly would've caused local damage.  How could Al Qaeda operatives load planes with enough explosive to damage more than only nearby parts of the building?  They surely would've needed plenty of help from airport security.

The real 9/11 co-conspirators remain free. They're in charge of condemning innocent suspects to death.

Shhhhh. Don't say it too loudly, for it might wake some people up.  Of course the "real 9/11 co-conspirators remain free" and they're going to continue that way.  After all, they're among the people who run the USA and aren't going to indict or self-indict themselves.  It'ld be great if they finally did, but they'll get to live out their lives freely and in luxury, and then die that way, first.  But condeming innocent people is one of Washington's passtimes.  These criminals and despots would get bored if they didn't take time to condemn innocent people.  So they want us to be really "good sports" and just "play along" with this SICK game.

High treason:

This article describes high treason.  The mere fact that the govt despotically acts against the 1936 and 1926 rulings is an example of high govt treason, imo.  I don't know if this treason can be argued in terms of what the US Constitution says, but if it lacks in this regard, then we nevertheless can simply and justly conclude that the Constitution is lacking and that the MCA is an MCAT, Military Commissions Act of Treason.  It should be unconstitutional, but I don't know if the Constitution says anything related.

Does the MCA and US govt application of it remind us of any particular historical figure?   What about Marie Antoinette?  Guilty until proven innocent.  Otoh, I don't know if she also prohibited the right to defence, while the US govt clearly is doing that; and has been doing it now for over a decade.

More on destruction of WTC towers:

It wasn't Al Qaeda that destroyed the WTC Towers, but it took years before some present believers began to wake up about this and the fact that the "official story" is very bogus.  The people I'm referring to woke up when they learned about the 5:20 p.m. destruction (demolition) of WTC 7 on 9/11, which wasn't hit by any plane.  It had some fire, but certainly not enough to destroy the kind of 47-story structure that it was.  And buildings between 7 and 1 & 2 weren't completely destroyed.  One had a LOT of fire in it and this caused a LOT of (internal) damage, but the structures between 7 and 1 & 2 didn't fail.  They stayed fully upright.  I think those were buildings 5 and 6, or 5 and another number, other than 6.  And the destruction of WTC 7 was announced on TV news media, BBC I think, around 20 minutes PREMATURELY.  Quite funny too, for the female announcer was sitting with her back to a large pane window and we can clearly see that WTC 7 clearly wasn't destroyed whatsoever when she made this announcement.  Some guy had gone to her and told her that WTC 7 was destroyed.   :)  (I wonder if she would ever listen to that guy ever again after this.)

It was preplanned demolition that destroyed no. 7, and the govt and owner, Larry Silverstein, seriously tried to deny this, but there's simply too much proof for them to be at all credible.  Silverstein gave the "pull" order, too.

A lot of good analysis and reporting is found at the following two websites and websites it recommends.

911review.com

911research.wtc7.net

It isn't the planes that hit the towers that destroyed them.  It wasn't fire, either.  It was explosives that were pre-planted and there's no way that Al Qaeda could've possibly done this without a lot of "help" from security people and, therefore, surely the govt (US).

I've recently viewed or listened to videos, or maybe both are only audio-recordings, for interviews with Bush and Cheney about their claims on 9/11 regarding Osama bin Laden being responsible for 9/11.  I'm not finding the one with Bush, but the interview with Cheney is the following one and he said that the White House administration had never claimed that OBL was responsible, saying that the US has never had proof that he was; contrary to the historical claims made on 9/11 as well as a number of times thereafter, by Bush and Cheney.

"Dick Cheney Admits Osama Bin Laden Was Not Directly Involved In 9/11" (1 min.)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNXRLD3VSiU

Maybe the video with Bush saying the same thing simply isn't titled in a way that makes the video clip easy to find and this would be why I'm presently unable to find it; but Bush was also posed basically the same question and said, in his own words, the same thing as Cheney essentially does in the above interview with him. It's curious how they change the story depending on whether they're being specifically or directly questioned, or when speaking on their own and beating their war drums. It's curious and clownistic.

Precedents:

And yes, there're precedents making it easier to find that it's credible that 9/11 was indeed an "inside job".  And it was.  And in a case like that, of course the govt will do all it can to cover this up.  There're precedents of the govt (US, though not only US) committing crimes and then covering them up, or certainly trying to; plus, CIA black ops, and so on.  Does the CIA (ops division or unit, whatever it's called) try to cover up, i.e., hide, its black ops?  Most definitely.

Go to the About Us page at Sibel Edmonds' National Security Whistlblowers Coalition website and you'll find a long list of whistleblowers; and what do such people do to become called whistleblowers, aka lamplighters (Frank Serpico), besides exposing govt criminality.

www.nswbc.org

And the list at that website isn't complete.  It must be only present WB'ers, for it doesn't include, f.e., former NYPD officer Frank Serpico (not a national security whistleblower in an immediate or direct sense, but I think mature people can realize that there's surely national relevance), as well as former CIA ops officers John Maxwell, Phil or Philip Agee and Ralph McGehee, besides other former CIA ops people.  And there're probably other past whistleblowers who aren't included in the present NSWBC list.  But there're plenty of videos with these other people I just named on the Web, at YouTube and archive.org anyway.

OKC 1995, bombing:

Tim McVeigh was accused and solely put to death.  Everyone knows this little bit of the "story", but there's a tremendous amount about that bombing incident and related subsequent events that a MANY people probably still don't know even today; and perhaps never heard or, and if they did, then they thought it was just nonsense.  Well, read and listen to enough about the additional information, while having an open mind, and you'll see that the information isn't "just nonsense" and that it, instead, strongly justifies a full and independent investigation or inquiry. 

A starting point I will recommend is to search YouTube for "A Noble Lie", while possibly adding OKC or Oklahoma for an additional search term.  "A Noble Lie" is a new documentary and it's all based on factual information.  A very key witness is interviewed and the person is Jane Graham, who was head or director of HUD, Housing and Urban Development; and her office was in the building that was bombed. She was there on a regular basis. 

I haven't seen the film yet, so can't say what else is in it, but certainly learned enough about it to realize that it's based on facts and good analyses.  And there was a lot of existing information that could surely have been used in helping to make this film.

One thing probably many people still don't realize is that two bombs were found inside the building, unexploded ones, for the exploded one, well, it was gone with the explosion.  The truck bomb that McVeigh, who was working with the Army and frequently went to the Army section in the bombed building (see Jane Graham's eye-witness account), was parked on the street, 90ft away from the building, which had its entire side destroyed.  Buildings immediately across the street suffered barely any damage; some scratches and broken windows, and the explosion of the cow manure-based explosive on the struck wouldn't have blown out more forcefully in any particular direction than in the other directions.  The explosion would've been pretty evenly dispersed and it couldn't have had enough strength at 90 feet away to cause the destruction that happened to the heavily destroyed building, which seems to have had around only half of it still standing, the half on the other side of the building.  On the side that was destroyed, pictures reveal that it was entirely destroyed, or VERY nearly.

Tv news reporters reported the information they received from the investigations that were performed and Washington evidently didn't tell these investigators to not leak any information about anything suspect found inside the building.  They let their findings be known and reporters immediately reported it.  At first, one bomb (unexploded) was found inside the building.  Sometime later, the reporters learned that a second bomb (also unexploded) had been found.

Washington and the govt of the state of Oklahoma did everything in their power to cover this up and committed serious obstruction of justice, for they refused to allow any independent and true investigation or inquiry.  And it seems that the reporters who reported about the bombs found inside the building were fired and could never get similar work again.  I can't verify the latter part, for I don't know the names of those reporters, but maybe they can be found.  I just don't recall ever seeing their names mentioned in articles I've read about the OKC bombing in 1995.

I would recommend beginning by listening to Jane Graham in an interview on TheAlexJonesChannel at YouTube and in which a second guest is one of the producers of "A Noble Lie".  Jane Graham also has a lot more profile, say, worth learning than what I already stated about her; but the mere fact that she was head of HUD and her office was in the bombed building, where she worked on a regular basis and witnessed Tim McVeigh frequently entering the building and heading to the US Army floor, should be enough to draw everyone's careful attention to what she says.  But there're other OKC bombing 1995 videos at the same and other YouTube channels, as well as articles on the Web from a few or more different people.  I think AJ uses "Oklahoma City", rather than OKC, but people should try both.

The or one of the most recent things I learned about this is that while it's not certain that it's the reason, the Clinton administration wanted to enact a law that would diminish rights and liberties, and either this failed or they may've thought or knew it would.  Again, it's uncertain; but what's inferred is that the administration or he may've wanted the OKC bombing in order to get the new proposed law passed.  It's only a possibility, but with a govt as criminal, despotic, ... as we have, we shouldn't hastily disregard this possibility.

Since when does Washington [care] about human rights, liberties, LIFE.  JFK was an exception, but how many others were there to "the rule"?

Well, that's it for my 2 or 3 cents worth ....

I suggest everyone get a hold of Sibel Edmond's Classified Woman, to get a whiff of the totalitarian, fascist character of our political class and larger motives, behind the 9/11 terrorist act.   She documents, reveals that the French government and Iranian informer warned the U.S., Fascist FBI of the planned attack, months before it happened.   What jumps out at you, whether you believe it was ignored because they were trying to protect a cabal of Fascist Neocons, Fascist Zionists involved in espionage, corruption or DELIBERATE INCOMPETENCE, to allow the murder of 3,000 plus people, IT CLEARLY SUGGESTS that the Fascist NEOCONS/ZIONISTS needed their "Pearl Harbor", as suggested in their ideological document TO CO OPT, CORRUPT, MISUSE, INVERT REALITY, to justify endless War, "War against Terrorism", Fascism, Global Fascist Violence.


The reason 90 plus percent of the Americans jumped into this Fascist trap, is their historical ignorance, failure to see that before 9/11 even happened, WESTERN FASCISM, FASCIST U.S. EMPIRE, had already committed its long list of State Terrorist, fascist crimes which involved support for bloody dictators, fascist coups, and the financing of State sponsored terrorism, known as our fascist foreign policies.  The Word "counter terrorism", already suggests the existence of Terrorism, namely, Western sponsored Fascist Crimnality, never prosecuted, as shown in Sibel Edmonds account of a criminal political class, fascist class.   What should have been a police matter, instead, became CO OPTED INTO A FASCIST MILITARY OPPORTUNITY, to create endless wars, endless murder, TO FEED THE FASCIST EMPIRE AND ITS MILITARY BASES.   It is hypocritical for Amerikans NOT TO RAISE THE QUESTION, "WHY", 9/11 happened, hence we will see endless counter terrorism, BLOWBACK, CIA lingo for retaliations against FASCIST AMERIKA, WESTERN FASCISM.


The failure of the corporate press to raise the Why of 9/11, as Helen Thomas did in one of the President's News conferences, ALLOWED ENDLESS CONSPIRACIES within the fascist institutions, the FBI, STATE DEPT., PENTAGON, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT all linked to dirty judges, fascist judges, who protected criminal class politicians in Congress.   The whole fascist culture within the U.S. ruling class, now extended into NATO FASCISM, its dirty links to FASCIST ZIONISM, is proof that the inverted totalitarian class/Orwellian principle, around since class history began, has degenerated, deformed all instiutitions, all class politicians into TOTALITARIAN FASCISTS. ALL class parties around the world no longer even pretend to serve the popular will, instead impose their INVERTED TOTALITARIAN CLASS PRINCIPLE , NOW FASCISM, on the social classes around the world.   Inverting reality, co opting, corrupting reality requires "noble lies", class myths, class dogmas, class deformed language, that rots out Congress, the Press into Fascist propagandists, War mongering psychopaths

"DEA Special Agent Sandalio Gonzalez on Time Magazine's blackout of four whistleblowers 'exclusive' on U.S. agents drug-trafficking in Colombia..."

by Sibel Edmonds, June 11, 2009

www.bradblog.com/?p=7219

I only came across that article based on the homepage of www.nswbc.org, which I had checked for my prior post, above, having a link for latest news and the link is entitled, "Project Expose MSM Report - Major DEA Scandal & Time Magazine".  The article is about what Sandalio Gonzalez has exposed and others backed up, and which Time Magazine and the US DoJ worked to try to cover up.  So I tried to find some video-recorded interviews and didn't find any, yet, but found the copy of the article, above. It's a copy of the article at NSWBC and is explosive for what it reveals.

Former DEA officer Michael Levine spoke several years ago about the DEA being directly involved in international drug trafficking from South America to the USA, and NarcoNews.com has at least one article referring to him and some of what he's said.  And there's also at least one video at YouTube with Michael Levine speaking about a CIA or former CIA plane found to be trying to traffic 4 tons of cocaine to the US. Plus, we already knew about the FBI through the excellent investigative journalism of Gary Webb, and the CIA through excellent whistleblowing by former CIA ops officer John Maxwell.  Perhaps former CIA ops officers Phil or Philip Agee and Ralph McGehee may've possibly also spoken about the CIA ops division's international drug trafficking racket.  And there's the Frank Serpico story, speaking of the real one, i.e., real story, about NYC mayorship and high ranks of NYPD.  And then there's former LAPD officer Michael Ruppert.

It's not the same thing as terrorist attacks, but when a govt is as corrupt as the US govt is, and that govt also uses terrorism "strategically", or at least protects absolutely known terrorists, like the Cuban expatriots who shot down or blew up a plane either on the way to or departing from Cuba many years ago, f.e., and Washington has long provided those criminals protection from prosecution, then people need to wake up.  And regarding 9/11, people should look for videos with Michael Springman at YouTube.  Washington facilitates, exploits, and orchestrates terrorism.  Perhaps videos for the official testimony of former Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, who was member of the "Able Danger" team, should also considered regarding Washington's facilitation, if not orchestration, of terrorism in the USA.  There's also former CIA ops officer and Angola station chief John Maxwell, who said plenty about Operation Phoenix, which was US-orchestrated terrorism.  And there's the historical Operation Gladio that was conducted in Europe, not solely, but nevertheless much "thanks" to Washington.

Probably most govts commit crimes against human rights, but Washington is "king of the hill".

The US govt traffics guns from the US to Mexico, TODAY:

I seriously recommend that people do YouTube searches about "Operation Fast and Furious" as well as Operation or Project Gunrunner to learn that the govt (US) is intentionally behind the trafficking of thousands of guns, very serious ones, from the US to Mexico.  Many thousands of innocent Mexicans have been killed because of this, for the guns are trafficked to be sold to criminal gangs in Mexico and while they might not deliberately target innocent Mexicans, the gangs war against each other and there's a LOT of "colateral damage", as Washington likes to put it.

A govt could hardly be more criminal.

The article by Sibel Edmonds cites from a memo written by "Trial Attorney, Wiretap Unit" Thomas Kent and I'll excerpt just a little of this. 

Having been failed by so many before and facing tremendous risks to their careers and their safety and the safety of their families, they were understandably hesitant to reveal the information I requested, including the names of those directly involved in criminal activity in Bogotá and the United States.

In my prior post I referred to the OKC bombing of 1995 and with respect to what's quoted just above, the story of Terry Yeakey may help people to understand just how dangerous life can be for an individual who KNOWS of extremely criminal US govt mal-doing.  Terry Yeakey was an OKC police officer and arrived seconds or minutes after the bombing in OKC.  Right away, he worked on trying to rescue people, he rescued 8 and became considered a hero.  Well, heroic as he was in doing that, it's emphasized with what followed, for him.  Let's put it this way, the govt claimed his death a suicide and there's absolutely no way that someone can kill themselves the way that he was killed; absolutely no way.  I won't say more about it.  People really, truly need to do simple YouTube searches using his name, and Yeakey, alone, might suffice for search term, for his wife or soon to re-become wife and mother have been interviewed.  I've listened to those videos and they're not as important as the videos in which we learn of how he died.  There's absolutely no way that a person could possibly commit suicide in the manner that he died.  (If you have a weak heart, then it might be better to not do the search for these videos.  Maybe looking for articles would be easier on the heart, rather than listening to people describing the manner or manners of brutality that he went through.)

Ever heard of School of the Americas, renamed WHINSEC due to the increasing public awareness of SoA and it's relationship with the extremely violent death-squad-like police states of El Salvador, et cetera?  Washington loves extremes and they're not at all of any benevolant kind(s).

Washington has been hijacked since the assassination of JFK.  Freedom? What freedom.  George Carlin, "You have NO rights", for, and instead, we have whatever the corrupt "leaders" dictate.  Even if they don't declare themselves a dictatorship, it nevertheless is far more of what we have than we can claim about having real democracy.  Democracy is like Bush said in January 2003 when a group of journalists were at the White House to listen to him speak about war on Iraq and one intelligent journalist asked, "But what about the Constitution?", to which Bush replied that "It's just a piece of paper".  Make no mistake about it.  The only difference between him and the other Presidents is that he's the only one to state what they ALL think.  It's obvious through their actions, conduct, and as has long been said, "actions speak louder than words", revealing much more than words do.

When a govt that's supposed to be democratic LIES to the population, tries to deceive us, then be assured that it is NOT a real democracy, and a phony democracy is fraud.  It's why I sometimes said that we would probably be better off if we were frankly told the  truth; that, no, it isn't democracy that we have or will be granted, but rather dictatorship, totalitarianism, corporatocracy, and so on, status quo. Otherwise, we have many dodos who disneylandishly believe that we have real democracy.  Real fantasy, and I thought the Dark Ages was supposed to be very old and past history.  Now we have Darker Ages.

 

 

Informed Activist

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Stores:























Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.