911blogger.com seeks to cover a broad spectrum of news, posts in the blogs section are the responsibility of the poster, readers are encouraged to check the facts and form their own conclusions.
Defense lawyer Scott Fenstermaker in an interview with The Populist describes how he was blocked by the government from representing 9/11 detainees and how the judges and lawyers in the New York trial may themselves be prosecuted in a future war crimes tribunal.
Scott Fenstermaker, the 9/11 Lawyer, Speaks Out The Populist, November 30th, 2009
Scott Fenstermaker has become the lightning rod for 9/11. He is the only defense lawyer mentioned in the upcoming trials of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four co-conspirators. Although he won’t be defending them in court, he’s been pilloried by the press for daring to suggest that these detainees have any legal rights.
I called him this weekend, and asked him why.
Scott Fenstermaker has represented Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali in various legal proceedings at Guantanamo Bay. Mr. Ali stands accused of conspiracy, murder, destruction of property, hijacking, and terrorism for his part in the September 11th attacks. I could not understand why Mr. Fenstermaker would not defend his client in court, so I began the interview by asking him to clarify this:
Martin Summers, former East European projects officer for the New Economics Foundation and former Bosnian aid worker with CAFOD and Amnesty International joins some dots and places 9/11 within the historical context of international false flag terrorism with reference to Moscow apartment bombings, Northern Ireland, Operation Gladio, London Tube bombings, etc.
Judge: White House can ignore e-mail information requests By Timothy B. Lee Ars Technica June 16, 2008
"A federal judge today sided with the Bush administration in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit related to missing White House e-mails. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly... held that the White House's Office of Administration was not a federal agency as that term is defined by the FOIA and was therefore not obligated to respond to FOIA requests."
"CREW [Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington] was seeking internal documents that could reveal the extent of the missing e-mail problem. Not surprisingly, the Bush administration has been reluctant to release those potentially embarrassing records. Indeed, after more than a quarter-century of complying with FOIA requests, last year the Office of Administration announced that it had re-considered its status under FOIA and would no longer comply with FOIA requests."
The Guardian's reactionary and distractionary reporting of 9/11 has tarnished its image as an independent-minded investigative British newspaper. On the anniversary of 9/11 last year it aped the BBC and other sources by uncritically asserting Keith Seffen had "shattered conspiracy theories surrounding the September 11 terrorist attacks" on the basis of an analysis that had not been published. When it was, last February, it shattered nothing but the author's reputation.
Initially, together with its sister paper, The Observer, it raised many of the serious questions that were never answered. In 2004, having gone further than most, it apparently lost its nerve and turned its efforts toward ridiculing those who mistrusted the official story.
Uncle Sam's lucky finds
Anne Karpf, Tuesday March 19 2002
Gore Vidal claims 'Bush junta' complicit in 9/11 America's most controversial novelist calls for an investigation into whether the Bush administration deliberately allowed the terrorist attacks to happen
Completed last February, Rethinking 9/11: Why Truth and Reconciliation are Better Strategies Than Global War from Ground Zero Minnesota (providers of education for informed democracy and human survival since 1982) is a sober, carefully argued introduction to the subject.
The full documentary (just under an hour) can be watched or downloaded here: http://www.gzmn.org/video.htm