The recommendations, which must still be approved by a military tribunal official, set the stage for the high-profile Al-Qaeda suspects to finally face justice almost a decade after the attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people.

President Barack Obama’s administration last month abandoned plans to try the five in a civilian court just blocks from the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York, felled by Al-Qaeda hijackers on September 11, 2001.

A letter sent to families of 9/11 victims said fresh charges against Sheikh Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, Ramzi Binalshibh, Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, and Mustapha Ahmed al-Hawsawi would be filed at Guantanamo on Tuesday.

It listed the charges as: “conspiracy, murder in violation of the law of war, attacking civilians, attacking civilian objects, intentionally causing serious bodily injury, destruction of property in violation of the law of war, hijacking aircraft and terrorism.”

Almost identical charges were filed in May 2008 but dropped when the Obama administration announced plans to try the 9/11 suspects in a civilian court in New York.

The post Charges Filed Against 9/11 Terror Suspects appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

I recognize that there are many, many other things for Americans to be upset with today, but I hope everyone can take a second to contemplate this decision and recognize what it says about President Obama, the Department of Justice, and the United States.

As for the Department of Justice, it shows their inability to prosecute individuals who are responsible for the death of 3,000 people on the morning of 9/11. Apparently our Constitution and judicial system — two of the very cornerstones that make America so great and used to set such a shining example to the rest of the world — are not adequately set up to respond to or deal with the aftermath of terrorism. To me, this is a startling and dismal acknowledgment that perhaps Osama Bin Laden did, in fact, win on the morning of 9/11. And chillingly, I wonder whether it wasn’t just the steel towers that were brought down and incinerated on 9/11, but the yellowed pages of our U.S. Constitution, as well.

And what does it say about the solemn capabilities of our Department of Justice if it is left to “subcontract out” its duties and responsibilities to the Department of Defense? We should all think about that scary notion for a bit. But, perhaps more disturbingly recognize that it is not occurring under the tutelage of Bush and Cheney, rather it is coming at the hands of Obama.

At least when President Bush was in office, he was candid about his feelings regarding the alleged 9/11 conspirators in our custody. He didn’t care about them. He allowed them to be tortured. He was fine letting them rot in the heat of Guantanamo for all of eternity. They were less than human to him and he certainly was never going to afford them the benefits of our U.S. Constitution or the Geneva Conventions. That was President Bush. Whether you agreed or disagreed with him, you, at least, knew where he stood. And you could, like it or not, rely on his word.

For the past two years, it’s been President Obama in the Oval Office. Quite early on in his presidency, Obama invited the 9/11 families to the White House to discuss 9/11-related issues. During this meeting in Feb ’09 the topic of closing Guantanamo and the use of Article 3 courts to prosecute the remaining alleged 9/11 conspirators was discussed. Many of us were incredibly relieved to learn that as a matter of course President Obama was going to shut down Guantanamo and support the open prosecution of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. He gave us — the various widows and children at the meeting — his golden word. He shook our hands. He smiled broadly. He posed for pictures. (In fact, several weeks later many of the widows even received hand signed courtesy copies of these photos from Obama — a nice touch. I did not receive such a photo.)

It’s been almost ten years now since my husband was killed. My daughter has gone from a 2-year-old to a 12-year-old. Our country has started two — and now maybe three — pointless, misguided, costly wars. And if it wasn’t already difficult enough to accept that Osama Bin Laden will probably never be caught or held accountable, now I have to swallow the fact that I will never see constitutional justice for the handful of individuals we actually hold in custody. In short, justice in a court of law for the murder of my husband and 3,000 others will never come.

I suppose in life timing is everything. To me, as a lawyer and a 9/11 widow, DOJ’s announcement today acknowledges the sad defeat of our U.S. Constitution when it comes to 9/11. How truly tragic in my eyes. And you would think that a man who was once a constitutional law professor might feel the same way. Yet, not so much for President Barack Obama who has chosen this great day to announce his billion-dollar campaign for re-election. His slogan asking us to “join in” by writing him a check.

First, I’ve never been much of an “in”-sider. Second, I truly wonder how you can trust a leader who carries no compunction to keep his promises or his word — whether those words and promises were made in support of gay rights, to not start or perpetuate illegal/useless/costly military campaigns (or wars), in support of environmental causes even to the detriment of big business, to put an immediate end to torture and unlawful detainment, to rein in the bloat and greed of Wall Street, to oppose gun control, or to correct the broad overreach of a previous administration.

But perhaps most pointedly, if you can’t trust what a man says to a group of widows and children, then what words and promises of his can you trust?

So President Obama, am I IN? Will you be receiving my check?

Hell no.

Because I’m tired of gambling on your hope, believing in your promises, and being thrown under your bus.

The post Kristen Breitweiser: The Sad Defeat of Our Constitution appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

The post Obama Warns Not To Question 9/11 appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

The plot gave an opportunity for President Obama to look “presidential,” experts say, as he gave a high profile speech vowing “any steps necessary” to see al-Qaeda’s Yemeni affiliate destroyed.

The fact that by all accounts no explosives appear to have actually gotten to the United States also likely plays to the administration’s advantage, and indeed the advantage of all incumbents, who can claim that the “system worked” in this regard even as they promise major new foreign policy ventures in retaliation.

Though former Bush-era offical Gordon Johndroe insisted that these attacks can “cut either way” politically right before the election, the recent history in the US and abroad suggests that they have pretty much universally favored the incumbent, and while this particularly incident appears much larger, it does not appear to be any different in that regard.

Recent polls had showed Democrats taking big hits in the upcoming Midterm election, and President Obama’s campaigning doing very little to help. The consequences of a shift in the popular interest away from the economy and onto hawkish rhetoric about revenge attacks against al-Qaeda at the last minute could be significant, and might well mean that the massive losses the incumbents were facing will no longer apply.

The post "Terror Threat" a Big Political Win for Obama and Dems appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

The non-specific US warning, which despite its vagueness led Britain, France and other countries to raise their overseas terror alert levels, was an attempt to justify a recent escalation in US drone and helicopter attacks inside Pakistan that have “set the country on fire”, said Wajid Shamsul Hasan, the high commissioner to Britain.

Hasan, a veteran diplomat who is close to Pakistan’s president, suggested the Obama administration was playing politics with the terror threat before next month’s mid-term congressional elections, in which the Republicans are expected to make big gains.

He also claimed President Obama was reacting to pressure to demonstrate that his Afghan war strategy and this year’s troop surge, which are unpopular with the American public, were necessary.

“I will not deny the fact that there may be internal political dynamics, including the forthcoming mid-term American elections. If the Americans have definite information about terrorists and al-Qaida people, we should be provided [with] that and we could go after them ourselves,” Hasan said.

“Such reports are a mixture of frustrations, ineptitude and lack of appreciation of ground realities. Any attempt to infringe the sovereignty of Pakistan would not bring about stability in Afghanistan, which is presumably the primary objective of the American and Nato forces.”

Dismissing claims of a developed, co-ordinated plot aimed at Britain, France and Germany, European intelligence officials also pointed the finger at the US, and specifically at the White House. “To stitch together [the terror plot claims] in a seamless narrative is nonsensical,” said one well-placed official.

The post Obama May Have Exaggerated Terror Threat For Political Gain appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

Established in 1976, the National Emergencies Act grants certain powers (established in Title 50 Chapter 34 of the United States legal code) to the president during times of emergency. Amongst the law’s primary purposes was to prevent a US president from creating an open-ended state of emergency.

Ironically however the law provides for the annual renewal of an existing state of emergency with only a notification of Congress required. This has meant, in a state of open-ended warfare, Presidents Bush and Obama have been able to maintain a state of open-ended emergency anyhow.

The current state of emergency empowers the president in a number of manners, including allowing him to suspend officer personnel laws related to the US military, suspending all legal limits on the number of commissioned officers, authorizations to grow the size of the military beyond the legal appropriations, waive limits on reserves, and the right to recall retirees to active duty. The claim of “time of emergency” has also been cited in countless other measures taken by the presidents to expand their own power.

The post Obama Extends Bush’s 9/11 State of Emergency appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

“The President looks forward to signing the 9/11 health bill into law, once it passes both houses of Congress, to help the first responders whose health and livelihood were devastated by the events of Sept. 11,” a White House statement said.

Elated first responders and their families said it was the first show of support from Obama since the presidential campaign and boosted chances for bringing the bill to another vote in the House next month. A previous effort failed last month.

Obama’s statement came a day after he was slammed in a letter by John Feal, head of a first responder advocacy group, as reported in the Daily News. John Feal has expressed gratitude for the President’s support but awaits further action by the President to push both houses of congress to pass the bill.

The post Obama Comes Out In Support Of 9/11 Health Bill appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

Today, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said of the “professional left” (I don’t know if that applies to me. I don’t get paid to do what I do, but when I hear someone say “left” I think anti-war, pro-justice, etc…):

“I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy.” […] “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian health care and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon,” Gibbs retorted. “That’s not reality.” […] “They wouldn’t be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president,” he said.

As for Canadian Health care, eliminating the Pentagon, drug testing, and Dennis Kucinich, I just think the richest nation in the world (is that the case anymore?) should be able to provide healthcare for its citizens like less wealthy countries do. I think the military should be used for defensive purposes only, and that the military budget should be cut by 90%. Surely, that money could be spent on better things than death. I think all drugs should be made legal, to do away with the crimes associated with it. As for Dennis Kucinich, who promised to investigate a “narrow portion” of 9/11, who went on an airplane trip with Obama, and changed his stance on healthcare, no thanks. Cynthia McKinney is my President. Call me “crazy.”

As far as Obama being like Bush, I think Glenn Greenwald summed it up nicely today in his article:

“…because the President has escalated a miserable, pointless and unwinnable war that is entering its ninth year. Or because he has claimed the power to imprison people for life with no charges and to assassinate American citizens without due process, intensified the secrecy weapons and immunity instruments abused by his predecessor, and found all new ways of denying habeas corpus. Or because he granted full-scale legal immunity to those who committed serious crimes in the last administration. Or because he’s failed to fulfill — or affirmatively broken — promises ranging from transparency to gay rights.

However, there were a few things Glenn left out.

In the article I mentioned, I pointed out that Obama “used the 9/11 Families, and his meeting with them as part of the justification for sending more troops to Afghanistan (something the Bush Administration WAS willing to do, and did so often).”

To expand on 9/11 a bit, On 5/29/2009, the New York Times reports that “the Justice Department, in a brief filed Friday before the Supreme Court, said it did not believe the Saudis could be sued in American court over accusations brought by families of the Sept. 11 victims that the royal family had helped finance Al Qaeda. The department said it saw no need for the court to review lower court rulings that found in the Saudis’ favor in throwing out the lawsuit.” 9/11 Family Member, and “Jersey Girl” Kristen Breitweiser said, “I find this reprehensible. One would have hoped that the Obama administration would have taken a different stance than the Bush administration, and you wonder what message this sends to victims of terrorism around the world.” Your newest Supreme Court Justice, Elena Kagan, was very much involved in this.

On June 23rd, 2009, the NYTimes reports that “if the families were to clear those hurdles, two intriguing pieces of evidence in the Saudi puzzle might still remain off limits. One is a 28-page, classified section of the 2003 joint Congressional inquiry into the Sept. 11 attacks. The secret section is believed to discuss intelligence on Saudi financial links to two hijackers, and the Saudis themselves urged at the time that it be made public. President George W. Bush declined to do so. Kristen Breitweiser, an advocate for Sept. 11 families, whose husband was killed in the World Trade Center, said in an interview that during a White House meeting in February between President Obama and victims’ families, the president told her that he was willing to make the pages public. But she said she had not heard from the White House since then.”

This same information Pentagon Papers Whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg recently “wished” for from Wikileaks.

Obama has used 9/11 as the justification for continued war again, and again, and again. Something the Bush Administration was famous for.

On 6/4/2009, in Egypt, Obama made a similar statement as George Bush’s regarding questioning the 9/11 attacks:

“The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America’s goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice; we went because of necessity. I’m aware that there’s still some who would question or even justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.”

While Barack was Senator he said, “Oh, well, the—I don’t think anybody predicted 9/11. And, so, we don’t know what kinds of circumstances are going to come up.”

Where have I heard that before? Oh yea, “there was nobody in our government, at least, and I don’t think [in] the prior government, that could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale,” and “never (in) anybody’s thought processes… about how to protect America did we ever think that the evil doers would fly not one but four commercial aircraft into precious US targets… never.” – George W. Bush

Do I need to remind people of the sham regarding the KSM trials and the Obama Administration, or the healthcare needed for the 9/11 First Responders?

As far as 9/11 goes, the only difference between Barack Obama and George Bush are their names, and the color of their skin. Oh, and George was there at the time.

Gibbs has since issued a sorry retraction.

So long as Americans continue to fall for the antics of those criminals in Washington DeCeit, the future of America does not look good. It does not look good at all.

The post George Obama appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.