No Justice Wanted...

"... regardless which [disposition] option we follow however, and especially in light of the planned psychological pressure techniques to be implemented, we need to get reasonable assurances that [Abu Zubaydah] will remain in isolation and incommunicado for the remainder of his life.” 

Abu Zubaydah

Nothing says we know just how immoral, unethical, and down right wrong our actions are as the above statement. Abu Zubaydah is one of at least 119 known victims of the CIA rendition, detention, and interrogation (RDI) program. Suspecting someone of any criminal act does not preclude justice from being served in a just, ethical and moral manner; in fact, to act in any other regard nulls and voids the integrity of the actions of the hypocritically vengeful masquerading as proverbial white knights.

In the case of the CIA, their actions seem almost more criminal than the terrorists that they were so aggressively hunting. In hind sight, the truth is a lack of human intelligence expertise can create not only a vacuum of knowledge about 'enemies', it also creates a desperation in reaction that prevents intelligent, logical and rational judgment which respects the morals and legal code of conduct of the 'good guys'. This dilemma ensures that errors in judgment will be made and that much greater disaster will ensue.

As terror acts increase around the world, one is left wondering how can the U.S. government claim to be winning the war on terror. Does the U.S. even know who the terrorists are? And when asked to identify the enemy in this war on terror, the Pentagon claims "National Security" for a "No Comment" answer. Combine that doubt creating answer with the Senate Report on the CIA RDI program and it makes it very hard for any logically thinking American to have any faith in the actions of the U.S. Government regarding terrorism and foreign policy.

The CIA is an intelligence gathering agency, it has no law enforcement policy or procedure, as a matter of fact it is designed to work outside the rules of law without actually breaking the law. It should have never been the job of the CIA to apprehend any suspect of terror activity; their sole action in the apprehension of terror suspects should have been limited to identification of proper suspects and providing the proper intelligence to agencies, such as the FBI, so that proper law enforcement action could have been taken against the suspects. It is very apparent, in looking at the data from how the RDI program was put together and run, that there was no properly defined end game, and it could even be argued that the start game was not as organized as a local park pick up game. 

Bruce Jessen

James Mitchell

There are two names that are given as the creators of the enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs) used on victims of the CIA RDI program. Those names are James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, they are psychologists whom had served in the US Air Force. Mitchell received his PhD from University of South Florida, his dissertation was related to nutrition and diet's effect on hypertension; and Jessen received his PhD from Utah State University, his dissertation was on family therapy. While, yes these men were affiliated with the SERE (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape) program, they were observers to basically check a box with ensuring safety of the military students of the course. They were not developing policy or procedure, they were not writing SOPs or training manuals, they were not doing long term research on the effects of the course on students that passed or failed. As a matter of fact when it comes to real experience, these two men were about as qualified to found any interrogation policy as D.C. Meter Maids. Correction, the Meter Maids are probably more qualified in actual interrogation with suspects than these two men.

These men seem to have convinced officials of very questionable intelligence and even more questionable common sense that not only does torture work, but that what would absolutely ensure success was the complete psychological destruction of detainees to gain intel or worse to prove that they were not with-holding more. Most real and respected experts in the field of torture and interrogation will tell you that the exact opposite is true. That once you torture and 'break' a person, they will tell you 'what you want to hear' just to end the torture. It appears that in desparation to maintain control and relavance in the DC power war, the CIA rushed head first with blinders on into a terrorism black hole. The CIA has no idea how to investigate and build a prosecutable case against a suspect, again this was not their job. This fact seems to have been of no concern to them as they never considered allowing the justice system to have any part of holding terrorism accountable, having been allowed to operate in that gray area of the slippery slope that signals the self destruction of honor and integrity, the CIA decided that they alone knew how and what to do and whom to do it to to make the world a safe place. Instead what they have done is outranked the terrorists in destroying the safety and security and freedom of America and the world.

via ACLU.org

The RDI program basically answered to no one externally, when it functioned. What little 'reporting to' that was done was done to like minded over reactive neocons that think they are the only ones that know what is best. Even under their own 'self reporting' they still could not follow the rules or get it right. By their numbers, the CIA 'wrongfully detained' 26 individuals, of  which 3 were subjected to EITs. In addition, the interrogators were supposed to get approval of EITs before using them on any prisoner, yet 17 victims suffered unauthorized EITs. And to what end or success did this program achieve; a mere 17 high value suspects were ever detained. For the record that is less than a 15% success rate!

Not only were their methods flawed once they had a victim, their intelligence sources for picking 'terrorists' to detain was also very flawed. Under the Clinton administration the budget of the intelligence agencies and military were slashed to the point that the US had virtually no human assets in unstable areas to provide real true intelligence on the climate and players. Thus, the US as a whole became very dependent on the rumors of the terror world and on the intelligence gathering of other countries. Most disenters of the war in Iraq claim lies on the part of US officials leading up to the war, I would correct them in that it was not outright lies, it was incompentence and incomplete intelligence pieces to actually and factually know what was going on on the ground in Iraq, coupled with their own delusions of us against them left over from the Cold War. The proof can be seen in the sources that were cited regarding the WMD intelligence, some of which were Saddam's own high ranking officers trying to save their own lives and insure personal gains for themselves and their families and none of them have ever been held accountable for their bad information that led to the disaster that is currently their homeland.

via telegraph.co.uk

So who were some of the sources for names of terrorists that the CIA kidnapped? As Human Rights Watch has detailed, Gaddafi was one of the sources supplying the United States with the names of individuals it claimed were terrorism suspects. Most of the names that were supplied by such an honorable man as Gaddafi were members of the Libyan Islamist Fighting Group (LIFG), who were opposed to his rule in Libya. Thus in their ill-conceived rush to retaliate against the 'bad guys' the CIA became the thug enforcers for dictators that the US deemed terrorists themselves.

And what has  been the result of the CIA's rush to be the hero? There are over 100 broken men in the world. There was no regard for their guilt or innocence and no recompense for damages caused or life lost or time stolen, for how can you undo such damage as was inflicted during a torture session. How do you give a man back his pride and his sense of self when you stole it without cause? How do you return a man to family broken and shattered beyond repair? What good is a piece of paper saying we now believe you are not guilty when you have been locked up for years? Where is the justice for families that lost sons and brothers that subcumbed to hate under the burden of grief inflicted by the absence of love ones for years? Where is the increased safety due to the creation of that hate? How many more have lost their lives over anger and hate born out of punishment and execution without judgement or proof?

In the hopes of some truth and justice coming out of this senseless ill-planned knee jerk reaction to the tragedy of 9/11, journalists and lawyers and human rights groups are trying to do the right thing by using the justice system of Europe and the US to bring some peace and solace to the victims of the CIA's RDI program. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has heard 4 cases concerning the involvement of European states with the secret CIA RDI program and is currently hearing 2 more. The 4 cases that the court has ruled on have resulted in finding that the accused European states were complacent to some degree in their action or lack there of regarding the violation of the human rights of the men whom brought the cases before the court. The first case involved a German national of Lebanese descent, whom was a victim of the CIA RDI program. His complaint states that "he was arrested, held in isolation, questioned and ill-treated in a Skopje hotel for 23 days." This case resulted in the court finding that Macedonia (FYRM) had violated Articles 3, 5, 8, and 13. In 2 cases Poland was found in violation of Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, and 38, as well as Protocol 6. In a case against Italy, the state was found in violations of Articles 3, 5, 8, and 13. And currently there are cases pending against Romania and Lithuania. For more on these cases please read the press release for the ECHR. In the US, the ACLU is pursuing action against the men directly responsible for the RDI, Mitchel and Jessen.

In addition to the legal action, there are other groups that are working on bringing the truth to the public audience. The Rendition Project from their about page describes themselves as an unique group of academics and human rights focused individuals working to bring out the truth of the CIA RDI program. Another group that is trying to give a public voice to the victims is The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. BIJ is an independent not-for-profit organization that hopes to educate the public about the realities of power in today’s world. Please follow their projects for more detailed and specific information about this and other important issues of a global level. 

European Court of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights

Blackmail? Blind Ambition? Brutal Greed? Or All Of These?

Reuters via 911Review

From the first impact into the North Tower at 0846 on 11 September 2001, there have been questions, allegations, and accusations. Truth has been seasoned with controversy, national security, and various conspiracy theories about the who, the what and the how of the attack, leaving the casualties in the ashes of the event. As stories about the event multiplied so too did the theories that would create various urban legends; was it a complete and total inside job by the US government or was it a Saudi run operation for the US government, was Mossad involved or was it just complete incompetence and self-serving arrogance of various US intelligence agencies unwilling to play ball?

There's a saying that the stories that last do so cause there is at least a kernel of truth in their origins; yet, variations of all these stories have survived, partly because of the epic and world changing proportions of the tragedy,  thus muddying the waters of the whole and complete truth of what honestly happened that fateful day leaving us to wonder how accountable each accused is.

GITMO via freedomoutpost.com

While the United States government stated and made the public effort to show honest and truthful reactions to the terrorist attacks, behind the scenes the US had 'boots on the ground' within 48 hours. This was the reality when officially military operations were not announced, by then President Bush, until 7 October. President Bush, in the aftermath of the attacks, stated that justice would be brought to the perpetrators of the crime. With that intent, during the military operations an unknown number of 'suspects' and 'enemy combatants' were captured and detained.

In the ensuing years upwards to 1000 persons may have passed through the gates of GITMO or worse the secret detention locations in various countries around the world. The total true numbers are unknown due to the stonewalling of the Pentagon and other government agencies. Ironically, one of their stated excuses for not releasing a complete and accurate list has been respecting the privacy of the prisoners; yet, it seems that no other respectful consideration has been given in the treatment of the prisoners or their identities. I wonder if anyone has polled the prisoners to see if they want such respect for their privacy over no respect during interrogations and day-to-day treatment regarding things such as forced feedings. I also wonder if it occurred to anyone at the Pentagon that by releasing a whole and complete and accurate list of prisoners maybe things like wrong identities might be sorted out before improperly and immorally detaining innocent persons for years!

via en.wikipedia.org

In addition to military operations, a Commission was formed over a year later, 27 November 2002, "to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11 attacks". This report was published almost 2 years later on 22 July 2004; however, as of today there are still 28 pages of the report that are not public. Recently several members of the Commission, most notably, John H. Lehman, have stated the need to make public those 28 pages, which supposedly implicate several Saudi government officials with supporting the perpetrators of the attacks and or Al Qaeda as a whole. It should be noted that both the Saudi Royal Family and more than a few terrorist groups follow the same fundamentalist faction of Sunni Islam, Wahhadism. It should also be remembered that Bin Laden was the son of  Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden, a billionaire construction magnate with close ties to the Saudi royal family. And that the bin Laden family has enjoyed very close ties with the Saudi Royal Family for decades, you can read more about that relationship in a PBS article about Bin Laden. 

It has come to light that the Obama Administration might release the 28 pages in question. However, it has also been reported by various sources, that upon his recent visit to Saudi Arabia, he was encouraged by the Saudi Royal Family to keep those pages secret. Logic would imply that you would only want kept secret those things that you think or know would hurt your own self, or those that are close to you, or your current and or future interests. It would be interesting to know if that encouragement in fact did occur and by what means was the encouragement linked to American agendas. Was the price and or production output of oil used? What about the 'discrete' means of support and contact between the US and 'moderate' Syrian rebels via Saudi Arabia? (Of course we are using the term 'moderate' and 'Syrian rebels' very loosely here) Or were other means of encouragement used? President Obama will no longer be employed in his current position after January and former Prime Minister Tony Blair has done very well financially in the Middle East since leaving office.

Considering that Iran, as a US designated terrorist state, whom has never had anything to do with al Qaeda (they are Islamic enemies) was just found guilty in an American civil court for being responsible for 911, I am sure that they would gladly welcome the public release of those 28 pages of the Commission Report. Unfortunately, neither Iran nor any of their allies have such influence with the American government to reach that goal. It seems that the US government is tired of having to just let all that seized Iranian money sit without being accessed for the US economy. What better way to gain access to it than by unjustly finding Iran guilty of 911 and using the seized moneys to pay the victims thus getting their hands on money that is not theirs and diverting the guilt from truth to political agenda ends. Furthermore, the sole basis for the guilty finding in the trial is the fact that Iran did not show up and defend themselves....this in a country that claims that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff not the defendant! So much for innocent until proven guilty!

via weekly.ahram.org.eg

There are those that claim that 911 was a 'false flag' inside operation to create a pretense for the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq for oil. There are a few unanswered questions if that is the case. First, Afghanistan was not a member of OPEC, nor was it a non-OPEC oil provider. So what oil was wanted in Afghanistan? Another unanswered question is that it was for cheaper oil, yet, "on Aug. 24, 2001, the average weighted price for a gallon of gas was about $1.51"  and it has not dropped back to or below that price since. So where is the cheap oil for America? However, a plausible retort could be that OPEC and the Oil Industry have never passed along those savings to consumers. It could be the same market control as is found in the diamond industry, where supply is strictly controlled so that selling prices can be maintained (though the market would say it was controlling value not cost). 

In addressing the 'false flag' part of the pretense claim, I find the proof very lacking. The amount of coordination and planning and support that would be required to pull off an event of the magnitude of 911 would involve too many people. There is also the fact that keeping such an immoral criminal act secret would be virtually impossible. The closest that a 'false flag' theory could get to truth, with the available information being studied logically and reasonably, would have to be adapted to more a rogue act by some small group of over zealous and or disgruntled members of some government agency, probably no higher than middle management level. 

The most common theory for the military operations after the attack would be for control and regime change. It is common knowledge that Saudi Arabia was not happy with the Hussein regime in Iraq, especially after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. It is a fact that Hussein, along with his sons, were the worst bullies on the block in the region; however, it needs to be remembered that it was the US, along with regional allies, that put Saddam in power in Iraq to begin with, just as it was US support, money and involvement via bin Laden and al Qaeda that put the Taliban in power in Afghanistan. 

via USNews.com

These 2 facts make the US government in this respect at least partially responsible for 911. How, you might ask. Simple, bin Laden was a nothing thug playing at war in Africa when he was chosen as the 'hero of Afghanistan'. It would be very interesting to find out just how the US decided that some nothing thug from Saudi Arabia playing war in Africa could be so useful in Afghanistan. 
Who dropped bin Laden's name to US officials? Whom in the US government thought that he was 'the man for the job'? What made bin Laden willing to work with the US? Who provided the introductions? 

We do not have those answers, but, we do know that with US funding and training and support, which would have included being able to freely move internationally, so as to relocate from Africa to Afghanistan, the US created al Qaeda. Thus, since al Qaeda is considered the perpetrators of 911, that means that the US created the means by which we were attacked. It also means that 911 was completely preventable. The above information also means that since at least the early 80's and maybe even 70s the US was not opposed to using "outside freedom fighters" to incite regime change, especially in the name of defeating the enemy, whoever, that might be. Unfortunately, 911 did nothing to teach the US government that that method was not a long game positive for the safety and security of the land, citizens or interests of the United States; whereas this has been and still is the primary method of regime change used by the US at least since Afghanistan and is in full use today from Libya to Syria to Ukraine, leaving an enduring path of destruction and desolation in its wake for decades to come. Is there a single country that can say it is better off since US regime change was brought to bear?


To address the Mossad theories, it is a known fact that Israel has never had much issue with conducting military operations or covert acts within the borders of ally or enemy states alike, if it furthers their agenda. That being said, their apathy with regard to how their actions are seen lessen their desire to focus on discretion in such matters. It seems, that while they are known to be very comfortable using violent means to achieve their ends and their lack of concern about public opinion, thus it would not bother them to risk any American public backlash for such action, they had no true or real reason to commit the act. On such a scale as 911 Israel is not quite so discrete; nor would they, based on past actions, conduct such a large-scale operation that did not directly benefit them. And no, 911 did not directly benefit them!

What about the role of US Intelligence Agencies? It is common knowledge that each government agency has too much hubris and not enough team focus. It is also common knowledge that all that hubris has a very negative effect on inter-agency communications. It became known afterwards that numerous agencies had pieces of intelligence that had they been shared and combined would have given a complete enough picture of the intent of the 911 hijackers to have at least limited the destruction if not actually preventing it. Thus, the question becomes, how much did each agency know? Did any agency know enough? Was 911 intentionally ignored? Were there those whom thought that America 'needed a wake up call'? Was it just 'dropping the ball'? We may never know the full extent of which persons in each agency knew what and when they knew and what they did with what they knew.

One thing that is certain is that the whole of the government took advantage of and benefited from the tragic events of 911. The government has grabbed unconstitutional authority in the name of security. They have expanded their reach in the name of national interests. They have lined their pockets with the expansion of and implementations of security measures in the name of fighting terror. The disgrace is that the American public is not only not safer from terrorism, they are also not safe from their own government. They have lost freedoms and Constitutional protections and live with a government that has secret courts and immense surveillance tools turned to its own shores. There has been no positive to come out of 911 for the American public or her individual citizens.