Posted: Thursday, July 2, 2009
More Than 600 Architects Say 9/11 an Inside Job
By Mark Anderson
IRVINE, Calif.—Noted San Francisco architect Richard Gage told the audience at Freedom Law School’s annual health and freedom conference recently that his organization, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, is growing quickly and now has more than 600 structural experts who have grave doubts about the official story of what happened to the three World Trade Center buildings that were destroyed in New York City on Sept. 11, 2001.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAGRuRKudO4
“We hope to have 1,000 members by September and have over 600 now,” said Gage, a successful architect whose projects dot the California landscape.
The audience heard Gage describe the many problems with the official version, not the least of which is that fire is an “organic process” that could not have caused the symmetrical (uniform) destruction of the 110-story Twin Towers that morning, and the fall of the 47-story Soloman Brothers Building (Building 7) more than six hours later. These three buildings were part of the Rockefeller-inspired WTC complex, consisting of seven buildings on 16 acres.
Gage noted that the vaunted National Institute for Safety and Technology (NIST) study of the WTC buildings did not even look at the voluminous evidence of a controlled demolition of the three structures on 9-11, so it’s not as if the evidence was examined by NIST and declared inconclusive. NIST instead only examined the event “up to the point of collapse” and went no further. Thus, there is no way the government can objectively assess the entire catastrophic event.
“How can you find what you are not looking for?” Gage asked, adding that various forces that can destroy buildings—including fire and earthquakes—have obvious characteristics. Fire does not devour a structure uniformly because it randomly branches out wherever there is, say, furniture and other “fuel” to consume. Gage said the melting point of structural steel is around 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, and that the short-duration Twin Tower fires reached no more than 1,400 degrees F (although NIST claimed it reached 1,800F).
So for the government to say that burning jet fuel within the Twin Towers not only uniformly melted structural steel to the point of collapse—but brought the huge buildings down at near freefall speed—is the height of absurdity, not to mention that it is categorically impossible for fire to pulverize concrete. More than 90,000 tons of concrete was pulverized mid-air, along with metal decking. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away.
That third building that many Americans still are only dimly aware of, Building 7, really drives this issue home, in Gage’s view. “Well, the 600 architects I represent are most concerned about the freefall collapse of Building 7, the third skyscraper [that was] not hit by an airplane to fall on the afternoon of 9/11. This is a 47-story skyscraper that in the first hundred feet of its fall is falling at freefall speed. This is acknowledged by NIST. That can’t happen unless the structure [underneath] is removed. There is no resistance from the structure to that fall in the first 2.25 seconds. So this of great concern. Of course it falls symmetrically almost at freefall speed and collapses thereafter—the whole building is destroyed in 6.5 seconds,” as he told AFP in an exclusive interview.
He added: “NIST . . . claims that we have 10 fires [in Building 7], one of which was ‘roaring’ . . . and [the fires] ‘expanded the beams,’ knocking a girder off its seat and causing ‘an internal cascading collapse’—which is ludicrous because we would have seen all kinds of deformation on the perimeter structure. Anyway, they claim fires brought this building down, but fire is an organic process that doesn’t bring buildings down symmetrically at freefall speed, in the manner of a classic controlled demolition. So that’s the No. 1 key point of evidence.”
As for the Twin Towers, he said there are “many similar features of controlled demolition, but very different as well. It’s explosive. Everything is being ejected outside of the footprint – 95 percent of the debris. Four-ton perimeter wall units are being hurled laterally 600 feet, which takes 55 miles per hour instant acceleration out of the sides of the tower. Now underneath all three buildings we have several tons of molten metal [which stayed hot for several weeks] which is not created by jet fuel or office fires or anything else. Where does all this come from? We have video evidence, photographic evidence. The official government reports don’t even talk about it; nor do they talk about the dozens of explosions heard by 118 witnesses recorded orally by the chief fire commissioner of the City of New York.”
Gage continued: “It’s extraordinary what we don’t have in the [NIST] report, and that’s what we focus on in Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. In addition in the towers we have 110 floors of four-inch thick concrete; they are an acre in size each. We’re looking for some of those floors at the bottom of the pile. The photographs don’t reveal any of them—just a pile of debris two or three stories high.”
“Where did the ‘pancakes’ go?” AFP then asked Gage, referring to the government’s “pancake” theory, wherein the heavy collapsing floors from the top overwhelmed the structure below and “pancaked” down to the bottom. Counting both towers, 220 floors were missing on that “Black Tuesday.”
“That’s what we’re looking for is pancakes,” he replied. “We’ve got the ‘syrup,’ we have no pancakes. The ‘syrup’ is the molten metal.”
He went on to say: “Also we are looking at explosions that occurred 20, 40 and 60 stories down—below the collapsing building! Where are they coming from? NIST says they are ‘puffs of air’ because there are piledrivers pushing down the building and that air has to come out somewhere, right? They are not puffs of air; they are pulverized building materials and they occur at 160 to 200 feet per second. These are propelled by explosive speeds.”
As determined by former Brigham Young physicist Steven Jones—and reiterated by Gage—the telltale signs of an ultra-hot incendiary known as thermite (which becomes thermate with sulfur added) were found in the dust at 4-5 distinct locations in New York. Thermite can reach temperatures of 4,500 F and can be explosive when it’s souped up. Microspheres formed from molten iron constitute some of the evidence, as well as red chips comprised of unignited thermite. Gage believes that nano-thermite is the most likely culprit, since it is a “quieter” but ultra-powerful explosive.
“Al Qaeda probably did not have access to these buildings or to thermite (or thermate), which was not made in a cave in Afghanistan,” Gage commented, adding, however, that his organization [www.AE911truth.org] does not formally probe who the perpetrators were. But he fears whoever pulled it off could do it again because the truth has long been suppressed, leaving Americans vulnerable.
Gage’s group supports a new, genuine investigation, whereas the official “investigation” did not even include establishing a crime scene at the WTC complex and ended with the official 9/11 Commission report that does even mention Building 7.
Mark Anderson is corresponding editor for American Free Press.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/911architectsfortruth_32509.html
IRVINE, Calif.—Noted San Francisco architect Richard Gage told the audience at Freedom Law School’s annual health and freedom conference recently that his organization, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, is growing quickly and now has more than 600 structural experts who have grave doubts about the official story of what happened to the three World Trade Center buildings that were destroyed in New York City on Sept. 11, 2001.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAGRuRKudO4
“We hope to have 1,000 members by September and have over 600 now,” said Gage, a successful architect whose projects dot the California landscape.
The audience heard Gage describe the many problems with the official version, not the least of which is that fire is an “organic process” that could not have caused the symmetrical (uniform) destruction of the 110-story Twin Towers that morning, and the fall of the 47-story Soloman Brothers Building (Building 7) more than six hours later. These three buildings were part of the Rockefeller-inspired WTC complex, consisting of seven buildings on 16 acres.
Gage noted that the vaunted National Institute for Safety and Technology (NIST) study of the WTC buildings did not even look at the voluminous evidence of a controlled demolition of the three structures on 9-11, so it’s not as if the evidence was examined by NIST and declared inconclusive. NIST instead only examined the event “up to the point of collapse” and went no further. Thus, there is no way the government can objectively assess the entire catastrophic event.
“How can you find what you are not looking for?” Gage asked, adding that various forces that can destroy buildings—including fire and earthquakes—have obvious characteristics. Fire does not devour a structure uniformly because it randomly branches out wherever there is, say, furniture and other “fuel” to consume. Gage said the melting point of structural steel is around 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, and that the short-duration Twin Tower fires reached no more than 1,400 degrees F (although NIST claimed it reached 1,800F).
So for the government to say that burning jet fuel within the Twin Towers not only uniformly melted structural steel to the point of collapse—but brought the huge buildings down at near freefall speed—is the height of absurdity, not to mention that it is categorically impossible for fire to pulverize concrete. More than 90,000 tons of concrete was pulverized mid-air, along with metal decking. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away.
That third building that many Americans still are only dimly aware of, Building 7, really drives this issue home, in Gage’s view. “Well, the 600 architects I represent are most concerned about the freefall collapse of Building 7, the third skyscraper [that was] not hit by an airplane to fall on the afternoon of 9/11. This is a 47-story skyscraper that in the first hundred feet of its fall is falling at freefall speed. This is acknowledged by NIST. That can’t happen unless the structure [underneath] is removed. There is no resistance from the structure to that fall in the first 2.25 seconds. So this of great concern. Of course it falls symmetrically almost at freefall speed and collapses thereafter—the whole building is destroyed in 6.5 seconds,” as he told AFP in an exclusive interview.
He added: “NIST . . . claims that we have 10 fires [in Building 7], one of which was ‘roaring’ . . . and [the fires] ‘expanded the beams,’ knocking a girder off its seat and causing ‘an internal cascading collapse’—which is ludicrous because we would have seen all kinds of deformation on the perimeter structure. Anyway, they claim fires brought this building down, but fire is an organic process that doesn’t bring buildings down symmetrically at freefall speed, in the manner of a classic controlled demolition. So that’s the No. 1 key point of evidence.”
As for the Twin Towers, he said there are “many similar features of controlled demolition, but very different as well. It’s explosive. Everything is being ejected outside of the footprint – 95 percent of the debris. Four-ton perimeter wall units are being hurled laterally 600 feet, which takes 55 miles per hour instant acceleration out of the sides of the tower. Now underneath all three buildings we have several tons of molten metal [which stayed hot for several weeks] which is not created by jet fuel or office fires or anything else. Where does all this come from? We have video evidence, photographic evidence. The official government reports don’t even talk about it; nor do they talk about the dozens of explosions heard by 118 witnesses recorded orally by the chief fire commissioner of the City of New York.”
Gage continued: “It’s extraordinary what we don’t have in the [NIST] report, and that’s what we focus on in Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. In addition in the towers we have 110 floors of four-inch thick concrete; they are an acre in size each. We’re looking for some of those floors at the bottom of the pile. The photographs don’t reveal any of them—just a pile of debris two or three stories high.”
“Where did the ‘pancakes’ go?” AFP then asked Gage, referring to the government’s “pancake” theory, wherein the heavy collapsing floors from the top overwhelmed the structure below and “pancaked” down to the bottom. Counting both towers, 220 floors were missing on that “Black Tuesday.”
“That’s what we’re looking for is pancakes,” he replied. “We’ve got the ‘syrup,’ we have no pancakes. The ‘syrup’ is the molten metal.”
He went on to say: “Also we are looking at explosions that occurred 20, 40 and 60 stories down—below the collapsing building! Where are they coming from? NIST says they are ‘puffs of air’ because there are piledrivers pushing down the building and that air has to come out somewhere, right? They are not puffs of air; they are pulverized building materials and they occur at 160 to 200 feet per second. These are propelled by explosive speeds.”
As determined by former Brigham Young physicist Steven Jones—and reiterated by Gage—the telltale signs of an ultra-hot incendiary known as thermite (which becomes thermate with sulfur added) were found in the dust at 4-5 distinct locations in New York. Thermite can reach temperatures of 4,500 F and can be explosive when it’s souped up. Microspheres formed from molten iron constitute some of the evidence, as well as red chips comprised of unignited thermite. Gage believes that nano-thermite is the most likely culprit, since it is a “quieter” but ultra-powerful explosive.
“Al Qaeda probably did not have access to these buildings or to thermite (or thermate), which was not made in a cave in Afghanistan,” Gage commented, adding, however, that his organization [www.AE911truth.org] does not formally probe who the perpetrators were. But he fears whoever pulled it off could do it again because the truth has long been suppressed, leaving Americans vulnerable.
Gage’s group supports a new, genuine investigation, whereas the official “investigation” did not even include establishing a crime scene at the WTC complex and ended with the official 9/11 Commission report that does even mention Building 7.
Mark Anderson is corresponding editor for American Free Press.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/911architectsfortruth_32509.html
Terrorism drill planned for New York Harbor
by Associated Press Thursday July 02, 2009, 11:08 AM
New York City police and the Coast Guard plan a terrorism drill near Ellis and Liberty Islands in New York Harbor.
The NYPD Special Operations Division have scheduled the drill between noon and 1 p.m. Thursday.
It will simulate a report of shots fired on a New York Waterways vessel, followed by lost contact with the crew. The drill also will include an NYPD helicopter.
An NYPD helicopter will be participating in the drill.
Posted: Wednesday, July 1, 2009
MTV's The Hills Stars"Heidi Montag & Spencer Pratt" on Alex Jones Tv:Waking Up to The NWO and 9/11!!!
China Web controversy highlights public role
BEIJING – Beijing's retreat on its latest Internet-censorship effort highlights the rise of China's increasingly tech-savvy, vocal public as a factor in the authoritarian government's decisions.
China gave in late Tuesday to complaints by Web users, manufacturers and foreign governments and postponed a plan to require producers to supply a government-endorsed filtering software known as Green Dam with every personal computer sold in China.
"We think this is a result of the efforts of all the parties, but we think public opinion played an even more important role than the others," said Edward Yu, president of Analysys International, an Internet research company in Beijing.
Read More Here.
Olbermann: Obama ‘god damned wrong’ on ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’
This video is from MSNBC’s Countdown, broadcast June 30, 2009.
Bloggers don’t go to jail, Murdoch CEO laments
Tabloids are king and blogs are “barely discernible from massive ignorance,” according to John Hartigan, chief executive for News Limited, a cog in the Rupert Murdoch empire responsible for the publication of more than fifty newspapers in Australia.
Earlier today, Hartigan “told the National Press Club in Canberra that the newspaper business had to adapt, but would survive.”
“I’m here to celebrate the future of journalism, not to consign it to an analogue archive,” he said.
But Hartigan seems to believe that online journalism is not part of that future.
Read More Here.
Cynthia McKinney Demands Immediate Release
Former U.S. lawmaker and Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney, whose relief boat was seized by an Israeli naval ship Tuesday for the second time in a year, is demanding the immediate release of her and 20 other activists.
McKinney, a longtime supporter of Palestinians, said her Greek-flagged boat, the Spirit of Humanity, was carrying medical supplies, cement, olive trees and children’s toys to Gaza when it was boarded by the Israeli navy.
“This is an outrageous violation of international law against us,” said McKinney. “Our boat was not in Israeli waters and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip. President Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that’s exactly what we tried to do. We’re asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey.”
The Israeli military issued a statement Tuesday saying that the boat had attempted to break a blockade of Gaza and was forced to sail to an Israeli port after ignoring a radio message to stay out of Gaza waters.
Posted: Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Israel Kidnaps Cynthia McKinney, Human Rights Workers
The Free Gaza Movement
June 30, 2009
June 30, 2009
Today Israeli Occupation Forces attacked and boarded the Free Gaza Movement boat, the SPIRIT OF HUMANITY, abducting 21 human rights workers from 11 countries, including Noble laureate Mairead Maguire and former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. The passengers and crew are being forcibly dragged toward Israel.
“This is an outrageous violation of international law against us. Our boat was not in Israeli waters, and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip,” said Cynthia McKinney, a former U.S. Congresswoman and presidential candidate. “President Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that’s exactly what we tried to do. We’re asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey.”
Read More Here.
Fein: Obama 'shuts his eyes' to 'open confessions' of Bush-era war crimes
Speaking at the National Press Club on Monday, former Reagan administration Associated Attorney General Bruce Fein lamented President Barack Obama's decision to shut his eyes to open confessions of war crimes by members of the prior administration.
"It's at the highest levels that the rule of law finds its greatest majesty," he told reporters. "That's why the United States was so idolized after Nixon left. We said that the most powerful man in the world is subject to the law. He cannot defy it."
Read More Here.
Second officer used racial slur in BART killing
A new bombshell may be waiting to explode in the case of Oscar Grant, the black man who was killed by a white San Francisco Bay Area Transit Authority police officer.
One of the police officers called Grant a “bitch ass n—er” before Grant was killed by another officer.
A videotape taken by a bystander shows one of the officers, identified by the San Francisco Chronicle as Tony Pirone, shouting “bitch as n—er, right?” twice, about 30 seconds before Grant was shot to death by fellow officer Johannes Mehserle.
Read More Here.
Posted: Monday, June 29, 2009
A Rundown Of The Saudi Lawsuit
On 1/8/2008, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that "a huge lawsuit against the government of Saudi Arabia and key members of its royal family was put to a crucial test today as lawyers for victims of the 9/11 attacks urged a federal appeals court to reinstate the government of Saudi Arabia as a defendant." The Cozen O'Connor law firm in Philadelphia "was the first to file suit against the government of Saudi Arabia in 2003, charging that the desert kingdom bears responsibility for the attacks because it permitted Islamic charities under its control to bankroll Osama bin Laden and his global terror movement." The lawsuit "suffered a setback in 2005 when New York federal district court judge Richard Conway Casey ruled that the federal foreign sovereign immunity act barred lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and members of the royal family."
On 11/13/2008, it was reported that "thousands of victims of the 9/11 attacks appealed to the Supreme Court yesterday, asking it to overturn a lower court decision barring lawsuits against Saudi Arabia for supporting acts of terrorism."
On 1/6/2009, it is reported that "lawyers for Saudi Arabia have asserted in court papers that the Supreme Court should reject arguments that the desert kingdom be held accountable for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks because, over a period of many years, it financed al-Qaeda. In papers filed with the Supreme Court, lawyers for the kingdom and several high-ranking Saudi royals say that U.S. law provides blanket immunity to Saudi Arabia from lawsuits over the 9/11 attacks."
Read More Here.
On 11/13/2008, it was reported that "thousands of victims of the 9/11 attacks appealed to the Supreme Court yesterday, asking it to overturn a lower court decision barring lawsuits against Saudi Arabia for supporting acts of terrorism."
On 1/6/2009, it is reported that "lawyers for Saudi Arabia have asserted in court papers that the Supreme Court should reject arguments that the desert kingdom be held accountable for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks because, over a period of many years, it financed al-Qaeda. In papers filed with the Supreme Court, lawyers for the kingdom and several high-ranking Saudi royals say that U.S. law provides blanket immunity to Saudi Arabia from lawsuits over the 9/11 attacks."
Read More Here.
Court won't hear Sept. 11 claims vs. Saudi Arabia
Supreme Court rejects Sept. 11 victims' bid to hold Saudi Arabia, princes liable for attacks
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has refused to allow victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to pursue lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and four of its princes over charitable donations that were allegedly funneled to al-Qaida.
The court, in an order Monday, is leaving in place the ruling of a federal appeals court that the country and the princes are protected by sovereign immunity, which generally means that foreign countries can't be sued in American courts.
The Obama administration had angered some victims and families by urging the justices to pass up the case.
In their appeal, the more than 6,000 plaintiffs said the government's court brief filed in early June was an "apparent effort to appease a sometime ally" just before President Barack Obama's visit to Saudi Arabia.
At issue were obstacles in American law to suing foreign governments and their officials as well as the extent to which people can be held financially responsible for acts of terrorism committed by others.
The appeal was filed by relatives of victims killed in the attacks and thousands of people who were injured, as well as businesses and governments that sustained property damage and other losses.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York previously upheld a federal judge's ruling throwing out the lawsuits. The appeals court said the defendants were protected by sovereign immunity and the plaintiffs would need to prove that the princes engaged in intentional actions aimed at U.S. residents.
In their appeal to the high court, both sides cited the report of the Sept. 11 Commission. The victims noted that the report said Saudi Arabia had long been considered the primary source of al-Qaida funding. The Saudis' court filing, however, pointed out that the commission "found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization."
The victims' lawsuits claim that the defendants gave money to charities in order to funnel it to terrorist organizations that were behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
The appeal also stressed that federal appeals courts have reached conflicting decisions about when foreign governments and their officials can be sued.
The case is Federal Insurance Co. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 08-640
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Court-wont-hear-Sept-11-apf-3372680268.html?x=0
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has refused to allow victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to pursue lawsuits against Saudi Arabia and four of its princes over charitable donations that were allegedly funneled to al-Qaida.
The court, in an order Monday, is leaving in place the ruling of a federal appeals court that the country and the princes are protected by sovereign immunity, which generally means that foreign countries can't be sued in American courts.
The Obama administration had angered some victims and families by urging the justices to pass up the case.
In their appeal, the more than 6,000 plaintiffs said the government's court brief filed in early June was an "apparent effort to appease a sometime ally" just before President Barack Obama's visit to Saudi Arabia.
At issue were obstacles in American law to suing foreign governments and their officials as well as the extent to which people can be held financially responsible for acts of terrorism committed by others.
The appeal was filed by relatives of victims killed in the attacks and thousands of people who were injured, as well as businesses and governments that sustained property damage and other losses.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York previously upheld a federal judge's ruling throwing out the lawsuits. The appeals court said the defendants were protected by sovereign immunity and the plaintiffs would need to prove that the princes engaged in intentional actions aimed at U.S. residents.
In their appeal to the high court, both sides cited the report of the Sept. 11 Commission. The victims noted that the report said Saudi Arabia had long been considered the primary source of al-Qaida funding. The Saudis' court filing, however, pointed out that the commission "found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization."
The victims' lawsuits claim that the defendants gave money to charities in order to funnel it to terrorist organizations that were behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
The appeal also stressed that federal appeals courts have reached conflicting decisions about when foreign governments and their officials can be sued.
The case is Federal Insurance Co. v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 08-640
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Court-wont-hear-Sept-11-apf-3372680268.html?x=0
Posted: Sunday, June 28, 2009
Revealed: Members of Congress profited from bank stocks as they voted on bailouts
Several members of Congress who oversee the banking industry and bemoaned the industry’s greed actually pocketed cash from investing in or selling the same banks they were rebuking when the market collapsed last year.
At least two members of Congress — an Ohio Democrat and a Florida Republican — invested or cashed out of bank stocks just as the fortunes of those companies fell. Ohio Democrat Charlie Wilson sold between $15,000 and $50,000 worth of Huntington Bancshares stock Nov. 14 — the same day the bank got $1.4 billion in bailout money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program.
“Wilson’s transactions over the course of last autumn also included Bank of America and BB&T, both beneficiaries of the bank rescue program that Treasury implemented after congressional passage,” the Plain Dealer reported Friday.
Read More Here.
Did toxic chemical in Iraq cause GIs' illnesses?
Larry Roberta's every breath is a painful reminder of his time in Iraq. He can't walk a block without gasping for air. His chest hurts, his migraines sometimes persist for days and he needs pills to help him sleep.
James Gentry came home with rashes, ear troubles and a shortness of breath. Later, things got much worse: He developed lung cancer, which spread to his spine, ribs and one of his thighs; he must often use a cane, and no longer rides his beloved Harley.
David Moore's postwar life turned into a harrowing medical mystery: nosebleeds and labored breathing that made it impossible to work, much less speak. His desperate search for answers ended last year when he died of lung disease at age 42.
Read More Here.
Known terrorists were allowed to keep aviation licenses
Those who were shocked to discover, after 9/11, how easy it is for persons linked to terrorism to acquire pilots' licenses may be surprised to discover that, nearly eight years after that fateful day, at least six people known to have -- or suspected of -- terrorist links were able to keep their aviation licenses.
Among them, says a story in the New York Times, was a Libyan national convicted for his role in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.
The Times story, released late Thursday and largely overlooked by the rest of the media, says the Transportation Security Administration and Federal Aviation Administration didn't remove the individuals' aviation licenses until after the Times had inquired about the issue.
Read More Here.
White House denies ‘indefinite’ detention report
The White House dismissed reports that it has drafted an executive order allowing indefinite detention in the United States of some of the top terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay.
An administration official told AFP that no such draft order existed, though internal deliberations were taking place on how to deal with those inmates who could not be released or tried in civilian courts.
The source said that a task force established by the president was not due to present its recommendations until July, and that the administration would then work with Congress to find a solution to the conundrum.
Read More Here.
WeAreChange Live 4pm Eastern
tune in to the live Sunday show today 4pm eastern on the wearechange site for new confrontation videos with sen. Shumer, sen. Kerry and sen. Rockefeller, as well the latest updates from my trip to D.C, will be an amazing show.
http://www.livestream.com/wearechangelive
