"Mission Accomplished: The Failings of the 9/11 Commission" - July 2004
 
While the report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks in the US documents many of the failures of the US intelligence agencies leading up to the attacks of September 11, 2001, it leaves many basic questions unanswered.
 
Many of the shortcomings of the report are directly attributable to the limited charge given to the Commission in its creation, and the significant conflicts of interest among the Commission members, all prominent politicians or members of the national security team. Congress and President Bush only reluctantly agreed to the Commission's creation due to the lobbying and moral pressure from family members of the 9/11 victims. Controlling the damage to the President, Congress, the foreign policy establishment and the two major parties was the overwhelming mandate of the Commission members.
 
"Mission accomplished," is undoubtedly how Bush responded to the Commission's report, which failed to blame anyone for the murder of thousands of Americans. It is not surprising that Bush has publicly welcomed the report.
 
Among the Commission's notable failures is the lack of explanation of who paid for the September 11 attacks. It refused to examine the potential role of the CIA and the US government in providing support over the years to such terrorists. It fails to acknowledge that the failed invasion of Iraq has increased the risk of terrorism, though it does admit that 9/11 can not be a justification for the curtailment of civil liberties at home, starting with the Patriot Act.
 
Many questions relating to the role of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in the attacks go unanswered. Many members of the victims' families are upset about the lack of answers related to the FAA and NORAD's response to the hijacking and communication with the rescue workers at the World Trade Center.
 
The Commission also sweeps under the rug the assertions of Sibel Edmonds. Fluent in Farsi, the main language of Iran and Afghanistan, she was hired by the FBI as a translator after 9/11.She blew the whistle on the cover-up of intelligence that names some of the culprits who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks but is now under several gag orders. She has stated that "My translations of the 9/11 intercepts included money laundering, detailed and date-specific information ... If they were to do real investigations we would see several significant high-level criminal prosecutions in this country."
 
Edmonds rates only a footnote in the report, about insufficient translator capability in the FBI.
 
The Commission's report avoids analyzing the political reasons why the September 11 attacks took place. As Michael Scheuer, a 23-year veteran of the CIA, states in "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, "before you draft a policy to defeat bin Laden, you have to understand that our policies are what drives him and those who follow him...Iraq was a gift of epic proportions to Osama bin Laden and those who think like him." The report barely mentions the role of the Israel-Palestine conflict, though it does say that it was the motivation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man the report identifies as directing the terrorist attacks. Nor did it address many of the issues raised by the 9/11 Truth Movement concerning the inconsistencies with the government's version of what happened on 9/11. (See for instance "The New Pearl Harbor," by David Ray Griffin.)
 
Most curious is the Commission's assertion, widely reported in the media, that the attacks resulted from "a failure of the imagination." How is that possible when NORAD had conducted numerous training exercises in recent years under exactly the scenario that occured? Didn't anyone in the CIA, FBI or Congress read Tom Clancy's best-selling novel where a hijacked plane plows into the Capitol wiping out the entire elected government? Did no one read the report Congress commissioned by former Senator Gary Hart which concluded that such a domestic terrorist attack was not a question of if but when? What about all the warnings about an impending attack given to the US by Israel, Russia, France and Germany?
 
The Commission failed to explore why Mahmood Ahmed, then Director of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), ordered $100,000 to be wired to lead hijacker Momahmed Atta. It failed to explain why Ahmed was meeting with the head of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on the morning of 9/11.
 
Pakistan however is planning to execute Omar Sheikh, the person who implemented Ahmed's order to send the money. Sheikh is to be hanged for the murder of Wall Street journalist Daniel Pearl, even though Pearl's widow and the US government don't believe that Sheikh was involved in the murder.
 
One rumor is that Pearl had been investigating the role that the US was playing in providing training to the ISI. Many believe that the ISI, which has largely become a government of its own within the state of Pakistan, following its own agenda, was supporting and financing al-Qaida. The ISI is also closely linked with the CIA.
 
One foreign government issuing laudatory statements in response to the 9/11 Commission's report is Saudi Arabia. (Filmmaker Michael Moore however is less welcomed by the Saudis.) The Commission reported no evidence that the "Saudi government" directly financed al-Qaida or the hijackers. The panel did criticize the lack of Saudi cooperation with U.S. investigators of al-Qaida before Sept. 11, terming the Saudis "a problematic ally in combating Islamic extremism."
 
The Saudi government is widely considered the most corrupt in the world. The ruling family maintains power - and its control of its huge oil wealth - by literally buying off all other potential power players. It makes handsome payments to various "charitable groups," even though it is widely believed that a portion of such funds are diverted to terrorist groups.
 
Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. The Bush administration aided hundreds of Saudi principals, including members of the bin Laden family, flee the US immediately after the attack, doing only a cursory review of the Saudis before they deported. Twenty-eight pages of a prior Congressional report on 9/11 and Saudi involvement have still not been released to the public.
 
Family members of the 9/11 victims are less convinced than the Commission that the Saudis did not play a role in financing the 9/11 attacks. Commission Chairman Thomas Kean is partners with two of the Saudi billionaires sued by 9/11 families for their roles in the attacks. Khalid bin Mahfouz, who is Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law, and Mohammed Hussein al-Amoudi, are both key financial players allegedly tied to al-Qaeda.
 
The Commission does ominously point the finger at Iran, saying that it allowed the hijackers to pass through their country without stamping their passport, which might have lead to increased questioning when they entered the US. However, setting off screening detectors at the airport of the morning of the hijackings didn't raise enough alarm to stop the hijackers. And in fact a number of the hijackers were being monitored by the American government. They just did nothing to stop them.
 
The Commission does get it right in pointing out the threat of future terrorism. Congress dutifully issued press releases agreeing on the need for quick, corrective action and then went home for six week.
 
Investigative journalist and former FBI consultant Paul Williams warns in "Osama's Revenge: The Next 9/11: What the Media and the Government Haven't Told You," that al-Qaida plans to smuggle a half dozen suitcase nuclear bombs into to the US that would be detonated simultaneously in various cities. Some security experts believe the bombs may already be in the US.
 
Williams traces the spread of nuclear bomb development to Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of the Pakistani nuclear program. Khan was "pardoned" by the Pakistani President shortly after the US forced him to be arrested for selling nuclear technology to many foreign governments, including North Korea and Libya. Williams claims that Daniel Pearl was investigating Khan at the time of his murder. Williams reports that when the US invaded Kabul after 9/11, an al-Qaida safe house contained numerous documents detailing dealings between al-Qaida and Kahn.
 
While the Commission did accomplish some good in pointing out the failures of the CIA, FBI, Congress and the Bush administration in dealing with 9/11, it fell far short of providing a comprehensive and definitive analysis of the attacks. Much more work needs to be done. A new commission is needed, one which is directed by family members and those independent of the American foreign policy establishment.

return to 9/11 Writings

Dear Troy Record Editor: April 14, 2004

Contrary to your editorial on the 9/11 investigation (Blame Game Accomplishes Nothing, April 14), the family members of the 3,000 people killed that day have a right to answers. So do the American people.

Even with the cursory job done so far by the bipartisan 9/11 Commission, it is evident that the Bush administration failed to take seriously the threat posed by terrorism and then manipulated the tragedy of 9/11 to pursue its pre-existing agenda to invade Iraq.

 It should be the family members of the 9/11 victims that are asking the questions, because only then would America and the world learn the truth. It was only the persistent lobbying by the family members that overcome the aggressive campaign by President Bush and Vice-President Cheney to block any congressional investigation into 9/11.

 The Commission members are entrenched representatives of the very foreign policy establishment they are supposed to be investigating. Bush insisted that the Commission not include family members or other nonpartisan representatives. Only representatives of the two major political parties were allowed. Each party was given a veto over the actions of the Commission.

The Executive Director of the Commission not only co-authored a book on foreign policy with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, he was a member of the Bush foreign policy transition team. In that role, he participated in the January 25, 2001 meeting where former counter-terrorism advisor Richard Clarke briefed the president's national security team on the imminent al Qaeda threat. He was intimately involved in the very conduct he is supposed to be investigating. The Chairman of the Commission, Thomas Kean, is partners with two of the Saudi billionaires sued by families of the victims of September 11 for their roles in the attacks. Khalid bin Mahfouz, who is Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law, and Mohammed Hussein al-Amoudi, are both key financial players allegedly tied to al-Qaeda.

Commissioner Jamie S Gorelick is very close to CIA director George Tenet, serving on the CIA's National Security Advisory Panel and the president's Review of Intelligence. Commissioner Fred Fielding is a former White House counsel during Reagan's time, at the time of the Iran-Contra scandal. Commissioner John Lehman was navy secretary under Reagan.

The Commission members are there for damage control, not to find the truth.

In a true democracy, a Commission with such inherent conflict of interests would never be allowed to investigate such a critical matter. Most outrageous was Bush’s effort to appoint former Secretary of State Henry Commissioner as head of the Commission. In the rest of the world, Kissinger is regarded as a war criminal, starting with his leadership role in the assassination of President Allende of Chile on 9/11 thirty years ago.

The Commission has failed to asked probing questions in their recent public hearings. With the Commission members limited to ten minutes, witnesses like Rice provided long-winded, evasive and repetitive answers to chew up the allotted time. It was appalling to watch commission members like former Illinois Governor Jim Thompson implement the White House playbook in attacking the credibility of Clarke.

In addition to the briefing memo from the CIA entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States”, there are numerous reports in the mainstream media that the US received explicit warnings shortly before 9/11 from the governments of Russia, France, Israel, Germany and Israel. Russian leader Putin has been quoted as saying that his warning was delivered "in the strongest possible terms," specifically regarding threats to airports and government buildings.

The family members have been pushing the Commission to ask a series of questions related to 9/11. One example was the decision by Attorney General Ashcroft to use only expensive chartered flights in the months leading up to 9/11. One commission member today did haltingly ask the question at the end of his ten minutes, mentioning it was from the family members. The witness confirmed Ashcroft’s action, merely stating that is was due to a “security assessment.” No one asked the obvious followup question as to what the security assessment was.

The family members want the Bush administration to explain the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11. Most of the terrorists on 9/11 were Saudi Arabian citizens. It is well-known that the Saudi ruling family has been a major source of funding for terrorists. Both the Clinton and Bush administration impeded FBI investigations in Saudi Arabia. There has never been a president who has had as close a relationship with a foreign power as the Bushes have had with Saudi Arabia. More than $1.4 billion in investments and contracts went from the House of Saud over the past two decades to companies associated with the Bushes such as Harken Energy, Halliburton, and the Carlyle Group.\

As John O'Neill, the FBI's former top bin Laden investigator, said shortly before his death in the World Trade Center, "all the answers, everything needed to dismantle Osama bin Laden's organization can be found in Saudi Arabia." O'Neill also said that America's failure to stop bin Laden could be traced to one word - oil.

The list of other key questions are too long to go in detail here. What was the relationship between the US, the Pakistani Intelligence Service (IPS), the Taliban and al Qaida? Why did the head of the IPS wire $100,000 to the chief 9/11 hijacker? Why did he meet with the heads of both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on the morning of 9/11? Why didn’t the FAA and NORAD follow standard procedure on 9/11 in responding to the hijackings? Which terrorist organization(s) actually organized the 9/11 attacks? Who were the actual hijackers? What was the role of the CIA in training bin Laden as a terrorist?

America needs a truly independent commission to find these answers. It is disgraceful that the media has been so silent in failing to demand the truth about why so many people were killed on 9/11. I hope that the Troy Record will spend take a much closer look at 9/11 and its implications for our country and world.

return to 9/11 Writings

The 9/11 Commission Avoids the Hard Questions - March 2004

by Mark A. Dunlea

Two and one half years after 3,000 people were killed in the World Trade Center in New York City, not only do most questions remained unanswered about 9/11, they remain unasked.

President Bush aggressively lobbied Congress against a full-scale investigation. When Bush reluctantly agreed to the creation of the National Commission on Terrorists Attacks, he insisted it be limited to representatives of the two major political parties, with each party having a veto over what the Commission investigated.

Noticeably absent from the Commission are representatives of the family members of the victims, whose only interest would be to determine who was responsible for the murder of their loved ones. Instead, the Commission members are entrenched members of the very foreign policy establishment they are supposed to be investigating.

Family members have called for the resignation of Philip D Zelikow, Executive Director of the Commission. In addition to co-authoring a book on foreign policy with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, as a member of Bush’s foreign policy transition team Zelikow participated in the January 2001 meeting where counter-terrorism advisor Richard Clarke briefed the president's national security team on the al-Qaeda threat. Zelikow is thus leading an investigation of his own response.

Commission Chairman Thomas Kean is partners with two of the Saudi billionaires sued by 9/11 families for their roles in the attacks. Khalid bin Mahfouz, who is Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law, and Mohammed Hussein al-Amoudi, are both key financial players allegedly tied to al-Qaeda. Commissioner Fred Fielding is a former White House counsel during Reagan's time, at the time of the Iran-Contra scandal. Commissioner John Lehman was navy secretary under Reagan.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay recently called for the removal of Commissioner Jamie S Gorelick, deputy Attorney General under Clinton, after Ashcroft attacked her for authoring a memo reminding the Justice Department to keep counterintelligence separate from criminal investigations. DeLay however doesn’t seem bothered that Gorelick is also very close to current CIA director George Tenet and is a member of the CIA's National Security Advisory Panel.

The Commission members are there for damage control, not to find the truth. It was appalling to watch commission members like former Illinois Governor Jim Thompson implement the White House playbook in attacking the credibility of Clarke.

Even with the cursory job done so far by the 9/11 Commission, it is evident that the Bush administration failed to take seriously the threat posed by terrorism and then manipulated the tragedy of 9/11 to pursue its pre-existing agenda to invade Iraq.

The US received explicit warnings shortly before 9/11 from the governments of Russia, France, Israel, Germany and Israel. Russian leader Putin said his warning was delivered "in the strongest possible terms.” Despite the claims of the Bush administration that no one ever thought that terrorist would use hijacked planes as missiles, NORAD conducted numerous training exercises under exactly that scenario.

But there are many other key questions that family members have been pressing the Commission on, starting with the role of Saudi Arabia.

Most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi Arabian. The Saudi ruling family has been a major source of funding for terrorists. Both the Clinton and Bush administration impeded FBI investigations into Saudi Arabia. No President has ever had such a close relation with a foreign government as the Bushes have with Saudi Arabia. More than $1.4 billion in investments and contracts went from the House of Saud over the past two decades to companies associated with the Bush family.

As John O'Neill, the FBI's former top bin Laden investigator, said shortly before his death in the World Trade Center, "all the answers, everything needed to dismantle Osama bin Laden's organization can be found in Saudi Arabia." O'Neill also said that America's failure to stop bin Laden could be traced to one word - oil.

 Some other key questions include: 

1.  What was the role of the Pakistani Intelligence Service with the 9/11 hijackers? Why did Mahmood Ahmed, Director of Pakistan's secret service, order $100,000 to be wired to lead hijacker Momahmed Atta?

2. What role did the CIA play in training and arming of terrorists before 9/11, including bin Laden and other members of al Qaida? What role did Pakistan and the US play in allowing the Taliban to come to power? Bin Laden worked closely with the CIA when the US during the Carter administration organized "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan to go to war with the Soviet Union.

3. What negotiations took place between the US government and the Taliban before 9/11 relating to the construction of a pipeline through Afghanistan?

4. What surveillance did the FBI and CIA have on the alleged hijackers before 9/11? Several of the hijackers were apparently closely monitored, particularly Mohammed Atta

5. What terrorist organizations and/or governments were responsible for the 9/11 attacks? Saying that “bin Laden” did it is like saying the “Mob” is responsible for organized crime. The NY Times reported the CIA believed that the hijacking may primarily been the idea of Atta, an Egyptian citizen. Other media reports indicate some hijackers thought that their goal was to exchange hijacked passengers for the release of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, a cleric serving a life sentence for masterminding the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

If America is ever to find the truth about 9/11, it needs a truly independent commission, one which includes several relatives of those killed on September 11, 2001. Rather than state lawmakers engaging in name calling over “fighting terrorism”, the Governor and legislators should be demanding real answers as to why so many people were killed at the World Trade Center.

return to 9/11 Writings

Greens Accuse the Bush Administration of Using 9/11 to Hijack the Constitution
Renew Call for A Complete Investigation of Those Responsible for 9/11 Attacks
Urge US Support for Rule of International Law, Commitment to Peace and Justice

September 11, 2003

The Green Party said today that the response of the Bush administration and Congress to the September 11th attacks had increased the risk of terrorism, isolated the United States politically, and had seriously undermined democracy both in the United States and abroad.

The Greens renewed their call to bring American troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Greens also accused the Bush administration of blocking efforts to provide an honest accounting of the September 11th attacks, starting with their efforts to protect the oil regime of Saudi Arabia.

"The Bush administration squandered a real opportunity to create a world that reflected true American values of democracy and justice by their opportunistic response to the September 11th tragedy. They have used the deaths of thousands of innocent people as an excuse to invade foreign countries to control oil supplies in the Middle East, to increase corporate welfare and tax cuts for the rich, and to curtail civil liberties and public dissent. The end result is the death of tens of thousands of civilians and American soldiers, two foreign countries ruled by chaos and warlords, huge federal budget deficits, and increased acts of terrorism around the world," stated Paul Glover, the Green Party candidate for Mayor in Ithaca (http://www.glover-mayor.org) and a green candidate for President.

The Greens, who have called for the impeachment of President Bush for his administration's deceptions about the reasons for launching its illegal invasion of Iraq, are also calling for an investigation, and indictment, of the White House and government officials responsible for the Environmental Protection Agency lying to New York residents and rescue workers about air quality following the September 11th attacks.

"The pattern of deceit and illegal behavior by the Bush administration is breathtaking. They appear willing to do anything, say anything, to enrich themselves and their campaign contributors at the expense of American taxpayers and world peace. The Democrats have not only failed to stand up to this shredding of our Constitution, they have too often willingly joined in the effort," stated Gloria Mattera, a long-time peace and labor activist for the City Council in Brooklyn on the Green-Say No to War line. (http://www.electgloria.org/)

"It is time for the American Congress to ensure that the truth about 9/11 comes out. Congress needs to release the information they have about the role of the Saudi Arabian regime in providing funding to their citizens who flew the airplanes into the World Trade Center, as well as information about other foreign support. The FBI and CIA need to be overhauled following their failure to adequately respond to the prior warnings and information they received about the September 11th attacks," stated Mark Dunlea, Chair of the Green Party of NYS.

The Green Party of the United States has signed onto the 'Uniting for Peace' petition to the U.N. calling on the Security Council to insist that the central authority for restoring peace and security in Iraq rest with the U.N. The petition asks the Security Council to give the U.N. primary authority over humanitarian relief, Iraq's reconstruction, and the formation of a new government.

return to 9/11 Writings

Hold Bush Accountable If He Lied About Iraq - July 2003
   
by Mark Dunlea

If  Bush lied about going to war against Iraq, starting with its weapons of mass destruction, should he be impeached?So far political observers and media pundits say no.

Impeachment is inherently a political process, and with the Republicans controlling the White House and both Houses of Congress, it is unlikely they would seek to remove one of their own, particularly one with high standings in the polls.

Some even argue that conduct of foreign affairs invariably involves some level of untruthfulness. Besides, the world is well rid of Saddam Hussein ruling Iraq.

It is hard to believe, however, that making false statements about sex, the grounds for the last presidential impeachment, is a less serious offense than lying about the reasons to invade Iraq -- putting aside for the moment the question of whether such an invasion was legal.

The issue of impeachment is also important if one believes that integrity and truthfulness are critical to the proper functioning of our democratic, constitutional system of government.

For the first time in our history, the United States embraced a doctrine of pre-emptive war. The rationale cited for President Bush for the invasion was that we were threatened by WMDs, even though the intelligence agencies and United Nations weapons inspectors found no hard evidence that they still existed in Iraq, let alone that Iraq intended to use them against its neighbors or the United States.

A Washington Post story published in the Times Union on June 7 stated "senior administration officials, including President Bush, expressed certainty in public that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, even though U.S. intelligence agencies were reporting that they had no direct evidence that such weapons existed."

While President Bush stated that Iraq had obtained aluminum tubes to "enrich uranium for nuclear weapons," the CIA had already concluded that these were ordinary rocket materials unable to handle nuclear material. The Denver Post reported on June 29 that "claims by the administration that Iraq had unmanned aerial vehicles capable of delivering deadly biological agents around the world to the U.S. were known to be false; analysts estimated they didn't have the range even to reach Tel Aviv. ... Several members of the Senate Intelligence Committee told The New Republic that they knew that evidence contradicting the Bush administration's claims had been concealed, but they were unable to reveal it because it was classified."

Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., the dean of the U.S. Senate, recently said that while "the administration sought to portray Iraq as a direct and deadly threat ... there is a great difference between the hand-picked intelligence that was presented by the Bush administration ... when compared against what we have actually discovered."

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, was more blunt when he told Congress on June 10 that "I have seen the American people apparently deceived into supporting invasion ... on the basis of what now appear to be false assurances. ... The administration wanted to attack Iraq for a variety of ideological and geopolitical reasons. But the President knew that the American people would not willingly risk shedding the blood of thousands of Americans and Iraqis without the immediate threat of deadly attack on the United States."

President Bush made numerous statements about WMDs that appear not to true. On Oct. 7, 2002, the President said Iraq "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons."

The President also has said such things as his March 17 statement that "Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons." On Sept. 12, he said, "intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

Statements made by others in the Bush administration were equally assertive about the existence of WMDs in Iraq.

Vice President Dick Cheney said last Aug. 26 that "there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." Cheney also took the highly unusual step of visiting CIA headquarters several times to pressure analysts to make sure they said the same thing.

The most challenging question is not whether the Bush administration distorted evidence to justify its decision to invade Iraq, but whether Congress will hold the Bush administration accountable for it. As Nazi leader Hermann Goering said during at the Nuremberg trials in 1946, "Naturally the common people don't want war; ... But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along ... . All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

Are we going to sit by and let our government do this to us without any consequences? In a democracy, no one, not even the President, should be above the rule of law.

return to 9/11 Writings

Green Party Calls for Impeachment Proceeedings Against President Bush - June 16, 2003

The Green Party of New York State announced today that it had voted to urge Congress to start the impeachment process of President Bush for his apparently misleading statements regarding the reasons for launching an illegal invasion of Iraq.

The Greens also said that the President, as Commander in Chief, is responsible for the commitment of war crimes. The Greens said that it was clear that the United States had violated various international laws with respect to its invasion of Iraq. Charges have already been filed by victims against American troops in Belgium Courts related to war crimes. The Greens feel that the President should be held accountable for any actions that troops were directed to take. 

The United States alleged war crimes include the use of depleted uranium. DU is used by the U.S,  since it is 2.7 times stronger than steel.  DU is suspected as the cause of the Gulf War Syndrome which has caused health problems in tens of thousands of Americans veterans.

The Green Party said it would ask the national Green Party of the U.S. to support impeachment.

"All evidence points to the Bush administration lying to the U.S. people and the world about why we illegally invaded Iraq. There needs to be accountability if such a crime occurred," stated Mark Dunlea, Chairperson of the Green Party of New York State.

"Some people are urging the Greens to focus on voting Bush out in 2004. We would prefer to put an end to his illegal Presidency before he does more harm. We want a country that we can be proud of, one that is committed to values of truth, democracy and justice, including complying with international law and the American constitution. What the Bush administration has done has shamed our country with even our long time allies and has increased the long term security threat posed to our country and its citizens" stated Joe Lombardo, a member of the Executive Committee of the Green Party.

"In view of the fervor of the House Republicans to impeach President Clinton for making misleading statements about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, one would trust that they will take similar action in response to the Bush administration's misleading statements about the invasion of Iraq. It would be a far more serious offense that what Nixon did with Watergate" added Dunlea.

The Greens said that Bush and other administration officials should also be held accountable for any war crimes committed by American military forces. The Greens noted that since the U.S. invaded Iraq rather than responding in self-defense or declaring war, the U.S. faced even stronger  international requirements to protect civilians from harm than are in force during a war The Greens said that the U.S.had failed miserably to meet such standards.

" In any true democracy, the Bush administration would be held accountable for their actions. The Democrats have not been willing to do the tasks normally assigned to the opposition party. They have even failed to insist upon a comprehensive investigation of the murder of thousands on September 11th. It is time for the American people to demand a restoration of democracy and the rule of law in the United States," stated Betty Wood, Secretary of the Party.

Grounds Cited by the Greens Related to Impeachment

Providing False Information Related to the Invasion of Iraq

The allegations related to producing false information about Weapons of Mass Destruction WMD) were part of a broader pattern of deception. For instance, the Bush administration asserted that Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from Niger, though this information was based on crude forgeries that officials had been warned about. The administration's allegations about connections with bin Laden were dismissed worldwide but treated seriously here in the U.S.

A recent story in the Washington Post (reprinted, Albany Times Union, June 7, 2003) stated "senior administration officials, including President Bush, expressed certainty in public that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, even though U.S. intelligence agencies were reporting that they had no direct evidence that such weapons existed.".

Potential War Crimes

Some of the Existing charges in Belgium

1. Illegal Use of Cluster Bombs.

Although cluster bombs are not expressly forbidden by the Geneva Law, the rules of war prohibit the use of weapons that are incapable of being used in a manner that complies with the obligation to distinguish between civilians and combatants.

Complaints against American soldiers have already been filed in Belgium by victims of such war crimes, based on the Belgian law on "universal jurisdiction." The law gives the Belgian government the option of filing a case before the International Criminal Court (ICC) or forwarding it to the country of origin of the accused. Despite the Belgian government opposition to the war, it is expected that they will forward the complaint to the U.S. courts, where they are likely to be ignored.

2. Illegal Attacks, including killings, by American military forces on journalists.

Several international journalists' organizations, such as "Reporters without Borders," have filed complaints accusing the U.S. government of intentionally firing at war correspondents. The leading journalists in Spain staged a one-day walkout at the National Parliament, with more than one hundred marching to the U.S. embassy to publicly accuse the Bush administration of murder for killing Spanish journalists when they fired on the Palestinian Hotel in Baghdad, where the foreign media was concentrated. There are at least two other instances - the bombings of the Al-Jazeera and Abu Dhabi television channels - where American forces are alleged to have knowingly shot at and killed journalists.

3. Looting.

Acts of aggression against health services and other Iraqi infrastructure, including   widespread looting of hospitals, museums and private homes. The Fourth Geneva Convention states that an occupying power has the duty "of maintaining...  the medical and hospital establishments and services, public health and hygiene in the occupied territories."  The American and British government were repeatedly warned before the conflict by Amnesty International and others that there was a grave risk of widespread disorder, humanitarian crisis and human rights abuses, including revenge attacks, once the Iraqi government's authority was removed. The U.S. managed to protect the oil wells but little else.

Other Charges.

1. Illegal Treatment by the U.S. of prisoners

Major complaints have focused on the treatment of non-Afghan Taliban prisoners in Afghanistan. The most notorious incident involves the deaths of scores if not hundreds of prisoners who suffocated to death inside airtight metal cargo containers during a two-day journey after they surrendered to Northern Alliance and US forces in the Afghan city of Kunduz in late November. As the invading force, the U.S. is responsible under international law for the conduct of its war allies such as the Northern Alliance.

2. Use of Depleted Uranium (DU)

Depleted uranium makes shells, bullets and armor more effective since it is 2.7 times stronger than steel. The use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions by the U.S. forces is   alleged to be a war crime. The country of Iraq now joins Afghanistan and Bosnia in being a toxic dump for depleted uranium, which has a half-life of 40,000 years.

Depleted uranium is a component of toxic nuclear waste, usually stored at secure sites. Handlers need radiation protection gear. DU also burns upon impacts, creating a radioactive cloud that can be easily inhaled. Those exposed to DU will experience kidney dysfunction, lung damage,  memory loss, cancer and premature death.

320 tons of depleted uranium were used against Iraq in 1991; five times as much was used this time.  The incidence of horribly deformed Iraqi babies has greatly increased since the first Gulf War. A 1998 report by the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances found that inhaling DU causes symptoms identical to those claimed by many sick vets with Gulf War Syndrome. It is alleged that 8,000 American service men and women have died of DU exposure, with another 159,000 on service-related disability and illness. Medical care has routinely been denied to them, since to admit the effect of DU would expose the US to liability.

More American vets will be coming home from Iraq again after this lethal exposure. The Iraqi civilians of course will be exposed to the uranium forever.

return to 9/11 Writings

Green Party Calls for Kissinger to Be Removed from Panel to Investigate September 11th - December 2002
Accuse Him of Being a Terrorist

The Green Party today harshly criticized the Bush administration for appointing former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to head the government investigation into September 11th, saying that if was reprehensible to appoint someone widely regarded worldwide as a war criminal to oversee an inquiry into how 3,000 Americans were murdered.

Kissinger is presently facing several legal actions due to his role in the overthrow of the democratic government in Chile in 1973, and for efforts to murder political opponents throughout South America . He is also widely blamed for the illegal bombings of Cambodia which killed hundreds of thousands of civilians.

"It is clear that Kissinger was appointed by the Bush administration to ensure that the truth about September 11th remains hidden. His prime qualification is his long history of being willing to ignore U.S. and international law. We need someone to head this investigation who will be willing to discover who paid for the September 11th attacks, regardless of whom they were, and to determine whether or not our country's intelligence agencies did an adequate job in response to various warnings they received about such an attack. Kissinger has been brought in to bury the truth," stated Mark Dunlea, Chair of the Green Party of NYS.

The Greens continued to criticize the compromise reached last week between Congress and the Bush administration to create a panel to investigate the September 11th attacks. "This panel falls far short of the independent commission sought by the victims of the families of September 11th. The Bush administration is doing everything it can to prevent the American people from learning the truth about September 11th. The scope of the committee is severely restricted, it is controlled by the President and the two major parties, and effectively allows a single member of the committee to veto any particular witness from being called," added Howie Hawkins of the Syracuse Greens.

Kissinger is widely blamed for the U.S. efforts to overthrow the democratically elected Governor in Chile in 1973 , including the assassination of President Allende. In recent years, prosecutors in Chile, Argentina, Spain and France have sought to have Kissinger testify about what happened in Chile. Kissinger chaired the secret U.S. committee that oversaw the covert operations.

Victims of General Pinohcet's 17-year military dictatorship have brought legal actions in both Chilean and American courts against Henry A. Kissinger. One investigating judge in Chile has formally asked Mr. Kissinger to respond to questions about the killing of an American citizen, Charles Horman

Relatives of Gen. Renéé Schneider, commander of the Chilean Armed Forces when he was assassinated in Oct. 1970, have filed a $3 million civil suit in Washington against Mr. Kissinger and other officials who, according to declassified United States documents, were involved in plotting a military coup to keep Mr. Allende from power. General Schneider was known as an officer committed to upholding the Chilean constitution and therefore opposed to the rumored incipient coup against newly elected Socialist President Salvador Allende.

Mr. Kissinger has acknowledged that he initially followed Mr. Nixon's orders in Sept. 1970 to organize a coup, but contended that he reversed his position later. The newly released documents however showed that the C.I.A. continued to organize a coup and provided money to military officers who killed General Schneider.

Human rights lawyers in Chile have also filed a criminal complaint against Mr. Kissinger and other American officials, accusing them of organizing the covert regional program of political repression called Operation Condor. The plan involved the coordination of efforts by military dictatorships in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay the 1970's to kidnap and kill hundreds of their exiled political opponents. Argentina has also begun an investigation into American support for and involvement in Operation Condor. A judge there, Rodolfo Cancioba Corral, has said he regards Mr. Kissinger as a potential "defendant or suspect."During a visit by Mr. Kissinger to France last year a judge there sent police officers to his Paris hotel to serve him with a request to answer questions about American involvement in the Chilean coup, in which French citizens also disappeared. Kissinger fled on to Italy.

In April of this year, a British human-rights campaigner applied to a London judge to arrest Mr. Kissinger under the Geneva Conventions Act of 1957 for the "killing, injury and displacement" of three million people in Indochina during the Vietnam War years. The judge rejected the application.

Kissinger has been blamed as the mastermind of the secret and illegal bombings of Cambodia beginning in 1969 during the Vietnam War, which by some estimates killed as many people as the subsequent Pol Pot regime. An estimated 600,000 to one million people were killed in this decade long holocaust. U.S. B-52s pounded Cambodia for 160 consecutive days in 1973, dropping more than 240,000 short tons of bombs on rice fields, water buffalo, villages; this was 50% more tonnage than we dropped on Japan during WWII. At the time the Pol Pot took over in April 1975 Cambodia was a devastated nation on the verge of mass starvation with crops unsowed and vast numbers of refugees in and around Phnom Penh suddenly cut off from the U.S. aid that had kept them alive. High U.S. officials were estimating a million deaths from starvation before the Khmer
Rouge takeover

President Ford and Secretary of State Kissinger also gave the go ahead to Indonesia's invasion of East Timor and subsequent massive war crimes there.

Greens Says it is Time for Pataki to Support Independent State Investigation into September 11th Murders rather than Restricting Access to the Capitol - December 2002

The Green Party today questioned why 15 months after nearly 3,000 people were killed in the heart of New York City, Governor Pataki has failed to initiate any efforts to determine who is responsible for such murders or to bring them to trial.

"It is time for our state officials to demand justice for the victims of September 11th. We need Governor Pataki and our state officials to get serious about investigating those who were responsible for blowing up the World Trade Center, rather than enacting yet more restrictions on the public's access to the State Capitol or on our civil liberties. President Bush has been quite vocal in ensuring that the truth doesn't come out about this horrible event. Why isn't Governor Pataki and the State Legislature launching its own independent investigation into the murders of so many New Yorkers, or working with Mayor Bloomberg and the City Council to do a joint one?,". asked Mark Dunlea of the Peace and Justice Committee of the Capital District Greens.

Dunlea noted that the Governor's so-called security measuares is just the latest in a series of efforts initiated by Pataki from the moment he took office to restrict the public's access to the State Capitol. The media has dubbed the second floor of the Capitol Fort Pataki. The Greens said that the new security measures would eliminate many of the protests that take place in the Capitol. For instance, several years ago the Greens and other Earth Day protestors were able to sneak large puppets and a toxic drum into the Capitol; this will no longer be possible. While the Governor's spokesperson said that protestors would still be allowed to bring signs into the Capitol, the police have always blocked such signs, forcing protestors to hide them until they were ready to be used. Now each protestor would be screened before being allowed to enter the Capitol.In addition, whenever the police are aware that large number of protestors enter the Capitol, they lock down all the access doors, confining the protestors to the entrance area.

Both President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney have repeatedly lobbied Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and others to block an independent Congressional investigation into the attacks on September 11, 2001. The recent compromise by Congress and the Bush administration fell far short of the independent commission sought by the victims of the families of September 11th. The scope of the committee is severely restricted, it is controlled by the President and the two major parties, and effectively allows a single member of the committee to veto any particular witness from being called.

The Greens severely criticized President Bush's naming of Henry Kissinger as Chair of the Commission, noting that it was public knowledge that while he was Secretary of State Kissinger had helped plan the assassination of democratically elected President Allende in Chile as well as other political leaders in South America. He is presently wanted by courts in at least four countires to account for his role in such acts. Kissinger withdrew his name on the grounds that he didn't want to reveal his list of private clients, several of whom reportedly have financial interests in the oil industry and the Middle East.

The Greens said that an investigation into the September 11th murders needed to focus on what individuals, organizations or countries provided assistance to the hijackers who flew the planes into the World Trade Center.

"It is certainly understandable that the state would initially defer to the federal government to take the lead into investigating these murders. But when 15 months go by and the Bush administration is clearly impeding a true investigation, it is time for New York's elected leaders to ensure that the truth about these murders is found out," said Dunlea, Chair of the Green Party of NYS..

Dunlea said that he had asked Sen. Tom Duane to sponsor a resolution in the State Legislature on the need for an independent investigation into September 11th. Sen. Duana and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver are the two state legislators who represented the WTC area at the time of the attacks. The Greens believe that the involvement of the families of the victims of September 11th is critical in any investigation to ensure that the truth is pursued.

return to 9/11 Writings

Seeking Truth in the "War on Terrorism" - Nov. 2002

Dear Metroland Editor:   

One of the first casualties of war is the truth. While the mainstream media beats the drums of war and joins with our government in hiding the facts from the American people, I appreciate Metroland's ongoing commitment to independence and journalistic integrity. America will never find peace or defeat terrorism unless it is willing to find the truth about September 11th.

The Greens urge our government to end the bombing of Afghanistan, and instead seek to prosecute those responsible for September 11 as criminals, while committing to create an international economic political system based on justice for all rather than profits for a few. It is a scandal that our political and corporate leaders have used the horrors of September 11 to unleash a torrent of proposals to dramatically increase corporate welfare, while little is being done for the hundred of thousands of average workers who have been hurt.

In recent decades our government has agreed to expand the political power of corporations worldwide through entities such as the World Trade Organization; instead, we should be expanding the democratic rights of individuals worldwide to create a world the values the sacredness of each life. Congress should establish an independent Truth Commission, with the power to issue subpoenas, including to government representatives, to learn the truth about September 11. We also need a crash investment in energy self-sufficiency, in renewable energy, energy conservation and efficiency, to end this cycle of war for oil.

The bombing of Afghanistan not only increases the threat of terrorism, there is little to no evidence that the people of Afghanistan are responsible for the September 11 attack. The NY Times reported that the CIA believes that the mastermind of the attack was not bin Laden, but rather Mohamed Atta, one of the hijackers who was a member of the Egyptian Jihad. Almost all of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Most experts believe that the financing for the attack probably came from individuals in Saudi Arabia. The media reports that the motivation of the hijackers was to provoke a war between the "West and Islam," or at least initiate civil war in Pakistan by forcing that country's rulers to support the U.S's military response. Each day of the bombing increases the possibility of the use of biological or nuclear weapons, and the escalation into a regional or worldwide war.

The NY Times reported that Saudi Arabia's principal response to September 11 was to use a private jet to evacuate members of the bin Laden from the U.S. The U.S. continues to support the rulers of Saudi Arabia, probably the most corrupt and anti-women regime in the world, due to profits from oil. The mixture of politics, military spending and oil has resulted in a growing interconnection between the power elite in the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. For instance, media sources have reported that Bin Laden Sr., one of the wealthiest individuals in Saudi Arabia, has had ongoing financial dealings with George Bush the 41st, most recently through the Carlyle Group, a well-connected Washington merchant bank specializing in buyouts of defense and aerospace companies.

It is true that terrorist training camps have operated in Afghanistan, and it is likely that the hijackers received some training there. But the camps were able to operate there as a direct result of policies and support provided by the American government, not because they are supported by local residents. There are also other parts of the world where governments have collapsed that these terrorist operations can relocate to, and of course many of the terrorists involved in September 11 operated in the U.S. The United States government estimates that there are several dozen countries where terrorists presently operate. How many of these countries are we going to bomb? Will our government continue to make distinctions between "bad" terrorists and "good" terrorists?

The U.S. contributed to the collapse of the government in Afghanistan in its effort to undermine the Soviet Union during the Cold War. There is significant evidence that the U.S. subsequently worked with Pakistan to support the rise to power of the Taliban to replace our once and future allies, the "freedom fighters" and warlords who had carved out competing fiefdoms and were brutalizing local residents, especially women. The U.S. apparently hoped that the Taliban would stabilize the situation, making it possible for American energy companies to construct a pipeline through Afghanistan and Pakistan to extract large energy reserves in the Caspian Sea. The fact that the Taliban would continue to oppress women wasn't considered important.

There are news reports that the U.S. informed Pakistan this summer that we intended to launch a war this October to replace the Taliban; there is speculation that this information was leaked to the Taliban to provoke an attack on the U.S. so that we could retaliate with our war. There are also news reports that several years ago the Taliban offered to turn over bin Laden to the U.S., and that this summer the CIA met with several times with bin Laden while he was in a hospital in Dubai receiving medical treatment.

Truth in foreign policy is always an elusive concept, particularly in matters of war. That is why there is a need for an independent Truth Commission so that the American public knows what is actually going on. Is this a war on terrorism or just another war for oil profits? Why do we keep on going to war with individuals and countries who we militarily supported just a few years previously? Why do we repeatedly use our military might to prop up undemocratic regimes that oppress their own citizens? All of the above information has been reported in newspapers such as the NY Times, Guardian (UK), and Le Figaro (France). The greens have created a website at http://nys.greens.org/peace where some of this information is available.

September 11 has inflicted deep emotional scars on the American people. We feel sorrow, anger, fear, confusion, depression, powerlessness. In a made-for-tv production, foreign terrorists struck at the heart of our country, murdering thousands of innocent civilians. Hundreds of others sacrificed their lives to save others. But our cries of grief should not be manipulated by the Bush administration and the media into a cry for war.

For Americans, September 11 represents the greatest escalation and erosion of the "rules of war" since the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan. Unfortunately, terrorism is not a new tactic and many people in South America, the Middle East and Africa have been forced to live - and die - with it for decades. Nor can we expect to end terrorism unless Americans are willing to confront our governments' own support for terrorism, starting with the various wars we have promoted in Central America, such as financing and directing the killing of thirty thousand civilians in Nicaragua by the contras in the 1980s.

There are no easy answers to September 11th or eliminating terrorism. It is understandable that many Americans feel that war - or at least military attacks against terrorists - is at least part of the answer. But not only does violence just beget more violence, America has no realistic, comprehensive plan to deal with terrorism. Bombing one of the poorest countries in the world will primarily create only more innocent victims and will do nothing to safeguard Americans. Americans must resist the pleas by the Bush administration to "go back to shopping" while Congress curtails our civil liberties and instead demand the truth and real solutions from our government.

In Peace

Mark Dunlea
Capital District Greens

return to 9/11 Writings

Statement on One Year Anniversary of September 11 - 2002

On September 11, 2001, America watched in horror as thousands of innocent individuals were killed in an act of terrorism broadcast on live television. For the last twelve months, we have grappled with conflicting challenges of how to mourn those who were murdered while determining how best to bring those guilty of such terrible acts to justice. While there are no easy answers, we owe it to those who died to ask the difficult questions.

As a party committed to nonviolence, democracy and justice, the Greens have often been in conflict with the Bush administration and Congress in their response to the horrors of September 11. The Greens would have treated these attacks as a crime against humanity, working through the international community to bring those responsible to trial. Rather than pursuing an avenue that truly brings the guilty to justice, the Bush administration is intent on launching a new war on Iraq in violation of U.S. and international law. The Bush administration is isolating the United States on major international initiatives such as the International Criminal Court, the proliferation of nuclear weapons, ending racism, environmental protection, and economic development. Civil liberties that make our country "the land of the free" are eroding in the name of national defense and patriotism. The violence and hostilities in the Middle East are rapidly escalating while Congress pursues an energy policy that moves us further from energy independence and renewable energy sources.

September 11th represented a tremendous failure of our national intelligence and defense forces. We need an independent investigation to examine what happened that terrible day. We owe it to those who died to examine the performance of our national security agencies, to determine whether they acted properly to prior warnings about possible terrorist attacks, and to see whether our defense forces adequately responded once the hijackings became known. We need to identify all the individuals, terrorist organizations, and nations that were responsible for these attacks, starting with the question of who financed the operation. For instance, what was the role of the various corrupt kingdoms such as Saudi Arabia that we support in the Middle East in exchange for access to their oil supplies?

September 11th proved to Americans that our country is not immune to terrorist acts. Americans should realize however that the horrors of terrorism, genocide and slaughter of civilians are routine in many countries. Acts of savagery committed in the name of religion, culture or country have occurred since the dawn of civilization. Responding to such acts primarily with more violence normally mainly produces more victims. The U.S. bombing of Afghanistan killed thousands of innocent civilians, restored tribal warloads to power who will likely return to civil war once Americans troops are withdrawn, and in the long term will do little to stop terrorism. The war may have dispersed the al-Qaida terrorist network, but it has neither ended terrorism nor the threat posed by al-Qaida. A new report by the United Nations shows the al-Qaida network has established cells in at least 40 countries and is well entrenched in Europe, the Middle East, North Africa, and many parts of Asia.

War with Iraq will make the Middle East far more volatile, greatly increasing the likelihood of regional or even world war. The economic blockade and regular bombings of Iraq by the United States in the decade following the decision by the first Bush administration to allow Hussein to remain in power has inflicted untold misery on that country's most vulnerable citizens, leading to the deaths of an estimated half million Iraqi children from malnutrition and disease. The use of depleted uranium in our weapons has caused horrible birth defects. And as with the Taliban, the U.S. government previously supplied support to Hussein when he was useful as a proxy to combat Iran following the overthrow of the Shah that had long been supported by the U.S. If there is one single step that we should take to make the world a safer place, the U.S. most stop supporting regimes that brutalize its neighbors or its own people; invariably, we find ourselves going to war with dictators that we had previously assisted and often created.

There is an old saying that generals always plan to fight the last war, leaving themselves unprepared for the next generation of war. The Bush administration's response to the September 11th hijackings is a classic example of this. There are many other ways for terrorists to kill Americans other than using planes as missiles. And as we have seen in the Middle East, crushing one's "opponents" does not stop the flow of recruits for suicide bombings.

The only way to peace is peace. The most fitting tribute to those who died on September 11th would be to incorporate an international Peace Institute, with a substantial endowment, into a memorial at the site of the World Trade Center. This Institute would be our first line of defense in helping to resolve disputes between countries and cultures throughout the world.

America needs to strengthen the rule of international law. There needs to be an effective mechanism to bring the world's outlaws to justice, including the targeted, limited use of force when necessary. We need to recognize that the world is an international village where no one is secure, not even Americans, until the less fortunate worldwide are secure and have their basic human needs met. Only this will stop terrorism.

return to 9/11 Writings

Aronowitz Calls for Independent Investigation of September 11th Attacks - May 17, 2002

Stanley Aronowitz, who is seeking the Green Party nomination for Governor of New York State, today called upon Congress and the State Legislature to create an independent commission to investigate the September 11th attacks against the World Trade Center and Pentagon that killed thousands of New York residents.

Aronowitz said that relatives of the victims should constitute much of the membership of the committee overseeing the investigation.

"It is incredible that we still know so little about what happened on September 11th, and who is responsible. It is shocking that the Bush administration for eight months after September 11th kept hidden from the American public the fact that they received prior warnings about possible hijackings by bin Laden and his associates. What other information is the Bush administration hiding? It is disturbing to hear from Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D) that he has been pressured by Bush and Cheney, the latter repeatedly, to not to conduct a full investigation into September 11th," said Aronowitz, Distinguished Professor of Sociology and Urban Education at the Graduate Center, City University of New York.

Aronowitz also noted a recent report by CNN that FBI Deputy Director John O'Neill resigned two weeks before September 11 in protest over what he claimed wa