Home   |   Resources   |  9-11   |   Events  

Please feel free to post or reprint this in whole or in part.
Questioning the War on Terrorism (9/11)


Questioning the War on Terrorism




September 11- Unanswered Questions (good overview with links!)

Contents 
 

Demanding a Congressional Inquiry of 9-11
Questions with links to key articles


January 8th, 2002
People Gathered and Marched to Senator Feinstein's office


The Bad News- The cascading personal, family calamities continue. We've rented the same house for 18 years. Suddenly the owner wants to cherry it up (horror- will we have to move????). Workman coming to remove the dead water heater which has always lived in the garage forced us to move out a ton of stuff (including all the priceless banners and art onto the porch), we spent hours cleaning out a fraction of the garage, and it was extremely hard on our backs- particularly my husband's back- which is seriously traumatized (he can hardly walk and couldn't lay down because the pain was so bad last night he hardly got any sleep). In the turmoil which cost me my thumb last week, my son's notebook was lost plus the big assignment due today in his Honors English class.

Yesterday I joined Tian, Gerry and Dana to deliver signatures to the Voter Registrar's office in San Jose. As I was leaving the house- all the stuff on the porch (which I hadn't had time to put away) was getting wet and soiled by a guy cleaning the roof (argh- a thousand dollars worth of art wrecked- but I think they rescued it- I'm not sure yet- but I had to move it in the dark garage last night and I hope its ok.) I had to hurry...

What started out to be a joyous triumph turned into an ordeal when I was informed that the 35 signatures we had gathered "were on the wrong form and useless..."

Today I sent an email to-

    The Secretary of State- Debra Bowen

    Dear Debra,

    Having spoken at one of the hearings you organized regarding the integrity of our elections, I am confidant that you will be able to help me, and be understanding of the outrage I felt today when I submitted 37 signatures of Registered Green Party members to eliminate my filing fee in the June 6th Election, where I hope to be on the ballot for the Green Party nomination for US Representative District 14 in the November Election.

    In 2006, I also ran for Congress, and I enjoyed gathering signatures, and was able to do so in a timely fashion. In 2007, I was thinking about running for Congress, but I was also organizing film premieres, rallies, hosting a weekly radio show (one with Sherry Healy on Election Protection), and very active in the organization that I founded- The Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance. The day after our major rally/action in San Francisco, on December 17, 2007) while I was hosting my radio show, I became violently ill. I was unable to complete the broadcast, my husband called 911, and I was rushed by ambulance to the hospital. I was diagnosed with kidney stones. When I was able to leave the hospital, I was very weak.

    Following the Green Party Presidential Debate, (January 13th, 2008) friends within the Party encouraged me to run again. I told them that if they could help me gather the necessary signatures to waive the filing fee that I would run again, although we really didn’t have much time, and I knew I would need help, especially since I hadn’t the physical strength that I was accustomed to. I did receive lots of help, and I also stopped taking the medication that was responsible for the weakness that I felt and regained my strength.

    On February 21, 2008- the last day of signature gathering, I turned in 158 signatures in Santa Clara County (I had already turned in 3 in San Mateo County). The next day I received a phone call telling me that 120 were “good” and that I could turn in up to 38 replacement signatures.

    On February 21st I also received a form and two copies of that form at the Registrar’s office and the distinct impression that these were the new forms for the replacement signatures, in case I needed them. They were dated February 21st and I thought that the other forms were only for signatures gathered before that date, not subsequent to that date.

    Today when I tried to turn in 35 signatures, gathered between February 21st and March 4th, I was informed that they were on the wrong form and would not qualify to replace the needed signatures because they said “Nomination” not “Petition in Lieu of Filing Fee.” (The additional two signatures which someone handed me that day, I didn't think would count because they were on the "old form," but to my surprise- they were accepted and the staff tried to reject the others and say that they would not count towards the 150 signatures needed.) I was outraged, and the staff said that there was a terrible misunderstanding between me and whoever gave me the forms, but that there was nothing they could do- the situation was out of their control, and rested in your hands. Rules are rules, there are lots of candidates, no one could make an exception, I should have read all the rules. Well there is common sense and justice, and I assume you are amply endowed with both from my personal observation of you, and your actions, so I appeal to your humane understanding to acknowledge and grant the signatures that I gathered in this brief time period (that are good and from Registered Green Party members) to count towards the reduction of the filing fee. I'd rather save my anger, energy, efforts for larger justice battles that I am currently engaged in. Thank-you for your time, attention, and hopefully assistance in this matter.

    Sincerely,

    Carol Liane Brouillet...

    PS I thought of ccing this to the press, but I’d rather just draw it to your attention and have it quickly rectified and suggest that the “current process and procedures” be improved, so that other candidates do not suffer from the situation I found myself in today. Thank-you.

    Sometimes one doesn't have time to shorten and edit a message. Here's the first draft (with more info) of my DRAFT press release:

      International Demands for a New 9/11 Investigation Challenge the “War on Terror”

    In Japan, in Europe, in the Congress of the United States, in New York City, in Australia, elected officials and citizens are questioning the events of 9/11, the obstacles that the Administration has placed before the official Commission, and other Congressional investigations into terrorists’ attacks. People are challenging the official narrative of 9/11, and other attacks that have taken place in the US, and abroad, and challenging policies which assist the US to carry out its “War on Terror” and threaten civil liberties.

    On January 10, 2008, Mr. Yukihisa Fujita, a member of Democratic Party of Japan, challenged Bush’s request for assistance from the Japanese to supply the US military effort in Afghanistan, by raising questions about 9/11 and the “War on Terrorism” in the Japanese Parliament.

    On February 26, 2008 Guilietto Chiesa, a member of the European Parliament, journalist, and author, invited his colleagues and the press to attend a screening of the Italian documentary named ‘ZERO, an investigation into the events of 9/11’ and a debate with Mr. Yukihisa Fujita, Dr. David Ray Griffin, theologian and author of seven important books on 9/11, Tim Sparke, the film distributor, as well as the director and producers of ‘Zero’- Paolo Jormi Bianchi, Thomas Torelli, Francesco Trento and Franco Fracassi.

    On the same day, the anniversary of the first World Trade Center bombings, Representative Rohrabacher spoke out on the floor of Congress.

      “The disdain and uncooperative nature that this administration has shown toward Congress, including Republican Members, is so egregious that I can no longer assume that it is simply bureaucratic incompetence or isolated mistakes. Rather, I have come to the sad conclusion that this administration has intentionally obstructed Congress' rightful and constitutional duties.”

    Rohrabacher detailed the lack of cooperation in many specific cases, including his request to the acting Attorney General last October-

      “In 2005, former Clinton National Security Advisor Sandy Berger pled guilty to the mishandling and destruction of classified documents.

      “He admitted to entering the National Archives and unlawfully removing, then subsequently destroying, classified documents dealing with terrorist related issues. He removed the documents by stuffing them down his pants and in his suit jacket, presumably with the intention of getting rid of any damning evidence showing his involvement in the failure of our intelligence and law enforcement communities to prevent the Sept. 11th attacks prior to his testimony before the 911 Commission. These documents have never been recovered.

      “As part of a plea deal, Mr. Berger agreed to take a polygraph test to be administered by the Department of Justice. It has been two years since that agreement and Mr. Berger has yet to fulfill his obligation.

      “We are writing to officially request that as Attorney General you direct the Department of Justice without any further delay to administer a lie detector test to Mr. Berger and determine what documents were stolen and how our National Security was compromised.

      “The Congress, and the American people, deserve to know the facts of this crime and what Mr. Berger was covering up.”

    Rohrabacher also was denied access to the Federal prisoner Ramzi Yousef who-

      “may well have had something to do with the bombing of the World Trade Center and the bombing of the Oklahoma City building… This request is well within my committee's jurisdiction as ranking member of the Investigative Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. This request has been supported by the chairman of the Investigative Subcommittee, the chairman of the full Foreign Affairs Committee, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee…

      “Nevertheless, the Department of Justice, consistent with its treatment of congressional inquiries during the tenure of this President, has dismissed this valid request. This request has been treated with what can only be described as contempt and condescension.

      “So, why would this administration obstruct congressional inquiries such as this? Remember, Ramzi Yousef was the mastermind behind several devastating terrorist attacks and plots against America. He led the first murderous attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, as I say.

      “After fleeing to the Philippines, he and two other terrorists plotted to kill thousands of Americans by blowing up 12 commercial airliners over the Pacific at the same time. It was known as the Bojinka plot. It was within 2 weeks of being executed when it was discovered and thwarted by Philippine police.

      “Interestingly, the terrorist operation, the Bojinka plot, was to take place about the same time as the Oklahoma City Federal building bombing, perhaps on the same day. We don't know. Perhaps we should know. Perhaps we should ask Ramzi Yousef about that.

      “Ramzi Yousef has been in Federal prison for over a decade. He is a prisoner with a unique understanding of the al Qaeda terrorist structure. He is the nephew of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center.

      “In 2006, when I was the chairman of the House Oversight Investigations Subcommittee on the Foreign Affairs Committee, I was investigating Yousef's movements and activities not only in the United States but in the Philippines. I even traveled to the Philippines to question authorities who had captured Yousef's roommate and coconspirator in the Bojinka plot.

      “In spite of that fact and in spite of the fact that I was looking into Yousef's terrorist activities and in spite of the fact that I had obtained new information about Yousef's phone calls right here in the United States and new information about his associates while he was in the United States, the Department of Justice still dismisses the effort and, more than that, they are obstructing a legitimate congressional investigation, refusing to permit this elected Member of Congress, a ranking member of a congressional investigating committee, to interview a Federal prisoner. They refused access to Yousef claiming that there is a ‘ongoing investigation.’

      “This prisoner has been in jail for over 10 years. It is more likely that what we have here is an ongoing coverup and not an ongoing investigation. In fact, I have been told recently by a former member of the Justice Department that they were told routinely simply to give answers that there is an ongoing investigation even if no ongoing investigation was underway, but simply using it as a phrase to dismiss a request from Congress.

      “Well, this is outrageous, but it's typical of this administration… Is it really the rules of engagement that we want for our government that Members of Congress and the legislative branch don't have a right to talk to Federal prisoners?

      “Well, that's apparently what the Bush administration is trying to establish as the executive authority, as executive authority, the right to deny congressional investigators access to Federal prisoners. The danger of this should be easy to understand, both on my side of the aisle, the Republican side, and the Democratic side of the aisle.”*

      In New York City, there is a citizen effort to place on the November 2008 General Election ballot an initiative which will allow the voters of New York City to mandate, through public referendum, directly and democratically, the formation of a new Citizen’s Commission to Re-Investigate 9/11.

      Sydney Truth Action of