The 9-11 bombings Were Not Acts of War
|The 9-11 bombings Were Crimes Against Humanity|
|See the cost to your community at www.costofwar.com|
|On the Web|
|Listed by Topic: Start Here|
The Defendant is a convicted war criminal consequently unfit to hold public office; citizens, soldiers and all civil personnel of the United States would be constitutionally and otherwise justified in withdrawing all co-operation from the Defendant and his government and in declining to obey illegal orders of the Defendant and his administration including military orders threatening other nations or the people of the United States on the basis of the Nuremberg Principle, that illegal orders of Superior must not be obeyed.
Understanding Special Operations, And Their Impact on The Vietnam War Era - 1989 Interview with L. Fletcher Prouty, Colonel USAF (Retired), by David Ratcliffe, 1999.
The Secret Team, The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World, by L. Fletcher Prouty, Col., U.S. Air Force (Ret.), 1973, 1997
`Bin Laden does not have the capabilities
for an operation of this magnitude. When I hear Bush talking
about al-Qaeda as if it were Nazi Germany or the Communist
Party of the Soviet Union, I laugh because I know what is
there. Bin Laden has been under surveillance for years:
every telephone call was monitored and al-Qaeda has been
penetrated by US intelligence, Pakistani intelligence,
Saudi intelligence, Egyptian intelligence. They could not
have kept secret an operation that required such a degree
of organisation and sophistication.'"
S T A R T H E R E
To understand how the September 11th bombings are crimes against humanity and not an act of war, start with the following six works. Beyond this, see an additional list of useful materials.
- Introduction To C R I M E S A G A I N S T H U M A N I T Y:
We Are Not At War
The 9/11 bombings are Crimes Against Humanity
by David T. Ratcliffe, May 2003
But we are not at war. The 9/11 bombings were a crime against humanity mass murder of civilians. The U.N. Security Council rejected Bush II's bid to label the bombings an "armed attack" by one state against another state. The resolution that was passed denominated these events as "terrorist attacks." As international law professor Francis Boyle points out, "there is a magnitude of difference between an armed attack by one state against another state, which is an act of war, and a terrorist attack, which is not. . . . terrorists are dealt with as criminals. Terrorists are not treated like nation states. Terrorists are dealt with by means of international and domestic law enforcement. Terrorists are not given the dignity of special status under international law and practice."
But elevating the dignity of terrorist individuals to reside on a par with the authority of nation-states is precisely what Bush II is doing. The claim that "we are are war" provides the underlying justification for the USA PATRIOT Act, the Homeland Security Act, and the violation and destruction of the foundations of American Constitutional liberties as well as the abrogation of the United States' participation as an equal member in the family of nations. Regressing to the barbaric might-makes-right "law of the jungle" promises the abrogation of an entire species' evolutionary history that seeks to honor and serves life's needs. There is much to be done to challenge and dispell the bewitchment that "we are at war."
- Summary of Research/References on the 11 September 2001
World Trade Center and Pentagon Bombings
by David T. Ratcliffe, 9/11/03
- Perversions of Justice by Ward Churchill,
talking on the release of his new book, 2/22/03,
Having been conditioned your entire lives, the way we are all conditioned our entire lives, to receive sound-bite answers to questions we have never had the critical ability to form in our minds, forecloses our ability to interrogate reality and draw conclusions from it. That is the function of the media. That is the function of the educational system you understand. It's not to teach you to think critically, which is educational in value. It's to teach you what to think. That's indoctrination.
That's a rather different thing, to be indoctrinated than to be educated. We have this problem here in this population called "ignorance." And some of this population actually is. But when you say the word "ignorant" it's supposed to mean you didn't have the information: "I didn't know about it. I was ignorant of it." No, that's to be uninformed. And truly, there are a lot of people uninformed about a lot of things here. Uninformed is one thing. Ignorance is another.
We've got an ignorant leadership. We've got an ignorant intelligentsia. Ignorant means to have the information right there in front of you and ignore it. To draw conclusions in the face of the evidence; to pretend that the evidence does not exist -- clear evidence of genocide and war crimes -- to pretend it's something else. That's ignorance. That's close to being a synonym for duplicity. That is something very different than being uninformed. You have an obligation to become informed. Once informed, a person has an obligation to act upon the information, not to become an ignorant individual as a result. . . .
At Nuremberg it was said that there was a complicity on the part of the German citizenry. The Germans, as a whole, as a group, were deemed guilty of what was done. . . . Their government had set itself on a track that it felt it did not have to be bound by. It rejected the rule of law. The citizenry, at that point, incurred not only a right but an obligation to do whatever it was that was necessary to ensure that their government did comply with the rule of law. That was their obligation. That's the enforcement mechanism.
That's the "prevention" for international warfare: that the citizenry of each country do whatever it has to, as Malcolm X would have put it, by any means necessary, to ensure that their governments do not violate the rule of law in a manner that leads to the kinds of results that were observable in Europe during the Second World War. Or have been observable at every step in the course of U.S. history. . . .
[You] do what's necessary. The outlaw regime that is perpetrating the crime will ultimately make the determination of what is necessary by the nature of its resistance. How it resists will define for you. You don't define for it.
You are not going to morally persuade a criminal state structure, bent upon perpetrating genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, to do the right thing. You don't speak truth to power. Power is not listening. Power knows better than you. You don't speak truth to power. You speak truth, in the teeth of power. You speak truth to people.
- George Bush, Jr., September 11th and the Rule of Law
from The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, by Francis Boyle, 2/1/02
The Powell/Blair White Paper fell into that hallowed tradition of a “White Paper” based upon insinuation, allegation, rumors, propaganda, lies, half-truths, etc. Even unnamed British government officials on an off-the-record basis admitted that the case against bin Laden and Al Qaeda would not stand up in court. As a matter of fact, the Blair/Powell White Paper was widely derided in the British news media. There was nothing there. . . .
So let us now turn to the law. Immediately after the 11 September 2001 attacks President Bush's first public statement characterized these terrible attacks as an act of terrorism. Under United States domestic law there is a definition of terrorism, which clearly qualifies them as such. To be sure, under international law and practice there is no generally accepted definition of terrorism . . .
What happened? It appears that President Bush consulted with Secretary Powell and all of a sudden they changed the rhetoric and characterization of these terrible attacks. They now called them an act of war -- though clearly this was not an act of war, which international law and practice define as a military attack by one nation state upon another nation state.
There are enormous differences and consequences, however, in how you treat an act of terrorism compared to how you treat an act of war. This nation and others have dealt with acts of terrorism before. Normally acts of terrorism are dealt with as a matter of international and domestic law enforcement -- which is, in my opinion, precisely how these terrible attacks should have been dealt with -- not as an act of war.
Indeed there is a treaty directly on point to which both the United States and Afghanistan are party: the 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation, the so-called Montreal Sabotage Convention. Article 1(I)(b) thereof criminalizes the destruction of civilian aircraft while in service. It has an entire legal regime specifically designed to deal with this type of situation and all issues related to it, including reference to the International Court of Justice to resolve any disputes that could not be settled by negotiations between the United States and Afghanistan or other contracting parties. The Bush Jr. administration simply ignored the Montreal Sabotage Convention completely, as well as the 12 or so multilateral conventions already on the books that deal with various components and aspects of what people generally call international terrorism, many of which could have been used and relied upon to handle this matter in a lawful, effective, and peaceful manner.
- The Enemy Within, by Gore Vidal, 10/27/02
We have only outdone the Romans in turning metaphors such as the war on terrorism, or poverty, or Aids into actual wars on targets we appear, often, to pick at random in order to maintain turbulence in foreign lands. . . . The media, never much good at analysis, are more and more breathless and incoherent. On CNN, even the stolid Jim Clancy started to hyperventilate when an Indian academic tried to explain how Iraq was once our ally and `friend' in its war against our Satanic enemy Iran. `None of that conspiracy stuff,' snuffed Clancy. Apparently, `conspiracy stuff' is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.
- Broadening Our Perspectives of 11 September 2001
by David T. Ratcliffe, September 2002
The intention to limit and control the investigation of the historically unprecedented bombings on United States soil is entirely consistent with the misrepresentations and obfuscations fomented and directed by Bush II. Historian Robert Conot wrote about the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials in his book Justice at Nuremberg. His assessment of Hitler's understanding and use of the "big lie" is timeless in its relevance. How power can corrupt and how unaccountable power can pervert a free and open society, is the paramount issue we must address while there is time to exercise any of the constitutional rights we claim are still ours.
"Hitler's dictum that `the magnitude of a lie always contains a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people . . . more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one' has once more come into vogue.
"The most effective means to combat such distortions is to make the facts accessible, and, with them, expose the statements for what they are. At Nuremberg, General Telford Taylor, the prosecutor of more war criminals than any other man, said: `We cannot here make history over again. But we can see that it is written true.'" 
Today, making the facts about 9-11 accessible to all our human family is how we can reclaim our world and renew our hope for ourselves and each other. The misrepresentations, omissions, and deceptions described [in Broadening Our Perspectives of 11 September 2001] that have defined the Bush II agenda since 9-11 occurred, are summarized in the following list.
- The 9-11 bombings were a crime against humanity of mass murder of civilians. Bush II intentionally chose to misrepresent these crimes as an act of war, rejecting legal remedies, and pursuing wars that they claim may never end, at least not in our lifetime.
- The evidence, as presented to the world, claiming Osama bin Laden was responsible for the 9-11 bombings would not stand up in a court of law.
- The real reason Bush II is sabotaging the International Criminal Court is that senior officials fear prosecution for their criminal conspiracy to conduct a war of aggression.
- The 1/8/02 Bush II Nuclear Posture Review, ordering the Pentagon to draw up war plans for the first-use of nuclear weapons, constitutes a Nuremberg Crime against Peace by "planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances."
- Since 1991, a World Trade Center's worth of Iraqi children have died every month as a direct result of U.S. policies. Bush II only mentions the loss of American lives on the single day of 9-11-01.
- The United States has rejected a legally-binding system of United Nations inspections of suspected U.S. biological weapons facilities while at the same time accusing other countries -- including Iraq -- of developing biological weapons. Simultaneously, the United States armed forces, in direct violation of the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, is actively pushing for offensive biological weapons development, despite the fact such activity is illegal and subject to federal criminal and civil penalties.
- The October 2001 "USA PATRIOT Act" is turning the U.S. into a permanent police state. It vastly expands the structures of government secrecy and surveillance, utterly relinquishes any semblance of due process, categorically violates the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments, and unacceptably mixes aspects of criminal investigations with aspects of immigration and foreign intelligence laws, while it simultaneously extinguishes the accountability of elected and non-elected government officials.
- The creation of the Department of Homeland Security, representing the biggest government reorganization since the establishment of the Department of Defense in the 1940s, will further erode if not overturn the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 which has kept the U.S. military out of local law enforcement for more than a century.
- Attorney General Ashcroft, the leading law enforcement officer of the land, is mounting a series of assaults on the United States Bill of Rights that deny a host of constitutional liberties to U.S. citizens, as well as preparation on many fronts for the imposition of martial law and the creation of internment camps for enemy citizens of Ashcroft's choosing.
- Bush II's war on terrorism is founded on political deceptions and deceits directed at the civilian population of the United States. These include omissions that supposed enemies like Al Qaeda are categorized as U.S. intelligence assets and that the Islamic Brigades are a creation of the Central Intelligence Agency.
- A broad range of data and sources indicate the United States has planned for war in Asia long before 9/11. The beneficiaries and proponents of such military campaigns include U.S. oil corporations, the interests of which are well-represented in Bush II.
- Given all indications from the four commercial airliner's timeline sequences on 9-11, there was a stand down of defensive U.S. Air Force response. United States military and/or civilian incompetence or complicity is the only rational explanation for this situation.
- Bush Jr. and Cheney have expressly asked Senate Majority Leader Daschle to limit any congressional investigation into 9-11 because, as Cheney said, "a review of what happened on September 11 would take resources and personnel away from the effort in the war on terrorism."
Article Pool Contains local copy of articles referenced in Crimes Against Humanity (indicated with a `+' link back to the file referencing the following). See Also: Articles from John Judge's 911 Analysis.
- 1878 Military Law Gets New Attention, by T.A. Badger, Associated Press, 11/24/01 [+, ++]
- Administration Begins to Rewrite Decades-Old Spying Restrictions, by David Johnston, New York Times, 11/30/02 [+]
- Afghanistan Land Mine, by S. Frederick Starr, Washington Post, 12/19/00 [+]
- Amazing stories: The air, the island and the fortress, by Jennifer Simmons, Counseling Today Online, 10/01 [+]
- Are You Camera-Ready? Police surveillance in the nation's capital, by Jacob Sullum, Creators Syndicate Inc., 2/15/02 [+]
- Ashcroft: Groups Could be Monitored, by John Solomon, Associated Press, 12/2/01 [+]
- Ask Bechtel what war is good for, by Bob Herbert, International Herald Tribune, 4/23/03 [+]
- Bin Laden Family Could Profit From Jump In Defense Spending Due to Ties to US Bank, Wall Street Journal, 9/27/01 [+]
- Bin Laden: from 'Evil One' to Unmentionable One, by Alan Elsner, Reuters, 8/20/02 [+, ++, +++, ++++]
- The Blame Game Between Bush and the Brit, by R.Wolffe, M.Hosenball, & T.Lipper, Newsweek, 3/17/03 [+]
- Bush asks Daschle to limit Sept. 11 probes, CNN, 1/29/02 [+, ++]
- Bush Is to Propose Broad New Powers in Domestic Security, by Elizabeth Becker, New York Times, 7/16/02 [+]
- C-130 crew saw Pentagon strike, official confirms, by Terry Scanlon and David Lerman, Daily Press, 10/17/01[+]
- Canada sells gold, keeps shift into euro reserves, by Randall Palmer, Reuters, 1/6/03 [+]
- The Carlyle Group, by Victor Thorn, Babel Magazine, 10/6/02 [+]
- Carlyle's way--Making a mint inside the iron triangle of defense, government, and industry, by Dan Briody, Red Herring, 1/8/02 [+]
- Cheney: Investigators, Keep Out--VP blocks independent commission to investigate 9-11, by Michael Isikoff and Tamara Lipper, Newsweek, 10/21/02 [+]
- Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) in Glasgow - Main Findings, by the Scottish Office Central Research Unit, 7/7/99 [+]
- copy of defunct "CFR Online Study Group" file [+]
- Condoleeza holds talks in Moscow, Associated Press, 4/7/03 [+]
- Critics aid terrorists, AG argues, by Susan Milligan, Boston Globe, 12/7/01 [+]
- Contingency planning Pentagon MASCAL exercise simulates scenarios in preparing for emergencies, Military District of Washington News Service, 11/3/00 [+]
- Designation of 39 "Terrorist Organizations" Under the "PATRIOT USA Act", Federal Register, 12/7/01 [+]
- Disputed Air ID Law May Not Exist, by Paul Boutin, Wired, 8/15/02 [+]
- Dow Jones Newswire: Dollar's Decline Starting To Accelerate, Rattling Nerves, by Grainne McCarthy, Dow Jones, 1/25/03 [+]
- Empire or Not? A Quiet Debate Over U.S. Role, by Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post, 8/21/01 [+]
- United States Executive Order 13224 blocking Terrorist Property and a summary of the Terrorism Sanctions Regulations [+]
- Expanded Powers Raise Concerns About Ashcroft, by Bob Port, New York Daily News, 11/22/01 [+]
- FBI Given More Latitude: New Surveillance Rules Remove Evidence Hurdle, by Susan Schmidt and Dan Eggen, Washington Post, 5/30/02 [+]
- FBI Intelligence Bulletin no. 89, October 15, 2003 [+]
- Feds Link Anti-Terrorism Databases, by Laurie Kellman, Associated Press, 4/11/02 [+]
- Following Iraq's bioweapons trail, by Robert Novak, Chicago Sun-Times, 9/26/02 [+]
- Freedom Under Fire - Dissent in Post-9/11 America, ACLU, May 2003 [+]
- Gaining an empire, losing democracy?, by Norman Mailer, International Herald Tribune, 2/25/03 [+]
- Germany Warns U.S. on Wider Anti-Terror War, Reuters, 11/28/01 [+]
- Geneva Conventions Apply Even in Afghanistan -- ICRC, by Richard Waddington, Reuters, 11/28/01 [+]
- Global Eye -- Head Cases, by Chris Floyd, TheMoscowTimes.com, 12/21/01 [+]
- The Goebbels of Saddam's regime, by Peter Arnett, 2/25/03, by S. Frederick Starr, Haaretz, 2/25/03 [+]
- Group Says U.S. Expert Believed Behind Anthrax Attacks, Reuters, 11/28/01 [+]
- Halliburton Connected to Office in Iran, Dow Jones, 2/1/01 [+]
- In Round 2, It's the Dollar vs. Euro, Newsweek, 4/23/03 [+]
- India helped FBI trace ISI-terrorist links, by Manoj Joshi, The Times of India, 10/9/01 [+, ++]
- Iran Throwing Off Its Isolation - U.S. Remains Dubious After Decades of Mutual Distrust, by John Ward Anderson, Washington Post, 3/31/01 [+]
- Japan's economy at risk of collapse, by Tom Costello, MSNBC, 12/11/02 [+]
- Journalists Are Assigned to Accompany U.S. Troops, by Ralph Blumenthal and Jim Rutenberg, New York Times, 2/18/03 [+]
- Justice Dept. Uses Arrest Powers Fully--Scope of Jailings Stirs Questions on Detainees' Rights to Representation and Bail, by Peter Slevin and Mary Beth Sheridan, Washington Post, 9/26/01 [+]
- Look who's part of the harsh disorder, by William Pfaff, International Herald Tribune, Los Angeles Times Syndicate International, 8/1/02 [+]
- Loud Boom, Then Flames In Hallways - Pentagon Employees Flee Fire, Help Rescue Injured Co-Workers, by Mary Beth Sheridan, Washington Post, 9/12/01 [+]
- Mad ambitions: Why Bush's "National Security Strategy" is wrong, wrong, wrong, by Ann Rose Thomas, Online Journal, 10/3/02 [+]
- Mystery of terror `insider dealers', by Chris Blackhurst, The Independent, 10/14/01 [+]
- `Old Europe' presses ahead with plans for an EU army, by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Telegraph, 4/30/03 [+]
- Peers rebellion inflicts defeat on anti-terror Bill, by Melissa Kite and Greg Hurst, The [UK] Times, 12/7/01 [+]
- Replica of the Policy Analysis Market website -- lifespan: a few days at the end of July, 2003 [+, ++, +++]
- Unofficial PDF Transcript: The Power of Nightmares / The Rise of The Politics of Fear, written/produced by Adam Curtis, BBC 2, Oct - Nov 2004 [+]
PDF original at: http://silt3.com/tpon.pdf
- Episode 1 - "Baby It's Cold Outside," 20 Oct 2004 (page 2)
- Episode 2 - "The Phantom Victory," 27 Oct 2004 (page 16)
- Episode 3 - "The Shadows in the Cave," 3 Nov 2004 (page 31)
HTML/Video sources at: http://silt3.com/index.php?id=573
Summary: The Power of Nightmares: Baby It's Cold Outside, BBC, 14 Jan 2005
- Republican-controlled Carlyle Group poses serious Ethical Questions for Bush Presidents, but Baltimore Sun ignores it, by Alice Cherbonnier, Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel, 10/3/01 [+]
- Responsibility for the terrorist atrocities in the United States, 11 September 2001, by British Prime Minister Tony Blair, 4 October 2001 [+ ++]
- Ridge: Consider Using Military To Enforce Law Domestically, Associated Press, 7/22/02 [+]
- Scene at the Pentagon After Terrorist Attack: `A War Zone', by Glen Justice, Laura Smitherman and Tony Capaccio, with reporting by Dan Goldstein and John Rega, Bloomberg, 9/11/01 [+]
- Senator lies--to protect us, of course, by Robert Leger, Springfield News-Leader, 11/24/02 [+]
- Strategic Attack, United States Air Force, Air Force Doctrine Document 2-1.2, 20 May 1998[+]
- Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century, James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, April 2001 [+, ++, +++, ++++]
- Summary of New Homeland Security Bill's Immigration Provisions [+]
- Testimony By John J. Maresca Vice President, International Relations Unocal Corporation To House Committee On International Relations Subcommittee On Asia And The Pacific, 2/12/98 [+, ++, +++, ++++, +++++]
- THREATS AND RESPONSES: A PLAN FOR IRAQ;, U.S. Has a Plan to Occupy Iraq, Officials Report, by David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt, New York Times, 10/11/02 [+]
- Tough Anti-Terror Campaign Pledged--Ashcroft Tells Mayors He Will Use New Law to Fullest Extent, by Dan Eggen, Washington Post, 10/26/01 [+]
- TSA in `witch hunt,' air marshals say - Homeland Security denies knowledge of formal investigation, by Brock Meeks, MSNBC, 8/11/03 [+]
- UN Considers Arms Embargo on Afghanistan, by Farhan Haq, Inter Press Service, 12/16/97 [+]
- U.S. Adds Legal Rights in Tribunals, by John Mintz, Washington Post, 3/20/02 [+]
- U.S. Asks For Immunity in Colombia, Associated Press, 8/15/02 [+]
- `US, Britain, heading to disaster' - British Mideast expert, AFP, 3/29/03 [+]
- US companies move quietly into Iranian markets: Washington stands accused of hypocrisy in its trade sanctions policy, by Edward Alden and Guy Dinmore, Financial Times, 10/5/00 [+]
- US dollar on shaky ground, Associated Press, 1/24/03 [+]
- US drops `stupid' terror market plan, AP, 7/30/03 [+]
- US efforts to make peace summed up by `oil', by Lara Marlowe, The Irish Times, 11/19/01 [+]
- U.S. Extremists, Terror Groups Eyed, Associated Press, 2/28/02 [+]
- US Food Drops `Useless' For Hungry Hordes, Sunday Mail [UK], 10/14/01 [+]
- U.S. Military Plans the War of Words, by Carol Brightman, Los Angeles York Times, 2/16/03 [+]
- USA intelligence agencies revealed in plot to oust Venezuela's President, VHeadline.com, 12/12/02 [+]
- U.S. Army report on Iraqi prisoner abuse, Complete text of Article 15-6 Investigation of the 800th Military Police Brigade by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba, Updated: 7:09 p.m. ET May 04, 2004
- U.S. Is the Primary Loser in Failed Venezuelan Coup, by L.Birns & A.Volberding, Newsday, 4/21/02 [+]
- US to pay Iraqi workers in dollars, by Tim Reid, Times Online [UK], 4/17/03 [+]
- White House Appeals Wiretap Ruling, Associated Press, 8/23/02 [+]
- White House Blocks Deal by Congress on 9/11 Panel, by David Firestone, New York Times, 10/11/02 [+]
|Further Reading On the Web|