Tuesday, 30 May 2017

Who is the 9/11 'John Doe' and will the American Congress finally address the Issue?

The following article is written by Mary W Maxwell,
 Alabama Republican Party candidate for the US Senate. 

See: https://gumshoenews.com/2017/05/29/congress-9-11-and-the-constitution/

Congress, 9-11, and the Constitution

An official photo of Dick Cheney as he watches the towers burn
by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB
Some people have claimed that 9-11 was an inside job. If that were in fact the case, or appeared likely to be the case, what resources are available within the United States federal government to address such a thing?
(Note: “inside job” can mean either that officials or private persons were able to actually perform the destruction of the World Trade Center, such as by a controlled demolition of the buildings, or were able in some other way to direct the events of September 11, 2001.)
In this article I only want to walk through the structure of how the matter could be dealt with, per the United States Constitution. I’m not here to make a case against a particular person. Let’s call the miscreant “John Doe.”
Of course various entities below the level of “United States government” could take action against John Doe. State governments could act, if any of their citizens had died in the Towers or at the Pentagon on 9-11. Private citizens or corporations could sue in court. But this article will look only at the three branches of the federal government, and especially at the legislative branch, Congress.
Executive Branch Nabbing John Doe
Start with the executive branch. The Constitution’s Article II tells us what the job of the president is including, in Section 3: “He shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”
President George Washington appointed an Attorney General and eventually there came to be a Department of Justice. This
DoJ contains a group of people known as “US Attorneys.” They can prosecute criminals who have broken federal law.
I am personally very abstemious about what I take to be the subject matter available to the feds to prosecute. (I declare unconstitutional many laws enacted by Congress making such-and-such a federal crime). However some crimes mentioned in the Constitution are: treason, counterfeiting of money, and piracy.
The Attorney General – presently Jeff Sessions – has responsibility for those and also for any crimes added to the Constitution by amendments. In 1919, Amendment XVIII forbade the manufacture of sale of intoxicating liquors. This was called Prohibition; it was repealed in 1933 by Amendment XXI.
Earlier, in 1865, the 13th amendment had said “slavery shall not exist,” and it said “Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” Congress then enacted such law, which is codified at 18 USC 1581ff.
(Wouldn’t it be nice to see violations prosecuted today by the aforementioned US Attorneys, now that we are all aware of thousands of persons being trafficked as sex slaves!)
So if John Doe arranged the attacks of 9-11, it is possible for the executive branch of government to step in and prosecute. (First, a grand jury must present a “true bill,” but we won’t go into that now – at present the US Attorneys illegally “boss” the federal grand juries.)
The Judicial Branch Nabbing John Doe
Hmm. This is a tricky one. Article III of the Constitution says “The judicial power of the United States shall be invested in one supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” It says the judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution….”
Why do I say tricky? First, because Congress could ordain a court that would seem to undermine the judicial power of the Supreme Court (see the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 which prevents citizens from having their cases reach the Supreme Court).
Second, because the power “extends to all Cases.” If a matter is not a case – that is, not a civil case brought by a plaintiff or a criminal case brought by the government or by a private party (yes, private prosecutions are possible!), the matter cannot be ruled on by the judiciary.
So you won’t see any of the eight associate justices of SCOTUS, or the Chief Justice John Roberts, “doing anything” about John Doe’s 9-11 sins. They could, however, use the bully pulpit to talk about the issue.
Of course if they came out and said “John Doe looks guilty” they would then have to recuse themselves from adjudicating a case against him. Anyway they never do preach; they are silent.
The Legislative Branch Nabbing John Doe
Congress does not nab. It is not Congress’s job to catch or punish criminals and in fact the Constitution specifically prohibits a legislative bill that would name someone. Article I, Section 9 says “No Bill of Attainder…shall be passed,” and Section 10 also forbids the states to do that.
A 1965 case, United States v. Brown, held that in 1787 the Framers intended that clause to prevent “legislative punishment, of any form or severity, of specifically designated persons or groups.”
That said, Congress has wide scope to conduct inquiries about any matter that has federal content. It could certainly hold hearings to look into what really happened on 9-11. Thus, I repeat, Congress would not begin with any hint of “attainder.” It would not say “Let’s hold a hearing to see if So-and-So did the attacks.”
Congress could say “Let all come forward who want to give information about what happened.” Anyone might make a submission claiming that there is evidence that John Doe did it. Presumably this would lead to Congress recommending to the Justice Department that they consider indicting the person.
Note: there is one punitive action that the legislative branch has constitutional power to perform, namely impeachment.
So, say Vice President Richard Cheney were fingered for having given issued a stand-down of fighter jets that could have chased after hijacked planes that day. He could have been impeached while still in office (he remained in office for 7 years after September 21, 2001), by the House of Representatives. The case would have then been sent to the US Senate for conviction.
(“Conviction” does not mean criminal conviction; it means getting kicked out of office. But after that takes place the person is liable to be charged with crime.)
What Congress Has Actually Done about 9-11
The first thing Congress did about 9-11 was to bite its Article I, section 8 tongue and allow President Bush on October 8, 2001 to start bombing the preferred John Doe, Osama bin Laden.  That is, Congress sinned against the Constitution by not taking the responsibility to declare war.
You could almost say Congress wrote a bill of attainder against Bin Laden. (I do not claim that this offends the Constitution; only our own citizens are entitled to the protection of no-bills-of attainder).
Anyway our military did not actually target Bin Laden, who was a citizen of Saudi, but rather bombed Afghanistan where bin Laden was allegedly hiding.
Next, on October 26, 2001, Congress passed the Patriot Act — WITHOUT HAVING READ IT. Since the story was that Muslims had hijacked four planes and brought down the Twin Towers, there was suddenly a perceived need to protect Americans against further disaster.
The official name of the Patriot Act is: “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.”
Next, Senators Lieberman and McCain introduced legislation for a Commission to investigate 9-11. This group eventually
produced “The 9-11 Commission Report.”  It reported all “facts” about the hijackers without criticism of the basic premises and without taking into account any submissions that challenged the media’s line.
Senator Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah (who as of 2017 has been a senator for 40 years), gave a peculiar statement about the formation of the Commission. He said:
“I rise to discuss briefly my vote on the September 11 Commission. I joined in the amendment proposed by my good friends from Connecticut and Arizona because it is the right thing to  do. Sitting as I do on both the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, it has become clear to me over the past year that many different causes contributed to the horrific terrorist attacks on September 11. I have become convinced that we need to take a hard look at how this tragedy happened in order to better understand how we might avoid a similar tragedy in the future. …”
He was referring to government’s failure to stop the Muslims before they did what they did. He also spoke up for another branch:
“While I believe that a September 11 Commission should be appointed, I also think that the administration should have some voice in its makeup. The amendment establishes a 10-member commission with all of the 10 members appointed by the majority and minority leaders of Congress. It is fitting that Congress play a large role in defining the membership of this Commission, but it is striking to me that the Administration has no voice at all. … I would call upon my colleagues to think
seriously about providing the administration with some role in defining the Commission.”
Indeed the White House, in 2004, was allowed to have great say in the Commission, getting the Commission to agree that the president and vice-president could testify jointly, in private, THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO TAKE AN OATH, and that their statements would not be recorded!
The White House chose Henry Kissinger to lead the 9-11 investigation, but after public protests he resigned. Thomas Kean, former governor of New Jersey, led the Commission.
The Final Report of the 9-11 Commission starts with this:
“Tuesday, September 11, 2001, dawned temperate and nearly cloudless in the eastern United States. Millions of men and women readied themselves for work. Some made their way to the Twin Towers, the signature structures of the World Trade Center complex in New York City. Others went to Arlington, Virginia, to the Pentagon. Across the Potomac River, the United States Congress was back in session. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, people began to line up for a White House tour. In Sarasota, Florida, President George W. Bush went for an early morning run.”
The last chapter of the report presents the findings of that Commission about “failures of intelligence.” That chapter starts with:
“As presently configured, the national security institutions of the U.S. government are still the institutions constructed to win the Cold War. The United States confronts a very different world today. Instead of facing a few very dangerous adversaries, the United States confronts a number of less visible challenges that surpass the boundaries of traditional nation-states and call for quick, imaginative, and agile responses.”
I now quote from the Senate’s wrap-up of legislative efforts regarding 9-11:
Congress passed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention and Act of 2004, which created a Director of National Intelligence to coordinate the work of 15 federal intelligence agencies and established a National Counter Terrorism Center to analyze intelligence information – “connecting the dots” so the government could take effective action to detect, prevent, and disrupt terrorist activity.
To ensure appropriate oversight from Congress, the Senate expanded the Committee’s jurisdiction in S. Res. 445 and changed the Committee’s name to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
The new Department of Homeland Security was tested for the first time when Hurricane Katrina, the largest natural disaster in recent U.S. history, struck the Gulf Coast in August 2005.  The inadequate response by all levels of government to this disaster underscored the need to better prepare for both natural disasters and terrorist attacks.
The most recent Congressional intervention into matters arising from 9-11 has consisted of legislation in 2016 that permits US citizens to sue foreign governments with regard to the events of 9-11. So strong was Congress on this that it overrode a presidential veto. This was the first time in Obama’s 8 years of office that Congress overrode a veto by him.
Owing to this new law, families of 9-11 victims are suing the government of Saudi Arabia. Their claim is that:
“through a network of the kingdom’s officers, employees and/or agents who met with and aided the hijackers, providing them with money, cover, advice, contacts, transportation, assistance with language and U.S. culture, identification, access to pilot training and other material support and resources.”
I am currently a Republican Party candidate for the US Senate, in a special election in Alabama. If elected I may be out of step with the 99 others in that chamber if they all believe “9-11” is a closed issue.  However, it is the responsibility of the executive, not Congress or the judiciary to deal with it.
Besides the three branches of government there are two other parties to the Constitution – the states and the people. They can find creative, Constitutional ways to grapple with anything that needs grappling with.
— Mary Maxwell would like to hear from you at her campaign website: MaxwellForSenate.com

Sunday, 28 May 2017

The Media Manipulation of Terror Events
"The  'miasmatic theory' is an obsolete medical theory that held that diseases were caused by a miasma (μίασμα, ancient Greek: "pollution"), a noxious form of "bad air", also known as night air."

"Muslims and The Queen Step Up After Manchester Bombing | San Diego ...

San Diego Jewish World751 × 402Search by image
Muslims and The Queen Step Up After Manchester Bombing"


I always keep my eye out for indicators of contrivance or artifice in the public relations and news out following high-profile events, particularly those that come within the generic "terror" label. 

There is a difference between the genuine and spontaneous outpouring of grief and sympathy on the one hand, and orchestrated and pre-planned campaigns in the mould of those used by advertising agencies on the other. Human emotions can be easily manipulated as we know from our own experience in the concert hall, cinema or pop concert such as that performed by the singer Ariana Grande on the night of the attack. In addition these same emotions can be manipulated by those who plan and carry out the attacks themselves. This does not need me to convince you. It is plain for all to see.


We arguably witnessed the modern phenomenon first following the very suspicious Charlie Hebdo attack, when what appeared to be the prepared meme of "Juis oui Charlie Hebdo" although its gestation can be traced further, particularly with the death of iconic figures. The Hebdo example appeared with remarkable speed on thousands of posters. It leads to the inevitable conclusion that this gesture was already to be rolled out within hours of the event. 

By definition the production of a slogan requires unitary and central organisation. As far as I am aware no one has enquired into or revealed the actual mechanics of this. For example who came up with the slogan? Who transferred it to print? Who did the distribution? 


These are all crucial details in choreography of terror but it would be hard to believe that it would be Jihadist Militants that would organise such a thing, nor could it be spontaneous and atomistic. 
And of course if it was ready to roll, it means that whoever was behind it knew in advance what was to happen. 

The same techniques have been employed since, as we have all witnessed, suggesting the "controlling mind" in such things, has the power and influence to operate across national boundaries. Clearly although the violence is ascribed to ISIS, it would be ridiculous to do the same for the management of the subsequent publicity. This has to be a reflection of WESTERN authorities.

So now moving to the Manchester incident, I have already dealt with some of the many 'coincidences', familiar and suspicious features that we have come to expect with these European terror attacks. Both government and media pour contempt on these reservations but never examine or address them. There are so many anomalies that keep being repeated, that only a fool or rogue would not concur there is something very strange - even suspicious - in the official account.

UK Jews and Muslims team up against hate - Al Jazeera English


Here I want to concentrate on just one of those suspicious photographic examples. They have a clear message that both Jews and Muslims share a rejection of violence. This must be wholly good mustn't it?

The subliminal message may be less obvious but I would ask you to consider it. It parallels the meme of "togetherness", "love", "forgiveness" and rather weirdly "smiles". 

If I give you all the examples I shall get side-tracked so I shall have to resist the temptation. 

Of course these emotions are in stark contrast to what might be humanly expected or perhaps more importantly the military action that it propels. 

As pointed out in earlier article, in the few days following the attack there were top level meetings of NATO, G7 and Bilderburg, with an American Presidential Middle East/European tour by Donald Trump thrown in. 

The following Friday ex-President Obama landed in Edinburgh to give a speech to the Hunter Foundation "dedicated to poverty eradication and educational enablement". One of its 'partners' happens to be the Clinton Foundation and "Cash for Kids". Immediately after the Manchester bombing he tweeted to his 88 million followers, expressing his sympathy and praising the 'faith and character' of those affected by the blast. 

Two days later Manchester United midfielder Ander Herrera dedicated their  first-time Europa League triumph over Ajax Amsterdam to the victims of the deadly bomb attack. 

The Aviva Premiership Rugby Final was on the following Saturday 27 May 2017 at Twickenham. In the County Championship on the same day in the same place, Lancashire beat Cornwall. (Manchester of course is in Lancashire)

The Manchester Run - a huge local charity event - was organised for the following Sunday (26th). 

Call me old fashioned but these are some very BIG  timing coincidences!

A Center of Christian-Muslim Engagement for Peace and Justice ...
WordPress.com660 × 439Search by image
Members of Manchester's Muslim community among those most strongly condemning deadly bombing


So in Thursday's edition of the London Times there was this photograph of two young and beautiful women sub-titled as: "...  St Ann's Square Manchester where Renee Black, who is Jewish, and Sadiq Patel, a Muslim prayed for victims..." 

I have searched in vain on the Internet for the actual image and text in the Times (obviously I have the original paper hard copy) but I am satisfied the image below is of the same two individuals from a different source. Note the white rose and tearless emotion! 

The photograph has all the marks of a pre-planned publicity stunt, lacking any genuine emotion, however this is not the important point.

What is strange is that the by-line does not refer to the photograph of the two women or say who they are, only to Renee Black and Sadiq Patel in a very stylised demonstration of Jewish/Muslim 'togetherness'. However perhaps even stranger, the two unidentified women with the incongruous by-line, bear a striking likeness to two of the fatally injured - Eilidh MacLeod and Michelle Kiss. Of course this must be just a rather spooky coincidence.

Muslim man, Jewish woman pray together at tribute to Manchester ...
DNA India426 × 240Search by image
'You kill our cubs, we kill yours': Islamic State on slaughtering children in Manchester


The follow image and text refers to Eilidh MacLeod, one of the victims who died. It comes from the Telegraph here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/23/victims-manchester-terror-attack/  As far as I am aware a reliable identity for the two above has never been provided.

Eilidh MacLeod loved music and played the bagpipes

The following is the original text that accompanied the image and Trelegraph article:

"Eilidh MacLeod loved music and played the bagpipes

"A "vivacious" teenager from the picturesque Scottish island of Barra has been confirmed dead by her parents.
"Eilidh MacLeod, 14, was killed in the blast at the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester on Monday evening, which she attended with her close friend Laura MacIntyre, 15, who was located in hospital nearly 20 hours after the incident.
"Ms MacIntyre is recovering from severe burns, but her condition is not thought to be critical."

Then the woman on the left in this composite image said to be Michelle Kiss who was killed by the blast.
Michelle Kiss, Saffie Roussos and Georgina Callander
https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/13530/production/_96225197_156b8b14-0e0a 4d5d-a8e5-ce0a3ebad17b.jpg

The grieving bye-stander on the left below certainly has more than a passing resemblance?

A girl is interviewed immediately after the event at 3.26 on the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smlCU_9a2iE This person obviously ALIVE bears a striking resemblance to this image of this person named Georgina Callender (or Callander) depending on


The following are the images and explanatory tags relating to the evidently staged photo-shoot of  Renee-Rachel-Black and Sadiq-Patel, wrongly ascribed to the two anonymous grieving women above.

We'll get through this together': Touching unity as Muslim ...
Daily Mirror1168 × 657Search by image
'We'll get through this together': Touching unity as Muslim comforts 93-year-old Jewish woman at Manchester terror attack vigil. Sadiq Patel ...


We'll get through this together': Touching unity as Muslim ...
Daily Mirror1200 × 630Search by image
'We'll get through this together': Touching unity as Muslim comforts 93-year-old Jewish woman at Manchester terror attack vigil - Mirror Online



"WATCH: Jew and Muslim in viral Manchester photo tell of decade ...
The Times of Israel795 × 446Search by image
Renee Black and Sadiq Patel mourning the victims of the Manchester terror attack, May 24


Imam and Jewish woman explain why they showed solidarity over ...
Metro620 × 448Search by image
A Muslim man named Sadiq Patel and a Jewish woman named Renee Rachel Black walk by


What should we make of all this? 

On the face of it the message promoted by these images and slogans are good ones. Who could object to a coming together of what are ostensibly opposing religious forces after a terrible event, or indeed a recommendation for forgiveness, love and understanding? Trouble it is a rather superficial and inaccurate misrepresentation, that in the process denies any possibility of an analysis of the event itself or the underlying psychological purpose of the meme. Just a few examples of the slogan below.

Image result for manchester together images
(Incidentally this image link was not deemed safe by my computer!)

Nor are we allowed to examine the religious beliefs promulgated by the religions, or their ultimate consequences. The application of reason to faith is thereby stifled by such terms as "anti-semitism", "hate speech" and "political correctness". Britain has a long history of both tolerance and intolerance, but it is the application of reason to belief and action that is critical if we are to survive this current evil. An ostrich mentality will not help us. Nor can or should we ignore those elements embedded in religion that encourage hatred or violent or oppressive behaviour to others.


I would suggest the event and its subsequent handling have clear objectives, that have repeated time and time again throughout Europe. I believe that the terror and subsequent control of the messaging have common creative sources and controls. Does it not seem a a tad strange that the theme of "togetherness" so prominent in Manchester was the self same logo adopted for the NATO conference just a few days later and indeed for the whole of the EU that Britain is intent on leaving?


The apparent contrast between the violence and the reaction, is there to distance the two and implant the concept that 'we' and 'our' values are superior. We can abhor the sin whilst loving and forgiving the sinner. 


Further that both Jewish and Muslim faiths are suffused with these attitudes and emotions. (Christianity meanwhile is relatively side-lined) whilst any serious examination of illiberal beliefs and actions in the two (or three) cultural and political spheres and territories can be skimmed over with aplomb - even a bomb! The inherent hypocrisy and egotism embedded in the reaction to these events is impossible to ignore.


However our opposition (note not hatred) is directed to the organisation labelled ISIS or Daesh. This is the camouflaged and real objective, because the terror meted on the streets justifies both domestic and foreign policy objectives aimed not only against ISIS but paradoxically those that are also opposed to it - namely Syria and Russia. 

Trump scolds fellow NATO leaders: Spend more for military | Daily ...
Daily Mail634 × 397Search by image
From left, Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Britain's


Note the speed with which this line was pursued at NATO and the G7, and undoubtedly Bilderburg also, where the real business strategy is agreed. And what is the real consequence of all this, which we are told was being pushed by the USA despite its President's diffidence? Well of course further military intervention in Syria and supporting an Israeli objective of destabilisation and domination whilst building up tensions with Russian and Iran that risk all-out war. 

Happy Families?

G7 summit 2017 LIVE: Trump, Merkel, May and world leaders in tense ...
BuzzFix Today590 × 350Search by image
G7 summit: Donald Trump, Theresa May and more


Thus the populations of the west are herded in a miasmatic mix of pop sexuality, emotional grief, love and smiles, whilst the real power-brokers and decision-makers advance towards their political, territorial and natural resources goal unopposed by their respective electorates.




Manchester bombing: Theresa May 'will cut short G7 summit visit ...
Daily Express750 × 445Search by image
Ariana Grande to play benefit concert for Manchester victims after Piers Morgan criticism


Note below the prominance of the heat blankets and the slogan on the bus.


One of the claimed missing, presumed injured or dead, had actually been murdered four years previously!

From: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-horrified-after-picture-daughter-10497332

"Mum horrified after picture of daughter murdered by ex used in collages of 'missing in Manchester'

"Samantha Shrewsbury was shocked to see images of Jayden Parkinson, 17, who was murdered by her ex-boyfriend and dumped in a graveyard, circulating online
"On Tuesday, she wrote on Twitter : "Why is my MURDERED daughter's picture being used in a collage of pictures of children missing dead after last night terror attack.(sic).""

Also see: "The Manchester Hoax Compilation"