PDA

View Full Version : U.N. Official Calls for Study Of Neocons' Role in 9/11 (its real)




nc4rp
04-10-2008, 02:15 PM
U.N. Official Calls for Study Of Neocons' Role in 9/11

By ELI LAKE (http://www2.nysun.com/authors/Eli+Lake)
Staff Reporter of the Sun
April 10, 2008

WASHINGTON — A new U.N. Human Rights Council official assigned to monitor Israel (http://www2.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Israel) is calling for an official commission to study the role neoconservatives may have played in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

On March 26, Richard Falk (http://www2.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Richard+Falk), Milbank professor of international law emeritus at Princeton University, was named by unanimous vote to a newly created position to report on human rights in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. While Mr. Falk's specialty is human rights and international law, since the attacks in 2001, he has devoted some of his time to challenging what he calls the "9-11 official version."

On March 24 in an interview with a radio host and former University of Wisconsin instructor, Kevin Barrett, Mr. Falk said, "It is possibly true that especially the neoconservatives thought there was a situation in the country and in the world where something had to happen to wake up the American people. Whether they are innocent about the contention that they made that something happen or not, I don't think we can answer definitively at this point. All we can say is there is a lot of grounds for suspicion, there should be an official investigation of the sort the 9/11 commission did not engage in and that the failure to do these things is cheating the American people and in some sense the people of the world of a greater confidence in what really happened than they presently possess."

Mr. Barrett, who is the co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth, said in an interview yesterday of Mr. Falk, "I would put him on a list of scholars who are sympathetic to the 9/11 truth movement."

He added, "Unlike most public intellectuals today, he is both honest and very, very knowledgeable in that he understands the probable reality of 9/11. He understands that the evidence that it was a false flag operation is very strong."
The narrative that the attacks from 2001 were a "false flag" operation is a recurring theme in the literature challenging the consensus that 19 Al Qaeda hijackers flew commercial jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. False flag refers to espionage or covert actions taken by one government made to seem like the work of another. The false flag thesis has it that the Bush administration is somehow responsible for the September 11 attacks as a pretext for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr. Falk yesterday did not return e-mails and phone calls asking for a comment. But in 2004 he wrote the foreword to the book "The New Pearl Harbor," by David Ray Griffin (http://www2.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=David+Ray+Griffin). Mr. Griffin has posited that such an inside job is the likely explanation for the attacks.


http://www2.nysun.com/article/74465

also heres another thread on the topic http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message533692/pg1

torchbearer
04-10-2008, 02:20 PM
HAHAHAHA! Oh my God... this is an odd day..

Whose family lived down the road from the CIA Headquarters? Bin Laden?
Whose family had close personal ties to the Bushes? Bin Ladens?
Whose Family had ties to Nazis? Prescott Bush?
Let's see.. who was Bin Laden trained and paid by..? CIA/Neocons?
Who was Pakistan Allies with? Neocons?
Who funded the highjackers? Pakistan?
Who trained organized those highjackers? One of the above?
All of the above?

Kade
04-10-2008, 02:23 PM
U.N. Official Calls for Study Of Neocons' Role in 9/11

By ELI LAKE (http://www2.nysun.com/authors/Eli+Lake)
Staff Reporter of the Sun
April 10, 2008

WASHINGTON — A new U.N. Human Rights Council official assigned to monitor Israel (http://www2.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Israel) is calling for an official commission to study the role neoconservatives may have played in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

On March 26, Richard Falk (http://www2.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Richard+Falk), Milbank professor of international law emeritus at Princeton University, was named by unanimous vote to a newly created position to report on human rights in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. While Mr. Falk's specialty is human rights and international law, since the attacks in 2001, he has devoted some of his time to challenging what he calls the "9-11 official version."

On March 24 in an interview with a radio host and former University of Wisconsin instructor, Kevin Barrett, Mr. Falk said, "It is possibly true that especially the neoconservatives thought there was a situation in the country and in the world where something had to happen to wake up the American people. Whether they are innocent about the contention that they made that something happen or not, I don't think we can answer definitively at this point. All we can say is there is a lot of grounds for suspicion, there should be an official investigation of the sort the 9/11 commission did not engage in and that the failure to do these things is cheating the American people and in some sense the people of the world of a greater confidence in what really happened than they presently possess."

Mr. Barrett, who is the co-founder of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth, said in an interview yesterday of Mr. Falk, "I would put him on a list of scholars who are sympathetic to the 9/11 truth movement."

He added, "Unlike most public intellectuals today, he is both honest and very, very knowledgeable in that he understands the probable reality of 9/11. He understands that the evidence that it was a false flag operation is very strong."
The narrative that the attacks from 2001 were a "false flag" operation is a recurring theme in the literature challenging the consensus that 19 Al Qaeda hijackers flew commercial jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. False flag refers to espionage or covert actions taken by one government made to seem like the work of another. The false flag thesis has it that the Bush administration is somehow responsible for the September 11 attacks as a pretext for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr. Falk yesterday did not return e-mails and phone calls asking for a comment. But in 2004 he wrote the foreword to the book "The New Pearl Harbor," by David Ray Griffin (http://www2.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=David+Ray+Griffin). Mr. Griffin has posited that such an inside job is the likely explanation for the attacks.

http://www2.nysun.com/article/74465

What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.

Tedhunter
04-10-2008, 02:25 PM
He'll be gone soon. The Neocons don't appreciate investigations of this nature.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/10/spitzer/

torchbearer
04-10-2008, 02:28 PM
What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.

What I find funny, is the very organization that the Neocons praise as needed... and uses as an excuse for war... is now turning on them.

Maybe the neocons will start agreeing that we need to get rid of the U.N.

Ironies of ironies.

Bin Laden was our friend, now our enemy.
Saddam Hussien was our ally, then our enemy.
Iran was our friend, now our enemy.
U.N. was our friend, now our enemy.

Anyone else seeing a trend here? Almost like our government is purposefully creating its own dragons?

acptulsa
04-10-2008, 02:50 PM
What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.

The notion that no conservative here has demonstrated anything but contempt for human rights is hogwash, in all fairness.

So, as our pet U.N. loving liberal, what do you think? Is this more or less useful than, say, their ineffective actions in Rwanda, for example?

Kade
04-10-2008, 02:57 PM
What I find funny, is the very organization that the Neocons praise as needed... and uses as an excuse for war... is now turning on them.

Maybe the neocons will start agreeing that we need to get rid of the U.N.

Ironies of ironies.

Bin Laden was our friend, now our enemy.
Saddam Hussien was our ally, then our enemy.
Iran was our friend, now our enemy.
U.N. was our friend, now our enemy.

Anyone else seeing a trend here? Almost like our government is purposefully creating its own dragons?

I suppose that is ironic.

Kade
04-10-2008, 02:58 PM
The notion that no conservative here has demonstrated anything but contempt for human rights is hogwash, in all fairness.

So, as our pet U.N. loving liberal, what do you think? Is this more or less useful than, say, their ineffective actions in Rwanda, for example?

I'm actually not a fan of the U.N.

I do like there humanitarian organizations, but even some of the better ones have no admonished them for their lack of effort in some places.

I'm a "Reporters without Borders" type of guy personally.

And "Doctors without Borders"....

I do find this ironic.

scandinaviany3
04-10-2008, 03:05 PM
What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.

So not sure what you are saying..just checking

You think the authorship of this was false?

Zolah
04-10-2008, 03:07 PM
What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.

I don't think many people will stop hating the UN anytime soon, I believe the point is that the UN is an organisation that is universally recognised as a respectable organisation (well by the majority of people) and that what it says carries a lot of weight. Point being, if the UN says it, people pay attention, and if they say something favourable, we can explain how the UN as added weight to an argument.

That being said, I have only skimmed over the article so far and haven't checked links. Just saying why it should not-not be posted.

Broadlighter
04-10-2008, 03:09 PM
The Neo-con think-tank guys expressed an ideological motive for allowing the 9/11 attacks to happen in the very least. You could say they wished it on America.

That's enough of an inside job for me to want to hang these bastards in the court of public opinion.

Rhys
04-10-2008, 03:11 PM
LOL you all should know that this is leading to a UN resolution saying "America is corrupt and must submit to the laws of the UN and WTO before sanctions are imposed. Their government must undergo UN monitored reform." We do this in the third world every day.

James Madison
04-10-2008, 03:29 PM
Well I hate the UN as much as the next guy but I find it just a bit odd that they would all of a sudden take interest in this when there were plenty of opportunities to do so earlier. Something doesn't seem right since in many ways the neolibs are just as guilty as the neocons in making sure the evens on 9/11 were carried out as they were. Both parties are controlled. Hillary and Obama are just as bad as the neocons and are in bed with the UN. So, why would the UN want to do something about this. Perhaps they are turning on their former allies to guarantee a dem gets elected in November?

Sarge
04-10-2008, 03:37 PM
I was just thinking the same thing. What would the UN do if they found out it was true?

Amazing if this article is correct. The boards will be humming shortly, when this worms itself across the web.

I was watching when the second plane hit but have no explanation how the third building could have or should have come down when it was in no way hit. The other two buildings came straight down and didn't touch that building.

The video of the announcer in London saying the third building had come down, when it is still standing in the background behind her, needs to be explained.

I have a problem with the way the three buildings all fell. Not logical that all three would fall exactly the same. Especially the last one that had not been hit by a plane.

I likewise, don't like the UN, but hope it is true for all that still have questions.

If it is true, the neo cons will be shaking in their boots by the fact they are mentioning them vs. just trying to find out the facts.

nc4rp
04-10-2008, 03:49 PM
What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.



Kade. i was passing along this report before they removed the webpage or something, and put it up for discussion.

no need to get nasty. with that attutude you should do the forums a favor and leave.

constituent
04-10-2008, 03:53 PM
LOL you all should know that this is leading to a UN resolution saying "America is corrupt and must submit to the laws of the UN and WTO before sanctions are imposed. Their government must undergo UN monitored reform." We do this in the third world every day.

yes indeedee.

tangent4ronpaul
04-10-2008, 04:02 PM
First off, is Richard Falk associated with the UN? - apparently yes. He was appointed as a rapporteur, according the quotes in the article.

rap·por·teur (rpôr-tûr, -tr)
n.
One who is designated to give a report, as at a meeting.

To say that he is a "UN Official" is like saying General Patraus is a US Congressional official because be recently gave testimony and reported on the situation in Iraq to Congress. This reporter is clearly incompetent.

Now, is he REALLY associated with the UN? - apparently yes:

http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/22f431edb91c6f548525678a0051be1d/0da4ba56ade85249852574190058d462!OpenDocument

Human Rights Council
26 March 2008
UNITED NATIONS

Press Release

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ELECTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND APPROVES A NUMBER OF SPECIAL PROCEDURES MANDATE HOLDERS

The Human Rights Council this afternoon elected 18 experts to make up its new Advisory Committee. The Council also approved candidates for its Special Procedures on the right to adequate housing, the right to food, human rights of indigenous people, sale of children, effects of economic reform policies, human rights in Myanmar, human rights in the Palestinian territories, human rights and extreme poverty, contemporary forms of slavery, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, people of African descent, human rights in Somalia and human rights defenders.

Also this afternoon, the Council approved the list of candidates for Special Procedures mandate holders proposed by the President of the Council, who chose them out of candidates proposed by the Consultative Group which the Council appointed. The list included ... Mr. Richard Falk (United States), Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 ...


Now, if you read carefully, you will note that Mr. Falk, speaking as an individual, expressed a personal opinion on a radio show that the US should investigate 9/11 again.

Does this have ANYTHING do with Mr. Falk's UN assignment to report on the human rights situation in the Palestinian territories? - NO!

Is the UN planning on investigating what happened on 9/11? - NO!

What passes for news these days amazes me sometimes...

-n

nbhadja
04-10-2008, 04:23 PM
What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.

You support a candidate that supports the Iraq war, wants to invade Iran, put troops in Pakistan, supports an interventionist foreign policy, and wants to greatly increase the size of the military etc. Don't talk about human rights.

Rangeley
04-10-2008, 05:00 PM
I was just thinking the same thing. What would the UN do if they found out it was true?

Amazing if this article is correct. The boards will be humming shortly, when this worms itself across the web.

I was watching when the second plane hit but have no explanation how the third building could have or should have come down when it was in no way hit. The other two buildings came straight down and didn't touch that building.

The video of the announcer in London saying the third building had come down, when it is still standing in the background behind her, needs to be explained.

I have a problem with the way the three buildings all fell. Not logical that all three would fall exactly the same. Especially the last one that had not been hit by a plane.

I likewise, don't like the UN, but hope it is true for all that still have questions.

If it is true, the neo cons will be shaking in their boots by the fact they are mentioning them vs. just trying to find out the facts.
Debris from one of the towers hit WTC 7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwdD6ERutEI&feature=related

Give me liberty
04-10-2008, 05:09 PM
Dont jump over the bandwagon just yet
Your forgetting that the UN Wants the new world order

Ron paul wants the UN out of america, and i agree!

RonPaulFever
04-10-2008, 05:12 PM
WHEREAS Kade is a self-absorbed Obama-llama whose posts I am tired of reading,

BE IT RESOLVED that I shall place him on ignore.

jkm1864
04-10-2008, 05:43 PM
Kade probably works at Mc'Donalds and expects us the middle class to pay for his house and his kids whom he doesn't claim so the sow he got pregnant can get welfare. I know how all You liberals are You have no concept of personal responsibility or liberty. Hey I'll tell You what enjoy the bread line fucknut because its you're idols Hillary and Bill that have sent this country in that direction. We need a change and we need one now and its not Obama. I guess You will be the Torry when that change happens?

Give me liberty
04-10-2008, 06:51 PM
I cant believe this shit you idoits are actullay buying into the UN Study crap

SO MUCH FOR YOUR CLAIM THAT YOUR FREEDOM LOVERS:mad:


Your all Traitors.

Your backing the un this way.

you jack ass. What the hell is wrong with you ?



The UN IS EVIL.
Ever since the un has been created there has been allots of wars.

Kade
04-10-2008, 07:09 PM
Kade. i was passing along this report before they removed the webpage or something, and put it up for discussion.

no need to get nasty. with that attutude you should do the forums a favor and leave.

1,300 posts of trolling and rising....

*sigh*

Kade
04-10-2008, 07:15 PM
Kade probably works at Mc'Donalds and expects us the middle class to pay for his house and his kids whom he doesn't claim so the sow he got pregnant can get welfare. I know how all You liberals are You have no concept of personal responsibility or liberty. Hey I'll tell You what enjoy the bread line fucknut because its you're idols Hillary and Bill that have sent this country in that direction. We need a change and we need one now and its not Obama. I guess You will be the Torry when that change happens?

That's exactly correct, you are a god damn prophet.

Sandra
04-10-2008, 07:57 PM
My question is: Did people that knew things and were afraid to report to any agency within the US feel they could resort to the UN? I know a lot of American feel the UN is like an impartial entity and went to them instead. BTW, where would you go if you had sensitive information pertaining to911?

dannno
04-10-2008, 08:06 PM
I cant believe this shit you idoits are actullay buying into the UN Study crap

SO MUCH FOR YOUR CLAIM THAT YOUR FREEDOM LOVERS:mad:


Your all Traitors.

Your backing the un this way.

you jack ass. What the hell is wrong with you ?



The UN IS EVIL.
Ever since the un has been created there has been allots of wars.


Do you have any quotes from any posters here praising the UN?

..... Do you have quotes from "all of us" praising the UN??



Look, I don't want to be a part of the UN either. But if they want to investigate 9/11 based on the fact that we are destroying another country, then I believe they have every right to do so. If they make some interesting findings, then it will help our cause. In the mean time, we have someone who is in at least a somewhat credible position pushing for a new investigation which will at least get some public attention. This is great news. If you are afraid of the UN coming after us because we attacked ourselves, let me remind you that they aren't investigating "our government" they are investigating the neo-conservatives within our government. I'll bet Ron Paul is thrilled, he hates the neo-conservatives.

Bruno
04-10-2008, 08:29 PM
Do you have any quotes from any posters here praising the UN?

..... Do you have quotes from "all of us" praising the UN??



Look, I don't want to be a part of the UN either. But if they want to investigate 9/11 based on the fact that we are destroying another country, then I believe they have every right to do so. If they make some interesting findings, then it will help our cause. In the mean time, we have someone who is in at least a somewhat credible position pushing for a new investigation which will at least get some public attention. This is great news. If you are afraid of the UN coming after us because we attacked ourselves, let me remind you that they aren't investigating "our government" they are investigating the neo-conservatives within our government. I'll bet Ron Paul is thrilled, he hates the neo-conservatives.

+1

The way I read these posts, at the very most people might be excited that a group with authority is looking into 9/11. That's a far stretch to say anyone was having a love-fest with the UN>

ItsTime
04-10-2008, 09:02 PM
It is simple. Why do this? To make people THINK things are getting done. I have been through this on a personal level. People in power say and do things to MAKE IT LOOK LIKE things are getting done. While the whole time they are fucking you. This is a power grab from the left. Do not let it fool you. They may all have the same agenda but inside that agenda are sides that want the power. Most people think of "neo-con" as Republicans. Few people have come to the realization that "neo-cons" mean BOTH dems and reps. A move to the dems ideology will quicken the new world order.

slamhead
04-10-2008, 09:05 PM
Just shows me the UN is just as ignorant and misguided as I always thought. More reason to support Dr. Paul position of pulling out of the UN.

haaaylee
04-10-2008, 09:19 PM
What a bastion of hyprocrisy this place is sometimes. For the sake of all autistic anuses here, why do you give any legitimacy to the U.N. when it suits you?

My word, I can't explain it.

You hate something when it suits you. You love it when it suits you.

At least I'm consistent liberal. No conservative on here has demonstrated anything but contempt for "human rights"...

hogwash.


This is just one person within the U.N. We can admire what he says without agreeing that the U.N. is a good thing. I mean, we can also hate the Congress for not cutting funding on the war but still respect and admire what Ron Paul, a congressman, has to say. No?

nc4rp
04-10-2008, 09:20 PM
thanks for the insightful posts, although i think that its a positive that the UN would even mention the need for a re-investigation of 911. whether they have real intentions or not is fairly obvious. but its the message it sends to the world that has some merit.


other than that i informally call for banning Kade for being a prick. do i hear a second?

tangent4ronpaul
04-10-2008, 09:24 PM
DAMB - you people are dense!

THE UN IS NOT LOOKING INTO 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

this story is total BS and you are reading into it what you want to hear.

see post 17 again. though from followup, it looks like a bunch of you read the first 1-3 posts and skipped the rest before posting.

-n

Kade
04-10-2008, 09:29 PM
thanks for the insightful posts, although i think that its a positive that the UN would even mention the need for a re-investigation of 911.


other than that i informally call for banning Kade for being a prick. do i hear a second?

"Oh great authority figures, please get rid of this mean man!"

What's wrong ncrap, need Big Brother to defend you? That's what the nanny-staters do isn't it? Cry out for help when they can't deal with something themselves...

And this is even more pathetic, because this is a speech and expression issue, you're a tool and a hypocrite.

nc4rp
04-10-2008, 09:35 PM
Now, if you read carefully, you will note that Mr. Falk, speaking as an individual, expressed a personal opinion on a radio show that the US should investigate 9/11 again.

Does this have ANYTHING do with Mr. Falk's UN assignment to report on the human rights situation in the Palestinian territories? - NO!

Is the UN planning on investigating what happened on 9/11? - NO!


Tangent4Ronpaul, how does him expressing a personal opinion about 911 negate his authenticity or the possibility the UN actually would do it with any competence? no need to attack, just explain it a little further.


Kade, go away. You're like a fly. (note grammatical correctness)

dannno
04-10-2008, 09:36 PM
Kade, you are being ridiculous.

Now, if we weren't in complete disregard for other country's sovereignty then I would agree with you, but the fact of the matter is we are murdering people and destroying other countries. They have every right to investigate the neo-cons. It's not our government they are investigating, it's just the neo-cons. Relax. Ron Paul hates the neo-cons, this is great stuff.

Kludge
04-11-2008, 02:33 AM
blah blah blah blah blah...



Sorry, I've always wanted to do that.

tangent4ronpaul
04-11-2008, 04:50 AM
Tangent4Ronpaul, how does him expressing a personal opinion about 911 negate his authenticity or the possibility the UN actually would do it with any competence? no need to attack, just explain it a little further.


Kade, go away. You're like a fly. (note grammatical correctness)

His "authority" is as a subject matter expert on the Palestinian Territories which he has developed through being a university professor and researching the area over the years. As such, they asked him report to them on the situation, and if he's lucky, they might even pay for him to take a trip there to study it further.

That does not make him a UN spokesman. That does not put him in a position to decide what the UN will or will not investigate, beyond perhaps some limited discretion of what he personally looks into related to the Palestinian territories and reports back to the UN on. He's basically a contractor.

The problem isn't really with him. He expressed a personal opinion about set A (9/11 investigation need). He is a authority on the Palestinian territories and has happened to be hired by the UN to report on that. (set B). There is absolutely no intersection or union of sets A and B. They are distinct and separate. The UN did not hire him for whatever knowledge he has about 9/11.

Now the reporter (or their editor) has tried to imply there is a connection, and people here fell for the bait and believe that the UN is going to investigate 9/11. That has not happened and is unlikely to happen.

What might happen is that the UN may be forced to make a public statement disassociating themselves from these remarks and may end up firing this expert. As he is considered by many to be anti-Israel and is controversial, that may have been the purpose of the article. To out him.

That the UN would look into it is unlikely. It might be good if they did, for a number of reasons, but they are unlikely to meet with any cooperation as most of the people with records or knowledge are within the US government. If they cannot get access to the black boxes, the military and FAA records, the secret reports on the investigation and the people involved at the time won't talk to them for fear of loosing their jobs, it would be impossible to do an investigation with any competence. Also bear in mind that we host their headquarters and provide the majority of their funding. As to Pakistan, Israel, Syria, etc involvement - that's a highly charged can of worms...

A slightly different question would be if they would examine their own conclusions and sanctions against Iraq that was used as part of a false pretext to invade that country. We are on firmer ground there. Yet the UN, like Congress, is not known as an organization that is good at admitting fault and examining their own mistakes. It generally lacks introspection.

-n

SteveMartin
04-11-2008, 05:49 AM
We need our own military leaders to speak out about 9-11 and to call for a military investigation. Plenty of high-ranking generals, admirals (and reportedly even Peter Pace) know what 9-11 really was. We don't need the U.N. doing anything that would denigrate the U.S. and--despite the neocons surely deserving it--bring condemnation by the entire "world community" upon America as a totality.

A U.N. investigation that determined the truth of 911 before some panel here did so could possibly be used by radical pro-world government folks at the U.N. who know that the U.S. Constitution is their final roadblock to a total seizure of power. This could even develop into a "valid" resolution against the USA that would be jumped on by anyone who has ever hated us (even before we began conquering all these innocent nations and killing their people) and lead to WW III with the USA, Israel and possibly Britain on one side, and almost everybody else on the other side.

RonPaulVolunteer
04-11-2008, 09:10 AM
bump

RonPaulVolunteer
04-11-2008, 09:11 AM
You forgot the 2nd page...


[Continued from page 1 of 2]

In the preface, Mr. Falk writes, "There have been questions raised here and there and allegations of official complicity made almost from the day of the attacks, especially in Europe, but no one until Griffin has had the patience, the fortitude, the courage, and the intelligence to put the pieces together in a single coherent account."

When asked for a comment about the appointment of Mr. Falk, a former American ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton said, "This is exactly why we voted against the new human rights council." A spokesman for the American embassy at the United Nations offered no comment yesterday when asked.

A spokeswoman at the United Nations, Nancy Groves, yesterday also declined to comment. "I would not make a comment on how the member states vote on appointments. It is their council, they make their decisions," she said.

Mr. Falk's selection to the post as rapporteur has already prompted the government of Israel formally to request that Mr. Falk not be sent to their country. The Israeli press has reported that he may even be barred from entering the country.

The deputy permanent representative of Israel to the United Nations in New York, Daniel Carmon said, "We are asking the U.N. not to send him. We cannot agree to Mr. Falk's entrance into Israel in his capacity as the rapporteur."

One reason the Israelis are concerned about his appointment is that Mr. Falk has compared Israel's treatment of Palestinian Arabs to the Nazi treatment of Jews in the holocaust. In an April 8 BBC interview, Mr. Falk said he stood by the Israel-Nazi comparison.

The national director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, issued a statement yesterday saying, "This was clearly a singularly inappropriate choice for this position. Falk's startling record of anti-Israel prejudice should have been enough to preclude him from a position where an unbiased observer is needed to report on the status of human rights in the territories."

In a February 16, 1979, op-ed for the New York Times, Mr. Falk praised Ayatollah Khomeini and bemoaned his ill treatment in the American press. He wrote, "The depiction of him as fanatical, reactionary and the bearer of crude prejudices seems certainly and happily false."Nearly nine months later, student followers of Khomeini invaded the American embassy in Tehran and held 52 diplomats hostage for the following 444 days.

Alawn
04-11-2008, 12:31 PM
I hate the UN. I want it to be disbanded. I don't think they should be able to do anything to the US even if they prove the US did 9/11. But I don't have any problem with them investigating it as long as they have no ability to do anything about it. The more people that investigate 9/11 the better. Maybe this will convince more people within the US to investigate it and do something about it.

dannno
04-11-2008, 12:45 PM
I hate the UN. I want it to be disbanded. I don't think they should be able to do anything to the US even if they prove the US did 9/11. But I don't have any problem with them investigating it as long as they have no ability to do anything about it. The more people that investigate 9/11 the better. Maybe this will convince more people within the US to investigate it and do something about it.

+1


They won't do anything because they are NOT investigating our government, they are investigating a specific element (neocons) within our government.

If they bring about an investigation that finds legitamite cause for concern, it will only be good for the movement. We can have a good reason to start our own REAL investigations at home.

Nate K
04-11-2008, 03:41 PM
This is the work of elites you can be sure. They're finding ways to pit U.N. hating-potential-freedom lovers against us.

raiha
04-11-2008, 04:10 PM
Tell you what, I'm intrigued about the Conservative/liberal head butting that goes on here.
It is the thing that will split the movement and if you don't start looking at what you've got in common rather than what divides you, this revolution thing will end up in one big warped mess.

I like Torchbearer's comment:

Almost like our government is purposefully creating its own dragons?

Hopefully this will mean cheney and bush will end up strangling one another. :)

torchbearer
04-11-2008, 08:34 PM
Tell you what, I'm intrigued about the Conservative/liberal head butting that goes on here.
It is the thing that will split the movement and if you don't start looking at what you've got in common rather than what divides you, this revolution thing will end up in one big warped mess.

I like Torchbearer's comment:


Hopefully this will mean cheney and bush will end up strangling one another. :)

remember, there are some people on this forum this very night who are not here to help our cause of reinstating the consitution.
there are tools on here, and they love to start shit. in fact, every one of their post serves to provoke someone. look around, it gets kind of obvious after awhile.

SteveMartin
04-11-2008, 10:40 PM
All who call for the disbanding of the U.N. and resistance to the bitter end against the emerging world government should be able to work together.

However, the wimps, phonies and out-and-out traitors will all gradually fall by the wayside as the economy gets worse and worse, and they discover that this neocon government holds the keys to the pantry.

(Heck, even most seeds have been genetically altered not to reproduce now...)

Highland
04-11-2008, 10:55 PM
LOL you all should know that this is leading to a UN resolution saying "America is corrupt and must submit to the laws of the UN and WTO before sanctions are imposed. Their government must undergo UN monitored reform." We do this in the third world every day.

Very true....good thinking and figuring out how this benefits the NWO........the UN SUCKS;)

LEK
04-12-2008, 02:20 PM
What I find funny, is the very organization that the Neocons praise as needed... and uses as an excuse for war... is now turning on them.

Maybe the neocons will start agreeing that we need to get rid of the U.N.

Ironies of ironies.

Bin Laden was our friend, now our enemy.
Saddam Hussien was our ally, then our enemy.
Iran was our friend, now our enemy.
U.N. was our friend, now our enemy.

Anyone else seeing a trend here? Almost like our government is purposefully creating its own dragons?

It's called Hegelian Dialect:

Hegel's dialectic is the tool which manipulates us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action.

Hegelian conflicts steer every political arena on the planet, from the United Nations to the major American political parties, all the way down to local school boards and community councils. Dialogues and consensus-building are primary tools of the dialectic, and terror and intimidation are also acceptable formats for obtaining the goal.

Today the dialectic is active in every political issue that encourages taking sides. We can see it in environmentalists instigating conflicts against private property owners, in democrats against republicans, in greens against libertarians, in communists against socialists, in neo-cons against traditional conservatives, in community activists against individuals, in pro-choice versus pro-life, in Christians against Muslims, in isolationists versus interventionists, in peace activists against war hawks. No matter what the issue, the invisible dialectic aims to control both the conflict and the resolution of differences, and leads everyone involved into a new cycle of conflicts.

http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm

Zippyjuan
04-12-2008, 03:04 PM
Nothing to do with the UN as was pointed out a couple of times. The comments were made by Mr Faulk before he even was offered the UN position. If his nomination is not withdrawn, he won't be on the job for several more months. Israel does not want him to visit them (his position is to report on Palestinian human rights) because he has compared Israel to Hitler. They do not believe that he could issue an impartial report. Other selections to the committee have been controversial as well.