U.N. Official Calls for Study Of Neocons' Role in 9/11

[burythehatchet]

http://www2.nysun.com/article/74465?page_no=1

WASHINGTON — A new U.N. Human Rights Council official assigned to monitor 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, 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."





Someday the truth will be known, and the American media will ignore it.

[no_hypocrisy]

1. No wonder it's the neocons like John Bolton who want to get rid of the U.N.

An impartial panel that isn't corrupted by money.

[Fireweed247]

2. Kucinich is planning hearings into insider trading before 9/11

:applause:
I hope he does it sooner than later!

The American people need to know the truth whether they like it or not.

[TriggerGal]

13. Have link?

Please provide!!!

[Wilms]

25. Stick the following in google.

"insider trading" kucinich

Plenty of afternoon reading!

[Fireweed247]

3. Bring it on!

:kick:

[me b zola]

4. K&R!

[tilsammans]

5. It's about time!

:applause:

[Voice for Peace]

6. hallelujah - K&R

[spanone]

7. it would be nice to have an honest investigation of 911....

[provis99]

8. typical anti-semitic post

[Wilms]

9. In what way? n/t

[seemslikeadream]

14. You can't talk about 9/11 and not be anti-semtic

I have no idea why. And this thread like the many others will also be moved to the dungeon.

[G_j]

17. yes, I posted this yesterday in GD, it's in the dungeon now

ironically, some commented that people are finally starting to wake up to the importance of this issue.

too bad DU hasn't
ZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZ :boring:

[seemslikeadream]

18. The UN

Who knew :hi:

[Echo In Light]

29. Why? Because it's a convenient ruse used to discredit the numerous anomalies of 9/11

Dungeoned for the same purpose of "Free Speech Zones."

[TriggerGal]

11. Say WHAT?

How did you come up with that idea?

[seemslikeadream]

15. it's very easy around here

to get that idea

[LeftishBrit]

16. Possibly because...

Falk is combining this with a highly critical role as a monitor of Israel, and in such a context 'neocons' often implies 'Jews' or 'supporters of Israel'. See my other post. I don't think that the *post* is antisemitic; but I think that Falk may be.

Of course, his role as monitor of Israel may have *nothing* to do with his 9-11 arguments, in which case I apologize for my suspicions.

[scarletwoman]

20. I don't see that there is ANY connection between his interest in 9/11 and his position

as a human rights monitor.

And the only people who flog the neocon=Jew canard are those who support neocon policies and seek to derail all arguments against them by playing the "anti-semite" card.

[LeftishBrit]

21. Well, maybe. I hope so.

I am a left-winger; and I use the word neo-con myself; and I don't support their policies; and I am aware that most of them aren't Jewish anyway! But there ARE sites that imply that Israel/ Mossad/ supporters of Israel perpetrated 9-11; and often such sites DO use 'neo-con' as a code-word; and for that reason, combining the roles that Falk does seems questionable.

In just the same way, it was more than questionable - in fact it was disastrous - for people with a strong anti-Iraq agenda to propagandize 9-11 to the extent that they did, and to imply that Saddam/Iraq were somehow involved in it. 9-11 investigation should be kept separate from other international political agendas.

[TriggerGal]

22. Falk is Jewish

So, I highly doubt he's anti-semitic.

http://www.transnational.org/Area_MiddleEast/2007/Falk_PalestineGenocide.html

[seemslikeadream]

19. Falk.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x201134

JackRiddler (1000+ posts) Thu Apr-10-08 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Richard Falk's scholarly career spans decades and has been highly influential
Edited on Thu Apr-10-08 03:45 PM by JackRiddler
in the study of international relations for his contributions to the interdependency paradigm. We were reading him in our (centrist) political science college classes in the 1980s. Whatever you may think of his work, he has made a career as an academic theoretician, and not as a professional liar.

Henry Kissinger is a fugitive war criminal and a primary planner of the genocide that killed about two million civilians in Indochina and poisoned the land for generations to come, among hundreds of other severe atrocity charges. He remains armed with positions of great influence in the nuclear-armed U.S. rogue state and is to be considered an active danger to billions of people on the planet.

[TheWatcher]

27. Typical Bullshit Logic With No Basis In Fact.

[TriggerGal]

10. Yahoo!!!

And ... bring them all to The Hague for war crimes, please!!

[LeftishBrit]

12. This sounds very dodgy...

and as though he is implying, or influenced by those who imply, Israeli/Jewish involvement in 9-11. Note: I do NOT think that all or most 9-11 truthers imply this; but in this case it's juxtaposed with his being assigned to 'monitor Israel'. If he wants to be taken seriously on human rights in Israel/ the Occupied Territories, he should not be mixing it with 9-11 accusations.

Anyway, shouldn't this be in the 9-11 forum?

[Wilms]

26. wtf is the problem?

Talk about "conspiracy theorists". Where in the article do you see something suggesting that he's suggesting "Israeli/Jewish involvement in 9-11"?

Where do you see an accusation?

I see a call for a REAL investigation of a crime.

If you want to be "taken seriously" you ought to consider the fact that there wasn't a real investigation of the event.

As to your question about where the OP belongs, I ask again. wtf is the problem?

[seemslikeadream]

28. It really gets so tiresome

[bemildred]

23. Israel bars UN envoy after 'holocaust' claim

Israel has said it will refuse a visa for the new United Nations human rights envoy to the Palestinians after he said it was responsible for a “Holocaust in the making” in Gaza.

Richard Falk, a Jewish-American law professor, is to assume the UN post of special rapporteur in June.

But the Israeli government is furious as he compared it last year to Nazi Germany and has refused to retract his comments since his appointment.

A spokesman for Israel’s foreign ministry also accused his employers of bias.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/08/wisrael108.xml

[G_j]

24. 25 contradictions that one can openly discuss without fear of being labeled "conspiracy theorist"

well, maybe not here.. :shrug:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8374

25 Intolerable Contradictions: The Final Undoing of the Official 9/11 Story
Review of David Ray Griffin's book

by Elizabeth Woodworth


Global Research, March 17, 2008

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

A review of "9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press," by Dr. David Ray Griffin. Interlink Publishing, March 2008. 368 p. List

At last there is a book about 9/11 that politicians and journalists can openly discuss without fear of being labeled "conspiracy theorists".

9/11 Contradictions advances no theories. It simply exposes 25 astonishing internal contradictions that will haunt the public story of this unparalleled event for all time.

Until now, the persistent and disturbing questions about the day that changed the world have confused and alienated journalists and politicians, because:

The technical issues regarding the collapse of the towers, the failure of the military to intercept the flights, and the relatively minor damage to the Pentagon have been considered too complex for analysis in the media.
However, Griffin’s new book requires no technical expertise from the reader, because each readable chapter revolves around one simple internal contradiction inherent in the public story. "If Jones says ‘P’ and Smith says ‘Not P’, we can all recognize that something must be wrong, because both statements cannot be true."

Many who have doubted the official story have offered alternative theories which have been dismissed as "conspiracy theories" by a press which must understandably place a high value on its credibility.
However, this book offers no alternative theories to explain the contradictions within the public story. It simply presents the glaring contradictions that have never been probed by Congress or the media, and beseeches members of these institutions come to grips with the reality and lead the charge for a truly independent investigation.

The 9/11 issue is six years old, journalists are busy people, and the world has moved on.
Though six years have passed, this matter is by no means closed, nor is the trail cold. "The accepted story about 9/11 has been used to increase military spending, justify wars, restrict civil liberties, and exalt the executive branch of the government." Indeed, this reviewer notes, the public story has recently been challenged in foreign forums (Japan Parliament, January 10, 2008, and at the European Parliament building in Brussels, February 26, 2008). The 9/11 Commissioners themselves have cast doubt on the credibility of the Commission Report in their January 2, 2008 New York Times article, "Stonewalled by the CIA." (Ref. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html)

Let us now turn to the contradictions. But first, to quote Professor Griffin:

"Within the philosophy of science, there are two basic criteria for discriminating between good and bad theories. First, a theory should not be inconsistent with any of the relevant facts....Second, it must be self-consistent, devoid of any internal contradictions. If a theory contains an internal contradiction, it is an unacceptable theory."

..more..

[Echo In Light]

30. Thanks for posting