9/11 Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson

newsviewsnolose@yahoogroups.com on behalf of dick.mcmanus

9/11 Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson

April 1, 2008

According to this story, Solicitor General Ted Olson reported that his wife had "called him twice on a cell phone from American Airlines Flight 77," saying that "all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers. The only weapons she mentioned were knives and cardboard cutters."

Olson's contradicts himself

American Airlines contradicts Olson's second version of his story

Olson's story contradicted by the FBI - The evidence presented at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui in 2006, the alleged so-called 20^th hijacker, included a report on phone calls from all four 9/11 flights. The evidence, an FBI report, attributed only one call to Barbara Olson and it was an "unconnected call," which lasted "0 seconds." According to the FBI, therefore, Ted Olson did not receive a single call from his wife using either a cell phone or an onboard phone.

The fact that Ted Olson's report has been contradicted provides grounds for demanding a new investigation of 9/11.

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8514

US Attorney General hints US had attack warning before 9/11

March 28, 2008: In his recent speech at San Francisco's Commonwealth Club, Attorney General Michael Mukasey defended the Bush-Cheney administration's illegal domestic spying agenda by proclaiming that the 9/11 attacks could have been prevented if the government had been able to monitor overseas phone calls to the United States.

According to Mukasey, Bush-Cheney "knew there had been a call from some place that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went.

Mukasey did not explain why the government, if it knew of telephone calls from suspected foreign terrorists, hadn't monitored all such calls without a warrant for 72 hours as allowed by law. Or explain why the government hadn't sought a wiretapping warrant from the FICA court to authorize terrorist surveillance. He also did not get specific about the call to which he referred.

The Justice Department did not respond to a request for more information.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/03/29/mukasey/print.html

DoJ TORTURE MEMO failed to follow the CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM, a violation of a Presidential Executive Order

April 3, 2008: The Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel memo dated March 14, 2003 on interrogation of enemy combatants that was declassified this week "exemplifies the political abuse of classification authority," Secrecy News suggested yesterday. J. William Leonard, the nation's top classification oversight official from 2002-2007, concurred.

"The disappointment I feel with respect to the abuse of the classification system in this instance is profound," said Mr. Leonard, who recently retired as director of the Information Security Oversight Office, which reports to the President on classification and declassification policy.

The document in question is purely a legal analysis," he said, and it contains "nothing which would justify classification."

"It is not even apparent that [John] Yoo [who authored the memo] had original classification authority," Mr. Leonard said.

NOTE: Per EXECUTIVE ORDER 13292 dated March 25,2003 only specific U.S. government officials like agency heads and officials designated by the President in the Federal Register; with specific rank may classify information (documents, etc.) at various classification levels.

That is, levels such as confidential, secret, and top secret.

I find it interesting that the Vice President has been given the original classification authority "in the performance of executive duties" in this March 2003 Executive Order.

I find this HIGHLY UNUSUAL, given that the chain of command for our U.S. executive branch's, department secretaries or agencies are under the President, not the Vice President. I suspect this Executive Order 13292 was changed or supersedes previous EOs to add the Vice President. I think this is unconstitutional because the VP has no executive duties until the President dies.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 13292 see: http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html

From a secrecy policy point of view, the document itself exemplifies the political abuse of classification authority. Though it was classified at the Secret level, nothing in the document could possibly pose a threat to national security, particularly since it is presented as an interpretation of law rather than an operational plan. Instead, it seems self-evident that the legal memorandum was classified not to protect national security but to evade unwanted public controversy.

What is arguably worse is that for years there was no oversight mechanism, in Congress or elsewhere, that was capable of identifying and correcting this abuse of secrecy authority.

Had the ACLU not challenged the withholding of the document in court, it would undoubtedly remain inaccessible.) Consequently, one must assume similar abuses of classification are prevalent.

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States - Justified Warrantless Surveillance

03 April 2008: In a footnote of the above noted secret memo states, "Our office recently concluded that the Fourth Amendment (right against seach and seizure without probable cause) had no application to domestic military operations," referring to a Justice department titled "Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States" dated Oct. 23, 2001.

For at least 16 months after the Sept. 11 terror attacks in 2001, the Bush administration believed that the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures on U.S. soil didn't apply to its efforts to protect against terrorism.

Exactly what domestic military action was covered by the October memo is unclear. But federal documents indicate that the memo relates to the National Security Agency's Terrorist Surveillance Program, or TSP.

That program intercepted phone calls and e-mails on U.S. soil, bypassing the normal legal requirement that such eavesdropping be authorized by a secret federal court. The program began after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and continued until Jan. 17, 2007, when the White House resumed seeking surveillance warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/040308J.shtml

Irregular Warfare (IW), Strategic Communications; Information Operations (IO)? against state and non-state adversaries in future protracted regional, multi-regional and global engagements/campaigns.

Military Study: Secretly 'Recruit or Hire Bloggers' 31 Mar 2008

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/03/report-recruit.html

A study, written for U.S. Special Operations Command, suggested "clandestinely recruiting or hiring prominent bloggers." ...A 2006 report for the Joint Special Operations University, "Blogs and Military Information Strategy,"

http://cryptome.org/ then link to

http://cryptome.org/covert-blogs.zip

offers a third approach -- co-opting bloggers, or even putting them on the payroll. "Hiring a block of bloggers to verbally attack a specific person or promote a specific message may be worth considering," write the report's co-authors, James Kinniburgh and Dorothy Denning.

NOTE: It appears neo-con Leaders in our military know that blogges are having a great deal of influance on the views of the American people toward the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for oil.

One example is the speed at which the truth about 9/11 has been coming out. This possible false flag operation to get us into illegal wars.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes. MY NEWSLETTER has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is MY NEWSLETTER endorsed or sponsored by the originator.

Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may read this email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse or protection and everything you type may be used against you to detain you in a secret prison.