Obama is NOT in power. Neither are the democrats. The country is still run by the same people that have been running it since the end of WWII - the money behind the mercenary lobbyists on 'K' street.
-Joe
Newly released documents suggest Saudi royal family funded 9/11 hijackers
- Thread starter Paulie
- Start date
Obama is NOT in power. Neither are the democrats. The country is still run by the same people that have been running it since the end of WWII - the money behind the mercenary lobbyists on 'K' street.
-Joe
neurosport
Rookie
- Banned
- #42
i wasn't talking about WORDS but ACTIONS
Obama didn't pull out of Iraq
he EXPANDED the mission in Afghanistan
and now he is overseeing the overthrow of Ahmadinejad in Iran ...
why can't you sheep ever see beyond words ?
Last edited:
txlonghorn
Senior Member
- Mar 9, 2009
- 3,042
- 400
- 48
Hey DUMBASS.. His words ARE his actions. That's all he knows how to do is talk. At least Bush actually backed up his words. Well, Obama is too...he's saying he's sorry and promising to weaken our super power so that we're all on an equal playing field and easier to defeat. You're right about one thing.. he DIDN'T pull out of Iraq...another lie from his election campaign. You might want to read the news about Iran...he isn't being overthrown...he's killing his own people in the streets. He's shutting down media outlets and cell phone systems. He's taking Iran hostage. And he has enough confidence in his position to shoot threats at the U.S. Something he isn't worried about because he knows Obama is a blow hard with no intentions of doing anything but spew alot of rhetoric BS. I think that pretty much covers seeing beyond his words (or BS..whichever term you prefer).
txlonghorn
Senior Member
- Mar 9, 2009
- 3,042
- 400
- 48
We wouldn't be in this mess if the democrat sheep COULD see beyond Obama's lies. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and that's all he had to run on...he wanted to change the world and make it a better place. He just didn't know it was going to be hard. He thought he could smooth talk his way through this.
txlonghorn
Senior Member
- Mar 9, 2009
- 3,042
- 400
- 48
ok, joe. that's good to kow. But you might want to tell Nancy Pelosi and the president about it. They are making some pretty powerful moves lately.
eots
no fly list
lol..ok..this is satire..right ?
manu1959
Left Coast Isolationist
and this surprises you.....
neurosport
Rookie
- Banned
- #48
you are hopelessly lost.
you don't have the slightest clue as to what politics are at all about.
i'll give you a hint though - it's not what the media says so you may wanna stop sucking on the corporate media pacifier.
for a 100th time fuckheads politicians don't "fail" because they are "stupid". politicians always "fail" for the same reason - because they never try in the first place. that's why they "fail" 100% of the time.
if somebody "fails" to give you what you want then you are the one who is stupid. the other person just doesn't give a fuck about you. politicians play dumb and the lap dog media is only too happy to play along because they get good ratings when they call politicians idiots.
how can you be so fucking stupid to think that Obama would actually tell you what he really wants ? my guess is what he wants he will get. then once he gets it he will come out and say " i am so sorry people, i didn't know this was going to be the result ! "
kinda like Tony Blair was crying and apologizing for Iraq saying he thought it was for the best. YEAH RIGHT !
Last edited:
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
A little, but mostly women and children.
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
2+2=3?...2+2=5?...2+2=????....Ah hell, I don't know, it equals what ever they say it does.
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
Remember that NIST report? NIST officials involved with nano-thermites (Dial-up Warning) - Democratic Underground
The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites
By Kevin R. Ryan
Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? NIST did not test for the
residue of these compounds in the steel.
NIST Responses to FAQs, August 2006
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has had considerable
difficulty determining a politically correct sequence of events for the unprecedented
destruction of three World Trade Center (WTC) buildings on 9/11 (Douglas 2006, Ryan
2006, Gourley 2007). But despite a number of variations in NISTs story, it never
considered explosives or pyrotechnic materials in any of its hypotheses. This omission is
at odds with several other striking facts; first, the requirement of the national standard for
fire investigation (NFPA 921), which calls for testing related to thermite and other
pyrotechnics, and second, the extensive experience NIST investigators have with
explosive and thermite materials.
Microscopic iron spheres found in the dust of WTC that are
formed in the presence of extreme heat and pressure.
One of the most intriguing aspects of NISTs diversionary posture has been their total
lack of interest in explosive or pyrotechnic features in their explanations. Despite the
substantial evidence for the use of explosives at the WTC (Jones 2006, Legge and
Szamboti 2007), and the extensive expertise in explosives among NIST investigators
(Ryan 2007), explosives were never considered in the NIST WTC investigation. Only
after considerable criticism of this fact did NIST deign to add one small disclaimer to
their final report on the towers, suggesting they found no evidence for explosives.
The extensive evidence that explosives were used at the WTC includes witness testimony
(MacQueen 2006), overwhelming physical evidence (Griffin 2005, Hoffman et al 2005,
Jones and Legge et al 2008) and simple common sense (Legge 2007). There is also
substantial evidence that aluminothermic (thermite) materials were present at the WTC
(Jones 2007), and the presence of such materials can explain the existence of intense fire
where it would not otherwise have existed. Additionally, despite agreement from all
parties that the assumed availability of fuel allowed for the fires in any given location of
each of the WTC buildings to last only twenty minutes (NIST 2007), the fires lasted
much longer and produced extreme temperatures (Jones and Farrer et al 2008).
These inexplicable fires are a reminder that the WTC buildings were not simply
demolished, but were demolished in a deceptive way. That is, the buildings were brought
down so as to make it look like the impact of the planes and the resulting fires might have
caused their unprecedented, symmetrical destruction. Therefore, shaped charges and
other typical explosive configurations were likely used, but there was more to it than that.
Those committing the crimes needed to create fire where it would not have existed
otherwise, and draw attention toward the part of the buildings where the planes impacted
(or in the case of WTC 7, away from the building altogether).
This was most probably accomplished through the use of nano-thermites, which are hightech
energetic materials made by mixing ultra fine grain (UFG) aluminum and UFG
metal oxides; usually iron oxide, molybdenum oxide or copper oxide, although other
compounds can be used (Prakash 2005, Rai 2005). The mixing is accomplished by
adding these reactants to a liquid solution where they form what are called sols, and
then adding a gelling agent that captures these tiny reactive combinations in their
intimately mixed state (LLNL 2000). The resulting sol-gel is then dried to form a
porous reactive material that can be ignited in a number of ways.
The high surface area of the reactants within energetic sol-gels allows for the far higher
rate of energy release than is seen in macro thermite mixtures, making nano-thermites
high explosives as well as pyrotechnic materials (Tillitson et al 1999). Sol-gel nanothermites,
are often called energetic nanocomposites, metastable intermolecular
composites (MICs) or superthermite (COEM 2004, Son et al 2007), and silica is often
used to create the porous, structural framework (Clapsaddle et al 2004, Zhao et al 2004).
Nano-thermites have also been made with RDX (Pivkina et al 2004), and with
thermoplastic elastomers (Diaz et al 2003). But it is important to remember that, despite
the name, nano-thermites pack a much bigger punch than typical thermite materials.
It turns out that explosive, sol-gel nano-thermites were developed by US government
scientists, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (LLNL) (Tillitson et al 1998,
Gash et al 2000, Gash et al 2002). These LLNL scientists reported that --
The sol-gel process is very amenable to dip-, spin-, and spray-coating
technologies to coat surfaces. We have utilized this property to dip-coat various
substrates to make sol-gel Fe,O,/ Al / Viton coatings. The energetic coating dries
to give a nice adherent film. Preliminary experiments indicate that films of the
hybrid material are self-propagating when ignited by thermal stimulus
(Gash et al 2002).
The amazing correlation between floors of impact and floors of apparent failure suggests
that spray-on nano-thermite materials may have been applied to the steel components of
the WTC buildings, underneath the upgraded fireproofing (Ryan 2008). This could have
been done in such a way that very few people knew what was happening. The Port
Authoritys engineering consultant Buro Happold, helping with evaluation of the
fireproofing upgrades, suggested the use of alternative materials (NIST 2005). Such
alternative materials could have been spray-on nano-thermites substituted for intumescent
paint or Interchar-like fireproofing primers (NASA 2006). It seems quite possible that
this kind of substitution could have been made with few people noticing.
Regardless of how thermite materials were installed in the WTC, it is strange that NIST
has been so blind to any such possibility. In fact, when reading NISTs reports on the
WTC, and its periodic responses to FAQs from the public, one might get the idea that no
one in the NIST organization had ever heard of nano-thermites before. But the truth is,
many of the scientists and organizations involved in the NIST WTC investigation were not
only well aware of nano-thermites, they actually had considerable connection to, and in
some cases expertise in, this exact technology.
Here are the top ten reasons why nano-thermites, and nano-thermite coatings, should
have come to mind quickly for the NIST WTC investigators.
1. NIST was working with LLNL to test and characterize these sol-gel nanothermites,
at least as early as 1999 (Tillitson et al 1999).
2. Forman Williams, the lead engineer on NISTs advisory committee, and the most
prominent engineering expert for Popular Mechanics, is an expert on the
deflagration of energetic materials and the ignition of porous energetic
materials(Margolis and Williams 1996, Telengator et al 1998, Margolis and
Williams 1999). Nano-thermites are porous energetic materials. Additionally,
Williams research partner, Stephen Margolis, has presented at conferences where
nano-energetics are the focus (Gordon 1999). Some of Williams other
colleagues at the University of California San Diego, like David J. Benson, are
also experts on nano-thermite materials (Choi et al 2005, Jordan et al 2007).
3. Science Applications International (SAIC) is the DOD and Homeland Security
contractor that supplied the largest contingent of non-governmental investigators
to the NIST WTC investigation. SAIC has extensive links to nano-thermites,
developing and judging nano-thermite research proposals for the military and
other military contractors, and developing and formulating nano-thermites
directly (Army 2008, DOD 2007). SAICs subsidiary Applied Ordnance
Technology has done research on the ignition of nanothermites with lasers
(Howard et al 2005).
In an interesting coincidence, SAIC was the firm that investigated the 1993 WTC
bombing, boasting that -- After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, our blast
analyses produced tangible results that helped identify those responsible (SAIC
2004). And the coincidences with this company dont stop there, as SAIC was
responsible for evaluating the WTC for terrorism risks in 1986 as well (CRHC
2008). SAIC is also linked to the late 1990s security upgrades at the WTC, the
Rudy Giuliani administration, and the anthrax incidents after 9/11, through former
employees Jerome Hauer and Steven Hatfill.
4. Arden Bement, the metallurgist and expert on fuels and materials who was
nominated as director of NIST by President George W. Bush in October 2001,
was former deputy secretary of defense, former director of DARPAs office of
materials science, and former executive at TRW.
Of course, DOD and DARPA are both leaders in the production and use of nanothermites
(Amptiac 2002, DOD 2005). And military and aerospace contractor
TRW has had a long collaboration with NASA laboratories in the development of
energetic materials that are components of advanced propellants, like nano-gelled
explosive materials (NASA 2001). TRW Aeronautics also made fireproof
composites and high performance elastomer formulations, and worked with
NASA to make energetic aerogels.
Additionally, Bement was a professor at Purdue and MIT. Purdue has a thriving
program for nano-thermites (Son 2008). And interestingly, at MITs Institute for
Soldier Nanotechnology, we find Martin Z. Bazant, son of notable conspiracy
debunker Zdenek P. Bazant (MIT 2008), who does research on granular flows,
and the electrochemical interactions of silicon. Zdenek P. Bazant is interested in
nanocomposites as well (Northwestern 2008), and how they relate to naval
warfare (ONR 2008). MIT was represented at nano-energetics conferences as
early as 1998 (Gordon 1998).
Bement was also a director at both Battelle and the Lord Corporation. Battelle
(where the anthrax was made) is an organization of experts in fundamental
technologies from the five National Laboratories we manage or co-manage for the
US DOE. Battelle advertises their specialization in nanocomposite coatings
(Battelle 2008). The Lord Corporation also makes high-tech coatings for military
applications (Lord 2008). In 1999, Lord Corp was working with the Army and
NASA on advanced polymer composites, advanced metals, and multifunctional
materials (Army 1999).
5. Hratch Semerjian, long-time director of NISTs chemical division, was promoted
to acting director of NIST in November 2004, and took over the WTC
investigation until the completion of the report on the towers. Semerjian is
closely linked to former NIST employee Michael Zachariah, perhaps the worlds
most prominent expert on nano-thermites (Zachariah 2008). In fact, Semerjian
and Zachariah co-authored ten papers that focus on nano-particles made of silica,
ceramics and refractory particles. Zachariah was a major player in the Defense
University Research Initiative on Nanotechnology (DURINT), a groundbreaking
research effort for nano-thermites.
6. NIST has a long-standing partnership with NASA for the development of new
nano-thermites and other nano-technological materials. In fact, Michael
Zachariah coordinates this partnership (CNMM 2008).
7. In 2003, two years before the NIST WTC report was issued, the University of
Maryland College Park (UMCP) and NIST signed a memorandum of
understanding to develop nano-technologies like nano-thermites (NIST 2003).
Together, NIST and UMCP have done much work on nano-thermites (NM2
2008).
8. NIST has their own Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST 2008).
Additionally, NISTs Reactive Flows Group did research on nanostructured
materials and high temperature reactions in the mid-nineties (NRFG 1996).
9. Richard Gann, who did the final editing of the NIST WTC report, managed a
project called Next-Generation Fire Suppression Technology Program, both
before and after 9/11. Andrzej Miziolek, another of the worlds leading experts
on nano-thermites (Amptiac 2002), is the author of Defense Applications of
Nanomaterials, and also worked on Richard Ganns fire suppression project
(Gann 2002). Ganns project was sponsored by DODs Strategic Environmental
Research and Development Program (SERDP), an organization that sponsored a
number of LLNLs nano-thermite projects (Simpson 2002, Gash et al 2003).
10. As part of the Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer, NIST
partners with the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Indian Head (NSWC-IH) on
Chemical Science and Technology (FLCTT 2008). NSWC-IH is probably the
most prominent US center for nano-thermite technology (NSWC 2008). In 1999,
Jan Puszynski, a scientist working for the DURINT program, helped NSWC-IH
design a pilot plant to produce nano-size aluminum powder. It was reported that
At that time, this was only reliable source of aluminum nanopowders in the
United States (SDSMT 2001), however, private companies like Argonide and
Technanogy were also known to have such capabilities.
Among an interesting group of contractors that NSWC-IH hired in 1999 were
SAIC, Applied Ordnance, Battelle, Booz Allen Hamilton, Mantech, Titan, Pacific
Scientific Energetic (see below), and R Stresau Laboratories for demolition
materials (NSWC 2000).
A tragic coincidence left William Caswell, an employee of NSWC-IH, dead on
the plane said to have hit the Pentagon (Flight 77). He had for many years
worked on deep-black projects at NSWC-IH (Leaf 2007).
The presence of Pacific Scientific Energetics (PSE) in this list of 1999 NSWC-IH
contractors is interesting because PSE was the parent company of Special Devices, Inc
(SDI). SDI specializes in explosives for defense, aerospace and mining applications, and
was acquired in 1998 by John Lehman, 9/11 Commissioner, member of the Project for a
New American Century, and former Secretary of the Navy (SDI 2008). Lehman divested
in 2001.
With this in mind, it is worthwhile to reiterate that nano-thermite materials were very
likely used in the deceptive demolition of the WTC buildings, but most certainly played
only a part in the plan. However, other high-tech explosives were available to those who
had access to nano-thermite materials at the time. Like SDI, several other organizations
with links to military, space and intelligence programs (e.g. In-Q-Tel, Orbital Science)
have access to many types of high-tech explosives to cut high-strength bolts and produce
pyrotechnic events (Goldstein 2006). These organizations also have connections to those
who could have accessed the buildings, like WTC tenant Marsh & McLennan and former
NASA administrator and Securacom director, James Abrahamson.
In any case, it is important for those seeking the truth about 9/11 to consider what
organizations and people had access to the technologies that were used to accomplish the
deceptive demolition of the WTC buildings. It is also important to recognize the links
between those who had access to the technologies, those who had access to the buildings,
and those who produced the clearly false official reports.
To that end we should note that NIST had considerable connections to nano-thermites,
both before and during the WTC investigation. It is therefore inexplicable why NIST did
not consider such materials as an explanation for the fires that burned on 9/11, and long
afterward at Ground Zero. This fact would not be inexplicable, of course, if those
managing the NIST investigation knew to not look, or test, for such materials.
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yx9NRX37SM]YouTube - Loose Change 2nd Edition (Full)[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_q6j6BZkHQ]YouTube - Painful Deceptions (Part 1)[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nVEQuWpaCE]YouTube - Improbable Collapse - PART 1 of 7[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-YqET96OO0]YouTube - Zero: An Investigation Into 9-11 - part 1[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwayjX4ipFc]YouTube - 911 Mysteries (Part 1 of 10)[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Odp1FO0Vmuw]YouTube - 9/11 Coincidences (Part One)[/ame]
Michael’s Blog » Nano-Thermite
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_q6j6BZkHQ]YouTube - Painful Deceptions (Part 1)[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nVEQuWpaCE]YouTube - Improbable Collapse - PART 1 of 7[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-YqET96OO0]YouTube - Zero: An Investigation Into 9-11 - part 1[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwayjX4ipFc]YouTube - 911 Mysteries (Part 1 of 10)[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Odp1FO0Vmuw]YouTube - 9/11 Coincidences (Part One)[/ame]
Michael’s Blog » Nano-Thermite
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRlVjVlmRZo]YouTube - Mind Control in America[/ame]
Mind Control: America's Secret War
History Channel - Mind Control - America's Secret War on Yahoo! Video
The Army's Totally Serious Mind-Control Project - TIME
Mind Control: America's Secret War
History Channel - Mind Control - America's Secret War on Yahoo! Video
The Army's Totally Serious Mind-Control Project - TIME
Every puppet has its strings. As much as I like my job and the people I work with, if they didn't give me money - I wouldn't go.
-Joe
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
We want truthful answers to questions such as:
Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?
Why has Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who claims to have knowledge of advance warnings, been publicly silenced with a gag order requested by Attorney General Ashcroft and granted by a Bush-appointed judge?
How could Flight 77, which reportedly hit the Pentagon, have flown back towards Washington D.C. for 40 minutes without being detected by the FAA's radar or the even superior radar possessed by the US military?
How were the FBI and CIA able to release the names and photos of the alleged hijackers within hours, as well as to visit houses, restaurants, and flight schools they were known to frequent?
What happened to the over 20 documented warnings given our government by 14 foreign intelligence agencies or heads of state?
Why did the Bush administration cover up the fact that the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency was in Washington the week of 9/11 and reportedly had $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, considered the ringleader of the hijackers?
Why did the 911 Commission fail to address most of the questions posed by the families of the victims, in addition to almost all of the questions posed here?
Why was Philip Zelikow chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice?
Those who are demanding deeper inquiry now number in the hundreds of thousands, including a former member of the first Bush administration, a retired Air Force colonel, a European parliamentarian, families of the victims, highly respected authors, investigative journalists, peace and justice leaders, former Pentagon staff, and the National Green Party.
As Americans of conscience, we ask for four things:
An immediate investigation by New York Attorney General.
Immediate investigation in Congressional Hearings.
Media attention to scrutinize and investigate the evidence.
The formation of a truly independent citizens-based inquiry.
Given the importance of the coming election, we feel it is imperative that these questions be addressed publicly, honestly, and rigorously so that Americans may exercise their democratic rights with full awareness.
In closing, we pray and hope for the strength to approach this subject with wisdom and compassion so that we may heal from the wounds inflicted on that terrible day.
Signed,
Signatories
Note: All organizations are mentioned for identification purposes only. Individuals have signed this statement as an act of their own conscience, not to signify organizational endorsement.
Virginia Deane Abernethy, Ph.D., anthropologist, author, Population Politics
Ed Asner, actor, activist
Marshall Auerback, international portfolio strategist for David W. Tice & Associates, Inc.
Catherine Austin Fitts, Asst. Secretary of Housing in the first Bush administration
Keidi Obi Awadu, aka The Conscious Rasta, talk show host, LIBRadio
Michael Badnarik, Libertarian candidate for President
Byron Belitsos, publisher, Origin Press, author Planetary Democracy
Philip J. Berg, Esquire, former deputy attorney general, Pennsylvania
Medea Benjamin, activist, author, co-founder, Global Exchange and Code Pink
Dennis Bernstein, investigative reporter, radio host of KPFA's Flashpoints
Steve Bhaerman aka Swami Beyondananda, author, political comedian
Brad Blanton, Ph.D., psychotherapist, author, Radical Honesty
Saniel Bonder, spiritual teacher and author, Great Relief
Dr. Robert Bowman, USAF Lt. Col. (Rtd.), founder, Institute for Space and Security Studies
John Buchanan, author, candidate for the Republican Party Presidential nomination, 2004
Gray Brechin, Ph.D., author, environmental historian, professor, UC Berkeley
Fred Burks, presidential interpreter for Bush, Clinton, Cheney, and Gore
Norma Carr-Rufino, Ph.D., author, professor of management, San Francisco State University
Angana Chatterji, Ph.D., scholar-activist and professor of anthropology
Paul Cienfuegos, co-founder, Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County
David Cobb, attorney, national presidential candidate, US Green Party
John Cobb, Ph.D., theologian, co-author, For the Common Good
Ernest Callenbach, founder/editor, Film Quarterly, author, Ecotopia
Kevin Danaher, Ph.D., author, speaker, co-founder, Global Exchange
Stephen Dinan, author, Radical Spirit
Ronnie Dugger, journalist/author, co-founder, Alliance for Democracy
Daniel Ellsberg, author, Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers
Jodie Evans, co-founder, Code Pink
Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus of International Law, Princeton University
Michael Franti, musician, filmmaker, human rights worker
Janeane Garofalo, actress, comedienne, talk show host, Air America Radio
Jim Garrison, Ph.D., president, State of the World Forum, author, America as Empire
Bruce Gagnon, Chair, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
Ric Giardina, author, consultant, speaker, former Director of Trademarks and Brands for Intel
John Gray, Ph.D., #1 bestselling author, Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus
Stan Goff, 25-year Army Special Ops veteran, author, Full Spectrum Disorder
Melvin Goodman, senior fellow, Center for International Policy, author, former Senior Analyst, CIA, professor, National War College
Morton Goulder, Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter
David Ray Griffin, Ph.D., theologian, author, New Pearl Harbor
Doris "Granny D" Haddock, campaign finance crusader, NH Democratic candidate for Senate
Thom Hartmann, radio host; author, Unequal Protection
Richie Havens, singer, songwriter, performer, artist
Paul Hawken, bestselling author, environmentalist, entrepreneur, founder of Smith & Hawken
Randy Hayes, founder, Rainforest Action Network, US National Director, Direction Conservation
Richard Heinberg, author, The Party's Over, core faculty, New College of California
Van Jones, executive director, Ella Baker Center for Human Rights
Rob Kall, editor, OpEdNews.com, president, Futurehealth, Inc.
Georgia Kelly, executive director, Praxis Peace Institute
Sean Kelly, Ph.D., author, professor of philosophy and religion, CA Institute of Integral Studies
John Joseph Kennedy, Democratic Write-in Presidential Candidate for 2004
Mimi Kennedy, actress, Dharma and Greg, progressive activist
Faiz Khan, M.D., Triage Emergency Physician on 9/11, Assistant Imam
David Korten, author, When Corporations Rule the World
Frances Moore Lapp?, author, Diet for a Small Planet; founder, Small Planet Institute
Scott M. Legere, 25 year radio broadcaster as Scott Ledger, Tampa FL
Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor, TIKKUN Magazine, author, Healing Israel/Palestine
Michael Levine, bestselling author of Deep Cover, journalist, 25-year veteran of the DEA
Joanna Macy, Ph.D., eco-philosopher, author
Enver Masud, founder, The Wisdom Fund, author, The Truth About Islam
John McCarthy, former Special Forces Captain, president, Veterans Equal Rights Protection Advocacy
Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst, co-founder, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
Cynthia McKinney, five-term Congresswoman from Georgia
Ralph Metzner, Ph.D., author, professor, co-founder, Green Earth Foundation
Mark Crispin Miller, media critic, author, professor, New York University
Joseph W. Montaperto, New York City Fire Department
Leuren Moret, geoscientist, radiation specialist, environmental commissioner
Ralph Nader, Independent candidate for President
Craig Neal, author, co-founder, The Heartland Institute, former publisher, Utne Reader
Jeff Norman, executive director, Tour of Duty
Jenna Orkin, Esquire, World Trade Center Environmental Organization
Kelly Patricia O'Meara, investigative journalist, public relations
Michael Parenti, Ph.D., author, Superpatriotism and The Terrorism Trap
Edward L. Peck, former US Ambassador and Chief of Mission to Iraq, former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism
Peter Phillips, Ph.D., professor, Sonoma State University, director, Project Censored
Henri Poole, Internet pioneer, board member, Free Software Foundation
Robert Rabbin, author, speaker, creator of TruthForPresident.org
Paul H. Ray, Ph.D., sociologist, author, The Cultural Creatives
John Renesch, business futurist, author, Getting to the Better Future
John Rensenbrink, professor emeritus, Bowdoin College, co-founder, US Green Party
John Robbins, author, founder, EarthSave International
William Rodriguez, 9/11 rescue effort hero, founder, Hispanic Victims Group
Neal Rogin, Emmy-award winning writer, performer, social observer
Allen Roland, Ph.D., psychotherapist, published author and peace activist
Rosemary Radford Ruether, professor of feminist theology, Graduate Theological Union
Michael Ruppert, publisher/editor, From The Wilderness, author, Crossing the Rubicon
Chris Sanders, founder, Sanders Research Associates
Karl W. B. Schwarz, President, CEO, Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC
Peter Dale Scott, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, author, Drugs, Oil, and War
Firefighter Kevin Shea, FDNY Hazmat Operations
Michelle Shocked, singer/songwriter, activist
Indira Singh, risk management and computer systems consultant
J. Michael Springmann, attorney, former Foreign Service Officer, US Department of State
Douglas Sturm, Ph.D., university professor emeritus, Bucknell University
Marjorie Hewit Suchocki, Ph.D., theologian, author
Chuck Turner, Boston City Council
James W. Walter Jr., venture investor, philanthropist, founder of Walden Three
Dan Whaley, E-commerce pioneer, founder of GetThere.com, acquired for $750M
Burns H. Weston, J.S.D., Professor of Law Emeritus, Director, Center for Human Rights, U-Iowa
Howard Zinn, professor, historian, author, A People's History of the United States
Family Members
Joanne Barbara, wife of FDNY Asst. Chief of Dept. Gerard Barbara
Gayle Barker, sister of William A. Karnes, WTC
Michele Bergsohn, wife of Alvin Bergsohn, Cantor Fitzgerald
Derrill Bodley, father of Deora Bodley, passenger on Flight 93
Kathryn C. Bowden, sister of Thomas H. Bowden, Jr. WTC1, 104th floor
Janet Calia, wife of Dominick Calia, Cantor Fitzgerald, WTC1
Maggie Cashman, wife of William Joseph Cashman, United Flight 93
Lynne Castrianno Galante, sister of Leonard Castrianno, 1WTC, 105th floor
Elza Chapa-McGowan, daughter of Rosemary Chapa, Pentagon
Bruce De Cell, father-in-law of Mark Petrocelli North Tower, 92nd floor
Ralph D'Esposito, father of Michael D'Esposito, WTC, 96th floor
Loisanne Diehl, Surviving Spouse, Michael D. Diehl, WTC2, 90th floor
Adina D. Eisenberg, sister of Eric Eisenberg, WTC
Jonathan M. Fisher, son of Dr. Gerald Paul "Geep" Fisher, Pentagon
Michael J. Fox, brother of Jeffrey L. Fox, Tower 2, 89th floor
Laurel A. Gay, sister of Peter A. Gay, AA Flight 11
Irene Golinsky, wife of Col. Ronald F. Golinski USA RET, Pentagon
Lori, Jerry, and Beatrice Guadagno, sister and parents of Richard Guadagno, Flight 93
Kristen Hall, daughter of fallen firefighter Thomas Kuveikis 9/11
Kurt D. Horning, father of Matthew D. Horning, WTC Tower One, 95th floor
Jennifer W. Hunt, wife of William C. Hunt, Euro Brokers
John Keating, son of Barbara Keating, passenger on AA Flight 11
L. Russell Keene II, father of Russ Keene III, WTC2, 89th floor, KBW
Peter Kousoulis, sister died in WTC
Paul & Barbara Kirwin, parents of Glenn Davis Kirwin, Cantor Fitzgerald 105th floor
Barbara Krukowski-Rastelli, mother of William E. Krukowski, NYC firefighter
Laura and Ira Lassman, parents of Nicholas C. Lassman, died in WTC, Tower One
Johnny Lee, husband of Lorraine Greene
Alicia LeGuillow, mother of Nestor A. Cintron III
Francine Levine, sister of Adam K. Ruhalter, who died on 9/11
Bob McIlvaine, father of Robert McIlvaine, WTC, Merrill Lynch
Mary McWilliams, mother of FF Martin E. McWilliams- Engine 22
Daryl J. Meehan, brother of Colleen Ann Barkow, WTC 1, 105th floor
Elvira P. Murphy, wife of Patrick Murphy, WTC 1
Natalee Pecorelli, sister of Thomas Pecorelli of Flight 11
James L Perry, M.D and Patricia J. Perry, parents of John W. Perry, Esq., NYPD Officer 9/11
David Potorti, brother of James Potorti, North Tower, WTC, Marsh & McLennan
Terry Kay Rockefeller, sister of Laura Rockefeller, North Tower, WTC
Grissel Rodriguez-Valentin, wife of Benito Valentin, WTC1, 94th floor
Alissa Rosenberg-Torres, widow of Luis Eduardo Torres, post-9/11 mother, writer
Elaine Saber, mother of Scott Saber
Julie Scarpitta, mother of Michelle Scarpitta, WTC Building 2, 84th floor
Paula Shapiro, mother of Eric Eisenberg, WTC2
Elizabeth Turner, wife of Simon Turner, lost on 11th September 2001
Adele Welty, mother of Firefighter Timothy Welty, FDNY, Squad 288
Joan W. Winton, mother of David Winton, WTC, South Tower, 89th floor
David Yancey, husband of Vicki Yancey, American Airlines Flight 77
Nissa Youngren, daughter of Robert G. LeBlanc, flight 175
Late Signatories (starting toward 200...)
Rita M. Haley, President, National Organization for Women, New York Chapter
Immortal Technique, Harlem-based hip-hop artist with Viper Records, Revolutionary I&II
Bob Kirkconnell, served in the U.S. Air Force 27 years, reaching the rank of Master Sergeant
Dennis Kyne, former Army air medic, 18th Airborne Corps during Gulf War I, musician, author, "Support the Truth"
Paul Landis, author, "Stop Bush Now!"
Eric H. May, former Army military intelligence officer and media essayist
Charles Shaw, Editor, Newtopia Magazine, National Peace Action Coordinator, National Green Party
Peter Erlinder, professor, William Mitchell College of Law, past-President National Lawyers Guild
Daniel Robert Rezac, 2004 Vice-Presidential Write-In Candidate, former Aviator & Armor Officer, Army National Guard, B.S.B.A.
Joel Horwitz, lost beloved cousin in WTC 1
Jessica Murrow, lost husband Stephen Adams, Beverage Manager, Windows on the World, WTC 1
Ellen Mariani, lost husband Neil on Flight 175
Jean Hunt, disabled survivor of Pentagon attack
Ralph & Brigitte Sabbag, lost son Jason in WTC 2
Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?
Why has Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who claims to have knowledge of advance warnings, been publicly silenced with a gag order requested by Attorney General Ashcroft and granted by a Bush-appointed judge?
How could Flight 77, which reportedly hit the Pentagon, have flown back towards Washington D.C. for 40 minutes without being detected by the FAA's radar or the even superior radar possessed by the US military?
How were the FBI and CIA able to release the names and photos of the alleged hijackers within hours, as well as to visit houses, restaurants, and flight schools they were known to frequent?
What happened to the over 20 documented warnings given our government by 14 foreign intelligence agencies or heads of state?
Why did the Bush administration cover up the fact that the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency was in Washington the week of 9/11 and reportedly had $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, considered the ringleader of the hijackers?
Why did the 911 Commission fail to address most of the questions posed by the families of the victims, in addition to almost all of the questions posed here?
Why was Philip Zelikow chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice?
Those who are demanding deeper inquiry now number in the hundreds of thousands, including a former member of the first Bush administration, a retired Air Force colonel, a European parliamentarian, families of the victims, highly respected authors, investigative journalists, peace and justice leaders, former Pentagon staff, and the National Green Party.
As Americans of conscience, we ask for four things:
An immediate investigation by New York Attorney General.
Immediate investigation in Congressional Hearings.
Media attention to scrutinize and investigate the evidence.
The formation of a truly independent citizens-based inquiry.
Given the importance of the coming election, we feel it is imperative that these questions be addressed publicly, honestly, and rigorously so that Americans may exercise their democratic rights with full awareness.
In closing, we pray and hope for the strength to approach this subject with wisdom and compassion so that we may heal from the wounds inflicted on that terrible day.
Signed,
Signatories
Note: All organizations are mentioned for identification purposes only. Individuals have signed this statement as an act of their own conscience, not to signify organizational endorsement.
Virginia Deane Abernethy, Ph.D., anthropologist, author, Population Politics
Ed Asner, actor, activist
Marshall Auerback, international portfolio strategist for David W. Tice & Associates, Inc.
Catherine Austin Fitts, Asst. Secretary of Housing in the first Bush administration
Keidi Obi Awadu, aka The Conscious Rasta, talk show host, LIBRadio
Michael Badnarik, Libertarian candidate for President
Byron Belitsos, publisher, Origin Press, author Planetary Democracy
Philip J. Berg, Esquire, former deputy attorney general, Pennsylvania
Medea Benjamin, activist, author, co-founder, Global Exchange and Code Pink
Dennis Bernstein, investigative reporter, radio host of KPFA's Flashpoints
Steve Bhaerman aka Swami Beyondananda, author, political comedian
Brad Blanton, Ph.D., psychotherapist, author, Radical Honesty
Saniel Bonder, spiritual teacher and author, Great Relief
Dr. Robert Bowman, USAF Lt. Col. (Rtd.), founder, Institute for Space and Security Studies
John Buchanan, author, candidate for the Republican Party Presidential nomination, 2004
Gray Brechin, Ph.D., author, environmental historian, professor, UC Berkeley
Fred Burks, presidential interpreter for Bush, Clinton, Cheney, and Gore
Norma Carr-Rufino, Ph.D., author, professor of management, San Francisco State University
Angana Chatterji, Ph.D., scholar-activist and professor of anthropology
Paul Cienfuegos, co-founder, Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County
David Cobb, attorney, national presidential candidate, US Green Party
John Cobb, Ph.D., theologian, co-author, For the Common Good
Ernest Callenbach, founder/editor, Film Quarterly, author, Ecotopia
Kevin Danaher, Ph.D., author, speaker, co-founder, Global Exchange
Stephen Dinan, author, Radical Spirit
Ronnie Dugger, journalist/author, co-founder, Alliance for Democracy
Daniel Ellsberg, author, Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers
Jodie Evans, co-founder, Code Pink
Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus of International Law, Princeton University
Michael Franti, musician, filmmaker, human rights worker
Janeane Garofalo, actress, comedienne, talk show host, Air America Radio
Jim Garrison, Ph.D., president, State of the World Forum, author, America as Empire
Bruce Gagnon, Chair, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
Ric Giardina, author, consultant, speaker, former Director of Trademarks and Brands for Intel
John Gray, Ph.D., #1 bestselling author, Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus
Stan Goff, 25-year Army Special Ops veteran, author, Full Spectrum Disorder
Melvin Goodman, senior fellow, Center for International Policy, author, former Senior Analyst, CIA, professor, National War College
Morton Goulder, Deputy Secretary for Intelligence and Warning under Nixon, Ford, and Carter
David Ray Griffin, Ph.D., theologian, author, New Pearl Harbor
Doris "Granny D" Haddock, campaign finance crusader, NH Democratic candidate for Senate
Thom Hartmann, radio host; author, Unequal Protection
Richie Havens, singer, songwriter, performer, artist
Paul Hawken, bestselling author, environmentalist, entrepreneur, founder of Smith & Hawken
Randy Hayes, founder, Rainforest Action Network, US National Director, Direction Conservation
Richard Heinberg, author, The Party's Over, core faculty, New College of California
Van Jones, executive director, Ella Baker Center for Human Rights
Rob Kall, editor, OpEdNews.com, president, Futurehealth, Inc.
Georgia Kelly, executive director, Praxis Peace Institute
Sean Kelly, Ph.D., author, professor of philosophy and religion, CA Institute of Integral Studies
John Joseph Kennedy, Democratic Write-in Presidential Candidate for 2004
Mimi Kennedy, actress, Dharma and Greg, progressive activist
Faiz Khan, M.D., Triage Emergency Physician on 9/11, Assistant Imam
David Korten, author, When Corporations Rule the World
Frances Moore Lapp?, author, Diet for a Small Planet; founder, Small Planet Institute
Scott M. Legere, 25 year radio broadcaster as Scott Ledger, Tampa FL
Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor, TIKKUN Magazine, author, Healing Israel/Palestine
Michael Levine, bestselling author of Deep Cover, journalist, 25-year veteran of the DEA
Joanna Macy, Ph.D., eco-philosopher, author
Enver Masud, founder, The Wisdom Fund, author, The Truth About Islam
John McCarthy, former Special Forces Captain, president, Veterans Equal Rights Protection Advocacy
Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst, co-founder, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
Cynthia McKinney, five-term Congresswoman from Georgia
Ralph Metzner, Ph.D., author, professor, co-founder, Green Earth Foundation
Mark Crispin Miller, media critic, author, professor, New York University
Joseph W. Montaperto, New York City Fire Department
Leuren Moret, geoscientist, radiation specialist, environmental commissioner
Ralph Nader, Independent candidate for President
Craig Neal, author, co-founder, The Heartland Institute, former publisher, Utne Reader
Jeff Norman, executive director, Tour of Duty
Jenna Orkin, Esquire, World Trade Center Environmental Organization
Kelly Patricia O'Meara, investigative journalist, public relations
Michael Parenti, Ph.D., author, Superpatriotism and The Terrorism Trap
Edward L. Peck, former US Ambassador and Chief of Mission to Iraq, former Deputy Director to the White House Task Force on Terrorism
Peter Phillips, Ph.D., professor, Sonoma State University, director, Project Censored
Henri Poole, Internet pioneer, board member, Free Software Foundation
Robert Rabbin, author, speaker, creator of TruthForPresident.org
Paul H. Ray, Ph.D., sociologist, author, The Cultural Creatives
John Renesch, business futurist, author, Getting to the Better Future
John Rensenbrink, professor emeritus, Bowdoin College, co-founder, US Green Party
John Robbins, author, founder, EarthSave International
William Rodriguez, 9/11 rescue effort hero, founder, Hispanic Victims Group
Neal Rogin, Emmy-award winning writer, performer, social observer
Allen Roland, Ph.D., psychotherapist, published author and peace activist
Rosemary Radford Ruether, professor of feminist theology, Graduate Theological Union
Michael Ruppert, publisher/editor, From The Wilderness, author, Crossing the Rubicon
Chris Sanders, founder, Sanders Research Associates
Karl W. B. Schwarz, President, CEO, Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC
Peter Dale Scott, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, author, Drugs, Oil, and War
Firefighter Kevin Shea, FDNY Hazmat Operations
Michelle Shocked, singer/songwriter, activist
Indira Singh, risk management and computer systems consultant
J. Michael Springmann, attorney, former Foreign Service Officer, US Department of State
Douglas Sturm, Ph.D., university professor emeritus, Bucknell University
Marjorie Hewit Suchocki, Ph.D., theologian, author
Chuck Turner, Boston City Council
James W. Walter Jr., venture investor, philanthropist, founder of Walden Three
Dan Whaley, E-commerce pioneer, founder of GetThere.com, acquired for $750M
Burns H. Weston, J.S.D., Professor of Law Emeritus, Director, Center for Human Rights, U-Iowa
Howard Zinn, professor, historian, author, A People's History of the United States
Family Members
Joanne Barbara, wife of FDNY Asst. Chief of Dept. Gerard Barbara
Gayle Barker, sister of William A. Karnes, WTC
Michele Bergsohn, wife of Alvin Bergsohn, Cantor Fitzgerald
Derrill Bodley, father of Deora Bodley, passenger on Flight 93
Kathryn C. Bowden, sister of Thomas H. Bowden, Jr. WTC1, 104th floor
Janet Calia, wife of Dominick Calia, Cantor Fitzgerald, WTC1
Maggie Cashman, wife of William Joseph Cashman, United Flight 93
Lynne Castrianno Galante, sister of Leonard Castrianno, 1WTC, 105th floor
Elza Chapa-McGowan, daughter of Rosemary Chapa, Pentagon
Bruce De Cell, father-in-law of Mark Petrocelli North Tower, 92nd floor
Ralph D'Esposito, father of Michael D'Esposito, WTC, 96th floor
Loisanne Diehl, Surviving Spouse, Michael D. Diehl, WTC2, 90th floor
Adina D. Eisenberg, sister of Eric Eisenberg, WTC
Jonathan M. Fisher, son of Dr. Gerald Paul "Geep" Fisher, Pentagon
Michael J. Fox, brother of Jeffrey L. Fox, Tower 2, 89th floor
Laurel A. Gay, sister of Peter A. Gay, AA Flight 11
Irene Golinsky, wife of Col. Ronald F. Golinski USA RET, Pentagon
Lori, Jerry, and Beatrice Guadagno, sister and parents of Richard Guadagno, Flight 93
Kristen Hall, daughter of fallen firefighter Thomas Kuveikis 9/11
Kurt D. Horning, father of Matthew D. Horning, WTC Tower One, 95th floor
Jennifer W. Hunt, wife of William C. Hunt, Euro Brokers
John Keating, son of Barbara Keating, passenger on AA Flight 11
L. Russell Keene II, father of Russ Keene III, WTC2, 89th floor, KBW
Peter Kousoulis, sister died in WTC
Paul & Barbara Kirwin, parents of Glenn Davis Kirwin, Cantor Fitzgerald 105th floor
Barbara Krukowski-Rastelli, mother of William E. Krukowski, NYC firefighter
Laura and Ira Lassman, parents of Nicholas C. Lassman, died in WTC, Tower One
Johnny Lee, husband of Lorraine Greene
Alicia LeGuillow, mother of Nestor A. Cintron III
Francine Levine, sister of Adam K. Ruhalter, who died on 9/11
Bob McIlvaine, father of Robert McIlvaine, WTC, Merrill Lynch
Mary McWilliams, mother of FF Martin E. McWilliams- Engine 22
Daryl J. Meehan, brother of Colleen Ann Barkow, WTC 1, 105th floor
Elvira P. Murphy, wife of Patrick Murphy, WTC 1
Natalee Pecorelli, sister of Thomas Pecorelli of Flight 11
James L Perry, M.D and Patricia J. Perry, parents of John W. Perry, Esq., NYPD Officer 9/11
David Potorti, brother of James Potorti, North Tower, WTC, Marsh & McLennan
Terry Kay Rockefeller, sister of Laura Rockefeller, North Tower, WTC
Grissel Rodriguez-Valentin, wife of Benito Valentin, WTC1, 94th floor
Alissa Rosenberg-Torres, widow of Luis Eduardo Torres, post-9/11 mother, writer
Elaine Saber, mother of Scott Saber
Julie Scarpitta, mother of Michelle Scarpitta, WTC Building 2, 84th floor
Paula Shapiro, mother of Eric Eisenberg, WTC2
Elizabeth Turner, wife of Simon Turner, lost on 11th September 2001
Adele Welty, mother of Firefighter Timothy Welty, FDNY, Squad 288
Joan W. Winton, mother of David Winton, WTC, South Tower, 89th floor
David Yancey, husband of Vicki Yancey, American Airlines Flight 77
Nissa Youngren, daughter of Robert G. LeBlanc, flight 175
Late Signatories (starting toward 200...)
Rita M. Haley, President, National Organization for Women, New York Chapter
Immortal Technique, Harlem-based hip-hop artist with Viper Records, Revolutionary I&II
Bob Kirkconnell, served in the U.S. Air Force 27 years, reaching the rank of Master Sergeant
Dennis Kyne, former Army air medic, 18th Airborne Corps during Gulf War I, musician, author, "Support the Truth"
Paul Landis, author, "Stop Bush Now!"
Eric H. May, former Army military intelligence officer and media essayist
Charles Shaw, Editor, Newtopia Magazine, National Peace Action Coordinator, National Green Party
Peter Erlinder, professor, William Mitchell College of Law, past-President National Lawyers Guild
Daniel Robert Rezac, 2004 Vice-Presidential Write-In Candidate, former Aviator & Armor Officer, Army National Guard, B.S.B.A.
Joel Horwitz, lost beloved cousin in WTC 1
Jessica Murrow, lost husband Stephen Adams, Beverage Manager, Windows on the World, WTC 1
Ellen Mariani, lost husband Neil on Flight 175
Jean Hunt, disabled survivor of Pentagon attack
Ralph & Brigitte Sabbag, lost son Jason in WTC 2
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
How the 9/11 Commission Got it Wrong - an Introduction to 9/11 Skepticism on YouTube
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript of the entire briefing and submitted documents here:
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/doc...t-it-right.zip
In the wake of Philip Shenon's best-seller, "The Commission", comes another wave of Americans snapping out of a media-induced trance. On another front, to a different audience, Willie Nelson is waking up another sector of the sleepwalking masses with his skepticism. Whatever route you took that made you take a second look at 9/11, welcome... and, you've got some catching up to do.
If Shenon's book was your introduction to the simple fact that the 9/11 Commission failed in its mandate on several levels, then you are probably unaware that serious criticism of the 9/11 Commission was entered into the Congressional Record of the 109th Congress. This criticism was the result of a Congressional Briefing conducted by former Congressional Representative, Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. (McKinney is currently seeking the Presidential nomination for the Green Party of the United States.)
The briefing was held on July 22nd, 2005, subsequently broadcast by C-SPAN, and studiously ignored by the corporate press. A comprehensive collation of the briefing has not been made available online, but thanks to the magic of YouTube, I have chopped the most pertinent testimonies from that day into neat 10 minute segments that are easily digestible for the busy internet surfer. You may have seen some of the footage from the briefing in the documentary, "Press for Truth", where Lorie Van Auken talked about her husband's fate on 9/11. Beyond that, not much of this footage has been circulating on the net.
So, if you are new to 9/11 Truth, or 9/11 skepticism, or you just have some questions, this is a great start. This briefing does not present much speculation or theory, but does break down the Commission on its bureaucratic failings, and lists a host of anomalies that will send you researching for days if this is all new to you. (This briefing does not discuss controlled demolition theories at all, it wasn't until physicist Steven Jones came on the scene in 2006 that CD "exploded" into the massive topic for 9/11 skeptics that is currently is. There was a lot of research already published online, and some in books, but it took a PhD to kick it over the top.)
The YouTube series is in 25 parts, and begins with McKinney's opening statement;
Parts 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 encompass the powerful testimony of "Jersey Girl" Lorie Van Auken, speaking for herself and two other "Jersey Girls", Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle. Van Auken's testimony alone should give anyone pause for thought about the conclusions of the Commission.
Part 2: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-glVvOB7bKE]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 2/25[/ame]
Part 3: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3MlNZzN25U]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 3/25[/ame]
Part 4: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1HfQ6l-LQA]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 4/25[/ame]
Part 5: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdS0CSrqOPI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 5/25[/ame]
Part 6: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdyKkrm4iJI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 6/25[/ame]
Part 7 is the testimony of John Judge. Judge had a hand in making this briefing happen as a member of McKinney's staff, and is the main presence behind The Coalition On Political Assassinations. Judge lists a host of problems with the Report, including a lack of transparency, a lack of accountability, conflicts of interest within the Commission, and was one of the first people I know of to speculate that the key 9/11 testimony may have been derived from acts of torture. He has been proven correct on that speculation.
Part 7: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA_MvahuneE]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 7/25[/ame]
Parts 8, 9 and 10 compile the 1st testimony of Mel Goodman, and a Q & A session with him. Goodman is an ex-CIA analyst. He quit the CIA because he would not inflate the "Soviet menace" during the Cold War with politicized analysis. (The creation of politically charged/fabricated intelligence during the Cold War is exemplified by the work of Team B.) Goodman was one of the first to challenge the appointment of Henry Kissinger as the original head of the 9/11 Commission.
For those who would categorically disregard Goodman's observations due to his work at the CIA, I understand your cynicism. It is difficult to know when a former or ex agent of a Federal agency is not simply being "sheep dipped" into the population or not. However, Goodman's analysis of the bureaucratic failings of the 9/11 Commission, and his brief history of other Commissions, like the ones that followed Pearl Harbor, (the best book analyzing the Pearl Harbor Commissions, including the House Minority Report which was the most far-reaching, is "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" by Harry Elmer Barnes, I recommend seeking out an original hardcover), the Church Commission and the Pike Commission is valuable for forming a historical perspective on these commissions. The 9/11 Commission had the broadest mandate of them all, and virtually unused subpoena power, Goodman critiques from an informed perspective.
Further, there seems to be a qualitative difference between the CIA's analysts and operatives. Although both are steeped in jingoistic propaganda as they are indoctrinated into the Agency, dissident analysts, (and operatives who wound up doing analysis in the field), tend to be more common. Dissident analysts include Victor Marchetti, Goodman, David MacMichaels, Bill Christison, and Ray McGovern. The most well-known dissident operatives include the deceased Philip Agee, and operative/analyst, Ralph McGehee, who has been harrassed into silence.
In the Q & A, Goodman makes the mistake of saying something postive about Hamilton's role in the Iran-Contra investigations, which ultimately went nowhere. As a corrective, here is Peter Dale Scott's observation on Hamilton, in his recent book, "The Road to 9/11", pp. 109-110;
"The bank's (BCCI's) immunity from regulation and prosecution in the ensuing Reagan years became notorious. As treasury secretary, James Baker flagrantly declined to prosecute BCCI after it had been exposed for illegally acquiring First American. A former National Security Council economist told author Johanthan Beatty that "Baker didn't pursue BCCI because he thought a prosecution of the bank would damage the United States reputation as a safe haven for flight capital and overseas investments." A simpler explanation might be that Baker knew what secrets could be told by the highest-level surviving BCCI officials."
The full story of BCCI was never officially told, nor was the story of the Republican countersurprise. The Iran-Contra hearings successfully covered up the arms shipments to Iran before 1984, and the House Task Force investigation of the Republican Surprise went nowhere. As Newsweek correspondent Eleanor Clift correctly predicted in 1991, "Congress will not formally investigate charges that the Reagan campaign stole the election in 1980, in large part because Israel's supporters on Capital Hill do not want to put the spotlight on Israel's role, which during that period sold weapons to Iran in blatant disregard of President Carter."
The key figure in both cover-ups was the congressman Lee Hamilton, a friend of the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby who chaired the House Iran-Contra Committee in 1987 and the House Task Force from 1992 to 1993. The bland results of the House Task Force report were hardly surprising. Hamilton had earlier participated in a dishonest defense of the Contras against charges of drug trafficking. The chief counsel of the House Task Force was E. Lawrence Barcella, who had received $2 million in legal fees as the lead attorney for BCCI in the late 1980s. At that time, Barcella also was a law partner of Paul Laxalt, who had been chariman of the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980. Finally, Barcella had close personal connections to Michael Ledeen, from whom he had bought a house and shared a common housekeeper.
In 2003, Hamilton would be resurrected to cochair the 9/11 Commission, investigating a third crisis that involved both right-wing Republican politicians and Muslim fundamentalists. Many people, including U.S. government officials, had alleged a number of links between BCCI investors, the Bin Laden family, and the financing of al Qaeda. For example, a French book has charged that "after dominating the financial news through the 1990s, the BCCI is now at the center of the financial network put in place by Osama bin Laden's main supporters." But in the 2004 9/11 Commission Report these allegations were completely ignored."
Whew. Now that that's out of the way, please check out Goodman's testimony, and decide for yourself if it has merit. I believe it does.
Part 8: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=8kHxOWlYYvI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 8/25[/ame]
Part 9: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=e7T4OTQ5NjY]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 9/25[/ame]
Part 10: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=SjBXX5edHTw]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 10/25[/ame]
Parts 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 comprise the combined panel presentations of Paul Thompson, Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, and John Newman.
Paul Thompson is the driving force behind Cooperative Research.org, home of the essential Complete 9/11 Timeline. If you have never visited the Complete 9/11 Timeline, do it now. If you have used the Timeline for your personal research, please make a donation! Cooperative Research runs on user donations. In his presentation, Thompson presents a host of anomalies associated with the FAA/NORAD response on 9/11. Many troubling questions remain unanswered regarding air defense on 9/11.
Nafeez Ahmed's 2002 book, The War on Freedom, was the first comprehensive printed volume challenging the official 9/11 narrative, published by John Leonard's Progressive Press. Ahmed followed up in 2005 with The War on Truth, which is where Ahmed derives the research for his 1st testimony. Ahmed deconstructs the myth surrounding the alleged 9/11 hijackers that presents them as dedicated religious fanatics, exposing intelligence links and possible military training of some of the alleged hijackers.
John Newman is a researcher known for his work exposing links Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA, research that has been confirmed and expanded upon by author Joan Mellen. Newman presents a picture of Omar Saeed Sheikh, allegedly the CFO of "al Qaeda", blamed for the murder of Daniel Pearl... an ISI and MI6 operative working at the highest levels of "al Qaeda".
Part 11: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=RzqyRbI3mFs]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 11/25[/ame]
Part 12: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=y1XycPwp5JE]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 12/25[/ame]
Part 13: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=VqRnz-qstEs]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 13/25[/ame]
Part 14: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=GF9clRScHxM]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 14/25[/ame]
Part 15: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rpn2hD8qq24]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 15/25[/ame]
Part 16: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=GUxthbC-74E]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 16/25[/ame]
Parts 17, 18 and 19 comprise the testimony of Peter Dale Scott and the 2nd testimony of Nafeez Ahmed. Scott is well known among independent researchers for his studies of the milieu that surrounds the JFK assassination. Arguably, his most powerful book on the subject is Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Scott has successfully transferred his research paradigm to 9/11, which he considers a "deep event" or "meta event". Scott reveals more about the real history of "al Qaeda" in this short presentation than you are likely to find in any handful of establishment books on the subject. (For another approach to the parallels between the JFK assassination and 9/11, please see this presentation from the 2006 COPA conference, JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both.)
Ahmed's 2nd testimony expands upon his previous comments, painting a vivid picture of the unbroken relationship between Western powers and the Mujahidin, and thus "al Qaeda", that continued past the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, throughout the 1990's. (Ahmed's research has led him to conclude in 2006 that al Qaeda "has no existence as an independent concrete entity. It designates a highly developed category of Western covert operations designed to secure destabilization through the creation, multiplication, mobilization, and manipulation of disparate mujahideen groups. The evidence suggests that this was certainly the case on 9-11.")
Part 17: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=xj-qCHwn8h0]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 17/25[/ame]
Part 18: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=zDHBoeRRvmo]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 18/25[/ame]
Part 19: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=jMpyxB4mnz8]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 19/25[/ame]
Parts 20 through 25 comprise a panel consisting of Mel Goodman, Ray McGovern, and David MacMichaels, and concludes the Briefing with Cynthia McKinney's closing statement in Part 25.
In Mel Goodman's 2nd testimony, he condemns the Intelligence reforms put forward by the 9/11 Commission. Ray McGovern draws on his many years of experience as a CIA analyst, (McGovern is a retiree, a "former" CIA man, but I must say that his active involvement in a variety of anti-establishment movements in the wake of Neocon agression has proven that he walks the walk), to severely critique the creation of the position of the DNI, an absolutely un-needed layer of bureaucracy upon an already unwieldy intelligence establishment.
David MacMichals is another example of an ex-CIA analyst who quit the Agency becuase he would not abide the distortion of intelligence to match Executive policy desires. (McGovern explains in his testimony some of the details behind the departures of Goodman and MacMichaels from the Agency). MacMichaels draws upon earlier Commissions to draw parallels between what has been done in the past and how the 9/11 Commission has performed in a similar manner. More of the same in Washington, in MacMichaels' view, a sad state of affairs.
Cynthia McKinney concludes the day's events in the second half of Part 25, praising all who participated, and she receives a standing ovation from the attendees who made it thorugh the whole day.
Part 20: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=Yr1rixniSAI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 20/25[/ame]
Part 21: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=xzeZfBJVNX4]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 21/25[/ame]
Part 22: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=XIVS7FT0iyc]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 22/25[/ame]
Part 23: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=sbS-ofe6kU4]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 23/25[/ame]
Part 24: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=4MPyWmQN28I]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 24/25[/ame]
Part 25: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=KejotYu6FX4]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 25/25[/ame]
This 25-part YouTube series is not the entire Briefing, see here for more details;
Video: McKinney's 2005 Congressional Briefing | 911Blogger.com
Compiled by Reprehensor at 911blogger.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript of the entire briefing and submitted documents here:
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/doc...t-it-right.zip
In the wake of Philip Shenon's best-seller, "The Commission", comes another wave of Americans snapping out of a media-induced trance. On another front, to a different audience, Willie Nelson is waking up another sector of the sleepwalking masses with his skepticism. Whatever route you took that made you take a second look at 9/11, welcome... and, you've got some catching up to do.
If Shenon's book was your introduction to the simple fact that the 9/11 Commission failed in its mandate on several levels, then you are probably unaware that serious criticism of the 9/11 Commission was entered into the Congressional Record of the 109th Congress. This criticism was the result of a Congressional Briefing conducted by former Congressional Representative, Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. (McKinney is currently seeking the Presidential nomination for the Green Party of the United States.)
The briefing was held on July 22nd, 2005, subsequently broadcast by C-SPAN, and studiously ignored by the corporate press. A comprehensive collation of the briefing has not been made available online, but thanks to the magic of YouTube, I have chopped the most pertinent testimonies from that day into neat 10 minute segments that are easily digestible for the busy internet surfer. You may have seen some of the footage from the briefing in the documentary, "Press for Truth", where Lorie Van Auken talked about her husband's fate on 9/11. Beyond that, not much of this footage has been circulating on the net.
So, if you are new to 9/11 Truth, or 9/11 skepticism, or you just have some questions, this is a great start. This briefing does not present much speculation or theory, but does break down the Commission on its bureaucratic failings, and lists a host of anomalies that will send you researching for days if this is all new to you. (This briefing does not discuss controlled demolition theories at all, it wasn't until physicist Steven Jones came on the scene in 2006 that CD "exploded" into the massive topic for 9/11 skeptics that is currently is. There was a lot of research already published online, and some in books, but it took a PhD to kick it over the top.)
The YouTube series is in 25 parts, and begins with McKinney's opening statement;
Parts 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 encompass the powerful testimony of "Jersey Girl" Lorie Van Auken, speaking for herself and two other "Jersey Girls", Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle. Van Auken's testimony alone should give anyone pause for thought about the conclusions of the Commission.
Part 2: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-glVvOB7bKE]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 2/25[/ame]
Part 3: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3MlNZzN25U]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 3/25[/ame]
Part 4: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1HfQ6l-LQA]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 4/25[/ame]
Part 5: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdS0CSrqOPI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 5/25[/ame]
Part 6: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdyKkrm4iJI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 6/25[/ame]
Part 7 is the testimony of John Judge. Judge had a hand in making this briefing happen as a member of McKinney's staff, and is the main presence behind The Coalition On Political Assassinations. Judge lists a host of problems with the Report, including a lack of transparency, a lack of accountability, conflicts of interest within the Commission, and was one of the first people I know of to speculate that the key 9/11 testimony may have been derived from acts of torture. He has been proven correct on that speculation.
Part 7: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA_MvahuneE]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 7/25[/ame]
Parts 8, 9 and 10 compile the 1st testimony of Mel Goodman, and a Q & A session with him. Goodman is an ex-CIA analyst. He quit the CIA because he would not inflate the "Soviet menace" during the Cold War with politicized analysis. (The creation of politically charged/fabricated intelligence during the Cold War is exemplified by the work of Team B.) Goodman was one of the first to challenge the appointment of Henry Kissinger as the original head of the 9/11 Commission.
For those who would categorically disregard Goodman's observations due to his work at the CIA, I understand your cynicism. It is difficult to know when a former or ex agent of a Federal agency is not simply being "sheep dipped" into the population or not. However, Goodman's analysis of the bureaucratic failings of the 9/11 Commission, and his brief history of other Commissions, like the ones that followed Pearl Harbor, (the best book analyzing the Pearl Harbor Commissions, including the House Minority Report which was the most far-reaching, is "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" by Harry Elmer Barnes, I recommend seeking out an original hardcover), the Church Commission and the Pike Commission is valuable for forming a historical perspective on these commissions. The 9/11 Commission had the broadest mandate of them all, and virtually unused subpoena power, Goodman critiques from an informed perspective.
Further, there seems to be a qualitative difference between the CIA's analysts and operatives. Although both are steeped in jingoistic propaganda as they are indoctrinated into the Agency, dissident analysts, (and operatives who wound up doing analysis in the field), tend to be more common. Dissident analysts include Victor Marchetti, Goodman, David MacMichaels, Bill Christison, and Ray McGovern. The most well-known dissident operatives include the deceased Philip Agee, and operative/analyst, Ralph McGehee, who has been harrassed into silence.
In the Q & A, Goodman makes the mistake of saying something postive about Hamilton's role in the Iran-Contra investigations, which ultimately went nowhere. As a corrective, here is Peter Dale Scott's observation on Hamilton, in his recent book, "The Road to 9/11", pp. 109-110;
"The bank's (BCCI's) immunity from regulation and prosecution in the ensuing Reagan years became notorious. As treasury secretary, James Baker flagrantly declined to prosecute BCCI after it had been exposed for illegally acquiring First American. A former National Security Council economist told author Johanthan Beatty that "Baker didn't pursue BCCI because he thought a prosecution of the bank would damage the United States reputation as a safe haven for flight capital and overseas investments." A simpler explanation might be that Baker knew what secrets could be told by the highest-level surviving BCCI officials."
The full story of BCCI was never officially told, nor was the story of the Republican countersurprise. The Iran-Contra hearings successfully covered up the arms shipments to Iran before 1984, and the House Task Force investigation of the Republican Surprise went nowhere. As Newsweek correspondent Eleanor Clift correctly predicted in 1991, "Congress will not formally investigate charges that the Reagan campaign stole the election in 1980, in large part because Israel's supporters on Capital Hill do not want to put the spotlight on Israel's role, which during that period sold weapons to Iran in blatant disregard of President Carter."
The key figure in both cover-ups was the congressman Lee Hamilton, a friend of the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby who chaired the House Iran-Contra Committee in 1987 and the House Task Force from 1992 to 1993. The bland results of the House Task Force report were hardly surprising. Hamilton had earlier participated in a dishonest defense of the Contras against charges of drug trafficking. The chief counsel of the House Task Force was E. Lawrence Barcella, who had received $2 million in legal fees as the lead attorney for BCCI in the late 1980s. At that time, Barcella also was a law partner of Paul Laxalt, who had been chariman of the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980. Finally, Barcella had close personal connections to Michael Ledeen, from whom he had bought a house and shared a common housekeeper.
In 2003, Hamilton would be resurrected to cochair the 9/11 Commission, investigating a third crisis that involved both right-wing Republican politicians and Muslim fundamentalists. Many people, including U.S. government officials, had alleged a number of links between BCCI investors, the Bin Laden family, and the financing of al Qaeda. For example, a French book has charged that "after dominating the financial news through the 1990s, the BCCI is now at the center of the financial network put in place by Osama bin Laden's main supporters." But in the 2004 9/11 Commission Report these allegations were completely ignored."
Whew. Now that that's out of the way, please check out Goodman's testimony, and decide for yourself if it has merit. I believe it does.
Part 8: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=8kHxOWlYYvI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 8/25[/ame]
Part 9: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=e7T4OTQ5NjY]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 9/25[/ame]
Part 10: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=SjBXX5edHTw]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 10/25[/ame]
Parts 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 comprise the combined panel presentations of Paul Thompson, Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, and John Newman.
Paul Thompson is the driving force behind Cooperative Research.org, home of the essential Complete 9/11 Timeline. If you have never visited the Complete 9/11 Timeline, do it now. If you have used the Timeline for your personal research, please make a donation! Cooperative Research runs on user donations. In his presentation, Thompson presents a host of anomalies associated with the FAA/NORAD response on 9/11. Many troubling questions remain unanswered regarding air defense on 9/11.
Nafeez Ahmed's 2002 book, The War on Freedom, was the first comprehensive printed volume challenging the official 9/11 narrative, published by John Leonard's Progressive Press. Ahmed followed up in 2005 with The War on Truth, which is where Ahmed derives the research for his 1st testimony. Ahmed deconstructs the myth surrounding the alleged 9/11 hijackers that presents them as dedicated religious fanatics, exposing intelligence links and possible military training of some of the alleged hijackers.
John Newman is a researcher known for his work exposing links Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA, research that has been confirmed and expanded upon by author Joan Mellen. Newman presents a picture of Omar Saeed Sheikh, allegedly the CFO of "al Qaeda", blamed for the murder of Daniel Pearl... an ISI and MI6 operative working at the highest levels of "al Qaeda".
Part 11: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=RzqyRbI3mFs]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 11/25[/ame]
Part 12: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=y1XycPwp5JE]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 12/25[/ame]
Part 13: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=VqRnz-qstEs]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 13/25[/ame]
Part 14: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=GF9clRScHxM]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 14/25[/ame]
Part 15: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rpn2hD8qq24]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 15/25[/ame]
Part 16: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=GUxthbC-74E]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 16/25[/ame]
Parts 17, 18 and 19 comprise the testimony of Peter Dale Scott and the 2nd testimony of Nafeez Ahmed. Scott is well known among independent researchers for his studies of the milieu that surrounds the JFK assassination. Arguably, his most powerful book on the subject is Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Scott has successfully transferred his research paradigm to 9/11, which he considers a "deep event" or "meta event". Scott reveals more about the real history of "al Qaeda" in this short presentation than you are likely to find in any handful of establishment books on the subject. (For another approach to the parallels between the JFK assassination and 9/11, please see this presentation from the 2006 COPA conference, JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both.)
Ahmed's 2nd testimony expands upon his previous comments, painting a vivid picture of the unbroken relationship between Western powers and the Mujahidin, and thus "al Qaeda", that continued past the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, throughout the 1990's. (Ahmed's research has led him to conclude in 2006 that al Qaeda "has no existence as an independent concrete entity. It designates a highly developed category of Western covert operations designed to secure destabilization through the creation, multiplication, mobilization, and manipulation of disparate mujahideen groups. The evidence suggests that this was certainly the case on 9-11.")
Part 17: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=xj-qCHwn8h0]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 17/25[/ame]
Part 18: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=zDHBoeRRvmo]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 18/25[/ame]
Part 19: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=jMpyxB4mnz8]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 19/25[/ame]
Parts 20 through 25 comprise a panel consisting of Mel Goodman, Ray McGovern, and David MacMichaels, and concludes the Briefing with Cynthia McKinney's closing statement in Part 25.
In Mel Goodman's 2nd testimony, he condemns the Intelligence reforms put forward by the 9/11 Commission. Ray McGovern draws on his many years of experience as a CIA analyst, (McGovern is a retiree, a "former" CIA man, but I must say that his active involvement in a variety of anti-establishment movements in the wake of Neocon agression has proven that he walks the walk), to severely critique the creation of the position of the DNI, an absolutely un-needed layer of bureaucracy upon an already unwieldy intelligence establishment.
David MacMichals is another example of an ex-CIA analyst who quit the Agency becuase he would not abide the distortion of intelligence to match Executive policy desires. (McGovern explains in his testimony some of the details behind the departures of Goodman and MacMichaels from the Agency). MacMichaels draws upon earlier Commissions to draw parallels between what has been done in the past and how the 9/11 Commission has performed in a similar manner. More of the same in Washington, in MacMichaels' view, a sad state of affairs.
Cynthia McKinney concludes the day's events in the second half of Part 25, praising all who participated, and she receives a standing ovation from the attendees who made it thorugh the whole day.
Part 20: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=Yr1rixniSAI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 20/25[/ame]
Part 21: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=xzeZfBJVNX4]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 21/25[/ame]
Part 22: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=XIVS7FT0iyc]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 22/25[/ame]
Part 23: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=sbS-ofe6kU4]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 23/25[/ame]
Part 24: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=4MPyWmQN28I]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 24/25[/ame]
Part 25: [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=KejotYu6FX4]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 25/25[/ame]
This 25-part YouTube series is not the entire Briefing, see here for more details;
Video: McKinney's 2005 Congressional Briefing | 911Blogger.com
Compiled by Reprehensor at 911blogger.com
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
Eight Senior Republican Administration Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 "Not Possible", "a Whitewash", "False"
Dec. 4, 2007 Link to full article
Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report Official Account of 9/11 a "Joke" and a "Cover-up" Sept. 23, 2007 Link to full article
Progressive Radio Links
Tag(s): 9 11 WTC Attack; 9-11; 911; 911; 911 Truth; Democracy; False Flag Attacks; Government; Military; Republican
Add to My Group
December 4, 2007 at 11
30
Eight Senior Republican Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 - "Not Possible", "a Whitewash", "False"
by Alan Miller
OpEdNews.Com Progressive, Tough Liberal News and Opinion
December 4, 2007 Eight former senior Republican administration appointees have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and several have called for a new investigation. "I find the facts against the official story of the [WTC] buildings' collapse more compelling than the case that has been made in behalf of the official story. I would like to see the issue debated by independent scientists and engineers," wrote Paul Craig Roberts, PhD, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan. "A real investigation is needed to find an explanation consistent with the evidence, even if it doesn't reassure the public," said Dr. Roberts [1], frequently referred to as the "Father of Reagonomics."
Paul Craig Roberts, PhD
"Over the past six years, the ranks of distinguished skeptics of the 9-11 storyline have grown enormously. The ranks include distinguished scientists, engineers and architects, intelligence officers, air traffic controllers, military officers and generals, including the former commanding general of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, former presidential appointees and members of the White House staff in Republican administrations, Top Gun fighter pilots and career airline pilots who say that the flying attributed to the 9-11 hijackers is beyond the skills of America's best pilots, and foreign dignitaries." [2]
Dr. Roberts currently serves as Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Previously he was the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University. He also served as a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and as Associate Editor of The Wall Street Journal.
In a 2004 interview by Dennis Bernstein on the Flashpoints radio show, Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of Housing under President George H.W. Bush (41) said "The official story could not possibly have happened. In other words, what the administration has put forward is essentially a conspiracy theory that does not conform to the facts. It's not possible. It's not operationally feasible ... The Commission was a whitewash." [3]
Catherine Austin Fitts Prior to her appointment to the first Bush administration, Ms. Fitts served as Managing Director and Member of the Board of Wall Street investment bank, Dillon, Read & Co. She previously was President of The Hamilton Securities Group.
In a 2004 essay, Ms. Fitts wrote, "Much has transpired since September 11, 2001. ... We have emerged deeply disturbing unanswered questions of 9-11 through global Internet media. We have worked with [Paul Thompson's Complete] 911 Timeline and realized that the official explanation of events is conspiracy theory, not conforming to documented fact.
We have watched the U.S. government suppress facts and restrict of the 9-11 Commission's access to information. We have watched the 9-11 Commission fail to answer the unanswered questions and concede to official suppression of information. We have watched the leaders of the national security infrastructure richly rewarded for their failure to protect America on 9-11. We have noted the material omissions of the corporate media. Something does not add up. Someone has something to hide. ... The Administration has something to hide. Rather than lose time and resources getting lost in the White House fog, let's follow the alleged advice of one of the 9-11 Commissioners, Fred Fielding ..."Follow the Money." [4]
Morgan Reynolds, PhD In a 2006 video interview with Alex Jones, Morgan Reynolds, PhD, former Chief Economist of the U.S. Department of Labor under current President George W. Bush said, "I first began to suspect that 9/11 was in inside job when the Bush-Cheney Administration invaded Iraq. ... We can prove that the government's story is false." [5] Prior to his appointment to the Bush administration, Dr. Reynolds was Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. He is also Professor Emeritus of Economics, Texas A&M University. And in a 2005 essay, Dr. Reynolds wrote, "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the Twin Towers [each 1300+ feet tall, 110 stories] and Building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely [to] prove to be sound." [6]
WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories. It would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11. However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." Watch the collapse video here. And six years after 9/11, the Federal government has yet to publish its promised final report that explains the cause of its collapse.
Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan. He's a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). He was also appointed by President George H. W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. He was Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. (1990 1994).
Col. Ronald D. Ray In an interview on Alex Jones' radio show on June 30, 2006 [7], Col. Ray described the official account of 9/11 as "the dog that doesn't hunt", meaning it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. In response to Alex Jones' question, "Is it safe to say or is the statement accurate that you smell something rotten in the state of Denmark when it comes to 9/11?" Col. Ray replied, "I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that that's accurate. That's true."
Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Mary Schiavo. Appointed under the administration of President George H. W. Bush, Ms. Schiavo served as the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Transportation from 1990 - 1996. Ms. Schiavo and her staff secured more than 1,000 criminal convictions and uncovered billions in waste and abuse at the U.S. DOT. Since leaving the Transportation Department, Ms. Schiavo has represented passenger and crew families in every major U.S. air crash, as well as pilots and passengers on private planes.
Mary Schiavo In an article written by Gail Sheehy that appeared in the New York Observer on Feb. 16, 2004, Ms. Sheehy wrote, "Ms. Schiavo sat in on the commission's hearing on aviation security on 9/11 and was disgusted by what it left out. 'In any other situation, it would be unthinkable to withhold investigative material from an independent commission,' she told this writer. 'There are usually grave consequences. But the commission is clearly not talking to everybody or not telling us everything.' " [8]
In a press conference on June 10, 2002 regarding the events of 9/11, Ms. Schiavo stated, "First of all, the question is not 'What they [the U.S. government] should have known?' And I believe I can show you in just a few seconds the question is, 'What did they know?' And believe me, they knew a lot. The second thing to emphasize is that in every single aviation disaster, whether there was intervening criminal activity or not, in every single one in the course of modern aviation history it has been followed by, not only were it necessary, a criminal investigation, but also a National Transportation Safety investigation into what went wrong in the aviation system. And the reason for that is so that it never happens again."
Ms. Schiavo continued, "This is the first time, and this is the worst disaster, but this is the first time that families have been attempted to be silenced through a special fund, which I believe is about silence more so than about money. Why? ... And from my rounds on the Hill to find these facts and others, I found that the airlines approached members of Congress and the Senate to get their bailout and their immunity and their protection starting on 9/11. They sent their first lobbyist up to the Hill on 9/11. And this has been confirmed to me personally by Senators and members of Congress. Now to me that's very shocking but to me it raises another question, Why? Why did they have to rush to the Hill to change the law? ... So in the wake of September 11, 2001, when we heard the carriers and governments alike saying, 'Oh, no one could have foreseen this. No one knew that this was coming. No one knew that there was any risk like this in the world,' is absolutely false. ... In the last thirty years we have had 682 hijackings. 682. Here's an interesting statistic. When we had the United States saying, 'Oh, we couldn't have known this.' " [9]
Barbara Honegger Another critic of the official account of 9/11 is Barbara Honegger, who served as Special Assistant to the Chief Domestic Policy Adviser to President Ronald Reagan and as a White House Policy Analyst. "The US military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11," she wrote. [10]
"A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, steep, high-speed 270- to 330-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Dulles Air Traffic Controllers were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens that morning. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the "Friendly" signal needed to disable the Pentagon's anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building. Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response systems on 9/11."
Ms. Honegger also served as Project Director of the Attorney General's Anti-Discrimination Federal Law Review at the U.S. Department of Justice in Reagan's administration. She is a graduate of the Naval War College master's program in National Security Decision Making and for over 12 years has served as Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the U.S. Navy's and the Defense Department's premier science, technology and national security affairs university.
Ms. Honegger has become a prominent critic of the official account of 9/11 as a private researcher, author and speaker at conferences. This is not Ms. Honegger's first experience with allegations of serious executive branch misconduct. In 1983, she resigned from the Reagan administration in protest to planned domestic policy decisions. In 1989, she authored the pioneering Irangate expose October Surprise, which led to a full-subpoena-power U.S. House of Representatives investigation. Her book alleged that prior to the 1980 Presidential election, members of the Reagan campaign cut a secret deal with Iran to delay the release of the 52 American hostages, in order to prevent President Jimmy Carter from arranging their release and prevent him from winning the November election. The hostages were released on the day of Ronald Reagan's inauguration, after 444 days in captivity.
Edward Peck Shortly after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, a group of over 100 prominent Americans signed a petition [11] urging Congress to immediately reinvestigate 9/11. In addition to four prominent former CIA officials [12], the signers included Catherine Austin Fitts (mentioned above), Edward Peck, and Morton Goulder.
Edward Peck served as Deputy Director of the White House Task Force on Terrorism under President Ronald Reagan. Mr. Peck, a 32-year veteran of the U.S. Foreign Service also served as Deputy Coordinator, Covert Intelligence Programs at the State Department and as U.S. Ambassador and Chief of Mission in Iraq (1977 - 1980).
Morton Goulder Morton Goulder was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Warning under President Richard Nixon and continued in that capacity under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. In World War II, he served as a Lt. Commander in the U.S. Navy. He is a co-founder of Sanders Associates, a billion dollar defense contractor, now a division of BEA Systems.
The petition stated, in part, "We want truthful answers to questions such as:
1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
4. Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
5. Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?"
These questions and many others still remain unanswered three years after the petition was submitted and six years after the terrible events of 9/11. As the statements of these eight senior Republican Administration appointees show, the need for a new thorough, and independent investigation of 9/11 is not a matter of partisan politics, nor the demand of irresponsible, mentally ill, or disloyal Americans. It is instead a matter of the utmost importance for America's security and the future of the entire world.
Statements questioning the official account of 9/11 and calls for a new investigation by more than 800 credible individuals can be found at Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report
Additional information on skeptics of the official account of 9/11 can be found in the author's other articles on this subject.
Sept. 23, 2007 - Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report - Official Account of 9/11 a "Joke" and a "Cover-up" featured statements by CIA veterans Raymond McGovern, William Christison, Melvin Goodman, Robert Baer, Robert David Steele, Lynne Larkin, and David MacMichael.
Sept. 5, 2007 - U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' Pilot Questions 9/11, featured the statement of Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' pilot.
Sept. 4, 2007 - Former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member Calls for New Investigation of 9/11 featured the statement of Joel S. Hirschhorn, Ph.D., who served for 12 years as a Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and later as Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources for the National Governors Association.
Aug. 27, 2007 - National Academy of Sciences Member Calls for New 9/11 Investigation featured the statment of Lynn Margulis, Ph.D., world renowned scientist.
Aug. 21, 2007 - Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation featured the statement of James Quintiere, Ph.D., one of the world's leading fire science researchers.
July 16, 2007 - Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement featured the statement of J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission.
Endnotes
[1] Is American Democracy Too Feeble to Deal with 9/11? By Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2006 VDARE.com: 09/10/06 - Is American Democracy Too Feeble To Deal With 9/11?
[2] 9/11, Six Years Later by Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2007 VDARE.com: 09/10/07 - 9-11, Six Years Later
[3] Interview of Catherine Austin Fitts by Dennis Bernstein on the Flashpoints radio show Sept. 9, 2004 Flashpoints - September 9, 2004 at 5:00pm | KPFA 94.1 FM Berkeley: Listener Sponsored Free Speech Radio
[4] 9/11 Profiteering by Catherine Austin Fitts on March 22, 2004 on GlobalResearch.ca 9-11 Profiteering:
[5] Video interview of Morgan Reynolds, PhD, by Alex Jones June 2, 2006 http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...23292618944278
[6] Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse? by Morgan Reynolds, PhD on LewRockwell.com June 9, 2005 http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html
[7] Radio interview of Col. Ronald D. Ray by Alex Jones, June 30, 2006 (Subscription required.) Summarized in July 1, 2006 article on propagandamatrix.com http://www.propagandamatrix.com/arti...doesnthunt.htm
[8] Stewardess ID'd Hijackers Early, Transcripts Show by Gail Sheehy, New York Observer, Feb. 15, 2004 Stewardess ID'd Hijackers Early, Transcripts Show | The New York Observer
[9] Press conference with Mary Schiavo June 10, 2002 Video: http://www.propagandamatrix.com/mult...y_schiavo.html Transcript: Scoop: UQ Wire: June 10th Press Conference Transcript
[10] "The Pentagon Attack Papers" by Barbara Honegger, published in The Terror Conspiracy by Jim Marrs 2006 http://physics911.net/pdf/honegger.pdf
[11] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11 Signed by Over 100 Prominent Americans Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?...41026093059633
[12] Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report by Alan Miller, Sept. 23, 2007 OpEdNews.Com Progressive, Tough Liberal News and Opinion
Dec. 4, 2007 Link to full article
Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report Official Account of 9/11 a "Joke" and a "Cover-up" Sept. 23, 2007 Link to full article
Progressive Radio Links
Tag(s): 9 11 WTC Attack; 9-11; 911; 911; 911 Truth; Democracy; False Flag Attacks; Government; Military; Republican
Add to My Group
December 4, 2007 at 11
30Eight Senior Republican Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 - "Not Possible", "a Whitewash", "False"
by Alan Miller
OpEdNews.Com Progressive, Tough Liberal News and Opinion
December 4, 2007 Eight former senior Republican administration appointees have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and several have called for a new investigation. "I find the facts against the official story of the [WTC] buildings' collapse more compelling than the case that has been made in behalf of the official story. I would like to see the issue debated by independent scientists and engineers," wrote Paul Craig Roberts, PhD, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan. "A real investigation is needed to find an explanation consistent with the evidence, even if it doesn't reassure the public," said Dr. Roberts [1], frequently referred to as the "Father of Reagonomics."
Paul Craig Roberts, PhD
"Over the past six years, the ranks of distinguished skeptics of the 9-11 storyline have grown enormously. The ranks include distinguished scientists, engineers and architects, intelligence officers, air traffic controllers, military officers and generals, including the former commanding general of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, former presidential appointees and members of the White House staff in Republican administrations, Top Gun fighter pilots and career airline pilots who say that the flying attributed to the 9-11 hijackers is beyond the skills of America's best pilots, and foreign dignitaries." [2]
Dr. Roberts currently serves as Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Previously he was the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University. He also served as a Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and as Associate Editor of The Wall Street Journal.
In a 2004 interview by Dennis Bernstein on the Flashpoints radio show, Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of Housing under President George H.W. Bush (41) said "The official story could not possibly have happened. In other words, what the administration has put forward is essentially a conspiracy theory that does not conform to the facts. It's not possible. It's not operationally feasible ... The Commission was a whitewash." [3]
Catherine Austin Fitts Prior to her appointment to the first Bush administration, Ms. Fitts served as Managing Director and Member of the Board of Wall Street investment bank, Dillon, Read & Co. She previously was President of The Hamilton Securities Group.
In a 2004 essay, Ms. Fitts wrote, "Much has transpired since September 11, 2001. ... We have emerged deeply disturbing unanswered questions of 9-11 through global Internet media. We have worked with [Paul Thompson's Complete] 911 Timeline and realized that the official explanation of events is conspiracy theory, not conforming to documented fact.
We have watched the U.S. government suppress facts and restrict of the 9-11 Commission's access to information. We have watched the 9-11 Commission fail to answer the unanswered questions and concede to official suppression of information. We have watched the leaders of the national security infrastructure richly rewarded for their failure to protect America on 9-11. We have noted the material omissions of the corporate media. Something does not add up. Someone has something to hide. ... The Administration has something to hide. Rather than lose time and resources getting lost in the White House fog, let's follow the alleged advice of one of the 9-11 Commissioners, Fred Fielding ..."Follow the Money." [4]
Morgan Reynolds, PhD In a 2006 video interview with Alex Jones, Morgan Reynolds, PhD, former Chief Economist of the U.S. Department of Labor under current President George W. Bush said, "I first began to suspect that 9/11 was in inside job when the Bush-Cheney Administration invaded Iraq. ... We can prove that the government's story is false." [5] Prior to his appointment to the Bush administration, Dr. Reynolds was Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis. He is also Professor Emeritus of Economics, Texas A&M University. And in a 2005 essay, Dr. Reynolds wrote, "It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the Twin Towers [each 1300+ feet tall, 110 stories] and Building 7. If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely [to] prove to be sound." [6]
WTC Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories. It would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11. However, no mention of its collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." Watch the collapse video here. And six years after 9/11, the Federal government has yet to publish its promised final report that explains the cause of its collapse.
Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan. He's a highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart). He was also appointed by President George H. W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 1994), and on the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. He was Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. (1990 1994).
Col. Ronald D. Ray In an interview on Alex Jones' radio show on June 30, 2006 [7], Col. Ray described the official account of 9/11 as "the dog that doesn't hunt", meaning it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. In response to Alex Jones' question, "Is it safe to say or is the statement accurate that you smell something rotten in the state of Denmark when it comes to 9/11?" Col. Ray replied, "I'm astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that that's accurate. That's true."
Another senior Republican appointee who has questioned the official account of 9/11 is Mary Schiavo. Appointed under the administration of President George H. W. Bush, Ms. Schiavo served as the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Transportation from 1990 - 1996. Ms. Schiavo and her staff secured more than 1,000 criminal convictions and uncovered billions in waste and abuse at the U.S. DOT. Since leaving the Transportation Department, Ms. Schiavo has represented passenger and crew families in every major U.S. air crash, as well as pilots and passengers on private planes.
Mary Schiavo In an article written by Gail Sheehy that appeared in the New York Observer on Feb. 16, 2004, Ms. Sheehy wrote, "Ms. Schiavo sat in on the commission's hearing on aviation security on 9/11 and was disgusted by what it left out. 'In any other situation, it would be unthinkable to withhold investigative material from an independent commission,' she told this writer. 'There are usually grave consequences. But the commission is clearly not talking to everybody or not telling us everything.' " [8]
In a press conference on June 10, 2002 regarding the events of 9/11, Ms. Schiavo stated, "First of all, the question is not 'What they [the U.S. government] should have known?' And I believe I can show you in just a few seconds the question is, 'What did they know?' And believe me, they knew a lot. The second thing to emphasize is that in every single aviation disaster, whether there was intervening criminal activity or not, in every single one in the course of modern aviation history it has been followed by, not only were it necessary, a criminal investigation, but also a National Transportation Safety investigation into what went wrong in the aviation system. And the reason for that is so that it never happens again."
Ms. Schiavo continued, "This is the first time, and this is the worst disaster, but this is the first time that families have been attempted to be silenced through a special fund, which I believe is about silence more so than about money. Why? ... And from my rounds on the Hill to find these facts and others, I found that the airlines approached members of Congress and the Senate to get their bailout and their immunity and their protection starting on 9/11. They sent their first lobbyist up to the Hill on 9/11. And this has been confirmed to me personally by Senators and members of Congress. Now to me that's very shocking but to me it raises another question, Why? Why did they have to rush to the Hill to change the law? ... So in the wake of September 11, 2001, when we heard the carriers and governments alike saying, 'Oh, no one could have foreseen this. No one knew that this was coming. No one knew that there was any risk like this in the world,' is absolutely false. ... In the last thirty years we have had 682 hijackings. 682. Here's an interesting statistic. When we had the United States saying, 'Oh, we couldn't have known this.' " [9]
Barbara Honegger Another critic of the official account of 9/11 is Barbara Honegger, who served as Special Assistant to the Chief Domestic Policy Adviser to President Ronald Reagan and as a White House Policy Analyst. "The US military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11," she wrote. [10]
"A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, steep, high-speed 270- to 330-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Dulles Air Traffic Controllers were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens that morning. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the "Friendly" signal needed to disable the Pentagon's anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building. Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response systems on 9/11."
Ms. Honegger also served as Project Director of the Attorney General's Anti-Discrimination Federal Law Review at the U.S. Department of Justice in Reagan's administration. She is a graduate of the Naval War College master's program in National Security Decision Making and for over 12 years has served as Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, the U.S. Navy's and the Defense Department's premier science, technology and national security affairs university.
Ms. Honegger has become a prominent critic of the official account of 9/11 as a private researcher, author and speaker at conferences. This is not Ms. Honegger's first experience with allegations of serious executive branch misconduct. In 1983, she resigned from the Reagan administration in protest to planned domestic policy decisions. In 1989, she authored the pioneering Irangate expose October Surprise, which led to a full-subpoena-power U.S. House of Representatives investigation. Her book alleged that prior to the 1980 Presidential election, members of the Reagan campaign cut a secret deal with Iran to delay the release of the 52 American hostages, in order to prevent President Jimmy Carter from arranging their release and prevent him from winning the November election. The hostages were released on the day of Ronald Reagan's inauguration, after 444 days in captivity.
Edward Peck Shortly after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, a group of over 100 prominent Americans signed a petition [11] urging Congress to immediately reinvestigate 9/11. In addition to four prominent former CIA officials [12], the signers included Catherine Austin Fitts (mentioned above), Edward Peck, and Morton Goulder.
Edward Peck served as Deputy Director of the White House Task Force on Terrorism under President Ronald Reagan. Mr. Peck, a 32-year veteran of the U.S. Foreign Service also served as Deputy Coordinator, Covert Intelligence Programs at the State Department and as U.S. Ambassador and Chief of Mission in Iraq (1977 - 1980).
Morton Goulder Morton Goulder was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Warning under President Richard Nixon and continued in that capacity under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. In World War II, he served as a Lt. Commander in the U.S. Navy. He is a co-founder of Sanders Associates, a billion dollar defense contractor, now a division of BEA Systems.
The petition stated, in part, "We want truthful answers to questions such as:
1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
4. Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
5. Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?"
These questions and many others still remain unanswered three years after the petition was submitted and six years after the terrible events of 9/11. As the statements of these eight senior Republican Administration appointees show, the need for a new thorough, and independent investigation of 9/11 is not a matter of partisan politics, nor the demand of irresponsible, mentally ill, or disloyal Americans. It is instead a matter of the utmost importance for America's security and the future of the entire world.
Statements questioning the official account of 9/11 and calls for a new investigation by more than 800 credible individuals can be found at Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report
Additional information on skeptics of the official account of 9/11 can be found in the author's other articles on this subject.
Sept. 23, 2007 - Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report - Official Account of 9/11 a "Joke" and a "Cover-up" featured statements by CIA veterans Raymond McGovern, William Christison, Melvin Goodman, Robert Baer, Robert David Steele, Lynne Larkin, and David MacMichael.
Sept. 5, 2007 - U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' Pilot Questions 9/11, featured the statement of Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' pilot.
Sept. 4, 2007 - Former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member Calls for New Investigation of 9/11 featured the statement of Joel S. Hirschhorn, Ph.D., who served for 12 years as a Senior Staff Member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and later as Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources for the National Governors Association.
Aug. 27, 2007 - National Academy of Sciences Member Calls for New 9/11 Investigation featured the statment of Lynn Margulis, Ph.D., world renowned scientist.
Aug. 21, 2007 - Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation featured the statement of James Quintiere, Ph.D., one of the world's leading fire science researchers.
July 16, 2007 - Former California Seismic Safety Commissioner Endorses 9/11 Truth Movement featured the statement of J. Marx Ayres, former member of the National Institute of Sciences Building Safety Council and former member of the California Seismic Safety Commission.
Endnotes
[1] Is American Democracy Too Feeble to Deal with 9/11? By Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2006 VDARE.com: 09/10/06 - Is American Democracy Too Feeble To Deal With 9/11?
[2] 9/11, Six Years Later by Paul Craig Roberts, PhD on VDare.com Sept. 10, 2007 VDARE.com: 09/10/07 - 9-11, Six Years Later
[3] Interview of Catherine Austin Fitts by Dennis Bernstein on the Flashpoints radio show Sept. 9, 2004 Flashpoints - September 9, 2004 at 5:00pm | KPFA 94.1 FM Berkeley: Listener Sponsored Free Speech Radio
[4] 9/11 Profiteering by Catherine Austin Fitts on March 22, 2004 on GlobalResearch.ca 9-11 Profiteering:
[5] Video interview of Morgan Reynolds, PhD, by Alex Jones June 2, 2006 http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...23292618944278
[6] Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse? by Morgan Reynolds, PhD on LewRockwell.com June 9, 2005 http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html
[7] Radio interview of Col. Ronald D. Ray by Alex Jones, June 30, 2006 (Subscription required.) Summarized in July 1, 2006 article on propagandamatrix.com http://www.propagandamatrix.com/arti...doesnthunt.htm
[8] Stewardess ID'd Hijackers Early, Transcripts Show by Gail Sheehy, New York Observer, Feb. 15, 2004 Stewardess ID'd Hijackers Early, Transcripts Show | The New York Observer
[9] Press conference with Mary Schiavo June 10, 2002 Video: http://www.propagandamatrix.com/mult...y_schiavo.html Transcript: Scoop: UQ Wire: June 10th Press Conference Transcript
[10] "The Pentagon Attack Papers" by Barbara Honegger, published in The Terror Conspiracy by Jim Marrs 2006 http://physics911.net/pdf/honegger.pdf
[11] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11 Signed by Over 100 Prominent Americans Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?...41026093059633
[12] Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report by Alan Miller, Sept. 23, 2007 OpEdNews.Com Progressive, Tough Liberal News and Opinion
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
Given this clarification, I now list the omissions and claims of The 9/11 Commission Report that I, in my critique of that report, portrayed as lies:
1. The omission of evidence that at least six of the alleged hijackers---including Waleed al-Shehri, said by the Commission probably to have stabbed a flight attendant on Flight 11 before it crashed into the North Tower of the WTC---are still alive (19-20).
2. The omission of evidence about Mohamed Atta---such as his reported fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances---that is in tension with the Commission's claim that he had become fanatically religious (20-21).
3. The obfuscation of the evidence that Hani Hanjour was too poor a pilot to have flown an airliner into the Pentagon (21-22).
4. The omission of the fact that the publicly released flight manifests contain no Arab names (23).
5. The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse (25).
6. The omission of the fact that the fires in the Twin Towers were not very big, very hot, or very long-lasting compared with fires in several steel-frame buildings that did not collapse (25-26).
7. The omission of the fact that, given the hypothesis that the collapses were caused by fire, the South Tower, which was struck later than the North Tower and also had smaller fires, should not have collapsed first (26).
8. The omission of the fact that WTC 7 (which was not hit by an airplane and which had only small, localized fires) also collapsed---an occurrence that FEMA admitted it could not explain (26).
9. The omission of the fact that the collapse of the Twin Towers (like that of Building 7) exemplified at least 10 features suggestive of controlled demolition (26-27).
10. The claim that the core of each of the Twin Towers was "a hollow steel shaft"---a claim that denied the existence of the 47 massive steel columns that in reality constituted the core of each tower and that, given the "pancake theory" of the collapses, should have still been sticking up many hundreds of feet in the air (27-28).
11. The omission of Larry Silverstein's statement that he and the fire department commander decided to "pull" Building 7 (28).
12. The omission of the fact that the steel from the WTC buildings was quickly removed from the crime scene and shipped overseas before it could be analyzed for evidence of explosives (30).
13. The omission of the fact that because Building 7 had been evacuated before it collapsed, the official reason for the rapid removal of the steel---that some people might still be alive in the rubble under the steel---made no sense in this case (30).
14. The omission of Mayor Giuliani's statement that he had received word that the World Trade Center was going to collapse (30-31).
15. The omission of the fact that President Bush's brother Marvin and his cousin Wirt Walker III were both principals in the company in charge of security for the WTC (31-32).
16. The omission of the fact that the west wing of the Pentagon would have been the least likely spot to be targeted by al-Qaeda terrorists, for several reasons (33-34).
17. The omission of any discussion of whether the damage done to the Pentagon was consistent with the impact of a Boeing 757 going several hundred miles per hour (34).
18. The omission of the fact that there are photos showing that the west wing's façade did not collapse until 30 minutes after the strike and also that the entrance hole appears too small for a Boeing 757 to have entered (34).
19. The omission of all testimony that has been used to cast doubt on whether remains of a Boeing 757 were visible either inside or outside the Pentagon (34-36).
20. The omission of any discussion of whether the Pentagon has a anti-missile defense system that would have brought down a commercial airliner---even though the Commission suggested that the al-Qaeda terrorists did not attack a nuclear power plant because they assumed that it would be thus defended (36).
21. The omission of the fact that pictures from various security cameras---including the camera at the gas station across from the Pentagon, the film from which was reportedly confiscated by the FBI immediately after the strike---could presumably answer the question of what really hit the Pentagon (37-38).
22. The omission of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's reference to "the missile [used] to damage [the Pentagon]" (39).
23. The apparent endorsement of a wholly unsatisfactory answer to the question of why the Secret Service agents allowed President Bush to remain at the Sarasota school at a time when, given the official story, they should have assumed that a hijacked airliner might be about to crash into the school (41-44).
24. The failure to explore why the Secret Service did not summon fighter jets to provide air cover for Air Force One (43-46).
25. The claims that when the presidential party arrived at the school, no one in the party knew that several planes had been hijacked (47-48).
26. The omission of the report that Attorney General Ashcroft was warned to stop using commercial airlines prior to 9/11 (50).
27. The omission of David Schippers' claim that he had, on the basis of information provided by FBI agents about upcoming attacks in lower Manhattan, tried unsuccessfully to convey this information to Attorney General Ashcroft during the six weeks prior to 9/11 (51).
28. The omission of any mention of the FBI agents who reportedly claimed to have known the targets and dates of the attacks well in advance (51-52).
29. The claim, by means of a circular, question-begging rebuttal, that the unusual purchases of put options prior to 9/11 did not imply advance knowledge of the attacks on the part of the buyers (52-57).
30. The omission of reports that both Mayor Willie Brown and some Pentagon officials received warnings about flying on 9/11 (57).
31. The omission of the report that Osama bin Laden, who already was America's "most wanted" criminal, was treated in July 2001 by an American doctor in the American Hospital in Dubai and visited by the local CIA agent (59).
32. The omission of news stories suggesting that after 9/11 the US military in Afghanistan deliberately allowed Osama bin Laden to escape (60).
33. The omission of reports, including the report of a visit to Osama bin Laden at the hospital in Dubai by the head of Saudi intelligence, that were in tension with the official portrayal of Osama as disowned by his family and his country (60-61).
34. The omission of Gerald Posner's account of Abu Zubaydah's testimony, according to which three members of the Saudi royal family---all of whom later died mysteriously within an eight-day period---were funding al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (61-65).
35. The Commission's denial that it found any evidence of Saudi funding of al-Qaeda (65-68).
36. The Commission's denial in particular that it found any evidence that money from Prince Bandar's wife, Princess Haifa, went to al-Qaeda operatives (69-70).
37. The denial, by means of simply ignoring the distinction between private and commercial flights, that the private flight carrying Saudis from Tampa to Lexington on September 13 violated the rules for US airspace in effect at the time (71-76).
38. The denial that any Saudis were allowed to leave the United States shortly after 9/11 without being adequately investigated (76-82).
39. The omission of evidence that Prince Bandar obtained special permission from the White House for the Saudi flights (82-86).
40. The omission of Coleen Rowley's claim that some officials at FBI headquarters did see the memo from Phoenix agent Kenneth Williams (89-90).
41. The omission of Chicago FBI agent Robert Wright's charge that FBI headquarters closed his case on a terrorist cell, then used intimidation to prevent him from publishing a book reporting his experiences (91).
42. The omission of evidence that FBI headquarters sabotaged the attempt by Coleen Rowley and other Minneapolis agents to obtain a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui's computer (91-94).
43. The omission of the 3.5 hours of testimony to the Commission by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds-testimony that, according to her later public letter to Chairman Kean, revealed serious 9/11-related cover-ups by officials at FBI headquarters (94-101).
44. The omission of the fact that General Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of Pakistan's intelligence agency (the ISI), was in Washington the week prior to 9/11, meeting with CIA chief George Tenet and other US officials (103-04).
45. The omission of evidence that ISI chief Ahmad had ordered $100,000 to be sent to Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11 (104-07).
46. The Commission's claim that it found no evidence that any foreign government, including Pakistan, had provided funding for the al-Qaeda operatives (106).
47. The omission of the report that the Bush administration pressured Pakistan to dismiss Ahmad as ISI chief after the appearance of the story that he had ordered ISI money sent to Atta (107-09).
48. The omission of evidence that the ISI (and not merely al-Qaeda) was behind the assassination of Ahmad Shah Masood (the leader of Afghanistan's Northern Alliance), which occurred just after the week-long meeting between the heads of the CIA and the ISI (110-112).
49. The omission of evidence of ISI involvement in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Reporter Daniel Pearl (113).
50. The omission of Gerald Posner's report that Abu Zubaydah claimed that a Pakistani military officer, Mushaf Ali Mir, was closely connected to both the ISI and al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (114).
51. The omission of the 1999 prediction by ISI agent Rajaa Gulum Abbas that the Twin Towers would be "coming down" (114).
52. The omission of the fact that President Bush and other members of his administration repeatedly spoke of the 9/11 attacks as "opportunities" (116-17).
53. The omission of the fact that The Project for the New American Century, many members of which became key figures in the Bush administration, published a document in 2000 saying that "a new Pearl Harbor" would aid its goal of obtaining funding for a rapid technological transformation of the US military (117-18).
54. The omission of the fact that Donald Rumsfeld, who as head of the commission on the US Space Command had recommended increased funding for it, used the attacks of 9/11 on that very evening to secure such funding (119-22).
55. The failure to mention the fact that three of the men who presided over the failure to prevent the 9/11 attacks-Secretary Rumsfeld, General Richard Myers, and General Ralph Eberhart---were also three of the strongest advocates for the US Space Command (122).
56. The omission of the fact that Unocal had declared that the Taliban could not provide adequate security for it to go ahead with its oil-and-gas pipeline from the Caspian region through Afghanistan and Pakistan (122-25).
57. The omission of the report that at a meeting in July 2001, US representatives said that because the Taliban refused to agree to a US proposal that would allow the pipeline project to go forward, a war against them would begin by October (125-26).
58. The omission of the fact that Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book had said that for the United States to maintain global primacy, it needed to gain control of Central Asia, with its vast petroleum reserves, and that a new Pearl Harbor would be helpful in getting the US public to support this imperial effort (127-28).
59. The omission of evidence that some key members of the Bush administration, including Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, had been agitating for a war with Iraq for many years (129-33).
60. The omission of notes of Rumsfeld's conversations on 9/11 showing that he was determined to use the attacks as a pretext for a war with Iraq (131-32).
1. The omission of evidence that at least six of the alleged hijackers---including Waleed al-Shehri, said by the Commission probably to have stabbed a flight attendant on Flight 11 before it crashed into the North Tower of the WTC---are still alive (19-20).
2. The omission of evidence about Mohamed Atta---such as his reported fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances---that is in tension with the Commission's claim that he had become fanatically religious (20-21).
3. The obfuscation of the evidence that Hani Hanjour was too poor a pilot to have flown an airliner into the Pentagon (21-22).
4. The omission of the fact that the publicly released flight manifests contain no Arab names (23).
5. The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse (25).
6. The omission of the fact that the fires in the Twin Towers were not very big, very hot, or very long-lasting compared with fires in several steel-frame buildings that did not collapse (25-26).
7. The omission of the fact that, given the hypothesis that the collapses were caused by fire, the South Tower, which was struck later than the North Tower and also had smaller fires, should not have collapsed first (26).
8. The omission of the fact that WTC 7 (which was not hit by an airplane and which had only small, localized fires) also collapsed---an occurrence that FEMA admitted it could not explain (26).
9. The omission of the fact that the collapse of the Twin Towers (like that of Building 7) exemplified at least 10 features suggestive of controlled demolition (26-27).
10. The claim that the core of each of the Twin Towers was "a hollow steel shaft"---a claim that denied the existence of the 47 massive steel columns that in reality constituted the core of each tower and that, given the "pancake theory" of the collapses, should have still been sticking up many hundreds of feet in the air (27-28).
11. The omission of Larry Silverstein's statement that he and the fire department commander decided to "pull" Building 7 (28).
12. The omission of the fact that the steel from the WTC buildings was quickly removed from the crime scene and shipped overseas before it could be analyzed for evidence of explosives (30).
13. The omission of the fact that because Building 7 had been evacuated before it collapsed, the official reason for the rapid removal of the steel---that some people might still be alive in the rubble under the steel---made no sense in this case (30).
14. The omission of Mayor Giuliani's statement that he had received word that the World Trade Center was going to collapse (30-31).
15. The omission of the fact that President Bush's brother Marvin and his cousin Wirt Walker III were both principals in the company in charge of security for the WTC (31-32).
16. The omission of the fact that the west wing of the Pentagon would have been the least likely spot to be targeted by al-Qaeda terrorists, for several reasons (33-34).
17. The omission of any discussion of whether the damage done to the Pentagon was consistent with the impact of a Boeing 757 going several hundred miles per hour (34).
18. The omission of the fact that there are photos showing that the west wing's façade did not collapse until 30 minutes after the strike and also that the entrance hole appears too small for a Boeing 757 to have entered (34).
19. The omission of all testimony that has been used to cast doubt on whether remains of a Boeing 757 were visible either inside or outside the Pentagon (34-36).
20. The omission of any discussion of whether the Pentagon has a anti-missile defense system that would have brought down a commercial airliner---even though the Commission suggested that the al-Qaeda terrorists did not attack a nuclear power plant because they assumed that it would be thus defended (36).
21. The omission of the fact that pictures from various security cameras---including the camera at the gas station across from the Pentagon, the film from which was reportedly confiscated by the FBI immediately after the strike---could presumably answer the question of what really hit the Pentagon (37-38).
22. The omission of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's reference to "the missile [used] to damage [the Pentagon]" (39).
23. The apparent endorsement of a wholly unsatisfactory answer to the question of why the Secret Service agents allowed President Bush to remain at the Sarasota school at a time when, given the official story, they should have assumed that a hijacked airliner might be about to crash into the school (41-44).
24. The failure to explore why the Secret Service did not summon fighter jets to provide air cover for Air Force One (43-46).
25. The claims that when the presidential party arrived at the school, no one in the party knew that several planes had been hijacked (47-48).
26. The omission of the report that Attorney General Ashcroft was warned to stop using commercial airlines prior to 9/11 (50).
27. The omission of David Schippers' claim that he had, on the basis of information provided by FBI agents about upcoming attacks in lower Manhattan, tried unsuccessfully to convey this information to Attorney General Ashcroft during the six weeks prior to 9/11 (51).
28. The omission of any mention of the FBI agents who reportedly claimed to have known the targets and dates of the attacks well in advance (51-52).
29. The claim, by means of a circular, question-begging rebuttal, that the unusual purchases of put options prior to 9/11 did not imply advance knowledge of the attacks on the part of the buyers (52-57).
30. The omission of reports that both Mayor Willie Brown and some Pentagon officials received warnings about flying on 9/11 (57).
31. The omission of the report that Osama bin Laden, who already was America's "most wanted" criminal, was treated in July 2001 by an American doctor in the American Hospital in Dubai and visited by the local CIA agent (59).
32. The omission of news stories suggesting that after 9/11 the US military in Afghanistan deliberately allowed Osama bin Laden to escape (60).
33. The omission of reports, including the report of a visit to Osama bin Laden at the hospital in Dubai by the head of Saudi intelligence, that were in tension with the official portrayal of Osama as disowned by his family and his country (60-61).
34. The omission of Gerald Posner's account of Abu Zubaydah's testimony, according to which three members of the Saudi royal family---all of whom later died mysteriously within an eight-day period---were funding al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (61-65).
35. The Commission's denial that it found any evidence of Saudi funding of al-Qaeda (65-68).
36. The Commission's denial in particular that it found any evidence that money from Prince Bandar's wife, Princess Haifa, went to al-Qaeda operatives (69-70).
37. The denial, by means of simply ignoring the distinction between private and commercial flights, that the private flight carrying Saudis from Tampa to Lexington on September 13 violated the rules for US airspace in effect at the time (71-76).
38. The denial that any Saudis were allowed to leave the United States shortly after 9/11 without being adequately investigated (76-82).
39. The omission of evidence that Prince Bandar obtained special permission from the White House for the Saudi flights (82-86).
40. The omission of Coleen Rowley's claim that some officials at FBI headquarters did see the memo from Phoenix agent Kenneth Williams (89-90).
41. The omission of Chicago FBI agent Robert Wright's charge that FBI headquarters closed his case on a terrorist cell, then used intimidation to prevent him from publishing a book reporting his experiences (91).
42. The omission of evidence that FBI headquarters sabotaged the attempt by Coleen Rowley and other Minneapolis agents to obtain a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui's computer (91-94).
43. The omission of the 3.5 hours of testimony to the Commission by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds-testimony that, according to her later public letter to Chairman Kean, revealed serious 9/11-related cover-ups by officials at FBI headquarters (94-101).
44. The omission of the fact that General Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of Pakistan's intelligence agency (the ISI), was in Washington the week prior to 9/11, meeting with CIA chief George Tenet and other US officials (103-04).
45. The omission of evidence that ISI chief Ahmad had ordered $100,000 to be sent to Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11 (104-07).
46. The Commission's claim that it found no evidence that any foreign government, including Pakistan, had provided funding for the al-Qaeda operatives (106).
47. The omission of the report that the Bush administration pressured Pakistan to dismiss Ahmad as ISI chief after the appearance of the story that he had ordered ISI money sent to Atta (107-09).
48. The omission of evidence that the ISI (and not merely al-Qaeda) was behind the assassination of Ahmad Shah Masood (the leader of Afghanistan's Northern Alliance), which occurred just after the week-long meeting between the heads of the CIA and the ISI (110-112).
49. The omission of evidence of ISI involvement in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Reporter Daniel Pearl (113).
50. The omission of Gerald Posner's report that Abu Zubaydah claimed that a Pakistani military officer, Mushaf Ali Mir, was closely connected to both the ISI and al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (114).
51. The omission of the 1999 prediction by ISI agent Rajaa Gulum Abbas that the Twin Towers would be "coming down" (114).
52. The omission of the fact that President Bush and other members of his administration repeatedly spoke of the 9/11 attacks as "opportunities" (116-17).
53. The omission of the fact that The Project for the New American Century, many members of which became key figures in the Bush administration, published a document in 2000 saying that "a new Pearl Harbor" would aid its goal of obtaining funding for a rapid technological transformation of the US military (117-18).
54. The omission of the fact that Donald Rumsfeld, who as head of the commission on the US Space Command had recommended increased funding for it, used the attacks of 9/11 on that very evening to secure such funding (119-22).
55. The failure to mention the fact that three of the men who presided over the failure to prevent the 9/11 attacks-Secretary Rumsfeld, General Richard Myers, and General Ralph Eberhart---were also three of the strongest advocates for the US Space Command (122).
56. The omission of the fact that Unocal had declared that the Taliban could not provide adequate security for it to go ahead with its oil-and-gas pipeline from the Caspian region through Afghanistan and Pakistan (122-25).
57. The omission of the report that at a meeting in July 2001, US representatives said that because the Taliban refused to agree to a US proposal that would allow the pipeline project to go forward, a war against them would begin by October (125-26).
58. The omission of the fact that Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book had said that for the United States to maintain global primacy, it needed to gain control of Central Asia, with its vast petroleum reserves, and that a new Pearl Harbor would be helpful in getting the US public to support this imperial effort (127-28).
59. The omission of evidence that some key members of the Bush administration, including Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, had been agitating for a war with Iraq for many years (129-33).
60. The omission of notes of Rumsfeld's conversations on 9/11 showing that he was determined to use the attacks as a pretext for a war with Iraq (131-32).
Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
61. The omission of the statement by the Project for the New American Century that "the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" (133-34).
62. The claim that FAA protocol on 9/11 required the time-consuming process of going through several steps in the chain of command--even though the Report cites evidence to the contrary (158).
63. The claim that in those days there were only two air force bases in NORAD's Northeast sector that kept fighters on alert and that, in particular, there were no fighters on alert at either McGuire or Andrews (159-162).
64. The omission of evidence that Andrews Air Force Base did keep several fighters on alert at all times (162-64).
65. The acceptance of the twofold claim that Colonel Marr of NEADS had to telephone a superior to get permission to have fighters scrambled from Otis and that this call required eight minutes (165-66).
66. The endorsement of the claim that the loss of an airplane's transponder signal makes it virtually impossible for the US military's radar to track that plane (166-67).
67. The claim that the Payne Stewart interception did not show NORAD's response time to Flight 11 to be extraordinarily slow (167-69).
68. The claim that the Otis fighters were not airborne until seven minutes after they received the scramble order because they did not know where to go (174-75).
69. The claim that the US military did not know about the hijacking of Flight 175 until 9:03, when it was crashing into the South Tower (181-82).
70. The omission of any explanation of (a) why NORAD's earlier report, according to which the FAA had notified the military about the hijacking of Flight 175 at 8:43, was now to be considered false and (b) how this report, if it was false, could have been published and then left uncorrected for almost three years (182).
71. The claim that the FAA did not set up a teleconference until 9:20 that morning (183).
72. The omission of the fact that a memo by Laura Brown of the FAA says that its teleconference was established at about 8:50 and that it included discussion of Flight 175's hijacking (183-84, 186).
73. The claim that the NMCC teleconference did not begin until 9:29 (186-88).
74. The omission, in the Commission's claim that Flight 77 did not deviate from its course until 8:54, of the fact that earlier reports had said 8:46 (189-90).
75. The failure to mention that the report that a large jet had crashed in Kentucky, at about the time Flight 77 disappeared from FAA radar, was taken seriously enough by the heads of the FAA and the FBI's counterterrorism unit to be relayed to the White House (190).
76. The claim that Flight 77 flew almost 40 minutes through American airspace towards Washington without being detected by the military's radar (191-92).
77. The failure to explain, if NORAD's earlier report that it was notified about Flight 77 at 9:24 was "incorrect," how this erroneous report could have arisen, i.e., whether NORAD officials had been lying or simply confused for almost three years (192-93).
78. The claim that the Langley fighter jets, which NORAD had previously said were scrambled to intercept Flight 77, were actually scrambled in response to an erroneous report from an (unidentified) FAA controller at 9:21 that Flight 11 was still up and was headed towards Washington (193-99).
79. The claim that the military did not hear from the FAA about the probable hijacking of Flight 77 before the Pentagon was struck (204-12).
80. The claim that Jane Garvey did not join Richard Clarke's videoconference until 9:40, after the Pentagon was struck (210).
81. The claim that none of the teleconferences succeeded in coordinating the FAA and military responses to the hijackings because "none of [them] included the right officials from both the FAA and the Defense Department"---although Richard Clarke says that his videoconference included FAA head Jane Garvey as well as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers, the acting chair of the joint chiefs of staff (211).
82. The Commission's claim that it did not know who from the Defense Department participated in Clarke's videoconference---although Clarke's book said that it was Donald Rumsfeld and General Myers (211-212).
83. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that he was on Capitol Hill during the attacks, without mentioning Richard Clarke's contradictory account, according to which Myers was in the Pentagon participating in Clarke's videoconference (213-17).
84. The failure to mention the contradiction between Clarke's account of Rumsfeld's whereabouts that morning and Rumsfeld's own accounts (217-19).
85. The omission of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta's testimony, given to the Commission itself, that Vice-President Cheney and others in the underground shelter were aware by 9:26 that an aircraft was approaching the Pentagon (220).
86. The claim that Pentagon officials did not know about an aircraft approaching Pentagon until 9:32, 9:34, or 9:36---in any case, only a few minutes before the building was hit (223).
87. The endorsement of two contradictory stories about the aircraft that hit the Pentagon---one in which it executed a 330-degree downward spiral (a "high-speed dive") and another in which there is no mention of this maneuver (222-23).
88. The claim that the fighter jets from Langley, which were allegedly scrambled to protect Washington from "Phantom Flight 11," were nowhere near Washington because they were mistakenly sent out to sea (223-24).
89. The omission of all the evidence suggesting that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77 (224-25).
90. The claim that the military was not notified by the FAA about Flight 93's hijacking until after it crashed (227-29, 232, 253).
91. The twofold claim that the NMCC did not monitor the FAA-initiated conference and then was unable to get the FAA connected to the NMCC-initiated teleconference (230-31).
92. The omission of the fact that the Secret Service is able to know everything that the FAA knows (233).
93. The omission of any inquiry into why the NMCC initiated its own teleconference if, as Laura Brown of the FAA has said, this is not standard protocol (234).
94. The omission of any exploration of why General Montague Winfield not only had a rookie (Captain Leidig) take over his role as the NMCC's Director of Operations but also left him in charge after it was clear that the Pentagon was facing an unprecedented crisis (235-36).
95. The claim that the FAA (falsely) notified the Secret Service between 10:10 and 10:15 that Flight 93 was still up and headed towards Washington (237).
96. The claim that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down authorization until after 10:10 (several minutes after Flight 93 had crashed) and that this authorization was not transmitted to the US military until 10:31 (237-41).
97. The omission of all the evidence indicating that Flight 93 was shot down by a military plane (238-39, 252-53).
98. The claim that Richard Clarke did not receive the requested shoot-down authorization until 10:25 (240).
99. The omission of Clarke's own testimony, which suggests that he received the shoot-down authorization by 9:50 (240).
100. The claim that Cheney did not reach the underground shelter (the PEOC [Presidential Emergency Operations Center]) until 9:58 (241-44).
101. The omission of multiple testimony, including that of Norman Mineta to the Commission itself, that Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:20 (241-44).
102. The claim that shoot-down authorization must be given by the president (245).
103. The omission of reports that Colonel Marr ordered a shoot-down of Flight 93 and that General Winfield indicated that he and others at the NMCC had expected a fighter jet to reach Flight 93 (252).
104. The omission of reports that there were two fighter jets in the air a few miles from NYC and three of them only 200 miles from Washington (251).
105. The omission of evidence that there were at least six bases with fighters on alert in the northeastern part of the United States (257-58).
106. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that NORAD had defined its mission in terms of defending only against threats from abroad (258-62).
107. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that NORAD had not recognized the possibility that terrorists might use hijacked airliners as missiles (262-63).
108. The failure to highlight the significance of evidence presented in the Report itself, and to mention other evidence, showing that NORAD had indeed recognized the threat that hijacked airliners might be used as missiles (264-67).
109. The failure to probe the issue of how the "war games" scheduled for that day were related to the military's failure to intercept the hijacked airliners (268-69).
110. The failure to discuss the possible relevance of Operation Northwoods to the attacks of 9/11 (269-71).
111. The claim---made in explaining why the military did not get information about the hijackings in time to intercept them---that FAA personnel inexplicably failed to follow standard procedures some 16 times (155-56, 157, 179, 180, 181, 190, 191, 193, 194, 200, 202-03, 227, 237, 272-75).
112. The failure to point out that the Commission's claimed "independence" was fatally compromised by the fact that its executive director, Philip Zelikow, was virtually a member of the Bush administration (7-9, 11-12, 282-84).
113. The failure to point out that the White House first sought to prevent the creation of a 9/11 Commission, then placed many obstacles in its path, including giving it extremely meager funding (283-85).
114. The failure to point out that the Commission's chairman, most of the other commissioners, and at least half of the staff had serious conflicts of interest (285-90, 292-95).
115. The failure of the Commission, while bragging that it presented its final report "without dissent," to point out that this was probably possible only because Max Cleland, the commissioner who was most critical of the White House and swore that he would not be part of "looking at information only partially," had to resign in order to accept a position with the Export-Import Bank, and that the White House forwarded his nomination for this position only after he was becoming quite outspoken in his criticisms (290-291).
62. The claim that FAA protocol on 9/11 required the time-consuming process of going through several steps in the chain of command--even though the Report cites evidence to the contrary (158).
63. The claim that in those days there were only two air force bases in NORAD's Northeast sector that kept fighters on alert and that, in particular, there were no fighters on alert at either McGuire or Andrews (159-162).
64. The omission of evidence that Andrews Air Force Base did keep several fighters on alert at all times (162-64).
65. The acceptance of the twofold claim that Colonel Marr of NEADS had to telephone a superior to get permission to have fighters scrambled from Otis and that this call required eight minutes (165-66).
66. The endorsement of the claim that the loss of an airplane's transponder signal makes it virtually impossible for the US military's radar to track that plane (166-67).
67. The claim that the Payne Stewart interception did not show NORAD's response time to Flight 11 to be extraordinarily slow (167-69).
68. The claim that the Otis fighters were not airborne until seven minutes after they received the scramble order because they did not know where to go (174-75).
69. The claim that the US military did not know about the hijacking of Flight 175 until 9:03, when it was crashing into the South Tower (181-82).
70. The omission of any explanation of (a) why NORAD's earlier report, according to which the FAA had notified the military about the hijacking of Flight 175 at 8:43, was now to be considered false and (b) how this report, if it was false, could have been published and then left uncorrected for almost three years (182).
71. The claim that the FAA did not set up a teleconference until 9:20 that morning (183).
72. The omission of the fact that a memo by Laura Brown of the FAA says that its teleconference was established at about 8:50 and that it included discussion of Flight 175's hijacking (183-84, 186).
73. The claim that the NMCC teleconference did not begin until 9:29 (186-88).
74. The omission, in the Commission's claim that Flight 77 did not deviate from its course until 8:54, of the fact that earlier reports had said 8:46 (189-90).
75. The failure to mention that the report that a large jet had crashed in Kentucky, at about the time Flight 77 disappeared from FAA radar, was taken seriously enough by the heads of the FAA and the FBI's counterterrorism unit to be relayed to the White House (190).
76. The claim that Flight 77 flew almost 40 minutes through American airspace towards Washington without being detected by the military's radar (191-92).
77. The failure to explain, if NORAD's earlier report that it was notified about Flight 77 at 9:24 was "incorrect," how this erroneous report could have arisen, i.e., whether NORAD officials had been lying or simply confused for almost three years (192-93).
78. The claim that the Langley fighter jets, which NORAD had previously said were scrambled to intercept Flight 77, were actually scrambled in response to an erroneous report from an (unidentified) FAA controller at 9:21 that Flight 11 was still up and was headed towards Washington (193-99).
79. The claim that the military did not hear from the FAA about the probable hijacking of Flight 77 before the Pentagon was struck (204-12).
80. The claim that Jane Garvey did not join Richard Clarke's videoconference until 9:40, after the Pentagon was struck (210).
81. The claim that none of the teleconferences succeeded in coordinating the FAA and military responses to the hijackings because "none of [them] included the right officials from both the FAA and the Defense Department"---although Richard Clarke says that his videoconference included FAA head Jane Garvey as well as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers, the acting chair of the joint chiefs of staff (211).
82. The Commission's claim that it did not know who from the Defense Department participated in Clarke's videoconference---although Clarke's book said that it was Donald Rumsfeld and General Myers (211-212).
83. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that he was on Capitol Hill during the attacks, without mentioning Richard Clarke's contradictory account, according to which Myers was in the Pentagon participating in Clarke's videoconference (213-17).
84. The failure to mention the contradiction between Clarke's account of Rumsfeld's whereabouts that morning and Rumsfeld's own accounts (217-19).
85. The omission of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta's testimony, given to the Commission itself, that Vice-President Cheney and others in the underground shelter were aware by 9:26 that an aircraft was approaching the Pentagon (220).
86. The claim that Pentagon officials did not know about an aircraft approaching Pentagon until 9:32, 9:34, or 9:36---in any case, only a few minutes before the building was hit (223).
87. The endorsement of two contradictory stories about the aircraft that hit the Pentagon---one in which it executed a 330-degree downward spiral (a "high-speed dive") and another in which there is no mention of this maneuver (222-23).
88. The claim that the fighter jets from Langley, which were allegedly scrambled to protect Washington from "Phantom Flight 11," were nowhere near Washington because they were mistakenly sent out to sea (223-24).
89. The omission of all the evidence suggesting that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77 (224-25).
90. The claim that the military was not notified by the FAA about Flight 93's hijacking until after it crashed (227-29, 232, 253).
91. The twofold claim that the NMCC did not monitor the FAA-initiated conference and then was unable to get the FAA connected to the NMCC-initiated teleconference (230-31).
92. The omission of the fact that the Secret Service is able to know everything that the FAA knows (233).
93. The omission of any inquiry into why the NMCC initiated its own teleconference if, as Laura Brown of the FAA has said, this is not standard protocol (234).
94. The omission of any exploration of why General Montague Winfield not only had a rookie (Captain Leidig) take over his role as the NMCC's Director of Operations but also left him in charge after it was clear that the Pentagon was facing an unprecedented crisis (235-36).
95. The claim that the FAA (falsely) notified the Secret Service between 10:10 and 10:15 that Flight 93 was still up and headed towards Washington (237).
96. The claim that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down authorization until after 10:10 (several minutes after Flight 93 had crashed) and that this authorization was not transmitted to the US military until 10:31 (237-41).
97. The omission of all the evidence indicating that Flight 93 was shot down by a military plane (238-39, 252-53).
98. The claim that Richard Clarke did not receive the requested shoot-down authorization until 10:25 (240).
99. The omission of Clarke's own testimony, which suggests that he received the shoot-down authorization by 9:50 (240).
100. The claim that Cheney did not reach the underground shelter (the PEOC [Presidential Emergency Operations Center]) until 9:58 (241-44).
101. The omission of multiple testimony, including that of Norman Mineta to the Commission itself, that Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:20 (241-44).
102. The claim that shoot-down authorization must be given by the president (245).
103. The omission of reports that Colonel Marr ordered a shoot-down of Flight 93 and that General Winfield indicated that he and others at the NMCC had expected a fighter jet to reach Flight 93 (252).
104. The omission of reports that there were two fighter jets in the air a few miles from NYC and three of them only 200 miles from Washington (251).
105. The omission of evidence that there were at least six bases with fighters on alert in the northeastern part of the United States (257-58).
106. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that NORAD had defined its mission in terms of defending only against threats from abroad (258-62).
107. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that NORAD had not recognized the possibility that terrorists might use hijacked airliners as missiles (262-63).
108. The failure to highlight the significance of evidence presented in the Report itself, and to mention other evidence, showing that NORAD had indeed recognized the threat that hijacked airliners might be used as missiles (264-67).
109. The failure to probe the issue of how the "war games" scheduled for that day were related to the military's failure to intercept the hijacked airliners (268-69).
110. The failure to discuss the possible relevance of Operation Northwoods to the attacks of 9/11 (269-71).
111. The claim---made in explaining why the military did not get information about the hijackings in time to intercept them---that FAA personnel inexplicably failed to follow standard procedures some 16 times (155-56, 157, 179, 180, 181, 190, 191, 193, 194, 200, 202-03, 227, 237, 272-75).
112. The failure to point out that the Commission's claimed "independence" was fatally compromised by the fact that its executive director, Philip Zelikow, was virtually a member of the Bush administration (7-9, 11-12, 282-84).
113. The failure to point out that the White House first sought to prevent the creation of a 9/11 Commission, then placed many obstacles in its path, including giving it extremely meager funding (283-85).
114. The failure to point out that the Commission's chairman, most of the other commissioners, and at least half of the staff had serious conflicts of interest (285-90, 292-95).
115. The failure of the Commission, while bragging that it presented its final report "without dissent," to point out that this was probably possible only because Max Cleland, the commissioner who was most critical of the White House and swore that he would not be part of "looking at information only partially," had to resign in order to accept a position with the Export-Import Bank, and that the White House forwarded his nomination for this position only after he was becoming quite outspoken in his criticisms (290-291).
txlonghorn
Senior Member
- Mar 9, 2009
- 3,042
- 400
- 48
OK Look Out...Jesus, we get it...you don't have a life.
Do you think you could put that much effort into the Obama Birth Certificate Hunt???
Or how about the Sandy Berger Document Scandal???
Do you think you could put that much effort into the Obama Birth Certificate Hunt???
Or how about the Sandy Berger Document Scandal???
