TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11?
Pages (162): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by tiesto14 I had to comment to trancer-x....he is the most delusional person on this board....he would beleive his mother is part of a body snatching scheme originating from the planet Crazy Pants if he could find one web page that said so...he is the classic example of someone who beleive everything he reads in the internet...he is insane..and i do not mean insane in a facetious way...i mean insane, as in he should be commited or on serious medication...he proballey sits home each and every day sifting through evidence, meanwhile dismissing all evidence contrary to his beleif, to find one flaw in everything...he most likely has no friends and likes to sit in the dark....surely has disdain for everyone who doesnt agree with him and feels he is the most intellectual human being to walk this earth, apart from the quacks who post the web sites for him to uncover the "TRUTH"...his weekend nights consist of reading Chomsky and Zinn and writing letters to William Blum while watching the Discoveriy channels TRUE expose on Roswell, New Mexico..altering between that and the History channels proof that Lyndon Johnson had a part in the JFK assasination...he seldom leaves his house and when he does he looks at everyone as a sheep but keeps his head down because secrelty he wants to be wanted...yet he knows he can never find anyone as intellectual and unblinded as himself...so he will end up writing a book about all his conspiracies and how he found the truth but no one will buy it, exceot of course the other nuts who also know jsut where to look for their secret information...here i will give you a hint..it starts with www....he is a scarey individual and will probally post in repsonce to this that i am uneducated, have my head my ass, blinded and .or stupid...he predictable and will never truly be happy...regardless of what he tells you he is sad inside and very lonely...trancer will you be my Valentine? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by tiesto14 no credibal person on this planet takes the 9.11 conspirqacy seriously |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by skot_e TrancerX I read that link about the building's being cracked and I just couldn't help but think as I read that it was written as a creative piece. Then I got to this bit: William spent hours testifying before the 9-11 Commission behind closed doors. His testimony as an eye witness does not appear anywhere in the 576 page report. But after all, Bush told us who did it, so why bother to examine the evidence or talk with the witnesses. The only agency that was allowed to investigate the circumstances of the event was FEMA. Now, if someone appeares as a witness, then surely they would HAVE to be in the report. I just can't imagine the report by the 9/11 commision would be edited to suit the govt. Isn''t the commision made up from both democrats and republicans? |
| quote: |
| Prof. Zelikow's area of academic expertise is the creation and maintenance of, in his words, �public myths� or �public presumptions,� which he defines as �beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community." In his academic work and elsewhere he has taken a special interest in what he has called ��searing� or �molding� events [that] take on �transcendent� importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experiencing generation passes from the scene. In the United States, beliefs about the formation of the nation and the Constitution remain powerful today, as do beliefs about slavery and the Civil War. World War II, Vietnam, and the civil rights struggle are more recent examples.� He has noted that �a history�s narrative power is typically linked to how readers relate to the actions of individuals in the history; if readers cannot make a connection to their own lives, then a history may fail to engage them at all� ("Thinking about Political History," Miller Center Report [Winter 1999], pp. 5-7). In the November-December 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs, he co-authored an article entitled �Catastrophic Terrorism,� in which he speculated that if the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had succeeded, �the resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe it. Such an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event in American history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America�s fundamental sense of security, as did the Soviet atomic bomb test in 1949. Like Pearl Harbor, the event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States might respond with draconian measures scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly force. More violence could follow, either future terrorist attacks or U.S. counterattacks. Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently.� Philip Zelikow served on President Bush's transition team in 2000-2001. After George W. Bush took office, Zelikow was named to a position on the President�s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and worked on other task forces and commissions as well, including the National Commission on Federal Election Reform. |
The truth about Zelikow and the Sept. 11 cover-up commission
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
last updated October 20, 2004 1:51 AM
By CAROLE BROUILLET
Philip Zelikow will speak at Kresge Auditorium, today, from 4:15 to 5:30 p.m. We plan to protest the Sept. 11 cover-up and to raise questions about his role as executive director of the 9-11 Commission and the Commission�s report.
Zelikow, a national security adviser to both Bush administrations and a principal author of the official 9-11 Commission Report, was part of Bush�s transition team for the National Security Council after the 2000 election. He was appointed to the President�s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board a month after the Sept. 11 2001 attacks.
The Family Steering Committee called for his resignation because of his obvious conflicts of interests.
While Sept. 11 has been used to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, shred the Constitution and Bill of Rights, construct a global police state, enrich weapons manufacturers and seize oil assets, there have been no convictions in any courts of law supporting the government conspiracy theory, particularly the Saddam Hussein / Al Qaeda link.
The 9-11 Commission failed to mention or address the multiple war games / exercises that were being conducted that day, out of the White House. As many as five war game drills were in process, some involving hijacked airliners, a plane crashing into a building, some involving false blips deliberately inserted onto FAA and military radar screens.
One exercise pulled significant fighter resources away from the Northeastern United States on Sept. 11.
These exercises involved North American Air Defense Command, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Canadian Air Force, the CIA and the National Reconnaissance Office.
Coincidentally, in New York City, massive preparations were underway for a biochemical attack drill involving FEMA, the Mayor�s Office of Emergency Management, the FBI, the U.S. Department of Justice, Weill Medical College, the N.Y. Deptartment of Health, the N.Y. Fire Department, the N.Y. Police Department, the American Red Cross and the Port Authority.
The Secret Service and Cheney�s overseeing role during the events of Sept. 11 were overlooked. This was documented in Michael Ruppert�s new book �Crossing the Rubicon � The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil.�
The Commissioners and Zelikow had deep conflicts of interest and many reasons to cover up the truth about Sept. 11.
They are now engaged in a public relations effort to sell the official narrative and the war on terrorism. Both the official inquiry and the Commission�s parameters were to support the official story and justify the creation of Homeland Security Department.
Homeland Security in German is �geheimstadt politza,� which during World War II was abbreviated to Gestapo. Do Americans really believe a �Gestapo� will make us safer?
The Stanford Institute for International Studies is sponsoring Zelikow�s talk, but the Department of Homeland Security has awarded a 15-month $1.65-million contract to CISAC and the Stanford Institute for International Studies to conduct research on how national and local agencies improve the design and evaluation of future terrorist exercises of national and local response systems.
The DHS research contract resulted from CISAC�s observation of last year�s spring State Department-DHS-sponsored, full-scale exercise called TOPOFF2, designed to prepare national, state and local officials to respond to potential terrorist attacks within the United States.
The United States has a long history of training terrorists and launching covert operations throughout the world.
Terrorism allows states to declare emergencies, label all opposition as terrorists and reduce civil rights.
Carol Brouillet is an organizer for the International Inquiry into 9-11, a group that is responsible for exposing information about Sept. 11.
http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?pag...ry=0001_article
Cover up?
No way... absolutely no freaking way !!
When a building is involved in a controlled demolition, it falls STRAIGHT DOWN. Now go back to your elementary school books and wigger Eminem music....we knowz the media always TELLS THE TRUTH.
There once was a Paranoid named Trancer.
He thought whacked-out websites had the answer.
From a dark little computer room, he decried;
"CONSPIRACY! That's why they all died!"
...when shown common sense, it only made the dork type faster.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco There was a Paranoid named Trancer. He thought whacked-out websites had the answer. From a dark little computer room, he decried; "CONSPIRACY! That's why they all died!" ...when shown common sense, it only made the dork type faster. |
| quote: |
| Zelikow was named to a position on the President�s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and worked on other task forces and commissions as well, including the National Commission on Federal Election Reform. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco There once was a Paranoid named Trancer. He thought whacked-out websites had the answer. From a dark little computer room, he decried; "CONSPIRACY! That's why they all died!" ...when shown common sense, it only made the dork type faster. |
the guy has skill lol
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco There once was a Paranoid named Trancer. He thought whacked-out websites had the answer. From a dark little computer room, he decried; "CONSPIRACY! That's why they all died!" ...when shown common sense, it only made the dork type faster. |
^^^You are probably right, but the last sentence was pushing it in length anyways and adding "cut and paste" over the single word of "type" would have messed too much with the syntax.
Chaulk it up to "Artistic License".
It's funny that you guys think that personally attacking me with adolescent innuendo is going to make up for your absence of an argument.
I think that you keep forgetting that this is not the COR, so maybe you should go back there until you can learn to behave like adults.
BTW - donny, I really like your myspace profile. Those shades are pimpin.
http://www.myspace.com/donnybrasco
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco There once was a Paranoid named Trancer. He thought whacked-out websites had the answer. From a dark little computer room, he decried; "CONSPIRACY! That's why they all died!" ...when shown common sense, it only made the dork type faster. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X [color=#33ccff]It's funny that you guys think that personally attacking me with adolescent innuendo is going to make up for your absence of an argument. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco Common Sense is a finite commodity...insanity (conspiracy theories) knows no bounds. I'm fresh out of ways to show you common sense. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco So I turned to the arts and poetry. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco Common Sense is a finite commodity...insanity (conspiracy theories) knows no bounds. |
Essay: Outrageous Conspiracy Theories: A Report on a Conversation with Philip Zelikow
Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 12:42 PM
Thomas Hansen, Ph.D., Charlottesville, Virginia
It is nearly a year since the 9/11 Commission report was finished and the investigation of the events of 9/11 officially came to a close. But unofficially, many Americans have unanswered questions, and at least some of this hesitancy to close the book on 9/11 is because of the long-standing connection between the Bush Administration and the man who was the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Dr. Philip Zelikow.
In a new book by Professor Emeritus David Ray Griffin of the Claremont School of Theology (The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, Olive Branch Press, 2005), the case is made that the staff of the 9/11 Commission acted as gatekeepers who followed the official explanation of events of 9/11, rather than acting as true independent investigators. Griffin gives detailed and abundant evidence that he feels shows Philip Zelikow and his staff did not thoroughly investigate information that was contrary to what the Bush Administration had already accepted as the facts of 9/11. Last fall I had a conversation with Zelikow, which I feel supports the ideas and evidence of Professor Griffin�s book. But before I go into what Dr. Zelikow told me in person, let us look at the facts of Zelikow�s association with members of the Bush Administration over the past 15 years. The reason I present this �bio� of Dr. Zelikow is that, while we expect any person might receive a job offer based on whom they have worked with and have known in the past, this was not an ordinary job. This job was to oversee the official investigation of a most serious and consequential crime, and it occurred under the watch of President Bush�s Administration. Dr.Philip Zelikow, despite his fine record of integrity and scholarship, was clearly not independent from the Bush Administration. And since Bush, Cheney and Rice were three of the witnesses who testified before the Commission, their relationship with Zelikow is relevant.
Dr. Zelikow was on the National Security Council of President George H.W. Bush in the 1980s, working as an aide to National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft. Condoleeza Rice was also an aide, working with Zelikow. In 1997, Zelikow and Rice co-authored a book. Also in the 1990s, Zelikow directed the Aspen Strategy Group, which included Rice, Scowcroft, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and others. Then after President George W. Bush was elected in 2000, Zelikow was appointed to the National Security Council transition team to provide recommendations to Rice as she accepted the position of National Security Advisor to Bush. Shortly after 9/11, Zelikow was appointed to President Bush�s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. In 2003, he was appointed Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, and took a leave from his position as Director of the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia.
After the 9/11 Commission Report was finished in July 2004, and the Commission was dissolved, Zelikow returned to his previous Miller Center position for a few months. Recently he left the Miller Center job completely and became Counselor of the Department of State, as announced by new Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on February 25, 2005. To quote Rice in the U.S. State Department press release of that day, �Philip and I have worked together for years, and I value his counsel and expertise. I appreciate his willingness to take on this assignment.� To quote the State Department press release, �Though the position has been vacant since 2001, the office of the Counselor is not new, having been part of the Department�s organization since 1909. The Counselor is a principal officer of the Department. As Counselor, Dr. Zelikow will serve as a senior policy advisor on a wide range of issues and will undertake special assignments as directed by the Secretary.�
So we see from these facts that Philip Zelikow�s work with members of the Bush Administration preceded his 9/11 Commission work for 15 years, and it has now resumed again, fulltime. Apparently we are supposed to assume that during 2003-2004, when he was Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, he was NOT �associated with� members of the Bush Administration as he had been before, and is again now. He was somehow able to distance himself from his past relationship with them, oversee the interviews of many witnesses, thoroughly investigate all of the evidence, and supervise the writing of the final 9/11 Commission Report without being influenced by his past association with them. And now he has been able to re-associate with them in good stead and be re-hired by the Bush Administration fulltime in an important position.
Dr. Zelikow gave a lecture at the Miller Center at UVA on September 10, 2004, titled, �The Road to 9/11,� and another on October 14, titled, �The Road From 9/11.� I attended the second of the two lectures and had an opportunity afterwards to have a conversation with him for several minutes. Among other things, I asked him why the Commission did not report more evidence that would answer the specific conspiracy concerns and questions that have been circulating regarding 9/11. I asked him why the Commission would let these concerns go unanswered and cause unnecessary doubt and dissent in the country.
I pointed out to Dr. Zelikow that one of many reasons this conspiracy talk about 9/11 continues is that there have been no photos released of the Boeing 757 wreckage inside the Pentagon, or outside either, as we normally see after a civilian plane crash. I asked if he has seen photos that show the wreckage of the 757. He said, yes, they have photos, and that he has seen them, and he also said that there are eyewitness reports from a dozen or so rescue workers at the Pentagon who confirm seeing those airplane parts in the wreckage. Well, I asked, can I or some other ordinary person see these photos? He said no. I asked if I could see the rescue worker�s statements, and he said no. I told him I had seen photos of the exterior Pentagon wall before it collapsed, and the hole where the plane entered appeared to be only about 20 feet in diameter, with unbroken window frames on either side of it where the wings and engines would have hit. This hole was much too small for a 757 to enter, and no wreckage of the plane is shown on the ground outside. He said those photos might have been �adjusted� in scale by someone to give the wrong impression. I asked if I or anyone else could see the National Transportation Safety Board report about the crash, or even about the 757 being picked up by radar as it approached Washington, and he said no. He said that the air traffic controllers at Dulles saw on their radar that a plane was approaching, without its transponder turned on, but they could not identify it just by radar. It was not one scheduled to come into Dulles, so they assumed it was landing at Reagan National, and when it dropped off their radar at the Pentagon they knew something was wrong. This was 35 minutes after the second World Trade Center Tower had been hit. I told him this explanation defied reason, but he said it is proven in the NTSB Report, which I can�t see.
I told Dr. Zelikow that this secrecy of the 9/11 Commission is still fueling conspiracy theories and distrust throughout the country and around the world. Then I asked him why he and the Commission and the staff don�t simply release photos and other information to the public so that we can rest assured that the Commission has fully investigated and answered these and other persistent questions. His answer was that the staff, including himself of course as Executive Director, made a conscious decision not to dignify these �outrageous conspiracy theories� by investigating them or reporting on them. In my opinion, this statement by Dr. Zelikow lends credence to Professor Griffin�s charge that Zelikow�s staff acted as a filter of what would be investigated and reported. Dr. Zelikow then told me he could see my point about the public wanting to know more, and he said he would go back to the Commission staff and re-visit the question of what to release. We�re still waiting.
Americans are concerned about the unanswered questions of 9/11. The reputable polling firm, Zogby International, conducted a poll of State of New York citizens in August 2004. Results showed that 49.3% of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall said that some of our leaders �Knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act.� Nearly 30% of registered Republicans agreed with this statement, despite the serious legal and political implications. Only 36% of the total respondents believed that the 9/11 Commission had � answered all the important questions about what actually happened on September 11th,� and 66% want another full investigation of the �still unanswered questions.�
CSPAN2 recently broadcast, and rebroadcast, the speech Professor Griffin gave about his book to a standing-room-only crowd at the University of Wisconsin. People are paying attention and learning and speaking up. As the 9/11 Commission Report approaches its 1-year anniversary, many Americans are not celebrating, nor are they letting it all just fade away. We pay the salaries of those who have made conscious decisions to investigate and report only what fits their own version of 9/11 events, and their own vision of what the world should be like for them. It seems that �we the people� are considered by some officials to be just bystanders, without the right to see the evidence that our leaders have seen, and to decide for ourselves what is true. The Bush Administration has demonstrated a pervasive pattern of secrecy, deception, and arrogance, not just related to the 9/11 investigation. They have left the rest of us in the dark, but we can see well enough to fear that the Emperor has no clothes.
http://www.911citizenswatch.org/mod...article&sid=556
July 22nd Congressional Briefing: The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later: A Citizens' Response - Did They Get It Right?
On July 22, 2005, Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) will host a full-day briefing, co-sponsored by Rep. Ra�l Grijalva (D-AZ), and other sponsors, for Members of Congress and their staffs in the Caucus Room, Cannon House Office Building, Room 345, Independence Ave. & First Street SE, from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
One year after the release of the 9/11 Commission Final Report many questions about what transpired on September 11, 2001 and who should be held accountable still remain unanswered. Serious flaws and omissions in the Report have been addressed by whistleblowers and academics. Well known researchers and authors have put the evnts of that day into historical perspective, and have suggested possible alternatives to the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission regarding intelligence reform, domestic and foreign policy. The hard evidence has yet to be properly evaluated, and points to the need for full transparency, release of information, and continued probative investigations to have an effective, democratic response to the crisis that confronts all of us.
Family members of the victims of 9/11 will present a �Report Card� to address their still unanswered questions about the events of 9/11 and the lack of accountability for the security and intelligence failures that may have allowed these events to happen. Other experts will speak to the flaws in the 9/11 Commission�s process, including conflicts of interest, lack of transparency, investigative rigor and public input, and the many whistleblowers ignored by the Commission.
One panel of experts will explore the omissions and errors in the Commission�s Final Report, including the timeline of NORAD/FAA and P-56 defense responses that day, the suspects and plot, the background of Al Qaeda and bin Laden, the involvement of other countries, the obstruction of investigations by the FBI and CIA, and foreknowledge and forewarnings prior to the attacks. Another panel will place 9/11 into historical perspective and looka t the flawed assumptions that misled the Commission�s work, including the politics of illegal drugs, oil investments, covert operations and terrorism, as well as past covert operations like Contragate and the rise of the neo-conservatives and their agenda.
The last half of the day will be a critical examination by experts of the Commission�s recommendations concerning domestic and foreign policy and intelligence reforms, suggesting other alternatives and policies that could lead to real security and preserve civil liberties and democracy. Rep. McKinney will also address the need for further investigation and opening the evidence for public scrutiny.
A list of confirmed speakers so far includes:
Rober McIlvaine, father of 9/11 victim, member of September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows
Marilyn Rosenthal, mother of 9/11 victim, professor at U. of Michigan, expert on forewarnings to 9/11
Robert Baer, author of Sleeping with the Devil and See No Evil, former CIA
Nafeez Ahmed, author of The War on Truth, Director, Institute for Policy Research & Development
Jumana Musa, Amnesty International
Melvin Goodman, Fellow, Center for International Policy, former CIA
John Newman, Ph.D., professor University of West Virginia, former NSA analyst
Paul Thompson, author of The Terror Timeline
Elaine Cassel, author of The War on Civil Liberties, legal expert
William Michaels, author of No Greater Threat
Lauretta Napoleoni, author of Terror Incorporated: Tracing the Dollars Behind the Terror Networks
Anne Norton, author of Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire
Mary Rose Oaker, President, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination
Committee, legal expert
Peter Dale Scott, Ph.D., professor UC Berkeley, author of Drugs, Oil and War, former Canadian diplomat
Murray Weiss, author of The Man Who Warned America concerning FBI agent John O�Neill who died on 9/11
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/pres...albriefing.html
The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later: A Citizens� Response � Did They Get It Right?
-----------------------------
Rep. Cynthia McKinney:
I want to thank everyone for coming today to this briefing, as we take a scrutinizing look at the 9/11 Commission Final Report on the anniversary of its publication, and ask the question, �Did the commissioners get it right?�
I especially want to thank all of the panelists here today, some of whom have traveled across the Atlantic to be here.
And I wish to point out that without the families of victims of 9/11, none of us would be here today to hear them, as we shall very shortly share their evaluation of the work of the 9/11 Commission. And that is because there would not have been any Commission were it not for the stubborn refusal of family members of the victims of 9/11 to accept the silence and obstruction of the White House and Congress, on this issue.
And with us today we have two of the Jersey Girls; Mindy Kleinberg and Laurie Van Auken, who lost their husbands Alan and Kenneth on 9/11, and who co-chaired the Family Steering Committee. Bob McIlvaine, who lost his son Bobby on September eleven, and who works with 9/11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. And Marilyn Rosenthal, who lost her son, Josh on September eleven.
It is principally through the efforts of these and thousands more Americans whose families were touched by the tragedy of September eleven that this administration reluctantly agreed to establish the Commission. Yet, even once it was founded, the families had to fight to overcome underfunding, and to extend unreasonably short deadlines.
So when we talk of the 9/11 Commission, and its report, we must first thank the families for their perseverance in seeing to it that any commission was assembled at all.
We need to remind ourselves that this Commission�s task was to investigate the murder of nearly 3,000 persons. And while the Commission published a final report, there is today widespread skepticism, among the American public, about the Commission�s report. And many voices are calling for keeping the investigation alive.
Monica Gabriel, who lost her husband, and she is with us today, this morning, as a panelist.
Within days of the attacks, we were told that the perpetrators were from a terrorist network known as Al Qaeda. When reporters and members of the public asked for details, then Secretary of State Colin Powell promised that it would be made all clear to the world in a White Paper.
Nearly 4 years, and 2 wars later, we still have no official statement from the Bush administration on the specifics of who did it, who aided and financed them or what their origins are.
For the families who suffered so much loss this surely feels like adding insult to injury. They deserve to know everything that there is to be known about how their loved ones died. They fought for an investigation that would be non-partisan, independent, and that would get to the bottom of things. But, as work got underway, not only did the Commission run up against obstruction by the administration and non-cooperation from government agencies, many, if not most of the commissioners themselves had conflicts of interest.
And several commissioners spoke out about problems in the process; the lack of investigative rigor and heavy reliance on previous work the Joint-Commission Report, the drafting of recommendations before the investigative process got rolling, the failure to take testimony under oath or in many cases to even take transcripts.
As the original deadline approached, the Commission�s work was half done and only after the families fought for it was the deadline extended.
Then last year, we got the final report. An extensive, prosaically impressive report. But as some of us sat down to read it, the errors and omissions immediately jumped out at us.
How was it that it took over an hour after the first transponder went off before planes were scrambled to meet the threat? All of them too late.
What happened to those reports that surfaced within months of September 11th stating that 7 or more of the alleged hijackers had come forward and claimed that they were victims of stolen identities, they were alive and well, living in Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Tunisia? Why did the Commission choose not even to address this?
What about the terrorist Omar Said Sheikh? Now sitting in a Pakistani prison on charges of participating in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal�s Daniel Pearl. According to Indian intelligence, this man received orders from a Pakistani General to transfer $100,000 to Mohammed Atta. People all over the world are talking about this story. But not a word about it in the Report.
What about Osama bin Laden and his role in the Mujahadin backed by the CIA in the 1980�s to fight the Soviets? The Commission didn�t go there.
This morning, we will be hearing about these omissions, errors, and about the historical background of September 11th from the collection of experts we have assembled. In the afternoon we will be looking at the Report�s recommendations. And I think we will find very little in them that challenges the Bush administration�s foreign policy and its war on terrorism.
In fact, its recommendations for centralizing America�s intelligence networks seems designed to further that agenda.
And we will be hearing about how under the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act and the dual legal system that has been enacted to allow detainees to be held indefinitely without facing judge or jury, how our Civil Liberties are being eroded in the name of fighting the terrorists. As if the term �terrorist� alone tells us all we need to know about our enemies.
We need to know about our enemies, if we�re going to reclaim a future free from the fear of terrorist attacks and weapons of mass destruction. We cannot afford to shy away from inconvenient truths. Many of you may find what you hear today to be inconvenient information. But Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, �The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but times of challenge and controversy.�
I encourage you to engage with the issues that are raised, and if you don�t agree, or don�t like what you hear, challenge it.
I believe that we should take in what every reasonable person has to say, to inform our decisions, because that�s the best way to find the truth.
And in our pursuit of the truth, I encourage you to emulate the courage and the determination of the September 11th families, in their struggle to know, what really happened.
Thank you very much, for being here today.
--------------------------------------------------
http://www.nowpublic.com/node/16470
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X BTW - donny, I really like your myspace profile. Those shades are pimpin.[/color] http://www.myspace.com/donnybrasco |
Information Warfare: Ideas as Weapons in the Era of Deception
At the core of the September 11, 2001 attack is a series of stupendous lies, including:
Adding to the absurdity of the official story are facts such as:
How could such glaring red flags be ignored by the vast majority of Americans, and indeed most people throughout the world? To grasp how this is possible it is helpful to understand the history and sophistication of the "weapons of mass deception" that are used regularly to achieve the aims that the powerful could not attain through legitimate means.
There are many examples of intentional deceptions that, unlike the Big Lie of 9/11/01, are widely recognized, such as the specter of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction concocted by the administrations of George W. Bush and Tony Blair as a pretext to invade Iraq. Other less contemporary examples are described on this site under Historical Precedents for 9/11/01. With each operation, the perpetrators gain more experience about how the news media and the public will react -- experience useful in the planning of subsequent operations. For example, despite reports in local news outlets that responders to the Oklahoma City bombing discovered unexploded bombs inside the building, national media reports remained free of any mention of such contradictions to the official story. It is likely that the success of the cover-up of this operation emboldened the planners of the 9/11/01 attack.
The September 11, 2001 attack was not only bolder than previous attacks, it also likely involved the most careful planning of any psychological operation ever undertaken. We can see in its design and cover-up multiple layers of deception: should the outermost layer be exposed as fraudulent, the deeper layers will serve to continue to obscure the truth. Broadly speaking, there are three layers of cover-up:
Remarkably, it appears that the vast majority of propaganda supporting all three layers of deception was produced, not by attack insiders, but by people exploited by the perpetrators using psychological engineering. The perpetrators are apparently highly expert at designing memes that effectively recruit people to unwittingly support such diversions from the true nature of the attack.
http://911review.com/infowars.html
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco BTW: If this is your attempt at some sort of retrobutive come-back, it takes the cake for weakest come-back ever. If you have however, somehow deduced that this is actually me, I can only marvel at what tangled conspiracy web you had to crawl through in order to come to the conclusion that this is me? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X What does retrobutive mean? I'm not able to find a Moron to English dictionary anywhere online so any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by donnybrasco Simple typo, genius. "Retributive". I doubt the word is that foreign to you that you couldn't still figure it out. How about answering the question now? |
9/11 Coverup Commission
By Ben Johnson and Lt. Colonel Gordon Cucullu
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 15, 2005
�For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.
� � St. Matthew 10:26
Recent revelations about covert �Able Danger� operations are forcing certain people to deal with subjects that they had thought swept under the rug. Despite apparent attempts to conceal the fact, the 9/11 Commission has had to admit it was informed that government agents knew of Mohammed Atta�s affiliation with al-Qaeda two years before 9/11, that Clinton-era policies prevented intelligence officials from sharing that information with the FBI, that the amended time frame would allow Mohammed Atta to have made contacts with Iraqi intelligence, and � most damningly � that it kept all this out of its final report.
Rep. Curt Weldon, R-PA, has done praiseworthy work in drawing attention to the recently released �Able Danger� report. Former CIA operative and terrorism expert Wayne Simmons has described the �Able Danger� operation as �one of our best covert operations� run by the intelligence community. The operation, he continues, was expert at �using open source intelligence,� including data mining techniques, �to locate and identify Islamic terrorists,� specifically al-Qaeda operatives in the United States. This operation identified 9/11 mastermind Mohammed Atta and three of his fellow hijackers as members of an al-Qaeda cell located in New York City (and codenamed �Brooklyn�) in 1999. We can only surmise that a gold mine of information lies yet unrevealed.
Weldon noted with exasperation that this information had been delivered to the 9/11 Commission in at least two separate briefings, possibly three, proving the incredible ineptitude of the commission. Weldon says staffers of the 9/11 Commission did not share � and Commissioners did not request � information about these �Able Danger� reports. This would have been indispensable to uncovering how 9/11 happened and what could be done to prevent a repeat performance, allegedly the commision's task.
Faced with these revelations, commissioners first claimed Rep. Weldon was not telling the truth, that the 9/11 Commission had never been presented with this vital information. Early last week, commission spokesman Al Felzenberg said, �The name �Atta� or a terrorist cell would have gone to the top of the radar screen if it had been mentioned.� Former Congressman and commissioner Lee Hamilton, D-IN, echoed Felzenberg, saying last Monday: �The September 11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell. Had we learned of it obviously it would�ve been a major focus of our investigation.� The New York Times notes that just a few days later, �Mr. Felzenberg said the uniformed officer who briefed two staff members in July 2004 had indeed mentioned Mr. Atta.� Hamilton, too, quickly �readjusted� his initial comments to admit that, indeed, the commissioners heard of Atta after all. Felzenberg acknowledged the commission had been briefed on this information but rejected the testimony of a uniformed officer on the grounds that his evidence did not match their preconceived timeline; it indicates Atta was active from February-April 2000, whereas the commission believed Atta entered the United States for the first time that June.
There are several factors � none flattering to the Commission � that might explain this appalling lapse. John Podhoretz neatly summaries them: �So was the [9/11 Commission] staff a) protecting the Atta timeline or b) Jamie Gorelick or c) the Clinton administration or d) itself, because it got hold of the information relatively late and the staff was lazy?�
The really upsetting issue is contained in Podhoretz's first note. It requires a deeper reading because understanding it fully opens the entire mindset of the hard Left toward terrorism and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Podheretz notes that the Commission was �protecting� its interpretation of Mohammad Atta's international and domestic U.S. travels. Key in this �interpretation� in the minds of Clinton supporters and Bush haters of all stripes is the necessity to deny all ties between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and al-Qaeda. After all, in the endless cacophony of criticism against the Iraq War, the two steady drumbeats have been the failure to find WMDs, and the assertion that there were no links between Saddam Hussein�s Iraq and the September 11 attacks. Until now the Left has issued a series of deliberate misinterpretations of a series of reports � including that of the 9/11 Commission, and WMD reports by David Kay and Charles Dueffler. However the unimpeachable �Able Danger� report was at first denied by 9/11 spokesman Al Felzenberg, then was reluctantly confirmed to be correct. Felzenberg said that �the information that [the �Able Danger� briefing officer] provided us did not mesh with other conclusions that we were drawing.� (Emphasis added.)
And here we get to the crux of the matter. The movements of Atta prior to the terrorist attack as detailed by �Able Danger,� if acknowledged, would support statements by the Czech Republic that link Atta, and hence the al-Qaeda attack on America, irrefutably to Saddam's covert intelligence operatives. This is something that surfaced shortly after 9/11. A former Czech deputy foreign minister, later ambassador to the UN, gave statements that he personally expelled a high raking Iraqi embassy official in Prague for being a covert foreign intelligence agent after the latter was discovered to have met with Mohammed Atta in the international lounge at the Prague airport in August 2001. There the Iraqi transferred a large amount of cash to Atta, sufficient to fund the completion of the September 11 attack. Despite cruel pressure from mainstream media, the hard Left, the U.S. State Department, and the CIA, the Czechs insisted that their report was correct. Former Congressman John LeBoutellier was furious at the Bush administration for bowing to CIA pressure to discount the Czech report because it verified a vital deadly connection within the covert terrorist community. Now it appears as if the Czechs � and those who supported their account � were right.
This Atta-Iraqi meeting did not track well with some of the 9/11 Commission's pre-ordained agenda and had to be firmly discounted. They were able to accomplish this through a lame credit card receipt that could have been signed by any of Atta's cell. But a report with the weight of the Department of Defense and highly credible intelligence operatives behind it would expose the flimsy nature of the evidence that Atta was in the States. Hence, as Flzenberg said, with unflappable arrogance, �if we missed anything we will say so, but we doubt that we did.�
The possible motives of protecting Commissioner Jamie Gorelick and her former employer, President Bill Clinton, are also closely related. Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft testified at the 9/11 Commission�s grandstanding hearings that one of its own commissioners, former high-ranking Clinton Justice Department appointee Jamie S. Gorelick, had been the prime architect of one of the problems for which the commissioners regularly denounced the Bush administration: the wall between intelligence agencies. Her infamous 1995 �wall� memo produced much of the harmful lack of intelligence coordination that the Commission then used to criticize the Bush administration. As FrontPage Magazine�s Jean Pearce wrote last May, the intelligence wall Deputy Attorney General Gorelick put in place smothered ongoing investigations into Chinese contributions to Bill Clinton�s presidential campaigns. Specifically the Department of Defense and the CIA were prohibited from exchanging relevant information with the FBI.
Not all were happy at the time with Gorelick's action. Gutsy New York City-based U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White was appalled by the Gorelick directive, sending two of her own memoranda back to Janet Reno and Gorelick protesting, �The most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating.� Her recommendations were ignored. According to the New York Post, White was so incensed by their actions that she wrote a second, scathing memorandum warning that the �wall� hindered law enforcement efforts to combat terrorism. �It will cost lives,� she reportedly warned. This second memo is still kept secret.
Her prophecy proved accurate; in 2000, members of the Department of Defense knew of an al-Qaeda operative in the United States, but the DoD � hands tied by Gorelick�s policy � declined to alert the FBI, a step that might have prevented the 9/11 attacks. At this time, al-Qaeda had already, either directly or through its affiliates, killed American soldiers in Somalia, detonated the Khobar Towers, and bombed U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In the summer of 2000, they attacked the U.S.S. Cole.
This inaction seemed to fall into line with the Clinton administration�s general disregard for terrorism. Although the discredited former National Security Council staffer Richard Clarke presented President Clinton as an anti-terrorism warrior, former intelligence officer Ralph Peters tells a much different story. �Admitting that [terrorist] threats were real.threatened to destroy the belief system the Clintonites had carried into office,� Peters detailed. In regards to the entire terrorist network, methodology, and ideology, the Clintons were �a textbook case of denial.� It was bad enough, as the �Able Danger� reports indicate, that the Clintons were willfully ignorant of the threat but their criminal negligence was compounded by a sleazy attempt to pass the buck on the Bush administration. Bill Clinton never made any serious retaliation for any of these provocations, nor the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, emboldening these terrorists, assuring through his �intelligence wall� that 9/11 terrorists could not be properly identified and apprehended, and passing the blame for the inevitable outcome of his policies to the nascent Bush administration.
If there was, in fact, covert direction from the top of the Commission to key members of its staff to cloak any link between Saddam and the September 11 attacks, to obfuscate evidence tying the Iraqi regime to al-Qaeda and Mohammed Atta, and to paint the most positive possible picture of the Clintons as implacable terror-warriors, then �Able Danger� had to be ignored and covered up. It fits the pattern of revisionist historical interpretations that seems to be the only authentic legacy from the Clinton years. Further, in Washington staffers tell their bosses what the latter want to hear. They are not rewarded for initiative. As Peters says, when told to think outside the box by a superior, a subordinate knows his job is to �come back with fresh reasons why the in-house position was right all along.�
By acknowledging the Iraq/al-Qaeda ties, not only to terrorism in general but to the September 11 attack, the war becomes completely justifiable as exactly what the Bush administration claimed it was: a defensive, if preemptive, war to protect the United States from a regime with cordial ties to anti-American terrorists. This outcome is so repugnant to the hard Left that it will justify even the most extraordinary suppression of evidence or promulgation of an outright lie in order to achieve its ends.
This is a critically important story that demands public attention. It will not be seriously investigated by many reporters, because the mainstream (read: leftist) media is not interested in exposing how its favorite president in decades enabled terrorists to pull off the worse act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history.
Ben Johnson is Managing Editor of FrontPage Magazine. Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu is author of Separated at Birth, an in-depth profile of North and South Korea.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Article...le.asp?ID=19129
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.