Browse by Category
Graphic image for 9/11 foreknowledge
Graphic: unanswered questions
Graphic of paper shredder- destruction of evidence
Graphic: conflict of interest
Cui bono graphic
Alleged Hijacker graphic
9/11 Commission Shield

White House

The 9/11 Commission v. 19 Named Muslims: A Trial in Absentia

The 9/11 Commission v. 19 Named Muslims:

A Trial in Absentia

By

Gary Wenkle Smith1

[This article first appeared in The Warrior, the official journal of the Trial Lawyers College (www.triallawyerscollege.com) and is reprinted here with permission.]

Within a few hours after the 9/11 attacks, our government named a group of 19 Muslim men as the principal players in the most devastating attack on this country–even more so than Pearl Harbor, as it was mostly civilians who were murdered on 9/11, unlike the mass murder of our sailors by another military power. Further, in addition to approximately 3,000 murders, there could easily be many counts of attempted murder2 charged, as well. Assuming an indictment is issued, there will undoubtedly be dozens of kidnapping charges, some major theft counts, destruction of public and private property, and sundry other charges arising out of the death and destruction of that day’s events. Of course, the principal charge will be the conspiracy to commit these crimes. The 9/11 Commission Report, frequently referred to as the Kean-Zelikow Report3, has concluded that the 19 named Muslims were the operatives of Osama bin Laden, and that they conspired to hijack airliners and commit the atrocities of 9/11.
 

Editor’s Note:
A brilliant lawyerly sketch of what a factual 9/11 defense might look like, and why no one in power would want to see this day in court.

 

I will proceed with this article as though I had… Continue reading

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and 9/11

by Matt Everett
The Journal of Psychohistory Volume 32, No. 3
Winter 2005

If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind bars.
- Andreas von Bülow, former German government minister and author of “Die CIA und der 11. September”

 

Image of Andreas von Bülow At the beginning of the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld promised: “What will follow will not be a repeat of any other conflict. It will be of a force and scope and scale that has been beyond what has been seen before.” The invasion that ensued was, like all wars, destructive and resulted in the loss of thousands of lives. Yet Baghdad fell in a mere three weeks and just six weeks after the invasion commenced, President Bush announced: “Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.” Despite the death and destruction, it was hardly a war of a ‘force,’ ‘scope’ and ‘scale’ beyond what had been seen before.

Show Editor’s Note »

Extensive excerpt from Everett’s absorbing psychohistorical analysis of movers and motives behind the 9/11 tragedy. Everett is a research colleague of Paul “Terror Timeline” Thompson and documents his work with painstaking rigor.

However, before it began, there were indications that some people wanted a far more destructive war than that which ensued. For example, ridiculous as it may now sound, it was suggested that Britain and America might use nuclear weapons against Iraq. As The Guardian reported at the time:

“From last year’s US defence review and the testimony of the Defence Secretary, Geoffrey Hoon, to the defence select committee last March it was clear that a major change in the US and UK nuclear policy was taking place.For the first time Britain and America were contemplating using nuclear weapons against an enemy using only chemical or biological weapons.

Continue reading

We’re all paranoid

By Steven T. Jones
SF Bay Guardian

Sure, the people with the 9/11 conspiracy theories are a little odd. But not everything they’re saying is entirely crazy.

THE GRAND LAKE Theater in Oakland was filled almost to capacity March 10, just as the Guild Theatre in Menlo Park was the night before and the Herbst Theatre in San Francisco would be the next night, all for a documentary with bad production values and even worse leaps of logic.

This was the local premiere of The Great Conspiracy: The 9/11 News Special You Never Saw, a benefit screening for the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance, whose activists have been laboring for more than three years to dispel popular belief in the government’s version of the events on that fateful day.

And to fill that void, they offer a wide variety of alternative theories, carefully laid out in the dozens of books and DVDs that local truth-movement leader Carol Brouillet sold from a table in the theater lobby, or in the hundreds of Web sites devoted to debunking the official story.

Brouillet is what most people think of when they use the term “conspiracy theorist.” Ever since she saw the Oliver Stone film JFK — which she describes as her moment of awakening — she has been trafficking in the dark world of a shadow government executing secret plots. She’s been gathering every relevant document she can find, meticulously connecting every dot into an elaborate proof.

It is a worldview in which… Continue reading

Significant Pattern to 9/11 Report’s Omissions & Distortions

by David Ray Griffin

 

 

NOTE: This is a transcrpit of testimony delivered by theologian David Ray Griffin to the Congressional Black Caucus Annual Legislative Conference on September 23, 2005.

Testimony at the Congressional Black Caucus Annual Legislative Conference 2005 (September 21-24, Washington Convention Center, Washington, DC) for the session, ‘The 9/11 Omission: What the Commission Got Wrong,’ September 23, 2005, sponsored by Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA):

 

Introduction

There have been two main theories about 9/11, each of which is a conspiracy theory. The official conspiracy theory says that the attacks were planned and carried out entirely by al-Qaeda. The alternative theory says that the attacks could not have succeeded without the involvement of forces within our own government.

In examining The 9/11 Commission Report , I have focused on how it dealt with evidence supportive of the alternative theory. I have found that it did so by distorting or simply ignoring this evidence. This is no surprise, because the man running the Commission, Philip Zelikow, was essentially a member of the Bush-Cheney administration. But it is a fact that needs to be brought to light.

Because there are so many omissions and distortions—in my book I identified at least 115—I can point to a significant percentage of them only by moving through my representative list quite quickly.…

Continue reading

Important “Open Letter to Norman Mineta” concerning his 9/11 Commission-censored testimony – Please help distribute widely…

 

Editor’s Note:
An open letter to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta regarding the omission of his 5/23/03 testimony to the 9/11 Commission from the Commission’s Final Report. That testimony included eye witness accounting of events that occurred in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) the morning of 9/11/01. Additionally, as of the time of this letter, it appears that an effort has been made to conceal Secretary Mineta’s testimony from the public by editing it from video archives of the 5/23/03 hearing on the 9/11 Commission website (the testimony is not deleted from the .pdf and .html archive).

Dear Secretary Mineta

Portrait of Norman Mineta

 

On May 23, 2003 you testified before the 9/11 Commission in public hearing as to your experience on the morning of 9/11/01. During your testimony you stated that you arrived at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) underneath the East Wing of the White House “at about 9:20 a.m.”, at which time Vice President Richard Cheney and other staff was already present in the center, with Mr. Cheney clearly in command. You also state in your testimony that you had believed based on a conversation that took place between Mr. Cheney and an unnamed “young man” that a shoot down order had been given by the Vice President prior to your arrival, because, in your words…

“There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, “The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to, “The plane is 10 miles out, “the young man also said to the vice president, “Do the orders still stand?” And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, “Of course the orders still stand.

Continue reading

Open Letter to Richard A. Clarke regarding War Games, 9/11 Timeline and Myers/Rumsfeld Testimony

Editor’s Note:
There has been so little journalistic attention to 9/11 truth that glaring factual contradictions in the “official narrative” can go unremarked in the media for months if not years. In the following letter, 911truth.org co-founder Kyle Hence urges Richard Clarke (former counter-terrorism ‘czar’ for both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, Author, Against All Enemies: Inside America’s War on Terror) to deal with the fundamental inconsistencies between his writing and testimony regarding 9/11 and the version released as gospel by the 9/11 Commission. Clarke has yet to respond but Kyle’s letter is an education in itself.

Open Letter to Richard A. Clarke
From: Kyle Hence
February 23, 2005

Subject: Pertaining to accounts in Clarke’s book Against All Enemies, neither retracted or refuted, regarding 9/11 war games and the participation of General Myers and Sec. Rumsfeld in a video conference managed from the White House Situation Room by Richard Clarke with the assistance of his Deputy, Roger Cressey.

Note of Explanation: This letter/email was presented (via email or in person) to Mr. Clarke on four occasions without a response of any kind to the specific questions raised regarding the actions (or lack of) from our military and top officials in positions of responsibility on 9/11. Given no response, and Rep. Cynthia McKinney’s attempt to raise the issue at February 16th Armed Services Committee hearing, CitizensWatch is taking the step of making this letter public.

This letter (see below) with questions pertaining to 9/11 (wargames, sworn testimony by Rumsfeld & Myers) was first sent as an email in June of 2004 to Mr. Clarke via his consulting company, Good Harbor. This note and these questions were presented personally to Mr. Clarke a second time on October 6, 2004 – and via email (3rd attempt) directly to his personal email box on October 15. When presented with a second opportunity in person (4th attempt) to respond to these queries backstage at a December 7th function at the Institute for Ethical Culture in New York City, Mr. Clarke refused to acknowledge the author and instead quickly left the room.

Receiving no response despite repeated attempts I am now releasing this to the public as an ‘open letter’ in the hopes responsible members of the press, family members and/or dedicated investigators will follow up publicly and personally with Mr. Clarke and the Commissioners who failed to examine the glaring discrepancies between Clarke’s accounts and those offered in public statements and in sworn testimony by Chairman Myers and Sec. Rumsfeld.

It should be noted that Richard Clarke is the only member of the Bush Administration to publicly apologize to the 9/11 families. While generating controversy at the time, his testimony before the 9/11 Commission regarding the warnings and plan for dealing with Al-Qaeda that he presented to Condi Rice and the Bush Administration in January of 2001 has been recently bolstered by the release of an unclassified version of his January memo to then National Security Advisor Rice.

This controversy could pale in comparison, however, to what could be revealed in sworn testimonies before the appropriate Committee regarding Sept. 11th war games (including “Vigilant Warrior” mentioned by Gen. Myers on the morning of Sept. 11th), changing NORAD timelines and the testimony already offered by Chairman Myers and Sec. Rumsfeld regarding their whereabouts and actions taken in the first and most critical minutes immediately following the attack on the World Trade Center. {see pages 1-7; Against All Enemies)

This is being made public now in an effort to force this issue into the public’s eye and ultimately to see full accountability and disclosure. Another 9/11 commemoration must not pass without these issues being addressed forthrightly and honestly before the American people; either in Manhattan before an AG Spitzer or DA Morganthau-convened Grand Jury or public hearings, in Albany before the appropriate Committee or on Capitol Hill. We offer this in hope that those with integrity in a position of responsibility will rise to this challenge. In this case above all others we must not allow the truth to continue to be veiled or obfuscated.

Kyle F. Hence

Co-founder, 9/11 CitizensWatch

February 23, 2005

kfh@911citizenswatch.org

Continue reading

September Song

A Review of “The New Pearl Harbor”

By Marc Estrin

counterpunch.org

May 25, 2004

The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11
David Ray Griffin
Olive Branch Press, 2004
Paper, 214 pp, $15.00

The official story goes something like this:

With no actionable warning from intelligence agencies, four planes were hijacked by terrorists on the morning of September 11, 2001. Two crashed into the Word Trade Center, which then collapsed, and shortly thereafter, the third into the Pentagon. The last plane went down in Pennsylvania after a struggle between passengers and hijackers. Air defense arrived too late to stop the catastrophes. Responding to this attack on the homeland, the president declared a global war on terror which may last for generations until evil is finally eradicated, the security of America firmly established, and the world made safe for freedom and democracy.

In The New Pearl Harbor, David Ray Griffin compiles the evidence that every single assertion in the official story is implausible or impossible, and that something other must explain the inconsistencies and contra-factual assertions.

The implications of the accumulated evidence is that the Bush administration was complicit in the events of September 11th, and not merely a victim of structural problems or incompetence on the part of the intelligence establishment. In a nuanced discussion of “complicity”, Griffin distinguishes eight possible levels, from the lying about events to maximize political ends, through intentionally allowing expected attacks, to actual involvement in the planning of them.

Griffin does not make specific accusations, nor does he hypothesize a “true” version of what happened.…

Continue reading

Bush Administration’s First Memo on al-Qaeda Declassified

April 8, 2004. Responding to claims that she ignored the al-Qaeda threat before September 11, Rice stated in a March 22, 2004 Washington Post op-ed, “No al Qaeda plan was turned over to the new administration.”

Two days after Rice’s March 22 op-ed, Clarke told the 9/11 Commission, “there’s a lot of debate about whether it’s a plan or a strategy or a series of options — but all of the things we recommended back in January were those things on the table in September. They were done. They were done after September 11th. They were all done. I didn’t really understand why they couldn’t have been done in February.”

Also attached to the original Clarke memo are two Clinton-era documents relating to al-Qaeda. The first, “Tab A December 2000 Paper: Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from the Jihadist Networks of al-Qida: Status and Prospects,” was released to the National Security Archive along with the Clarke memo. “Tab B, September 1998 Paper: Pol-Mil Plan for al-Qida,” also known as the Delenda Plan, was attached to the original memo, but was not released to the Archive and remains under request with the National Security Council.

Below are additional references to the January 25, 2001, memo from congressional debates and the 9/11 Commission testimonies of Richard Clarke and Condoleezza Rice.

Excerpts from:

NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES

Eighth Public Hearing

Wednesday, March 24, 2004

Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC

Chaired by: Thomas H. Kean

[See also 9/11… Continue reading

Justice and 9-11

Special Report by D. Alexander Floum

Online Journal Contributing Writer

January 28, 2005-The evidence that certain elements of the government intentionally allowed and caused the 9-11 tragedy appears to be extremely strong. See, for example, Painful Questions by Eric Hufschmid, Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley, and The New Pearl Harbor and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions by David Ray Griffin.

After failing to obtain any competent investigation or tangible results from the 9/11 Commission, the White House, or Congress (many of the governmental personnel responsible for preventing an attack on the U.S. have actually been promoted since 9-11), many Americans are asking whether justice may be obtained through the courts. The answer is complicated, and it would be impossible for a brief article such as this to do anything other than scratch the surface concerning 9-11 justice.

Instead of being the final word on 9-11 legal issues, this article is intended to be an introduction to strategy regarding 9-11 lawsuits, and a practical discussion of how to avoid some of the landmines present on the path to the courtroom battlefield which could knock the unwary out of the game before they even get started.

CAN WE WIN A 9-11 LAWSUIT?

Legally, I believe we should win in court. If the facts surrounding the 9-11 attacks were applied to the elements of the law in a vacuum, then I believe that many of the real 9-11 perpetrators and accomplices would end up behind bars. There is strong… Continue reading

The “Progressive” Approach to 9/11 Strategy

Although Libertarians, old school conservatives and progressives have been most active promoting 9/11 truth, their eventual victory will serve almost every conceivable constituency except perhaps the neocons, Dominionists and corporatist right. All 9/11 truth seekers have their own distinct approaches however, and the following is a recent example of the progressive style.


Summer of Truth Logo

{{
Downloadable 3-panel Flyer of this Page }}

( Available as an Acrobat .pdf File Here! )

WANT TO END PERPETUAL WAR, REPRESSION,

CORPORATE RULE, FISCAL RUIN AND/OR

THE AMAZING DISAPPEARING SOCIAL SAFETY NET?

9/11 TRUTH AS KEY
TO PROGRESSIVE VICTORY

10 COMPELLING REASONS TO ADOPT 9/11 TRUTH

AS A PRIMARY THEME
IN PROGRESSIVE POLITICS

  • “THE ROOT OF COUNTLESS EVILS”

    Survey the military-industrial background (and payoff) of September 11th and we can clearly see (and teach) a brief history of our current repression, endless war and fiscal ruin. Their 9/11 lies are still the neocons’ principal source of war-making/rights-taking/vote-raking power. Before they can exploit 9/11 any more we must blow these lies up in their hands. They’ll be left politically maimed and in deep legal jeopardy.
  • THE BIG PICTURE PERSPECTIVE

    There is a strong case that “our” main objective in Iraq was not simply oil or support for Sharon. It was chiefly to replace the Soviet “Evil Empire” with an even scarier foe so the spiraling defense budget would never ever be questioned again. Against that backdrop, the clumsiness, torture and ruthless brutality of our tactics and occupation begin to make sense. In less than a year… Continue reading

“The Haunting of the White House”

Editor’s Note:
We are pleased on this evening of Nov. 1st to 2nd, known in Mexico as “The Day of the Dead,” to publish the following exclusive: a Republican-meets-Democrat, one-two punch editorial by Cynthia McKinney and Catherine Austin Fitts, on “The Haunting of the White House.” An earlier version of the piece was written in response to a request from editors of The New York Times. So far the Times has declined to publish, but other print publications are still considering it.
Meanwhile, you can feel free to forward it to the nine winds on the Web, with our thanks. – 911Truth.org Staff

Day of the Dead: The Haunting of the White House

By Cynthia McKinney and Catherine Austin Fitts

November 1, 2004

Something is rising from the ashes of September 11: the spectre of questions that will haunt our country until answered.

Months after the release of the official 9/11 Commission Report – even as Congress moves to implement its proposals for a radical centralization of security forces – growing numbers of Americans are doubting their  own government’s account of what really happened on September 11, and how.

From the first, the Bush Administration resisted investigation and disclosure. Families of September 11 victims were forced to lobby the administration and Congress for a full and independent inquiry. They fought  for 14 months, blocked every step of the way by the White House.

The political games reached such a point that the survivors of the worst attack ever on American soil were forced to hold a candlelight vigil in front of the White House. A vigil for the truth.

The White House finally assented in December 2002 to the establishment of an independent commission, under former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean. Still, the administration pushed for a hand-picked panel, with a narrow focus on intelligence failures and recommendations.

The families demanded a full investigation, posing nearly 400 questions to the Kean Commission. The commissioners said they welcomed these queries. But their final report ignored most of the unanswered questions. Still posted on the website of the September 11 Family Steering Committee, these questions are a stark reminder of the Kean Commission’s failures.

Now these same questions have been submitted to the New York Attorney General. Last week, the New York City office of Eliot Spitzer received a citizens’ complaint to open a legal inquiry into crimes still unsolved, more than three years later.

So begins the haunting of the White House. Continue reading

TRUE BELIEVERS: The 9/11 Truth Movement questions our new day of infamy

by Joel Warner
Boulder Weekly
October 21 – 28, 2004

Image for article: Secrets, Lies & 9/11

Tim Gale became a believer one day last January. He was prowling the Internet when he came across a video of one of the World Trade Center towers collapsing on Sept. 11, 2001. It was likely a video Gale had seen before, but this footage was in slow motion. As Gale watched the tower’s 110 floors begin to crumble, he noticed something unusual.

Right before the tower dropped into a cloud of debris, the windows on the upper levels of the towers blew outwards, one floor at a time, like clockwork. That wasn’t caused by the plane slamming into the tower or the ensuing fire, Gale told himself.

There were bombs in the World Trade Center.

“It blew my head off,” says Gale. “I started searching like crazy.”

What Gale found, in countless websites, books and films, was a vast network of information questioning the official story of what happened on Sept. 11. The 42-year-old Boulder resident was inundated with decades-old memos, foreign newspaper clippings, engineering studies and national-defense policies. And he discovered the collapse of the World Trade Center was just the beginning – he believes he’s witnessing the collapse of the American society.

“I was being confronted with the raw fact that the U.S. government was complicit in the mass murder of its own citizens for geopolitical purposes,” says Gale. “It’s too much to bear in the confines of your mind.”

Gale began spending six to eight hours… Continue reading

Press Picks Up on AWOL Chain of Command on 9/11

On the morning of September 11, Secretary Rumsfeld was having breakfast at the Pentagon with a group of members of Congress. He then returned to his office for his daily intelligence briefing. The Secretary  was informed of the second strike in New York during the briefing; he resumed the briefing while awaiting more information. After the Pentagon was struck, Secretary Rumsfeld went to the parking lot to assist  with rescue efforts…

At 9:44, NORAD briefed the conference on the possible hijacking of Delta 1989. Two minutes later, staff reported that they were still trying to locate Secretary Rumsfeld and Vice Chairman Myers  [acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on that day]. The Vice Chairman joined the conference shortly before 10:00; the Secretary, shortly before 10:30. The Chairman [Gen. Hugh Shelton] was out of the country.

– The 9/11 Commission Report, pp. 37-38

NEW YORK, Aug. 14, 2004 —

The official investigation of the September 11th events has failed to explain or even to ask why the top officials in the U.S. military chain of command were missing in action during the attacks, AWOL.

Long a subject for 9/11 researchers, the riddle of the absent leadership was highlighted in new articles by author Gail Sheehy in this month’s Mother Jones and last Saturday’s Los Angeles Times.

George W. Bush was moved to present a renewed defense of his actions on Sept. 11 in an interview published in last Thursday’s WashingtonPost.

Some background…

The first of the… Continue reading

The Great Deception (Video)

by Barrie Zwicker
What really happened on September 11? Why didn’t the White House, the Pentagon and the CIA succeed in stopping the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington? Have the mainstream media failed in their responsibility to ask searching questions about the events of that day?

Media critic Barrie Zwicker, the host of the Canadian TV show, “VisionTV Insight: Mediafile,” is one of the few North American journalists to offer an alternative viewpoint on the Sept. 11 tragedy. In this provocative six-part series of Mediafile commentaries, he challenges the official explanation for the attacks and considers the troubling implications of America’s new war.

Poring over a wealth of published material, Zwicker finds much that has gone unexamined — from the apparent breakdown of American air defenses on Sept. 11, to the longstanding ties between U.S. intelligence and Osama bin Laden. He also takes a hard look at the actions of President George W. Bush in the midst of the crisis. And he ventures to ask what role U.S. oil interests may have played in these events.

You are about to be diagnosed & drugged

Those agape at the barbed-wire cage designated as a “free speech zone” in Boston may wonder how it can be topped for its fascist implications. Actually, this already happened last month and went largely unnoticed.

Early in his administration Bush invited a group of pharmaceutical firms, among them companies that have been financing him since he was Texas governor, to join a commission on mental health and disabilities known as the New Freedom Initiative.

In its report presented in June, NFI proposes a universal program of mental health “screening” for everyone in the United States – starting with a captive market of 52 million pupils and 6 million teachers in the schools. The panel recommends that those diagnosed with a syndrome receive a prescription regimen based on treatment algorithms devised by the participating drug companies. (Now what makes me think there is a syndrome waiting for pretty much everyone?) The algorithms (hey, science!) derive from a program already implemented by Bush in Texas.

Unfortunately, Orwellian moments like these are only going to come thicker. The thrust towards the New Feudalism, Corporate Totalitarianism, New World Order, or whatever other name you like is in the open now, and it will not slow down unless we arise as a people to end it.

The New Freedom program fits seamlessly into the Kean Commission report proposals for a national ID system using biometric indicators. If we are all about to be fingerprinted and retinal-scanned and fed into a single database integrating all federal… Continue reading

9/11 Truth Movement Launches Joint Website, Calls for New Investigation of Unexplained Facts

NEW YORK CITY, NY (June 8, 2004) A new umbrella organization called 911Truth.org today announced the launch of a website to serve as a clearinghouse for the highest quality work of the emerging 911 truth movement. The site highlights the efforts of leading investigators, authors, videographers, and activists calling for a truly independent investigation of still unexplained facts.

According to David Kubiak, executive director of the organization, “The discoveries of independent 9/11 researchers, recent whistleblower testimony, and the demands of victim families have now reached the point where a coordinated approach is necessary. 911Truth.org will introduce the most important news on all these fronts as well as empower activism. Given just the currently known facts, we feel that exposing the full truth of 9/11 before the next election is an urgent and truly patriotic necessity.”

After many months of pressure from victim family groups, the Bush administration established the Kean Commission last year to investigate the events of 9/11. This body will conclude its inquiry on July 26. However, many concerned observers have noted that the Commission is deeply compromised by its members’ political, financial, and personal ties with those they should be investigating. Kyle Hence, founder of 9/11 Citizens Watch and a member of the 911Truth.org board, said, “Through my work with 9/11 families, I have witnessed growing disillusionment with this investigation’s direction, depth and sincerity. I believe it is now obvious that the Commission’s findings will reveal little new information because it still refuses to address the hard… Continue reading

The Condoleezza Rice-Philip Zelikow Connection: The Kean Commission and its Conflicts of Interest

MAY 16, 2004:

Condoleezza Rice is a household name. But most Americans still have never heard of the man who wrote a book with her, Philip Zelikow.

As the executive director of the Kean Commission, Zelikow is responsible for framing the agenda. He leads the research staff. He decides what evidence the commission sees.Image of Rice and Zelikow

In April, the world media focused on Rice’s appearance before the commission. She claimed, not for the first time, that no one could have imagined terrorists would use hijacked planes as weapons against buildings. This is a demonstrable falsehood, which Bush himself inadvertently exposed a week later. (See “Bush, Rice and the Genoa Warning”)

Rice’s testimony received mostly bad reviews. The commission was credited with investigative fervor. Few reports bothered to note that in the late 1980s, Rice and Zelikow worked closely together on George H.W. Bush’s national security staff.

Zelikow and Rice co-authored a 1999 book about their experiences in the first Bush White House, “Germany Unified and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft.” The book presents “a detailed and fascinating account of behind-the-scenes discussions and deliberations” during the fall of the Soviet empire, according to Library Journal.

Zelikow again served alongside Rice as a member of the Bush transition team in 2000- 2001, when he took part in White House meetings on the terror threat. Since this was of interest to the 9/11 investigation, the Kean Commission recently called Zelikow as a witness, in a closed-door session.

Now imagine if the judge in a trial was a close associate of the star witness.…

Continue reading

National Green Party

“The number of unanswered questions and the White House’s secrecy and obstruction surrounding 9/11 demand a real investigation, not the current compromised inquiry. We owe that to the family members and to all Americans.”

Greens call for Independent 9/11 Probe led by Family Members

by The Green Party of the United States

Common Dreams

Wednesday, Apr 28, 2004

WASHINGTON – April 28 – Green Party leaders renewed the party’s call for an independent commission, with full participation of surviving family members, to investigate the government’s handling of 9/11 and information leading up to the attacks.

“The members of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. have pervasive conflicts of interests which disqualify them from leading an investigation,” said Jake Schneider, treasurer of the Green Party of the United States. “The White House did all it could to obstruct a thorough probe, and has so far succeeded. President Bush insisted that commission members be limited to representatives of the two major parties, with each party having a veto, and that the commission could not investigate why 9/11 occurred. The commission’s focus was damage control, not discovery of the truth.”

Greens noted that the 9/11 Commission established two major points: (1) the Bush Administration ignored numerous warnings from intelligence and foreign governments; (2) the Bush Administration used 9/11 as a pretext to enact existing plans for a war against Iraq and to curtail civil liberties in America.

But Greens charge that numerous other points went uninvestigated:

– The full extent… Continue reading