9/11 Commission Forum Shows How DC “Works”

By Andrew KreigWorld Trade Center 9/11 via Creative Commons

Members of 9/11 Commission last week leveraged the 10th anniversary of their report to announce a dozen recommendations focused primarily on fanning fears of foreign terrorism. The former commissioners urged strong spending on counter-terrorism intelligence and far fewer congressional oversight committees.

News coverage arising from the announcement and related congressional testimony avoided mysteries and ongoing disputes.

For example, former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham, in Re-Open the 9/11 Investigation Now, and former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland, who left the commission before its final report in 2004, have each called for renewed formal investigations of 9/11. Their perspectives were almost entirely missing from the forum and mainstream news coverage.

“The fix is in,” former Bush Administration counter-terrorism advisor Richard Clarke recalled telling a White House colleague in early 2003.

Clarke is best known for apologizing to 9/11 families and other Americans for the tragedy to begin his 2004 testimony before the Commission. He told a biographer he made the “fix” remark upon hearing news that the 9/11 Commission had hired as its executive director Philip Zelikow. Zelikow, part of the Bush administration transition team, was a close ally of the administration and a fierce opponent of Clarke, a National Security Council staffer who had unsuccessfully warned about al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks.

Such talk was not part of last week’s forum convened July 22 by the Bipartisan Policy Center in downtown Washington, DC.

“Many Americans,” they said, “think that the terrorist threat is waning — that, as a country, we can begin turning back to other concerns. They are wrong. The threat remains grave and the trend lines in many parts of the world are pointing in the wrong direction.”

The speakers said the public should fear terrorism and support vigorous counter-terrorism measures. A photo above via Creative Commons portrays the attack on New York’s World Trade Center.

Counter-terrorism contractors and their allies in government, Wall Street and the media fear budget cutbacks in an era of austerity, especially when relatively few foreign terrorism threats have been discovered. Many of plots exposed have revealed deep involvement by undercover federal agents pretending to support a plot. That evidence could mean that counter-terrorism investments are working — or conversely that few plots exist aside from those observed if not fostered by agents until the time of arrest.

This column explores the financial and career incentives that shaped the 9/11 Commission’s work and shows that an effort for consensus has taken the commission far away from its core responsibility to determine why the 9/11 tragedy occurred. This column is organized in the following manner:

  • Overview
  • This Week’s News
  • A Necessary Flashback
  • The Short-Lived ‘Kissinger Commission’
  • Unfinished Business
  • The Final Word?
  • Links To Sources


James Clapper (Andrew Kreig Photo)As a featured segment in the forum, the Obama Administration’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper urged the audience — including those watching via five video crews — to fight for strong spending against foreign terrorists. My photo above shows Clapper from a vantage point a few feet from the podium. Clapper has headed White House intelligence operations for nearly four years.

Michael McCaulClapper’s message was reiterated by a bipartisan solid front that included eight of the 10 former commission members, and House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, right. McCaul is a Republican representing Texans in the 10th district that includes Austin.

The positioning is a rare achievement in Washington these days. Partisan fights are stagnating action through much of the capital. As a finale to the forum, commission leaders shared their tips for success.

Left unspoken is how money, power and media savvy influence create such Washington outcomes.

The commission’s leaders, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, and most commission members have strong ties to the intelligence community — and to the federal contractors, Wall Street financial houses and other institutions that prosper from counter-terrorism spending and related efforts. Naturally, the beneficiaries cycle back part of their revenue from taxpayers to the most supportive lawmakers, thought leaders, and their organizations.

Thus, the former commissioners’ recommendations raise the possibility of self-interest along with civic service. Furthermore, because the commission abstains from the challenging task of addressing lingering mysteries surrounding the 9/11 tragedy the question remains whether any other group in congress or elsewhere dares seek answers.

President Bush and advisor Andy CardThe drama and mystery of these issues was captured in part, for example, by a photo showing White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card informing the president at 9:04 a.m. that a second plane had hit the World Trade Center and “America is under attack.”

At the time, Bush and several of his top aides including Karl Rove were in a second-grade classroom in Florida where the president was reading the children’s story “My Pet Goat” while military personnel were scrambling defenses against three other hijacked planes. However, a presidential order was and is required to shoot down civilian aircraft.

The details in the investigation’s history have been forgotten for the most part, but are worth recalling.

President Bush and his aides opposed the 9/11 probe, attempted to stack it with loyalists, and vigorously fought its requests for information both from White House staff and from relevant agencies.

In response, commission members maintained a near-unanimous public front of accommodation for the most part. These days, the inside story regarding conflicts receives scant attention. Below, we start with the news and move to the background.

This Week’s News

The former commissioners unveiled their new findings at the Newseum, a museum dedicated to the newspaper industry located on Pennsylvania Avenue NW halfway between the White House and the Capitol. In total, eight of the ten 9/11 Commission members convened for the forum, which was entitled, “Ten Years Later.”

As noted above, one major theme was to warn against “counter-terrorism fatigue” among the American people.

Also, congressional oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is “dysfunctional,” said Hamilton, a former House Intelligence Committee chairman. He noted that 92 committees and subcommittees oversee the department. “That, of course, is completely unacceptable.”

“While Congress often complains about ‘waste, fraud and abuse,’ it seems to be complicit in squandering DHS resources here,” Kean and Hamilton wrote in the new report.“I have testified about 20 times before Congress in the past four or five years,” Kean told Politico in an interview. “It takes time to prepare testimony, it takes all morning to give it, and if you figure the secretary and his top deputies have to appear before these 90 or so committees, you can understand how much time it takes, and you can understand how it distracts them.”

Also, they recommended also disclosure of largely unspecified, still-secret documents. One controversial cache is a sensitive 28-page section about the Saudi Arabia government’s role in providing assistance to hijackers.

The commission was meagerly funded with just $3 million, and ended most of its formal operations after its report a decade ago.

The commission’s leaders began brainstorming last fall on how they could continue to contribute. Their solution? A dozen forward-looking reform recommendations, which are contained at the end of their new report. Commissioners said they could be most effective making recommendations about the future, not looking backward at causes of the attackThe Bipartisan Policy Center is a think tank founded by leaders of the two major parties. It organized this week’s conference with the assistance of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. Attendance was about 120, including speakers, staff, reporters, analysts, and family members of 9/11 victims.

Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton July 22, 2014Presiding was Commission Chairman Kean, a Republican New Jersey governor from 1982 to 1990 who led as moderate enjoying great popularity. The photo shows Kean at left with Vice Chairman Hamilton, a Democratic congressman representing southern Indiana for 34 years until 1999.

Kean and Hamilton co-chair the Center’s Homeland Security Project.

Kean is a blue-blood descendant of New Jersey’s first governor. After his two terms as governor he served as president of Drew University from 1990 to 2005.

Hamilton was president of the Woodrow Wilson Center after his congressional work, and now directs a center for congressional study at the University of Indiana, where he starred as a basketball player during his student years.

Both Kean and Hamilton have held numerous posts related to civic leadership, which often encompasses less obviously intelligence, foreign affairs and business. Kean, for example, has been a board member of the government-funded National Endowment for Democracy, and many corporate boards. Also, Kean was a paid consultant and executive co-producer for a controversial ABC two-part series in September 2006, “The Path To 9/11.”

The show included several fabricated scenes suspected of inclusion to affect the then-forthcoming 2006 mid-term elections and a longer-term historical view. Democrats alleged that scenes falsely blamed parts of the tragedy on Democrats, whereas creators said they merely used the literary license commonplace in films. The show was released in advance primarily to ultra-conservative radio hosts who touted it as authoritative despite requests also from mainstream and politically neutral reviewers.

Kevin MartinABC’s 9/11 project cost $40 million, an extraordinary sum raising many questions beyond Kean’s involvement and going to the project’s larger purpose since $40 million could not be recouped by advertising.

The show was developed as a special project outside of the news division at the broadcast network, which is owned by the Disney Corp. Disney, like the owners of all major networks, faces heavy federal regulation, and like most also has the opportunity via affiliates for lucrative government contracts in such fields as defense.

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission at the time was Kevin Martin, who had led the Bush-Cheney Florida vote recount team after the 2000 election. Martin, shown in a file photo, enjoyed loyal support on the five-person commission from Robert McDowell, another graduate of the Florida vote recount team that helped create the Bush-Cheney presidency.

Martin’s wife, Catherine Martin, was White House communications director first for Vice President Dick Cheney and later for President Bush.

In sum, her White House job was to influence the communications industry, as I have written in my book Presidential Puppetry, whereas her husband’s job was to regulate that same industry.

Washington lobbyists know about such power relationships and either leverage them to benefit clients, or at the minimum advise clients to beware of potentially harmful situations. Lobbyists, lawyers, think tanks and other influence peddlers do not maintain elaborate operations in the city just so their personnel can visit the Washington Monument.

Yet almost no one outside of the capital would know such things without retain vigilant operatives. How could the ordinary person connect the dots? Not easily when the media itself and captive members of congress are supposed to be reporting on such relationships.

In congress, one of Lee Hamilton’s most controversial appointive posts was on the Iran-Contra investigative team in the late 1980s. At the outset, Hamilton ruled out probing President Ronald Reagan and Vice President George H.W. Bush. Hamilton advocated instead focusing on lower level personnel, including three White House officials: Admiral John Poindexter, his aide Lt. Col Oliver North, and Gen. Richard Secord. Bush won the presidency in 1988, and appointed Justice Department personnel who halted the prosecution of the three after a court overturned their convictions.

Hamilton’s official biography at the University of Indiana congressional center omits his Iran-Contra post, which some regard as a major blot on his career and part of a disturbing pattern.

Critics say that Hamilton’s oversight record in four major investigations — including the “October Surprise” allegations regarding claims that Republicans secretly extended Iran hostage negotiations in 1980 to help swing the presidency to Ronald Reagan — has always been to reject the possibility of high-level wrongdoing.

The July 22 forum lasted from 9 a.m. to just after 2 p.m. The agenda was timed to the minute, a rarity in the nation’s capital. The speakers were eloquent, personable and well-credentialed. As a stellar example of how Washington works, the entire program is worth watching on C-SPAN or elsewhere no matter what one’s views.

Speakers, each with impressive titles at high levels in Washington, made themselves available to all those in the audience, including those not able to ask questions publicly when question periods expired. Those attending could talk to nearly anyone, at least briefly, aside from Clapper, who understandably said he had to rush to other meetings because of multiple crisis situations occurring around the world.

A Who’s Who of recent intelligence and law enforcement officials at the highest levels helped the former commissioners in their latest research. The commissioners cited with thanks more than a score of such officials, as well as such other enabling figures as Bipartisan Policy Center President Jason Grumet and Zelikow, the former 9/11 Commission executive director.

The commission’s legacy? “The first important thing that’s been done in this town in a long, long time,” responded Kean. Hamilton added that a secret to their success was Kean’s willingness to proceed in a non-partisan manner.

A Necessary Flashback

Nearly all mainstream news accounts of this week’s events omit reference to the recent history below. The reasons doubtless include space constraints, timidity and an aversion to controversy.

Robert KaganEvents such as the 9/11 forum are designed to shape news coverage, in this case a positive message that, as one speaker said, major institutions from the Brookings Institute on the left to the Heritage Foundation on the right essentially agree with the 9/11 commission’s themes. Omitted from that analysis is the reality that major Washington think tanks of whatever description tend to be well-funded advocacy bodies that do not necessarily represent or discuss all relevant facts or points of view.

For example, Brookings senior fellow Robert Kagan, shown in a file photo, describes himself as a “liberal interventionist.” But he was a pioneer during the 1990s in advocating U.S. war against Iraq, a policy that reached fruition in the aftermath of 9/11 even though Iraq had no known role in the attack and has no resulted in more than a millions deaths and a foreign policy disaster for the United States.

Victoria Nuland, Oleh Tyahnbock, Vitali Klitschko, Arseniy Yatsenyuk (l-r) For such reasons, Kagan is regarded by others as one of the most influential of the nation’s neo-conservatives as he and his allies provide pivotal thought leadership support in academia and the media for U.S.-orchestrated revolutions and war policies that were brought to fruition in the Bush-Cheney administration. The Obama team has continued the policy goals for the most part, albeit with far fewer ground troops and other spending.

Kagan’s wife, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Victoria Nuland, is arguably the key Obama official in the Ukraine crisis. A former high-ranking Bush-Cheney aide, the career diplomat implements similar bipartisan interventionist policies as those advocated by her husband. She posed at right with several members of the new leadership of the country. They include Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, at far right, the “Yats” whose installation Nuland helped orchestrate early last February as documented in Top U.S. Diplomat Caught On Tape In Profane Plot. His surprise resignation this week underscores the volatile that can occur even with bipartisan policies by the United States.

To recall the history of the 9/11 Commission’s creation:

Advocacy by the 9/11 Families Steering Committee, which is defunct, led to the creation of the 9/11 Commission over the objections of the Bush Administration and many members of congress who quietly worried about losing turf even as they more publicly objected to an investigation of intelligence and military topics during the ramp-up of the Afghan and Iraq wars.

But the family members, led in part by several New Jersey widows of World Trade Center victims, successfully pressured for an in-depth probe to succeed the Joint Intelligence Inquiry Committee (JICI). Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham of Florida co-chaired JICI with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Porter Goss, a Florida Republican who had been a career CIA officer.

The JICI was required to cease operations after its hasty and underfunded report in November 2003. Graham has since argued that their investigation was crippled by artificial deadlines and research handicaps, and should be reconstituted in some format to provide the public with the full story of 9/11. Goss became CIA director for a brief and troubled tenure.

The Short-Lived ‘Kissinger Commission’

To recap: the commission was created because of public pressure led by 9/11 families, including the widows known as The Jersey Girls.

As a fallback to blocking a probe, President Bush nominated in late 2002 GOP former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger as the first chairman.Kissinger, a longtime operative of the Rockefeller family and other powerful Wall Street interests, eagerly undertook his duties on what was soon called “The Kissinger Commission.” Kissinger, 79, a Nobel Peace Prize-winner among his many other accolades, described the commission responsibility as his greatest honor.But a dozen 9/11 family members visited him in the New York office of Kissinger Associates. Their commitment enabled them to resist his considerable credentials and charm, according to the authoritative account by New York Times investigative reporter Philip Shenon, author of The Commission.Condoleezza Rice Official PhotoKissinger spilled his coffee — possibly to buy time to think — when widow Lorie Van Auken of East Brunswick, New Jersey, bluntly cut through his prevarications on conflict of interest and asked whether his firm had clients from Saudi Arabia. The widows ignored Kissinger’s plea for privacy. Instead, they insisted on inspecting his client list themselves to check for potential conflicts of interest.

Kissinger resigned the next day.

Withdrawing for similar reasons was a trusted establishment Democratic counterpart, George Mitchell, a former Senate Majority Leader, federal judge and ambassador.

The commission limped forward with limited powers and finances.In the fall of 2003, some commissioners were astonished to learn, according to the Shenon account, of remarkable conflicts of interest involving the executive director, Zelikow. A former White House national security aide, Zelikow was a University of Virginia-based presidential historian with a background also in law and national security.

It came out that Zelikow had been also a member of the Bush-Cheney Transition Team in 2000 and a close friend of Bush National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, with whom he had worked in George H.W. Bush White House.

Also, Zelikow had co-authored a book with Rice, Germany Unified and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (1995), an academic study of the politics of reunification.

The commission would interview Rice, shown in her official photo, for just three hours in ground rules imposed by the Bush White House. Rice was a central witness because of allegations that she and others in his administration had ignored specific warnings about terrorists for months before the attack occurred.

Another major conflict for Zelikow was that he helped lead the Bush administration’s transition team demotion of Richard Clarke, the former anti-terrorism czar for both Presidents Bush and Clinton and the government’s leading advocate before 9/11 of focusing on the dangers of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.

Philip ZelikowThe commission quietly resolved the issues by asking Zelikow to recuse from any investigating the National Security Council’s transition from the Clinton to Bush administrations, which Zelikow had helped manage.

This was a difficult situation in view of Zelikow’s obsessive control previously over all elements of staff work. Also, he had close contacts with such vital Bush aides as Rice and Karl Rove. Clarke would later expose the conflicts in his 2003 memoir, Against All Enemies, which was launched with his powerful denunciation of Rice and her colleagues on CBS “60 Minutes.”

Underscoring the depth of the conflict in another way, Zelikow (shown in a file photo) worked for Rice from 2005 to 2007 as counselor after she became Secretary of State Zelikow.

Zelikow and 9/11 Commission leaders disputed (as amplified below) Shenon’s claim that Zelikow’s behavior and connections hurt the commission’s work. Zelikow has returned to the University of Virginia, where he is a professor and associate dean of the arts and sciences graduate school. Also, he advises the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s program in global development and is a member of President Obama’s Intelligence Advisory Board.

For current purposes, the Zelikow controversy is best understood as yet another DC career “success story” whereby bright front men with long records of government posts advance their careers by providing the appearance of oversight.

More generally, the commission’s consensus decision-making was fostered by its largely homogenous composition. All but one of the members were white men.

Every commissioner came from the top levels of politics and law. No outsiders from politics, such as 9/11 family members, were included on the commission despite some of their hopes that one would win appointment. Kissinger’s appointment should have set off major alarm bells everywhere, not just among the families.

But the commission did maintain outreach with the families. Also, the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Director of Homeland Security is 9/11 family member Carrie Lemack, who lost her father in the attack. The commissioners cited her as instrumental in their work, and this week she spoke an eloquent introduction to the forum’s proceedings.

Unfinished Business

The 9/11 Commission faced its own monumental struggles in obtaining relevant testimony under oath. However, the members were nearly all cut from the same mold of centrist politicians and high-level lawyers, evenly divided between the corporate-friendly wings of the Republican and Democratic parties.

Max ClelandThe one outwardly contentious member, former Georgia Senator Max Cleland, protested in late 2003 that Bush administration efforts to block the commission’s investigation were “disgusting.” Cleland, a Democrat, was a triple amputee during the Vietnam War because of a battlefield grenade explosion.

Despite Cleland’s ordeal and brave struggle to build a successful career, he lost re-election in 2002 because of a Rove-orchestrated Republican smear campaign suggesting that Cleland was unpatriotic. The loss was especially difficult because Cleland had prided himself on living only on his Senate salary, and thus needed a job. In 2009, Cleland would entitle his memoir, Heart of a Patriot – How I Found The Courage To Survive Vietnam, Walter Reed, and Karl Rove.

Before that, however, Cleland demanded on the 9/11 Commission in 2003 that the commission subpoena from the Bush administration those 9/11 documents necessary for a thorough inquiry.

His stance created a serious public relations problem for Bush and certain other commissioners. Most of the commissioners, either personally or via their law firms and other employers, had strong ties to the intelligence agencies and their well-financed corporate contractors, law firms and other beneficiaries of funding. This is what is now known as the Military Intelligence Complex, much-fattened from national security dollars from what President Eisenhower had denounced as the Military Industry Complex).

The problem was solved when Cleland, who needed a job, received Democratic Senate support for a Bush appointment to the board of the U.S. Export-Import Bank.

Some advocated for a 9/11 family member or other non-traditional replacement for Cleland. Leaders kept the group and its mission unified by appointing former Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey, another Vietnam War who had lost a leg. Kerry, by then president of the New School for Social Research in New York, was an outspoken supporter of the Bush-advocated invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Multiple Bush Executive Branch agencies stonewalled the commission, which did not even take testimony under oath at the beginning of its inquiry.

Wrapping up, the commission issued a report on July 22, 2004 that found systematic intelligence failure. The commission avoided assigning blame. Career reprisal apparently was limited to one executive, an Federal Aviation Administration official, who was permitted to resign.

The Final Word?

Kean and Hamilton co-authored Wthout Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission, published in 2006 and a best-seller. Kirkus Reviews assessed it as follows, “A valuable resource for those needing proof that the government machine could use a good overhaul.” Kirkus amplified as follows:

“We were set up to fail,” Kean and Hamilton candidly remark; the 9/11 committee was given far too broad a mandate, too tight a deadline and too small a budget to do the job. It was also hampered by partisan politics from the start; the Republicans wanted the committee to disband well before the 2004 presidential election, and in all events, the committee was constituted in such a way to prevent subpoenas from reaching inside the White House. Still, built-in flaws and all, the committee set about doing its work as best it could, and it was surprised to discover the depth of detail that 9/11 families commanded.”

The book was drafted in significant part by Benjamin Rhodes, who began his high-profile career working for Republican New York Mayor City Rudolph Giuliani. Rhodes went on to become deputy national security advisor for President Obama under Clapper.

Barack Obama and Benjamin RhodesThe Rhodes career helps illustrate the bipartisan consensus pervading Washington and the media on intelligence issues among those who receive mainstream news coverage. Rhodes, whose brother David is president of CBS News, is portrayed at left in a White House photo with the president earlier this year.

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius this month described Rhodes as “Obama’s speechwriter, deputy national security adviser and the closest thing he has to a chief strategist.”

More generally, the Kean and Hamilton book, this week’s forum and congressional testimony all continue to foster widespread perceptions — enthusiastically implied if not repeated by commission members themselves — that its work succeeded in answering reasonable questions about the 9/11 attack.

But out of the limelight, some continue to question the findings and seek more information. A staffer for Executive Intelligence Review plied the forum this week seeking additional support for the Walter Jones-led effort in Congress to release the 28-pages on Saudi involvement.

Federal courts have so far blocked on national security grounds family members from continuing their lawsuits against Saudi entities in a search for truth and justice. A new column by Glenn Greenwald suggests the kinds of tight bonds between the United States and Saudis that take highest priority: The NSA’s New Partner in Spying: Saudi Arabia’s Brutal State Police.

Meanwhile, dozens of books have been written raising unanswered questions about the investigation, including two books by former JICI co-chairman Bob Graham. The three-term retired senator from Florida, a Democrat, has urged that a new commission be named to complete the investigation with adequate resources and subpoena power.

Graham is a graduate of Harvard Law School, a successful businessman and a half-brother to longtime Washington Post Publisher Donald Graham, who sold the paper last year.

Bob Graham and Keys to the KingdomYet the former Florida senator’s commitment to 9/11 fact-finding receives little news coverage despite his impressive record and connections. He took time to appear on my relatively small visibility weekly radio show, Washington Update, and to meet privately several years ago after I heard him lecture in a scene portrayed at right

Graham told me he wrote his novel Keys to the Kingdom to provide the public with as many facts as he could without violating CIA requirements against disclosing national security information. The novel (with the word “Kingdom” referring to Saudi leaders) dramatized the stakes of such inquiries by portraying a Florida senator seeking the truth about 9/11 as being murdered by an unknown person via a pickup truck used as a weapon while the senator took his regular morning walk.

Regarding the 9/11 Commission, current coverage tends to omit any mention of the former members Cleland, Kissinger and Mitchell, who dropped from the panel before its final report. The three have disappeared for the most part down the Orwellian memory hole that sometimes swallows up even, or especially, key facts about the nation’s the most horrid and historic events.

But blunt comments and unfinished business occasionally surface.

“Do you think there should be another 9/11 commission?” author and former Navy intelligence officer Wayne Madsen asked Cleland in 2009 while the former commissioner was signing his memoir at the National Press Club’s book fair.

“There should be about fifteen 9/11 commissions.”

Andrew Kreig is Director of the Justice Integrity Project in Washington DC and the author of Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney, and Their Masters (Eagle View, 2013).

48 thoughts on “9/11 Commission Forum Shows How DC “Works””

  1. My heart aches when I think of how foul and polluted our government has become. It’s like looking into a cesspool, so little integrity still exists there. Where to find it?

  2. Strange analysis…It misses the elephant in the room: the self-evident essence of 9/11 as a false flag. The forum and the “opposition” it nurtured are just another instance of worship of its mythical attribution to Osama bin Laden’s fanatical hijackers.


    1. I agree. As for Richard Clarke, I think he has been duped. He undoubtedly has knowledge about bin Laden and al Qaeda in certain contexts, but does not appear to have questioned the significant inconsistencies in the government’s attribution of 9-11 to them. (Meaning: Clarke has closed his eyes to the more likely cause of the two towers’ collapse, which was controlled demolition, not planes hitting them, and to 9/11’s obvious uses as a pretext for war in Iraq, and to make money for other connected interests, such as Larry Silverstein.).

      As for Saudi Arabia, I sense a new direction being orchestrated, to shift blame for 9/11 to the Saudis, so that we can now turn on THEM. Not that I will shed any tears over the demise of that repressive regime, nor that I believe they were NOT involved in the machinations. It’s just that it’s a bit hypocritical, to say the least.

    2. John O’Neill thrown on the pile dead and body intact – murdered elsewhere – he would have said right away that Clarke was in on the fix with his phony statements and that Al Queda had nothing to do with the explosions and in particular the explosions in the Pentagon itself, (eyewitness say and pilots for 9/11 truth.) This article also fails to mention William Rodriguez testimony behind closed doors and not in the commission’s fictional report. What’s the point of putting this article in an investigative site?

  3. As far as the 9/11 Commission having been set up as a rubber stamp committee, is the situation much different from the Warren Commission to include Arlen Specter and his ludicrous magic bullet theory?

    Meet the new whitewash crew, same as…

    Regarding concerns that the fear of terrorism is waning for many Americans, wouldn’t that be the motive for the Boston bombing psy op and the ongoing efforts of the apex globalists to set up an internationally coordinated terrorist cell training camp in Syria to be unleashed upon the world’s serfs? The trainees of the latter project sent out in dramatic fashion as ISIS boldly made its way unhindered in conveys into Iraq Mad Max style to terrorize Iraqis, generating a grisly show for Americans glued to their televisions, and advance long held globalist plans for a fractured Iraq. The American government and its global mafia collaborators are funding, arming, and training Al Qaeda terrorists and we are told by American officials that many of these terrorists will return to the western nations they came from to set up terrorist attacks in the west and “there is nothing that can be done to stop them.” It’s more problem, reaction, “solution”.

    1. Thank you Larry – this is an excellent find!


      Seems the climate alarmists are using the same tactics of claiming to be victims and using the legal system to avoid any FOI requests for their own protection! Huge amounts of our tax dollars are used to support the governments position only and decenters are punished for daring to speak!


    2. I’m with dino and Kathy, Larry. Great work. I read the stupid “Posner” piece, because it was linked to here by a commenter, but did not read the comments. I appreciate the work you did in digging it up, and sharing it on youtube, and particularly your posting it here. Thanks.

      1. Thanx pat. The comments on the posner piece got shut down after about 36 comments. I think all but two were on the hoax side. The courant did, however, print two letters to the editor excoriating the heartless truthers. The video i did just previous to this one is all about the posner piece, just in case you are not subbed to my channel, which you should be, dammit. Can you put the link to your monteith interview here again, i spaced it.

      2. Dude! That’s cold. OK, I should have subscribed before. I just did.

        I dig your work. It is true, and honest. Always.

        Dr. Stan’s archives on line are only a month long, so act quick. The only way I know how to get there is http://www.radioliberty.com; click on Listen Online, and scroll down to 7/2/14, hour 4. If there is a more direct way to get there, I don’t know it.

      3. Larry, have no clue on what your channel is, although appreciate your links and passion you have posted here….

      1. Yes, I can barely hear it from my laptop. I’ve tried it twice now and had to quit because I usually listen while I’m doing something, but for this one I need to sit down with my ear to the computer.

    3. Thank you Larry. I enjoyed the information and your commentary. We’ve commented a few times on the conundrum of them constantly hyping the event for funds and destruction of the 2nd Amendment while whining about everyone else’ 1st Amendment rights.

      I said the same thing about the “report”. Why leave all that suspicious stuff in there? I have a theory that they’re mocking us. After being forced to release it they left it there as a sort of “OK, here you go, chew on this”.

      What makes SHES so surreal is precisely that aspect of it. It is so flawed on so many levels, and yet they insist that people take it on “faith”. It is a way of dividing the curious into “camps”, and establishing an “obligation” to believe.

      Well, we’ve been through this over and over. I suppose if there’s a lesson here it is that they got away with it, at least in terms of nobody went to jail. Rather than being fearful I would imagine that it makes them feel pretty invincible.

  4. Daniel Noel is quite right; the account is useful but suffers from the customary evasion of the candid by leftish writers of not Mentioning the Unmentionable. There is overwhelming empirical evidence that building 7 in the 9/11 was destroyed by internal demolition: videos, testimony by fire fighters, scientific studies, the absurdity of the official and media explanation, etc. And this has power implications that subvert the American power system, which of course is precisely the reason that the Unmentionable isn’t Mentioned.

    There is no way that the US power system will support an honest investigation of the 9/11-anthrax homicides. They not only initiated the War on Terrorism, American power was complicit in their coordination precisely to allow them to be used. Journalists and other truthers who do not say so explicitly are tacitly supporting the official and media narrative. But the mainstream truth institutions CAN’T say so without subverting the entire US power system, i.e. committing political suicide.

    So. The American people must form a truth organ that tells the candid truth about American power relations and their historical influence on people. Doing so will help unite the American people against anti-people American power. The truth will not may you free, only people can do that. But it is the most powerful weapon that the people possess, and it is diluted and blunted by the partial truth like that presented in this article.

    1. 9/11 opens a very vast field for research. Fortunately, the essential path of this research appears to have been blazed and be disconcertingly simple, albeit full of surprises for the unaware reader. It starts with the elementary conspiracy class of http://www.911BabyStep.com, which cleverly affirms the official 9/11 myth and is so simple that most 9/11 holy inquisitors flee it while the others ridicule themselves trying to refute it.

      Building on Mark’s points, the most alarming part of the 9/11 conspiracy is the counter-intuitive drive by just about all institutions and scholars opposed to large-scale mendacity, like the article’s author, to live the official 9/11 myth as an axiomatic truth and send their gullible followers on wild goose chases that 9/11 Truth would cancel. This is largely why so many otherwise discerning political activists have rejected, in good faith from their perspective, an objective exploration of 9/11. The reverse truth is that whenever enough political activists realize that their adulated leaders have been terribly, and often knowingly, misleading them, they may not only reorient their activism toward 9/11, but also initiate humanity’s transition out of this silly war system and into an era of historically unprecedented harmony and prosperity.


  5. “Critics say that Hamilton’s oversight record in four major investigations — including the “October Surprise” allegations regarding claims that Republicans secretly extended Iran hostage negotiations in 1980 to help swing the presidency to Ronald Reagan — has always been to reject the possibility of high-level wrongdoing.”

    Trust us…we P_R_O_M_I_S you, we wouldn’t ever attempt to defraud Americans.

    This piece is so full of meat to digest, I’m not having dinner tonight.

  6. Sorry, this is off topic, but I just saw this photo of Cassidy Stay on her instagram account, from 3 days ago. It shows what appears to be her left hand in a close-up alongside her face.http://www.enjoygram.com/m/773468203467343720_1138063776 Her 3rd finger, which was the one bandaged up (left hand) during her public appearances, looks absolutely flawless. In the comments someone mentioned being glad to see she had all ten fingers intact, and she replied that the photo was a mirror image, so actually her right hand was what we saw. So, is she left handed and was holding the camera with her left hand? Where is the camera in the mirror? Am I missing something here? Also, a little strange just how happy and full of joy she mentions being just because she gets to get dolled up and go to a party.

    1. That is her left hand, held against her left cheek.

      But why would someone say “glad to see you have all 10 fingers intact,” when only one hand is shown?

      1. Well, answering myself (duh), I realize it’s because it was only the left hand that was supposedly injured. They are assuming the other hand is still OK!

    2. Why….., it’s an obvious MIRACLE! It’s hard to “hook” those hands with one “horn” missing.

      1. And still, she is the happiest most joyful person to have lost her entire family, mother/father, young siblings, a month ago. “It’s a parTAY, y’all, and I’m livin’ large with hair and makeup done, and wow, am I so EXCITED. Oh, yeah, bereaved, too, blah blah Dumbledore, blah, blah blah – but yeah, PARTAY! Love my uh…selfie.”

        I was watching Dateline this past week and a mother who lost her grown daughter by murder at the hand of her grandchildren (twins killed their own mom) was sobbing, tears streaming down her face, almost overcome and unable to speak, a picture of total grief as she relayed the story and her memories. This happened several years ago. Now that, my friends, is a true picture of grief.

        Ms. Stay? Robbie? Any family member interviewed within days of the so called horrific Sandy Hook tragedy? Not so much.

      2. They’re still staying strong in Texas:

        ~ The tragic story and her use of Dumbledore’s words grabbed the attention of well-wishers around the world, and word appears to have reached Rowling. According to LDS.net and a Facebook page that wanted to set up a meeting between Stay and Rowling, the Harry Potter author sent an amazing care package.
        “This afternoon, I talked to a friend of Cassidy’s who confirmed that J.K. Rowling did, in fact, write her a personalized letter from ‘Dumbledore’ (hand-written with purple ink),” the manager of the page wrote. “She was also sent a wand, an acceptance letter to Hogwarts with a school supply list, along with the 3rd book with JK’s autograph. I’m so excited and ecstatic that we were all able to make a difference! How wonderful.”
        In an email to Hypable, a manager of the Facebook page tells us they received this information from a friend of the Stay family.
        We’re so happy to see Rowling respond in this way. ~

  7. So mirror imaging means never having to show both hands at once.

    I just heard an awful SH debate between Fetzer and Jack Blood. They were both more interested in rehashing their 9/11 fued than debating Sandy Hook. Blood is childish. Fetzer was as usual.

    I’ve never heard a rational refutation of the footage of the plane nose peeking through the other side of the tower. Jack Blood uses this theory to ridicule Fetzer, in other words: “This guy believes X, everything he says is suspect because of that” Not the greatest debating tool. Am I crazy for thinking ‘no planes’ is possible?

    I agree completely with Daniel Noel about the counter-intuitive drive to accept the myth on it’s face. The alternative so-called media and certain activists groups argue and fight about minutae till they are hoarse. The prevailing myth skates by unchallenged. It’s happening with SH now. That debate is a case in point.

    1. You are not “crazy” to think “no planes” is possible. There were no planes. They were added, as screens, in the studio. The nose of an airliner is not capable of plunging into a steel and concrete grid; it is extremely fragile, and would shatter like glass. Those images show the “planes” not even slowing down after impact, like a pencil being pushed into a plate of jello. Even the tips of the wings, and the top of the tail, instead of snapping off, simply sliced into the building and disappeared. Ridiculous.

      I, too, agree with Daniel. It is, in essence, the theme of my recent article here, Modern Politics is Masonry Writ Large (http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/06/16/modern-politics-is-masonry-writ-large/): the Public Mind is controlled by shared myth, and the “left” and the “right” both unwittingly maintain the illusion. We can debate its details, but we can’t reject the fundamental basis of the myth. It is the Matrix, and to break out of it is simply unthinkable for almost everyone, so powerful is the manufactured reality.

      If one allows oneself to recognize how preposterous is the footage of airplanes being absorbed by a steel-grid structure, you are suddenly, in a way, seeing those green symbols streaming down (as they depict it in the movie): the computer code that programs the illusion that is the Matrix. If one allows oneself to “not be fooled again,” to steadfastly refuse to play along with that particular obvious lie, well, almost everyone will think you’re a nut. The way this modern-politics-as-masonry works is that everyone shares an illusory reality so comprehensive that its “reality” cannot be questioned; we are only allowed to quibble about details. I imagine that to publicly talk about “no planes” is something like a citizen in ancient Athens walking into the Agora, shoving Socrates aside, and announcing that Zeus and all the rest of the gods are fictional, that they don’t really exist. The assembled citizens would tear him to pieces on the spot.

      Here is the problem: if you tell a friend that there were no planes, they will look at you in wary, cautious, astonishment (perhaps glancing around to be sure where the exit is, in case you are about to go postal). If you press the point they will certainly say: I SAW those planes hit the towers.

      Of course, all anyone saw was a TV show. Everyone saw those towers absorb those airliners in exactly the way I SAW Tony Soprano strangle a man with his bare hands: I was staring at a piece of illuminated glass in my living room, thousands of miles away from the event I was witnessing on the screen.

      In Wag the Dog, when the CIA figures out that the White House were the people who were producing the imaginary televised war in Albania, they joined the fun by telling the Press that the CIA had negotiated an end to it. Dustin Hoffman, staring at the illuminated glass inside of which the announcer was relating the breaking news, is outraged: “It’s NOT over! I’m the producer!” “It’s over,” Robert DiNero tells him, “I saw it on TV.”

      1. I agree that there were no planes. Not only was the video faked, because planes do not just melt into buildings–let alone with the nose poking out the other side–but there were no airplane parts at the bottom of the building. No engines, no landing gear, no suitcases. (No bodies, either. But hey, the FBI sure found that terrorist’s passport in the inferno!) Also, there are the expert pilots who say no one could’ve flown a big jet on that kind of trajectory.

        I also find what you say about MH 370/MH 17 very compelling, Patrick, with the secret landing on Diego Garcia. That theory explains things very well. I’m wondering if the bodies that were “not fresh” when recovered after the demise of MH 17 could even have been the passengers of MH 370, a macabre thought. But…maybe there were no passengers of MH 370. Who knows?

        I just wonder where those cadavers came from, and how these people met their death–because they were living human beings at some point.

      2. You all are ignoring the really important research done at pilots for 9/11 truth about the Pentagon where no plane hit and it was a flyover. They’ve proved it using government provided data – and eyewitnesses. Videos on sidebar. http://pilotsfor911truth.org/

        The so called investigative articles and sites about 9/11 ignore the Pentagon truth because there’s no way to pin this one on “terrorists.”

      3. You make a good point, Marzi, about the Pentagon. It was still maximum morning traffic time as people were making their way into the District, and there are no canyons of skyscrapers around there, to obscure the view: they HAD to have a dummy plane fly over, because there were thousands of people trapped on the highway the “terrorists” were supposed to have flown over. They DID see a plane; they just didn’t see one crash into the building.

        Also, there WAS a plane downed in Pennsylvania, just not at Shanksville–it was shot down, creating a debris field eight miles long. Lots of people saw the plane that shot down that one.

      4. Patrick, right about Shanksville. It’s also good to remember that DC was restricted airspace and chaser planes were deliberately sent in the wrong direction. In general, the warning system had to have been shut off for NYC event as well and that could not have been done by anyone but domestic personnel.

      5. The planes going in shots were so ridiculous it makes you wonder what happened to the grown-ups in the country who know basic principles of engineering, that they would be so taken in. Is it possible that keeping your head down was already a habit for them, too busy to be concerned about politics and such? We are a long way from the days of the citizen-engineer-opinionator like Ben Franklin, and in fact our forefathers would think we were changelings.

    2. If you accept that 9/11 wasn’t what the official story portends it to be, then do the following thought experiment. What’s the easiest, cheapest, and safest (in some perverted sense) to make 9/11 look like it did?

      Well you put some pyrotechnics and explosives around the “impact” floors, collapse the buildings with controlled demolitions, and show the masses a movie where planes are overlaid and timed with the initial explosions. (This explains the “nose out” where the timing was off.) You move or uncover some pre-placed debris at the scene. Passengers were either fictitious or people wanting/needing a new identity (possibly due to the event itself).

      Playing a movie got past the hardest and most improbable steps: flying a large jet a full speed at very low altitude into rather narrow buildings – a rather improbable feat for even very skilled pilots. Twice.

      1. I got interested in the passengers since so many supposedly came from Boston. Yet in Boston and the suburbs they were alleged to come from there was little public show of grief or the search for memorials. I began to understand that Raytheon, for instance, in which so many passengers were supposedly employed could easily make up a list, as could a few other corporations like the clothing merchant TJMaxx. It would be a snap. I actually looked up one woman supposedly married to the eponymous public relations firm owner (I won’t say it here – I live too close to it and was scared off from taking pictures there by a “bouncer”). She was one of the pair of friends headed to Disneyland on different planes, and the actual woman was a Texas native and far too young to be married to the 80 year old who ran said firm. Just a fake. One of the early fakes that we now know so much more about, an early attempt.

        I have no idea what happened to Berry Berenson (died already of something like the AIDS her husband had? an alcoholic? Made alliya?)
        There are a few famous people, but darned if they aren’t all somehow, well, you know, tribally associated. In fact the minority in the country was interestingly a majority in the passenger lists, but not spoken of (and it would have been if this were genuine).

        I believe the entire thing was a movie, and the evidence keeps building in that direction.

    3. Susan, you are not “crazy” as there were no planes. They couldn’t chance ruining their dustification scheme by using real planes.

  8. What an exhaustive summary spelling out the embedded old boys’ network that holds the corrupted system together. Funny how the same names keep popping up everywhere there is something to investigate, eh?

    Without a network, there could be no hold on the purity of reality. Another homerun off the bat of MHB, DR. Tracy!

    1. I think, PS, that we are well beyond left and right these days. I would not put false hopes on the old system where you could “throw the bums out” and build up your base that you trust. Trust none of them. They vote unanimously for things like Israel’s attack on Gaza. Wrap your mind around that one. They can agree to one thing if pressed, but mostly they pretend to fight whenever it is a question of doing the peoples’ business for those who put them in Washington. When it’s about Israel, they collapse into their own footprints.

      1. Musings, I couldn’t agree more. They can all drop the “R’s” and “D’s” from their suffixes and put “P”, for parasite. The whole thing is a disgusting display that deserves to be ignored.

  9. The rape of the Palestinians by apartheid Israel is disgusting, but it is not as dangerous as the hostilities in Ukraine, which threatens to lead to nuclear war. The US by a combination of war threats and economic strangulation hopes to create regime change in Russia by appealing to the oligarchs there.

    This extremely dangerous policy is the brainchild of Zbig Brzezinski. He was Obama’s mentor at Colombia, and has built his entire career around hostility to Russia. As security director under Carter, he championed the policy of collecting Islam fanatics from around the world to attack the regime in Afghanistan, six months BEFORE the Soviets send in an army to support it. He is largely responsible for the current al Qaida and other groups which is spreading death and chaos in the Islam countries in west Asia. and the middle east.

    In his book THE GRAND CHESSBOARD he argues for the splitting up of Russia into three parts, and maintains that this and other aggressions cannot be effectively pursued absent a Pearl Harbor incident to scare the American people into increasing the military budget. False flags have been a staple ever since, including two in Ukraine to rouse the Europeans to efforts as bloody and stupid as those supported by the Americans. The decay of American power has so irked the American powerful that they are putting all their political chips in the Ukrainian pot.

Comments are closed.