Willie Nelson: "The Twin Towers Were Imploded" -VIDEO

[zengrifter]

VIDEO - Willie Nelson: "The Twin Towers Were Imploded"

[zengrifter]

9/11 inquiry head 'tried to shield George Bush'

By Tom Leonard in New York
Last Updated: 1:55am GMT 05/02/2008

The head of the commission that investigated the Sept 11 terrorist attacks had closer ties to the White House
than he admitted and tried to limit the Bush administration's responsibility for the incident, a book claims.


Philip Zelikow was a friend of Condoleezza Rice

Philip Zelikow, the 9/11 Commission's executive director, allegedly attempted to intimidate staff to avoid findings
that would be damaging to President George W Bush, who was running for re-election, and Condoleezza Rice,
his then National Security Adviser.

The claims are made by Philip Shenon in The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, published today.

MORE- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...inquiry105.xml

[zengrifter]

February 4, 2008

Why Were the 9/11 Tapes Destroyed?
Did They Reveal the Absence of Confessions?

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Many Americans are content with the 9/11 Commission Report, but the two chairmen of the commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton are not. Neither was commission member Max Cleland, a US Senator who resigned from the 9/11 Commission, telling the Boston Globe (November 13, 2003): "This investigation is now compromised." Even former FBI director Louis Freeh wrote in the Wall Street Journal (Nov. 17, 2005) that there are inaccuracies in the commission's report and "questions that need answers."

Both Kean and Hamilton have twice stated publicly, once in their 2006 book, Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission, and again in the January 2, 2008, New York Times, that there are inaccuracies in their report and unanswered--or mis-answered--questions.

On the second day of this new year, Kean and Hamilton accused the CIA of obstructing their investigation: "What we do know is that government officials decided not to inform a lawfully constituted body, created by Congress and the President, to investigate one of the greatest tragedies to confront this country. We call that obstruction."

In their book, Kean and Hamilton wrote that they were unable to obtain "access to star witnesses in custody who were the only possible source for inside information about the 9/11 plot."

MORE- http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02042008.html

[aslan]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

February 4, 2008

Why Were the 9/11 Tapes Destroyed?
Did They Reveal the Absence of Confessions?

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

...In their book, Kean and Hamilton wrote that they were unable to obtain "access to star witnesses in custody who were the only possible source for inside information about the 9/11 plot."

MORE- http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02042008.html

But what good would the testimony of these witnesses (the perpetrators) be? If this is the only way in which they believe the 9/11 investigation was compromised, I see no reason to doubt the report as to what really happened.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by aslan

But what good would the testimony of these witnesses (the perpetrators) be? If this is the only way in which they believe the 9/11 investigation was compromised, I see no reason to doubt the report as to what really happened.

The Head (Kean), and FBI's own Muller have both stated publicly that the Commission Report is NOT accurate. zg

[Brutus]

I was sitting up watching that Penn Jillette on TV.
Penn Jillette gave an interesting story, about how he was witness to an event that later made the press. while reading the published article, he says to himself repeatedly "this is not the way it happened at all" later he states that if the story he was witness to was false, what about all the other press, are all those stories bogus or slanted as well?

[aslan]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

The Head (Kean), and FBI's own Muller have both stated publicly that the Commission Report is NOT accurate. zg

I know. But the point I'm making is -- not accurate as to what? If it's just trivia or what the arrested arabs said or didn't say, it doesn't mean much. But if it's got to do with whether there was auxilliary bombing taking place, well, that's major.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by aslan

I know. But the point I'm making is -- not accurate as to what? If it's just trivia or what the arrested arabs said or didn't say, it doesn't mean much. But if it's got to do with whether there was auxilliary bombing taking place, well, that's major.

Bottom line, just like the Warren/JFK Commission, it was a whitewash. zg

[aslan]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

Bottom line, just like the Warren/JFK Commission, it was a whitewash. zg

I feel like you are evading a straightforward answer. Those on the inside (like members of the Commission or high government officials) who say it was a whitewash or a coverup or inaccurate, do they specify what was covered up or whitewashed or stated inaccurately? If so, what do they say? I had the impression that their thoughts about what was inaccurate differed greatly from what the outsider analysts were saying.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by aslan

I feel like you are evading a straightforward answer. Those on the inside (like members of the Commission or high government officials) who say it was a whitewash or a coverup or inaccurate, do they specify what was covered up or whitewashed or stated inaccurately? If so, what do they say? I had the impression that their thoughts about what was inaccurate differed greatly from what the outsider analysts were saying.

That the Commission spent very little money and much was ommitted from consideration - like WTC-7, for instance. And in the end they "concluded" the same BS that was ALREADY in the news within 2-hrs of collapse, told by "man on the street eye-witnesses" - "17 Arabs", "pancaking dominoe collapse", "burning jetfuel weakened structure", etc.

Read Tarpley or Griffin or Zwicker and get the full gestalt. zg