9/11 Citizens Watch Challenges 9/11 Commission

Citizens' Watchdog Group Challenges 9/11 Commissioners to Debate; Says 9/11 Report "Worst Cover-up in History"

Today, the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, the legacy non-profit project of the 9/11 Commission, is issueing its first report on the Congressional response to the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. During a recent C-SPAN interview Vice-Chair Lee Hamilton challenged those who have evidence contrary to the findings of the 9/11 Report to bring it forward into the public arena, this his response to criticism of the 9/11 Report from callers and pressing follow-up questions from Washington Journal's co-host Brian Lamb. 9/11 CitizensWatch, the only group formed with the expressed purpose of watchdogging the work of the 9/11 Commission maintains that the Commission's work is flawed and incomplete and is prepared to bring evidence forward in a publicly televised debate or forum that effectively challenges the official narrative and "findings of facts and circumstances" of the 9/11 Report.

"I believe this Commission will go down as the worst cover-up in our nation's history," said CitizensWatch co-founder Kyle F. Hence, "but what I believe is not what is important here. We are prepared to meet Mr. Hamilton's challenge for the benefit of the families, and all Americans concerned about the future of our country. But will he meet ours? Mr. Hamilton, former 9/11 Commissioners and staffers, will you join us in a public forum or debate before you conclude your reports on the Commission's recommendations? Will you put real public discourse into your 9/11 Public Discourse Project and see if it measures up to the families expectations?"

A preliminary analysis of the 9/11 Report by 9/11 Family Steering Committee (FSC) members and prominent Jersey widows Lorie Van Auken and Mindy Kleinberg found that well over half of the questions posed by their 9/11 victim family group (one responsible for the 9/11 Commission) were not addressed in any way whatsoever by the 9/11 Commission.

OPEN LETTER Challenges 9/11 Commissioners to Debate in Public Forum

Dear Mr. Hamilton,

During your recent appearance with Brian Lamb on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, you issued a public challenge to those who doubted or questioned the findings of your 9/11 Commission. In the spirit and treasured tradition in this democratic Republic of open public debate, and in the interest of serving the truth, 9/11 CitizenWatch would like to meet that challenge. We propose a formal public debate and forum to examine the findings of the 9/11 Report and provide opportunity for whistleblowers, academics and investigators to challenge those findings. We propose that this debate or forum be moderated and facilitated by former members of the Family Steering Committee who were primarily responsible for the Commission's formation following a year of lobbying. 9/11 CitizensWatch will approach them independently. Representatives McKinney (D-GA) and Grijalva (D-AZ) have begun to meet your C-SPAN issued challenge in their July 22nd Congressional Breifing on Capitol Hill. Many whistleblowers have as well including most recently Lt. Col. Shaffer of Able Danger. Now 9/11 CitizensWatch would like to join that effort and formally issue a challenge in turn to you and your Public Discourse Project. Join us in public debate now -- examine new and ignored evidence under the ever watchful eye of the 9/11 families and other concerned Americans. Should you accept, we trust together can settle on a suitable and appropriate time and venue.

Will you live up to your namesake, meet this challenge and join us in vital public discourse relative to the tragic events of September 11th? For the sake of the country and the truth, we hope you do.

I delivered this signed letter personally to Mr. Hamilton after I was prevented from personally addressing the former Commissioners early this afternoon at a Press Conference of the so-called "Public Discourse" Project at the Ronald Reagon Building in Washington, DC.. Mr. Hamilton refused to take it from me directly, not pausing at all in a hasty departure, telling me I should send it to his staff, so I was forced to slip into his half open leather attache to be sure he himself had an opportunity to see that CitizensWatch is attempting to answer his challenge, willing to bring forward evidence countervailing their 9/11 Report. Will he or his fellow Commissioners answer ours? This long time observer, now confronting the 9/11 PDP, is not holding his breath.

I like it, think they'll go

I like it, think they'll go for it???

hell no, its not really

hell no, its not really public discourse.. its just a name.. like everything else! :)

From the dictionary, there

From the dictionary, there appears to be a little wiggle room:

"Discourse: 1) Verbal expression in speech or writing. 2) Verbal exchange; conversation. 3) A formal, lengthy discussion of a subject, either written or spoken. 4) The process or power of reasoning."

Of course, the stated objectives of the 9/11 Public Discourse Project are what matter, and they seem to have implied we had a conversation coming.

You seem to have missed this

You seem to have missed this one:

Sept. 11 Commission Rejects Atta Claim

By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer

Wednesday, September 14, 2005


I cannot get behind the

I cannot get behind the notion of our false friends at 911citizenswatch, who gatekeep much of the same evidence as did the 9/11 Commission, debating them.

Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse...!

What is probably the single most meaningful and significant omission from the 9/11 Commission report (567 pages) was also omitted from 911citizenswatch's 149-page "omission report"!!!

The two heads of the same monster also both gatekeep the Naudet video "flash frame". (The 9/11 Commission at least refers to the Naudet video when it suits their pupose -- they just don't refer to the part of it they can't explain, while 911citizenswatch pretends that Naudet does not exist at all!!!!!!)

There are other such "coincidences".

Are we men, or are we a bunch of "coincidence theorists"?

911citizenswatch (and 911truth.org and othres) are clearly assisting the lying government. In the struggle for FULL truth about 9/11, they are the enemy! The are the "Team B", or alter ego, of the 9/11 Commission. They gatekeep the same incriminating, government-conspiracy-theory-busting evidence...

If we want to wake up from the bad dream about 9/11, we must wake up to the fact that the 9/11 truth movement is being misled, in dastardly fashion, by those who just pretend to be our friends.

All this talk about Atta and "Able Danger" are clearly designed to substantiate the bogus belief that hijackers, which were neither necessary nor sufficient to account for what happened on 9/11, are to blame.

Pleease wake up to reality, folks, and soon!

thank you blimp pilot for

thank you blimp pilot for your post. the links are very revealing

if it ever happens, we should call it THE GATEKEEPERS DEBATE

i'm not a man, but i'm not a "coincidence theorist" either. something is wrong very wrong with 911citizenswatch