Proof of Government Whitewash

The evidence that the government has covered up and whitewashed what really occurred on 9/11 is overwhelming.

For example, the former director of the FBI says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission.

And the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials lied to the Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).

Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political considerations.

9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only "the first draft" of history.

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn't have access . . . ."

And former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up".

But let's back up and look at the 9/11 Commission in more detail. Preliminarily, President Bush and Vice-President Cheney took the rare step of personally requesting that congress limit all 9/11 investigation solely to "intelligence failures", so there has never been a congressional probe into any of the real issues involved.

The administration also opposed the creation of a 9/11 commission. Once it was forced, by pressure from widows of 9-11 victims, to allow a commission to be formed, the administration appointed as executive director an administration insider, whose area of expertise is the creation and maintenance of "public myths" thought to be true, even if not actually true (and see this article), starved the commission of funds, providing a fraction of the funds used to investigate Monica Lewinsky, failed to provide crucial documents (and see this article also), and refused to require high-level officials to testify under oath, and allowed Bush and Cheney to be questioned jointly.

More importantly, the 9-11 Commission refused to examine virtually any evidence which contradicted the administration's official version of events. As stated by the State Department's Coordinator for Counterterrorism, who was the point man for the U.S. government's international counterterrorism policy in the first term of the Bush administration, "there were things the [9/11] commission[s] wanted to know about and things they didn't want to know about."

For example, the 9-11 Commission report fails to mention the CIA director's urgent warnings to top administration officials in July 2001 of an impending attack (indeed, the 9-11 Commission was briefed on these warnings, but denied they knew about them until confronted with contrary evidence). Moreover, numerous veteran national security experts were turned away, ignored, or censored by the 9/11 commission, even though they had information directly relevant to the commission's investigation. And the 9/11 Commission Report does not even mention the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 or any explosions in the buildings (the word "explosion" does not appear in the report). There are literally hundreds of other examples of entire lines of evidence which contradict the government's account which were ignored by the Commission.

A very well-documented book by a distinguished professor shows that the 9-11 Commission was a whitewash. According to law professor Richard Falk of Princeton, the author of this book "establishes himself, alongside Seymour Hersh, as America's number one bearer of unpleasant, yet necessary, public truths" (Seymour Hersh, as you might know, is the Pulitzer prize-winning reporter who uncovered the Iraq prison torture scandal). See a synopsis of the book here; and a summary of a portion of the book here.

Indeed, the very 9-11 widows who had pressured the administration to create the 9/11 Commission now "question the veracity of the entire Commission’s report", and have previously declared it a failure which ignored 70% of their detailed questions and "suppressed important evidence and whistleblower testimony that challenged the official story on many fronts".

Moreover, a leading firefighters' trade publication called the investigation concerning the world trade center a "half-baked farce". In addition, the official investigators themselves were largely denied funding, access to the site and the evidence contained there, or even access to such basic information as the blueprints for the world trade center. Similarly, a professor of fire protection engineering, and the former chief of the fire science and engineering division of the agency now investigating the world trade center disaster, wrote that the world trade center buildings could not have collapsed due to jet fuel fires, that evidence was being destroyed, and that there was no real investigation into the collapses.

Indeed, the blueprints for the world trade center are apparently STILL being withheld from reporters and the public, and the government agency in charge of the investigation has grossly mischaracterized the structure of the buildings.

And the government agency tasked with examining the collapse of the World Trade Centers did NOT investigate any anomalies in the collapse of the buildings, failing to even examine any of the following evidence: the buildings’ impossible near free-fall speeds and symmetrical collapses; the unexplained fact that the core of the North Tower failed first; the apparent demolition squibs; the fact that the buildings turned to dust in mid-air; the presence of molten metal in the basement areas in large pools in all of the buildings; the unexplained presence of unusual compounds in the steel; the unexplained swiss-cheese like holes in the steel; and the unexplained straightening out of the upper 34 floors of the South Tower after they had precipitously leaned over and started toppling like a tree

Indeed, an article from a respected civil engineering trade journal states: 

"World Trade Center disaster investigators are refusing to show computer visualizations [i.e. models] of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers".

The article goes on to state "a leading U.S. structural engineer said 'By comparison [to the modeling of fires] the global structural model is not as sophisticated' . . . The software used has been pushed to new limits, and there have been a lot of simplifications, extrapolations and judgement calls . . . it would be hard to produce a definitive visualization from the analysis so far.'” (free subscription required; copy posted here)(in other words, the government refused to release a visual model of the collapses, and even the non-visual computer models which the government used to examine why the trade centers collapsed are faulty).  

The same journal points out that "Some engineers . . . have accused NIST of repeatedly changing its explanation of the collapse mechanism." (Google's cached version of the article is here)

See also this question and answer exchange at a recent government press conference (skip to 1 minute and 23 seconds into the video).  And this short video on building 7 and the subsequent investigation (you may wish to disregard brief partisan portion).

And did you know that investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House?

Or that a former FBI translator who Senators Leahy and Grassley, among others, have claimed is credible, and who the administration has gagged for years without any logical basis -- has stated that "this administration knowingly and intentionally let many directly or indirectly involved in that terrorist act [September 11th] go free – untouched and uninvestigated"?

Or have you heard that the FBI long ago found and analyzed the "black box" recorders from the airplanes which hit the Twin Towers, but has consistently denied that they were ever found? 

Or did you know that the tape of interviews of air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 was intentionally destroyed by crushing the cassette by hand, cutting the tape into little pieces, and then dropping the pieces in different trash cans around the building as shown by this NY Times article (summary version is free; full version is pay-per-view) and by this article from the Chicago Sun-Times?

And amazingly, many years after the FBI stated it did not have sufficient evidence to prosecute Bin Laden for 9/11, that agency apparently still does not have hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the crime.

Still think the government really investigated and disclosed what happened on 9/11?

Indeed, there are even indications that false evidence may have been planted to deflect attention from the real perpetrators. 

digg this story

Good Work...


"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Digg This Story!


Someone posted on Netscape, also. You can vote for it here:

Utter nonsense, GW and Jon Gold

A reminder of how morally vacuous and idiotic you all are:

Posted on Fri, Oct. 06, 2006

Conspiracy theories twist facts, speculation

In graduate school I spent a couple of weeks cloistered in a dank library basement reading volumes of testimony about the disaster at Pearl Harbor. At the end I came to the same conclusion as the Congressional committee: The Japanese did it. You probably think so too, but just ask yourself: How much do you really know, and will all the facts ever be known? Maybe the whole thing was staged by President Franklin Roosevelt using our fighters painted to look like zeros.

A lot of Americans think much the same thing about 9/11. More than a third of us believe that the Bush administration either participated in the attack or deliberately sat back and allowed it to succeed. Some conspiracy theorists believe the planes that struck the Twin Towers were not airliners but other planes modified for a destructive impact. Others think there were no planes involved, but cruise missiles, mysteriously wrapped in holograms to look like planes. Many believe that the World Trade Center was planted with explosives.

Conspiracy theories are nothing new. Stories of Gov. Bill Clinton involved in drug running and murder were dusted off and circulated with gusto when he arrived at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The 36 percent who buy into 9/11 conspiracies seems like a pretty big slice of the American pie, but it isn't really. Almost twice as many people believe that the Kennedy assassination was "part of a larger conspiracy" despite the utter absence of evidence.

For conspiracy theorists, the relationship between evidence and conclusions is the reverse of what it is for more sober investigators. The Warren Commission reviewed whole truckloads of documents, including testimony from thousands of witnesses and a few famous pieces of film. It boiled that down to a simple but inescapable conclusion: that Lee Harvey Oswald, a skilled marksman and certifiable nut, got off a few lucky shots. The 9/11 Commission had a lot more physical evidence, as well as photos and footage, to work with. The mountain of evidence converged on a single story: an elegantly simple plot executed by a handful of zealots, backed by a terrorist organization operating from the soil of Afghanistan. All responsible investigations work that way.

Conspiracy theorists practice a different method. They comb the available facts for the few bits that excite their already over-excited imaginations. They string these bits together and pad them with volumes of idle speculation. Because their imaginations run on idiosyncratic lines, they produce dozens of irreconcilable stories. It was the Russians who killed Kennedy. No, the Cubans. No, the CIA. In the delicious movie "Bubba Ho Tep," Ossie Davis plays a black man who believes he is Jack Kennedy, and is waiting for Lyndon Johnson to come around and finish the job. When his friend Elvis, who turns out to actually be Elvis Presley, advises him that LBJ is dead, he replies: "You think that's gonna' stop him?"

A black JFK allied with a geriatric Elvis is more plausible than the multitude of 9/11 conspiracy stories. How do you make four whole airliners and their passengers disappear without a trace? Can you really mine one of the busiest skyscrapers in the world without anyone noticing and later reporting on the activity? Consider the thousands of people who would have to be involved and know what they were doing. Yet not one of them has let the story leak. Surely an administration that could pull this off could have kept its wire-tapping program a secret from the New York Times. Surely these demonic men in black could have easily manufactured a chemical weapons industry in Iraq.

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are not just loony, they are morally detestable. One of the doomed passengers of Flight 93 informed his mom by cell phone that they were about "to do something." Conspiracy nut Dylan Avery denies that this conversation ever took place. It was faked by, well, "them." Avery apparently doesn't find his own life or God's world interesting enough. He entertains himself by trying to erase the heroism of Flight 93. What a wonder that such a large imagination can fit within the compass of so small a man.
Kenneth C. Blanchard Jr., is a professor of political science at Northern State University. His columns appears occasionally in the American News.

Don't be ridiculous

Every rational person knows full well that there can be no films of something that never happened. We've waited for years for you to present evidence of explosives yet you can't come up with any.

Take the time to educate yourself on the necessity of presenting evidence for your claims. We aren't interrested in your pagan religious beliefs.

maybe next time you can use

maybe next time you can use your own words "Anonymous". it tends to strengthen your argument when you do more than simply cut and paste a whole article, and also, if you use a name instead of staying 'Anonymous" and taking shots. coward.

Maybe you could learn to read

"Utter nonsense" are my own words, bozo.

Maybe you could learn to think for a change instead of being such a good example of a 9/11 conspiracy sheeplehead.

But if you are still pushing your untter nonsense here after 5 years there is little hope that you'll ever educate yourself.

did you write the column or

did you write the column or not? and get a name already ya fucking coward.

Or some name.

Hell, show some imagination. I'll give you some suggestions: Galacticus, The Joker, Gilligan.

I'll stop being petty when you(anonymous)stop being insulting.

Report - Select Committee on Assassinations - U.S. House of Rep.

and i quote,

"Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.

The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy.

The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that anti-Castro Cuban groups, as groups, were not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.

The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the national syndicate of organized crime, as a group, was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.

The Warren Commission failed to investigate adequately the possibility of a conspiracy to assassinate the President. This deficiency was attributable in part to the failure of the Commission to receive all the relevant information that was in the possession of other agencies and departments of the Government."

take your blinders off you ignorant ass.......or spend more time in a library and actually read.

Steve Jones says

you need to know the actual LEVELS, or it is not very interesting. Also, could be from illegal dumpers at the landfill -- not necessarily 9/11.

Not Fresh Kills

The site listed in the article is Great Kills, not Fresh Kills. Great Kills is a park on the opposite side of Staten Island, not the place where they dumped WTC debris. No smoking gun here.

Ok, thank you guys for the

Ok, thank you guys for the clarifications.

thanks George

Thanks George.

I agree. It was an inside job. There has been a massive coverup of 911. And the news and facts of the coverup are written all over the public record.

I was just listening to the false flag radio progam with Dan Abramson and Kenneth Barrett.
They were talking about how the internet has become the new intelligence agency that is surpassing the existing ones. ie. the CIA, DIA,...
We have even more information than they do.
They said Ray McGovern had said that most of what these agencies get, they get from the public record.
And as you can see from GeorgeWashington's post he is acting as a member of the 911 truth intelligence agency.
We are the 911 truthers from the 911 TIA agency freeing this planet from the unjust overlords.
The CIA, DIA etc. are probably coming to this website to read these articles to get information THEY don't even know about.
And certainly some of these intelligent agents will start to turn in our direction when they see the full evidence.

Abramson was talking about how he gets web hits from Raytheon, Military contracting companies etc on his website. He can tell from the web logs. And that probably they are coming to get info that they are not even aware of.

We are witnessing on this website and in response to 911 a new consciousness for man, near real time news of what is really occurring on this planet.

As the printing press was to the written book,so now is the internet to the printing press.

The internet is the greatest invention of man.
It is our salvation.

Go 911 TIA ers !!

Take off your pinkish glasses, please


sorry to spill your pink beans.... but the battle for control over the Internet has hardly even started.

Yes, the Internet has helped us reveal a few big scandals. But look closely: what is the content of the most popular websites (YouTube, MySpace, Yahoo, videos@google, what-have-you....)?

We have our little corner of the Big Net -- just as we have some "independent" little print publications against the MainStream Media.

You seem to glorify the Internet too much. If we are not vigilant, or if we are too weak, even our little corners will all be taken over in a few years. Already now, 70% of net traffic is p0rn and other commercial stuff.... So even if we can win the battle against fascist takeover in USA and elsewhere, the Internet as we know it will be in danger even if we keep a (relatively) "democratic" capitalism.

Imagine that. A cover up?

Imagine that. A cover up?

BTW, is anyone considering a

BTW, is anyone considering a book about his "memoirs" of being in the truth movement. It might turn to gold when 9/11 truth takes effect.

The Truth about the War on Terror

The Truth about the War on Terror

Outstanding effort.

'Nuff said.