Cheney "Resisted Testifying Before The 9/11 Commission Until The Bitter End"

He resisted, and then only agreed to testify with Bush at his side, and "not under oath and there was to be no recording made of the session nor a stenographer in the room." The "White House has said there will not be a transcript of the session" even though the family members believed they "were entitled to" it. Not to defend Clinton or Gore, but at least they agreed to appear "separately before the panel, and their sessions were recorded." - Jon

Cheney Should Testify Before Congress
The Nation: If VP Can Talk In Libby Trial, He Should Do So On Capitol The Hill As Well


John Nichols
Dec. 21, 2006

Vice President Dick Cheney should get used to testifying under oath.

It is expected that he will start talking soon, as part of a self-serving effort to defend a former aide. But once the vice president is done giving that testimony, how hard would it be for him to head over to Capitol Hill and respond to all the questions that members of Congress have been preparing to ask?

It was revealed Tuesday that Cheney will be called to testify on behalf of his former chief of staff, I. Scooter Libby.

Libby stands accused of perjury and obstruction of justice in an upcoming trial involving issues that arose from alleged efforts by the Vice President's office to punish former Ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife, former CIA operative Valarie Plame, for revealing that the Bush-Cheney administration had manipulated intelligence to make the "case" for invading and occupying Iraq.

Cheney, who resisted testifying before the 9/11 Commission until the bitter end, is reportedly willing to take the stand in Libby's defense. William Jeffress, one of Libby's attorneys, says of the vice president: "We don't expect him to resist."

Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for the vice president, seemed to confirm that sentiment when she told reporters that, "We've cooperated fully in this matter and will continue to do so in fairness to the parties involved."

Since schedules and notes — some in the vice president's own handwriting — confirm that Cheney was involved in conversations about using his office to discredit Wilson, his willingness to testify in the Libby case becomes particularly significant.

Of course, the vice president will make it his purpose to protect his former chief of staff, the loyal retainer who has been described as "Cheney's Cheney." But his openness to testifying under oath about this matter would seem to open the door for him to testify before Congress regarding the matter.

Gerald Ford, while serving as president, testified before a Congressional committee about his 1974 pardon of his scandal-plagued predecessor, Richard Nixon. So there is a clear precedent. And members of the House have already requested that Cheney come clean.

A little more than a year ago, three key members of the House — Michigan Democrat John Conyers, the incoming chair of the Judiciary Committee; California Democrat Henry Waxman, the incoming chair of the Government Reform Committee; and New York Democrat Maurice Hinchey, one of the most outspoken critics of the administration's misuse of intelligence during the period before the Iraq War began — sent a letter to the Vice President's office in which they asked the Cheney to "make yourself available to appear before Congress to explain the details and reasons for your office's involvement, and your personal involvement, in the disclosure of Valerie Wilson's identity as a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operative."

At the time the letter was sent, Hinchey said, "We are going to do everything we can to force this administration and this Congress to face up to the truth and to face up to their responsibility under the Constitution."

The congressman explained that, "The people who wrote the Constitution that set this government up knew what they were doing. They knew what would happen if you let a regime go its own way without oversight. That's why they set up the system of checks and balances. This Congress has shunned its responsibility, tossed its obligations under the Constitution aside – allowing the administration to do whatever it chooses, even to the point of looking aside when the administration lies to Congress and violates federal laws. That's got to stop. We cannot have a monolithic government. We have to restore some balance, where the legislative branch is a part of this process. And we think that one way to do that is by asking the vice president, in light of the questions that have arisen with regards to his actions, to come to Congress and answer the questions that are on the minds of the American people and their representatives."

Cheney showed little regard for Congress when Republicans were in charge of the House and Senate. And no one expects him to display any more respect for the system of checks and balances now that Democrats are in control.

But if the vice president is willing to testify in Libby's trial, then surely Congress has not just the right but the Constitutional duty to suggest that Cheney must also take questions from the Congress.


4 out of 5 dentists say he smells like rancid hotdog water.

911 In Plane Site Airs on New Zealand Television

Video Exposing Blunders of 9/11 Commission Report Airs on New Zealand Television

Bridgestone Media Group, PO Box 30576, Columbia, MO 65205

Contact Information: Debbie Lewis 573-378-9123

Immediate Release:

Video Exposing Blunders of 9/11 Commission Report Airs on New Zealand Television

Columbia MO December 23, 2006 -- On December 16, 2006, while most Americans slept, Television 3 New Zealand debuted the provocative documentary "911 In Plane Site" on national television. The film presents photographs and video footage from that fateful day, as well as computer-aided analysis focusing on the Pentagon and World Trade Center buildings One, Two and Seven. Also examined are dozens of independent and mainstream media news reports from the morning of September 11 that highlights inconsistencies and contradictions in the "official" account.

Saturday night's national airing of "In Plane Site" on New Zealand television represents a historic turning point in the global collective consciousness regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11. After all, it was only months after the second national airing of "In Plane Site" on Australia's Network 10, which kicked off a firestorm of debate leading to Federal Labor politician Michael Danby's demand that the programming director of Network 10 be fired for airing the program. Mr. Danby said that September 11 victims had been killed twice - once by the terrorists and once by Ten. However, Mr. Danby's highly publicized comments did not seem to dissuade worldwide public interest, as a spokesman for Network 10 stated that a unified public reaction to the film had generated a massive wave of phone calls to station operators praising the network for its airing of the program.

Producer Dave vonKleist says that support for the documentary remains a global phenomenon. The international news program Out There Television was the first syndication to take the controversial film into thirty-one countries in a single airing. The internationally available Namaste Magazine has made the documentary available to those in Europe since it's release in mid-2004. Nexus Magazine, also internationally available, has been a continued advocate, as well as other organizations in North and South America, Europe and Asia.

Shining the torch of truth to Spanish speaking nations is outspoken World Trade Center survivor, William Rodriguez. Rodriguez was the last person to escape the World Trade Center buildings before they collapsed and was witness to a deafening and massive explosion, which seemed to emanate from between sub-basement B2 and B3 of Two World Trade Center moments before UAL Flight 175 struck the tower. He believes to this day that explosives were utilized in the demolition-style, pancake collapse of both World Trade Center towers.

Commenting on some of the video evidence, which is contained in “911 In Plane Site,” NASA engineers Jim LeGarde and Dale Carros, in a recent interview at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., called into question the integrity of the 9/11 Commission Report by drawing attention to the fact that World Trade Center Towers One and Two collapsed into themselves much faster than basic physics will allow, when taking into account the physical resistance forces that are present with any building collapse. Adding confirmation to this heated controversy, Van Romero, an explosives expert and former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at New Mexico Tech, said on September 11, 2001 "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." Mr. Romero's comments have been widely censored in the U.S. press.

The curiosity surrounding the video and photographic images seen and discussed in the documentary has led to its mass airing in both public and private venues in the United States. It has also led to scathing criticism and rebuttal from U.S. mainstream media sources, including FOX News journalist Geraldo Rivera, syndicated talk show host Glenn Beck, CNN's Anderson Cooper and Popular Mechanics magazine. To date, no U.S. based news program has aired the documentary in its entirety.

Way to Go New Zealand!

Yes, In Plane Site is pretty shoddy and there are probably a dozen or so 911 documentaries that are better at this point, but still props to NZ for getting this on air. It was actually the first 911 movie I saw and the one that "woke me up", even though I thought parts of it were hokey.

It seems that NZ is slightly more open to letting thist stuff out. Would this same channel show Press for Truth, Loose Change, 9/11 Mysteries?

Who can we contact there?

TV3 (nationwide) = USA

TV3 (nationwide) = USA Canadian owned

TV1 & 2 = people owned, but managed as for-profit corp (auckland only) has aired loose change and others before

Show "Here it is: 9/11 Denial is the same" by Anonymous (not verified)

i have a funny feeling that

i have a funny feeling that we will be labeled as terrorists pretty soon. there was a headline today about al queda and the net. it is time to let the chips fall where they may, and of course, arm yourselves properly.


And they wonder why us truthers question the offical fairy tale.This does'nt raise any doubt with them?
DAMN what fools! By the way my son flew home for xmas,and i asked him to try and call me on his cell phone in flight.Yup! You guessed it.....


great write up Jon, but can

great write up Jon, but can you provide me with Ron Pauls statements regarding 9/11? i never knew he made any pro-9/11 truth comments. hes my favorite republican though, so im not all that surprised if he did.


Remember there was an old article written by Ron Paul on, but I can't seem to find it. Here's something that was posted on

The Time For Debate Is Over

It(our government) should

It(our government) should stop militarizing future enemies, as we did by supplying money and weapons to characters like Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.-Ron Paul

yeah, hes the man. even if hes not on board with 9/11 truth yet, hes still one of the few good ones in congress.

Paul knows...

definitely. He's in with Alex Jones and Aaron Russo. He's fighting a good fight and I think he's just playing his cards the best way he sees fit. At this point he would be slammed in congress and the media by coming out against the official 911 story, but I think he will be a hero when the time is right.

i hear what your saying, but

i hear what your saying, but wouldnt it be nice if he helped McKinney out? she is a woman, shes black, and shes a democrat. sadly, the deck is stacked against her from the start. Ron Paul on the other hand is a man,white and a republican. the mirror image of her(at least in typical MSM black/white-left/right standards). having Ron Paul on board would be a lot easier for your average american(who lets be honest, many are still pretty sexist or racist enough to discount what McKinney says instantly)to take. Paul would be a bit harder to slam as a "conspiracy theorist" or whatever. hes a good man from what ive seen of him, but now is the time to be a hero. the Iran war is just on the horizon(draft included) and the excuses need to stop. you hear me Ray McGovern? another good man, but its time to stop playing games and parsing words in my opinion.

I think Paul is doing

I think Paul is doing everything he can, honestly. He has stood on the floor of the house and made speeches railing against the Iraq war, the Federal Reserve, the out of control government, the neocon madness and the NWO agenda. For that alone he is a hero in my mind.

And Paul HAS been warning on Iran. Of course as usual he has received no media coverage, and no one hears from him, except for the people like us on the internet who are paying attention.

Read this great speech by Ron Paul on Iran and the neocon plan:

Unfortunately, IMO, it's still too early for Rep. Paul to...

.....step out in support of 9/11 Truth in a major way....he just isn't well known enough yet, nationally to survive what he would face....

We need to do more to achieve critical mass so that Paul can safely ride a movement that cannot be denied...right now he would be attacked and ruined if the elites turned their focus on's still too early....

For the time being, it remains a fight for the middle third of America, folks....

I'm sure...

The Ron Paul article is in my 9/11 Truther Forum, but I don't have the time to look for it.

If some of you people are reading this... what happened to the Ron Paul piece specifically about 9/11?

The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "9/11 Poll results" by Anonymous (not verified)

Was that poll...

Show "Seems the poll supports 9/11 Truth Movement claims" by Anonymous (not verified)

Considering we are always told...

"It would have taken 1000's of individuals to pull off an "inside job", and they would never be able to keep their mouths shut, etc...", and the 9/11 Truth Movement doesn't believe it would require that many, and in fact, have stated on several occasions that it would probably require a handful of people (anywhere from 7 to 100), and that poll asks a question the "uninformed" would answer in favor of the "debunkers" or "anti-9/11 Truth Movement" people's opinion, I think my reading glasses are just fine.

The Time For Debate Is Over

The Official Story...

Says that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, Osama Bin Laden, and 19 individuals pulled off 9/11 (21 people).

Why does the alternative version require so many more?

The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "So you do not know how to count either? Hmmm...." by Anonymous (not verified)

You're right...

However, where is your eye drawn to on this poll? I'll give you three guesses, and the first two don't count.

The Time For Debate Is Over

Zogby is a professional pollster

Also, I'm no social scientist, but somehow I doubt 129 votes, sampled according to no method whatsoever, is indicative of a representative sample.

Zogby, on the other hand, is a professional pollster.

Now you are getting ridiculous

That greater than 1,000 got only 32%.

But one takes the poll first. You do not see the results - unless you have to look first at the results to see which way to vote.

The fact remains that the poll is fair, asks a straightforward question, gave all sides an opportunity to answer, and supports your 9/11 Denial Movement claims by a margin of 58% to 42%.

Do you really want to keep making a fool of yourself, Jon Gold?


That refers to the movement as the "9/11 Denial Movement" is defending that ridiculous poll.


Next time you create a poll, why don't you have just two options. 7-100 and Greater than 1000...

The Time For Debate Is Over

You cannot come up with a valid reason.

You just keep making an ass of yourself, Jon Gold.

And yes, you are a member of the 9/11 Denial Movement.

I can't wait...

Until anonymous posting is gone.

The Time For Debate Is Over

Show "So you do not have to hear the truth." by Anonymous (not verified)


So I don't have to deal with people who refuse to answer questions... such as, "where is your eye drawn to on this poll?", and instead, attack, an do their best to insult me.

The Time For Debate Is Over

You do not deal with anything.

You are on record here as not answering questions and trying to claim that people would look at the poll answers before answering it to see which way the wind was blowing.

Your inability to think or reason is why you are a 9/11 Denier who believes anything you wish without a stitch of evidence.

As you well know, the best thing you can do is stop posting altogether until you learn how to reason.


A first responder lately?

The Time For Debate Is Over

Help is always available.

You just have to learn to accept the truth:

Hannity, you don't deal with anything

You haven't answered anybody's question, you know, like what orders was Norman Mineta asking Cheney about; Do they still stand? If standard protocol means to shoot down any unidentified aircraft approaching the Pentagon, then what would Cheney's orders be? To not intercept? Think about it.


oh my god a whole 129 people took the poll as well!

And you still can vote

All by your little bitty self.


The last poll I listed did not pertain to "inside job". It was more of a "blowback" poll... I was quickly grabbing polls earlier to make that post, and grabbed it by mistake.

However, according to this poll, 85% of Canadians believe that "9/11 was an inside job."

The Time For Debate Is Over

And this one...

Show "There is no debate. There is no need for you to show remorse" by Anonymous (not verified)


so you're saying a poll taken of 129 voters on some random website is more accurate then multiple main stream news reports with tens of thousands of voters?
And we're the crazy ones right? You're in the fringe, buddy, face it. That's why you're so angry.

Yes, you are the crazy ones.

Hopefully, you are catching on.

Imagine that you think less than 100 people would be all that would be needed to know of a plot if 9/11 was an inside job.

No wonder your brain is short of brain cells.

I was thinking about doing

I was thinking about doing that too when I go home today....

I think Dick is in his last throes, if you will





line of the day.

"Cheney shot a man in Reno, just to watch him.....apologize..."

I especially like the 4 categories at the top in blue...


Also, it's good to be reminded of Bush/Cheney's guilty-as-hell behavior and stipulations before the Kean Commission (which was cover-up friendly to begin with, of course...that was its purpose...and they still had to handcuff it with regard to their testimony...)....thanks, Jon

Yeah, Dick Cheney going to go use a weapon

But first, he had to have a few drinks, then go pick up a weapon. Whoa, now there's a good idea, someone like Hannity can be proud of.

Bush Doles Out 16 Pardons For Drug Crimes, Bank And Mail Fraud,

How can you get pardoned for something that doesn't exist?

That's odd: I thought "conspiracy" was just another word for "paranoid delusion"?

You mean it's an actual crime?


Clinton apologizes for MKUltra

President Clinton admits to mind control experiments

Wonderful, Wonderful, Wonderful

Just as I was beginning to think nothing will change with the new congress this comes out.
BUT I am at a point with the Government where I will wait and see if Mr. Hinchey follows through in January. Who knows he may change his mind like a lot of the witnesses did for 9/11.
Keep Positive thinking and positive things will happen ?

"Fleece-Navidad- USA!"

Man, I hate these TRAITORS. And, if you listen to what Barry Chamish is saying these days, they ARE planning to dispose of ISRAEL; -to destroy the Jewish State, -in YOUR name, -by Proxy!

But, it won't matter to those with the - - GOLDEN Lear Jets- - . The GOOD old boys club!

I told you, arresting them at their annual bacchanal at Bohemian Grove was indeed your last chance!


new site

I'll be there...

are Edmonds and Grove gonna

are Edmonds and Grove gonna speak for sure? that should be interesting. i hope people get some video from this event.

I don't know...


"Stratagies" should be spelled "Strategies".

Looks like a great conference, though.

DRG Myth Vs. Reality

I recently saw DRG Myth vs. Reality on the web with
1. The text written down and
2. On the same page, several sections of the speech on You Tube or Google Video.

It seemed like a very nice format for that material.

Does anybody know the url for that webpage?

You probably mean this

Ralph Schoenman details how

Ralph Schoenman details how during every year of the 80's Rumsfeld and Cheney and Richard Clarke would disappear for days on end to take part in exercises concerning the Continuity of Government -- Martial Law in other words.
Final six minutes of this's worth listening to the whole thing really.....

Schoenman the same week on Guns and Butter tearing apart the cover story of just about every major terrorist event of the last ywenty years too...

His and Mya Shone's archive at is an amazing resource. This is a guy who was a close associate of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and Bertrand Russell and the 911 Truth movement doesn't make use of his genius nearly enough IMO.


Anyone have a collection of articles pertaining to the fact that they didn't want to investigate 9/11?

I would like to gather some statements to write an article... any help would be appreciated.

"Mainstream" please... thanks.

The Time For Debate Is Over

Thank you...

Start here


No mention of it on that site.

The Time For Debate Is Over