Prof. Peter Dale Scott publishes: "9/11 Commission Deception, Cheney’s Actions on 9/11, and Why He Should Testify Under Oath"

Professor Peter Dale Scott has written an insightful and provocative paper, published today in the Journal of 9/11 Studies. Excerpts from the paper:

"The 9/11 Commission Report is an example of concerted cover-up, partly by omissions, and just as importantly by its cherry-picking of evidence to create impressions that are in fact authoritatively disputed, and in some cases probably not true. There are many examples of cherry-picking and contrived simulations of fact. More importantly, there is a consistent pattern in this: to minimize Cheney’s responsibility for what happened that day."

"In this presentation I have focused on anomalies in the behavior, especially on 9/11, of Richard Cheney. He, and Donald Rumsfeld and others, should testify, under oath, about

1) The June 1 JCS Order requiring highest-level approvals for intercepts of off-course planes,

2) The contested time of Cheney’s arrival in the Presidential bunker,

3) Cheney’s orders with respect to a plane approaching Washington, and did this occur around 9:27 AM (as testified to by Mineta), or 10:15 AM (as per the 9/11 Report)?

4) Cheney’s call or calls with Rumsfeld and the President before or about 10 AM, and did they discuss so-called “Continuity of Government” (COG), including warrantless surveillance, suspension of habeas corpus, and arrangements for mass detention.?

The story the Report presented was embarrassing enough: of a trillion dollar defence system that broke down on 9/11, and completely failed to perform its allotted function. But the Report’s systematic and repeated distortions lead one to suspect that some even more embarrassing truth is being concealed, and that this truth has to do with orders given on that day by the Vice President.

I believe that COG may be the answer to the mystery question about Cheney’s actions at a time when he was talking to the President and Rumsfeld. If so, the three men were almost certainly not acting on their own. Rather, they would have been key figures in a highly classified agenda that must have involved other people.

The question to be explored is whether that agenda involved revising the U.S. constitutional balance of powers, and whether Cheney on 9/11 was primarily occupied in exploiting the attacks as a means to implement an agenda of constitutional revision which he already had in place.

The 911 Commission decided that its supporting evidence and records should be withheld from public view until January 2, 2009 – a date which would obviously insure the President and Vice-President from possible impeachment. But many would concede that since 9/11, and as a result of 9/11, the American nation has drifted towards a constitutional crisis, requiring a change of policy direction. The issues posed by what happened on 9/11 are very relevant to this crisis, and too significant to be postponed until 2009. As it did belatedly in the case of the John F. Kennedy assassination, Congress should initiate a procedure for these records to be reviewed and released expeditiously.

Records that should be released would include all of the phone logs from the White House on 9/11, to determine, as a matter of priority, the precise time and circumstances of Cheney’s orders on that day. They would also include materials (such as COG files and the videotape of the White House teleconference) that the Commission apparently never requested. The public also needs to establish why other records requested by the Commission did not initially reach them.

And then, I believe, it would be appropriate for a venue to be established in which the Vice President would testify for the first time about 9/11 under oath."

I'm confident you will want to read Prof. Scott's paper, here:


This article is an A+, one of the best I have seen.

Have already emailed it out to my friends and printed off a copy for closer study.

Great job, Dr. Scott!

You're right, this is a

You're right, this is a great paper, which seams to be a condensed version of his book, "The Road to 9/11". I just read the book a couple weeks back and highly recommend it to anyone who thought the article was insightful.

I wouldn't count on seeing those documents declassified

January 2, 2009

It'll be more like January 2, 2049.

Show "From the information seer" by Thomas Dishner

Write a novel, Dishner.

Or maybe start your own website. It worked for Tom Flocco, Sorcha Faal, and Wayne Madsen. There is an audience for your portentious revelations from secret authority. Just not here.


Tom Flocco I don't know. Sorcha is disinfo. Wayne Madsen appears to be an honest investigator. Listen to his radio show on WTPR network Tuesday nights.

"There are none so hoplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." (Goethe)

Wayne Madsen is a liar

I used to believe Wayne Madsen was honest until August 2005, the first time I caught him publishing a story I knew to be false*. I contacted Wayne, gave him my documentation, and he refused to withdraw his story. Since then he has published other stories that were demonstrably false**. As Wonkette says, "Wayne Madsen just makes stuff up." Of interest, Mike Rivero, who did publish the debunking of Tom Flocco, has refused to publish any debunking of Wayne Madsen. Mike Rivero also regularly links tabloid fictional essays from the "Voice of the White House" as legitimate news.

*Madsen reported in August 2005 that Bin Laden was alive and well in Pakistan protected by the government as per the wishes of GW Bush with his trusty USAF surplus T-39 sabreliner jet fueled up and ready to go. The problem with that is that while Bin Laden did own a USAF surplus T-39 jet, it was wrecked and abandoned in Khartoum in 1995 as reported by the LA Times 18 Nov 2001. (Copy archived at this site, otherwise LA Times archive is behind a paywall In addition, I recall seeing the wrecked T-39 jet on TV circa November 2001, unfortunately did not save video, so it is down the memory hole.
My other problem with the story is that I am a MD specializing in internal medicine. In my opinion, Bin Laden looked to have end stage disease in his last plausibly authentic video from November 2001. This is consistent with reports of hospitaization for dialysis, and the reports in the Arab press that Bin Laden died circa 16 Dec 2001. So Madsen in 2005 is pushing the idea that a man nearly 4 years dead flies around in a plane 10 years wrecked. How is that not disinfo? Whose interest is served by supporting the story that Bin Laden is alive?

**Of note, Madsen also was a great supporter of the absurd notion that Patrick Fitzgerald, a co-conspirator in the judical coverup of the FBI directed 1993 WTC bombing (along with Chertoff and Mukasey), was going to bring down the Bush administration over the Plame case. Ha!

Finally, Madsen reported a totally false climate change scare story, that ship sensors on an LNG tanker had detected massive seabed methane hydrate release off the east coast of the US. No scientific sources have ever made such a claim. Madsen just made this up.

Not a well kept secret

Mike and Bill Kieschnick in conjunction with big oil heavily influence governments and corporations the world over. Believe what you want, but I have had a lifetime of experience with these bizarre persons who have provided me with detailed information concerning future events. I'll bet that you are fully aware that what I am writing is true. Sorry - spelling is not my strong suit. TD

PS: use the spell check, Dishner.

It will help you spell more "accuratly" (clearly not a typo as you did it twice). Then maybe someone might at least believe that you are a high school graduate.