The 9/11 Commission Doesn't Believe It: Why Do You?

The 9/11 Commission co-chairs don't believe the 9/11 Commission Report:

  • Chairman Thomas Kean says “I’m upset that [the government] didn’t tell us the truth.”

Many of the other 9/11 Commissioners don't buy it:

And many other key players in generating the Report don't believe it:

  • One of the primary architects of the 9/11 Commission Report, Ernest May, said in May 2005, "We never had full confidence in the interrogation reports as historical sources."

They don't believe it. Why do you?

Postscript: David Ray Griffin sent me the following email after reading this post, clarifying the various stories about the conflicting timelines of the military's response to the hijacked flights (the first and last points cited above):

What the 9/11 Commission calls lies by the military are places where officers have contradicted the Commission’s own new story about why the flights were not intercepted, as I explained in the latter half of “Omissions and Distortions” and more briefly in “Flights of Fancy” (in Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11) and then again in the first chapter of Debunking 9/11 Debunking. As I show, the idea that the military would have deliberately told the kinds of lies alleged by the Commission makes absolutely no sense. Why? Because the story that the military told in “NORAD’s Response Times” (Sept. 18, 2001), and continued to tell to the 9/11 Commission, got the military only partly off the hook, because it left them vulnerable to the charge that they had either stood-down their standard procedures or had been incredibly incompetent. According to the new story told by the 9/11 Commission, the FAA didn’t even notify the military about Flights 175, 77, and 93 until after they had crashed. This gets the military completely off the hook, at least for those 3 flights. If that had been the truth, it would have been completely irrational for the military to have lied by saying that the FAA had given them notice in time for them to have intercepted the flights. But the 9/11 Commission could handle the contradictions between its new story and the military’s old story only by claiming that the military had made false statements. (And since it was hard to see how the military officers could have been confused, the inference was made that they had lied.)

This is not to say that the story the military had told was true. It is possible that the old story and the new story are both false. Indeed, I believe that to be the case. E.g., the military’s claim that it was not notified until 9:24 about Flight 77 contradicts the FAA memo, sent to to the Commission by Laura Brown on May 22, 2003, stating that the FAA had been in conversation with the military about Flight 77 long before 9:24. So the Commission knew that the military’s story was a lie. It responded by increasing the lie by suppressing the memo and saying that the FAA NEVER notified the military.)

This needs to be repeated to hacks like

McCain and others who trumpet the 9/11 Commission Report.

Very .....

well done George !

As usual

excellent work, GW.

GW past, present, and future ...

GW, I love your contributions, par excellence always.


GW has a genuine talent for putting good information in a readable, accessible form

Looks like someone is trying to cover their ass...

"Meantime Friday, the former chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean, told WNBC's Jonathan Dienst that the CIA's destruction of the videotapes hampered the panel's investigation into the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington."