Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! interviews Phillip Shenan for approximately 30 minutes during its tuesday broadcast. Although I have not read his book, "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation", I have to applaud his mention of several important conflicts of interest to do with Phillip Zelikow, (well known to the 9/11 Truth Movement at large as revealed by David Ray Griffin in his criticisms of the commission), especially his extensive relationship with Condoleeza Rice-- National Security Council staff colleagues, coauthoring of a book, and comembers of the National Security Council transition team.

Shenan is capable of criticising the lack of action of Condoleeza and Ashcroft on intelligence briefings, but stops short of questioning many things on the long list of 9/11 truther grievances, such as G.Bush's dual testimony with Cheney behind closed doors, sans oath, and without recording devices. Shenan agrees with the White House argument, calling it a "strong argument" that they needn't testify based on the precendent of the Lyndon Johnson (LBJ) not testifying at the Warren Commission. Needless to say that the public widely regards the Warren Commission as an unaccountable mess with ill-founded conclusions.

Shenan also seems to accept the argument that the commission was unanimous, even while telly the story of Max Cleland, originally a commissioner, but later forced out because he wanted to investigate intelligence malfeasance in the Bush Administration in the spring and summer of 2001, and faulty linking of intelligence to Al-Qaeda leading up to the invasion of Iraq, while the 9/11 Commission did not.

Shenan seems to believe that Cheney's orders were a "shoot down" order, rather than what is understood by the Movement as a "stand down" order, as shown by the testimony of Norman Mineta. Although there is no mention of the testimony in the interview, Shenan does point out that if you read between the lines, the Commission doesn't trust Cheney's story.

Goodman surprises me when she asks "Let me ask you about those in this country who believe 9/11 was an inside job. How did you deal with that for example, the concerns among many others that the building number seven was not even talked about in the Commission report? " , to which he sits back in his chair, taking a deep breath-- saying "um...its a tough issue, I..I just haven't seen the evidence..eb..d...there certainly people who believe it was an inside job, I..I..have trouble believing that myself, I have great difficulty believing in vast conspiracies, I just think a conspiracy of that nature would require competence on the part of people in the federal government that I just don't believe exists in the federal government."

Of course, one has to demand why Shenan believes the vast conspiracy promoted by the 9/11 Commission, in the face of the conflicts of interest , lies, and suspicious testimony he has discovered during his research.

Although the Movement is not mentioned by name by DN!, I think this marks high point for 9/11 Truth on Democracy Now!. Although still short of interviewing a leading academic who has studied 9/11, at least she has asked one of the questions that we are repeatedly pushing to have answered-- What happened to Building 7?