Phil Shenon, Your Presence Is Requested

Phil, you and I have corresponded on several occasions, and I have found you to be a relatively nice guy. For those who don't know, Phil Shenon covered the 9/11 Commission for the New York Times. He recently released a book entitled, "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation" that cites many of the problems with the 9/11 Commission. He also runs a blog available here.

Recently, you wrote an article regarding the 9/11 Commission's reliance on testimony gotten through torture, and I commend you for that.

Several times in my correspondence with you, I have asked why hasn't the New York Times run a front page story on the problems with the official account and each time, I haven't gotten an answer.

I realize I'm putting you on the spot so to speak, so I won't hold it against you if you refuse. I would though VERY MUCH APPRECIATE IT if you could find the time to answer this question as a poster here. I have asked Reprehensor (the boss of to create an account for you. I will send it your way, and hope for the best.

Thank you for your time.

The idea...

For this originated here. I ask that if he does decide to post here, to please be respectful. Thanks.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Zelikow and friends


Thanks, Jon, for your quiet and patient work behind the scenes.

I think Shenon, at this point, is becoming quite conflicted. He investigates, writes, and interviews as a real intelligent and worldly guy. If you read his CV you'll discover he's been around the block a few times.

Back to his conflict. On his book tour last fall for "The Commission" he stopped by Democracy Now! Amy, to her credit, asked him how he answers the Truthers and their doubts about the official story. There was a pregnant pause and he answered that, of course, he believes the official accounts of the day. But his book documents that the accounts were based on unreliable testimony (elicited through torture) and the verdicts/conclusions of the day were fabricated and constructed before any Commission staff meetings had occurred.

Chapter 55 in "The Commission" is the Rosetta Stone of the book; perhaps the Commission report; and, just maybe, 911 itself. Give it read. I'm not quite sure if Mr. Shenon knew what he was doing when he wrote it, or he did know, and he was sending a coded message. I'm, hopefully, leaning toward the latter.

Damned with faint praise

As you say Jon, it's vital to remain respectful. Mr Shenon may be "a relatively nice guy" but I doubt he's flattered to hear it. I was recently described as "nice enough" and I'm still smarting.

I've never met him...

Hung out with him, etc... so as far as I know, he's a "relatively nice guy." I meant no disrespect by it.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

"Rosetta Stone"

The Rosetta Stone in the context of Chapter 55 and the book in general seems to be the theory of incompetence. Does this interpretation accord with what you have in mind? I like your metaphor but want to understand your thoughts correctly.

You Are Welcome Here Philip.

North Texans for 911 Truth
North Texans for 911 Truth Meetup Site

Philip Shenon's book is helpfull

The book is certainly worth a read. From "The Commission"....

"John Lehman thought that he asked some of the tougher questions of Bush during the session, especially about the possibiliity of Saudi government ties to some of the hijackers. Lehman recalled asking Bush about the news reports that checks for thousands of dollars written by the wife of Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador in Washington, might have been funneled to two of the hijackers in San Diego. "he dodged the questions," said Lehman." page 344

He did more than dodge the questions over a year earlier during the Joint Inquiry.....

"A former landlord of two of the September 11 hijackers was an FBI informant at the time, knowledgeable sources confirm to CNN."

This informant was working with.....

"Since September 11, the FBI has learned that al-Bayoumi has connections to terrorist elements. He has been tied to an imam abroad who has connections to al-Qa’ida. Further, the FBI’s Executive Assistant Director for Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence described in testimony before the Joint Inquiry FBI contacts “with the [ redacted] government about collection on a person named [redacted ], who has ties to al-Qa’ida, who has ties to al-Bayoumi.”

"After September 11, the FBI developed information clearly indicating that Bassnan is an extremist and a Bin Ladin supporter. <>"
page 229/858

"Speaking to the Arabic satellite network Al-Arabiya on Thursday, Bandar -- now Abdullah's national security adviser -- said Saudi intelligence was "actively following" most of the September 11, 2001, plotters "with precision."

"If U.S. security authorities had engaged their Saudi counterparts in a serious and credible manner, in my opinion, we would have avoided what happened," he said.

"Sources close to the case told TIME that beginning in January 1999 monthly payments of $2,000 were made from Princess Haifa's checking account to Majida Dwaikat, wife of Osama Bassnan. A Saudi national, Bassnan was living in San Diego last year and has been linked to Omar al Bayoumi, a Saudi student who befriended two men who wound up helping crash Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The sources also say that the ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, gave $15,000 to Bassnan.",9171,1003790,00.html

"The Administration has to date objected to the Inquiry’s efforts to interview the informant in order to attempt to resolve those inconsistencies. The Administration also would not agree to allow the FBI to serve a Committee subpoena and deposition notice on the informant. Instead, written interrogatories from the Joint Inquiry were, at the suggestion of the FBI, provided to the informant. Through an attorney, the informant has declined to respond to those interrogatories and has indicated that, if subpoenaed, the informant would request a grant of immunity prior to testifying." page 51/858

"In July 2003, the asset was given a $100,000 payment and closed as an asset."
footnote 197 page 38/141

Most of us "weirdos" consider that obstruction of Justice, and treason.

Doesn't look like...

He's in any hurry. I do hope he answers this one question.

Edit: Just sent him a little reminder. Last one... if he doesn't show, I'm not going to bother him.

Edit Part II: I corresponded with Phil about this, and although he is "tempted," it doesn't appear that he is going to post, and I think that's a shame.

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?