What is Philip Zelikow Hiding? A History of Zelikow's Efforts to Block Public Access to 28 Pages

Via OPEd News

By Elizabeth Woodworth

....."On Wednesday, January 7, Congressmen Walter Jones (R) and Stephen Lynch (D), co-sponsors of House Resolution 428[5] calling for the President to release the information, held a press conference on Capitol Hill, together with three people who had lost family members in the attacks. [6]

Before and after this press conference, Jones and Lynch were interviewed by national networks, including CNN, CBS, ABC, CBC, and Fox News.

In at least two cases, news agencies referred to statements by Zelikow, who, after running the 9/11 Commission returned to academics at the University of Virginia in 2007, where he is now:[7]

The CBS anchor commented: "Philip Zelikow, who was the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, says that the pages should not be released, saying that the pages are full of unproven facts."[8] (Congressman Lynch replied that the same people who wrote these pages drafted the entire report, the rest of whose 858 pages have been public all along.)

Newsweek reported: "Philip D. Zelikow, who was executive director of the 9/11 Commission, and has read the pages, thinks they should remains secret. Now a professor of history at the University of Virginia, Zelikow compared the 28 pages to grand jury testimony and raw police interviews -- full of unproven facts, rumors and innuendo."[9]

Equally intriguing is that Zelikow fired a 9/11 Commission investigator, Dana Leseman, back in 2003 over the same issue. Leseman and a colleague had been researching a possible link between two of the 9/11 hijackers -- Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi -- and elements of the government of Saudi Arabia.

Leseman asked Zelikow to provide her with a document she needed for her work -- 28 redacted pages from the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry report that she herself had helped to research -- but Zelikow blocked her access to it. This led to an argument that resulted in her dismissal". [10]




Zelikow's credibility should be questioned at every turn

Instead the media loves to present the 9/11 Commission high ranking members as valiant truth seekers. If we get past all the garbage media spin Zelikow's conduct comes across as obstruction of justice, accessory after the fact or aiding and abetting the enemy.

The double think generated by the political/media establishment is hard to believe. They tell us that they were so worried about al Qaeda follow up attacks that it was necessary to resort to tactics like anal hydration. Yet evidence of direct Saudi links to the hijackers was covered up. This sort of disconnect is absurd.

Does it make sense to think the Saudis sponsored an al Qaeda attack on US soil without any prior knowledge by US officials? Not at all. We know there was something very odd going on by the fact that CIA agents deliberately obstructed the Cole investigation and the search for al-Hazmi and al-Mihhdar. They did this while CIA Director Tenet claimed he was panicked about a possible terrorist attack. We don't understand this conduct because the 9/11 Commission failed.

Show "Some additional info on Zelikow" by mikealfaromeo

mikealfaromeo wrote "Perhaps

mikealfaromeo wrote "Perhaps everybody should check their confirmation bias and consider a more balanced view of things and people."

What's condemned round these parts is the mans WORK. For example

9/11 Commission Report (2011 Edition)

Notes to Afterward pg 603 by Phillip Zelikow

"The NIST work was confirmed by independent experts commissioned by the National Geographic Society available at http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/remembering-911/episodes/911-science-and-conspiracy1/

"Remaining conspiracy theories about the 9/11 tragedy tend to dwell on supposed anomalies in the physical evidence about the collapse of the buildings. A small number of people have actually originated the underlining arguments. Those arguments have, in turn, provoked a spontaneous grassroots reaction, coming mainly from people angered about the misuse of science and engineering analysis by the self described "truth movement." See, eg; http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ ; and https://sites.google.com/site/911guide/home

Show "What exactly is wrong there?" by mikealfaromeo

YesThe NIST work WAS


The NIST work WAS confirmed by National Geographic , and that work has been invalided over and over.

The debunkers ARE a small group of people outraged by the misuse of science..that invalidates the claims that fires could bring the 3 towers down.

What im saying is that PZ is as shrewed and skillful in rhetoric as anyone ever was. Thats partly why he got the job of Executive Director. He used his intellectual talent in constructing and defending an impossible scenario and fantastic state crime. Are you saying PZ's work with the 9/11 Commission report and its summation is valid in its conclusion as to who, what and why the events happend? Thats what is under scrutiny.

And if PZ is against torture and the faulty intelligence it produces, then why no public apology reguarding the use of KSM's "confession" as the basis for his books claim?

Thats a pretty big gaffe he has yet to explain.


"PZ is a shrewed and skillful in rhetoric as anyone ever was. Thats why he got the job of Executive Director."
Do you have evidence for this, or is that conjecture and opinion?

I suggested a more balanced view of the person. You know, recognize the "gray". Not either "PZ is guilty and evil as hell" or "his work shines the light of truth".

I think the "what" is mostly correct.
The "who" probably needs some additions.
The "why" certainly gets short thrift.

The thread title asks "What is PZ hiding?" and I think the honest answer is "we don't really know, therefore we can't fairly assess whether the 28 pages better remain hidden" - unless you take the global view that no government intelligence documents should ever be secret. So perhaps PZ is really guided by honorable motives, even if our opinion on what constituutes the best policy here differs (I would certainly love to see the 28 pages released, and more). He argues that the 28 pages contain unproven allegations. To which I say: So what? If they are wrong, let us find that out. If they are right, let us dig for the proof.
I pointed out that PZ is in no position at all now to hide anything, as he holds no position which would give him the power to influence the decision. All he can do is voice an opinion and try to persuade decision makers.

your counterpoints remind me of...

I remember several years ago Dallas had a district attorney who was immersed in several scandals. He was wildly unpopular and was destined to be ousted at the upcoming election. As I was driving down Caruth Haven Blvd. I noticed a car with a bumper sticker supporting this scandal-ridden district attorney. I was curious to see who on earth would be supporting this man. So, I sped up to get a look at the driver and it turned out to be him, the scandal-ridden district attorney.

He's hiding the fact...

That the 9/11 Commission did investigate the allegations that were in the 28 redacted pages (what he recently referred to as "wild accusations"), the individuals involved, and still absolved them. Even though several of the MFRs refer to the individuals as not being at all trustworthy, and yet, Saudi Arabia was absolved.

He's hiding the fact that Dana Leseman, someone who came from the JICI, and who helped AUTHOR the 28 redacted pages, was not allowed access to them by Philip Zelikow. So, she went through a back channel to gain access to them, and Zelikow fired her for it.

He refused half of the Saudi interview requests.

He and Dieter Sneill took part in a "late night editing" session to remove Saudi support for the hijackers from the book, and put it in bits an pieces in footnotes in the back of the book.

Dieter later went on to be a witness in a court trying to place the blame for 9/11 on Iran and won because of his testimony. He also got Eliot Spitzer to get him out of testifying before the Able Danger Hearings.

Now, imagine this scenario. The families FINALLY manage to get the pages released, and they take Saudi Arabia into a court room. The families will say we have all the proof we need in these 28 redacted pages, and the Saudis will point to the 9/11 Report, because it absolved them. Hmmm? Somebody's going to have to be brought in to testify about the differences between the reports, and who better than the man himself, Philip Zelikow. That's something I would like to see.