The 9/11 Commission Scam Exposed in all its Glory

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Feb 11, 2017.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All over this thread, read the contents.

    1. It's not MY theory.
    2. The point is irrelevant to the topic of this thread, it has nothing to do with CD or any theory.

    I haven't spewed any BS, everything in this thread is supported by fact and evidence and fully sourced (from the US government itself). I have no interest in addressing YOUR nonsense designed to derail this discussion.

    Nonsense, I'm not presenting ANY theory, just the facts and evidence relative to the topic of this thread and the above has little to do with that unless you believe the purpose of the 9/11 Commission and their report is to coverup that crime.

    And where is that found in the 9/11 Commission Report or how does it relate to it (see prior answer)?
     
  2. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The above is still the case.
     
  3. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    (anything posted unrelated or irrelevant to the topic of this thread will not be responded to depending on context)

    So to continue with the topic.

    John Farmer was Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission. He authored a book called The Ground Truth. The following is an article based on his book. Some excerpts:

    The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies

    (CINCINNATI, Ohio) - In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

    The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

    Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.

    Does Farmer have cooperation and agreement from other members of the Commission? Yes. Did they say Bush ordered 9/11? No. Do they say that the 9/11 Commission was lied to by the FBI, CIA, Whitehouse and NORAD? Yes. Is there full documentary proof of this? Yes.

    Farmer states...“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened... I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”


    Read the rest ...

    http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september112009/911_truth_9-11-09.php

    https://www.amazon.com/Ground-Truth-Untold-America-Attack/dp/1594488940
     
  4. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    it's a theory Bob ... just like your CD theory ...

    please pay attention ... what do you think the commission was covering up? ...
     
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know, you made that claim but that doesn't quite answer my question. Never mind on that, it's irrelevant.

    Once again, it's NOT MY THEORY, pay attention Shiner, and it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. There are many other threads that deal with the destruction of the 3 towers on 9/11. Make your case in those threads if you have any, otherwise you're diverting this discussion.

    The truth and the facts about 9/11, obviously. Why are you asking me a question that has such a ridiculously obvious answer? Isn't that what any reasonably intelligent person would conclude? What do you believe they covered up? Or if you don't believe it was a coverup what do you believe would be the purpose of publishing an admitted wholesale LIE (masquerading as fact) as an official publication purportedly about the events of and surrounding 9/11?
     
  6. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,529
    Likes Received:
    2,306
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Responsible governance does not exist on the federal level in this country. Feds are bought and sold for the most part. A few good men maybe, but they remain silent for job security.
     
  7. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You're just like Trump Bobby ... you try to steer the conversation in your direction without ever answering any questions ... you should be a politician ... you're good at lying and distorting facts ...
     
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Please quit the trolling, this thread is NOT about me or your personal opinion of me. I started this thread because OCT defenders such as yourself prodded me into doing what I should have done in the first place. In this case to post the FACTS about the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report and to discuss these issues. If you can't or won't do that, STOP posting in this thread and go play with your "hobby" elsewhere. This thread is intended for SERIOUS and INTELLIGENT discussion about these issues. It's the direction I chose for this thread, everything else is derail.

    The thread does NOT belong in the "Conspiracy Theory" section of this forum because none of what's posted is theory. But I presume that because it's 9/11 related, any and every discussion about 9/11 is automatically considered "conspiracy theory" and will eventually be moved here, regardless of the facts, thanks to CIA and MSM indoctrination and the cowards who suck up this propaganda weapon without question.
     
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess as irrelevant to this thread as it is, I should respond to these lies. Especially if it helps to steer the discussion back to the topic of this thread.

    1. You quoted MY ANSWER to the question YOU asked me.
    2. This very thread was started as an ANSWER to YOUR question.
    3. This conversation is and always was about the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report and I started this thread so I have full standing to steer the conversation in the direction of the topic of this thread, OBVIOUSLY.
    4. You OTOH, have no standing to try to steer the conversation away from the topic and especially not in your direction if that also serves that purpose. Remember it's YOU who tried to derail the discussion by introducing the CD theory which is not part of this discussion.
    5. YOU failed to answer my question, instead you responded with a bald faced hypocritical lie.

    Check the mirror before accusing someone of what you do.

    Now stick to the ****ing topic or leave. You can start by answering my question, especially since I answered yours, if you have the stones that is. Here's a refresher for your hobby pleasure and perfectly on topic:

    Let me know if the question is too complicated for you or duck it as you wish.
     
  10. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I already answered your question ... twice I believe ...
     
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You didn't answer it once, never mind twice. Your theory (if that's what you're referring to) is not an answer to my question. The question is about the 9/11 Commission and its report, not about what the Bush administration may or may not have ignored. However if you're saying the 9/11 Commission covered up anything then you're agreeing that it was a scam. It's ok though, I never expected an adult discussion about this topic (or any) from you.
     
  12. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I answered your question Bob ... and don't try to put words in my mouth ... you have nothing to support that the commission was trying to cover up anything but intelligence failures ...

    so when are you going to man up and answer a question? ...
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Despite your claim that I put words in your mouth, the above is YOUR admission that you believe the 9/11 Commission was a scam. Any coverup or intent to coverup corrupts any investigation (even though this was not any kind of legitimate investigation). Contradicting or lying to yourself doesn't change the facts or your admitted position.

    As for me, the answer to YOUR question is and always was that the purpose of the 9/11 Commission was to coverup the facts about 9/11, the Bush administration's crimes (they directed the whole circus anyway) and create an official narrative preconceived by the Bush administration.

    If for YOU personally I have nothing, that's quite ok with me, the FACTS (as posted in this forum) speak for themselves, they have nothing to do with you and I didn't invent them. There's more than enough here for any intelligent person to arrive at their own conclusion, it is inescapable.

    There were NO intelligence failures, history shows the White House was alerted many times by INTELLIGENCE that 9/11 was going to take place.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-bush-knew-before-sept-11/
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/30/AR2006093000282.html
    http://www.salon.com/2012/09/11/911_what_bush_knew/

    That's just a small sample of articles on the subject.
     
  14. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    calm down before you have a heart attack old man ...
     
  15. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The topic is still the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report Shiner, stick to it or quit posting in this thread.
     
  16. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I wouldn't hold my breath.
     
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Continuing with the expose, besides Henry Kissinger, there were many conflicts of interest within the 9/11 Commission members so the 9/11 Commission was far from independent or impartial. Some of these are outlined here:

    http://www.dc911truth.org/flyers/4Supp911Conflicts.pdf

    But by far the most glaring conflict of interest was Philip Zelikow, the one responsible for drafting the outline of the 9/11 Commission Report and the one who had the most control over the direction of the "investigation" and of course, final editorial control. He was in essence, a Bush administration plant whose job was to shape the official narrative as directed by the Bush administration.

    Condoleezza Rice is a household name. But most Americans still have never heard of the man who wrote a book with her, Philip Zelikow.

    As the executive director of the Kean Commission, Zelikow is responsible for framing the agenda. He leads the research staff. He decides what evidence the commission sees.

    In April, the world media focused on Rice’s appearance before the commission. She claimed, not for the first time, that no one could have imagined terrorists would use hijacked planes as weapons against buildings. This is a demonstrable falsehood, which Bush himself inadvertently exposed a week later. (See “Bush, Rice and the Genoa Warning”)

    Rice’s testimony received mostly bad reviews. The commission was credited with investigative fervor. Few reports bothered to note that in the late 1980s, Rice and Zelikow worked closely together on George H.W. Bush’s national security staff.

    Zelikow and Rice co-authored a 1999 book about their experiences in the first Bush White House, “Germany Unified and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft.” The book presents “a detailed and fascinating account of behind-the-scenes discussions and deliberations” during the fall of the Soviet empire, according to Library Journal.

    Zelikow again served alongside Rice as a member of the Bush transition team in 2000- 2001, when he took part in White House meetings on the terror threat. Since this was of interest to the 9/11 investigation, the Kean Commission recently called Zelikow as a witness, in a closed-door session.

    Now imagine if the judge in a trial was a close associate of the star witness. Imagine if the judge called himself as a witness to the case, in secret testimony. A parallel situation has arisen, with Zelikow in the role of the judge, and Rice as the star witness.

    Even after September 11, two days before the invasion of Afghanistan, Zelikow went back to work for the Bush national security staff, as a member of the White House advisory board on foreign intelligence.

    Zelikow’s evident conflicts of interest prompted September 11 family leaders to call for his resignation months ago. “It is apparent that Dr. Zelikow should never have been permitted to be Executive Staff Director of the Commission,” the Family Steering Committee concluded in a March 20 statement. So far, the commission has ignored their plea.

    The Rice/Zelikow connection should have set off alarm bells about the Kean Commission’s independence. Yet it has barely caused a stir.


    http://www.911truth.org/rice-zelikow-connection-kean-commission-conflicts-of-interest/

    [video=youtube;HMQNyhoAcBY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMQNyhoAcBY[/video]
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As already seen in abundant detail, the 9/11 Commission was not an investigation of any kind and a massive scam on America. There is much more evidence to support this obvious conclusion. Personally, in a legitimate Constitutional Republic, those involved in the scam should be impeached and/or prosecuted for complicity in the coverup. Here's yet another sample, a statement from the Jersey Girls.

    Mandate of the 9/11 Commission

    The 9/11 Independent Commission was established by law to “… ascertain, evaluate, and report on the evidence developed by all relevant governmental agencies regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding the attacks;…“make a full and complete accounting of the circumstances surrounding the attacks, and the extent of the United States’ preparedness for, and immediate response to, the attacks…”
    ======

    Recent stories in the Washington Post, the New York Times, as well as the release of the transcripts of the NORAD tapes in Vanity Fair, clearly show that the 9/11 Commission failed in its duties.

    According to current reports, the Commission knew that it had been deceived by NORAD. In May 2003, representatives of NORAD testified, in full regalia, before the 9/11 Commission equipped with an easel and visual aids to highlight NORAD’s timeline for the day of 9/11. In June 2004, NORAD testified again, changing its previous testimony. The new timeline blamed the lack of military response on late notification by the FAA. The Commissioners never determined or explained why there was a discrepancy between the two sets of testimonies. Governor Kean is quoted in the Washington Post article as saying “we, to this day don’t know why NORAD told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth … It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied”.

    The fact that the Commission did not see fit to tie up all loose ends in their final report or to hold those who came before them accountable for lying and/or making misleading statements puts into question the veracity of the entire Commission’s report. Individuals who came before the Commission to testify, after NORAD’s appearance, had no reason to state the truth. It was abundantly clear that there would be no repercussions for any misrepresentations.

    Furthermore, the lack of tenacity and curiosity, by the Commissioners themselves, to determine why NORAD had deceived them is unconscionable. Knowing full well that the lack of military response was such a critical failure, begs the question of whether that same lack of tenacity and curiosity was applied to other critical areas of the 9/11 investigation.

    We fought to establish the 9/11 Independent Commission because we believed that American citizens would be better served if our nation’s vulnerabilities were uncovered and then fixed.

    Unfortunately, once again the failure to fully and properly investigate all areas, not follow all leads and not address the need for accountability, whether it be bureaucrats lying at a hearing or personnel with questionable performance of assigned duties, continues to leave this Nation and its citizens vulnerable and at risk.

    The 9/11 Commission was derelict in its duties. What we needed from them was a thorough investigation into the events of September 11th. Inexcusably, five years later, we still do.

    Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg, & Lorie Van Auken
     
  19. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    So many posts…so few quotes from the Commission Report.

    The thread IS about the Commission Report…right? Let me guess, By mentioning the “commission report” in every sentence, I’ll be the one dubbed to be “off topic”.

    So it goes in the bizarro world of 9/11 truthers.
     
  20. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I believe you're the one who asked for quotes, at least one, now that you got some, it's too "few" for you, even though the entire matter is irrelevant as stated multiple times.

    Good catch Sherlock, almost. It's actually about the 9/11 Commission AND the 9/11 Commission Report AND the scam perpetrated by both.

    The rest of your post is worthless nonsense, in fact, your entire post is. How about YOU quote the 9/11 Commission Report (as relevant to the topic of this thread) if that's what you desperately need? IMO there are more than enough FACTS in this thread proving they were both a massive scam on America, Americans and the world. But for YOU I'm guessing it's still "accurate" regardless of the overwhelming FACTS proving otherwise.
     
  21. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Philip Zelikow, obstructing the "investigation" and lying, every chance he got. Here's just one example:

    Philip Zelikow Says There Is No Evidence Of Saudi Government Funding Al-Qaeda - 6/16/2004

    [video=youtube;z_xgUp_OV84]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_xgUp_OV84[/video]

    According to the 28 pages classified for over 15 years, the alleged source of the funding was the Saudi royal family. Zelikow was fully aware of the contents of those 28 pages but made sure nothing about that subject was going to be part of the 9/11 Commission Report.

    To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance. - 9/11 Commission Report - page 172 (PDF page 189)

    (especially for those who desperately need quotes to figure out if the 9/11 Commission Report was accurate or not)

    Both sentences from the 9/11 Commission Report are lies of course. The former (the origin of the money) is published in the now declassified 28 pages and the latter is sheer nonsense. One of the most basic standards of every criminal investigation is to FOLLOW THE MONEY. But the 9/11 Commission was not and was never intended to be any kind of investigation so investigating anything inconvenient (read incriminating) to the Bush administration was of little practical significance to them.
     
  22. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That's a lie right there Bobby ... show me where in the 28 redacted pages pointing to the Saudi royal family??? ... you truthers are shameless liars ...
     
  23. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you read for comprehension, I used the word ALLEGED for a reason. The now declassified 28 pages are a part of the OCT so they are to be taken with a grain of salt. However, as FULLY EXPLAINED, they were known to Zelikow, the guy who LIED when he said there's NO EVIDENCE of Saudi government funding of 9/11 and steered the 9/11 Commission away from anything having to do with the Saudis and fired a staff member who wanted such classified information made available to the 9/11 Commission.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/19/911-report-details-saudi-arabia-funding-of-muslim-/
    http://www.salon.com/2016/07/15/28_..._911_attacks_finally_released_after_14_years/
    http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/

    That's the best you can come up with after the reams of videos and documents I posted in this thread about the 9/11 Commission and their report? Yet another (non-)defense of the OCT?
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,161
    Likes Received:
    1,116
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And of course the usual libel and insults. That is a required component of your hobby, right?
     
  25. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    who besides you used the word alleged? ... you're trying to mislead the gullible with wordplay ...
     

Share This Page