9-11 panel heads say Rudy got off easy Daily News 8-5-06 BY ADAM NICHOLS DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER The two chairmen of the 9-11 Commission say in a new book they were intimidated by angry New Yorkers from grilling Rudy Giuliani on the city's organizational failures and called it the "low point" of their probe. Or intimidated by this tyrant himself? Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton state in "Without Precedent" that they let the former mayor off the hook. "It proved difficult, if not impossible, to raise hard questions about 9-11 in New York without it being perceived as criticism of the individual police and firefighters or ... Giuliani," they said. The firefighters and police were victims, as were the innocent civilians that died by the thousands on that horrible day. The question is WHO within "our" government is responsible for allowing the attacks to succeed, and probably for aiding and abetting them. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that Ghouliani, who profited obscenely from 9-11, was among those responsible! "There were no questions posed to him about communication problems between police and firefighters in the towers, or why New York City had its emergency response command center in World Trade Center 7 after the complex had been the target of the 1993 person attack," they wrote. WTC 7 collapsed a few hours after the towers, but unlike the towers, the planes didn't touch it and there were only minor fires, probably arson, in the building. No steel frame building has EVER collapsed from a fire, no matter how extensive - the steel frame always remains standing. This collapse is the weakest link in the official coverup of 9-11, as much evidence indicates it was due to demolition explosives put in place BEFORE the attacks occurred! (see below). Giuliani's questioning is described as a low point of their probe, as panel members continually congratulated Giuliani on his handling of the devastation. No one ever says so when the Emperor wears no clothes. "Magnificent suit, Your Majesty; was it a gift of the President?" "We did not ask tough questions, nor did we get all of the information we needed to put on the public record. ... We did not question him in the same manner that we questioned other witnesses," said Kean, a Republican, and Hamilton, a Democrat. Giuliani's office did not return calls for comment yesterday. Do they ever? The commission did grill the city's former police, fire and emergency operations commissioners the day before Giuliani testified. Including Kriminal Kommissioner Kerik. The questions focused on the inability of commanders to use radio to warn officers inside the twin towers to get out, and confusion between fire and police commanders. Commission member John Lehman scolded them, saying the lack of command and control was "not worthy of the Boy Scouts." The remark infuriated New Yorkers, and Giuliani began the day's hearing by telling the commission that blame should be directed only at the persons. The audience applauded. During the questioning of Giuliani someone shouted, "The mayor did a great job, so sit down and shut up!" Yes, blame the persons, but not the HOMELAND persons that enabled, aided, and abetted them! Any suggestion of failures, they said, was regarded as an "acknowledgment of culpability for people dying ... or as a threat to the phenomenal legacy that had emerged out of the ashes of the World Trade Center." The 9-11 Commission was established by Congress in 2002 to look at government decisions that led to the attacks. Its report became a national best seller when it was released in 2004. Originally published on August 5, 2006 ---------------- WASHINGTON POST Book: Sept. 11 Panel Doubted Officials By HOPE YEN The buttociated Press Friday, August 4, 2006 EXCERPT: "The questioning of Giuliani was considered by Kean and Hamilton "a low point" in the commission's examination of witnesses during public hearings. "We did not ask tough questions, nor did we get all of the information we needed to put on the public record," they wrote." WASHINGTON -- The Sept. 11 commission was so frustrated with repeated misstatements by the Pentagon and FAA about their response to the 2001 terror attacks that it considered an investigation into possible deception, the panel's chairmen say in a new book. POSSIBLE deception?? Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton also say in "Without Precedent" that their panel was too soft in questioning former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and that the 20-month investigation may have suffered for it. The book, a behind-the-scenes look at the investigation, recounts obstacles the authors say were thrown up by the Bush administration, internal disputes over President Bush's use of the attacks as a reason for invading Iraq, and the way the final report avoided questioning whether U.S. policy in the Middle East may have contributed to the attacks. Kean and Hamilton said the commission found it mind-boggling that authorities had butterted during hearings that their air defenses had reacted quickly and were prepared to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93, which appeared headed toward Washington. In fact, the commission determined after it subpoenaed audiotapes and e-mails of the sequence of events that the shootdown order did not reach North American Aerospace Command pilots until after all of the hijacked planes had crashed. The book states that commission staff, "exceedingly frustrated" by what they thought could be deception, proposed a full review into why the FAA and the Pentagon's NORAD had presented inaccurate information. That ultimately could have led to sanctions. Due to a lack of time, the panel ultimately referred the matter to the inspectors general at the Pentagon and Transportation Department. Both are preparing reports, spokesmen said this week. "Fog of war could explain why some people were confused on the day of 9-11, but it could not explain why all of the after-action reports, accident investigations and public testimony by FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9-11 that was untrue," the book states. The questioning of Giuliani was considered by Kean and Hamilton "a low point" in the commission's examination of witnesses during public hearings. "We did not ask tough questions, nor did we get all of the information we needed to put on the public record," they wrote. Commission members backed off, Kean and Hamilton said, after drawing criticism in newspaper editorials for sharp questioning of New York fire and police officials at earlier hearings. The editorials said the commission was insensitive to the officials' bravery on the day of the attacks. "It proved difficult, if not impossible, to raise hard questions about 9-11 in New York without it being perceived as criticism of the individual police and firefighters or of Mayor Giuliani," Kean and Hamilton said. Congress established the commission in 2002 to investigate government missteps leading to the Sept. 11 attacks. Its 567-page unanimous report, which was released in July 2004 and became a national best seller, does not blame Bush or former President Clinton but does say they failed to make anti-terrorism a high priority before the attacks. Perhaps a greater coverup than the Warren Commission report? The panel of five Republicans and five Democrats also concluded that the Sept. 11 attacks would not be the nation's last, noting that al-Qaida had tried for at least 10 years to acquire weapons of mbutt destruction. In their book, which goes on sale Aug. 15, Kean and Hamilton recap obstacles they say the panel faced in putting out a credible report in a presidential election year, including fights for access to government documents and an effort to reach unanimity. Among the issues: Iraq. The commission threatened to splinter over the question of investigating the administration's use of 9-11 as a reason for going to war. The strongest proponent was original member Max Cleland, a Democratic former senator who later stepped down for separate reasons. If Cleland had not resigned, the commission probably would not have reached unanimity, according to the book. Ultimately, commissioners decided to touch briefly on the Iraq war by concluding there was no "collaborative relationship" between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida; the administration had butterted there were substantial contacts between the two. Israel. The commission disagreed as to how to characterize al-Qaida's motives for attacking the U.S., with Hamilton arguing that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the presence of U.S. forces in the Middle East were major contributors. Unidentified members believed that "listing U.S. support for Israel as a root cause of al-Qaida's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should rebuttess that policy," which those commission members did not want. Ultimately, the panel made a brief statement noting that U.S. policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Iraq are "dominant staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world." Access to detainees. The panel pushed for direct access to detainees, at one point proposing to be at least physically present or to listen by telephone during interrogations so they could gauge credibility and get unvarnished accounts. The administration resisted, citing concerns about national security. Officials also said they feared setting a precedent of access by a nongovernment enbreasty that could undermine the administration's position that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to detainees clbuttified as "enemy combatants." The commission agreed to submit questions and receive written responses. Later, allegations emerged of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay that probably played a factor in the government's resistance, the book states. ----------------------------------------------- 9-11 was an INSIDE JOB - and HERE IS THE COMPELLING EVIDENCE: The deliberate demolition by explosives of WTC building 7, just hours after the collapse of the twin towers, is a matter of record, not one requiring proof. The planes that struck the towers did not structurally damage building 7. No steel frame building has EVER collapsed from even a serious fire, and the fires in building 7 were limited, not extensive. Videos show the collapse began with the roof penthouse, though the fires were only on a few of the lower floors. These probably were arson fires, as falling debris from the towers would have only ignited the roof and upper floors. Deliberate, pre-planned explosive demolition is the ONLY explanation for the collapse of building 7. This is the weakest link in the official coverup - and the 9-11 Commission whitewash IGNORES building 7 entirely! Who Cares About Drunks, AnywayI think this was a case of mistaken idenbreasty. A very young woman dressed like a whore, drunk out of her mind, walking down, what was... Explosive demolitions take considerable time to set up (see explosives could not possibly have been properly placed around the structural supports and set up for detonation in building 7 in the few hours between the attacks and that building's collapse. Yet that collapse was clearly a professionally executed demolition by explosives. Therefore - THE DEMOLITION EXPLOSIVES IN BUILDING 7 WERE PUT IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE PLANES IMPACTING THE TWIN TOWERS! Therefore - The 9-11 attacks were KNOWN OF IN ADVANCE, and DELIBERATELY ALLOWED TO OCCUR! It was intended beforehand that building 7 and the twin towers all be completely destroyed, KILLING THE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE REMAINING IN THEM! The above documented facts alone do not rigorously prove that previously placed explosives likewise brought down the twin towers, but see the following: A paper published by Steven E. Jones, Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University, concludes that prepositioned demolition explosives brought down all three collapsed WTC buildings, not the plane impacts or fires. Photos, audio, and video clips accompany this report. You can see this at Further evidence can be found at: This author has a master's degree in Engineering from Stanford University, and a Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Oregon. EVIDENCE OF THERMITE EXPLOSIVE DEMOLITION: There were several thousand pounds of still red-hot molten iron found under the three collapsed WTC buildings six weeks after the cleanup began. When metal is heated to over 3500 degrees F in a matter of seconds, and a piece falls away, it is effectively cut just as with an oxy-acetylene torch. This is how thermite is used to cut through steel from a safe distance. Demolition crews use it in conjunction with C-4 explosive "kicker" charges. Initiate the thermite by remote control, wait 12 seconds or so, then detonate the C-4 to "kick" the column or post or whatever away from its base. History can be rewritten, but the laws of physics cannot. Jet fuel can only reach about 1100 degrees F, nowhere near the temperature required to create a pool of molten iron slag. That only happens at thermite reaction temperatures. Thermite is a simple substance, containing only aluminum and iron oxide. When the reaction-explosion takes place, the iron oxide and aluminum become aluminum oxide and white-hot molten iron at a temperature of about 4500 F. Thermite requires at least 1400 degrees F to start its exothermic reaction, so you cannot ignite thermite by crashing an airplane into a building. And even if that were possible, how did the thermite get there in the first place, positioned to sever steel structural members? Many very small HUMAN BODY FRAGMENTS have been found on the roofs of nearby buildings. These were too far away to be from jumpers from the towers. If the towers simply collapsed from damage and fire, what blew these bodies to smithereens and sent the fragments flying for considerable distances? The plane impacts did not have the explosive brisance necessary to do this - only HIGH EXPLOSIVES, like C-4, can blow bodies to tiny bits. Two unexplained "spikes" in seismic records indicate huge bursts of energy shook the ground beneath the twin towers immediately prior to their collapse. In addition, consider THE TOTAL FAILURE of our sophisticated NORAD AEROSPACE DEFENSE SYSTEM. Not even ONE of the FOUR hijacked jets flying at SUBSONIC speeds towards known person targets was intercepted! Such a failure could not have happened without it being intentional. The attempts at official explanation for this failure have been uniformly ludicrous. Possible motives? Do a Google search on the "Project For a New American Century," and the "New Pearl Harbor." Many deniers of these unprecedented crimes of mbutt liquidate are simply psychologically incapable of considering them possible. Misled by the corporate-government-controlled media, deceived by an elaborate cover-up, and indoctrinated with a perverted sense of "patriotism," they are under the delusion that only barbaric foreign persons could commit such inhuman atrocities. But foreign persons could not have planted demolition explosives in advance. HOMELAND personS had to do that! The implications of this are literally unthinkable to many, which is just what the evil perpetrators of this crime against humanity are counting on. Given the shock and horror, the mbuttive rest and destruction of these events, irrational denial is understandable. History reveals despicable acts of terror by unscrupulous powers in the USSR, Germany, China, and elsewhere. Why would this evil side of human nature not surface here in America? Overcoming denial and exposing the truth is the only hope for saving us from a fascist regime of vicious persons as bad as the Nazis ever were. Should we wait to find out if they can be even worse? CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS AND THE SENATE. DEMAND A NEW AND INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION OF THIS CRIME OF THE CENTURY! More 9-11 documentation:
|
