Skip to content

Ten Years Later: Introduction

by on September 20, 2011

In order to pursue September 11, 2001, and its reverberating aftermath in the socio-political-economic world, we begin by looking at things as they are now.  In contrast, our primary sources begin by looking at things as they were in 2001 and 2008.  Conspiracy theories abound in politics.  Obama was born in Kenya; Bush approved September 11 for personal reasons; Clinton was a werewolf, etc.  I am apt to believe some of these and disbelieve others.  Most of us do.  We pick and choose our beliefs.

Fourteen months after September 11 – and whether that is a long or short time I’ll let the rest of this report conclude for itself – congress and the President created the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.  It had a massive job and a sweeping mandate.

The law directed [them] to investigate “facts and circumstances relating to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,” including those relating to intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, diplomacy, immigration issues and border control, the flow of assets to terrorist organizations, commercial aviation, the role of congressional oversight and resource allocation, and other areas determined relevant by the commission.

The Commission reviewed more than 2.5 million pages of of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 people – which included almost every senior official in past administrations that might be relevant.

And who were these commissioners, charged with an investigation into an event that has created unfathomable bloodshed and untold millions of deaths?  Five Republicans and five Democrats; with a career in government on their resumes.  They are:

  • Thomas Kean, Republican, former governor of New Jersey
  • Lee H. Hamilton, Democrat, former US representative 9th district Indiana
  • Richard Ben-Veniste, Democrat, attorney and former chief of Watergate Task Force
  • Max Cleland, Democrat, former US Senator Georgia (resigned in 2003 stating that White House was playing cover-up; replaced by Bob Kerrey, Democrat, former US Senator Nebraska)
  • Fred F. Fielding, Republican, attorney and former White House counsel
  • James Gorelick, Democrat, former Deputy Attorney General in Clinton administration
  • Slade Gorton, Republican, former US Senator Washington
  • John F. Lehman, Republican, former Secretary of the Navy
  • Timothy J. Roemer, Democrat, former US representative 3rd district Indiana)
  • James R. Thompson, Republican, former governor of Illinois.

Several years later, around 2005, an extensive document was published online by an anonymous author. Updated for a final time in 2008, as we read this anonymous document it is clear why the author desires to remain unnamed. It details the moral failings of the United States at many levels, including the highest levels. It is the kind of information we try to avoid, and therefore we must know it. Although the author remains ambiguous, neither the purpose nor the sources are unclear.

The intent of this report is to 1)provide a hypothetical explanation for the events of September 11, 2001 that incorporates currently public information not included in the official government report, and 2)focus public attention on circumstances that strongly suggest there has been wrong doing by public officials and organizations involved in misuse of government resources, 3)explain why officials may have been motivated to mislead the American public, and 4)provide a foundation of research and hypothesis for future research. Information presented in this report documents that the federal institutions responsible for investigating these events are currently involved in efforts to suppress the facts under the guise of National Security. Hence, this information is being made public in the hope that unknown officials with appropriate level of authority can re-institute the appropriate investigation, or that private investigative resources can further substantiate (or disprove) these claims.

These two sources, one by commissioned by the government titled “9/11 Commission Report,” and the other by unknown interestingly titled “September 11 Commission Report” tell different versions of the same story.  Our job is to know the stories, and to know which, if either (or perhaps both) are the story we will be proud to tell, knowing that we have told the truth.

This is the first in a many part series, synthesizing the stories of 9/11, its aftermath, and our future.

From → 9/11

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: