a reply to: Jchristopher5
Those closest to the investigation, the 9/11 Commisioners, have been very vocal about this cover up.
1. Kean and Thompson said it was a White House cover up.
2. Senator Kerry calls for a full impartial investigation and agree that this whole affair was a cover up.
3. Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "we are extremely frustrated by the false statements thst we are getting".
4. Commissioner Max Cleland resigned stating, "it is a national scandal"; "this investigation has been compromised", and "One of these days we
will get the full story because the 9/11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up."
5. John Farmer, the senior counsel of the comission said "at some level of the government, at some point in time....there was an agreement not to
tell the truth about what happened". He also said "I was shocked how different the truth is from what is described.....the tapes told a radically
different story from what had been told to us and thr public for two years."
Below is a transcript of the Mike Malloy radio show, on which Mr. Farmer was interviewed.
The five statements you listed, were indeed made. However, when you research things, you find that those statements are in reference to the story
given to the public that our government's response was well-oiled and responsive that day.....which was indeed the testimony given by many
individuals in the first days of the 9/11 Commission... And that when the Commission actually started getting into the tapes and records, they found
that the response was confused, disorganized and not at all "well-oiled" . They found that there was confusion on who could issue orders, what
level of authority was needed, and how our communications systems were so bad that there were literally times where the President of the United
States, flying aboard Air Force One, and the battle staff officer flying aboard the Airborne Command Post were out of contact.
Not once, did those statement change the reality that it was Al Qaeda that attacked us that day.
Some excerpts from the interview.....
John Farmer (JF) JF- Well, glad you point out that- my function with the 9/11 Commission was to lead a team to put together an account of the
nation’s reaction to the attacks- in other words, reconstruct the events of the day of 9/11. And there are obviously many components to that, from
what the President was doing, the Vice President, to what the Pentagon, was doing, what the firefighters and police in New York were doing, to what
was happening virtually all over the country- so, very daunting task when you have basically a year and a half to put it together.
So, going into it, I really thought that the air defense side of that story would be the easiest part to put together, simply because the story had
been told so many times, in so many different forums. There had been testimony before Congress, there had been major networks news specials dedicated
strictly to the air defense story, there had even been early Commission hearings dedicated to that subject, so the story was out there, and it had
been told numerous times, so I actually started writing an account of the day based strictly on the public sources, figuring, well, we’ll get all
the primary sources and we can simply validate what’s already been told. But to my, uh, ‘disappointment’, to put it mildly, when we, uh, started
getting access to the primary sources, which ultimately took a subpoena to the FAA and Department of Defense, we couldn’t verify the public account
that had been given. And to summarize what that account was- it basically overstated the efficacy and the efficiency of the government’s
Specifically, what we had been told after 9/11 was that by the time of the 3rd flight- American 77, which ultimately hit the Pentagon- the national
command structure had recovered from the shock of the two flights that hit the World Trade Center and had reestablished itself essentially, and had
scrambled planes from Langley Air Force Base to protect the capital, and those planes narrowly missed intercepting American 77, but were certainly in
position by the time United 93, uh, hijacking, and when that turned toward Washington they were certainly in position that they could’ve taken the
plane out if they had to, uh, as it approached Washington.
And what we found happened in fact, when we went through the records and through the tapes and the different logs that were kept, they told a very
consistent story, which was, in fact, the uh military had had basically a minute’s notice that American 77 was missing, with no location given, um,
and they had actually no notice of United 93 until four minutes after the plane crashed, so they were never able to even locate that flight on radar.
The planes were scrambled from Langley, but it was not in response to either of the last two flights, it was in response to a mistaken report that had
come across the radio that the first flight, American 11, had actually not hit the Trade Center at all, but was still airborne, heading south for
Washington. So, in other words, the, uh- and to just to finish the story, the authorization to intercept and potentially shoot down planes, came
from, um, came from the national command structure, from the President and Vice President about thirty minutes after United 93 had already crashed-
so, that particular authorization was never passed to the pilots, because at that point there was no target.
BF- Interesting, hold the thought there, John (break) John, you were speaking of, before the break about some of the things that you were told and the
public was told and the Commission was told that were, quote, “almost entirely and inexplicably ‘untrue’”; you refer to the fact that, uh, the
claim that they could have ‘taken out’ Flight 93 if they had wanted to, that they had within their sights, and so on and so forth- why would- why
do you suspect some of these stories would have been told, that were so wildly inaccurate, as you describe them?
JF- I think there was an effort to, um, uh, to make the government look ‘better’ than it was that day- to make the national command structure,
um, seem, uh, like it was more in control than it was in those critical moments,
and I think in doing that, one of the unfortunate byproducts was
that they obscured some of the really important lessons from that morning, among which are- you know, how critical decisions are actually made in a
crit- in a cataclysmic situation like that, and the essential estrangement of the top levels from the people on the ground who actually had to
improvise the national defense- was important,
Finally, what he says about the Report...
JF- Well, let me just say that I think the report is, uh, extremely accurate, and- and sets forth the facts of 9/11. And we actually did point out
in the report the discrepancies between the accounts that were given and what we actually found.
So, if you are going to rest your arguments on that the 9/11 Commission said there was a cover up, then you have to accept their conclusions that it
actually was Al Qaeda that attacked us that day.