It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Zelikow and the 9/11 Whitewash-Coverup.

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:25 PM

Originally posted by something wicked

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
OTOH, there's the 9/11 Commission Report, which is as far as I know, the only "official" "historical" record of the event which in the words of Zelikow himself is more of a "narrative" or a story than an actual historical accounting of events and on that note, you might be well served to research Zelikow's biography and his writings pre-9/11 to understand why he was charged with creating the official "narrative" for 9/11.. you might be rather taken aback..

Hi, no, not really, why would I be taken aback?

Catastrophic Terrorism:

Elements of a National Policy

by Philip D. Zelikow, December 1998

guy must be a prophet, or...?

You may note how his language found it's way into this report

Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century
A Report of the Project for the New American Century
September 2000

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."

On September 11, 2001, George W. Bush wrote in his journal: "The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." He was echoing the summary of a September, 2000 report titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses" published by a neoconservative think tank called the Project for a New American Century (PNAC).


The idea of 'public presumption'," he explained, "is akin to [the] notion of 'public myth' but without the negative implication sometimes invoked by the word 'myth.'

Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community."

So Zelikow, the guy who wrote The 9/11 Commission Report, was an expert in how to misuse public trust and create PUBLIC MYTHS.

If 9/11 was nothing but a huge HOAX, you would naturally expect that the event itself would have to be perfectly scripted.

In 1998, Zelikow actually wrote Catastrophic Terrorism about imagining "the transformative event" three years before 9/11.

Here are Zelikow's 1998 words. Readers should imagine the possibilities for themselves, because the most serious constraint on current policy is lack of imagination.

An act of catastrophic terrorism that killed thousands or tens of thousands of people and/or disrupted the necessities of life for hundreds of thousands, or even millions, would be a watershed event in America's history.

It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented for peacetime and undermine Americans' fundamental sense of security within their own borders in a manner akin to the 1949 Soviet atomic bomb test, or perhaps even worse.

Constitutional liberties would be challenged as the United States sought to protect itself from further attacks by pressing against allowable limits in surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and the use of deadly force. More violence would follow, either as other terrorists seek to imitate this great "success" or as the United States strikes out at those considered responsible.

Like Pearl Harbor, such an event would divide our past and future into a "before" and "after."

The effort and resources we devote to averting or containing this threat now, in the "before" period, will seem woeful, even pathetic, when compared to what will happen "after."

Philip D. Zelikow

"... if the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had succeeded, the resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe it. Such an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed even in American history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America's fundamental sense of security..Like Pearl Harbor, the event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States might respond with.."

~ Philip Zelikow, pre-9/11

While at Harvard he worked with Ernest May and Richard Neustadt on the use, and misuse, of history in policymaking. They observed, as Zelikow noted in his own words, that "contemporary" history is "defined functionally by those critical people and events that go into forming the public's presumptions about its immediate past. The idea of 'public presumption'," he explained, "is akin to William McNeill's notion of 'public myth' but without the negative implication sometimes invoked by the word 'myth.' Such presumptions are beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community."

Zelikow's focus was on what he calls 'searing' or 'moulding' events [that] take on 'transcendental' importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experience generation passes from the scene."

In Rise of the Vulcans (Viking, 2004), James Mann reports that when Richard Haass, a senior aide to Secretary of State Colin Powell and the director of policy planning at the State Department, drafted for the administration an overview of America’s national security strategy following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Dr. Rice, the national security advisor, "ordered that the document be completely rewritten. She thought the Bush administration needed something bolder, something that would represent a more dramatic break with the ideas of the past. Rice turned the writing over to her old colleague, University of Virginia Professor Philip Zelikow." This document, issued on September 17, 2002, is generally recognized as a significant document in the War on Terrorism.

The Family Steering Committee for the 9-11 Commission repeatedly called for Philip Zelikow’s resignation. The families, citing Zelikow’s close connections to the Bush Administration, were concerned that Zelikow’s appointment made a mockery of the idea that the Commission was “independent.” But the Zionist controlled Bush Administration ignored their complaint.

Zelikow's Conflicts of Interest

1989-91: Zelikow works closely with Condoleezza Rice as part of the National Security Council during George Bush Sr’s Administration.

1995: Zelikow & Rice write a book together.

1996-98: Zelikow & Rice are together again when Zelikow is Director of the Aspen Strategy Group, a Zionist foreign-policy strategy “think tank.” Rice, along with Dick Cheney & Paul Wolfowitz, are also members.

2000: Zelikow & Rice are reunited when Bush names Zelikow to his transition team for the National Security Council.

2000: Zelikow is briefed by former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke about the growing al-Qaida threat.

2001: Zelikow is appointed by Bush to the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board.

2003: Zelikow is appointed Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission. Thus it is no different than if Rice or Cheney had been running the Commission.

2004: Zelikow skews the investigation by deciding which topics would be investigated and which ones not. Bush’s comic book line for the motive behind 9/11 is taken by Zelikow: “Al Qaida hates our freedom.”

2004: Zelikow is secretly in contact with President Bush’s close adviser Karl Rove while the “independent” Commission is completing its report finalized on July 22 2004.


  • exonerate by means of a perfunctory investigation or through biased presentation of data
  • cover up a misdemeanor, fault, or error; "Let's not whitewash the crimes of Stalin"; "She tried to gloss over her mistakes"

edit on 4-10-2012 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:28 PM

edit on 4-10-2012 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 07:38 PM
I find funny how 11 years later all of these books that have come out from the staff and the co-chairmen of the commission have said pretty much the same thing.That they let him come up with the narrative of 9/11 and they let him decide what was going to be investigated and what was not.To be blunt I think that everyone who made up that commission really did not want to know what happened.Other then Max Cleland who was quickly removed.
edit on 073131p://3926 by mike dangerously because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 07:52 PM
Wellp, looks like we have, in the person of Philip Zelikow, the very fingerprint (without need of a magnifying glass) of a REAL CONSPIRACY, in this case at the very least a blatant, highly controlled (spun) cover-up, but why? Because of incompetence alone, or because the buildings came all the way down this time, as per plan (but how could such an event be anticipated?). LIIHOP (let it happen on purpose) or MIHOP? (MADE it happen on purpose) or any combination thereof, either way it's criminal negligence causing death, and the most heinous act of treason, all done as the pre-text to wage a war of PRE-EMPTION, which by it's very nature is in direct violation of international law, and as we might painfully remember, a cowed Hussein was letting them see his rusting missile stockpile, and welcoming the inspectors while George W. Bush was issuing his "final warning" to flee the country and/or see the entire nation destroyed (and so it has).

This is not just hypocrisy on hypocrisy, to the nth degree, but war crime on war crime, recorded, in public view, all on the their premise that the mainstream media rules, but does it? No I think history will get this straight in the final analysis, looking back, compliments of the Internet, and future historians they will use more than the only official historical accounting of the event, in the form of the 9/11 Commission Report "narrative" (Zelikow) alone, and there really is no other "official" "investigative" report nor offical historical record other than that one best selling book, nothing. Therefore they, the future historians looking back (with near 20/20 historical hindsight), won't take the whole thing at face value, nor accept the now discredited 9/11 Commission Report, discredited even by it's own members, some of whom are on record repeatedly saying that their "investigation" was compromised from the outset all the way to publicataion, and was not the least bit impartial or empirical.

So what are future historians to DO - BUT to make a new and honest investigative inquiry..?

It's only because the poor quality of education and the overall dumbing-down process and hijacked patriotism which is the lowest form of idolatry and idiocy (to love one's own country as exceptional ie: above all others or greater than) that the truth about 9/11 as a heinous crime of the century committed by persons in addition to Bin Laden and his 19 merry men (with boxcutters), has not become widely accepted.

Future historians however, are interested in the truth, not patriotic spin and propaganda, and so at some stage, looking back Zelikow's "parallel universe" will fall, along with the credibility of the mainstrain media and lying government who in this case MUST lie for national security reasons. Wouldn't that be ironic though, if the historical truth came back full circle, making of the "secure", the most insecure among us, and where the stone that was rejected (9/11 victims) by the "builders" (ha, hardly, more like destroyers), became the keystone in a royal arch across which humanity may one day pass into everlasting freedom and a life lived to the full in and comitted to the truth and reality at all cost, except at the cost of truth and reality itself. Then and only then will there he justice, in the form of historical justice, for all the many victims of the atrocity committed, both on that day and in the wake of the event supposedly in their name and in purpose of justice (George Bush Jr.).

"That which hurts, instructs."
~ Benjamin Franklin

edit on 4-10-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 08:03 PM
pursuit of justice i meant (of course)

Zelikow's Parallel Universe

Preface: The questioner asks the wrong question out of the gate and wasn't able to debate Zelikow very well, at first, but it gets better and more interesting as you'll see I think especially towards the end - just note every aspect of his body language (i'll withold from launching a rather nastry pejorative @ Zelikow here, for the time being..).

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 08:24 PM
Here's who Bush originally selected to head the 9/11 Commission and to handle the "investigation" - Henry Kissinger.

What became a "problem" however, was Kissinger's business ties to the Bin Laden family.. so the victims' families cried fowl and Kissinger was very quickly and rather quietly recused.

edit on 4-10-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 08:28 PM
And here's our history bending public mythmaker in action (read between the lines of his presentation..)

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 08:40 PM
Catastrophic Terrorism:

Elements of a National Policy

by Philip D. Zelikow, December 1998


Graham T. Allison, Jr.

Zoe Baird

Vic DeMarines

Robert Gates

Jamie Gorelick

Robert Hermann

Philip Heyman

Fred Ikle

Elaine Kamarck

Ernest May

Matthew Meselson

Joseph S. Nye, Jr.

William J. Perry

Larry Potts

Fred Schauer

J. Terry Scott

Jack Sheehan

Malcom Sparrow

Herbert Winokur

Robert Zoellick

Hmph, Gorelick.. maybe God has a sense of humor even in the most heinous of things.. I hope not (just coincidence).

Robert Gates... that's interesting.

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:09 PM
Hello...? Is mike dangerously the only one courageous enough to say anything about this?

It can't be that bad, the apathy regarding this, does no one care any more?

..or is everone just too afraid to post in this forum because of the recent TOS crackdown?

I don't understand.. this is the biggest conspiracy website and discussion group on the Internet, and this is pretty devastating information regarding the greatest conspiracy and "crime of the century" in modern history! Maybe I ought to just be more patient I don't know, but I figured people might have some interest and comment about what's been presented here. Or does Zelikow win because everyone's so.. cowed, so Zeli-kowed...

edit on 4-10-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:19 PM
reply to post by NewAgeMan

I personally think the whole thread deserves at least a mod 'applause', and in particular, this post:
post by NewAgeMan

I haven't been through all the links, or watched the videos yet, but starred and flagged for what I've already read.

Thank you!

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:22 PM

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Catastrophic Terrorism:

Elements of a National Policy

by Philip D. Zelikow, December 1998

Participants include:

Robert Gates

Jamie Gorelick

9/11 Commission Members

Philip D. Zelikow, Executive Director/Chair

Thomas Kean (Chairman) - Republican, former Governor of New Jersey

Lee H. Hamilton (Vice Chairman) - Democrat, former U.S. Representative from the 9th District of Indiana

Richard Ben-Veniste - Democrat, attorney, former chief of the Watergate Task Force of the Watergate Special Prosecutor's Office

Max Cleland - Democrat, former U.S. Senator from Georgia. Resigned December 2003, stating that the "the White House has played cover-up"[7]

Fred F. Fielding - Republican, attorney and former White House Counsel

Jamie Gorelick - Democrat, former Deputy Attorney General in the Clinton Administration

Slade Gorton - Republican, former U.S. Senator from Washington

Bob Kerrey - Democrat, President of the New School University and former U.S. Senator from Nebraska

John F. Lehman - Republican, former Secretary of the Navy

Timothy J. Roemer - Democrat, former U.S. Representative from the 3rd District of Indiana

James R. Thompson - Republican, former Governor of Illinois

The members of the commission's staff included:

Christopher Kojm, Deputy Executive Director
Daniel Marcus, General Counsel
John J. Farmer, Senior Counsel
Janice Kephart, Counsel
Alvin S. Felzenberg, Spokesman[8]

President Bush had initially appointed former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to head the commission, but he withdrew shortly afterward because he would have been obliged to disclose the clients of his private consulting business.[9]

The commission was established on November 27, 2002 (442 days after the attack) and their final report was issued on July 22, 2004.

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:31 PM
reply to post by Dogdish

Thank you, and God bless you for having the courage to at least make a comment!

This is rather important stuff, the very stuff of history itself and some among us realize and undestand what's at stake here and by God this cover-up artist, no matter how ingenius, will not get the last word regarding what took place on September 11th, 2001, there's just too much info out there now, not the least of which is the actual first hand observation, of the event itself, a record of events which has been forever preserved in perpetuity for all future generations to look back on and go WTF?!!!

posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 12:01 AM
I'm still watching the vids.It's interesting that most of the commissioners run in the same circles.I have always believed that the commission's real job was not just covering up 9/11 but also to minimize any lawsuits that would arise.

posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:42 PM

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by maxella1

Here's a couple more dealing with the first hand accounts.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Originally posted by maxella1
What would they (rescue workers at Ground Zero) find in the wreckage if bombs were used Dave?

Active thermitic material, and high temperatures, maybe..?

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Also worthy of evaluation

The Journal of 9/11 Studies

But none of this is real, if you reside in Mr. Zelikow's parallele universe, whereby since the buildings "collapsed" from the plane strikes and fires at the level of impact, no explosives could possibly be present, so why investigate such an absursity - clearly (said like Zelikow) the sole causal mechanism, as supported by the ASCE and the NIST, was not "BOMBS" going off (smirk), but as a result of the impact of the aircraft upon the buildings which CLEARLY and evidently "collapsed" due to structural failure. If there were bombs, or the possibility of bombs, we would surely have investigated that, and have, coming to the conclusion that such a premise is an absurd implication by it's very nature and thus not worthy of any further investigation, at least not beyond the point of collapse initiation.

What did you say? The buildings basically exploded and in a descending wave of exploding building material, went from top to bottom to within a mere two or three seconds of absolute freefall for any dropped object whether a large steel safe or a grand paino, from the same height but in nothing but air? Well obviously (duh in his case a sophisticated elitist eyeroll) it must have been crushed by the cumulative weight of the all the steel up above which, upon sufficient weakening simply accordioned down all the way to the ground since nothing could stop such a process once initiated, isn't that obvious? Occams razor states (as Zelikow drones on and on) that for any phenomenon under observation the simplist and more straightforward explanation is the one that must be adopted and I'm sorry to say (bulging eyes, strange sinister smile) but the "notion" that it wasn't the planes impacting the buildings, but explosives, is utterly ludicrous. Maybe in ANOTHER UNIVERSE (smirking, deviously) it may have been bombs which felled those buildings, and not the planes that impacted them, but we simply don't have any evidence whatsoever to suggest that that hypothesis, that that "universe" or worldview, has any connection with THIS universe. Theres no there there..

Yeah, but Mr. Zelikow, building 7 fell AT the rate of absolute freefall, yet it was a massive structurally reinforced steel building, a feat which can only occur if all structural members along the same lower level are all severed at once. What about that?!!!

NIST - he says with a sneer, conducted a thorough review etc etc quickly turns, grabs his briefcase, gone, but not without a red face and a rather sheepish and sneaky glee, for having presumed to have gotten away with changing the very nature, of historical reality itself.

It would be funny if it wasn't so grave, and sinister. Reminds me of Dick Cheney, most assuredly a close friend of Philip's if a friend of Condi Rice's. Those guys.. I doubt history will be kind to them in the long run. Time will tell.

Never forget.

Best Regards,


edit on 5-10-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit

posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 08:36 PM
bump thread for those surfing new posts and threads on a Friday night..

Here's the tiny url to distribute this thread

www./98rgp88 (op, doesn't work here, so just send them the url at the top of the page)

IF you so chose to do SOMEthing.. hey people need to know about this stuff, surely, no matter how much time has elapsed, right?

Never Forget!

9/11 Victim Kevin Cosgrove would ask us, if he could I think, to learn about what happened there that day and share the information so that something of great historical value might be learned in the final analysis even and perhaps most especially when "that which hurts, instructs" (Ben Franklin).

edit on 5-10-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit

posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 08:54 PM
I certainly care. Very well put together thread. These are things I've been aware of for a long time now, but I've studied the ins and outs of 9/11 for years. I've always struggled to figure out what are the best threads to pull in terms of unraveling this mystery and getting people to open their eyes. The fact that people won't even see that physics do not even explain what happened to the towers, considering the bottom half were undamaged and yet they picked up speed as they fell, it's difficult to ascertain what people will believe if they cannot even see the obvious. I think Phillips Zelikow is a good place to start though, or at least one of many coincidences, if you will, that should be examined.

Without getting into conspiracy theories it's pretty obvious that 9/11 needs to be investigated, again, though I wouldn't call the commission a true investigation - more of a whitewash as you stated. I'm doing the best I can waking people up one at a time, the only thing that keeps me going is knowing the truth is on my side and there are others out there doing the same. Very good job.

edit on 5-10-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 8 2012 @ 05:50 PM

Originally posted by PatriotGames2
I certainly care.

Good for you. I'm glad I'm not alone on this.



posted on Oct, 8 2012 @ 05:51 PM

posted on Oct, 8 2012 @ 05:53 PM

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
9/11 Victim Kevin Cosgrove would ask us, if he could I think, to learn about what happened there that day and share the information so that something of great historical value might be learned in the final analysis even and perhaps most especially when "that which hurts, instructs" (Ben Franklin).

posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 12:51 PM
Kind of bad form to blatantly bump your own thread, so here is a free one for you. Once i get on my PC ill reread and comment. I think a lot of people burn out on 911 stuff because it usually is rehashing ideas discussed a million times already and usually with less than polite posters. I look forward to watching the vids though.

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in