When Tom Kean, a Republican, says that this was obstruction it is news. Republicans usually find some way of spinning or dismissing any such charges. Some people might wonder what else there is that we do not know about. With this bunch, if anyone discloses any facts that they want to keep secret, they go after them for disclosing secrets.

Opinionated, It was consensual. and they all said they were 18.

snydly January 3rd, 2008 10:56 pm ...One must agree that this motive for torture presents a high level of feasibility. If TPTB know THE TRUTH about 9/11, what would be their reason to create a possible Constitutional crisis and future confrontation with international tribunals, if not to alleviate the chance of a 9/11 TRUTH corraborator coming forth? Of course, since DC exists as a foreign entity and is subject to the Constitution FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC.,it may not have been a concern, but it would seem that international outrage would. And I doubt they are ready to present the idea of the dual constitution for general consumption.

At the least, this is one of many reasons behind dis-honoring our country and it's People through the use of torture. At the most, it's the prime reason, simply obfuscated by a bunch of superfluous motives. AND, it could be PURE EVIL, just for the sake of EVIL AND FEAR.

Some are getting fairly good at connecting dots.
Lots of secrecy makes lots of detectives.
FOLKS, it pains me to admit that something like the FOLLOWING can even enter my head, but...
We've been led to believe that the torturing was to gain intelligence that would help us defeat the non-state terrorists aligned against "our interests". The destruction of these tapes makes a plausible case for the conjecture that the suspects picked up have been persons who have had direct or court-admissable indirect contact with or knowledge of how and by whom 9/11 was set up. Under this conjecture, they would be tortured to find out what they knew, then, depending on their answers, they would be transfered out of sight or otherwise disappeared in a process that could only be described as destruction of witnesses (human evidence). Torturers only extract information. Others pass it along until it gets to actionable levels where decisions are decided by deciders on what to do with these pieces of "evidence".
Whoever set up 9/11, assuming there is anything to this conjecture, must be starting to feel that they may have to face judicial proceedings of some kind, and have set about shredding evidence, material and human. The torture may have never been about making a war shorter or less severe for our troops and our country. War, after all, is a big money-maker for---could it be?---the same people.
These are dark, dark thoughts, and I truly hope someone can make a different picture from these dots. But all the morality stories from human history of all cultures teach us that this is how uber-mendacity plays out.

God save the Constitution.
God bless the United States of America.

"for your lame illusion of "addressing" any of my arguments or details."

"I have plenty of basis for my conclusions,"

*sigh*

Your demand that I provide proof for something I never asserted is hardly an "arguement". *You* are the ones making claims about what happened, and chooses to rant in public about it. The onus is on you, not me. Basic.

What would be the single most important point you would provide as an example that hasn't already been debunked years ago? And rather than just repeating the point, address the debunking arguement too.

"Even the Egyptians 4,000 years ago knew more about structures, and how to build them than you exhibit - "

And yet *you* are the one who wants to treat the WTC buildings as single monolithic entities while ignoring the basic *fact* that they were assembled from *thousands* of individual components and contained mostly air.

"density and resistance to water flow, which is caused by gravity, is actually EXACTLY analogous to much of what you ignore about the building collapse "

Simply repeating that you think they are analagous is not a demonstration that they are. Angle of repose of a structure changes drastically as forces applied change dramatically. Comparing erosion of natural rock and soil structures to manmade steel buildings as an "exact" analogy? Wise up.

"There is no scientific basis other than the observation that it fell,"

Ignoring any number of papers that have been published, you show that you are not able to keep up. You can't continue to repeat points that have been debunked, you must now address the debunking arguments.

"So, if you're not a troll, why do believe even bother to response here?"

Bad ideas and faulty reasoning should be exposed as such, no matter where they occur.

Many posters think Greenwald is focusing on something trivial compared to the immense crimes the Bush Administration has perpetrated: wars, torture, illegal spying, disinformation, etc.

Prima facie, the destruction of the tapes seems like small potatoes compared to killing a million or so civilians in an illegal invasion.

Greenerthanthou in particular makes some excellent points: of course the 9/11 Commission was carefully selected and manipulated to function as a whitewash. Some believe that served to cover up incompetence and neglect, others feel that the commission was used to hide involvement from elements within the U.S. government.

I would add to Greenerthanthou's list that Hamilton and Kean later confessed that they knew the Pentagon was lying to them during their investigations and yet chose to do nothing.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14191255/

However, I think many here are underestimating Greenwald. Okiegal has it right: his articles reveal an extremely astute analytical mind at work--an extremely acute legal mind.

Greenwald is a constitutional lawyer and he is not looking at the tape destruction issue in terms of the gravity of the act per se; rather he is looking at in terms of the gravity of the legal ramifications.

There is a huge difference. The Bush cabal is going to get away with the murder of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq; they need not get away with obstruction of justice in Washington.

Greenwald is telling us that they can be nailed on this. Of course, that assumes that someone in the corporate media or Congress (hello Nancy) displays the will to pursue them.

REN REN -- Nice to read your response, and to learn about your own 'raising of one's head' in outrage.

The part of the greatest tragedy is my overgeneralizing to stab at collectively the corporations, bankers, and political hacks CONSPIRACY and cartel of profitable collusion to control and dominate everything within the USA. And I mean that there is clearly (too me) a multi-generational several hundred year trajectory of banking families and industrialists that have exerted nudges, bank collapses, wars, and assassinations - all for nefarious gain and domination. Although many have yet to see it, the arc is reaching it's inevitable conclusion which portends the demise of the USA.

For me, the Viet Nam and Iraq WARS are really the same external symptoms of the cancer at the heart of this fascist takeover, extended over the period of corporations (1820s - now). My outrage is still throttled back, in proportion to my own denial of what has occurred to American. What Andrew Jackson did in the 1830s to kill the "bank of the US', popped back up 83 years later as Federal Reserve, and is the major central force (and connection point) of economic power today.

What fascist Prescott, father of Geo I of the CIA, did to attempt to kill FDR in 1934 and take over USA (from socialism = egalitarian re-distribution of wealth and opportunity), was thwarted, but really only delayed for Geo II the inferior's reign. The Great Depression WWI & II and similar future enterprises are the ugly face of these demonic democracy killers, and they are real sociopaths.

Although Adolf Hitler was evil (as was Stalin), I now see that their very existence grew out of greater nexus of evil, of greed and power hunger underneath them (propping them up as figureheads). The hidden hands that pull and/or nudge (much of) the strings of our collective destiny.

The profound tragedy is how today's world might have been w/o JFK's early termination, which in some ways is an indication of the intrinsic good that still exists, although only accidentally allowed expression for short periods. With so many "conspiracies" all best understood by a common thread, "Occam's razor" (rule) applies to me: the simplest theory that connects the facts is most likely to be true. Very sad, but nonetheless very true.

May you be blessed with a solid chair and supportive family & friends when you find your own voice of dissent. I am extremely sad to say that the prospect is very high, that that will be following what later survivors will likely call the Greater Depression.

Our current house of cards is so unstable, that powers-that-be will likely hit the BIG reset of the entire world economy, in an attempt to finesse a phoenix transformation on the other side.

If you could choose to be in their shoes, would you gamble on avoiding almost certainly being caught and tried for one's crimes, by hiding everything in the dust of collapse? I would.

Does the 9/11 commission really care about evidence ?

Not that you could tell from what they've done with the investigation --- !!!

What they're afraid of is looking bad ---

JAKE Yeah personal insults to you, for your lame illusion of "addressing" any of my arguments or details. Where you only give the fallacious appearance of reasoned arguments,as here "Now you shift the burden of proof, another fallacy of basic reasoning". I have plenty of basis for my conclusions, whereas you dodge and weave around actually saying anything real

Even the Egyptians 4,000 years ago knew more about structures, and how to build them than you exhibit - but no, the burden of proof is on me? Have you ever built anything? DO you have any knowledge of how forces are distributed and balanced throughout a structure? For example, why is there a ceiling in a house, instead of just building up to the roof rafters?

Sorry to throw some light onto your dark little world, it must be tough to actually learn something new for you. You're the one who has too little attention to the facts to entertain the similarity of water eroding say the Grand Canyon, and the collapse of a building. The density and resistance to water flow, which is caused by gravity, is actually EXACTLY analogous to much of what you ignore about the building collapse (as did the 911 findings). HOw you can be so pleased with a flawed report is enough evidence to me, but nonetheless, I choose to wade into this AS IF you actually had an inquiry going.

As far as shallow reasoning, please fill in the details that the 911 comis left out, about how exactly did the building *keep falling (the way it was observed) with something more solid than their hand waving: we saw the building fall so we know that it fell. There is no scientific basis other than the observation that it fell, no that's the ultimate in illogical thinking and points to a cover-up. *even granting the possibility of one floor or two pancaking - the whole theory of collapse is serious lacking any rigor.

So, if you're not a troll, why do believe even bother to response here? I have seldom seen you do anything but superficially tear at another's postings, throw sand into the gears. You choose your "battles" and jump in, but where is there anything personal about what you believe, and why that might be so?

I wouldn't expect you to present a life story herein, but I doubt anyone has gleamed much of your context and beliefs, because it's really never about you - that of itself to me is enough

"do explain."

In another thread, I was accused of being paid to post ideas that did not agree with the majority.

"and calling everybody here an idiot isn't very constructive either."

I called unidentified people idiots, those who made the above accusations, because rather than present a reasoned arguement they fantasized that I was paid. I think that's idiocy.

There are on occaision people who disagree with me here that are reasonable about it, I don't =say they are idiots.

"also, I don't honestly know what a troll is,"

Try Googling that, central to the troll is a "dishonest" quality in their participation. No one has ever made a good case that I have been dishonest in my disagreements here.

Jake- (sorry I was writing at the same time as you)

I don't know about getting into personal attacks over what happened, but I did notice you said something that was also strange,

"I get paid! LOL! That's what some idiots said in another one of these threads, in lieu of presenting a reasoned arguement."

do explain.

also, I don't honestly know what a troll is, I've not been at this particularly long, so I am not "with it" on some of the lingo

and calling everybody here an idiot isn't very constructive either.

nspire
thanks for responding, and for giving me a bit more ground to understand you on.

It is not particularly elaborate, how I became disinterested with the exact nature of 9/11. My aunt had barely dodged being one of the casualties in that attack, she worked in the towers on a floor near the top of one of the towers. But even given that possibility, and believe me I loved my aunt, I would not be able to call it the greatest tragedy in American history.
I reserve that for the Vietnam war, and times like those when the american public, first and again, becomes so convinced that war is a solution, now, when that mentality allows money to be spent on missiles and weapons and "security" instead of helping the people here survive. America will not spend money on the helping the poor while fighting our so called enemies overseas.

I see tragedy when a lot of those same impoverished people, find the way out to be success through a career in the armed forces. I view soldiers as civilians, including when they are killed, because behind all the lies they were fed, and behind the thin uniforms and missing armor, they are people, and a lot of them are people fighting to get themselves out of what I consider the American dream.

I am very much to the left, moreso than anybody in my community, and in my christian conservative town, that is a dangerous thing to be. So when I come here, and try to define the line, between intelligent dissident and "rebel without a cause" as my father put it, I need to question. So yes, I like you, and everybody else (whether they realize it or not) have some preconceived notions, non-objectivity etc. But I wouldn't ask you to clarify if I didn't intend to read and consider.

I don't believe in false complacency, or false outrage for that matter, and I don't think you practice either. A friend of mine once argued that people force themselves to be "appropriate" rather than "fucking outraged" and that because of that they convince themselves being angry takes away from credibility. This, if you can form an argument, is not the case. That said, given your original argument and its tone, there is something to be desired, and it means something to me that you rephrased for me, and built on it.

"Why I take on the task of reversal of several billion dollars of neocon propaganda, as my own avocation, is conceivably quite beyond the useful level of confidence, hubris, and arrogance that might eventually lead me to find a new career and job"

god's speed (as they say) to anybody who can topple that. I haven't decided yet, where the place for chair standing, sign waiving dissent is, but I know that there is a place for outrage yet left in the heart of every citizen, and non-citizen in the U.S.

MiMiCcS -- Excellent points, in an easy to read, non-confrontational manner.

I find that your postings here on CD provide immense clarity to complex and complicated issues, which otherwise have only a vague map of the hidden connections.

It is amusing (to me) that your points of view, when we both post on a subject, is liken to the steel structure, planning, and foundation - that holds everything together. I tend to grab at the bigger picture elements, and rely on a less thorough approach - but then again - thankfully we do provide independent paths to similar conclusions.

Like that bunch of twigs, which individually can be easily broken, we form a cohesive whole that together holds against much larger forces - a community forged to support itself and sustain the common needs. Thank you.

"If you were willing to push your heel into the soft earth, and mix some sand, you might be able to discover that nature has NEVER yet EVER cut a stream bed through the path of greatest resistance. "

Still not analagous to steel buildings collapsing. You would want the towers to topple like a tree? You are hung up on the path of resistance. Given the "tremendous" potential energy of the materials involved having been stacked so high as they were during the construction, the path is dictated by the direction of gravitational pull.

"But it appears the the path of greatest resistance is between your ears."

Personal insult. Nice. See that everyone?

"I said that real factual evidence of tens of thousands of collapsing building over 10 thousand years of construction best practices CANNOT ALL BE WRONG, for just on one day in 2001."

No you did not. You are just saying it now because I caught you. The "factual evidence" of the collapses in the past does not include buildings like the WTC towers built in the most modern times, does it now?

"prove that any building has ever collapsed ..."

"...where is your evidence?"

Now you shift the burden of proof, another fallacy of basic reasoning. *You* claim the towers were intentionally imploded, *you* provide proof.

"What do you gain by being a troll here?"

I get paid! LOL! That's what some idiots said in another one of these threads, in lieu of presenting a reasoned arguement.

You have no idea what a troll is. Hint: It's not someone who simply says you are wrong about something.

JAKE -- If you were willing to push your heel into the soft earth, and mix some sand, you might be able to discover that nature has NEVER yet EVER cut a stream bed through the path of greatest resistance. Water it turns out, has a lot to teach people like you. But it appears the the path of greatest resistance is between your ears.

Why do you assume I'm stupid enough to believe that there is any basis to my statements having a logical flaw? I didn't say that it couldn't have happened because it never did before, I said that real factual evidence of tens of thousands of collapsing building over 10 thousand years of construction best practices CANNOT ALL BE WRONG, for just on one day in 2001.

As for Griffin, I've read a bit of him, but don't need his authority to discount your rantings, nor feel that he's my hero. If you'd ever taken a physics class, or could discuss gravity acceleration, we might be able to have a discussion.

And oh please, prove that any building has ever collapsed in any manner inconsistent with where the structural integrity holds up the building against gravity (w/ or w/o structural damage), or for you and the rethuglicans, you got CHenney to write you a hall pass for repeal of the law of gravity and conservation of momentum?

I am no longer apologetic for wanna be engineers and betrayers of truth, just go away.

BTW, where is your evidence? Can you substantiate any of the highly suspect FEMA/NIST "volunteers" and 911 commissioners, who profited post-report with hundreds of millions of gov't contracts. What do you gain by being a troll here?

"there's NEVER been a building that has collapsed along the path of greatest resistance"

Why do you guys continually use basic logical fallacies especially after having been called on it? "X never happe4ned before, therefore X did not or could not have happened". Get real, even your hero Griffin wouldn't do that.

"Ever play with a hose, and watch your own personal version of man made erosion?"

How on earth could "play with a hose" even remotely be analagous to what happened to the WTC towers?

"If there are any reporters left who aren't traipsing around together in Iowa, it seems pretty clear that this story ought to be dominating the news."

Seems pretty clear to most of us that it should be dominating the news. So why isn't it?

Here's an interesting article on the same subject written in Feb,2006 by former CIA agent, Paul Pillar:

http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=00181

I am not going into 9/11 details here, plenty of sites for that. Conspiracy is when a group of people conspire in secret to do something they should not do. This happens every day, but we are cautioned never consider a conspiracy theory. Those who conspire, and are subjected to investigation, cover up. Those who are innocent and stand accused, do their best to make sure they are cleared, and cooperate fully. In any crime, when looking for potential suspects, you ask, who had motive, opportunity and means, and then you judge how cooperative they are. Thats part of any investigation.

But if you can choose the investigators, control the money they need to investigate, control the information you give them, limit the scope of the investigation, then you control the outcome.

Some question how could there be such a conspiracy, someone would talk. Yet, if you can jail those involved who talk (National Security laws, Classified information, etc), can control the MSM and discredit anyone with a conspiracy theory as a nut or traitor, threaten to withold funds or contracts for companies dependent on government, and fire those in government, send out Anthrax as a warning to those few credible people in media and congress who might report the truth, control the investigation, then even if people talk, they do not get heard (and people have talked, architects, scientists, military, pilots, theologians), they get ignored.

You might even want to learn a bit about Operation Northwoods, Operation Gladio, etc to see what we are capable of planning if not executing.

Man can do evil if they think they are doing good. Those who do evil justify it as the means justifying the ends. If the means are evil, yet the end goal is good, then it is ok, evil = good. What is the end they have in mind? Global Government and loss of American sovereignty, to ensure survival of the human race. But those with the power to act as Gods, accountable to no one, become corrupted by their power, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So the future is bleak.

Bush was asked once about how history would judge him. Said it depended on who wrote the history. See, even your history can not be trusted, it is controlled, thats why we have socialized education.

REN REN -- I'm sorry for lashing out beyond your understanding (or appropriately), and yes, I've found "find time to adjust", and consider other possibilities.

Your use the terminology of what I view as the fascists, was then interpreted by me in a too exaggerated manner. I still don't feel that your spirit of inquiry was entirely open (be only a subconscious defense, cognitive dissonance, or whatever …)

I was more than anything else, attempting to passionately dish out tit for tat, for the abuses and excessive required burden of truth, while criminal obfuscation and complicity is so obvious.

My life isn't going well, being layed-off, and beating on the fascists is a fit target for my angst, given their criminal enterprise (much yet unknown, or suspected).

Perhaps the implications of my words was too strong, and I can see your outrage is justified. Obviously you have a spine and aren't a half-wit tv drone, and I used the flawed logic of excluded middle to tip the argument's balance to forcing the image of just the two extreme positions.

Fine, your being undecided isn't a crime and I'm open to see that the evidence is hardly clear for most.

On the other hand, my formal training and experience do lead me to be able to make my own conclusions regarding the laws of physics (and engineering), and the overall plausibility of the gestalt of the threadbare evidence even closely supporting the conclusions. Because I have been gamed, and lost (for a while) my clarity from likely payed propagandists and my own negligent logic (following through on details). Every assault is an added injury to my sense of justice and fairness, and I've long lost my impartiality and objectivity (but these are usually illusions anyway).

Nothing you stated was in any manner fascist, or indicating your association with them, nor becoming of their (likely to what I've read, to wit Aleister Crowley & Barbara B's mom) potential cannibalistic meal. I would not wish such a fate on anyone, and was attempting to make a twisted joke about how unlikely someone supporting the fascist point of view would ever receive full acceptance into their club.

As to why you "care not a ripple" about the greatest of tragedy in American history (from my point of view) is an open inquiry that you may chose to pick upon at some future time.

Yes, I overreact and passionately jump up and down about things that I feel strongly about, and this is one of my particularly vulnerable areas. I do have trouble understanding your point of view, out of whatever experience. I sense the entire country (even world) is in the midst of a profound sense of resignation, PTSD, denial or whatever - but none of that changes the unseen truths and facts of the matter.

All together, this exchange has been beneficial to me, and hopefully has had something positive to you and your point of view.

Why I take on the task of reversal of several billion dollars of neocon propaganda, as my own avocation, is conceivably quite beyond the useful level of confidence, hubris, and arrogance that might eventually lead me to find a new career and job. Obviously, that has nothing to do with you or this discussion, other than about where my mind is coming from. Not too surprising, but this is NOT my first time along a similarly rocky road.

¿ What is truth, but an inquiry itself ?

The only way to get to the truth is to sign the the bill that would give power to the Hague to try Americans for war crimes. We are one of the few countries that have not signed on. Then we could run those scoundrels before the Hague on crimes against humanity.
If it is strictly the justice dep. investigating the white House, where the decisions were ultimetly made, it aint going to happen.
How do you spell Executive privilege? Then upon leaving office how do you spell pardons?

nspire "Get a spine, learn to read for yourself, watch a few dozen of the free videos on google and youtube, it is far less wasteful of your time than M$M (TV), and it might just save your life."

I was asking in the spirit of inquiry,
and because the only truthers I know follow that loose change garbage like it's some grand epiphany. Plus, just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am some half-wit television drone. Nor does that mean I intend to appease fascists or any other such nonsense you intend to throw at me without cause.

and yeah, I do ask why the people are convinced one way or another,
I personally don't give a ripple what happened on 9/11, because either way what we did in "response" was unforgivable. dickweed, george, and company may not have been behind it, but they sure capitalized on it, and so have a lot of people who claim the other side.

now, in spite of your fun hannibal reference, I am not too thrilled with your take on my question. It seemed to me to be an over-reaction, I don't see how wholeheartedly espousing some particular idea means you have more of a spine than me

so maybe if you find time to adjust that I would appreciate it, or maybe you think it was appropriate, that is okay too.

There is no monolithic "pro-truth" camp. Anyone saying so is trying to sell you something.

For my part, I'm in the pro-question camp.

REN REN -- ¿ Why is it truthers ?
¿ You use that derisive and divisive crap from bu$h!t the inferior,
and then also ask for the truth ?
¿ Seriously?

I'm so tired of so many liars, and apologists for the corrupt fascists acting confidently and speaking (repeating) pure bu$h!t. Get a spine, learn to read for yourself, watch a few dozen of the free videos on google and youtube, it is far less wasteful of your time than M$M (TV), and it might just save your life.

Anyone who still has ears to listen can understand the basis of 911 setup. Regardless of use of explosives, there's NEVER been a building that has collapsed along the path of greatest resistance, especially three of them from relatively low temp (non-aerosoled fuel air mixtures) fires.

After the USA has spent several trillion dollars on USSR early warning systems, that until 2001, were able to detect anything the size of small bolt 300 miles above. Do you really believe that it is possible for the general dude who was in charge - was promoted to Head of DOD Joint Chief of Staff for the level of incompetence of that day? Who has ever seen managers rewarded for the worse disaster in American history, unless they were doing exactly what the were told to do.

Ever play with a hose, and watch your own personal version of man made erosion? The evidence is right there for anybody not bamboozled into submission to act the same as the other sheeple.

Ever try to actually light kerosene (same as jet fuel)? All the movies showing gas tank fires catching up with a burning trail of fuel are without any basis in reality, even using gasoline instead of kerosene (it just makes for good box office draw, if the good guy can do some sort of McGIVER and save the day (with a BIG splash and bang) - life doesn't work this way.

I could go on for days about what's been going on for 100 years, but above it was simplified for you:

"A conspiracy theorist is a person that knows more about something than you do."

I guess if someone isn't in the pro-TRUTH camp, then they must be pro-LIES?

BTW pro-LIARs, good luck hanging with the fascists.

I'm sure they've got you in their plans for continued world domination
(yeah, we'd like you for diner … … … with some chante and fava beans).

umm.. how many of you here are truthers?

also I worry about greenwald's articles, on merit of having looked at some of his tendencies, and not being comforted.

Fascist corporate oligarchy operatives probably killed MLK, RFK, JFK, JFK Jr., Paul Wellstone, Abbie Hoffman, etc., etc. and probably caused numerous incidents like the Pueblo and 9/11 to institute their Shock Doctrine.

"A conspiracy theorist is a person that knows more about something than you do."

It's probably not the actual torture that they're covering up. 50% of the mouth breathers would support torture.

It's probably that he denied anything to do with 9-11 until they tortured him. They don't want that out there, not after the fat BinLaden "confessed" on the tape found in bombed out Kabul in late 2001- after the other BinLaden denied having anything to do with 9-11. After the fat BinLaden, the denials went down the memory hole, and they probably don't want anyone to remember.

"It's hard to imagine a more serious scandal than this."

Really? Then you haven't been paying close enough attention. Let's assume it's even true - that the CIA actually still uses videotape, and that they destroyed a small number of them in order to cover up what Cheneybush claim is all legal and stuff anyway.

Fine. What's on all the other tapes, then? Let's see every tape ever made since, say, the day our White House was occupied by an anti-American regime. CIA, FBI, NSA, DoD, all of them. Bet there's at least a handful of "serious scandals" that make this one look like the Iran NIE distraction it is. Or is nearly lying a country into a third war not as serious a scandal as some tossed tapes? Is murdering over a million Iraqis for resource control as serious a scandal? Literally bankrupting an entire nation into the pockets of "friends" (who, supposedly, are also fellow Americans,) not as serious a scandal? Do I even have to go on?

5 million destroyed emails v. a few destroyed tapes which would only confirm what we already know but will not ever admit to or accept and atone for?

Don't blame the messenger. Glen Greenwald has historically pointed out Bush & Co. lunatic world and shredding of the constitution.

He posts almost daily at Salon.com. If you haven't been following his work, you might want to do so. The guy is way ahead of most of the so called journalists out there.

Greenwald seems to be aware that we are living in an alternative universe these days. He puts his shock into words, and is more and more mystified no one does anything.

Kind of like you and me.

They're shocked! shocked! to find that there was withholding of evidence!

This is the commission from which Max Cleland resigned in disgust that they weren't allowed to see the evidence?

The commission chaired by a buddy of Condi Rice's?

The commission which agree to interview bush and cheney together, in the White House, with no tapes or notes and the Secret Service enforcing the rules?

Disingenuous doesn't cover it.

Lee Hamilton has a history of covering up government misdeeds. Who does he think he's fooling? Except Greenwald, of course.

cactuspie - truly.

How about 'shock and awe'? What minor scandal was that... bombing indiscriminatly defenceless civilians of a country for their resources?

nspire - it's called 'repressive tolerance'. Read Herbert Marcuse.

All the best...

MALFORD -- When you stated "Then after the election, back to business as usual. Suckers take it in every time."

I got a chill rippling through layers of rarefied bu$h!t.

I just now realized that the recent "thawing" of the NYT editorial, is on the same dangerously thin and pathetically distorting ice.

¿ What ever would American's ever have to think, if we didn't have just such a liberal M$M ?

¿ Besides liberating us from truth, justice, the American way -- what else do you want from us ( M$M + corpo-fascists rethuglicans ) ?

¿ Let's inventory, what do we got left ?
∆ Owning our Homes
∆ A retirement plan (got to keep working)
∆ Financial security, self + gov't (out sourced)
∆ Children's future (military option is looking better each day)
∆ Medical Health, preventing or causing illness
∆ Environmental Health, global Rx = bad
∆ No child left thinking independently of M$M
∆ Prosperity, without high crime risk (everywhere)
∆ Inexpensive recreational drugs
∆ Would-wide prestige and support for our Goodness
∆ Our freedom to object to ill-advised policies
∆ Our representative democracy
∆ … … …

"It's hard to imagine a more serious scandal than this"

Hellooooooo! Earth to Glenn! Where you been the past 6 years? It's VERY easy to imagine a more serious scandal. How about complicity in the attacks of 9-11 and all that goes with it? How about war crimes, crimes against humanity, peace and nature? Even your article's title "9/11 Commission: Our Investigation Was 'Obstructed'". Yeah, obstructed by themselves! Sorry, this article is too little, too late.

The Commission had the same amount of subpoena powers then as now,
effectively, circumventing justice for expediency

I guess all of those extremely profitable gov't contracts that all of the board members received soon after they published the QUICK LOOK report, had nothing to do with their integrity and honesty.

Probably so, they have the same amount of integrity and honesty then as now.

It's the final hour of the Bush administration, so of course we'll start to get self-righteous criticism from those who have been gorgeing themselves at the trough for the past seven years.

This is the way elections are fought in democracies. 'Believe us because we're on your side - see how we criticize authority for you?' Then after the election, back to business as usual. Suckers take it in every time.

Impeach.

What are Kean and Hamilton really doing by publishing this sort of lament?

Were these men ever serious about fully and properly elucidating what happened on the eleventh of September, 2001?

If they were, why does their report contain so many gross omissions (for example, the report outrageously ignores the collapse of WTC building 7) and glaring errors (for instance, the report describes the core of the Twin Towers as a "hollow steel shaft" (p. 541, note 1) whereas the core of the buildings consisted of forty-seven massive steel columns)?

(For a list of the countless omissions and errors in the 9/11 Commission Report, see David Ray Griffin, "The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie.")

Furthermore, the Commission had subpeona powers, yet barely made use of them. It could have subpoenaed the relevant members of the CIA and other agencies. Instead, it chose not to do so.

Are those two guys telling us that they were victims of obfuscating forces beyond their control? Are they trying to cover their posteriors? Are they trying to cover over the fact that their very report is an obstruction?

Wow, the not really independent commission complaining about obstruction.

Just imagine what they're really covering up.

And why exactly should we trust the Bush Dynasty and its philosophical forbears -- on anything -- at this point?

They wanted Empire, they probably dropped a few buildings in NYC, and subsequently failed: by stretching the country and military too thin, wrecking what was left of our international reputation, set the economy on thin ice, and failed to unite the people in their cause.

That they hid something from the commission -- which they picked themselves -- speaks for itself.

Wise up folks, the media attention to obstruction is just a bandaid to give the appearance of credibility to the initial report.

BRAVE NEW WORLD definitions:
O B S T R U C T E D _ = _ E L U C I D A T E D
E L U C I D A T E D _ = _ O B S T R U C T E D

For example, in proper bu$h!tonese:

Those who knew about those videotapes … obstructed our investigation, while we were busy elucidating the truth of 911

For example, in proper english:
We knew about and condoned the purposeful hiding of videotapes and much other evidence to obstruct a thorough investigation, as only a superflicial one would have obstructed the truth of 911

"America, You Need to Wake Up NOW! Three documentaries revealing truths about JFK, Oklahoma City, and 911"
http://www.chycho.com/?q=America_wakeup

"The following three documentaries are must viewing for all patriotic Americans who love their country and have a desire to regain their freedom."

The 9/11 Omission reminds me of an infant just beginning to open its eyes...

Despite the compelling & entirely correct case set forth by Greenwald, I'd be willing to bet that

1) this story will NOT "dominate the news" -- in fact, it will be relegated to the back pages, or will disappear altogether -- and fairly quickly.

2) there will be no consequences whatsoever for Bush, Cheney, Addington, or Gonzales

3) neither party's "first tier" presidential candidates will say anything of real substance about the matter. No one in Congress will, either, except for the 1 or 2 usual "maverick" figures. Looking into this matter seriously is basically "off the table."

Hmmm... classic play by politicians. When an investigation is poorly and hurriedly conducted, blame it on obstruction.

Yep, that's the argument that proves everything else that I've looked at for dozens of years must be false:

"They can't even take my driver's license photo without hassles."

I apologized for wasting everyone's time, and admit that because I was never hassled at DMV, that all of the other data must be wrong. Sorry.

¿ How likely would the complete viewing of these tapes (by the “blue ribbon” 9/11 Commission) change any of their results ?

Some might consider the following probability optimistic:
Between 1/∞ and 0

The entire investigation was of itself an obstruction, so the lack of tapes is forgivable, right?
_ ! _ N O P E _ ! _

Namaste … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Mahatma Gandhi … … … … … … … … … …
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world »

« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed »

I'm with Obama. I think we should just hold hands with republicans and hope for a better tomorrow. Otherwise people could get....angry! And sad.

I believe you are correct. If we had an opposition they'd be going after the other side all the time. At the very least, they'd go after them when the pickings are easy. The absence of movement among the DLC, etc. betrays them as crypto-neocons.

"I don't think any reasonably intelligent human being looking at the events of that day and without any bias would construe anything but a government operation."

LOL! They can't even take my driver's license photo without hassles.

I don't think any reasonably intelligent human being looking at the events of that day and without any bias would construe anything but a government operation.

The reasons are many and all the evidence anyone needs is there for all to see unfortunately many are blind from choice, the 9/11 commission being a prime example.

As far as I can tell, Bush and Cheney could rape teenagers on the White House lawn every day at high noon, and nothing would be done about it. Pelosi betrayed our nation from the moment she said she would not allow impeachment procedings, and every politician who's turned away from the issue is just as bad.

"I apologized for wasting everyone's time, and admit that because I was never hassled at DMV, that all of the other data must be wrong. Sorry"

It was a joke. Are you going to decline the challenge then?