Cynthia McKinney "Mr. Chairman, I have a question" on Malloy tonight

[seemslikeadream]

second hour don't miss it!



Representative Cynthia McKinney Rocks Rumsfeld on War Games


"Mr. Chairman, I have a question"

On-the-Record:
Representative Cynthia McKinney Rocks
Rumsfeld on War Games

By
Michael Kane

© Copyright 2005, From The Wilderness Publications, www.fromthewilderness.com . All Rights Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web site for non-profit purposes only.


Hurriedly I made contact with her staff and forwarded a number of PDF files so that when her time came and on national television, McKinney could finally, in a public forum, hold those responsible for 9/11 accountable with the proof in her hands and demand an answer. These were the same files I had acquired during my research for Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. McKinney was to be well-armed with assistance from other tenacious 9/11 researchers and there would be no escape.

Unless it came time for lunch.

Having lost her seniority after a successful 2002 Israeli-funded and Republican Party-managed campaign to unseat her, McKinney's chance to question Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld and Joint Chiefs Chairman General Richard Myers was pushed aside until the hearings were about to be closed. It appears the bears knew what was coming and had neatly dodged a bullet.

Not quite.

Although the American people were deprived of an on-the-record answer about who was running the wargames which paralyzed official response on 9/11, Cynthia McKinney let it be known (on the record) that we knew and would not forget. As she found a way to get her question on the record, she gave us all a priceless Kodak moment: one that ranks right up there with the reaction I evoked in public from then CIA Director John Deutch in 1996.

The point here is not that 9/11 is suddenly back on the table, somehow available for resolution and justice. It's a long way from a question from a junior member of the minority party asking a question to an impeachment, conviction and imprisonment. The election is still over. The compromised Keane Commission has still closed its doors. No further investigations or legal proceedings are pending. The media has still moved on and the court system and congress are still willfully impotent.

But courage endures. And as long as there is someone like Cynthia McKinney on Capitol Hill there will be moments - wonderful moments like the one captured on the attached video - which prove that we have not gone away or forgotten and that we still have the will to speak.

For those of us who spent years investigating 9/11, the research and evidence we have compiled will always be within arm's reach, awaiting these golden moments. As new threats and challenges overtake us and demand our focus in "the now" we stand ready to jump on any miracle that presents us with an opportunity to remind the world that murderers still walk free, still in power. Like blades of grass growing steadfastly up through the sidewalk we will never surrender our ability to speak truth to power.

God bless Cynthia McKinney. - MCR]

March 1, 2005, PST 1200 (FTW): On February 16, 2005, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney asked Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard B. Myers the same question this reporter asked General Ralph "Ed" Eberhart at the final 9/11 commission hearing:

What about the war games?

The Full House Armed Services Committee met to receive testimony on the Fiscal Year 2006 National Defense Authorization budget request from the Department of Defense. As the meeting wound down to its expected end, Secretary Rumsfeld prepared to leave. Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA), who chaired the hearing, asked the Secretary to commit to a breakfast with Representatives who had not yet asked their questions. Secretary Rumsfeld happily agreed to do so.

At that moment Cynthia McKinney made sure to get the following vital question into the Congressional Record.

Transcript, February 16, Rumsfeld and Myers questioned by Cynthia McKinney:

Cynthia McKinney: Mr. Chairman, I have a question.

Duncan Hunter: The Gentle-lady is recognized.

McKinney: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Would that breakfast with the Secretary be open to the public?

Hunter: Well, if you want to bring all the omelets it might be, but ah -

McKinney: Well Mr. Chairman, the problem is - and I appreciate your adherence to the five-minute rule - however there are many of us who have important questions and my question in particular is about the four war games that were taking place on September 11th and how they may have impaired our ability to respond to those attacks.

Mr. Hunter: Well let me say the gentle lady...



McKinney: I would like that question to be answered in public Mr. Chairman.

Hunter: Let me say to the gentle lady we're going to have other opportunities to have the Secretary in front of us and what we will do beyond having questions, if you want a question for the record, be able to put that to the record and have the answer on the record, but additionally at the next event where the Secretary testifies - we'll try to make sure that happens - we will start with the folks who did not get their question answered so you will have an opportunity.

McKinney: Thank you so much Mr. Chairman, and I hope the record is still open so that even that portion of my comment will be on this record.

Hunter: It will be so ordered.

McKinney: Thank you Mr. Chairman.

-- end of transcript

At this point Representative Skelton (D-MO) asked a visibly flustered Donald Rumsfeld if in the future a classified briefing could occur on the recommendations given by General Luck and his team to the Secretary.

This helped to bury McKinney's question (and by necessity, the process continues: DoD has posted a peculiar "transcript" of the meeting's final moments, from which Representative McKinney's question has been thoroughly deleted), giving Rumsfeld a way to divert attention from the issue she had skillfully placed on the record. Rumsfeld responded to Skelton's question without addressing McKinney's at all. The only response to her question came in the form of both Rumsfeld and Myers' rapid hand movements and off-microphone murmurs. The issue seemed to knock Rumsfeld off-balance, affecting him as it had affected Ralph "Ed" Eberhart at the final 9/11 Commission hearing.

It's unlikely that "No comment" will be an acceptable reply to Representative McKinney's question. Eberhart got away with that when responding to this reporter, and has since retired from his post heading both NORTHERN COMMAND and NORAD. His retirement came immediately after the 2004 presidential election. It appears "no comment" will be his final word on the matter, but that will not be the case for Secretary Rumsfeld and General Myers.

Who was in charge of coordinating the multiple war games running on 9/11? Crossing the Rubicon has already answered this question in spades. But maybe, just maybe, with her return to Capitol Hill Cynthia McKinney has kept alive a flicker of hope that the crimes of 9/11 may yet shake up the US government.

The courage and directness of this fearless woman never cease to amaze us. She has let it be known that she will be a perpetual thorn in the side of the administration for at least the next two years.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Open Letter to Richard A. Clarke regarding War Games, 9/11 Timeline and Myers/Rumsfeld Testimony

From: Kyle Hence
February 23, 2005
Open Letter to Richard A. Clarke, former counter-terrorism 'czar' for both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Author, Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror
http://www.911citizenswatch.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=484

Subject:
Pertaining to accounts in Clarke's book Against All Enemies, neither retracted or refuted, regarding 9/11 war games and the participation of General Myers and Sec. Rumsfeld in a video conference managed from the White House Situation Room by Richard Clarke with the assistance of his Deputy, Roger Cressey.

Note of Explanation:
This letter/email was presented (via email or in person) to Mr. Clarke on four occasions without a response of any kind to the specific questions raised regarding the actions (or lack of) from our military and top officials in positions of responsibility on 9/11. Given no response, and Rep. Cynthia McKinney's attempt to raise the issue at February 16th Armed Services Committee hearing, CitizensWatch is taking the step of making this letter public.

This letter (see below) with questions pertaining to 9/11 (wargames, sworn testimony by Rumsfeld & Myers) was first sent as an email in June of 2004 to Mr. Clarke via his consulting company, Good Harbor. This note and these questions were presented personally to Mr. Clarke a second time on October 6, 2004 - and via email (3rd attempt) directly to his personal email box on October 15. When presented with a second opportunity in person (4th attempt) to respond to these queries backstage at a December 7th function at the Institute for Ethical Culture in New York City, Mr. Clarke refused to acknowledge the author and instead quickly left the room.

Receiving no response despite repeated attempts I am now releasing this to the public as an 'open letter' in the hopes responsible members of the press, family members and/or dedicated investigators will follow up publicly and personally with Mr. Clarke and the Commissioners who failed to examine the glaring discrepancies between Clarke's accounts and those offered in public statements and in sworn testimony by Chairman Myers and Sec. Rumsfeld.

It should be noted that Richard Clarke is the only member of the Bush Administration to publicly apologize to the 9/11 families. While generating controversy at the time, his testimony before the 9/11 Commission regarding the warnings and plan for dealing with Al-Qaeda that he presented to Condi Rice and the Bush Administration in January of 2001 has been recently bolstered by the release of an unclassified version of his January memo to then National Security Advisor Rice.

This controversy could pale in comparison, however, to what could be revealed in sworn testimonies before the appropriate Committee regarding Sept. 11th war games (including "Vigilant Warrior" mentioned by Gen. Myers on the morning of Sept. 11th), changing NORAD timelines and the testimony already offered by Chairman Myers and Sec. Rumsfeld regarding their whereabouts and actions taken in the first and most critical minutes immediately following the attack on the World Trade Center. {see pages 1-7; Against All Enemies)

This is being made public now in an effort to force this issue into the public's eye and ultimately to see full accountability and disclosure. Another 9/11 commemoration must not pass without these issues being addressed forthrightly and honestly before the American people; either in Manhattan before an AG Spitzer or DA Morganthau-convened Grand Jury or public hearings, in Albany before the appropriate Committee or on Capitol Hill. We offer this in hope that those with integrity in a position of responsibility will rise to this challenge. In this case above all others we must not allow the truth to continue to be veiled or obfuscated.

Kyle F. Hence
Co-founder, 9/11 CitizensWatch
February 23, 2005

[e-mail]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sent originally in June '04 via email to Good Harbor Consulting; Presented directly to Mr. Clarke on October 6th at a speaking engagement in New Jersey. A follow-up email was sent directly to his personal email box following the October meeting and his signing of my copy of his book, Against All Enemies. Another attempt to get answers to these questions was rejected on December 7th at the Institute for Ethical Culture in New York City.
Dear Mr. Clarke,

Yesterday I had the pleasure of a brief discussion regarding the events in the White House Situation Room on the morning of September 11th with your then Deputy and now partner, Roger Cressey. He was helpful in answering a few questions. Seeing as I didn't expect him to answer when I rang a number I wasn't sure about, I was not entirely prepared with my questions. Thankfully he offered to make himself available in the future and encouraged me to email you via your Assistant, Ms. Roundtree, for questions I wanted to address to you specifically.

Before I get to my specific queries I should say that I have been running a Citizens watchdog group since March of last year monitoring the course of the investigation of the September 11th attacks. I've attended all the hearings and been successful in putting key questions and areas of inquiry on the radar for the Commission though they have not been sufficiently addressed them in their report.

Currently we are preparing to publish a response to the 9/11 Commission Report and are in the midst of attempting to review their 'findings of fact and circumstances' and their timeline; and where appropriate challenge them with substantiated and credible conflicting accounts or evidence. I appreciate whatever details and corroboration you can offer us to help us in this effort.

Roger said that both you and he were questioned for many hours by the 9/11 Commission Report. I guess I'd like to start there if I may:

In your book, from my reading of your account, the Video Conference with links to the CCC at the OSD, the FAA, etc began sometime between 9:08AM approximately when you arrived at the White House but well before 9:27AM, the time you recounted in the book immediately following detailed exchanges you had with General Myers and prior to that with Jane Garvey at the FAA.

Is this accurate?

Since your book and the Report has been released have you had opportunity to confirm your version of the timeline of events with others who were present?

Given your account, is it accurate to say that both Gen. Myers and Sec. Rumsfeld were involved in discussions about how to respond to the attack? And again, before 9:27AM?

Roger said he remembered clearly seeing Rumsfeld sitting at the CCC on screen at the Video Center when he arrived before 9:30AM. In your account, while you mention the presence on Rumsfeld on the Conference from the outset when Lisa Gordon-Hagerty started taking the roll, was he involved in any substantive discussions regarding the need for issuing orders for military response, the scrambling of planes for intercept of any of the most threatening of the 11 targets that Jane Garvey had identified, or putting a CAP over D.C.?

Or was this issue handled entirely by Gen. Myers and his uniformed staff as recounted in your book?

In either your testimony before the Commission or in the private interview, did you convey the above timeline and details?

I imagine you are well aware of the Commission's account of the videoconference and that it conflicts with the account in your book.

Obviously the bottom line here to put it to you bluntly, did they get it right?

And are you standing by your account including the timeline and the participation in the conference by both Myers and Rumsfeld from Defense?

The report maintains that the videoconference did not begin until 9:40AM. (see page 36 of the Report). Roger says it was underway when he arrived in the Situation Room before 9:30AM and your account has it starting around a half hour earlier. What's the truth here? Can you help me resolve this discrepancy; it's seems a serious one?

Given this discrepancy are you concerned about the implications of such a possible distortion of the public record as it is reflected in the report?

Thank you for taking the time to consider these questions. I know your time is valuable. I have just a few more questions if I may.

1) From what location did Gen Myers join the videoconference? Was he too, along with Rumsfeld, at the CCC in the Office of the Secretary of Defense?

2) At any point during the first half hour of the conference did the conference include or communicate directly with the NMCC?

3) Is there a direct secure line between the CCC and the NMCC?

4) Are you aware of any communication regarding a CAP or scramble and intercept orders being conveyed by either General Myers or Sec. Rumsfeld to the NMCC?

5) Defending D.C.:
While I understand that military jets from two squadrons at the highest state of readiness at Andrews were not formally part of NORAD on the morning of September 11th, can you tell me if there were any jets there that morning in standard readiness at D.C. area bases to protect P-56 or the Pentagon airspace?

If yes, were these planes scrambled and if so, when and from where? In other words, was the non-NORAD defense option--involving normal P-56 defense--for the Capitol identified and employed that morning?

And if not, why not from your position in the circle of those responding that morning?

When did you first hear of a possible threat to D.C. either from the so-called phantom flight 11 or from flight 77?

Did the Andrews AFB based jets on practice bombing runs over North Carolina (confirmed by John Farmer of the Commission and reported in the press) factor into defense options? For example, speculating for a moment from my position of ignorance, did these exercises involving three planes from Andrews leave D.C. without strip alert fighters armed and ready that morning?

Finally, did the NORAD war games (Vigilant Guardian, Vigilant Warrior, Northern Vigilance) being run on 9/11 impact in any way, positively or negatively, the response by the military that morning?

Was there any involvement from the White House in the war games?

Who was ultimately responsible for monitoring and running these exercises? And for being sure there was a 'firewall' between the games and 'real life'?

Were any of the 11 potential hijacks on the FAA system radar 'injects' part of the war gaming?

Re. the Vice-President. When did he reach the PEOC? My reading of your account has him headed down there some minutes after your arrival at the WH but well before 9:27AM. Was the PEOC linked to either the Video Center, the NMCC or the CCC during the critical minutes before the Pentagon strike? When did you first have the VP on an open line at the PEOC?

On any of these questions if you cannot answer for whatever reason perhaps you could direct me to someone who could. The pieces are starting to fall into place and your support could be critical to our own, we believe ultimately, more accurate report.

If you would prefer to meet in person for an interview I would be happy to arrange to come to Washington. A half an hour is all I would need should you be interested in further helping us clarify the record here.

Alternatively, may I follow up with you by phone at some point before we conclude our report?

Your willingness to take the time to help us sort this out is much appreciated.

Sincerely,

Kyle F. Hence
9/11 CitizensWatch
[e-mail]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following questions had been prepared in advance of Mr. Clarke's appearance at the Institute for Ethical Culture in New York City on December 7th, 2004:

Discrepancies in accounts regarding Rumsfeld and Myers

In addition to answers to the above questions can you explain why in your second edition of your book coming out AFTER the 9/11 Report (the first edition have come out before the final report) when you clearly had the opportunity you did not address the very serious discrepancies between your accounts of the whereabouts and involvement of General Richard Myers, then Acting Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld in the response to the terrorist attacks in the critical thirty minutes prior to the attack on the Pentagon?

Your account which I confirmed personally with your former deputy and now business partner Roger Cressey, places Myers at a location where he is seen by way of the video conference you were running from the White House situation room? Whereas, Myers' own account repeated in the 9/11 Report has him in a breakfast meeting and presumably incommunicado until he leaves the office of Max Cleland to head to the Pentagon where en route, he says, he saw smoke rising from the Pentagon. Similarly, Rumsfeld claims he is out of the loop (echoed again by the Commission) but your account places him on your videoconference not long after the second tower was struck around 9:10AM EST. Furthermore, Mr. Cressey informed me personally by phone from his home that when he arrived at the Situation Room at approximately 9:35 he recalled clearly seeing Rumsfeld on screen in direct contradiction to Rumsfeld's public statements and the 9/11 Commission Report.

9/11 War games/Terror exercises - Vice-presidents role…

At a recent speaking engagement in Northern Californian I understand that you were asked by a member of the audience if on the morning of 9/11 Cheney was coordinating war games including ones involving false radar injects and live mock hijacked aircraft. According to the conversation as it was related to me, you corrected her saying that Cheney was NOT responsible for coordinating the war games that just happened to coincide with the actual attacks but that we was in charge of overseeing these war games.

Would you please for the benefit of all Americans and in the interest of full disclosure confirm for us what VP Cheney's role was in these war games, particularly Vigilant Warrior?

Were you involved in any way of the field-training exercise you mentioned in your book, Vigilant Warrior? Can you confirm that it involved live-fly hijackings? That it involved multiple radar 'injects' on FAA radar?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This article comes from 9/11 CitizensWatch
http://www.911citizenswatch.org

The URL for this story is:

http://www.911citizenswatch.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=484

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/030105_mckinney_question.shtml#1

[lovuian]

1. Yes how convenient to have our military playing war games

the day we really needed them when we were under attack!!!

[caledesi]

2. McKinney "shoots from the hip w/ an Uzi." I love her! nt

[TrustingDog]

5. I need a hero, she's seems to fit the bill.

How much time do you give her before an 'accident'?

[Just Me]

26. She doesn't "shoot from the hip". She knows what's going on.

She is utilizing her knowledge as a weapon against power-mongering extremists.

THAT is what makes her "exceptional".

No one can deny this woman's wisdom (knowledge + passion + realist).

[caledesi]

28. I don't mean someone who is a loose cannon...I mean that McKinney

tells it "like it is."

[chlamor]

3. Cynthia McKinney-No politics-No "strategies"-Just the Truth

The best of the best

[Just Me]

4. BWAHAHAHA!! Good grief!!! BUT, SLAD,...must "nutshell" info.

Seriously, you are a literal flood of info,...and you are "flooding" the human realm.

Outline and summarize,...please.

You are like a water "well" without a line or pump,...just a swell of water that needs to be directed.

Start with WHAT you are trying to prove. NAME IT. NAME WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DEFEAT.

Characterize it.

Then, maybe your information dump,...can be organized into an effective tool.

On edit: your capacity to accumulate information is incredible,...is beyond me.

[oasis]

6. Cynthia has taken her lumps, even here on DU, but she has endured.

A courageous congress person is hard to find. She's a keeper.

[bearfan454]

7. Cynthia McKinney is a true patriot.

I really admire that woman. She is one of my heroes along with

[chlamor]

11. Tell me whatever happened to

Walter Payton. I knew he was having serious health problems a while back and looking for a transplant. never heard the details or outcome. Any Info?

[BlackVelvetElvis]

15. Payton died a few years ago.

It was so sad.

[G_j]

8. "courage endures" ..

which also brings to mind Sibel Edmonds.

[Just Me]

10. I don't know how she does it,...

,...Sibel is an amazing femonemon.

[bobthedrummer]

9. A National Disgrace: A Review of the 9/11 Commission Report

by David R. Griffin
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GRI503A.html

[Octafish]

12. Thanks, seemslikeadream! One Woman with Real Backbone.

...Not just any woman. A Democrat.

[understandinglife]

13. Bookmarked. Nominated. Thank you. (nt)

www.missionnotaccomplished.us

[Wilms]

14. Nominated. She does amaze me, too.

[in_cog_ni_to]

16. This was the first time EVER that I heard ANY politician mention

the "war games" on 911! I say, like Mike did, Cynthia McKinney for President!

CHENEY should be questioned IN PUBLIC about his "war games" also. I would LOVE to see him squirm.

[seemslikeadream]

18. Only one Congressperson demanded hearings on the matter.

After George Bush Senior left the White House, he became an advisor and lobbyist for a Canadian gold-mining company, Barrick Gold. Hey, a guy’s got to work. But there were a couple of questions about Barrick, to say the least. For example, was Barrick’s Congo gold mine funding both sides of a civil war and perpetuating that bloody conflict? Only one Congressperson demanded hearings on the matter.

You’ve guessed: Cynthia McKinney.

That was covered in the . . . well, it wasn’t covered at all in the U.S. press.

McKinney contacted me at the BBC. She asked if I’d heard of Barrick. Indeed, I had. Top human rights investigators had evidence that a mine that Barrick bought in 1999 had, in clearing their Tanzanian properties three years earlier, bulldozed mine shafts . . . burying about 50 miners alive.

I certainly knew Barrick: They’d sued the Guardian for daring to run a story I’d written about the allegations of the killings. Barrick never sued an American paper for daring to run the story, because no American paper dared.

The primary source for my story, an internationally famous lawyer named Tundu Lissu, was charged by the Tanzanian police with sedition, and arrested, for calling for an investigation. McKinney has been trying to save his life with an international campaign aimed at Barrick.


That was another of her mistakes.

http://www.alternet.org/story/16172

Another first in_cog_ni_to

[kaitykaity]

17. I caught the audio on Malloy tonight.

Spine-tingling. She was like a pit bull. She bit into
Rumsfeld's ass and wouldn't let go.

[cthrumatrix]

19. kick

[JohnyCanuck]

20. And why was the Sec. or Transportation's testimony ignored?

An open letter to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta regarding the omission of his 5/23/03 testimony to the 9/11 Commission from the Commission's Final Report. That testimony included eye witness accounting of events that occurred in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) the morning of 9/11/01. Additionally, as of the time of this letter, it appears that an effort has been made to conceal Secretary Mineta's testimony from the public by editing it from video archives of the 5/23/03 hearing on the 9/11 Commission website (the testimony is not deleted from the .pdf and .html archive).

March 23, 2005

Dear Secretary Mineta,

On May 23, 2003 you testified before the 9/11 Commission in public hearing as to your experience on the morning of 9/11/01. During your testimony you stated that you arrived at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) underneath the East Wing of the White House "at about 9:20 a.m.", at which time Vice President Richard Cheney and other staff was already present in the center, with Mr. Cheney clearly in command. You also state in your testimony that you had believed based on a conversation that took place between Mr. Cheney and an unnamed "young man" that a shoot down order had been given by the Vice President prior to your arrival, because, in your words...

"There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out, "the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"

You made it clear during your testimony to the Commission that you had arrived at the PEOC prior to the Pentagon attack and that the plane the young man was referring to was Flight 77 that reportedly hit the Pentagon at 9:37. Your testimony made it clear that you were not confusing flight 77 and flight 93, which crashed at 10:10 a.m. in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Considering the timeframe and that Shanksville is 170 miles from Washington D.C., the distances announced by the young man could not have had any meaningful relevance to Flight 93. Also, when asked by Commission Co-Chair Hamilton if you knew beforehand (before it crashed) about Flight 93 you said "I did not". You were clearly lucid about the timeframe of the conversation and the strange response by the vice president, which occurred in your words "about five or six minutes" after your arrival at the PEOC, or around 9:25 or 9:26.

Your testimony was consistent with statements made by Mr. Cheney during an interview September 16, 2001 with Tim Russert of "Meet the Press";

Cheney: "...when I arrived there (PEOC), within short order, we had word the Pentagon's been hit."

It was also consistent with the report of that morning according to Richard A. Clarke in his book "Against All Enemies". Furthermore, your testimony is in synch with the published timing of the approach of flight 77 according to the recently released Staff Report 3 by the 9/11 Commission. In this report the Commission states that Flight 77 was 60 miles out at 9:25, and 38 miles out at 9:29. This trajectory fits with your description of events and persuasively matches your account with the approach of the aircraft that struck the Pentagon.

What is strange and unexplained is that despite your testimony and the numerous public reports and statements which support it including Mr. Cheney's, in its final report the 9/11 Commission gives the time for the arrival of the Vice President to the PEOC as 9:58, an almost 38 minute difference from your public testimony, and at the least 20 minutes later than the Vice President himself claimed on national television. While the Commission report states that there "is conflicting evidence about when the vice president arrived in the shelter conference room", it does not resolve nor make any comment as to the fact that your testimony is discarded in its entirety.

According to David Ray Griffin, who has analyzed this topic and many others in detail in his important recent book "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions":

"In constructing its revisionary timeline, the Kean-Zelikow Commission implies that either Mineta was lying or else his memory of his experiences that morning had become very confused. But it is hard to imagine what motive Mineta would have for lying about his time of arrival at the PEOC and about what he observed there."

There is another disturbing aspect to the discarding of your testimony by the 9/11 Commission. It appears that the Commission has attempted to conceal your testimony by editing out that part of your public testimony in which you describe your experience in the PEOC from the video archive on the 9/11 Commission website ( Day 2: Panel 1 - Windows Media).

The PEOC chronology is not the only significant timeline revision made by the 9/11 Commission in its report. During the final 9/11 Commission hearing, the longstanding timeline for FAA and NORAD response was drastically rewritten to conflict with previous official testimony and records disseminated to the public by NORAD and the FAA. The new timeline appeared to absolve the military of responsibility for failure to execute standing protocols on 9/11.

The omission of your testimony from the Final Report and editing of the video is not the only case of the 9/11 Commission tampering with public testimony records on its own web archive. As of this writing and for quite some time, General Major Larry Arnold and Colonel Alan Scott have been omitted from the archived agenda of the Commission hearing of the same day (5/23/03) as your testimony. Both individuals gave substantial testimony on that day, and like your own, that sworn testimony conflicted prolifically with revisions applied much later to the timeline by Phillip Zelikow and the 9/11 Commission. And so we now see that not only did the commission revise history on the last day of Commission hearings and in their report, but they also have attempted to conceal that public testimony which conflicts with their revision. These two circumstances alone lend credence to the conclusion arrived at by David Ray Griffin. According to Griffin...

"The purpose of the 9/11 Commission...was not to provide 'the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11'. The purpose was to argue that the US Government was not itself complicit in the attacks."

A thorough review of the 9/11 Commission hearings makes it quite evident that Griffin's hypothesis can be narrowed even further as it applies to the FAA and NORAD failures on 9/11. The strategy of the 9/11 Commission was to pin the failures on the morning of 9/11 on the FAA, while deflecting attention away from the military and the executive branches of the government. This is abundantly evidenced by the aggressive questioning given to FAA officials on the last day of hearings, while the Commission treated in particular Admiral Charles Leidig, who reportedly manned the NMCC National Military Command Center ­ nerve center of the military communications structure - with kid gloves. This is despite the fact that Leidig makes the claim that the NMCC staff first learned about the second World Trade Center attack by seeing it on TV, a full 30 minutes after the FAA Boston Center had contacted NEADS, the Northeast Air Defense Sector branch of NORAD. The Commission implies that the FAA didn't use common sense and pick up the phone to call the NMCC. But the testimony of FAA Officials Monty Belger, Acting Deputy FAA Administrator on 9/11, and Ben Sliney, Operations Manager of the Air Traffic Control System Command Center in Herndon, VA on 9/11, reveal that there was in fact no excuse for the military to not have situational awareness throughout the events that morning. According to Belger...

"There were military people on duty at the FAA Command Center. They were participating in what was going on. There were military people in the FAA's Air Traffic Organization in the situation room. They were participating in what was going on."

And according to Sliney...

"...available to us at the (FAA) Command Center, of course, is the military cell, which was our liaison with the military services. They were present at all of the events that occurred on 9/11."

Clearly the Commission made a deliberate choice to avoid pursuing the possibility of any military accountability for failed response on the morning of 9/11. Because the mainstream media has scarcely cast a critical eye on the proceedings and report of the 9/11 Commission, the majority of the American public is still doing their homework on these critical issues despite overt attempts by some to brand any 9/11 questioner as a conspiracy nut or extremist. Fortunately, the discarding of your testimony is amongst the most graspable of issues for a budding 9/11 questioner to verify by simply comparing the 9/11 Commission Report (see p. 40) with the written transcript of your testimony archived on the 9/11 Commission website archive (see see Transcript for Fri, May 23, 2003), then comparing that with the edited video (see Panel 1 Windows Media for Fri, May 23, 2003).

In 19 days and over 100 hours of public testimony, there was scarce illumination into the events of the crucial 2 hours between 8:00 and 10:10 a.m. the morning of 9/11. Your testimony and the testimony of Major General Larry Arnold, as well as that of Colonel Alan Scott on 5/23/03, are amongst the few glimpses we have seen. The record clearly reveals that that important original testimony has been revised, discarded, and concealed by the 9/11 Commission. And as has been well reported by Mike Ruppert and Michael Kane of From The Wilderness and others, there is scarcely a mention of the multiple live-fly drills being conducted the morning of 9/11. There is clear indication via recorded conversation that the actual hijackings were initially thought to be a part of these drills as exemplified by the response of NEADS to the first contact from FAA (NEADS: "Is this real-world or exercise?"). A full understanding of the drills is crucial and the fact that the Commission did not explore this topic is disturbing and must be corrected.

Secretary Mineta, your testimony serves to provide an important point of reference for evaluation and revelation of the 9/11 Commission and the veracity of its report. Given the facts in this matter, it is perhaps a rhetorical request to ask you to comment on your testimony to the 9/11 Commission and the Commissions actions to discard and attempt to conceal it from the public. Nonetheless the request is hereby made with great respect to your office and your service to this nation.

Very Sincerely,

Gregor Holland, US Citizen
Los Angeles, CA

NOTE TO READERS:
Concerned individuals are encouraged to take "The Mineta Test". Here's how:

1. Read the 9/11 Commission testimony of Secretary Mineta from May 23, 2003 (see day 2: full transcript, p. 11-13).
2. Compare it to the 9/11 Commission Report PEOC timeline (see Chapter 1: "We Have Some Planes" p. 40).
3. Verify that the 9/11 Commission Archive has edited the Mineta testimony from the video. (see Day Two: Panel 1, Windows Media ).
4. Get your friends and family to take the test.
5. Call your Congressional Representative and get them to take the test. Then ask them if they are confident in the 9/11 Commission Report given the preceding information as well as the many additional serious unanswered questions that still exist over 6 months after the adjourning of the Commission.
6. Contact your local media and get them to take the test. Make them accountable if they are not writing about the many remaining unanswered questions, including the War Games taking place on 9/11.
7. Be encouraged by Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (link).
8.Refer also to the open letter to Richard A. Clarke written by Kyle Hence available at http://www.911truth.org .[br />
9. Be encouraged by this.

http://www.911truthmovement.org/dear_secretary_mineta.html

[southernboy]

21. kick.

[Kurovski]

22. Heard that last night.

She was magnificent.

Good bookmark thread.

[B Calm]

23. I don't care if this thread has been nominated 10 times

my vote makes 11. You don't want to miss Malloy tonight!

[Greylyn58]

24. She was awesome

and KICKED RUMMY'S ASS!!! She was wonderful and I really enjoyed the show. Everyone was stammering and stuttering and none of them could form a complete sentence.

It was great!!!

:woohoo:

[G_j]

25. btw, I have to mention that is a great pic of Cynthia n/t

[Al-CIAda]

27. NEADS 911 Timeline and War Game Research Resource

NEADS 911 Timeline and War Game Research Resource
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=NEADS&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=+Go+#events


nominated.