Amazon.com Widgets
  • A total sham...Admitted by the authors that it was 'set up to fail'.

    It's own authors have stated that it was, 'Set up to fail'. It was totally stonewalled by the CIA and had no power of subpoena and therefore no teeth. What a total sham. Watch George Tennet giving evidence to the 9/11 commission for the ultimate 'dog ate my homework' excuse...

  • Conflict of Interest.

    Of course it was. Henry Kissinger was first selected to chair the report. This alone proves a cover up was ordered. Plus, when all other investigations started within 2 days of the disaster the investigation into 9-11 was delayed for 447 days. Was it flawed? It was a cover up from start to finish. This is like asking if a defendant received would receive a fair trial in a Kangaroo Court. One where he was allowed to be his own Judge and Jury. Where his first ruling was to ban the Prosecutions case from entering the Court Room and there witnesses were murdered, threatened or paid off. Of course it was flawed how could it not be?

  • A Flawed Report

    The report prepared by the 9/11 Commission in the tragedy's aftermath was supposed to explain the reasons for the attack and the security failures that permitted the attacks to be carried out. But the national security witnesses and agents were not entirely forthcoming and the actual truth did not show up in the report.

  • 9/11 commission was fair and independent

    The 9/11 commission was a fair and independent assessment of the events of that day. All of the available information was gathered and reviewed. The commissions had the authority from congress to look at all aspects of the attack and conducted everything in thorough process. Many people were interviewed and lots of data was compied.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.