Proof that the 9-11 Commission is not seeking the truth

Plenty of evidence, including quotes from administration people and ex-administration people, exists that the WMD issue was political cover for the real reasons why the bushgang wanted to invade Iraq.

We all know about PNAC. We all know about L'il George's revenge and finishing Poppy's business motives.

In all the 9-11 Commission exploration of the bushgang being too focused on Iraq, why did no one ask pointed questions about these other real motivations for going to war?

The commission members undoubtedly know that:

a. the WMD were a lie (or for the Repug commissioners--a mistake).

b. the WMD were a marketing message, not a legitimate rationale for war.

c. the bushgang had real reasons for going to war, but did not believe they could sell those to the American people.

d. PNAC has huge influence in this administration. PNAC called for a "Pearl Harbor" event to enable them to execute their plans (why Condi and other witnesses referring to "Pearl Harbor" in the context of 9-11 did not set off alarms with the commissioners is a mystery). 9-11 was their Pearl Harbor.

Yet, to the extent they asked any questions about motivations for invading Iraq, the commission asked questions that assumed the bushgang's cover story is actually true--that we feared the threat of Saddam's WMD's.

I know the commission is focused only on what went wrong on 9-11, but the reasons why the bushgang were not paying attention to 9-11 are clearly relevant to understanding what went wrong. And those reasons relate to WMD's only in the most flimsy and transparently untrue way.

If the 9-11 Commission were trying to find the truth, they certainly would have explored this line of inquiry.

supposed to address Iraq at all. Remember, this is not an independent commission, it is Bush's commission.

Publicly, though, they claim to be independent and claim to be seeking the truth.

My belief is that their failure to explore the bushgang's preoccupation with Iraq and need for a "Pearl Harbor" event prove they are not seeking the truth.

Furthermore, their complete avoidance of PNAC's role in the bushgang prior to and after 9-11 proves that they are not independent.

9/11 Commission is tasked to find out what went wrong leading up to the attack, and what can be changed so it does not happen again.

It is not their job to research Iraq and resons for going to war. If they get involved with that, they are going to lose credibility and their report and recommendations will be overshadowed with accusations of over-reaching!

That Bush's preoccupation with Iraq is one of the reasons we were unprepared for 9-11.

This is the primary criticism in Clarke's book and in his testimony.

The reasons why they were focused on Iraq are clearly relevant to the Commission's inquiry.

was fixated on Iraq and not the actual threat. That point does need looking into and needs to be aired in public. It is the single most damaging fact that the Bush gang does not want discussed.

This administration was planned and put in place by those who wanted the war with Iraq way before the 2000 election. Winning the White House was a means to that end. When they got there by stealing the election the single most important thing to them was to put their Iraq plan into effect since they had gotten the power to do so.

Iraq is as much a part of 9/11 as OBL is!

is probably more part of the bushgang allowing 9-11 to happen than is OBL.

can't make the link. I suppose they could try to ask the right questions, but you would have to have someone claim that the Al Qaeda was ignored BECAUSE they were focused on Iraq invasion. The closest they cam to that was the statement by the interim FBI Dir. who said Ashcroft said he didn't want to "hear any more about this".

Since Ashcroft "sort of denied this" you would need a lot more cooberation and from what I can see, that's just not going to happen.

The Iraq "total concentration" needs to be aired and investigated, but I don't think this 9/11 Comm. is the venue.

Let's assume that LIHOP or MIHOP are, if not true, at least possible. The PNAC plan provides a clear motive.

The 9-11 inquiry has been executed very carefullynot only not to uncover this, but to reinforce the artificial cover story(ies).

important. I think they were so intent to completely disregard ANYTHING Clinton or any of his administration had to say, they ignored ANY warnings and persued their own agenda. Yes, this, by arrogance and ignorance, LIHOP!

It's encouraging to see that there are still human, decent, public-spirited American citizens who aren't completely caught up in the partisan civil war raging everywhere else. I've been surprised, for example, that some of the best questions have come from the "Republicans" on the committee. Gordon Slade and Gov. Kean have both valiantly defended Ms. Gorelick from goon jihadists like Congressman Sensenbrenner and Sen. Frist. Evidence of the overwhelming incompetence of the Bush administration will lead any rational, concerned American to draw the same damning conclusion.

They have asked a few tough questions. Maybe that makes them nice people, but that doesn't mean they are engaged in an objective search for the truth about 9-11. What they have NOT addressed about 9-11 is more instructive of their motives than what they HAVE addressed.

They were given specific direction and specific scope to their inquiries by the bushgang.

They may come out with findings that in part are marginally critical of the bushgang, but they are primarily engaged in institutionalizing the current mythology about 9-11 and whitewashing any actual culpability that may be exposed.

Here's what their report will say:

"Osama bin Laden did it. 19 evildoers hijacked 4 planes and the US was helpless for nearly 2 hours while they committed dastardly deeds. There is NO question that these are the salient facts of 9-11."

"The FBI and CIA couldn't talk to one another. There was a structural failure of our intelligence gathering and analysis. Neither Clinton nor Bush did enough to prevent terrorist attacks agains the US."

"With 20-20 hindsight, 9-11 could possibly have been prevented in some alternative reality. Some mistakes were made, but given the structural problems in our intelligence agencies, there was nothing anyone could have done to stop the evildoers. In order to prevent this kind of evil terrorist polt succeeding in the future, we recommend further curtailment of civil liberties in the US and fewer restrictions on the ability of the FBI to investigate anyone, anywhere, anytime, if they are suspected of 'terrorism.'"

they aren't going to reveal their findings until after the election. What more do you need?