FBI veteran/whistleblower: 'There has to be a new investigation of 9/11'

October 2009 interview of 24-year FBI veteran, Coleen Rowley.



pt.1
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnLMAzUIb5M
pt.2
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QXYNcVuBPM
pt.3
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSqzziSGonI




'we have to have something like a new church committee...you have got to find out the truth of the matter in order to get past it, you can't just turn the page without having read it...there has to be an opening of the books of the bush administration, at EVERY level.'


on the job obama is doing:

'obama talked about transparency, he talked about opening up freedom of information, whistleblower protection, but unfortunately he has not accomplished that. whistleblower protection was a promise he had made on the campaign trail, and it has not occurred. that's a key thing because if you can't even tell someone in government, that there's a mechanism for them to reveal fraud, waste and abuse, illegal acts, that is basically a recipe for people going along with something like torture. becaue they don't have a way to reveal that someone is giving them an illegal order. so that's a key thing and unfortunately that hasn't changed.'








Rowley was one of Time's persons of the year in 2002.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhMcii8smxk

It's your inability to get even basic facts correct that make you the object of such derision here.

of the Los Angeles Division Office. So, he may have never been THE chief, but he was a Division Special Agent in Charge - making your comment irrelevant and semantical.

Now...how about addressing what this former FBI LOS ANGELES DIVISION CHIEF says in this video rather than creating a distraction?

the pancakers never seem to have anything of substance to say about the OP or anything else.

simply time wasters . . .

if you asked 100 people who is Chief of the FBI, I'm certain that a vast majority would say it's the director. Secondly, IBM has numerous presidents of operating units. If you refer to one of those presidents, would it make sense to refer to him as President of IBM?

You guys are fucking unbelievable when you're wrong about something. Next time, write more clearly, RR. If you'd written former FBI division chief Ted Gunderson, no one would have called you on it. You start a lot of stupid fights with your sloppiness, RR...it seems to be an occupational hazard with "truthers".

Please go back to the OP and read it and watch the video and then make an on-topic comment if you want to.

that's why. Duh.

how many have there been? That's my point. It sure has more impact when RR led the reader to believe that Gunderson was a former chief of the entire FBI, rather than one of many. This leads to a larger question. If Gunderson is right, why aren't more former divisional chiefs speaking up?

Grasping at straws just makes the "9/11 truth movement" look weak.

it might be worth listening to. In the meantime, if he's right, why is no one else joining him?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

and you have a problem with SDuderstadt.

wow, you are beyond clueless.

do you know the difference between a chief and a director in the FBI? because there are several FBI chiefs at any one time, but only one director. don't get the two confused.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/22/lockerbie.fbi.mueller/index.html

Who's the "chief" in that story, rollingrock?

The director.

Come on. You got loose with your description so you could inflate Gunderson's importance. SDuderstadt called you on it. Let it drop and move on is probably your best bet right now.

why don't you move on to addressing what these former FBI officials have to say about 9/11? because you prefer to play semantic games with their job titles?

inflate Gunderson's importance? it says it right there in the video that he was the DIVISION chief of the FBI. can you read English?

Google "FBI Agent Provocateur Informant 9/11 LET IT HAPPEN" and then when you'd had enough of that go google "Operation Gladio"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/16/48hours/main2580419_page6.shtml

Who's the (former) "chief" in that story, Bolo?

SDuderstadt was wrong. Let it drop and move on is probably your best bet right now.

to be specifically called that to avoid confusion.

rollingrock was looking for confusion. rollingrock got confusion.

why not call the director (official designation), "director," and call the chiefs, the "chiefs"?

That's what rollingrock did. SDuderstadt was wrong.

It's really stupid to pretend that RollingRock was not trying to make Gunderson sound more authoritative than he actually is. Do you honestly believe that if someone was asked to name the chief of the FBI, they'd name a divisional chief?

Simple question: Why can't "truthers" typically admit silly mistakes?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

people wouldn't have to decipher what you actually mean.

encountered Warren Christopher, who was in FL for the recount fight and she remarked they had a lot in common because he had been a Secretary of State and she was one.

It's really stupid to pretend readers could have been led to believe that Gunderson had been higher up in the FBI than he actually was. The problem could have been easily remedied by referring to him by his actual title, not that the truth and actual facts mean much to "truthers". Fucking unbelievable.

Gunderson works for the Muslim Brotherhood, Neo-Nazis, and domestic and foreign high level spooks that wanted to get some war action going in Iraq. Fuck Gunderson..p.o.s.

Gunderson was never a spook nor a member of any of those groups you mentioned.

interesting.

that is basically a recipe for people going along with something like torture. because they don't have a way to reveal that someone is giving them an illegal order.



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

I wonder though about 'the others' who know and are complicit and outside the needed Whistleblower Protection.

What then Ms. Rowley prevents these people from divulging a secret regimen of torturous acts?
Other than their own complicity of course.

I haven't made it through the vids yet, but there's an interesting bit at the top of the comments under part 1...

Gunderson is an opportunist who will say anything to gain the attention of his niche market.

Rowley is a true whistleblower who deserved to be elected to Congress, and came very close. Her statements and arguments stand on their own, like anything true they don't require reinforcement from dubious quarters.

The pattern of responses on this thread should tell you what happens when you take the shotgun approach and mention the good as well as the bad arguments for demanding 9/11 disclosure. The entire "discussion" will revolve around Gunderson (or no-planes or whatever), allowing the credible stuff to be altogether ignored.

RollingRock.

please do tell.

I don't know Gunderson's views on anything else and frankly I don't care. This thread is about 9/11 or 9/11 whistleblowers, not about Ted Gunderson's political views. If you or anyone else wants to discuss the latter, they are free to start their own thread.

RollingRock...what proof do you have that what Gunderson says IS true? You pull this crap all the time, dude.

Like Gerald Posner?

In order to be a whistleblower don't you have to have first hand knowledge that something wrong has taken place. If that is the case then he does not qualify as a whistleblower. Just another crank.

who does in fact have first hand knowledge of 9/11. she's even credited by Time magazine as a whistleblower and received the person of the year award for it.

Thanks for providing the links. I think Ms. Rowley has a political future.

they say 9/11 couldn't have been an inside job because someone in the government would have blown the whistle by now. well, several highly credible whistle blowers have come forward but the MSM ignores them for the most part, including the big Sibel Edmonds case which is blacked out by the MSM and swept under the rug, although it qualifies as one of the biggest stories of the decade, if not the century. I guess they're too busy covering much more important topics like the balloon boy and Tiger Woods' love life.

welcome to the DUngeon, btw.

to do with the comments in the youtube video link.

so pretty much anything goes in the comments section.