The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America's Defense on 9/11

[BCR]

Well, the not-as-good-looking-as-me John Farmer has a new book coming off the press in September.

The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America's Defense on 9/11 (http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0151013764)

The story that John Farmer, Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission, tells is one of monumental bureaucratic failure encompassing our entire government. Farmer exposes "the story behind the story", as the false congressional testimony given by an array of agencies and individuals, as well as misleading reports in the media culminated in the Commission staff's dawning recognition that the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks. What emerges with painful, stunning clarity is that "at some level of the government, at some point in time...there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened." The implications of this are profound. And Farmer argues that these lies have prevented real and necessary changes that would make our nation more secure and responsive to subsequent threats and catastrophes--domestic, man-made and natural. Farmer pulls no punches in drawing these conclusions, or making explicit what will have to change to make our nation safe. There is a dispassionate beauty in Farmer's writing and the way in which he allows the facts of this story to unfold. He takes the readers through these terrifying events and revelations with calm, impartial and utterly compelling relentlessness. "The Ground Truth" is the definitive account of all the needs to happen following the tragedy of September 11th.


This should be a good read. He is my kin folk (somewhere back among the Scottish trouble-makers), so be kind.

[16.5]

Well, the not-as-good-looking-as-me John Farmer has a new book coming off the press in September.

The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America's Defense on 9/11 (http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0151013764)



This should be a good read. He is my kin folk (somewhere back among the Scottish trouble-makers), so be kind.

I do believe he is a member here... Caustic Logic perhaps?

All I know is that he got his mug posted by Emo and Enormous over at the CIT "Enemies" site, so he can't be all bad.

[BCR]

No, I am the real John Farmer. This guy is just someone who served on the 911 Commission :)

[Mince]

If someone wants to kill someone else, particularly if they don't mind dying themselves, the task is not that hard. There is no defense against murder, just deterrent and hope that the deterrent works.

[RedIbis]

No, I am the real John Farmer. This guy is just someone who served on the 911 Commission :)

I was confused by that and did think it was you, but then the thesis appeared inconsistent with what I get from your posts. This book sounds like Shenon's, I'll have to pick it up and give it a read.

[BCR]

I was confused by that and did think it was you, but then the thesis appeared inconsistent with what I get from your posts. This book sounds like Shenon's, I'll have to pick it up and give it a read.

My understanding is that the "blurb" on Amazon may be premature and not entirely reflective of the book. None-the-less, John "the Commish" Farmer has always been an honest broker in my estimation, so it should be a good read.

[RedIbis]

My understanding is that the "blurb" on Amazon may be premature and not entirely reflective of the book. None-the-less, John "the Commish" Farmer has always been an honest broker in my estimation, so it should be a good read.

Quite possibly, but on the publisher's site, the wording is mostly the same saying,

"Ultimately Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security."

If the official version is "almost entirely untrue" what is left of it? And this is coming from someone described as a primary author of the report.

This is what debunkers are going to have to confront, and in a way the twoofiest of twoofers. Whereas the truth is usually somewhere between extremes, we can forget about conspiracy theories and agree that the investigation was the result of politics and was never intended to provide an accurate account. Most people would ask why? The answer is either MIHOP or CYA.

If the only indictments handed down to the members of the adminisration were for perjury, obstruction of justice and dereliction of duty, I'd be very happy with that and never have to address CD or any other MIHOP theories. Regardless, either scenario is criminal.

[T.A.M.]

I was confused by that and did think it was you, but then the thesis appeared inconsistent with what I get from your posts. This book sounds like Shenon's, I'll have to pick it up and give it a read.

I am reading Shenon's now, and so far it is excellent (only about 80 pages in). This new book also sounds like an excellent read.

TAM:)

[BCR]

John "the Commish" Farmer testified before Senator Leahy's committee last month.

“Getting to the Truth Through a Nonpartisan Commission of Inquiry” (http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=3686)

The video is a ram file, so a Real Player plug-in is required to view.

[JamesB]

But how could there be two people with the same name discussing the same subject?

Did you know that 5 to 7 of the hijackers are still alive....

[Brainster]

A further publisher's note here (http://www.tower.com/ground-truth-john-farmer-hardcover/wapi/112519212):

One of the primary authors of the 9/11 Commission's report, John Farmer was proud of his and his colleagues' work. Yet he came away from the experience convinced that there was a further story that demanded to be told, one he was uniquely qualified to write.
Now that story can be told. Tape recordings, transcripts, and contemporaneous records that had been classified have been declassified, and the inspector general's investigations of government conduct have been completed. Drawing on his knowledge of those sources, Farmer reconstructs the truth of what happened on that fateful day and the disastrous circumstance that allowed it: the repeated, institutionalized disconnect between what those on the ground knew and what those in power did. He reveals terrifyingly -- and illuminatingly -- the key moments in the years, months, weeks, and days that preceded the attacks, then descends almost in real time through the attacks themselves, revealing them as they have never before been seen.
Ultimately Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security. The ground truth that Farmer captures tells a very different story -- a story that is doomed to be repeated unless the systemic failures he reveals are confronted and addressed.

You know how it is, you can interpret some of that as talking about Rowley, the Phoenix Memo, etc., and if you look at the cover (with the top half of the WTC shrouded in fog) you can see that theme being presented. But the "official version" is almost entirely untrue? Hard to see how he's going to claim that unless he gets into the conspiracy theories.

A Truther noticed that Farmer testified before congress about Leahy's "Truth Commission", but apparently didn't think (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090304151530601) he had anything explosive to say:

Oh, nevermind! I was going to add a little background info on John Farmer ... Given that he saw and spoke (vaguely) about cover-ups and failings of the 9/11 Commission, I saw a ray of hope that he might be an interesting first witness. I thought he might point out specifics that led to the inadequacies of the 9/11 Commission and should be avoided this time... Not. He pretty much said this is ONLY about "detentions" and even then, the investigation should be fairly narrow, and suggested the 9/11 Commission was successful... he added this commission should have subpoena power, carefully consider any immunity offered, and be thoroughly funded with a clear mandate ... very disappointing, though not surprising.

So I'm left scratching my head.

ETA: Here's the link to Farmer's testimony there (http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=3686&wit_id=7650). Relevant pull quote:

Composition. The commission should be independent and nonpartisan in composition. Bipartisan commissions can reach nonpartisan results; the 9/11 Commission, under the leadership of Governor Kean and Congressman Hamilton, succeeded in that respect.

And:

Powers. The scope of the inquiry will determine what powers the commission will need to employ. Essential to any investigation, however, will be the ability of the commission to compel cooperation. Compulsory process is essential; it was vital to the success of the 9/11 Commission, and its lack - as in the context of the Armenian investigation - can be a real handicap. So at a minimum the commission should be given subpoena power.

[Bobert]

I love it!
This should get the CIT CULT all fired up!

[bje]

I love it!
This should get the CIT CULT all fired up!

Who?

[BCR]

But how could there be two people with the same name discussing the same subject?
I'm telling you folks, there is something to this Farmer John conspiracy thing :D

[Galileo]

9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11

New book from man tasked by government to help investigate attacks unveils how “official story is almost entirely untrue”

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet.com

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission - John Farmer - says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon were engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.

Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), and is also a former New Jersey Attorney General.

Farmer’s book about his experiences working for the Commission is entitled The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11, and is set to be released in September.

The book unveils how “the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks,” and Farmer himself states that “at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.”

Only the very naive would dispute that an agreement not to tell the truth is an agreement to lie. Farmer’s contention is that the government agreed to create a phony official version of events to cover-up the real story behind 9/11.

(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)

http://www.prisonplanet.com/911-commission-counsel-government-agreed-to-lie-about-911.html

[twinstead]

Because if it comes from Prison Planet, it MUST be true. Film at 11

[Galileo]

Because if it comes from Prison Planet, it MUST be true. Film at 11

It's not from prison planet, its from the 9/11 Commission. It must be true.

[Alt+F4]

Prison Planet.com

Stopped reading at this point.

[MarkyX]

Stopped reading at this point.

Same

[Galileo]

Same

Please argue the evidence.

Thank you.

[AJM8125]

Well, the not-as-good-looking-as-me John Farmer has a new book coming off the press in September.

The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America's Defense on 9/11 (http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0151013764)



This should be a good read. He is my kin folk (somewhere back among the Scottish trouble-makers), so be kind.

Day late and a dollar short as usual.

[MarkyX]

Please argue the evidence.

Thank you.

No evidence. This is a giant appeal to authority book.

You can't confirm any statements this guy says. He might as well say "I'm Jesus"

[AJM8125]

Please argue the evidence.

Thank you.

What evidence? Shouldn't we read the book first or are you hung up on the hyperbole of the press release?

[Brainster]

I don't think the Troofers are going to find this book all that sympathetic to their nutbar claims. Here's what Farmer said about a month (http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=3686&wit_id=7650) ago to a congressional hearing about a proposed commission on torture:

Composition. The commission should be independent and nonpartisan in composition. Bipartisan commissions can reach nonpartisan results; the 9/11 Commission, under the leadership of Governor Kean and Congressman Hamilton, succeeded in that respect.

And later:

Powers. The scope of the inquiry will determine what powers the commission will need to employ. Essential to any investigation, however, will be the ability of the commission to compel cooperation. Compulsory process is essential; it was vital to the success of the 9/11 Commission, and its lack - as in the context of the Armenian investigation - can be a real handicap. So at a minimum the commission should be given subpoena power.

So he clearly thinks the 9-11 Commission was a success; it will be interesting to see how his book reconciles that with the claims that the "Official version" is almost entirely untrue.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Mods, can I get a merge?

[Galileo]

I don't think the Troofers are going to find this book all that sympathetic to their nutbar claims. Here's what Farmer said about a month (http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=3686&wit_id=7650) ago to a congressional hearing about a proposed commission on torture:



And later:



So he clearly thinks the 9-11 Commission was a success; it will be interesting to see how his book reconciles that with the claims that the "Official version" is almost entirely untrue.

Are you arguing that we should, or should not, stop reading when we get to the part where it says "prison planet"?

[BCR]

Day late and a dollar short as usual.

Twoofers just don't pay attention do they?

[AJM8125]

Twoofers just don't pay attention do they?

If they did listen there wouldn't be a troof movement.

[Galileo]

In a related topic:

The real story of Columbine

Much of what the public has been told about the 1999 shootings is wrong.

10 years later, the real story behind Columbine

By Greg Toppo, USA TODAY

They weren't goths or loners.

The two teenagers who killed 13 people and themselves at suburban Denver's Columbine High School 10 years ago next week weren't in the "Trenchcoat Mafia," disaffected videogamers who wore cowboy dusters. The killings ignited a national debate over bullying, but the record now shows Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold hadn't been bullied — in fact, they had bragged in diaries about picking on freshmen and "fags."

Their rampage put schools on alert for "enemies lists" made by troubled students, but the enemies on their list had graduated from Columbine a year earlier. Contrary to early reports, Harris and Klebold weren't on antidepressant medication and didn't target jocks, blacks or Christians, police now say, citing the killers' journals and witness accounts. That story about a student being shot in the head after she said she believed in God? Never happened, the FBI says now.

A decade after Harris and Klebold made Columbine a synonym for rage, new information — including several books that analyze the tragedy through diaries, e-mails, appointment books, videotape, police affidavits and interviews with witnesses, friends and survivors — indicate that much of what the public has been told about the shootings is wrong.

MORE:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm?se=yahoorefer

So two big events that both happend around ten years ago were total lies.

Anyone else see a pattern here?

[johnny karate]

In a related topic:

The real story of Columbine
Much of what the public has been told about the 1999 shootings is wrong.

10 years later, the real story behind Columbine

None of these new revelations change anything about the basic narrative of what happened that day. Sort of like this book you're touting won't reveal anything that will change the basic narrative of what happened on 9/11.

Anyone else see a pattern here?

That you consistently fail? Yeah, that pattern was made evident pretty much by your second post.

[parky76]

Does John Farmer conclude that 9-11 was an inside job?????

Sure, the govt. may have indeed lied about some aspects of 9-11. No one is perfect. That doesn't mean the entire story is one gigantic lie.

Only someone who lives in a bi-polar world believes such nonsense.

[Reheat]

Anyone else see a pattern here?

Absolutely, I do see a pattern. It follow the twoofer profile precisely by switching the subject matter to encompass your world view.

BTW, I think you're going to be very disappointed by what Farmer has to say in his book.

[parky76]

Anyone else see a pattern here?

Do you see faces in the clouds? It doesn't mean they are really there.

[parky76]

I predict that John Farmer believes Al Qaeda is REAl, they DID attack us on 9-11, and they are trying to attack us again.

John Farmer is no truther.

Though, now that Alex Jones believes that Flight 93 did crash at Shanksville, who knows what other parts of the "9-11 was an inside job" Gospel he is willing to concede?

I suspect, Jones is dropping 9-11 as his main event, and is now focused on Obama.

[parky76]

This is from John Paul Watson himself:

"Make no mistake, Farmer is not saying that 9/11 was an inside job."

So there you have it.

[Galileo]

This is from John Paul Watson himself:

"Make no mistake, Farmer is not saying that 9/11 was an inside job."

So there you have it.

So you believe what prison planet says, or not?

[parky76]

i believe in this case, they are correct. John Farmer does not believe that 9-11 was an inside job.

[Galileo]

i believe in this case, they are correct. John Farmer does not believe that 9-11 was an inside job.

This is an fact-based forum, based on evidence, not a faith-based forum, based on beliefs.

[Pardalis]

I don't think the Troofers are going to find this book all that sympathetic to their nutbar claims. Here's what Farmer said about a month (http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=3686&wit_id=7650) ago to a congressional hearing about a proposed commission on torture:

And later:

So he clearly thinks the 9-11 Commission was a success; it will be interesting to see how his book reconciles that with the claims that the "Official version" is almost entirely untrue.

Also, from the Amazon description:

And Farmer argues that these lies have prevented real and necessary changes that would make our nation more secure and responsive to subsequent threats and catastrophes

http://www.amazon.ca/Ground-Truth-Behind-Americas-Defense/dp/0151013764/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1239745832&sr=8-1

Nope, no "inside job" there. Al Qaeda are still the culprit.

He seems to be saying the government agencies were covering up their unpreparedness and incompetence. No news here.

[beachnut]

It's not from prison planet, its from the 9/11 Commission. It must be true.
You failed to understand 19 terrorists killed 8 pilots and flew planes into buildings so you go to the dolt news at prisonplanet, the dumbest place for dumb stuff you can find. Prisonplanet all the news dumb enough for 911Truth. Dumb; did I say dumb. How can you post pure stupid? Do you have a gift for picking out stupid articles or did you learn it from 911Truth follower guide book?

Next time try some facts and evidence instead of dirt dumb delusions from prison planet(dddfpp).

[Bobert]

Dont feed the troll!

[Pardalis]

He's a clone, not a troll. ;)

[BCR]

So you believe what prison planet says, or not?

NO...

[beachnut]

... Anyone else see a pattern here?
Yes, 911Truth followers can't read and comprehend the written word.

911Truth takes articles and forgets to read them for content and then makes delusional relationships to support their delusions on 911.

It is a pattern of dirt dumb logic that 911Truth has perfected.

[mark4mark]

This is an fact-based forum, based on evidence, not a faith-based forum, based on beliefs.

Yes, correct.

So why do you post here?

[BCR]

i believe in this case, they are correct. John Farmer does not believe that 9-11 was an inside job.

No I don't believe that, and neither does the not-as-good-looking as me John Farmer.

[Galileo]

Yes, correct.

So why do you post here?

I started the thread, so naturally I'd make a few comments regarding it, as things progress.

[UNLoVedRebel]

This is another example of a truther not reading past the headlines. Our resident holocaust denier just made a complete idiot out of himself (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4610243#post4610243)for doing the same thing.

[twinstead]

This is an fact-based forum, based on evidence, not a faith-based forum, based on beliefs.

It is indeed. You'd be advised to keep that in mind as well.

[BCR]

I started the thread, so naturally I'd make a few comments regarding it, as things progress.

Well no, actually I started the thread, but who cares about petty details like that :)

[Galileo]

Well no, actually I started the thread, but who cares about petty details like that :)

Looks like I was outflanked, they merged our threads together.

Great minds think alike.

[Pardalis]

If the only indictments handed down to the members of the adminisration were for perjury, obstruction of justice and dereliction of duty, I'd be very happy with that and never have to address CD or any other MIHOP theories. Regardless, either scenario is criminal.

So the truth never really mattered to you, only that the bush administration gets punished?

So you were ready to deny the heroic last moment of the passengers of flight 93, the DNA evidence of passengers of flight 77, you were almost accusing M. Silverstein of being complicit of mass murder, and the FDNY along with him, and you were willing to deny the very existence of Al Qaeda and the threat they pose to our countries just as long as it put the Bush administration at fault?

Great. :rolleyes:

[T.A.M.]

A prisonplanet article full of unsourced commentary meant to look like it came out of the horses mouth...I am amazed...lol

TAM:)

[BCR]

Looks like I was outflanked, they merged our threads together.

Great minds think alike.

No, great minds think great thoughts. Lesser minds come along the day after and claim things that simply are not so about what an author thinks even before his book makes it to the press.

I may have gotten the good looks, but the other JF got the smarts. His book has nothing to do with the essential facts of what happened (he already published those in the 911 Commission Report). His book is about the political and bureaucratic nightmare behind the scenes (welcome to Washington). Prison Planet is not the best source of information in this regards and I promise you they have not spoken to JF himself. They simply took a blurb released by the publisher which is designed to spur constroversy and sell advance copies of the book.

So I would suggest reading the book before making such outlandish claims.

[9/11-investigator]

9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11

New book from man tasked by government to help investigate attacks unveils how “official story is almost entirely untrue”


Djeeez, who needs 911blogger when there is JREF to provide you with excellent troofer material.

[RedIbis]

So the truth never really mattered to you, only that the bush administration gets punished?

So you were ready to deny the heroic last moment of the passengers of flight 93, the DNA evidence of passengers of flight 77, you were almost accusing M. Silverstein of being complicit of mass murder, and the FDNY along with him, and you were willing to deny the very existence of Al Qaeda and the threat they pose to our countries just as long as it put the Bush administration at fault?

Great. :rolleyes:

No. More like I'm sure Elliot Ness was satisfied with Capone's incarceration even if it was for tax evasion, as opposed to his mob related activities.

[dudalb]

Djeeez, who needs 911blogger when there is JREF to provide you with excellent troofer material.



Why do I get a feeling that a wave of "The Jews Are Behind Everything" crap is coming?

[RedIbis]

A prisonplanet article full of unsourced commentary meant to look like it came out of the horses mouth...I am amazed...lol

TAM:)

You can find some of Farmer's quotes in this Washington Post article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html).

[T.A.M.]

You can find some of Farmer's quotes in this Washington Post article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html).

Thank you, going to read it now.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

"I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described," John Farmer, a former New Jersey attorney general who led the staff inquiry into events on Sept. 11, said in a recent interview. "The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. . . . This is not spin. This is not true."

The above is the only quote(s) I can find attributed to Farmer in the article.

We have been over the vanity fair article, the tapes, etc...many times here.

I have always said, and will still say, that there may be areas of incompetence and perhaps even worse within any number of organizations that took part that day. What I have asked for is evidence of it.

Perhaps Farmer and others, now with Bush out of power, will come forward, and perhaps a case will be made for criminal negligence...who knows. I am not a lawyer, so i have no idea what has to be proven to indict someone for such a crime.

I suspect that 90% of the "lying and misleading" was for CYA more than anything else, but I eagerly await Farmer's book.

I suspect many truthers will be very disappointed by it.

TAM:)

[RedIbis]

Houghton-Mifflin, not exactly a publisher of conspiracy material, says this about Farmer's new book:

“Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security.”

[dtugg]

That could very easily be the publisher hyping up the book in order to sell more copies. I guess we'll have to see. But I also feel that twoofers will be very disappointed.

[parky76]

One must ask: why are truthers rooting for a book that says that 9-11 was NOT an inside job?

Oh, I get it. if the government lied about some parts of 9-11, then they must have lied about ALL of 9-11!!!!!

truther logic. its very absolutist. very black or white.

[parky76]

Houghton-Mifflin, not exactly a publisher of conspiracy material, says this about Farmer's new book:

“Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security.”

so the book says there were no 19 hijackers? no crash at shanksville? no osama bin laden?

BS. the book says none of this. im willing to bet real $$.

[Pardalis]

No.

Yes:

More like I'm sure Elliot Ness was satisfied with Capone's incarceration even if it was for tax evasion, as opposed to his mob related activities.See? You just contradicted yourself.

With this analogy, you just admitted you were more than willing to accept that Bush and his administration was behind the controlled demolitions, the fake DNA and whatever other denialist claims you were willling to endorse, just on the basis that it's the Bush administration, not because of the truth.

Or are you saying you still believe in all the MIHOP crap, but are happy with an indictment about perjury, obstruction of justice and dereliction of duty? In that case, you are even more dishonest and guilty of not caring about the truth, by letting them get away, quite literally, with murder, mass murder.

You can't escape your own dishonesty this time.

You don't care about controlled demolitions, fake airplanes, missiles, thermite or the 3000 people who were killed that day, you just want Bush to get nailed to cross.

This is not truth seeking, it's retribution.

[BCR]

That could very easily be the publisher hyping up the book in order to sell more copies. I guess we'll have to see. But I also feel that twoofers will be very disappointed.

I am certainly going to advance order a copy, and like I said, JF is an honest broker (in my humble opinion). I predict that the same people who are here promoting the hype will be here trashing JF and his book in September.

[RedIbis]

One must ask: why are truthers rooting for a book that says that 9-11 was NOT an inside job?

Oh, I get it. if the government lied about some parts of 9-11, then they must have lied about ALL of 9-11!!!!!

truther logic. its very absolutist. very black or white.

Why are you so hostile to the idea of pursuing multiple avenues of research? Although the book hasn't been released yet, I think it will be comparable to Philip Shenon's book. It will build upon the argument that short of an inside job, criminal behavior took place.

This CYA argument only goes so far. At a certain point, this is dangerous to our security and an obstruction of justice. What I'm wondering is why the debunkers aren't up in arms over this. Forget about conspiracy theories, we're talking about crimes being committed.

Another flaw in the CYA argument is that many people would not have to cover their own asses, now they have to cover for other people. And who on earth would do that? This is where I am sure George Bush would have loved to be seen as the reformer, the guy who goes in and cleans up the incompetence and prosecuting those who were just covering their asses. He could have appointed Rudy to the head of the commission and we would have found out who was incompetent, who was deceptive during the investigation.

But that never happened. Do you guys ever wonder why?

[T.A.M.]

Houghton-Mifflin, not exactly a publisher of conspiracy material, says this about Farmer's new book:

“Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security.”

We will see...you will see.

TAM:)

[parky76]

It will build upon the argument that short of an inside job, criminal behavior took place.

what criminal behavior? you haven't read the damn book yet.

[Pardalis]

Forget about conspiracy theories

Then take this to the politics section.

we're talking about crimes being committed.
Oh, and all the controlled demolition claims, the planted DNA and Silverstein's "pull it" nonsense you were/are endorsing never inferred any crimes having been committed?

Don't you see we do care about allegations, even more so when they are totally unfounded. This is what debunking 9/11 CTs is all about.

[T.A.M.]

Why are you so hostile to the idea of pursuing multiple avenues of research? Although the book hasn't been released yet, I think it will be comparable to Philip Shenon's book. It will build upon the argument that short of an inside job, criminal behavior took place.

This CYA argument only goes so far. At a certain point, this is dangerous to our security and an obstruction of justice. What I'm wondering is why the debunkers aren't up in arms over this. Forget about conspiracy theories, we're talking about crimes being committed.

Another flaw in the CYA argument is that many people would not have to cover their own asses, now they have to cover for other people. And who on earth would do that? This is where I am sure George Bush would have loved to be seen as the reformer, the guy who goes in and cleans up the incompetence and prosecuting those who were just covering their asses. He could have appointed Rudy to the head of the commission and we would have found out who was incompetent, who was deceptive during the investigation.

But that never happened. Do you guys ever wonder why?

So Red I am still confused.

If you were a betting man, and you were about to know the entire, real truth, about the events of 9/11, would you bet on,

(A)LIHOP
(B)MIHOP
(C)Criminal Negligence

or

(D)Incompetence

TAM:)

[Pardalis]

So Red I am still confused.

If you were a betting man, and you were about to know the entire, real truth, about the events of 9/11, would you bet on,

(A)LIHOP
(B)MIHOP
(C)Criminal Negligence

or

(D)Incompetence

TAM:)

What RedIbis wants is:

E) Guilty whatever the reason may be.

[RedIbis]

What RedIbis wants is:

E) Guilty whatever the reason may be.

100% incorrect. I have no animus towards anyone in particular, Bush or anyone else. These people have earned my disrespect.

[RedIbis]

So Red I am still confused.

If you were a betting man, and you were about to know the entire, real truth, about the events of 9/11, would you bet on,

(A)LIHOP
(B)MIHOP
(C)Criminal Negligence

or

(D)Incompetence

TAM:)

This is a fair question, and I know it will be nothing but chum for the bottom feeders, but I would answer (B) with about 95% certainty. There is always doubt, and I don't pretend to know the whole story about anything.

My point in this thread is that (A) is criminal, in fact (E) CYA is criminal, as well.

Agreed?

[parky76]

what the hell is CYA???

what is with conspiracy theorists and acronyms? does it make them feel smart and special?

[BCR]

This is a fair question, and I know it will be nothing but chum for the bottom feeders, but I would answer (B) with about 95% certainty. There is always doubt, and I don't pretend to know the whole story about anything.

My point in this thread is that (A) is criminal, in fact (E) CYA is criminal, as well.

Agreed?

Well, the sad news is, whether it is (A) or (E), there is not a darn thing you can do about it except talk trash without evidence. Sadly, on the evidence side of things, you fail.

[parky76]

i think as time goes on, more and more 9-11 truthers will abandon their core beliefs, and compromise in order to leave the world of woo and rejoin society.

LIHOP is much easier to swallow then MIHOP. it may still win the day.

[dtugg]

This is a fair question, and I know it will be nothing but chum for the bottom feeders, but I would answer (B) with about 95% certainty. There is always doubt, and I don't pretend to know the whole story about anything.

My point in this thread is that (A) is criminal, in fact (E) CYA is criminal, as well.

Agreed?

You see Red, that is one of the many reasons you're so dishonest. You are convinced that 9/11 was a government plot. Yet you are perfectly OK with arguing points that are totally contradictory of your fantasy so long as it has something to do with blaming Bush. That's all that matters to you. Blaming Bush. I am would bet a lot of money that you will do the same when this book comes out. It will totally contradict the fantasy that you are convinced is real, but you will have no problem citing the parts that may have the Bush Administration look bad.

Also do have any evidence that CYA that might have been used in regards to the 9/11 commission was criminal? Statutes and how they were violated would be nice.

what the hell is CYA???

what is with conspiracy theorists and acronyms? does it make them feel smart and special?

CYA=Cover Your Ass.

[Pardalis]

This is a fair question, and I know it will be nothing but chum for the bottom feeders, but I would answer (B) with about 95% certainty. There is always doubt, and I don't pretend to know the whole story about anything.

My point in this thread is that (A) is criminal, in fact (E) CYA is criminal, as well.

Agreed?

But they are not the same kind of crime. Being charged for E) isn't the same as being charged for B), they probably wouldn't get the same sentence if they are found guilty of E) than if they are found guilty of B). The families of the victims won't get justice if they are only found simply guilty of E).

But yet you are perfectly happy with them being convicted of E), and not B), as long as they get convicted of something. This is completely immoral, even from your point of view. This means you are perfectly happy with them getting away with murder, mass murder, since you are still 95 % convinced they are guilty of B.

[Pardalis]

100% incorrect. I have no animus towards anyone in particular, Bush or anyone else. These people have earned my disrespect.

Again, contradicting yourself in the same sentence.

I was 100% correct, you can't escape that.

[T.A.M.]

This is a fair question, and I know it will be nothing but chum for the bottom feeders, but I would answer (B) with about 95% certainty. There is always doubt, and I don't pretend to know the whole story about anything.

My point in this thread is that (A) is criminal, in fact (E) CYA is criminal, as well.

Agreed?

Well I would have thought you would say (A) LIHOP, or (C) Criminal Negligence.

So just to double check that you didn't read it wrong, you are saying that you are with 95% certainty, convinced that the USG helped orchestrate the 9/11 attacks (MIHOP)?

TAM:)

[Galileo]

You failed to understand 19 terrorists killed 8 pilots and flew planes into buildings so you go to the dolt news at prisonplanet, the dumbest place for dumb stuff you can find. Prisonplanet all the news dumb enough for 911Truth. Dumb; did I say dumb. How can you post pure stupid? Do you have a gift for picking out stupid articles or did you learn it from 911Truth follower guide book?

Next time try some facts and evidence instead of dirt dumb delusions from prison planet(dddfpp).

9/11 was an inside job.

[dudalb]

9/11 was an inside job.


Notice how COnspiracy kooks think that saying the same thing over and over again will make it true?

[twinstead]

9/11 was an inside job.

No, you've still got 15,423 more times to say that before it magically comes true. Hey, consider yourself lucky; some people have to write it on a chalkboard that many times before it becomes true.

[Dog Town]

Notice how COnspiracy kooks think that saying the same thing over and over again will make it true?

Yes, the definition of insanity, fits them well!

[Galileo]

Notice how COnspiracy kooks think that saying the same thing over and over again will make it true?

# 1

I was responding to another post that made an unsupported claim.

# 2

You violate the JREF rules, you are not allowed to make personal insults against fellow JREF members.

# 3

What's your evidence that I have said "9/11 was an inside job" over and over again? You have made an unsupported claim.

[Dog Town]

OT:
COnspiracy kooks

It is plural. If you have never said it repeatedly, you were not targeted.
However, me thinks thou doth protest too much!

[beachnut]

# 1

I was responding to another post that made an unsupported claim.

# 2

You violate the JREF rules, you are not allowed to make personal insults against fellow JREF members.

# 3

What's your evidence that I have said "9/11 was an inside job" over and over again? You have made an unsupported claim.
Too bad there is not rule for making up lies like you do and posting them without support of evidence or facts.

You posted dirt dumb ideas from prisonplanet. You made a mistake and have no idea you have made a mistake and posted stupid ideas.

[roundhead]

One must ask: why are truthers rooting for a book that says that 9-11 was NOT an inside job?

Oh, I get it. if the government lied about some parts of 9-11, then they must have lied about ALL of 9-11!!!!!

truther logic. its very absolutist. very black or white.


By your logic....Yes i know they lie sometimes, just not all the time. So, anybody who questions them has no resonable reason to do so.

That about sum up your warped sentiments???

Edited for civility

[Dog Town]

By your logic....Yes i know they lie sometimes, just not all the time. So, anybody who questions them has no resonable reason to do so.

No, they just have to actually demonstrate a reason for not trusting over said issues. Twoofers have not done such!

Quoted post and response removed

[parky76]

By your logic....Yes i know they lie sometimes, just not all the time. So, anybody who questions them has no resonable reason to do so.

If Dick Cheney says that 2+2=4...does that mean it is a lie????

by your logic, yes, 2+2 does NOT equal 4, if it comes from Dick Cheney's mouth.

no one lies ALL the time!!! you have to look at what they are saying, evaluate it based on other evidence, and then decide if you have enough reason to doubt its honesty.

just saying that "Dick Cheney has lied before, therefore NOTHING he EVER says can be the truth!!!"..is juvenile, ignorant, dumb, and plain old silly.

but...so is the truth movement.

=)

[Cheap Shot]

I am certainly going to advance order a copy, and like I said, JF is an honest broker (in my humble opinion). I predict that the same people who are here promoting the hype will be here trashing JF and his book in September.Hopefully I fall into the 5% who told the truth, when is the book going to be available.

[BCR]

Hopefully I fall into the 5% who told the truth, when is the book going to be available.

I want to say mid-September.

[T.A.M.]

I suspect that the vast majority of Farmer's book will focus on the obstructionism by elements of the USG administration, and possibly higher ups in the various organizations.

I suspect the Truthers, LIHOP and MIHOP alike, will be very disappointed.

TAM:)

[ElMondoHummus]

I suspect that the vast majority of Farmer's book will focus on the obstructionism by elements of the USG administration, and possibly higher ups in the various organizations.

I suspect the Truthers, LIHOP and MIHOP alike, will be very disappointed.

TAM:)

Ditto. I agree completely. Our little truther Galileo may be excited at the moment, but this seems to me to be the same hyperventilation that conspiracy addicts had over Dr. Quintiere's statements a few years ago. Once it was explained to them that the narrative and failures he was talking about actually strengthens the case for fires and impact, you stopped seeing them bring him up (except in isolated circumstances, like that Firehouse forum when Koolaide1 keeps quote mining him. In exactly the same way others used to before this was pointed out, too; I think I'm going to register for that forum and point that out over there myself...). Same thing here. I don't know what'll be in the book yet, but from what I've read, that Farmer is a strong LIHOI'er, and is talking about CYA, not MIHOP.

Of course, I may be wrong. I need to know what's in the book. But I'd be astonished if the pre-publication statements describing LIHOI and CYA were at odds with what the book actually discusses.

[T.A.M.]

Not to mention, if Farmer, well known, well respected public figure, were about to whistleblow as some of the truthers think, we would have heard it through other means by now...just not gonna be the case.

That said, like Shenon's book, it will be a very good and enlightening read.

TAM:)

[BCR]

Not to mention, if Farmer, well known, well respected public figure, were about to whistleblow as some of the truthers think, we would have heard it through other means by now...just not gonna be the case.

That said, like Shenon's book, it will be a very good and enlightening read.

TAM:)

Not to mention that the NWO would arrange a little plane accident by firing up the old icing machine again. But that might be too obvious with the warming weather.

[T.A.M.]

Not to mention that the NWO would arrange a little plane accident by firing up the old icing machine again. But that might be too obvious with the warming weather.

yup.

You know the truthers remind me of a person hanging on to the edge of a cliff. If you hand them a rag, they will grab it. if you hand them a stick, they will grab it. If you hand them a turd, they will grab it, all in desperation to hang on...

TAM:)

[Dog Town]

Ditto. I agree completely. Our little truther Galileo may be excited at the moment, but this seems to me to be the same hyperventilation that conspiracy addicts had over Dr. Quintiere's statements a few years ago. Once it was explained to them that the narrative and failures he was talking about actually strengthens the case for fires and impact, you stopped seeing them bring him up (except in isolated circumstances, like that Firehouse forum when Koolaide1 keeps quote mining him. In exactly the same way others used to before this was pointed out, too; I think I'm going to register for that forum and point that out over there myself...).

No need.
ChiefKN called him on it days ago in post #145.
I wouldn't expect everyone to agree. However, you are not being completely honest about why he has called for a new investigation. It has nothing to do with these crazy theories about exotic accelerants.

So what... here's what he says of your theories.

Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.

[oldhat]

Take a look. It looks like he's mostly reading from the publisher's publicity sheet but I wonder what this book's going to say. I guess he says explicitly it wasn't 9/11 = inside job but who knows what the truthers are going to pull out of it. Especially the NORAD stuff.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/16/732116/-Official-story-of-9-11-almost-entirely-untrue

[UNLoVedRebel]

I believe we discussed this somewhere already.

[BCR]

Bump

[BCR]

Yes we have, I bumped the thread

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=140141

[FineWine]

Please argue the evidence.

Thank you.

The author will attempt to show that the CYA syndrome is prevalent in Washington ("I'm shocked--shocked, I tell you!"). His interest is in making this country safer from the terrorism lunatics pretend doesn't exist. He will not lend the slightest bit of credence to the insane fairy tales you people peddle.

[FineWine]

9/11 was an inside job.



No, it could not have been. Your delusions have been refuted.

[firecoins]

Ill get back to this thread.

[T.A.M.]

I am willing to wager good money, that Farmer's book will be almost entirely,

"Bush and Co had their eyes off the prize on 9/11"
"The CIA and FBI were nearly completely incompetent leading up to 9/11".

Here is what I will wager money will NOT be said in the book.

"WTCs came down via CD"
"something besides Flight77 hit the Pentagon"
"There was a STANDDOWN at NORAD"
"WTC7"
"Flight93 was shotdown".

Anyone care to take my wager?

TAM:)

[RedIbis]

The author will attempt to show that the CYA syndrome is prevalent in Washington ("I'm shocked--shocked, I tell you!"). His interest is in making this country safer from the terrorism lunatics pretend doesn't exist. He will not lend the slightest bit of credence to the insane fairy tales you people peddle.

Here's the problem with the CYA theory as I see it. You are assuming that those who were not negligent would keep quiet for those who were. Comprehensive incompetence in such redundant systems is not probable.

For instance, people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, they are not going to cover for anyone. They have no reason to. If people were truly incompetent and negligent their heads would have rolled. No one's did.

[BigAl]

Here's the problem with the CYA theory as I see it. You are assuming that those who were not negligent would keep quiet for those who were. Comprehensive incompetence in such redundant systems is not probable.

For instance, people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, they are not going to cover for anyone. They have no reason to. If people were truly incompetent and negligent their heads would have rolled. No one's did.

10s of thousands of first responders and investigators were in a position to see a discrepancy between what they read in the paper that day and what they saw with their own eyes. Some of these people have since died for the air they breathed and never said a thing.

Not a single one of these people has spoken up.

What those people read in the paper on 9/11, 9/12 and for weeks and months spoke the truth. As a New Yorker, I know that I can read the papers and watch the TV video from Washington from 9/11 and know it describes events accurately and shows many of the claims of the "Truth Movement" to be wrong and silly.

[gumboot]

I still don't buy that the FAA and NORAD intentionally lied, and no evidence has ever been presented that they did. I cannot understand why it is that the 9/11 Commission cannot grasp that the organisations presenting their version of events might have simply got it wrong.

It's not like getting a detailed account of what happened was exactly high on their priorities at that moment, and everyone with experience in traumatic events knows how difficult it can be to make sense of everything in retrospect. Even the Commission, for all their lofty claims, got some basic facts wrong.

I think it's a shame that the Commission and staff decided to fixate on a tenuous and illogical belief that these agencies lied, instead of turning the mirror on themselves. The fault for failure to stop 9/11 lies firmly at the feet of Congress. It's the elephant in the room, the one government entity that no one has ever dared to blame, because it's Congress doing the blaming.

The US wasn't failed by its FBI agents or its defense personnel or its air traffic controllers, or even by its administration. It was failed by its Elected Representatives, who have become so detached from reality, so fixated on playing the politics of Washington DC, that they've forgotten what their job even is.

I was reading an article today about how even awarding of the Medal of Honor has become a victim of American Partisan Politics. That something as fundamental as extreme courage and service to the flag can be used as a political football shows just how out of touch your government is.

[BCR]

I still don't buy that the FAA and NORAD intentionally lied, and no evidence has ever been presented that they did.

Because sadly they do lie Gumboot. I was involved in a case locally a few years ago involving several Airmen in Tennessee. We finally got a local Congressman and several state-level legislators involved. The Congressman was going to start hearings, but at the last minute shut his 'investigation' down.

I could not begin to relate the number of blatant lies coming from the Pentagon and military units. Sadly, all of the Airmen involved were 'disposed' of or otherwise 'discredited'. The last of them was taken by security police to their office and told that he would work from that office (upon orders from the base commander). Nothing was ever resolved and the case even involved criminal charges which did stand up in court related to one incident (later swept under the run).

My uncle was killed on the HMS Rohna in WWII, but the Pentagon lied about how he died until the late 1990's just so the public would not find out that the Germans had radio-controlled rocket capability. I could go on-and-on about other 'cover-ups', especially 'Gulf War Syndrome' (aka anthrax vaccinations) for which I have a family member on 100% disability because of, and another on 50%.

The 911 Commission staff was concerned about lying from the Pentagon because they have a track record of lying to Congress and the public. They are justified in every scrutiny they can bring to bear on them. Related to 911, what happened to the radar and ATC records from Langley AFB? The official line is that they were 'routinely' per SOP recorded over after 15 days. Even the FOIA officer at Langley AFB did not buy that explanation.

There may be no evidence that they did lie in your opinion, but when you are dealing with a known chronic liar, the burden of proof shifts to them.

[gumboot]

Because sadly they do lie Gumboot.

I'm sure they do. But there's no evidence that they lied in this case (it has been investigated, let's remember) and it would make utterly no sense for them to lie in this regard.

These sorts of agencies lie when it's in their interests and to their benefit to do so. Lying with regards to 9/11 wasn't to their benefit. Quite the opposite. Further, the inaccuracy of their stories was immediately evident. Even if you were to hold that the Pentagon personnel were pathological liars, you'd still need to argue that they were also stupid, and they're not.

The only possible way in which their version makes sense is if they didn't know what actually happened, and if they didn't know what actually happened they cannot have lied about what happened.

Further, if you actually delve into the nitty gritty and look at the timeline the military gave, it makes perfect sense and you can see exactly where those times came from.

Their timeline is obviously a mistake. The evidence is plain as day.

[Reheat]

Because sadly they do lie Gumboot.

I'm sure they do.

I simply refuse to let this appear here and not comment on it. The military is composed of people. People do not always tell the truth. However, to imply that there is a institutional problem with lying in the DOD is pure hogwash.

While I was not everywhere during my over 26 years of service in DOD, I know of only three instances where lies were told by individual people. One was intentional, one was more of an oversight than an intentional act, and the other you'll have to decide for yourself. In all cases, the individuals were caught and FIRED from their jobs and ended their careers.

One involved an Army O-6 who had given considerable material to a foreign military for favors rendered and then lied about it during the investigation. He was caught by others who told the true story. He was fired, fined, and ended his career in disgrace.

In another instance, an AF Wing Commander was allowing his Maintenance Organization to inflate the "Combat Ready" status of aircraft in his Wing. This was caught in reports to the Major Command level and he was fired and retired. I do not believe this was an intentional lie, but more of an oversight where the Wing Commander was not aware of the distortions. But, obviously lies were being told by others and their careers also ended.

During the Vietnam era, lies were repeatedly told and distortions promoted by the Executive Branch and Congress regarding our involvement in areas outside of Vietnam proper. DoD essentially lied (strict intrepretation) in support of that, so that was one case of Institutionalized lying by DoD. However, millions of people knew the true story and the whole affair was revealed with Nixon's demise. The distortion problems actually began during the Johnson Administration and continued with Nixon's.

As a result of this, the third example was known as "protective reaction strikes" into the "off-limits" area in North Vietnam. These were airstrikes into North Vietnam territory because of ground fire or reported ground fire near the border areas between North Vietnam and Laos. Airstrikes occurred on gun emplacements and supply areas and vehicles near the border areas because of the massing of supplies in those areas waiting for darkness. Both aircrews and Command and Control elements knew of this tactic by the North Vietnamese and devised deceptive methods to strike these areas in defiance of the Rules of Engagement which prohibited it. It was eventually discovered and NUMEROUS people ended their careers over it.

I personally know of no other instances where deliberate lies were told.

This is related directly to 9/11. If 9/11 was a "inside jobby job" it would have had to have involved NUMEROUS elements of the US Military. There is simply no way around it and it is IMPOSSIBLE for this to have been kept a SEKRIT for any longer than a couple of years at the very most. In fact, it would have never been allowed to even happen in the first place as American civilian lives were involved.

While the Military/Industrial Complex is not a myth, the individual people who compose our various branches of the Military part of that Complex are for the most part honorable people. There are, of course, rogues who might lie here and there, but they do not exist in a vacuum and the rest are not fools. There is simply NO WAY that the Military could have been involved in any conceivable 9/11 scenario that would have even been ALLOWED to happen, let alone to have been kept a secret of almost 8 years. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE.

[BCR]

I agree with both Gumboot and Reheat. My contention is only that it was wise for the 911 Commission to be skeptical. The fact that they were skeptical on reinforces their results. Ronald Reagan's old maxim, 'trust, but verify' is applicable here. I am looking forward to Jr's take on it.

[Corsair 115]

My uncle was killed on the HMS Rohna in WWII, but the Pentagon lied about how he died until the late 1990's just so the public would not find out that the Germans had radio-controlled rocket capability.


That doesn't make much sense given that there are various books which mention the Germans having sunk the battleship Roma with a radio-guided bomb which were published well before the late 1990s.

[BCR]

That doesn't make much sense given that there are various books which mention the Germans having sunk the battleship Roma with a radio-guided bomb which were published well before the late 1990s.

Well, I don't argue the point with people who display ignorance of a topic. Sorry if that sounds a little rash, but yes, it became 'public' knowledge in 1967 via a FOIA. However, that information was NOT passed along to the families of the victims in general. Our family knew ONLY that he died on a ship at sea, no ship name or other details. Most families did not become aware of the circumstances until a group of survivors began planning a Memorial in the 1990's. My mother (his sister) died in 2006 without knowing. I did not learn of the details until late 2006 after she had died. If you wish to argue the point, I can tell you where she is buried and and you can argue it with her. She died not knowing, as did his parents.