9/11 Commission records unsealed

[MikeW]

Ah the memories of 2006. So boring now.

Yeah, I know it's old. But I think the "still alive" claims remain interesting because they're such a perfect example of truther claims. They a) make no sense (you'd never try to blame someone who was still alive), b) are based on a very small number of press reports which are given preference over other evidence, c) are very poorly researched (you must ignore press stories that show they have different names, are different ages etc), but d) many truthers cling to them anyway because they can't admit that they're wrong on any significant point.

 

[T.A.M.]

Yeah, I know it's old. But I think the "still alive" claims remain interesting because they're such a perfect example of truther claims. They a) make no sense (you'd never try to blame someone who was still alive), b) are based on a very small number of press reports which are given preference over other evidence, c) are very poorly researched (you must ignore press stories that show they have different names, are different ages etc), but d) many truthers cling to them anyway because they can't admit that they're wrong on any significant point.

I wasn't criticizing, just gettin' all nostalgic.

TAM

 

[MikeW]

I wasn't criticizing, just gettin' all nostalgic.

The good old days! >wipes tear from eye<

Ah, it does all seem a very long time ago. Even though most of those old claims are recycled here on a regular basis. What's next? The PNAC maybe?

 

[T.A.M.]

The good old days! >wipes tear from eye<

Ah, it does all seem a very long time ago. Even though most of those old claims are recycled here on a regular basis. What's next? The PNAC maybe?

See there you go again. All we need now is a replay of Gravy down at GZ, and I will feel full warped back in time.

TAM

 

[MikeW]

NARA tell me there's a new set of MFRs due out soon, hopefully by the end of the month. I believe there are FBI and DoD interviews included, and if so they may be more interesting then the first set.

The MFRs will be displayed in a separate section to make them easier to spot. So, if you're interested, take a look at http://www.archives.gov/research/9-11-commission/ or the MFR section on Friday/ next Monday and see what's been uncovered this time.

 

[MikeW]

They're a couple of days overdue, but the new MFRs are up. Find them at http://www.archives.gov/legislative/research/9-11/commission-memoranda-additional.html

 

[stateofgrace]

To the Mods, Is it possible to get this thread on sticky ?

Great work Mike.

 

[MikeW]

Interesting MFRs to get you started.

Briefing on Financing of Sept 11 Plot:
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609863

Adam Drucker of the FBI has more on the financing:
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609813

Major John Daniel Caine, Supervisor of Flying at Andrews Air Force Base, on not being on alert on 9/11
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609614

Lt Col Timothy Duffy, one of the two Otis pilots who responded to the Flight 11 hijack report
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610514

General Eberhart @ NORAD
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610387

Sibel Edmonds MFR is, apart from an initial bio, entirely redacted (the truthers are going to love that)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609828

 

[MikeW]

More...

Rick Findley was the Canadian Battle Staff Director at NORADs CMOC on 9/11. His interview is important for its details on NORADs awareness (none of 77, or 93 as far as he was concerned)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610388

James Fox at NEADS says things like:

Fox understood NORAD's air defense mission as a task to survey and identify all aircraft entering United States airspace. If NORAD was unable to identify an aircraft, then the mission would be to scramble and actively identify. NORAD is also tasked to work with customson.counter-drug operations, Thirdly, NORAD is tasked with defending against a coordinated air attack on the United States.

And provides much invaluable detail on procedures and NEADS on 9/11
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2838506

Marc Grossman of the DoS, someone implicated by Sibel Edmonds in all kinds of things (Google it)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610188

Michael Kelly at Otis talks about receiving the order to scramble
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610511

Khalil A Khalil gives an anti-bin Laden, Saudi perspective on the attacks
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610853

John Kingston of the FBI says the US had bin Laden located in 1996, "but for policy reasons chose not to capture" him
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610045

Lance Kuhn of the FBI worked on the Lofti Raissi investigation
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610012

Author Peter Lance gives the Commission his thoughts
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610267

 

[GStan]

Interesting MFRs to get you started.
...

Lt Col Timothy Duffy, one of the two Otis pilots who responded to the Flight 11 hijack report
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610514

Somebody alert Christopher7. This MFR says that Duffy looked down at Tower 2 and "realized the building was imploding."

...

Sibel Edmonds MFR is, apart from an initial bio, entirely redacted (the truthers are going to love that)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609828

 

[MikeW]

Leidig at the DoD is a super-important witness re: Pentagon knowledge of the hijackings. This bit is weird, though:

FAA had a report of a hijacking on a plane that had departed Boston. They asked if FAA needed any assistance. The answer was no, the pilot had called in and said everything was under control and he was going to land
at New York shortly. This call was made to the FAA Operations Center

http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610279

It's supposedly suspicious that the US had a plan ready to go to attack Afghanistan. However:

On September 12, there was a plan on the shelf for Afghanistan. While prior planning was done, as noted earlier, not much attention was paid to Afghanistan. The plans on the shelfwere likely those used as the basis of planning for Enduring Freedom. So, there was some work done because they were told to plan something.

http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610501

David McNulty has a little more detail on what happened at Andrews AFB on 9/11
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609615

Langley Tower staff talk about launching on 9/11, why planes initially fly east, more
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610271

A quick summary on Moussaoui's likely place in the 9/11 plot
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610340

Daniel Nash was the second Otis pilot to respond on 9/11 (with Duffy, above)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610510

Useful summary of what happened at the NMCC on 9/11
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610351

Abderraouf Jdey was apparently supposed to be part of the 9/11 plot, but dropped out
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609865

PENTTBOM timeline briefing includes details like "there was no explosive residue" fount at the Flight 93 crash site. Also:

"On whether-the hijackers had enough skilJ to do what they did, Penttbom put someone with no background on a simulator, and after about 30 minutes of practice they were able to replicate it under the conditions of 9/11, clear skies during daylight."

Atta and al Omari did not have much contact before the attacks. There is some speculation that al Omari was very religious and could have written the letter that was found in their belongings. [Binalshibh also said this]

According to Binalshibh, Atta brought up the possibility of a nuclear power plant as a possible target, but Atta said the "other students" did not like the idea.

http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609857

 

[MikeW]

Colin Powell doesn't have as much to say as you might hope
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610564

Donald Quenneville of Otis "remarked that prior to 9/11 the focus of the alert bases was still an
outwards-looking monitoring mission"
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610515

Christina Rocca of State on Pakistan/ Afghanistan in 2001
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2838512

Marc Sasseville, Squadron Commander at Andrews talks about flying on 9/11
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609616

A Saudi military person talks about meeting Nawaf al Hazmi
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610852

Col Seetin gives brief but useful information about NORADs awareness on 9/11 (no notice of UA175, "a lot of misinformation re UA93")
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610390

Mark Stuart of NEADS on 9/11 events, drafting a "briefing on the threat of terrorist use of aircraft to crash into buildings", and more on exercises
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610378

 

[MikeW]

A summary of Saudi interviews, useful if you want to know who's who, but not essential reading
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610841

If you've wondered why 9/11 flight-related discussions sometimes mention GIANT KILLER or VACAPES then this document will explain all
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610162

A useful summary of events at Langley Air Force Base on 9/11
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610272

Details on the Air Force Rescue Coordination Centre at Langley, including receiving a call about a possible downed aircraft (Indi thought Flight 77 had crashed)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610269

A Langley Base Operations summary, including:

Dating to 1989, personnel contacted recalled no instance where they were exposed to or even thought of the notion of a hijacking for suicide or weapon-of-mass-destruction purposes. Nor did they recall any training or exercises that dealt with multiple hijackings. The common picture of a hijacking prior to 9/lJ was to use the airplane to go somewhere.

http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610270

A German lawyer has some interesting comments on what happened with the various German 9/11-related cases
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610846

General David Wherley commanded Andrews on 9/11, and reports on talking to the White House about getting planes up to protect Washington
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610715

Ken Williams, author of "the Phoenix Memo", gives his views on what was (and still is) wrong with the system. Also much detail on his own investigations
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610033

Initial overview of Otis Air Force Base operations (also notes that exercises didn't train for 9/11-type attacks)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610513

Interview with unnamed Yemeni about his knowledge of the young Ramzi Binalshibh
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610856

Aaron Zebley of the FBI provides a few brief details on the German 9/11 investigations
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609997

 

[MikeW]

And I'm completing my first pass through this new batch of MFRs by looking at the various interviews with unnamed FBI employees. Most of these are discussing fine details of the case and distant suspects, so if you're bored with all that then jump straight to the last in the list, where the interviewers try to uncover the truth about a supposed warning of the attacks. (Truthers will find much to cherry pick there, too.)

Interview with an unnamed FBI employee. Seems to have worked in some important places, including Alec Station, but as a result all the important bits have been redacted
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610319

An FBI translator says he's never been asked by any supervisor to "slow down" (a Sibel Edmonds accusation)
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610072

More brief details on al Hazmi and Mihdhars activities
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610054

Talk of someone who says Hanjour was a "horrible pilot" and he didn't believe Hanjour could fly a plane into the Pentagon. Also says Hanjour was a guilty person - he'd drink one day, pray the next
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610021

Some details on el Atriss, who provided IDs for some of the hijackers
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609951

Useful information on Jim Nouri, landlord of the Paterson apartment where some of the hijackers lived. Also talk of why they lived there, and other activities in the area
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2609952

More on al Hazmi and Mihdhar's activities
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610062

Details on some Nawaf al Hazmi contacts. Did they have advance knowledge of the attacks?
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610037

Still more on Nawaf al Hazmi's contacts
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610040

More on al-Bayoumi and Osama Basnan, friend of al Bayoumi and possible contact for some of the hijackers
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610051
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610057
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610047
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610050
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610055
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610061

Mention of a suspect who lived at an address associated "with one of the al Ghamdi hijackers"?
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610022

An FBI agent does not recall a reported meeting with an Iranian asset who supposedly talked of a "kamikaze" attack by bin Laden on "US property"
http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=2610085

 

[ref]

Thanks for your work again, Mike!

 

[MikeW]

No problem, ref. This is the most interesting part.

Good though they were, all of yesterday's new releases are instantly eclipsed by something I've just spotted in a History Commons upload. It's another 9/11 Commission folder, this time containing a submission by law firm Motley Rice. The first part of this is a standard timeline where they aim to show that the attacks should have been foreseeable. But the second part is something new, I think: a complete transcript of, I believe, the Ramzi Binalshibh confession tape to Yosri Fouda in 2002. Justifications for the attacks, details of the planning, what they aimed to do on the planes, it's all here. It's a must-read, and you'll find it here.

Truthers will pick up on an error or two to say it's fake, though. Binalshibh says it was important to take over the plane in the first 15 minutes, for instance: didn't happen. He also gets the sequence of events wrong, talking about flight 93 crashing "in the suburbs" of Washington before the Pentagon is hit.

And also there's a touch more detail for the LIHOP people: Binalshibh says "when the two brothers Marwan and Zyad were performing the aerial exploratory trips from New York to California, they were being watched by American intelligence officers. The security officers were tailing them throughout the whole trip". (Of course you might think that including this kind of detail is an indicator that the tape isn't faked, but that's probably because you're not a truther.)

 

[T.A.M.]

As for your question with regard to the coordination, it is in a nutshell...

Who knew there was an arabic equivalent for "in a nutshell".

TAM

 

[MikeW]

I've just uploaded another History Commons-sourced document on "NORAD/ FAA Misstatements" and their referral to the Office of the Inspector General.

It contains a detailed description of the inaccurate statements made by the FAA and NORAD re: timelines, including a) "the FAA notified the military at 9:16 that UA93 was hijacked", b) "the FAA notified the military of the hijacking of American 77 at 9:24", c) "the Langley fighters were responding to the previous two notifications", and d) "officials were tracking United 93 and intended to intercept it".

You also get summaries of why these claims weren't true, and an explanation of why the military really should have known that.

So, there's something for everyone here, and I think this is very much the ground that the Commission's John Farmer will be exploring in his book. Really, if you've any interest in the NORAD or FAA side of 9/11 at all then it's a must read, and you'll find a copy at http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Daniel_Marcus-Box6_NORAD-FAA-Misstatements.pdf

In fairness I should also point out that History Commons say the documents support the idea that Zelikow buried the idea of a criminal referral for perjury on the issue, and made false statements to Philip Shenon on the issue. Go to http://hcgroups.wordpress.com/ , check the entries for May 21, 22 and 24.

 

[Cheap Shot]

It contains a detailed description of the inaccurate statements made by the FAA and NORAD re: timelines, including a) "the FAA notified the military at 9:16 that UA93 was hijacked", b) "the FAA notified the military of the hijacking of American 77 at 9:24", c) "the Langley fighters were responding to the previous two notifications", and d) "officials were tracking United 93 and intended to intercept it".

Mike great job I read the whole link. During my interview with DOJ, this where this started to all come about, I think they thought that when they interviewed me it was going to be a 5 minute interview. Well two hours later we finished and they ended up with a lot more questions when then they arrived.

One of the big issues here is that the majority of the tapes that they pulled right after 9-11 came from Hotlines between the FAA and NEADS. No one pulled the other tapes the one with phone calls that came from the DSN phone. I told our QA personel three days after 9-11 that since we didn't record our DSN line that they should ask NEADS for a copy of the tapes. I advised them that I had made about forty calls. No one ever did. I told them several times they should request to pull those tapes probably over a course of a year.

No one ever requested them. It wasn't until my first interview with the DOJ that the issue arose again. I told them that I doubt they existed now, but they found them and it was a reality check to me when I finally got to here them in 2nd invterview with the DOJ.

I still beleive they were other recordings that may have never been heard because some of the tapes or channels probably have never been listened to. I never heard of any Airline tapes but I am pretty positive anything through their operations is probably recorded. It would be interesting to here some of those.

 

[MikeW]

One of the big issues here is that the majority of the tapes that they pulled right after 9-11 came from Hotlines between the FAA and NEADS. No one pulled the other tapes the one with phone calls that came from the DSN phone.

Good job they found them eventually!

I'm wondering if we have all the recordings that are available, though. Do you remember what you heard at the DoJ?