Dozens of 9/11 Commission interview summaries released

[Lenbrazil]

I don’t think this has been mentioned here before, my apologies if it has. I did a search and didn’t find anything.

The site Cryptome has released the transcripts below which I assume they got via FOIA. Unfortunately most or all are heavily redacted. The spelling errors are theirs not mine. I saw them linked at a conspiracy kook site as if the poster expected there to be smoking guns but I imagine that like the FDNY interviews they be more of interest to debunkers

cia-03-1229.pdf CIA Terrorism Reports 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (854KB)
cia-03-1204.pdf CIA Counterterrorism 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 971KB)
cia-03-1125.pdf CIA Winston Wiley CTC 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (1.2MB)
cia-03-0905.pdf CIA John Helgerson IG 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (620KB)

cia-03-0905-2.pdf CIA Director of HR 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (592KB)
cia-03-0902.pdf CIA Bruce Berkowitz 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (724KB)
nsa-04-unk.pdf NSA Chief Counterintel 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (607KB)
nsa-04-0519.pdf NSA SIGINT Collection 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (1.2MB)
nsa-04-0121.pdf NSA William Black DDIR 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (984KB)

nsa-04-0109.pdf NSA Rep to FBI 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (709KB)
nsa-03-1215.pdf NSA Barbara McNamara DDO 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (1.2MB)
nsa-03-1210.pdf NSA Rich Taylor DDO 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (1.5MB)
nsa-03-1209.pdf NSA William Crowell DDIR 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (1.2MB)
nsa-03-1107.pdf NSA SIGINT National Intel 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (766KB)

nsa-03-1107-2.pdf NSA William Crumm SIGINT 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (848KB)
nsa-03-1106.pdf NSA SIGINT Liaison 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (929KB)
state-03-0922.pdf State Dept Stapelton Roy 9-11 Commish Interview December 28, 2010 (944KB)

http://cryptome.org/

 

[Jango]

Released? Large percentages of the entire document are boxed out. Transparency my ass.

 

[BasqueArch]

Released? Large percentages of the entire document are boxed out. Transparency my ass.

Here's a Transparency Test you can take.

On your very next post report the following information:
Your full name:
Residential address:
Place of birth:
DOB:
SSN:
Name and address of present employment:
Home telephone no.:
Business telephone no.:
Cell telephone no.:
Names of financial institutions:
FI account numbers:
FI ID and passwords:
Internet addresses, Id and passwords:

 

[Jango]

Here's a Transparency Test you can take.

On your very next post report the following information:
Your full name:
Residential address:
Place of birth:
DOB:
SSN:
Name and address of present employment:
Home telephone no.:
Business telephone no.:
Cell telephone no.:
Names of financial institutions:
FI account numbers:
FI ID and passwords:
Internet addresses, Id and passwords:

And when I don't tell you the above information but expect you believe a certain narrative of my real life is exactly my point with my first comment in this thread -- we're given incomplete information but are expected to come to the same conclusions whomever has declared in whatever officially defended report or statement.

 

[Oystein]

And when I don't tell you the above information but expect you believe a certain narrative of my real life is exactly my point with my first comment in this thread -- we're given incomplete information but are expected to come to the same conclusions whomever has declared in whatever officially defended report or statement.

It's not unusual here for members to provide bits of real life info supplemental to arguments made; for example, people relating academic or job credentials, or places and projects where they worked, to convince us that their opion carries somewhat more than random weight. No one is obliged to believe, but often it is possible for smart and knowledgable people to assess the plausibility of such claims by perusing the content of the argument. For example, if someone claims to have a degree in chemistry, but it turns out he can't use chemistry terms correctly in context, credibility is diminished.

Back to the redacted Commission protocols: It's okay to be skeptical about the credibility of the readable content, but that content can be used and assessed, given sufficient background knowledge and ability.

What you need to watch out for is the following fallacy:
- Claiming that information is withheld to such an extent that the conclusion drawn from it cannot be trusted and believed
- THEN drawing conclusions from the same insfficient information (or from the fact that it is insufficient)
I mean, saying "they are not giving me the information, therefore they are accomplices in the conspiracy"

There can be several reasons, good and bad, why content is redacted:
- What they say - to protect the safety of indoviduals and the nation
- To cover up the fact that they are incompetent
- To cover up the fact that they are guilty accomplices
- Or just so - because that's what they always do instinctively

If someone wants to pick and claim one of these, they need evidence to support it.

 

[BasqueArch]

Released? Large percentages of the entire document are boxed out. Transparency my ass.

And when I don't tell you the above information but expect you believe a certain narrative of my real life is exactly my point with my first comment in this thread -- we're given incomplete information but are expected to come to the same conclusions whomever has declared in whatever officially defended report or statement.

"Here's a Transparency Test you can take.

On your very next post report the following information:
Your full name: XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Residential address: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Place of birth: XXXXXXXXXX
DOB:XXXXXXXXX
SSN: XXXXXXXXX
Name and address of present employment: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Home telephone no.: XXXXXXXXXX
Business telephone no.: XXXXXXXXXXX
Cell telephone no.: XXXXXXXXXX
Names of financial institutions:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
FI account numbers:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
FI ID and passwords:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Internet addresses, Id and passwords: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX "

"To do good is noble; to teach others to do good is nobler, and less trouble." - Twain

 

[jaydeehess]

Here's Mine:
Your full name: JXXXXDXXSXXXX
Residential address: XXXXXXXXXStreet
Place of birth: XXXXXX, Canada
DOB:XXXXX19XX
SIN(Canadian Social Insurance Number): XXXXXXXX0
Name and address of present employment: XXXXXXXXXXXStreet
Home telephone no.: 1XXXXXXXXX
Business telephone no.: 1XXXXXXXXXX
Cell telephone no.: 1XXXXXXXXX
Names of financial institutions:XXXXXXXXXXBankXXXXXXXXXXX
FI account numbers:XXXXXXXXXXXXXX3XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
FI ID and passwords:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX6
Internet addresses, Id and passwords: XXXBXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX "

 

[beachnut]

And when I don't tell you the above information but expect you believe a certain narrative of my real life is exactly my point with my first comment in this thread -- we're given incomplete information but are expected to come to the same conclusions whomever has declared in whatever officially defended report or statement.

Have you read them yet? What was left out that you need to know? Like the UFO junk you push, you failed to read anything past UFO, and now you fail to comment on what is there, instead make up BS about what is not there.