'Do the orders still stand?' Censoring MINETA Testimony Is Evidence 9-11 Commission Was Cover-Up Job

[Octafish]

Mr. Philip Zelikow and the 9-11 Commission edited Secretary of Transportation Mineta's story. From Wikipedia:

During the September 11, 2001 attacks, Mineta issued an order to ground all civilian aircraft traffic for the first time in U.S. history.

Mineta's testimony to the 9/11 Commission about his experience in the Presidential Emergency Operating Center with Vice President Cheney as American Airlines flight 77 approached the Pentagon was not included in the 9/11 Commission Report.<3> In one colloquy testified by Mineta, the vice president refers to orders concerning the plane approaching the Pentagon:

There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, 'The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out.' And when it got down to, 'The plane is 10 miles out,' the young man also said to the vice president, 'Do the orders still stand?' And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, 'Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?' Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant.

– Norman Mineta, (4)

Commissioner Lee Hamilton queried if the order was to shoot down the plane, to which Mineta replied that he did not know that specifically.(4)

Mineta's testimony to the Commission on Flight 77 differs rather significantly from the account provided in the January 22, 2002 edition of the Washington Post, as reported by Bob Woodward and Dan Balz in their series "10 Days in September"

“ 9:32 a.m.
The Vice President in Washington: Underground, in Touch With Bush

Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta, summoned by the White House to the bunker, was on an open line to the Federal Aviation Administration operations center, monitoring Flight 77 as it hurtled toward Washington, with radar tracks coming every seven seconds. Reports came that the plane was 50 miles out, 30 miles out, 10 miles out-until word reached the bunker that there had been an explosion at the Pentagon.

Mineta shouted into the phone to Monte Belger at the FAA: "Monte, bring all the planes down." It was an unprecedented order-there were 4,546 airplanes in the air at the time. Belger, the FAA's acting deputy administrator, amended Mineta's directive to take into account the authority vested in airline pilots. "We're bringing them down per pilot discretion," Belger told the secretary.

"(Expletive) pilot discretion," Mineta yelled back. "Get those (expletive) planes down."

Sitting at the other end of the table, Cheney snapped his head up, looked squarely at Mineta and nodded in agreement.
”
—Dan Balz and Bob Woodward, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42754-2002Jan26_3.html

This same article also reports that the conversation between Cheney and the aide occurred at 9:55 am, about 30 minutes later than the time Mineta cited (9:26 am) during his testimony to the 9/11 Commission.

SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Mineta

Here's Sec. Mineta's actual testimony on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y

It was left out of the report.

[SDuderstadt]

1. Jesus, dude...

don't you have your hands full trying to solve JFK's assassination nearly fifty years after the fact? Shouldn't you focus on solving that before you try to take on 9/11?

Of course, it stands to reason that you're a "truther". It's gonna be fun to watch you mangle that one too.

[Octafish]

5. Rather than attacking me, why don't you bring up some points to support your opinion?

Then, again, that's your M.O.

BTW: There's no statute of limitations on murder or treason. Are you also uninterested in justice, SDuderstadt?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

27. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeFree]

31. Oops

Had to scrub that one clean, eh?

Something about someone giving an order to shoot down something?!?!?

[zappaman]

2. yeah and so?

Old news

[Octafish]

6. The 'so' part would be the censoring of Mineta's testimony.

If you're really into Zappa, you'd know the power of The Slime. For many Americans, if it's not on tee vee, it didn't really happen.

[Ohio Joe]

3. Soooo...

Because Mineta and Woodward do not agree on time it is proof of a cover-up? or is it because Mineta's publicly available testimony is not in the report (is that true? I don't know) that it is a cover-up? Either way... both ways... it sounds silly.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Octafish]

7. Mineta's testimony was scrubbed from the report.

That means Cheney's word made the record.

I can't remember any time that's been good.

Interesting to see how so many have forgotten, which is the purpose of the OP.

[OnTheOtherHand]

8. Cheney's word didn't make the record on this issue at all (unless you mean

...that the report cites Cheney). On the contrary, the 9/11 Commission report says that Cheney claims to have received Bush's approval for a shoot-down order in a phone call, but that there's no evidence that the call actually occurred, despite extensive telephone logs and multiple eyewitnesses on both sides. Oops.

Now, Mineta's recollection of these events conflicts with other accounts, and it's not facially unreasonable for the commission to have concluded that Mineta conflated two separate events. That doesn't mean that Mineta's testimony was "scrubbed from the report" -- any more than all the other testimony that wasn't referenced in the report.

If you think that the commission blew it on this, you're welcome to make the argument.

[Octafish]

9. The video above of Mineta's testimony includes his answers.

Mineta's story is no where to be found in the 9-11 Commission Report. Cheney's story -- his version of events -- is. I believe Mineta -- who happens to be a Democrat -- over Cheney's any day of the week.

January 26, 2003: Some 9/11 Commission Members Unhappy with Staffing Arrangements, Executive Director Zelikow’s Appointment and Degree of Control When all ten members of the 9/11 Commission meet for the first time, in an informal setting, some of them are already unhappy about the way the commission is being run. Some of the Democratic members are unhappy about the selection of Republican Philip Zelikow as executive director (see Shortly Before January 27, 2003), a decision made solely by chairman Tom Kean and vice chairman Lee Hamilton. Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste will say Zelikow’s appointment was “presented as a fait accompli.” Ben-Veniste is also alarmed by Zelikow’s links to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice (see 1995 and January 3, 2001), and he and fellow commissioner Max Cleland are upset about the proposed staff structure (see Around February 2003). There is to be a single staff led by Zelikow, and the commissioners will not have personal staffers, although this is usual on such commissions. Ben-Veniste proposes that each commissioner develop an expertise in a specific field, but this plan is blocked by Kean, Hamilton, and Zelikow. Kean and Hamilton also say that the commissioners can visit the commission’s offices, but cannot have a permanent presence there. Indeed, not even Kean and Hamilton will have an office in the commission’s building. Author Philip Shenon will comment: “To Ben-Veniste, the way the staff was being organized guaranteed that the commissioners’ involvement in the details of the investigation would be limited. It centralized control in Zelikow’s hands.”

SOURCE: http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a0303outline

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0446580759/centerforcoop-20

Cheney's political ally, Philip Zelikow, served as executive director and, thus, as editor of the report. Zelikow ensured that Cheney's story would become the official history.

[OnTheOtherHand]

14. umm, hello?

If you aren't going to respond to the substance of my comments, I would just as soon that you not "reply" at all.

[Octafish]

17. Uh. I'll write what I want. Thanks for the warning or reminder, I don't care which.

FYI: Here's another reason why I don't believe Bush, Cheney and the 9-11 Commission Report:

Zelikow's 'What Do I Do Now?' Memo

And if you don't like my reply, tough shit.

[OnTheOtherHand]

19. ROFL

OK, I guess you've got nothing.

[Octafish]

24. Here's the short of it: Instead of Bush and Cheney, I believe Mineta and Rowley.

Colleen Rowley: Minders Ensured She Didn't Say Anything About 9/11 the FBI Didn't WANT Told, Even to Government Officials with Top Security Clearance.

That something is better than nothing, which is that which you must be most familiar.

[Bolo Boffin]

25. Again, the choice is not that simplistic.

It's not "Bush and Cheney v. Mineta", it's "every other single piece of evidence plus parts of Mineta's own story v. Mineta."

And why are you changing the subject to Rowley?

[SDuderstadt]

26. Do you believe Mineta when...

he says he could be mistaken about the timeline and states that he believes it was a shootdown order? Again, if your claims are true, why isn't Mineta leading the charge?

[OnTheOtherHand]

28. jeepers

I made a pretty straightforward point, to which you still haven't responded -- unless "I believe Mineta" counts as a response.

Everyone here, AFAICT, thinks Bush and Cheney lied about the shoot-down order, so your distrust of Bush and Cheney doesn't distinguish you.

[defendandprotect]

30. Hadn't read that before, but Nixon/FBI pulled that with Watergate witnesses ....

FBI was present during the interviews -- a strong intimidation for witnesses.

Thanks for the info!

:)

[SDuderstadt]

23. Let me make sure I get this straight...

you produce a YouTube video of Mineta's testimony,then claim the 9/11 Comission censored it? Does it occur to you why most here do not take you seriously?

[Octafish]

16. Sorry. Mis-post.

Replied to the wrong reply -- my mistake.

[Bolo Boffin]

11. Mineta is off on his timeline.

His story about the orders still standing happened during the 10:00 am hour, around 10:25 or so.

Mineta's story and timeline perfectly fits in with all other testimony (not just Cheney's word - you're leaving out a lot of evidence to the contrary) once you eliminate his impossible assertion about the conversation being about Flight 77 in actuality.

For instance, he told someone who asked him later that the Cheneys were already in the PEOC when he arrived there. However, they had not moved there until right at 10:00. Cheney was not even evacuated from his office by Secret Service personnel until they got a call from the airport about the circling pattern of what proved to be Flight 77. It was when Flight 77 circled back toward Washington (making its final approach to the Pentagon) that Cheney was taken down to the basement, where he waited outside the PEOC in the corridor, watching a television and trying to get in touch again with Bush. Liz Cheney joined him there around 9:50 while he was on the phone, and from there they went into the PEOC at around 10:00.

This is not only backed up by Cheney's testimony, but by logs of the Secret Service, other people in the room, the White House log of arrivals and departures, etc.

So please stop pretending this is Mineta v. Cheney. It's Mineta v. every other piece of evidence that day, the same standard that shows Bush and Cheney to be lying about when Cheney got clearance from Bush to shoot down planes that proved to be a threat. That's something the 9/11 Commission documented as well, by the way.

[Octafish]

12. I'm not pretending anything. Why wasn't the ''young man'' brought in to testify?

His word would be of interest.

I'd also like to know what he and Cheney were talking about and why his question made Cheney so angry.

Is his name on record?

[Bolo Boffin]

13. Certainly you are. Your post #7: "That means Cheney's word made the record."

It was not just "Cheney's word". That's where you're pretending this is Mineta v. Cheney. It's not that simple and you do yourself and your readers a disservice by your pretense.

It's very clear what they were talking about, if you care to look at the other evidence instead of cherrypicking what you like about Mineta's testimony. They were talking about a shootdown order that Cheney had given before. Cheney was pissed because he'd made the order and then other people in the room questioned his authority to do so and asked him to call Bush to verify the order. He did so and then the young officer came in again. When he asked if the orders still stood, Cheney bit his head off for questioning him.

I've never seen the name of that person anywhere. So go ahead and wax silly about it while you miss the documented lie revealed in the 9/11 Commission Report as told by Bush and Cheney. And you must, because you must discount the 9/11 Commission report at all costs, even when it presents the clear evidence that Bush and Cheney lied about when Bush gave Cheney authorization for the shootdown order.

ETA: More ways that the 9/11 Commission Report documents the bullshit that passed for an administration under George W. Bush.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=285831&mesg_id=285831

[Octafish]

15. Bush and Cheney controlled the Commission. That's how, boloboffin.

Remember them? Maybe you didn't know they're the same people who wanted Bernie Kerik to head Homeland Security.

So, no, I don't agree with Ashcroft, Cheney, Bush and the Commission. Sen. Max Cleland said it well:

“The White House Has Played Cover-Up”

BTW: Don't worry about my readers. They should be no business of yours.

[Bolo Boffin]

18. The Commission that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bush and Cheney lied?

That's the one they "controlled"?

Your ability to ignore that my opinion of Bush-Cheney is similar to yours is astounding. What part of the proposed 9/11 Commission index do you not understand is a scathing indictment of the Bush Adminstration?

[reinvestigate911]

21. "scathing indictment of the Bush Adminstration"

...with zero accountability.
but oh so scathing. perhaps "scathing" might satisfy you, others of us are a bit more skeptical.

thanks.

[SDuderstadt]

20. Ummm, no they didn't, dude..

Have you ever read the public law that created the 9/11 Commission? I'm thinking you haven't or else you wouldn't make such a silly accusation.

Maybe you could actually read the public law, then explain to us how "Bush and Cheney controlled" the Commission. It's your inability to get even basic, fundamental facts right that leads me to regard you with such derision, dude.

[jberryhill]

22. That post deserves an award...

By way of proving your thesis of "control", you note they wanted Bernie Kerrick to head DHS

Ummm... It was my understanding Bernie Kerrick didn't head DHS. So, they exert control by not getting the appointments they want.

[defendandprotect]

29. This is a long ignored testimony by Mineta -- but other than something criminal

going on, difficult to guess which way Cheney was playing it . . .

Was he using the kid and a prearranged script to suggest that someone was actually

tracking a plane/missile coming in? Or, was it actually happening?

Since there's no evidence that a plane ever hit the Pentagon -- I'd guess that this

was something arranged for Mineta's benefit. But, since it makes Cheney, himself,

look suspicious it sounds like a pretty dumb idea. Could it by any means be considered

a necessary "prop" to prove incoming? Hmmm....


Lots of evidence no plane -- CNN journalist had been at Pentagon alerted by still loose

"hijacked" plane in area. And, one of the NORAD Generals immediately sent a pilot up

to "flying over the Pentagon and see what happened" -- Report came back . . .

"NO plane hit the Pentagon." One of the Pentagon employees was sitting right behind

where the "plane" allegedly hit. No plane!