The 911 Report, an elaborate fiction

On July 22, 2004, the "National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" , also known as the "9/11 Commission," published its final Report, the "9/11 Commission Report". The Report became a best-seller and was hailed in the corporate media as the definitive report on the attacks. However, the Report is more accurately characterized as the definitive narrative of the official myth of 9/11. As David Ray Griffin points out in his scholarly book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, the Report systematically excludes almost every fact that doesn't support the official story.

source here






Set up to fail? And fail it did. The 911 Report is now widely viewed by the majority of people who have read it as a falsehood in general and a half-hearted explanation to explain to the citizens of America (and the world) of what happened on 911. So, how was the story surrounding 911 "sold" to the media and the public? It first began in the media right on the streets of NYC while the smoke and fires were still present.





Box cutters, lies and Barbara Olsen cell phone calls...Umm

The "Omission Commission"

The 9/11 Commission has earned the designation of the "Omission Commission" due to its refusal to even consider the vast body of evidence contradicting the official narrative of the attack. For example, the Commission decided not to hear from any of the fire fighters who witnessed the destruction of the World Trade Center. 7 (The body of oral history testimony from the FDNY and EMS personnel remained suppressed until after the Commission had closed the doors.) The agenda of the Commission to rubber-stamp the official story, evident in the conduct of its hearings, became crystal-clear with the publication of its final report. Our critique of the Report shows that it has some outright lies and contradictions, but its principal method for avoiding troublesome facts is through omission. In essence the Commission performs the magician's sleight of hand -- diverting attention from the many red flags in the official story by weaving a detailed narrative about the alleged hijackers, terror networks, and breakdowns in systems that were supposed to deal with the threat.

source: 911 Research

Contradictions of the "Omission Commission"





sources for vids are embedded

John Farmer, the General Counsel for the 9/11 commission, in his book out last year points no fingers of blame. He just says the report is 90% false testimony & False evidence.

reply to post by mikelee


Even commission members say it was a joke. But people continually bombard us with the idea that 9/11 happened exactly like the report says.

With the fact that the govt. is giving away billions in bailouts, I don't understand why we can't just set aside a few million to have an independent enquiry. I mean, what did they spend on the first one...$1.50??

Originally posted by Doctor G
John Farmer, the General Counsel for the 9/11 commission, in his book out last year points no fingers of blame. He just says the report is 90% false testimony & False evidence.

That's interesting. Can you direct me to where he said that please ? Thanks

John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″

Admission from the senior counsel of the 911 Commission (OS) that it's a lie

(CINCINNATI, Ohio) - In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

Thread here

911 Report and the cell phone calls.

FYI - this vid was apparently recorded while being broadcasted on television as is apparent by the audio.