Lookout
VIP Member
- Oct 5, 2007
- 922
- 77
- 63
Transcript of the entire briefing and submitted documents here:
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/documents/did-they-get-it-right.zip
In the wake of Philip Shenon's best-seller, "The Commission", comes another wave of Americans snapping out of a media-induced trance. On another front, to a different audience, Willie Nelson is waking up another sector of the sleepwalking masses with his skepticism. Whatever route you took that made you take a second look at 9/11, welcome... and, you've got some catching up to do.
If Shenon's book was your introduction to the simple fact that the 9/11 Commission failed in its mandate on several levels, then you are probably unaware that serious criticism of the 9/11 Commission was entered into the Congressional Record of the 109th Congress. This criticism was the result of a Congressional Briefing conducted by former Congressional Representative, Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. (McKinney is currently seeking the Presidential nomination for the Green Party of the United States.)
The briefing was held on July 22nd, 2005, subsequently broadcast by C-SPAN, and studiously ignored by the corporate press. A comprehensive collation of the briefing has not been made available online, but thanks to the magic of YouTube, I have chopped the most pertinent testimonies from that day into neat 10 minute segments that are easily digestible for the busy internet surfer. You may have seen some of the footage from the briefing in the documentary, "Press for Truth", where Lorie Van Auken talked about her husband's fate on 9/11. Beyond that, not much of this footage has been circulating on the net.
So, if you are new to 9/11 Truth, or 9/11 skepticism, or you just have some questions, this is a great start. This briefing does not present much speculation or theory, but does break down the Commission on its bureaucratic failings, and lists a host of anomalies that will send you researching for days if this is all new to you. (This briefing does not discuss controlled demolition theories at all, it wasn't until physicist Steven Jones came on the scene in 2006 that CD "exploded" into the massive topic for 9/11 skeptics that is currently is. There was a lot of research already published online, and some in books, but it took a PhD to kick it over the top.)
The YouTube series is in 25 parts, and begins with McKinney's opening statement;
Parts 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 encompass the powerful testimony of "Jersey Girl" Lorie Van Auken, speaking for herself and two other "Jersey Girls", Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle. Van Auken's testimony alone should give anyone pause for thought about the conclusions of the Commission.
Part 2: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-glVvOB7bKE[/ame]
Part 3: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3MlNZzN25U[/ame]
Part 4: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1HfQ6l-LQA[/ame]
Part 5: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdS0CSrqOPI[/ame]
Part 6: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdyKkrm4iJI[/ame]
Part 7 is the testimony of John Judge. Judge had a hand in making this briefing happen as a member of McKinney's staff, and is the main presence behind The Coalition On Political Assassinations. Judge lists a host of problems with the Report, including a lack of transparency, a lack of accountability, conflicts of interest within the Commission, and was one of the first people I know of to speculate that the key 9/11 testimony may have been derived from acts of torture. He has been proven correct on that speculation.
Part 7: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA_MvahuneE[/ame]
Parts 8, 9 and 10 compile the 1st testimony of Mel Goodman, and a Q & A session with him. Goodman is an ex-CIA analyst. He quit the CIA because he would not inflate the "Soviet menace" during the Cold War with politicized analysis. (The creation of politically charged/fabricated intelligence during the Cold War is exemplified by the work of Team B.) Goodman was one of the first to challenge the appointment of Henry Kissinger as the original head of the 9/11 Commission.
For those who would categorically disregard Goodman's observations due to his work at the CIA, I understand your cynicism. It is difficult to know when a former or ex agent of a Federal agency is not simply being "sheep dipped" into the population or not. However, Goodman's analysis of the bureaucratic failings of the 9/11 Commission, and his brief history of other Commissions, like the ones that followed Pearl Harbor, (the best book analyzing the Pearl Harbor Commissions, including the House Minority Report which was the most far-reaching, is "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" by Harry Elmer Barnes, I recommend seeking out an original hardcover), the Church Commission and the Pike Commission is valuable for forming a historical perspective on these commissions. The 9/11 Commission had the broadest mandate of them all, and virtually unused subpoena power, Goodman critiques from an informed perspective.
Further, there seems to be a qualitative difference between the CIA's analysts and operatives. Although both are steeped in jingoistic propaganda as they are indoctrinated into the Agency, dissident analysts, (and operatives who wound up doing analysis in the field), tend to be more common. Dissident analysts include Victor Marchetti, Goodman, David MacMichaels, Bill Christison, and Ray McGovern. The most well-known dissident operatives include the deceased Philip Agee, and operative/analyst, Ralph McGehee, who has been harrassed into silence.
In the Q & A, Goodman makes the mistake of saying something postive about Hamilton's role in the Iran-Contra investigations, which ultimately went nowhere. As a corrective, here is Peter Dale Scott's observation on Hamilton, in his recent book, "The Road to 9/11", pp. 109-110;
"The bank's (BCCI's) immunity from regulation and prosecution in the ensuing Reagan years became notorious. As treasury secretary, James Baker flagrantly declined to prosecute BCCI after it had been exposed for illegally acquiring First American. A former National Security Council economist told author Johanthan Beatty that "Baker didn't pursue BCCI because he thought a prosecution of the bank would damage the United States reputation as a safe haven for flight capital and overseas investments." A simpler explanation might be that Baker knew what secrets could be told by the highest-level surviving BCCI officials."
The full story of BCCI was never officially told, nor was the story of the Republican countersurprise. The Iran-Contra hearings successfully covered up the arms shipments to Iran before 1984, and the House Task Force investigation of the Republican Surprise went nowhere. As Newsweek correspondent Eleanor Clift correctly predicted in 1991, "Congress will not formally investigate charges that the Reagan campaign stole the election in 1980, in large part because Israel's supporters on Capital Hill do not want to put the spotlight on Israel's role, which during that period sold weapons to Iran in blatant disregard of President Carter."
The key figure in both cover-ups was the congressman Lee Hamilton, a friend of the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby who chaired the House Iran-Contra Committee in 1987 and the House Task Force from 1992 to 1993. The bland results of the House Task Force report were hardly surprising. Hamilton had earlier participated in a dishonest defense of the Contras against charges of drug trafficking. The chief counsel of the House Task Force was E. Lawrence Barcella, who had received $2 million in legal fees as the lead attorney for BCCI in the late 1980s. At that time, Barcella also was a law partner of Paul Laxalt, who had been chariman of the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980. Finally, Barcella had close personal connections to Michael Ledeen, from whom he had bought a house and shared a common housekeeper.
In 2003, Hamilton would be resurrected to cochair the 9/11 Commission, investigating a third crisis that involved both right-wing Republican politicians and Muslim fundamentalists. Many people, including U.S. government officials, had alleged a number of links between BCCI investors, the Bin Laden family, and the financing of al Qaeda. For example, a French book has charged that "after dominating the financial news through the 1990s, the BCCI is now at the center of the financial network put in place by Osama bin Laden's main supporters." But in the 2004 9/11 Commission Report these allegations were completely ignored."
Whew. Now that that's out of the way, please check out Goodman's testimony, and decide for yourself if it has merit. I believe it does.
Part 8: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=8kHxOWlYYvI[/ame]
Part 9: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=e7T4OTQ5NjY[/ame]
Part 10: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=SjBXX5edHTw[/ame]
Parts 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 comprise the combined panel presentations of Paul Thompson, Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, and John Newman.
Paul Thompson is the driving force behind Cooperative Research.org, home of the essential Complete 9/11 Timeline. If you have never visited the Complete 9/11 Timeline, do it now. If you have used the Timeline for your personal research, please make a donation! Cooperative Research runs on user donations. In his presentation, Thompson presents a host of anomalies associated with the FAA/NORAD response on 9/11. Many troubling questions remain unanswered regarding air defense on 9/11.
Nafeez Ahmed's 2002 book, The War on Freedom, was the first comprehensive printed volume challenging the official 9/11 narrative, published by John Leonard's Progressive Press. Ahmed followed up in 2005 with The War on Truth, which is where Ahmed derives the research for his 1st testimony. Ahmed deconstructs the myth surrounding the alleged 9/11 hijackers that presents them as dedicated religious fanatics, exposing intelligence links and possible military training of some of the alleged hijackers.
John Newman is a researcher known for his work exposing links Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA, research that has been confirmed and expanded upon by author Joan Mellen. Newman presents a picture of Omar Saeed Sheikh, allegedly the CFO of "al Qaeda", blamed for the murder of Daniel Pearl... an ISI and MI6 operative working at the highest levels of "al Qaeda".
Part 11: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=RzqyRbI3mFs[/ame]
Part 12: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=y1XycPwp5JE[/ame]
Part 13: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=VqRnz-qstEs[/ame]
Part 14: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=GF9clRScHxM[/ame]
Part 15: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rpn2hD8qq24[/ame]
Part 16: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=GUxthbC-74E[/ame]
Parts 17, 18 and 19 comprise the testimony of Peter Dale Scott and the 2nd testimony of Nafeez Ahmed. Scott is well known among independent researchers for his studies of the milieu that surrounds the JFK assassination. Arguably, his most powerful book on the subject is Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Scott has successfully transferred his research paradigm to 9/11, which he considers a "deep event" or "meta event". Scott reveals more about the real history of "al Qaeda" in this short presentation than you are likely to find in any handful of establishment books on the subject. (For another approach to the parallels between the JFK assassination and 9/11, please see this presentation from the 2006 COPA conference, JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both.)
Ahmed's 2nd testimony expands upon his previous comments, painting a vivid picture of the unbroken relationship between Western powers and the Mujahidin, and thus "al Qaeda", that continued past the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, throughout the 1990's. (Ahmed's research has led him to conclude in 2006 that al Qaeda "has no existence as an independent concrete entity. It designates a highly developed category of Western covert operations designed to secure destabilization through the creation, multiplication, mobilization, and manipulation of disparate mujahideen groups. The evidence suggests that this was certainly the case on 9-11.")
Part 17: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=xj-qCHwn8h0[/ame]
Part 18: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=zDHBoeRRvmo[/ame]
Part 19: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=jMpyxB4mnz8[/ame]
Parts 20 through 25 comprise a panel consisting of Mel Goodman, Ray McGovern, and David MacMichaels, and concludes the Briefing with Cynthia McKinney's closing statement in Part 25.
In Mel Goodman's 2nd testimony, he condemns the Intelligence reforms put forward by the 9/11 Commission. Ray McGovern draws on his many years of experience as a CIA analyst, (McGovern is a retiree, a "former" CIA man, but I must say that his active involvement in a variety of anti-establishment movements in the wake of Neocon agression has proven that he walks the walk), to severely critique the creation of the position of the DNI, an absolutely un-needed layer of bureaucracy upon an already unwieldy intelligence establishment.
David MacMichals is another example of an ex-CIA analyst who quit the Agency becuase he would not abide the distortion of intelligence to match Executive policy desires. (McGovern explains in his testimony some of the details behind the departures of Goodman and MacMichaels from the Agency). MacMichaels draws upon earlier Commissions to draw parallels between what has been done in the past and how the 9/11 Commission has performed in a similar manner. More of the same in Washington, in MacMichaels' view, a sad state of affairs.
Cynthia McKinney concludes the day's events in the second half of Part 25, praising all who participated, and she receives a standing ovation from the attendees who made it thorugh the whole day.
Part 20: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Yr1rixniSAI[/ame]
Part 21: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=xzeZfBJVNX4[/ame]
Part 22: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=XIVS7FT0iyc[/ame]
Part 23: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=sbS-ofe6kU4[/ame]
Part 24: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=4MPyWmQN28I[/ame]
Part 25: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=KejotYu6FX4[/ame]
This 25-part YouTube series is not the entire Briefing, see here for more details;
http://www.911blogger.com/node/6800
Compiled by Reprehensor at 911blogger.com
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/documents/did-they-get-it-right.zip
In the wake of Philip Shenon's best-seller, "The Commission", comes another wave of Americans snapping out of a media-induced trance. On another front, to a different audience, Willie Nelson is waking up another sector of the sleepwalking masses with his skepticism. Whatever route you took that made you take a second look at 9/11, welcome... and, you've got some catching up to do.
If Shenon's book was your introduction to the simple fact that the 9/11 Commission failed in its mandate on several levels, then you are probably unaware that serious criticism of the 9/11 Commission was entered into the Congressional Record of the 109th Congress. This criticism was the result of a Congressional Briefing conducted by former Congressional Representative, Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. (McKinney is currently seeking the Presidential nomination for the Green Party of the United States.)
The briefing was held on July 22nd, 2005, subsequently broadcast by C-SPAN, and studiously ignored by the corporate press. A comprehensive collation of the briefing has not been made available online, but thanks to the magic of YouTube, I have chopped the most pertinent testimonies from that day into neat 10 minute segments that are easily digestible for the busy internet surfer. You may have seen some of the footage from the briefing in the documentary, "Press for Truth", where Lorie Van Auken talked about her husband's fate on 9/11. Beyond that, not much of this footage has been circulating on the net.
So, if you are new to 9/11 Truth, or 9/11 skepticism, or you just have some questions, this is a great start. This briefing does not present much speculation or theory, but does break down the Commission on its bureaucratic failings, and lists a host of anomalies that will send you researching for days if this is all new to you. (This briefing does not discuss controlled demolition theories at all, it wasn't until physicist Steven Jones came on the scene in 2006 that CD "exploded" into the massive topic for 9/11 skeptics that is currently is. There was a lot of research already published online, and some in books, but it took a PhD to kick it over the top.)
The YouTube series is in 25 parts, and begins with McKinney's opening statement;
Parts 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 encompass the powerful testimony of "Jersey Girl" Lorie Van Auken, speaking for herself and two other "Jersey Girls", Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle. Van Auken's testimony alone should give anyone pause for thought about the conclusions of the Commission.
Part 2: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-glVvOB7bKE[/ame]
Part 3: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3MlNZzN25U[/ame]
Part 4: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1HfQ6l-LQA[/ame]
Part 5: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdS0CSrqOPI[/ame]
Part 6: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdyKkrm4iJI[/ame]
Part 7 is the testimony of John Judge. Judge had a hand in making this briefing happen as a member of McKinney's staff, and is the main presence behind The Coalition On Political Assassinations. Judge lists a host of problems with the Report, including a lack of transparency, a lack of accountability, conflicts of interest within the Commission, and was one of the first people I know of to speculate that the key 9/11 testimony may have been derived from acts of torture. He has been proven correct on that speculation.
Part 7: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA_MvahuneE[/ame]
Parts 8, 9 and 10 compile the 1st testimony of Mel Goodman, and a Q & A session with him. Goodman is an ex-CIA analyst. He quit the CIA because he would not inflate the "Soviet menace" during the Cold War with politicized analysis. (The creation of politically charged/fabricated intelligence during the Cold War is exemplified by the work of Team B.) Goodman was one of the first to challenge the appointment of Henry Kissinger as the original head of the 9/11 Commission.
For those who would categorically disregard Goodman's observations due to his work at the CIA, I understand your cynicism. It is difficult to know when a former or ex agent of a Federal agency is not simply being "sheep dipped" into the population or not. However, Goodman's analysis of the bureaucratic failings of the 9/11 Commission, and his brief history of other Commissions, like the ones that followed Pearl Harbor, (the best book analyzing the Pearl Harbor Commissions, including the House Minority Report which was the most far-reaching, is "Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace" by Harry Elmer Barnes, I recommend seeking out an original hardcover), the Church Commission and the Pike Commission is valuable for forming a historical perspective on these commissions. The 9/11 Commission had the broadest mandate of them all, and virtually unused subpoena power, Goodman critiques from an informed perspective.
Further, there seems to be a qualitative difference between the CIA's analysts and operatives. Although both are steeped in jingoistic propaganda as they are indoctrinated into the Agency, dissident analysts, (and operatives who wound up doing analysis in the field), tend to be more common. Dissident analysts include Victor Marchetti, Goodman, David MacMichaels, Bill Christison, and Ray McGovern. The most well-known dissident operatives include the deceased Philip Agee, and operative/analyst, Ralph McGehee, who has been harrassed into silence.
In the Q & A, Goodman makes the mistake of saying something postive about Hamilton's role in the Iran-Contra investigations, which ultimately went nowhere. As a corrective, here is Peter Dale Scott's observation on Hamilton, in his recent book, "The Road to 9/11", pp. 109-110;
"The bank's (BCCI's) immunity from regulation and prosecution in the ensuing Reagan years became notorious. As treasury secretary, James Baker flagrantly declined to prosecute BCCI after it had been exposed for illegally acquiring First American. A former National Security Council economist told author Johanthan Beatty that "Baker didn't pursue BCCI because he thought a prosecution of the bank would damage the United States reputation as a safe haven for flight capital and overseas investments." A simpler explanation might be that Baker knew what secrets could be told by the highest-level surviving BCCI officials."
The full story of BCCI was never officially told, nor was the story of the Republican countersurprise. The Iran-Contra hearings successfully covered up the arms shipments to Iran before 1984, and the House Task Force investigation of the Republican Surprise went nowhere. As Newsweek correspondent Eleanor Clift correctly predicted in 1991, "Congress will not formally investigate charges that the Reagan campaign stole the election in 1980, in large part because Israel's supporters on Capital Hill do not want to put the spotlight on Israel's role, which during that period sold weapons to Iran in blatant disregard of President Carter."
The key figure in both cover-ups was the congressman Lee Hamilton, a friend of the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby who chaired the House Iran-Contra Committee in 1987 and the House Task Force from 1992 to 1993. The bland results of the House Task Force report were hardly surprising. Hamilton had earlier participated in a dishonest defense of the Contras against charges of drug trafficking. The chief counsel of the House Task Force was E. Lawrence Barcella, who had received $2 million in legal fees as the lead attorney for BCCI in the late 1980s. At that time, Barcella also was a law partner of Paul Laxalt, who had been chariman of the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980. Finally, Barcella had close personal connections to Michael Ledeen, from whom he had bought a house and shared a common housekeeper.
In 2003, Hamilton would be resurrected to cochair the 9/11 Commission, investigating a third crisis that involved both right-wing Republican politicians and Muslim fundamentalists. Many people, including U.S. government officials, had alleged a number of links between BCCI investors, the Bin Laden family, and the financing of al Qaeda. For example, a French book has charged that "after dominating the financial news through the 1990s, the BCCI is now at the center of the financial network put in place by Osama bin Laden's main supporters." But in the 2004 9/11 Commission Report these allegations were completely ignored."
Whew. Now that that's out of the way, please check out Goodman's testimony, and decide for yourself if it has merit. I believe it does.
Part 8: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=8kHxOWlYYvI[/ame]
Part 9: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=e7T4OTQ5NjY[/ame]
Part 10: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=SjBXX5edHTw[/ame]
Parts 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 comprise the combined panel presentations of Paul Thompson, Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, and John Newman.
Paul Thompson is the driving force behind Cooperative Research.org, home of the essential Complete 9/11 Timeline. If you have never visited the Complete 9/11 Timeline, do it now. If you have used the Timeline for your personal research, please make a donation! Cooperative Research runs on user donations. In his presentation, Thompson presents a host of anomalies associated with the FAA/NORAD response on 9/11. Many troubling questions remain unanswered regarding air defense on 9/11.
Nafeez Ahmed's 2002 book, The War on Freedom, was the first comprehensive printed volume challenging the official 9/11 narrative, published by John Leonard's Progressive Press. Ahmed followed up in 2005 with The War on Truth, which is where Ahmed derives the research for his 1st testimony. Ahmed deconstructs the myth surrounding the alleged 9/11 hijackers that presents them as dedicated religious fanatics, exposing intelligence links and possible military training of some of the alleged hijackers.
John Newman is a researcher known for his work exposing links Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA, research that has been confirmed and expanded upon by author Joan Mellen. Newman presents a picture of Omar Saeed Sheikh, allegedly the CFO of "al Qaeda", blamed for the murder of Daniel Pearl... an ISI and MI6 operative working at the highest levels of "al Qaeda".
Part 11: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=RzqyRbI3mFs[/ame]
Part 12: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=y1XycPwp5JE[/ame]
Part 13: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=VqRnz-qstEs[/ame]
Part 14: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=GF9clRScHxM[/ame]
Part 15: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rpn2hD8qq24[/ame]
Part 16: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=GUxthbC-74E[/ame]
Parts 17, 18 and 19 comprise the testimony of Peter Dale Scott and the 2nd testimony of Nafeez Ahmed. Scott is well known among independent researchers for his studies of the milieu that surrounds the JFK assassination. Arguably, his most powerful book on the subject is Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Scott has successfully transferred his research paradigm to 9/11, which he considers a "deep event" or "meta event". Scott reveals more about the real history of "al Qaeda" in this short presentation than you are likely to find in any handful of establishment books on the subject. (For another approach to the parallels between the JFK assassination and 9/11, please see this presentation from the 2006 COPA conference, JFK and 9/11 - Insights Gained From Studying Both.)
Ahmed's 2nd testimony expands upon his previous comments, painting a vivid picture of the unbroken relationship between Western powers and the Mujahidin, and thus "al Qaeda", that continued past the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, throughout the 1990's. (Ahmed's research has led him to conclude in 2006 that al Qaeda "has no existence as an independent concrete entity. It designates a highly developed category of Western covert operations designed to secure destabilization through the creation, multiplication, mobilization, and manipulation of disparate mujahideen groups. The evidence suggests that this was certainly the case on 9-11.")
Part 17: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=xj-qCHwn8h0[/ame]
Part 18: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=zDHBoeRRvmo[/ame]
Part 19: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=jMpyxB4mnz8[/ame]
Parts 20 through 25 comprise a panel consisting of Mel Goodman, Ray McGovern, and David MacMichaels, and concludes the Briefing with Cynthia McKinney's closing statement in Part 25.
In Mel Goodman's 2nd testimony, he condemns the Intelligence reforms put forward by the 9/11 Commission. Ray McGovern draws on his many years of experience as a CIA analyst, (McGovern is a retiree, a "former" CIA man, but I must say that his active involvement in a variety of anti-establishment movements in the wake of Neocon agression has proven that he walks the walk), to severely critique the creation of the position of the DNI, an absolutely un-needed layer of bureaucracy upon an already unwieldy intelligence establishment.
David MacMichals is another example of an ex-CIA analyst who quit the Agency becuase he would not abide the distortion of intelligence to match Executive policy desires. (McGovern explains in his testimony some of the details behind the departures of Goodman and MacMichaels from the Agency). MacMichaels draws upon earlier Commissions to draw parallels between what has been done in the past and how the 9/11 Commission has performed in a similar manner. More of the same in Washington, in MacMichaels' view, a sad state of affairs.
Cynthia McKinney concludes the day's events in the second half of Part 25, praising all who participated, and she receives a standing ovation from the attendees who made it thorugh the whole day.
Part 20: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Yr1rixniSAI[/ame]
Part 21: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=xzeZfBJVNX4[/ame]
Part 22: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=XIVS7FT0iyc[/ame]
Part 23: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=sbS-ofe6kU4[/ame]
Part 24: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=4MPyWmQN28I[/ame]
Part 25: [ame]http://youtube.com/watch?v=KejotYu6FX4[/ame]
This 25-part YouTube series is not the entire Briefing, see here for more details;
http://www.911blogger.com/node/6800
Compiled by Reprehensor at 911blogger.com
