Griffin & Scott note the contradictions regarding Cheney and the Bunker on 9/11

[reprehensor]

9/11 Contradictions: When Did Cheney Enter the Underground Bunker?

Wednesday 23. Jan 2008

by David Ray Griffin

With regard to the morning of 9/11, everyone agrees that at some time after 9:03 (when the South Tower of the World Trade Center was struck) and before 10:00, Vice President Dick Cheney went down to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), sometimes simply called the “bunker,” under the east wing of the White House. Everyone also agrees that, once there, Cheney was in charge---that he was either making decisions or relaying decisions from President Bush. But there is enormous disagreement as to exactly when Cheney entered the PEOC.

According to The 9/11 Commission Report, Cheney arrived “shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58” (The 9/11 Commission Report , 40). This official time, however, contradicts almost all previous reports, some of which had him there before 9:20. This difference is important because, if the 9/11 Commission’s time is correct, Cheney was not in charge in the PEOC when the Pentagon was struck, or for most of the period during which United Flight 93 was approaching Washington. But if the reports that have him there by 9:20 are correct, he was in charge in the PEOC all that time.

Mineta’s Report of Cheney’s Early Arrival

The most well-known statement contradicting the 9/11 Commission was made by Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta during his public testimony to the 9/11 Commission on May 23, 2003. Saying that he “arrived at the PEOC at about 9:20 AM,” Mineta reported that he then overheard part of an ongoing conversation, which had obviously begun before he arrived, between a young man and Vice President Cheney. This conversation was about a plane coming toward Washington and ended with Cheney confirming that “the orders still stand.” When Commissioner Timothy Roemer later asked Mineta how long after his arrival he overheard this conversation about whether the orders still stood, Mineta replied: “Probably about five or six minutes.” This would mean, Roemer pointed out, “about 9:25 or 9:26.”

This is a remarkable contradiction. Given the fact that Cheney, according to Mineta, had been engaged in an ongoing exchange, he must have been in the PEOC for several minutes before Mineta’s 9:20 arrival. If Cheney had been there since 9:15, there would be a 43-minute contradiction between Mineta’s testimony and The 9/11 Commission Report. Why would such an enormous contradiction exist? ...

Continued...
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2008/01/22/02147.html

----------------------------------------------

9/11 Commission Deception, Cheney’s Actions on 9/11, and Why He Should Testify Under Oath

September 2007
Peter Dale Scott

"...The important claim that Cheney had first arrived well before 9:58 does not rely on Mineta’s testimony alone. Richard Clarke wrote that he saw Cheney preparing to leave his White House office some time long before 9:28.14 Cheney himself told Tim Russert of “Meet the Press” on September 16, 2001, in an interview still available five years later on the White House website, that he arrived in the PEOC before the Pentagon was hit, i.e. before 9:37 AM.15 But the 9/11 Report follows a later and very different account in Newsweek, based on an interview with Cheney, which now had him leave his office at 9:35 and arrive in the PEOC “shortly before 10 a.m.”16 We shall see that new evidence, which only surfaced in 2006, corroborates Cheney’s first story, and makes his revised time-table extremely unlikely.

Clearly one of Cheney’s two accounts of his arrival (before 9:37, and around 9:58) must be wrong. Moreover what is at stake is not trivial. Important orders were issued in this hour from the PEOC: one alleged order (whose content is uncertain) which Mineta claims to have heard about 9:30, a second order to ground all planes at about 9:45, and a third tripartite order (which according to Clarke included a shoot-down order) at about 9:50. By Mineta’s account, corroborated by Clarke, Cheney had arrived in the PEOC in time to give all three of these orders; by Cheney’s second account, he arrived after all three were given.

The Report flagrantly, symptomatically, and disturbingly failed to deal with Mineta’s and Clarke’s testimony..."

Continued...
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/ProfScottWhyCheneyMustTestify.pdf

[Twist_U_Up]

1. Sometimes you have to operate in the shadows.

[MinM]

2. undisclosed location where Dick Cheney secreted himself after the 9/11 attacks?

Shining Light On Cheney's Hideaway

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/05/bidens_bunker_undisclosed_disc.html

:kick:

[MinM]

3. Why did Bush and Cheney refuse to testify under oath?

:think: Or separately? :shrug:

YouTube - 911 : Bush and Cheney Refused to Testify Under Oath

http://books.google.com/books?id=Awgp3H5mBXgC&pg=PA533&lpg=PA533&dq=bush+and+cheney+refuse+to+go+under+oath&source=bl&ots=zSkwbc2rMJ&sig=r6b0m3XQLN84je55xhw2yWXepFs&hl=en&ei=wFWqTbm0L8mI0QH37835CA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCsQ6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/143-143/3278-a-lesson-from-911

[SDuderstadt]

4. So did Clinton and Gore...

were they "in on it"?

[MinM]

6. Clinton and Gore met with the panel separately.

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/1906143

BTW do you ever get tired of making excuses for Bush and Cheney?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=396040&mesg_id=396055

[JackRiddler]

10. First, Clinton and Gore were not in office on the day.

Second issue is that they didn't want to testify under oath either.

The right question this raises is, "Was this right?" No, it was not.

What else it may indicate is opaque, by design. Why didn't they testify under oath and provide transparency? It is not our job to invent some excuse for them, or to speculate. They would know. They should answer, exactly like Bush and Cheney should answer.

[MinM]

13. Exactly: Clinton/Gore should demand to have their testimony under oath

That was in the second link I posted:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=396040&mesg_id=396055

[johnnie]

5. A family member of mine was a SS that took him down there

He told me what happened. That's why I laugh at the flat-earthers. But they can live in their land of marshmellow clouds and unicorns.

[JackRiddler]

9. Screenname on Internet claims to know other unnamed guy, settles all questions, no details given.

I'm forever convinced! Mineta, Clarke, Cheney himself in his first version... are those guys posting here? No. Do any of them say they know a guy who was actually there and told them "what happened"? Heck no! Should you tell us what "what happened" means? Nonsense. You already have a very solid basis to argue from ridicule. Keep shooting, now!

[johnnie]

11. You don't deserve details.

It doesn't concern you.

[JackRiddler]

12. That's pretty persuasive.

Unwilling to give information, grumpy, looking down with contempt on the public from a position of imagined authority, pronouncing finalities without details... that describes the national security state pretty well, and since your own behavioral profile here matches, I'm willing to believe in your Total Insiderhood. What's your clearance? Is it Galactic? Cosmic? King of Heaven? Burn Before Reading? Zero zero?

[johnnie]

14. My personal clearance is top secret

I've had it for a few years.

On edit. What's yours?

[JackRiddler]

15. My clearance? A library card.

I do not and would not work for any national security state.

[johnnie]

16. Good for you

Stick to your guns boy!

[SDuderstadt]

17. Truther catfight!

Too funny!

[johnnie]

18. Huh? n/t

[JackRiddler]

19. It ain't all geniuses on either side, that's for sure.

[johnnie]

21. Oh I get it

SDuderstadt thinks there are "sides" because he/she is here to "debunk" anything that isn't the official story. Unfortunately he/she doesn't realize that other people think for themselves and doesn't fall for every "conspiracy". The flat earthers are here to "debunk" anything and everything that isn't shoved up their ass by the "truth tellers".

[JackRiddler]

22. Or maybe I'm the stupid one. It happens sometimes.

Let's start again. What is it that you're saying about Cheney? What time did he, in your estimation, arrive at the PEOC?

[johnnie]

23. All I can say is

A family member of mine took him to the bunker and was there when it all went down. It isn't what the official story says. If you don't believe the official story then good, don't.

[zappaman]

24. All I can say is

My neighbor's cousin's housekeeper's nephew's ex-girlfriend's step-son-in-law was also with Cheney.
Man, I could tell you some amazing things, but I won't.
Cuz I'd rather keep it mysterious.
Certainly not because I am full of shit...nope.
:rofl:

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

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

[JackRiddler]

26. Well, that's the logical conclusion from examining the publicly available evidence

but you have to admit your form of backing it up - post on a thread - isn't worth anything to people who don't know you. Sorry.

[johnnie]

27. How would I back it up? A link to my brain?

It is what it is. I'm just saying that what the "official story" is isn't. There's enough proof out there to show what really happened, you don't need my brain prints.

[zappaman]

28. "There's enough proof out there to show what really happened,"

Care to present some and tell us what really happened?
I'll hold my breath, so please don't dilly-dally.

[johnnie]

29. Care to present some for you?

Ummm..nope. You don't seem to care about reality.

[zappaman]

30. LOL!

You've yet to present any evidence and when asked always revert to a variation of "I'm not gonna tell you".
Too funny!!!!!
:rpfl:
Wouldn't it be easier to just admit you have nothing?

[johnnie]

32. LOL

LOL, LMFAO, LOL ROTFLMAO LOL HAHAHA LOL LMASO ROTFLMAO....

[SDuderstadt]

31. Unintentional irony...

"flat-earthers" weren't "debunkers". "Debunkers" debunked them.

[johnnie]

33. Unintentional irony

SDuderstadt isn't a debunker either.

[SDuderstadt]

34. Dude...

your nonsense has been debunked repeatedly, often by me.

[zappaman]

35. What nonsense?

Johnnie doesn't post anything but things like "I know something but won't tell you".
Let's see some facts, Johnnie.
Tell us what happened, Johnnie.
If you can't or won't, then why do you bother posting about how much you supposedly know?
Too funny!!!!

[johnnie]

38. It doesn't matter what I know zappaboy

Do you actually think I care what you think? You aren't as important as you think you are. You are just somebody on an internet forum. I know what I know and if you want to believe the "official" story on things then go ahead. It doesn't matter to me.

[johnnie]

36. You don't debunk crap

Dude.

[SDuderstadt]

37. Not to "true believers"...

dude. That's impossible.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

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

[SDuderstadt]

40. Just like you...

dude. Just like you.

[johnnie]

41. Yup

So why do you waste your time?

[SDuderstadt]

42. Why do you? n/t

[johnnie]

43. I would answer you

But for some reason my posts always gets deleted here in the dungeon. I've been on DU for 8 years plus and I have never had posts deleted. The thin skinned people hang out here I guess.

[SDuderstadt]

44. Either that or...

the rule-breakers, dude.

[johnnie]

45. Get over it

Dude

[SDuderstadt]

46. I'm not sure that...

I have anything to "get over", dude.

I'm still cracking up at the "top secret clearance" claim.

[johnnie]

48. It's not a claim

It's truth, but you wouldn't know anything about that. Enjoy your la la land.

[SDuderstadt]

50. Sure, dude...

sure.

Top secret clearance holders usually go around casually talking about it. Personally, I am a "00".

Don't believe me? Why not?

[johnnie]

52. You have no idea

I just mentioned my clearance. It's public record. It's what I do that has no concern to you or anyone else. Everyone I know knows what my clearance status is, it's not a secret....dude.

[SDuderstadt]

53. Like I said...

I have "00" status. I'm sure you know what that means. It's public record. It's what I do that has no concern to you or anyone else. Everyone I know knows what me "license to kill" status is, it's not a secret, dude.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[SDuderstadt]

57. Compartmentalization...

even my wife does not know my name.

[zappaman]

47. No, you wouldn't.

You haven't yet, so why would you?
Especially now that you can use the "my posts get deleted" excuse.
What next..."the dog ate my post"?
:rofl:

[johnnie]

49. Was I talking to you?

Can't help yourself can ya kid?

[AZCat]

54. It's an internet forum.

You're talking to all of us.

Want to have a personal conversation with no-one else involved? PM someone.

[zappaman]

55. yes, you were

everyone can see your endless excuses and ridiculous claims.
kid?
funny...like your avatar...unlike your posts.
except the one about having top secret clearance...now that was funny!
:rofl:

[SDuderstadt]

51. I wonder what level clearance...

the dog has.

[Larry L. Burks]

7. Timing is Every thing.

Ever thing on the news was being reported on a ten minute time delay system.

The truck stop where I was watching it. There was man in the same room with us that had a pager on his belt.

He was getting s text message from A. P. About the event on 9/11 ten minutes before they showed it (as) “ Live on T.V.”

If you check all the wire news services. All of the text messages are timed and dated.

The first building may have hit at 8:53 am. Check it out.

If they used a DEW from the military. (Navy or Air Force.) They were having joint military exercises that morning.

The DEW is a weapon of mass destruction. In order to get one out of the arsenal and use it.

They have to have an executive order signed by the President.

These order can not be destroyed by law.

The military has to keep records on it when every they use it.

There may have been Government contractor on board the plane.

They to would have records of the flight.

This plane would have showed up on radar.

There are pictures of the type of plane taken over NY and DC.


Some believe that they used s DEW on TWA Flight 800. And they may have used it to down John’s plane. JFK’s son. And may be a lot of other air planes.

The Government can say that they did or that they didn’t use it.

They could tell you if they did. They would know.

But they are not going to do that.

Oh. By the way. Did you here about Israel’s New Missile Defense System. The “Iron Dome.”

The one we gave to them. The same type DEW Missile Defense System that we have.

It knocked out six in coming missiles just last week.

That DEW really works great.

It hasn’t missed yet.

Great timing uh?

I sure would like to here what the people that shot the missile at Isreal has to say about how well it works.

Good news for Israel. A Defence System that really works for once.

[eyl]

8. I may be wasting my breath here

But Iron Dome is Israeli-designed and has nothing to do with DEW (You may be confusing it with the Nautilus system, which was a joint US-Israel project, but whose development was discontinued)

And how the hell would a DEW be considered a WMD?

[Larry L. Burks]

20. Go Look Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x311765



There is a Conflict of Interest Hidden with in the pictures.