Tomorrow is About Condi Rice or A 9/11 Cover-Up By The Commission?

[David Zephyr]

Poll question: Tomorrow is About Condi Rice or A 9/11 Cover-Up By The Commission?

Like a great many of you, I will be up with a full pot of hot coffee brewing and parked right smack dab in front of the television watching history break in front of our very eyes as National Security Advisor, Condi Rice, gives sworn testimony to the "blue ribbon" panel doing the "investigation" into the events of September 11th, 2001.

But, speaking for myself, I will be watching the so-called 9/11 Commission far more than Condi Rice. Why?

Because I know she is going to tell one well-rehearsed lie after another. She will be indignant that anyone would suggest that she had been negligent about terrorism, that she had been dismissive of serious warnings by intelligence professionals. She will lie and lie and then lie. That's old news, folks.

What will be revealing will be watching this Commission, which is the instrument of George Bush, and how its members address Rice.

What will the Commissioners choose to ask her with their precious little time? What will be the nature of their questions that they pose to her? What will the body language of the Commission tell us?

We know that the Corporate News Media will be excusing her within seconds of the termination of her questioning. We will hear gushing praise from one talking head after the next about how "she faced the music" and how "she presented a very credible face for the Bush Administration". That's a given.

But HOW will the Commission act toward her? I'd advise everyone to focus on the Commission itself...for that's where, I think, the real story will be. Am I nutz?

[Minstrel Boy]

1. Watching and listening to the Commission.

Rice will offer up nothing surprising. (Though it's always fun to watch her telegraph her lies with body language.) The handling she receives will be most telling.

Tom Flocco's just posted some observation points:

1. Observe carefully the strength, intensity and thoroughness of the FOLLOW-UP questions Dr. Rice is asked. Initial queries during recent hearings were reasonably tough; but the failure comes in the 2nd, 3rd or 4th questions, where testimony inconsistencies can begin to appear. Poor intensity and lack of rapid, well-paced follow-up indicates either lack of preparation or an intentional desire to let Dr. Rice off the hook. (3,000 death mass murder investigation) Look to see if there is an air of amiability, socialness, familiarity and general lack of serious atmosphere. Are members continually grinning--ignoring the gravity of the matter at hand?

2. Watch to see if Dr. Rice is asked to discuss specific details surrounding Pakistani General Mahmud Ahmad's visit to WashDC one week prior to 9-11. Ahmad had $100,000 wired to alleged terrorist Mohammed Atta a few weeks prior to the attacks. Colin Powell testimony confirmed Pakistani intel in town that week. Reports say Powell and Richard Armitage met with Ahmad during week, and Joint 9-11 Congressional Intelligence Cmte. co-chairmen Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) and Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL) plus Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) met Ahmad on morning of attacks! Talk about questions!!! The issue is important since Federal officials were talking to the man providing funds for the lead terrorist--yet no one has explained the contents of the meetings! Evidence indicates CNN and White House doctored transcript reference to Gen. Ahmad--only Fed. Doc. Clearinghouse named Ahmad in Condi's May 16, 2002 "damage control" press conference--regarding NY Post "Bush Knew" headline that day.

3. The potential perjury-trap question the commission must ask: Dr. Rice, did you call, email or fax San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to warn him not to fly on September 11? Regardless of your answer and since 3,000 people died, will you make your personal and official phone records, fax records, and computer hard-drives showing electronic communications during June-July-August, 2001 available for media inspection? (Rice is on the boards of SF's Chevron Oil and San Francisco Symphony, et. al.--is well-connected to same social circles as Mayor Brown--said to be a close friend.) COMMISSION FAILURE TO ASK THIS KEY QUESTION WILL INDICATE IT IS COMPROMISED.

4. Observe if question concentration centers upon months/weeks BEFORE September 11 rather than ON 9/11. Actions of Bush, Joint Chiefs' Gen. Myers, and Rumsfeld during nearly 2-hour time-line of attacks are INDEFENSIBLE within context of pre-attack "set your hair on fire" intel briefings and Sibel Edmonds' translations of intel intercepts re: "planes used as weapons." This is CRUCIAL! Careful examination of cooperativeresearch.com 9-11 time-line will set YOUR hair on fire!

http://www.tomflocco.com/

[David Zephyr]

2. Damn! Thanks, Minstrel Boy For This Link!

So it's not just my tin foil hat that has sparks flying over the commission's performance tomorrow. Thanks so much! :hi:

I hope everyone can scoot over to the link provided by Minstrel Boy to read Tom Flocco's good advice on watching the Commission.