The 9/11 Commission report : omissions and distortions
Author(s)
Bibliographic Information
The 9/11 Commission report : omissions and distortions
Arris Books, 2005
- Other Title
-
The nine eleven Commission report : omissions and distortions
The September eleven Commission report : omissions and distortions
Available at 1 libraries
  Aomori
  Iwate
  Miyagi
  Akita
  Yamagata
  Fukushima
  Ibaraki
  Tochigi
  Gunma
  Saitama
  Chiba
  Tokyo
  Kanagawa
  Niigata
  Toyama
  Ishikawa
  Fukui
  Yamanashi
  Nagano
  Gifu
  Shizuoka
  Aichi
  Mie
  Shiga
  Kyoto
  Osaka
  Hyogo
  Nara
  Wakayama
  Tottori
  Shimane
  Okayama
  Hiroshima
  Yamaguchi
  Tokushima
  Kagawa
  Ehime
  Kochi
  Fukuoka
  Saga
  Nagasaki
  Kumamoto
  Oita
  Miyazaki
  Kagoshima
  Okinawa
  Korea
  China
  Thailand
  United Kingdom
  Germany
  Switzerland
  France
  Belgium
  Netherlands
  Sweden
  Norway
  United States of America
Note
Includes index
Description and Table of Contents
Description
With US political leaders - Democrat and Republican alike - embracing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, and an eager media receiving the Commission's 567 page report as the whole story, everyone who cares about the fate of American democracy will want to know something about what those pages actually say. The Commission's account, has made an impression with its size, its endnotes, its detail, its narrative finesse. Yet under the magnifying glass of eminent theologian David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor (a book that explores questions that reporters, eyewitnesses, and political observers have raised about the 9/11 attacks), the report appears much shabbier. In fact, there are holes in the places where detail ought to be abundant: Is it possible that Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld has given three different stories of what he was doing the morning of September 11, and that the Commission combines two of them and ignores eyewitness reports to the contrary?
Is it possible that the man in charge of the military that day, Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers, saw the first tower hit on TV, and then went into a meeting, where he remained unaware of what was happening for the next 40 minutes? Is it possible, as the Commission reports, that the FAA did not inform the military that the fourth aeroplane appeared to have been hijacked, contrary to both common sense and the word of FAA employees?
by "Nielsen BookData"