I tried to translate this text from French into English so sorry if it's not very accurate.

There is still no official version of the September 11 attacks in 2001. Aucune enquête judiciaire n’a été ouverte sur les attentats eux-mêmes, ni d’enquête parlementaire d’ailleurs. No judicial investigation was opened into the attacks themselves, or parliamentary inquiry elsewhere. Tout au plus dispose-t-on d’une version gouvernementale explicitée par un rapport rendu par une commission présidentielle. At most are there for a government covered by a report by a presidential commission. Le professeur David Ray Griffin, qui a consacré un ouvrage de référence à l’étude de ce rapport, ya relevé 115 mensonges dont il dresse ici la liste. Professor David Ray Griffin, who spent a reference to the study of this report, there lies 115 noted he stands by the list.

For every lie, see analysis by Professor David Ray Griffin in his book Omissions and manipulation of the Commission of Inquiry. Figures in parenthesis refer to the pages of the book in its original edition U.S.

1. The omission of evidence that at least six of the hijackers suspected (including Waleed al-Shehri, the Commission accused of stabbing an air hostess UA11 flight before it crashed on the North tower of World Trade Center) are still alive (19-20).

2. The omission of evidence about Mohamed Atta (as his reported fondness for alcohol, pork and private erotic dances - lap dances -) are in contradiction with the Commission's assertions that he had become a religious fanatic (20 -- 21).

 
3. The confusion deliberately created around the evidence that Hani Hanjour was a pilot too incompetent to bring an airliner to crash into the Pentagon (21-22).

4. The omission of the fact that the lists of passengers (flight manifests) made public contained no Arabic name (23).

5. The omission of the fact that fire has never caused the total collapse of a building steel structure, either before or after September 11 (25).

6. The omission of the fact that the fires of the Twin Towers were not very extensive, nor particularly intense or even very long compared with other fires in skyscrapers (structures) like them who have never collapsed (25-26).
JPEG - 16.7 ko
"Omissions and manipulation of the inquiry commission on September 11"
The book of D. Ray Griffin, in French, is available for sale in the library of Voltaire Network.

7. The omission of the fact that, given the assumption that the collapse was caused by the fire, the South Tower, later hit the North Tower and prey to the flames of lesser intensity, should not have s 'Collapse the first (26).

8. The omission of the fact that building No. 7 of the WTC (which has not been hit by a plane and that was the scene of small localized fires) also collapsed, an event that the Federal Agency for Treatment of Emergency Situations (FEMA) has recognized they can not explain (26).

9. The omission of the fact that the collapse of the Twin Towers (and Building No. 7) presents at least 10 characteristics of a controlled demolition (26-27). 10. The assertion that the core of the structure of each of the Twin Towers was "a well steel vacuum", a statement that denies the presence of 47 massive steel columns that in reality constituted the core of each tower, which according the theory of "stacking of floors" (the "pancake theory") Explanatory collapses, should have remained upright into the sky over many tens of meters (27-28).

11. The omission of the statement by Larry Silverstein [the owner of the WTC] that he decided, in agreement with the firefighters, "demolish" (to pull, technical slang) the building No. 7 (28).

12. The omission of the fact that the steel of the WTC buildings was quickly cleared of the crime scene and loaded on ships abroad before it can be analyzed to detect traces of explosives (30) .

13. The omission of the fact that building No. 7 had been evacuated before the collapse, the official reason given for the rapid clearance of steel [on site] (that some people may still be alive under the rubble) was no meaning in this case (30).

14. The omission of the statement of Mayor R. Giuliani that he had been warned that the WTC was going to collapse (30-31).

15. The omission of the fact that Marvin Bush, brother of the President, and his cousin Wirt Walker III were both directors of the company responsible for the safety of the WTC (31-32).

16. The omission of the fact that the West Wing of the Pentagon [that actually hit] was the least likely to be targeted by terrorists of al-Qaeda, for several reasons (33 - 34).

17. The omission of any discussion to determine whether the damage on the Pentagon were consistent with the impact of a Boeing 757 traveling at several hundred kilometers per hour (34).

18. The omission of the fact that there are photos showing that the facade of the west wing has collapsed 30 minutes after the strike and that the entry hole appears too small for a Boeing 757 (34 ).

19. The omission of any contradictory testimony about the presence or absence of visible debris of a Boeing 757 that either inside or outside the Pentagon (34-36).

20. The absence of any discussion to determine if the Pentagon had a defense system capable missile to shoot down a commercial airliner, although the Commission suggested that terrorists of al-Qaida n'attaquèrent not a central Nuclear because they assumed it would be defended (36).

21. The omission of the fact that images from different cameras (including the service station opposite the Pentagon, whose film was confiscated by the FBI immediately after the strike) could probably give an answer to what really struck the Pentagon (37-38).

22. The omission of the reference of the Minister of Defense D. Rumsfeld "a missile [used] to damage [the Pentagon]" (39).

23. The apparent approval of the totally unsatisfactory answer to the question of why the Secret Service agents allowed President Bush to remain in the Sarasota school at a time when, according to the official version, they should take an airplane diverted could have taken the school to target (41-44).

24. The failure to explain why the Secret Service did not request the protection of hunters for [the presidential plane] Air Force One (43-46).

25. Claims that when the presidential motorcade arrived at school [Sarasota], nobody in the audience knew that several planes had been hijacked (47-48).

26. The omission of the report that the Minister of Justice John Ashcroft was warned to stop using commercial airlines prior to Sept. 11 (50).

27. The omission of David Schippers assertion that, based on information provided by FBI agents about planned attacks in southern Manhattan, tried unsuccessfully to convey this information to the Minister of Attorney General John Ashcroft during the 6 weeks before September 11 (51).

28. The omission of any mention that FBI agents had said he was aware of targets and dates of the attacks [terrorists] in advance (51-52).

29. The assertion by a rebuttal circular assumes the matter resolved, that the unusual volume purchases of options on the decline before Sept. 11 did not imply that buyers knew in advance that attacks would occur. (52-57)

30. The omission of reports that the mayor [San Francisco] Willie Brown and some Pentagon officials received warnings out to fly on September 11 (57).

31. The omission of the report that Osama bin Laden, who was already the most wanted criminal of the United States, was treated in July 2001 by an American doctor at the American Hospital in Dubai and received a visit from the local agent of the CIA (59).

32. The omission of articles suggesting that after September 11, the U.S. military deliberately let Osama bin Laden escape (60).

33. The omission of reports, including one on the visit by the head of Saudi intelligence to Osama bin Laden to the hospital in Dubai, which contradict the official version that Osama was disowned by his family and his country ( 60-61).

34. The omission of the account by Gerald Posner on the testimony of Abu Zubaydah, that three members of the Saudi royal family (who all mysteriously died eight days apart) financed al-Qaida and had foreknowledge of the attacks of September 11 (61-65).

35. The denial by the Commission to have found evidence of financing al-Qaida by the Saudis (65-68).

36. The denial by the Commission to have found evidence that money from Prince Bandar's wife, Princess Haifa, went to agents of al-Qaida (69-70).

37. The denial, simply ignoring the distinction between private flights and commercial flights, the private flight carrying Saudis from Tampa to Lexington on September 13 violated the regulations of the airspace in force on that date (71-76).

38. Denied that the Saudis were allowed to leave the United States shortly after Sept. 11 without having been adequately investigated (76-82).

39. The omission of evidence that Prince Bandar obtained special permission from the White House for the Saudi flights (82-86).

40. The omission of Coleen Rowley assertion that officials at Q.-G. FBI had seen the memo from Phoenix agent Kenneth Williams (89-90).

41. The omission of the fact that FBI agent Robert Wright in Chicago says that the Q.-G. FBI closed its investigation into a terrorist cell, and then tried to intimidate him to prevent him from publishing a book recounting experiences (91).

42. The omission of evidence that the Q.-G. FBI attempt to sabotage the Coleen Rowley and other agents [FBI] from Minneapolis to obtain a warrant to search the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui (91-94).

43. The omission of the three hours thirty different testify before the Commission by Sibel Edmonds, a former translator at the FBI, according to testimony made public a letter it addressed to the President [of the] Kean, revealed serious concealment on the part of officials FBI in connection with Sept. 11, at the headquarters of the FBI (94-101).

44. The omission of the fact that General Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of the ISI [the Pakistani Intelligence Services], was in Washington a week before September 11, and met with CIA Director George Tenet and other High U.S. officials (103-04).

45. The omission of evidence that Ahmad, the head of the ISI [the Pakistani Intelligence Services] had ordered the dispatch of $ 100,000 to Mohamed Atta before Sept. 11 (104 - 07).

46. The affirmation of the Commission that it found no evidence that a single foreign government, including Pakistan, had financed agents of al-Qaida (106).

47. The omission of the report that the Bush administration was pressuring Pakistan to dismiss Ahmad from his post as head of ISI after the disclosure that he had ordered the sending of money from the ISI Mohamed Atta (107-09).

48. The omission of evidence that the ISI (and not just al-Qaeda) was behind the assassination of Ahmad Shah Massoud (the commander of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan), which occurred just after a meeting that lasted a week between officials of the CIA and the ISI (110-112).

49. The omission of evidence that the ISI is involved in the abduction and murder of Daniel Pearl, the journalist Wall Street Journal (113).

50. The omission of Gerald Posner report that Abu Zubaydah claimed that a Pakistani military officer, Mushaf Ali Mir, having close links with the ISI and al-Qaeda had a foreknowledge of the attacks of September 11 (114).

51. The failure of the prediction made in 1999 by Rajaa Guluma Abbas, an official of the ISI, that the Twin Towers' collapse '(114).

52. The omission of the fact that President Bush and other members of his administration repeatedly évoquèrent the attacks of September 11 as "opportunities" (116-17).

53. The omission of the fact that the Project for the New American Century ( "The Project for the New American Century"), many of whose members became key figures in the Bush administration, published a paper in 2000 saying that a "new Pearl Harbor "would help in obtaining funding for a rapid technological transformation of the U.S. military (117-18).

54. The omission of the fact that Donald Rumsfeld, who was the chairman of the Committee of the U.S. Space Command and had recommended increasing the budget, used the attacks of September 11 the same evening to ensure such credits (119 -22).

55. The failure to mention that the three men responsible for the failure to prevent the attacks of September 11 (the Minister Rumsfeld, General Richard Myers, and General Ralph Eberhart) were also the three main promoters of the U.S. Space Command (122).

56. The omission of the fact that Unocal had declared that the Taliban could not guarantee adequate security to start construction of its pipelines (oil and gas) from the Caspian basin through Afghanistan and Pakistan (122-25 ).

57. The omission of the report that representatives of the United States said at a meeting in July 2001 that because the Taliban refused their proposal to develop the construction of a pipeline, a war against them would begin in October (125-26).

58. The omission of the fact that in his book published in 1997 Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote that if the U.S. maintains its global supremacy, they needed control of Central Asia, with its vast oil reserves, and that new Pearl Harbor would be helpful to get the accession of American public opinion referred to the imperial (127-28).

59. The omission of the fact that key members of the Bush administration, including Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, had refute for a new war against Iraq for many years (129-33).

60. The omission of notes of conversations Donald Rumsfeld on September 11 which showed his determination to use the attacks as a pretext for a war against Iraq (131-32).

61. The omission of the statement in the Project for a New American Century that "the need for a strong U.S. presence in the Gulf than about the regime of Saddam Hussein" (133-34).

62. The assertion that the protocol of the FAA (Federal Aviation Agency) on September 11 the lengthy process required to go through several stages in the chain of command, although the official report of the [Commission] cites evidence to the contrary ( 158).

63. The assertion that these days, only two bases of the U.S. Air Force in the north-east sector of NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command Center for Defense Command of the Aerospace North America) Hunters kept on alert and that in particular there were no fighter aircraft on alert at McGuire or Andrews (159-162).

64. The omission of the fact that the basis of the U.S. Andrews Air Force convervait several fighter jets on alert permanently (162-64).

65. The acceptance of dual claim that Colonel Marr of NEADS (North East Air Defense Sector) should call a superior for permission to send fighter since [the base] Otis and that this call necessita eight minutes ( 165-66).

66. The approval of the assertion that the loss of the transponder signal from an airplane makes its virtually impossible for locating radars by the U.S. Army (166 - 67).

67. The assertion that the Payne Stewart interception did not show that the response time of NORAD flight AA11 was extraordinarily slow (167-69).

68. The assertion that hunters from the base Otis remained nailed to the ground seven minutes after they had been ordered because they did not know where to go (174-75).

69. The assertion that the U.S. military was unaware of the diversion of the flight UA175 before 9:03, the exact moment when he crashed into the WTC South Tower (181-82).

70. The omission of any explanation on (a) why NORAD's earlier report that the FAA had notified military diversion of the flight UA175 at 8:43, was now considered false and (b) how this report, s It was false, was published and then left uncorrected for almost three years (182).

71. The assertion that the FAA has installed teleconferencing only from 9:20 that morning (183).

72. The omission of the fact that a memo by Laura Brown of the FAA says that the call was made at about 8:50 and it included the diversion of the flight UA175 (183-84, 186).

73. The assertion that the NMCC teleconference, (the National Military Command or National Military Command Center) does not start before 9:29 (186-88).

74. The omission in assertion of the Commission that the AA77 has not deviated from its course before 8:54, because previous reports had announced 8:46 (189-90). 75. The failure to mention that the announcement of a jet crash in Kentucky, about the time the AA77 disappeared from FAA radar, was taken seriously enough by officials from the FAA and the unity against terrorism FBI to be relayed to the White House (190).

76. The assertion that the AA77 flew almost 40 minutes in American airspace towards Washington without being detected by radar of the military (191-92).

77. The failure to explain, if NORAD's earlier report that he was notified of AA77 at 9:24 was "incorrect" how this erroneous report was made possible date, ie, whether those responsible NORAD lied or were "confused" during almost three years (192-93).

78. The assertion that fighting planes from Langley, which NORAD had initially said they were dispatched to intercept the AA77, were actually deployed in response to an erroneous report from a controller (non - identified) from the FAA that the 9:21 flight AA11 was still in the air and heading to Washington (193-99).

79. The assertion that the military were not contacted by the FAA about the probable diversion of AA77 before the Pentagon was struck (204-12).

80. The claim that Jane Garvey did not join the video of Richard Clarke before 9:40, ie after the Pentagon was struck (210).

81. The assertion that none of the calls failed to coordinate the FAA and military responses to hijackings because "none of [them] included the right officials within the FAA and the Department of Defense", although Richard Clarke says that his videoconference included FAA Director Jane Garvey as the Minister of Defense Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers, the Chief of the Armed Forces ai (211).

82. The assertion that the Commission did not know who, within the Ministry of Defense, participated in the videoconference with Richard Clarke as Clarke says in his book that it was Donald Rumsfeld and General Myers ( 211-212). 83. The approval of the statement by General Myers that he was on Capitol Hill during the attacks, without mentioning the contradictory account of Richard Clarke, that Myers was at the Pentagon and attended the videoconference with Clarke (213-17 ).

84. The failure to mention the contradiction between Clarke's testimony about the timetable Rumsfeld this morning and the statements of Rumsfeld (217-19).

85. The omission of the testimony of the Minister of Transportation Norman Mineta, given the Commission itself, that Vice President Cheney and other [people] in the underground shelter were alerted at 9:26 that an aircraft approaching the Pentagon (220).

86. The assertion that Pentagon officials knew nothing of a plane approaching them before 9:32, 9:34 or 9:36, and in any case only a few minutes before the building is affected (223).

87. The acceptance of two contradictory versions about the aircraft that struck the Pentagon: one that describes the execution of a spiral to 330 degrees down (a high-speed dive ") and another in which it 'Is no mention of this maneuver (222-23).

88. The assertion that the fighter jets from Langley, who received so-called order to take off quickly to protect Washington against "ghost flight AA11" were nowhere near Washington because they were sent to the ocean by mistake (223-24).

89. The omission of any evidence suggesting that what hit the Pentagon was not AA77 (224-25).

90. The assertion that the military were not informed by the FAA diversion UA93 flight before it crashed (227-29, 232, 253).

91. The dual assertion that the NMCC did not monitor the conference initiated by the FAA and therefore was unable to connect the FAA in the teleconference initiated by the NMCC (230-31).

92. The omission of the fact that the Secret Service are able to know everything that the FAA knows (233).

93. The omission of any investigation into why the NMCC initiated its own teleconference if, as Laura Brown of the FAA said, this is not the standard protocol (234).

94. The omission of any investigation of why General Montague Winfield not only was replaced by a "blue" (a rookie), Captain Leidig, as Director of Operations NMCC but still gave the command when it was clear that the Pentagon was facing an unprecedented crisis (235-36).

95. The assertion that the FAA notified (so wrong) the Secret Service between 10:10 and 10:15 the flight UA93 was still in the sky, toward Washington (237).

96. The assertion that the Vice-President Cheney gave no permission to shoot until 10h10 (several minutes after the flight UA93 it was crushed) and that such authorization was not transmitted to the U.S. army before 10:31 a.m. (237 -- 41).

97. The omission of any evidence indicating that the flight UA93 was shot by a military plane (238-39, 252-53).

98. The assertion that [the Tsar of the Counter-Terrorism] Richard Clarke not received a request for authorization to fire at 10:25 (240).

99. The omission of Clarke's own testimony, which suggests he got this request for permission to shoot to 9:50 (240).

100. The assertion that Cheney won only safe underground PEOC [or CPOU Center for Presidential Emergency Operations]) and 9:58 (241-44).

101. The omission of multiple testimony, including that of Norman Mineta [Transport Minister] to the Commission itself, that [Vice President] Cheney was in the CPOU before 9:20 (241-44).

102. The assertion that the authorization to shoot down a civilian aircraft should be granted by the President (245).

103. The omission of reports that Colonel Marr gave the order to shoot down the flight UA93 and that General Winfield indicated that he and other [officers] at NMCC expected that a hunter reaches the flight UA93 ( 252).

 
104. The omission of reports indicating that there were two fighter planes in the sky a few miles from New York and three to only 320 kilometers Washington (251).

105. The omission of the fact that there were at least six military bases with fighters on alert in north-eastern United States (257-58).

106. The approval of the statement by General Myers that NORAD had defined its mission in terms of defending only against threats [to USA] from abroad (258-62).

107. The approval of the statement by General Myers that NORAD had not considered the possibility that terrorists might use hijacked airliners as missiles (262-63).

108. The failure to put into perspective the significance of the fact presented in the report itself, or to mention other facts showing that NORAD had indeed considered the threat posed by hijacked airliners being used as missiles (264 - 67).

109. The failure to probe the implications of the question of how the military exercises ( "war games") scheduled that day could affect the military failed to intercept hijacked airliners (268-69).

110. The failure to discuss the possible relevance of Operation Northwoods with the attacks of September 11 (269-71).

111. The assertion (presented as to why the military n'obtinrent no information about the hijacked planes in time to intercept) that the FAA personnel inexplicably failed to follow standard procedures some 16 times (155-56, 157 , 179, 180, 181, 190, 191, 193, 194, 200, 202-03, 227, 237, 272-75).

112. The failure to mention that the independence of the Commission was fatally undermined by the fact that Philip Zelikow, its executive director, was virtually a member of the Bush administration (7-9, 11-12, 282-84). (ndt a close associate of Ms. Condoleezza Rice)

113. The failure to mention that the White House initially sought to prevent the establishment of the [formal investigation on the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11], then placed many obstacles in his way, as did accord to extremely limited budget (283-85). (ndt: estimated at approximately $ 15 million, when the feature film "United 93" Paul Greengrass took 18, and "World Trade Center" by Oliver Stone 4 times more or 60 million; on the first point, it took 441 days for this commission be created and Mr. Bush suggested that Mr. Kissinger is before the president ... to withdraw under the criticism of public opinion.)

114. The failure to mention that the Chairman of the Commission, most of the other Commissioners, and at least half the staff had serious conflicts of interest (285-90, 292-95).

115. The failure of the Commission, which boasted that the presentation of its final report had made "without dissent", mentioning that it had been possible only because Max Cleland, the Commissioner most critical of the White House who swore that "it would not be an accomplice of a partial information" had to resign to accept a position with the Export-Import Bank and the White House forwarded his nomination only after it has become very direct in his criticisms (290-291).

I conclude by saying that I concluded my study of what I've come to call "the report Kean-Zelikow" by writing this: In the end, the Report of the Commission of Inquiry on September 11, far hunt My suspicions about official complicity served only to confirm them. Why are responsible for drafting the final report engage in such business fraud, if this was an attempt to cover very large crime? (291).

Source: voltairenet.org