Even Cheney himself on Tim Russert’s "Meet the Press" five days after 9/11 contradicted what became the official story and everybody just says oh well just ignores it. Secondly, besides telling that 45 minute lie, they deleted Mineta’s testimony from the 9/11 Commission Report, so you don’t see a mention of that whatsoever. Furthermore, from the audio video recording of it in the files of the 9/11 Commission, that part of Mineta’s testimony is deleted. So, you start to see, this is a big deal.
Furthermore, they even invent a new story, and where the guy comes in and asks, time and time again, should we should we do this should we do this, and Cheney then says yes. But that occurs at about 10:15 long after everything has happened. long after the Pentagon’s been hit long after flight 93 has crashed and then the question is was it shot down and it appears to be. So they go to enormous lengths there to cover up Cheney's role. Furthermore, I, in the new book, reveal for the first time, that there was a guy at Los Angeles International Airport that morning, who had been involved with security at LAX, putting in systems, and he knew the security people there very well. And he went back there that morning and he was there with LAX security, when he said he heard them on their walkie talkies and sometimes he could hear both sides of the conversation, saying that what, what, first of all they heard that the planes didn’t intercept these things because the FAA didn’t notify them, but then they heard, well no, the FAA did notify them, but they didn’t intercept them because there had been a stand down order. Then the question was well where did the stand down order come from and the answer was from the highest level of the white house. So…
Kall: So you've kind of made it clear that you haven't come up with or posited or taken any position on any theories about what were the deeper underlying reasons that this happened, but you know what they are; can you talk about them, about what some of those theories are that have been generated, or are you not comfortable with that, or--?
Griffin: Well, no, I can certainly talk about the motive for 9/11 and I talk about those in my book; the most immediate one was, of course, to have an excuse to attack Afghanistan. That war had been decided upon at least by July of 2001, and I had recorded that already in "New Pearl Harbor."
Secondly, these Neocons, particularly Cheney and Wolfowitz and Perle and some others had been chomping at the bit to attack Iraq ever since 1992 and were very upset with Papa Bush for not going all the way to Baghdad and they'd been working on that all through the Nineties, writing letters to Clinton and saying "Ignore the U.N. ignore international law, just attack Saddam. You know, Clinton did some bad things, but he didn't do that; so that was clearly a motive, and we've seen from the secretary of the 'treasury, Paul O'Neal, that he said that when he was in the first meetings of the National Security Council, as soon as the Bush/Cheney administration went into office, the main agenda, in fact, almost the only item on the agenda was to attack Iraq, and not why, not what, but simply how to do it.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
