ChatGPT Agrees That There Is "a strong case for a new, independent investigation into the 9/11 attacks"
Zelikow is such a liar. "2 of the 3 people that took my calls..." "The Commission had no phone logs." Contradict yourself much Zelikow? He's playing semantics. There were no official "9/11 Commission phone logs," but he had 3 people taking his messages. Phil Shenon says he has copies of the messages. - Jon
JON
An entry from the “Complete 9/11 Timeline” that used to be available at www.historycommons.org
March 31, 2003: 9/11 Commission Says It Will Not “Point Fingers” Family Members Are Disappointed
After his opening comments on the first day of the 9/11 Commission's hearings, chairman Tom Kean says, "We will be following paths, and we will follow those individual paths wherever they lead," adding: "We may end up holding individual agencies, people, and procedures to account. But our fundamental purpose will not be to point fingers." According to author Philip Shenon, there is "a rumble in the audience, even a few groans," as the family members realize "what the Commission would not do: It did not intend to make a priority of blaming government officials for 9/11." Shenon will add: "A few of the family advocates cocked their ears, wondering if they had heard Kean correctly. They had pushed so hard to create the Commission because they wanted fingers pointed at the government. And Kean knew it; the families had told him that over and over again in their early meetings. For many families, this investigation was supposed to be all about finger pointing. They wanted strict accountability, especially at the White House, the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, and other agencies that had missed the clues that might have prevented 9/11. The families wanted subpoenas' and indictments and jail sentences, if that was where the facts led."
ChatGPT
Philip Shenon's depiction of the reaction from the family members of 9/11 victims to Tom Kean's opening comments highlights a significant tension regarding the purpose and direction of the 9/11 Commission. In his opening remarks, Kean emphasized that the Commission's primary goal was not to point fingers but to understand what happened and how to prevent such a tragedy in the future.
Shenon notes that there was an audible response from the audience—some groans and murmurs of discontent. This reaction was rooted in the family members' expectations; they had fought hard for the establishment of the Commission, hoping it would hold government officials accountable for their failures leading up to 9/11. They expected the investigation to lead to clear accountability, potentially including subpoenas, indictments, and even jail sentences for those responsible.
Kean’s statement implied a more investigative and preventive approach rather than one focused on retribution or blame. This difference in expectations set the stage for ongoing tension between the Commission's aims and the desires of the 9/11 families, who sought concrete accountability and justice.
JON
From the “Complete 9/11 Timeline.”
February 4, 2008: Seattle Post-Intelligencer Calls for New 9/11 Inquiry
The editorial board of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer calls for a new inquiry into 9/11, as it believes the 9/11 Commission's investigation may have been compromised. The call is due to a new book by New York Times journalist Philip Shenon, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission. The book highlights the close relationship between 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow and the White House, in particular National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice, as well as an attempt he made to connect Iraq to al-Qaeda. The Post-Intelligencer writes of Zelikow that "[s]omeone with an apparent deference for the White House should not have been trusted with such a valued task." It comments, "If bulletproof, the book prompts us to add one more thing to our to-do list for the next administration: Pressure it to charge a panel of independent experts to write a real, nonpartisan report on the attacks." [Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2/4/2008]
ChatGPT
The February 4, 2008 editorial by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer called for a new inquiry into the events of 9/11, expressing concerns that the original 9/11 Commission's investigation might have been compromised. This call was prompted by Philip Shenon's book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission, which shed light on troubling aspects of the Commission’s process, particularly highlighting the relationship between its Executive Director Philip Zelikow and the White House, specifically with National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
Shenon's book revealed potential conflicts of interest and suggested that Zelikow's connections and actions might have unduly influenced the Commission’s findings. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer editorial criticized the decision to place someone with perceived deference to the White House in such a critical role, suggesting that it compromised the integrity of the investigation. The editorial concluded that if the claims made in Shenon's book were credible, it was imperative for the next administration to commission an independent panel of experts to conduct a truly impartial and comprehensive investigation into the 9/11 attacks.
JON
"[T]he staff could see that with every passing day, Zelikow was centralizing control of the day-to-day investigation in his own hands. He was becoming the eleventh commissioner and, in many ways, more powerful than the others." - Phil Shenon
ChatGPT
Philip Shenon's book The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission provides a critical examination of the Commission’s internal dynamics, particularly focusing on the role of Philip Zelikow, the Commission’s Executive Director. Shenon notes that Zelikow's influence grew significantly over time, to the point where he centralized control of the investigation, becoming what Shenon describes as "the eleventh commissioner" and, in many respects, more powerful than the actual commissioners.
This centralization of power in Zelikow’s hands raised concerns among the Commission's staff and others about the impartiality and independence of the investigation. The book suggests that Zelikow’s close ties to the White House, particularly with National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, could have influenced the direction and findings of the Commission, potentially compromising its mission to provide an unbiased and thorough account of the events leading up to and on September 11, 2001.
JON
The White House had "final edits" of the 9/11 Commission's report. That which was sold to the world as the "definitive account of 9/11." Surely, we can trust what the White House had to say about 9/11 considering how trustworthy they were considering everything else, right?
ChatGPT
The revelation that the White House had "final edits" on the 9/11 Commission's report has been a point of significant controversy. The Commission's report was presented as the definitive account of the events surrounding 9/11, yet the involvement of the White House in the final editing process raised concerns about potential biases and the completeness of the investigation.
Given the broader context of the time, including various criticisms and controversies surrounding the Bush administration's actions and transparency, the involvement of the White House in finalizing the report could be seen as problematic. Critics argue that this level of involvement might have allowed the administration to influence the report’s findings and downplay or omit information that could be damaging to the government or its officials.
In essence, while the 9/11 Commission's report remains a crucial document for understanding the events and failures leading up to 9/11, the involvement of the White House in its final edits has understandably led to skepticism about the report’s impartiality and completeness. This skepticism is further fueled by other controversies and issues of trust associated with the administration at that time.
JON
https://web.archive.org/web/20080207065037/https://www.rawstory.com/news/2008/911_widows_call_for_new_investigation_0205.html
What I consider to be one of the most newsworthy events of our time and Rawstory was the ONLY news outlet to report on it.
9/11 widows call for new investigation after revelations of White House, commission ties
Nick Juliano
Published: Tuesday February 5, 2008
The widows whose political activism was largely responsible for the establishment of a commission to investigate the September 11 attacks say a new book revealing the backstory of the 9/11 Commission proves that their initial concerns about its executive director were correct and demonstrate the need for another investigation.
Philip Shenon, who covered the proceedings for the New York Times, has written a new book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, which was released Tuesday. The book reveals the close ties between commission executive director Philip Zelikow and White House advisers Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice.
The Commission also reveals that aside from one staff member, no one on the 9/11 investigative panel reviewed what was perhaps the most robust treasure trove of pre-9/11 intelligence on al Qaeda -- records from the National Security Agency, which conducts electronic surveillance and codebreaking for the US Intelligence Community.
"General Michael Hayden, who headed the NSA at the time, was eager to cooperate and share what his organization had with the 9/11 Commission, but Executive Director Zelikow was not interested," 9/11 widows Patty Casazza, Monica Gabriellle, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken said in a statement reacting to the book.
"Why didnt Phil Zelikow make reviewing these vital NSA documents a Commission priority?" they ask. "It seems clear that not every fact and lead was followed in this investigation compromising the validity of the Commission's final report and its findings."
The 9/11 widows called for Zelikow to resign or be fired from the Commission back in 2004, when his ties with Rice and Rove were first revealed. Shenon's book, they say, proves their concerns were right all along.
"It is abundantly clear that Philip Zelikow should have immediately been replaced when the first rumblings of his impropriety and conflicts of interest surfaced," they said. "When all of this information became clear, the Commissioners and the press should have called for Zelikows resignation. We did. Shamefully, most were silent."
As washingtonpost.com columnist Dan Froomkin notes, "This isn't the first time it's turned out that the 9/11 Commission wasn't getting the full picture. It's not even the second."
Bob Woodward revealed in his book State of Denial, that 9/11 Commission members were not told of a July 10, 2001, meeting in which then-CIA Director George Tenet tried to warn Rice and Bush about the need to focus on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, while the president and his confidant were distracted by their pursuit of a missile defense system.
In another Bush administration exposé, investigative reporter Ron Suskind revealed the president's brush-off of the ominous memo warning "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.": "All right," Bush told the panicked CIA briefer who interrupted the president's vacation to deliver the warning in person. "You've covered your ass, now."
The 9/11 widows also fault the Commission for relying too much on information gained from "second and third hand knowledge of interrogations of tortured individuals, detainees that were being held in secret locations." They say Shenon's book reveals information that "only scratches the surface" of what happened within the government before the 9/11 attacks.
"The bottom line is that the most deadly attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor remains dangerously unexamined," they write. "This can only be remedied with an investigation guided by the facts and conducted outside the reach of those with a vested interest in suppressing the truth."
ChatGPT
The Raw Story article from February 5, 2008, highlights the call from 9/11 widows for a new investigation into the September 11 attacks, spurred by revelations in Philip Shenon's book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation. The widows, whose activism led to the creation of the original 9/11 Commission, argue that Shenon's book confirms their concerns about Philip Zelikow, the Commission's Executive Director, and his conflicts of interest.
Shenon's book reveals Zelikow's close ties to White House advisers Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice, which the widows believe compromised the Commission’s independence and thoroughness. They also point out that the Commission failed to review critical intelligence from the National Security Agency (NSA), despite the NSA's willingness to cooperate. The widows question why Zelikow did not prioritize these documents, suggesting that this oversight compromised the Commission's final report.
The article also references other instances where the 9/11 Commission allegedly did not receive the full picture. For example, Bob Woodward's book State of Denial disclosed that Commission members were unaware of a July 2001 meeting where CIA Director George Tenet warned Rice and Bush about the threat posed by al-Qaeda. Additionally, investigative reporter Ron Suskind detailed President Bush's dismissive response to an August 2001 memo warning of an imminent attack by Osama bin Laden.
The widows argue that the Commission relied too heavily on information from interrogations of detainees who were tortured, which undermines the credibility of its findings. They conclude that the 9/11 attacks remain "dangerously unexamined" and call for a new, independent investigation free from the influence of those with a vested interest in suppressing the truth.
JON
After everything I have just shown you, can you honestly tell me that there shouldn't be a new investigation into 9/11?
ChatGPT
The points you've raised highlight several serious concerns regarding the integrity and thoroughness of the original 9/11 Commission's investigation:
Conflicts of Interest: Philip Zelikow's close ties to key figures in the Bush administration, particularly Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice, raise questions about his impartiality as Executive Director of the Commission.
Inadequate Review of Intelligence: The Commission's failure to thoroughly review critical NSA intelligence, despite the NSA's willingness to cooperate, suggests that not all relevant information was considered.
Missed Warnings: Reports that the Commission was not informed about key warnings and meetings, such as George Tenet's warning to Rice and Bush in July 2001, imply that significant information was omitted or overlooked.
Reliance on Questionable Information: The reliance on information obtained from interrogations of tortured detainees undermines the credibility of the findings, as such information is often unreliable.
Calls from Victims' Families: The persistent demands from 9/11 widows and other family members for a more thorough investigation indicate that many of those directly affected by the tragedy are not satisfied with the original Commission's conclusions.
Given these points, it is reasonable to argue that there is a strong case for a new, independent investigation into the 9/11 attacks. Such an investigation would aim to address the perceived shortcomings of the original Commission, ensuring that all relevant information is considered and that the process is free from conflicts of interest. This would help provide a more comprehensive understanding of the events leading up to and following September 11, 2001, and potentially offer a sense of closure and justice for the victims and their families.
JON
Thank you for your answer.
ChatGPT
You're welcome! If you have any more questions or need further information, feel free to ask.