The "9/11" Commission Report

I'm of the LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose) persuasion. There were fingerprints of way too many Pearl-Harbor-hungry PNAC signatories all over that mess for that not to have been the case. Maybe they "misunderestimated," mebbe not.

But anyway, the lead attorney for the 9/11 Commission, is out with a book in which he claims "the official version of the story is almost entirely untrue, based on false testimony by the White House, CIA, FBI and NORAD." John Farmer, Dean of the Law School at Rutgers University and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was legal counsel to the 9/11 Commission, and in charge of drafting its report. Mark Crispin Miller reports:

And now, having read through lots of further evidence, he’s come to the conclusion that the official version of the story is almost entirely untrue, based on false testimony by the White House, CIA, FBI and NORAD.

His new book, The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11, makes this case with loads of documentary evidence–and his colleagues on the commission are on board, as the article below makes clear.

So are John Farmer and those other members of that very commission all “conspiracy theorists”?

Here’s the press release re: Farmer’s book from Rutgers University:

I wasn't even aware the Commission had finished publishing its report. There was a "Part 1," about five years ago, iirc, which summarized the evidence and recorded testimony, but drew no conclusions and assigned no responsibility. The summary was delayed for political reasons, and finally released in 2007. And now, one of the major functionaries in the initial proceedings apparently recants (cants?)? Vehdddy interlesting... (rip, aj. w)

Well, sorta. It's not exactly a smoking gun.

Skip to the chase:

Newark, NJ – The nation’s top-down command structure was abysmally ill-prepared to respond to the surprise attacks of September 11, 2001 and, as the bungled response to the much-anticipated Hurricane Katrina underscored, remains a bureaucratic hindrance to the “on the ground” way in which crises are actually experienced and most effectively addressed. Equally important, misleading accounts by the administration and the military of key aspects of the air and ground response on 9/11 have set the country up to fail in response to future threats.

Of course, the greatest weakness of the top-down model is that if there is either willful ignorance or inadvertent, total incompetence at the top, every subsequent level will be contaminated ("Helluva job, Brownie!"). Purposeful ineptitude was also apparent in the officials' responses to Katrina, perhaps more evidently, in the discourses which celebrated the 'cleansing' of the city. It's not an accident, e.g., that the restorations in New Orleans do not include replacing the inexpensive housing overwhelmingly occupied by poor black and immigrant communities.