Tom Flocco: 9-11 Commission Testimony Too Hot To Be Under Oath

posted by ewing2001 on Thursday May 29, @01:36PM

http://www.tomflocco.com/9-11_commission_Testimony_too_hot.htm

9-11 Commission Testimony Too Hot To Be Under Oath

by Tom Flocco

WASHINGTON, May 27, 2003 (TomFlocco.com) --

"...Just after former head of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Jane Garvey concluded her controversial time-line of events testimony and responses to questions from Chairman Thomas Kean’s blue-ribbon 9/11 panel Thursday afternoon, whispers commenced among the reporters and some of the victim family members in attendance at the Hart Senate office building.

Kean, a popular former governor of New Jersey who was known for integrity, fairness, and good judgment will have some major decisions in coming weeks -- given that many of the witnesses he called to testify could not get their stories straight regarding key events on the 9/11 time-line sequence.

Advertisement

Jane Garvey, former head of the Federal Aviation Administration, had a difficult time during her testimony on Thursday afternoon, particularly with issues surrounding the 9/11 timeline. Moreover, she continually remarked that the FBI was handling many issues thought to be within her own realm.

For those fully conversant with the published event chronologies and incredible story legs linked to the attacks, Garvey’s statement and answers to questions began a series of some of the most compelling declarations since the Watergate hearings. All this, with the next morning’s witness statements before the Commission -- and hallway press interviews -- continuing to surprise more and more as testimony progressed.

Curiously however, none of the testimony offered before the Commission was sworn under oath (either on Thursday or Friday); and the most critical statements concerning the 9/11 military response failures occurred on the morning prior to a long Memorial Day weekend when the public would not be paying attention.

Just prior to the start of Friday’s sparsely attended hearings, we asked Kean’s Deputy for Communications Alvin S. Felzenberg why none of the witnesses were being sworn in.

Felzenberg, a former Heritage Foundation fellow connected to the Bush 2000 presidential transition, who has also written for The Weekly Standard, told us “We will not be swearing in witnesses during any [public or private] 9/11 testimony.”

When we asked whether un-sworn testimony would be a wise decision -- considering both the importance of the hearings and Garvey’s conflicted testimony the previous day, spokesman Felzenberg replied: “Congress has indicted individuals for false statements not made under oath, and we don’t think it’s necessary -- so no one will be sworn in. Would you please sit down.”

All three aisle-accesses were guarded by secret service members and armed guards just prior to their entry, so it was impossible to ask either Chairman Kean or Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton before testimony commenced whether they -- or perhaps someone higher -- had authorized the ruling not to swear in witnesses. Thus, the origin of the decision is unknown at this juncture.

Kean had noted Thursday that “we are finders of fact, not triers of fact,” leaving some reporters and victim family members to wonder who would indict individuals responsible for 9/11 incompetence, negligence, or even criminal wrong-doing, should the Commission’s findings indicate as much.

Commissioner and Council of Foreign Relations member Jamie Gorelick told TomFlocco.com “I think we’ll be able to determine whether they’re [witnesses] telling the truth without swearing them in,” while adding “we’ll certainly do our best to find out.”

Gorelick is closely linked to the intelligence community, currently serving on the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) National Security Advisory Panel, as well as President Bush’s Review of Intelligence -- affording the current Fannie Mae vice-chairman access to the inner-workings of the CIA while providing the Agency with an ally on the Commission.

We also happened to catch Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-IN) at the Hart Senate elevator late Friday, asking him about his thoughts concerning the importance of swearing in witnesses. “We don’t swear in witnesses on Foreign Relations -- that is, unless we think they aren’t going to tell the truth,” smiled the cordial Indiana Republican.

A few minutes later in the same hallway, Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) stopped for a moment to offer us his thoughts about 9/11 after having testified the previous day: “The evidence is compelling; but the Administration is not very inclined to go after the answers. It [not swearing in witnesses] doesn‘t surprise me.”

Given the incredible, sometimes confusing testimony over the two days -- let alone revealing impromptu sessions outside the hearing room, the issue of sworn testimony may still be in question, as Commissioner Tim Roemer told us while heading down the sweeping spiral staircase in the Hart Building: “That’s a good point. We’re going to have to do something about that.”

Read full story at:
http://www.tomflocco.com/9-11_commission_Testimony_too_hot.htm

<  Iraq weapons dossier 'rewritten' (BBC) | Graham accuses Bush of 'Nixonian stench'  >