Gold9472
08-27-2022, 10:13 AM
Government Minders Completely Discredit The 9/11 Commission
Witnesses that went before the 9/11 Commission were intimidated by "Government Minders" that accompanied them. A "Minder" is someone that "minds the store (an expression you may have heard of)." Someone that protects or looks after someone. Not in the friendly sense.
Jon Gold
8/27/2022
UPDATED: 8/31/2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyt_QOxEdhI
Erik Larson and I discuss "Government Minders"
The following is information that has been made available before, but I'm not sure the ramifications of the information is understood or looked at as importantly as it should be.
On April 27th 2009, hcgroups.wordpress.com (HistoryCommons) reported (https://hcgroups.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/newly-released-memo-government-‘minders’-at-911-commission-interviews-‘intimidated’-witnesses/) on "a recently released 9/11 Commission memo (http://wewereliedtoabout911.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/13279605-9-11-Commission-Memo-Executive-Branch-Minders-Intimidation-of-Witnesses.pdf) [...] that highlights the role of government “minders” who accompanied witnesses interviewed by the commission."
The memo, entitled “Executive Branch Minders’ Intimidation of Witnesses,” complains that:
1) Minders “answer[ed] questions directed at witnesses;”
2) Minders acted as “monitors, reporting to their respective agencies on Commission staffs lines of inquiry and witnesses’ verbatim responses.” The staff thought this “conveys to witnesses that their superiors will review their statements and may engage in retribution;” and
3) Minders “positioned themselves physically and have conducted themselves in a manner that we believe intimidates witnesses from giving full and candid responses to our questions.”
These "minders" were reported on by some media.
From cryptome.org:
"Among the sticking points were whether the administration will require minders to be present when staffers are questioned, and whether investigators will be able to interview staffers from federal agency field offices without first notifying their Washington headquarters." - [cryptome.org, 7/8/2003]
From Gail Sheehy at the Observer:
"The Justice Department has forbidden intelligence officials to be interviewed without "minders" among their bosses being present, a tactic clearly meant to intimidate witnesses." - [observer.com, 8/24/2003]
Most importantly, the 9/11 Families also had something to say:
"On August 27th the Family Steering Committee received an update on the Commission's progress. We learned that there has been improved compliance from some government agencies and that minders continue to be present during interviews, even though the Chairman and Vice Chairman publicly protested." - [911Independentcommission.org, 9/10/2003]
"The FSC is shocked with the use of "minders" in the interrogatory process. And, despite the Commissioner's similar objection to "minders", as stated at the last press conference, "minders" continue to be present during witness examination and questioning. The FSC does not want "minders" present during any witness examination and questioning; it is a form of intimidation and it does not yield the unfettered truth." - [911Independentcommission.org, 9/2003]
Understandably, they were EXTREMELY adamant about not wanting the "Government Minders" there. Reason being, their very presence destroys the credibility of the 9/11 Commission. Just imagine having witnesses that were fearful of what was being reported to their bosses because they didn't want to lose their jobs. Just imagine witnesses LITERALLY being INTIMIDATED during testimony. Oh wait, we don't have to imagine it because it DID happen.
Thomas Kean said (https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/08/politics/911-commission-says-us-agencies-slow-its-inquiry.html) in July 2003 during a press conference "I think the commission feels unanimously that it’s some intimidation to have somebody sitting behind you all the time who you either work for or works for your agency. You might get less testimony than you would."
However, on September 23rd, as he has done before (http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?21837-Don-t-Listen-To-Thomas-Kean&p=99270#post99270), Thomas Kean took a few steps back.
Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton gave another press conference. (https://web.archive.org/web/20040623225126/https://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/2003-09-23_press_briefing.pdf) He was asked by "Craig Miller with the Los Angeles Times. Can you give us an update on your access to witnesses, and specifically on the conditions of that access? You had some concern at the last interim report that you were required to see witnesses with minders present at certain agencies.
Kean's response:
"Still got minders, still don't like them. (Laughs; laughter.)
But I'll say this, having said that, to be fair. Talking to staff, what they have told me is that as they've done these interviews, that the interviewees are encouragingly frank; that they by and large have not seemed to be intimidated in any way in their answers. In fact, it's the opposite in some cases. So, that's very, very encouraging. Do I wish we didn't have minders? I do. But I'm glad to hear that it's -- from the staff that they don't feel it's inhibiting the process of the interviews."
That's funny because the memo that HistoryCommons found is dated October 2nd 2003. It's from Kevin Scheid, Col. Lorry Fenner, and Gordon Lederman. All staffers of the 9/11 Commission. The press conference Kean and Hamilton held was on September 23rd 2003. The memo was written after Kean and Hamilton's press conference.
It seems Kean's statement that "talking to staff, what they have told me is that as they've done these interviews, that the interviewees are encouragingly frank; that they by and large have not seemed to be intimidated in any way in their answers. In fact, it's the opposite in some cases. So, that's very, very encouraging. Do I wish we didn't have minders? I do. But I'm glad to hear that it's -- from the staff that they don't feel it's inhibiting the process of the interviews" is bullshit (this really makes me angry, on top of everything else, I should write an article entitled "9/11 Commissioners Completely Discredit The 9/11 Commission")"
To play Devil's Advocate, let's say that as a result of Philip Zelikow's effort to keep staffers from speaking to Commissioners (https://web.archive.org/web/20210611203247/http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a0303zelikowaccess#a0303zelikowac cess), these particular staffers never spoke to Kean about Government Minders. I suppose it's also possible that the "Government Minders" weren't assholes across the board. I suppose it's possible there were nice and kind Government Minders. HIGHLY UNLIKELY, but possible (though being an "asshole" would be a prerequisite for such a job I would think). I suppose it's possible that he ONLY spoke to people that would tell him what they thought he wanted to hear ("Yes Men"). If they were assholes across the board, chances are he HAD to have heard from SOME staffers about their actions, and not just "Yes Men."
Yes, I call "bullshit." I might even call it a lie.
Hamilton's response:
"First of all, it's very difficult to make a judgment in a particular briefing or question-and-answer session as to whether or not the witness feels intimidated. That's not an easy judgment to make in most cases.
Secondly, it is our feeling that thus far, the minders have not been an impediment, in almost all cases. We've interviewed more than 200 individuals to date. We've also had 87 briefings by government officials, whom we have questioned. And I think there may have been one or two instances where the question has arisen. As the Governor has indicated, we would prefer no minders. But neither are we aware at this point that the presence of a minder has substantially impeded our inquiry. And nor have we run into a situation where we think a witness has refrained from speaking their minds. Now, let me go back to my first point, and that is these are not easy judgments to make."
To me, the opinions of these individuals that shouldn't have been anywhere near the 9/11 Commission are worthless.
For the investigation into the murder of 2,977+ people, there should be NO DOUBT that the BEST INVESTIGATION POSSIBLE is taking place. If there is ANY DOUBT WHATSOEVER about Government Minders intimidating witnesses, then that is unacceptable, they should have been removed, and the witnesses they already spoke to should have been spoken to again WITHOUT their presence.
There are MANY things that discredit the 9/11 Commission. This one is ABSOLUTELY DISCREDITING.
Witnesses that went before the 9/11 Commission were intimidated by "Government Minders" that accompanied them. A "Minder" is someone that "minds the store (an expression you may have heard of)." Someone that protects or looks after someone. Not in the friendly sense.
Jon Gold
8/27/2022
UPDATED: 8/31/2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyt_QOxEdhI
Erik Larson and I discuss "Government Minders"
The following is information that has been made available before, but I'm not sure the ramifications of the information is understood or looked at as importantly as it should be.
On April 27th 2009, hcgroups.wordpress.com (HistoryCommons) reported (https://hcgroups.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/newly-released-memo-government-‘minders’-at-911-commission-interviews-‘intimidated’-witnesses/) on "a recently released 9/11 Commission memo (http://wewereliedtoabout911.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/13279605-9-11-Commission-Memo-Executive-Branch-Minders-Intimidation-of-Witnesses.pdf) [...] that highlights the role of government “minders” who accompanied witnesses interviewed by the commission."
The memo, entitled “Executive Branch Minders’ Intimidation of Witnesses,” complains that:
1) Minders “answer[ed] questions directed at witnesses;”
2) Minders acted as “monitors, reporting to their respective agencies on Commission staffs lines of inquiry and witnesses’ verbatim responses.” The staff thought this “conveys to witnesses that their superiors will review their statements and may engage in retribution;” and
3) Minders “positioned themselves physically and have conducted themselves in a manner that we believe intimidates witnesses from giving full and candid responses to our questions.”
These "minders" were reported on by some media.
From cryptome.org:
"Among the sticking points were whether the administration will require minders to be present when staffers are questioned, and whether investigators will be able to interview staffers from federal agency field offices without first notifying their Washington headquarters." - [cryptome.org, 7/8/2003]
From Gail Sheehy at the Observer:
"The Justice Department has forbidden intelligence officials to be interviewed without "minders" among their bosses being present, a tactic clearly meant to intimidate witnesses." - [observer.com, 8/24/2003]
Most importantly, the 9/11 Families also had something to say:
"On August 27th the Family Steering Committee received an update on the Commission's progress. We learned that there has been improved compliance from some government agencies and that minders continue to be present during interviews, even though the Chairman and Vice Chairman publicly protested." - [911Independentcommission.org, 9/10/2003]
"The FSC is shocked with the use of "minders" in the interrogatory process. And, despite the Commissioner's similar objection to "minders", as stated at the last press conference, "minders" continue to be present during witness examination and questioning. The FSC does not want "minders" present during any witness examination and questioning; it is a form of intimidation and it does not yield the unfettered truth." - [911Independentcommission.org, 9/2003]
Understandably, they were EXTREMELY adamant about not wanting the "Government Minders" there. Reason being, their very presence destroys the credibility of the 9/11 Commission. Just imagine having witnesses that were fearful of what was being reported to their bosses because they didn't want to lose their jobs. Just imagine witnesses LITERALLY being INTIMIDATED during testimony. Oh wait, we don't have to imagine it because it DID happen.
Thomas Kean said (https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/08/politics/911-commission-says-us-agencies-slow-its-inquiry.html) in July 2003 during a press conference "I think the commission feels unanimously that it’s some intimidation to have somebody sitting behind you all the time who you either work for or works for your agency. You might get less testimony than you would."
However, on September 23rd, as he has done before (http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?21837-Don-t-Listen-To-Thomas-Kean&p=99270#post99270), Thomas Kean took a few steps back.
Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton gave another press conference. (https://web.archive.org/web/20040623225126/https://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/2003-09-23_press_briefing.pdf) He was asked by "Craig Miller with the Los Angeles Times. Can you give us an update on your access to witnesses, and specifically on the conditions of that access? You had some concern at the last interim report that you were required to see witnesses with minders present at certain agencies.
Kean's response:
"Still got minders, still don't like them. (Laughs; laughter.)
But I'll say this, having said that, to be fair. Talking to staff, what they have told me is that as they've done these interviews, that the interviewees are encouragingly frank; that they by and large have not seemed to be intimidated in any way in their answers. In fact, it's the opposite in some cases. So, that's very, very encouraging. Do I wish we didn't have minders? I do. But I'm glad to hear that it's -- from the staff that they don't feel it's inhibiting the process of the interviews."
That's funny because the memo that HistoryCommons found is dated October 2nd 2003. It's from Kevin Scheid, Col. Lorry Fenner, and Gordon Lederman. All staffers of the 9/11 Commission. The press conference Kean and Hamilton held was on September 23rd 2003. The memo was written after Kean and Hamilton's press conference.
It seems Kean's statement that "talking to staff, what they have told me is that as they've done these interviews, that the interviewees are encouragingly frank; that they by and large have not seemed to be intimidated in any way in their answers. In fact, it's the opposite in some cases. So, that's very, very encouraging. Do I wish we didn't have minders? I do. But I'm glad to hear that it's -- from the staff that they don't feel it's inhibiting the process of the interviews" is bullshit (this really makes me angry, on top of everything else, I should write an article entitled "9/11 Commissioners Completely Discredit The 9/11 Commission")"
To play Devil's Advocate, let's say that as a result of Philip Zelikow's effort to keep staffers from speaking to Commissioners (https://web.archive.org/web/20210611203247/http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a0303zelikowaccess#a0303zelikowac cess), these particular staffers never spoke to Kean about Government Minders. I suppose it's also possible that the "Government Minders" weren't assholes across the board. I suppose it's possible there were nice and kind Government Minders. HIGHLY UNLIKELY, but possible (though being an "asshole" would be a prerequisite for such a job I would think). I suppose it's possible that he ONLY spoke to people that would tell him what they thought he wanted to hear ("Yes Men"). If they were assholes across the board, chances are he HAD to have heard from SOME staffers about their actions, and not just "Yes Men."
Yes, I call "bullshit." I might even call it a lie.
Hamilton's response:
"First of all, it's very difficult to make a judgment in a particular briefing or question-and-answer session as to whether or not the witness feels intimidated. That's not an easy judgment to make in most cases.
Secondly, it is our feeling that thus far, the minders have not been an impediment, in almost all cases. We've interviewed more than 200 individuals to date. We've also had 87 briefings by government officials, whom we have questioned. And I think there may have been one or two instances where the question has arisen. As the Governor has indicated, we would prefer no minders. But neither are we aware at this point that the presence of a minder has substantially impeded our inquiry. And nor have we run into a situation where we think a witness has refrained from speaking their minds. Now, let me go back to my first point, and that is these are not easy judgments to make."
To me, the opinions of these individuals that shouldn't have been anywhere near the 9/11 Commission are worthless.
For the investigation into the murder of 2,977+ people, there should be NO DOUBT that the BEST INVESTIGATION POSSIBLE is taking place. If there is ANY DOUBT WHATSOEVER about Government Minders intimidating witnesses, then that is unacceptable, they should have been removed, and the witnesses they already spoke to should have been spoken to again WITHOUT their presence.
There are MANY things that discredit the 9/11 Commission. This one is ABSOLUTELY DISCREDITING.