Gold9472
04-06-2008, 03:32 PM
Who Is Lorie Van Auken?
Thanks to www.cooperativeresearch.org (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org), and a very special thanks to Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg, Patty Casazza, Kristen Breitweiser, and Monica Gabrielle. For everything. I'm so sorry you had to do any of it. For the most part, this was written by me, with the exception of the September 11th Advocate letters, and the July 9, 2003 entry.
September 11th, 2001: Kenneth Van Auken is murdered in the September 11th attacks
"I love you. I'm in the World Trade Center. And the building was hit by something. I don't know if I'm going to get out. But I love you very much. I hope I'll see you later. Bye." Those are the last words Lorie hears from her loving husband Kenneth who was a bond broker at Cantor Fitzgerald in 1 World Trade Center. [Larry King Live, 9/12/2001; New York Times, 12/14/2001] Over time, grieving starts to take place in "the cedar-wood arbor in the yard" completed by Kenneth a week before he died. Carpentry and gardening were his passion. [New York Times, 10/24/2001]
June 11, 2002: 9/11 Family Members hold rally for Investigation into the attacks of 9/11
Today, the "Jersey Girls" "marched through the halls of Congress" inspired by Bob Monetti, whose son died in the crash of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. ''He said: 'You're not getting any answers. It's time for a rally,' '' Ms. Van Auken, 47, of East Brunswick, said. ''We had no idea what we were doing, but we didn't think we couldn't do it.'' Up until this time, "President Bush has resisted the creation of an outside body, saying Congress can handle the job and suggesting that an additional investigation might interfere with national security." He said, "I don't want to tie up our team when we're trying to fight this war on terror." However, that did not dissuade the families demanding answers. "At a gathering across from the Capitol under a broiling sun, speaker after speaker described their cause as nonpolitical and a matter of grave national concern." [New York Times, 6/12/2002]
July 9, 2003: 'Jersey Girls' Lambast Zelikow over Author's Testimony Linking 9/11 to Iraqi Government
While some find neoconservative author Laurie Mylroie's testimony before the 9/11 Commission of a terrorist conspiracy between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda to be compelling (see July 9, 2003), others do not. One group that is not convinced is the so-called "Jersey Girls," the group of widows who lost their husbands in the 9/11 attacks and then worked to force the Bush administration to create the Commission (see March 31, 2003). They lambast Commission director Philip Zelikow for allowing Mylroie to testify. "Jersey Girl" Lorie Van Auken, who has learned a great deal about Mylroie's theories in her research, confronts Zelikow shortly after the hearings. "That took a lot of nerve putting someone like that on the panel," she tells Zelikow. "Laurie Mylroie? This is supposed to be an investigation of September 11. This is not supposed to be a sales pitch for the Iraq war." Van Auken later recalls "a sly smile" crossing Zelikow's face, as he refuses to answer. "He knew exactly what he was doing," Van Auken will say. "He was selling the war." After the hearing, Zelikow informs the staff that he wants them to aggressively pursue the idea of a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda. Author Philip Shenon will later write, "To some members of the staff, Zelikow seemed determined to demonstrate that whatever the evidence to the contrary, Iraq and al-Qaeda had a close relationship that justified the toppling of Saddam Hussein." [Shenon, 2008, pp. 130-134]
November 28, 2003: Members of the Family Steering Committee send letter citing Mayor Bloomberg's "Stonewalling" of the 9/11 Commission
"As members of the family steering committee of the 9/11 commission, we find it inconceivable that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg would stand in the way of turning over tapes of the first responders' experiences, which could yield invaluable information about preparedness, to the commission. No training sessions or military exercises could amount to lessons learned from actual experience. A theoretical plan could never anticipate every possible contingency, and even the most carefully designed exercise cannot possibly mimic reality. Instead of spending millions of tax dollars on theoretical exercises, why not use what was learned from the horrors of Sept. 11 by the first responders? Mayor Bloomberg is blocking our ability to gain access to that knowledge." [Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg; New York Times, 11/28/2003]
May 19, 2004: Rudy Giuliani testifies before the 9/11 Commission, Families begin to lose faith in 9/11 Commission
Because the "commission opted not to confront Mr. Giuliani directly with its critical findings", several of the family members spoke out about "how they had not heard the questions and answers they had come to hear." As a result, they began to "lose faith in the commission, saying it seemed to be committed to a sanitized history of that day." "We fought like crazy to get this commission established,'' said Lorie Van Auken, whose husband, Kenneth, died in the north tower. ''We want the truth. If we're not being told the truth, if we are only being told one side of the story, the commission is not doing its job properly.'' [New York Times, 5/20/2004]
June 16, 2004: As the 9/11 Commission comes to a close, Family Members cite several outstanding questions not answered
''I want the definitive timeline of Sept. 11,'' said Lorie Van Auken, of East Brunswick, N.J., whose husband died in the World Trade Center. Another widow, Beverly Eckert, echoed the sentiment, stating flatly, ''Information is still being concealed.'' Several of the families "have been doing their own investigative work and have spent hours poring over news clippings and Internet sites." Bill Doyle, who lost his son Joey, "wanted to know more about Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi student who befriended hijackers and helped pay their expenses." Kristen Breitweiser, who lost her husband Ron, "insisted that Richard A. Clarke, President Bush's former counterterrorism adviser, had conducted a ''post-mortem report'' after the attacks, analyzing intelligence files for all mentions of Al Qaeda in the 18 months before Sept. 11, 2001. ''Where is that report?'' she demanded. ''Where are the findings?'' Lorie Van Auken, who lost her husband Kenneth, "was irate that there was no mention of an accusation that Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of Pakistan's intelligence services, ordered the transfer of $100,000 to Mr. Atta. As to the other details -- that the plot initially included attacks in Southeast Asia and that the original target list included the White House, the Capitol and buildings in Los Angeles and Seattle -- she was dismissive. ''We know all that,'' she said. ''They're missing key elements that tell the story.'' [New York Times, 6/17/2004]
June 23, 2005: Family Members ask for CIA Inspector General's Report to be released
"Relatives of Sept. 11 victims on Thursday called on the CIA to release an internal report that scrutinizes the U.S. spy agency's counterterrorism efforts prior to the 2001 attacks." "The report by the Central Intelligence Agency's inspector general, which is said to be in its final stages, is expected to be sent in classified form to CIA Director Porter Goss and then to the intelligence oversight committees in Congress later this summer, officials said. But victims' relatives, whose lobbying overcame President Bush's initial resistance to the creation of the Sept. 11 commission, say they intend to step up public pressure on the CIA to release the report publicly. "There's information in there that's supposed to really name some names and finally go for some accountability," said widow Lorie Van Auken of the group known as the Sept. 11 Advocates, a driving force behind creation of the bipartisan commission that investigated the attacks. "Accountability would be fabulous because right now nobody's being held accountable for anything anywhere in this entire government," she said in an interview. [Reuters, 6/23/2005]
July 22nd, 2005: Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle Testify Before the 9/11 Congressional Briefing
Former Representative Cynthia McKinney holds a historic Congressional Briefing in Washington D.C. a year after the release of the 9/11 Report asking "did the Commission get it right?" Family Members Lorie Van Auken, Monica Gabrielle, and Mindy Kleinberg are the first to testify. Representing Monica and Mindy, Lorie Van Auken states, "Incredulous, but undeterred, we realized that it was necessary to take a thorough and independent look at what had gone wrong on 9/11. Our children were going to have to grow up in this changed world, and we needed to make sure that this would never happen again. We knew that with the 3,000 deaths on 9/11 there remained thousands of questions that needed to be answered, so, we fought for the creation of the 9/11 Commission. And with all of America by our side, we finally won that battle. The Commission was passed into law in the autumn of 2002, and by January, 2003 the Commission finally sat down to commence its very important work. The 9/11 Commission's report is one year old today. This report was supposed to provide the definitive account of what had transpired on September eleven, 2001. We hoped that our thousands of unanswered questions would be addressed and answered. Yet incredibly we have found that the Commission's definitive final report has actually yielded more questions than answers. Moreover, there are still so many areas that remain unexplained, or are only vaguely touched upon by the 9/11 Commission, so much so that it was quite difficult for me to decide where I should start my testimony to you today." [reprehensor.gnn.tv, 7/22/2005]
August 10, 2005: News about Able Danger is revealed, Family Members release a statement, declare 9/11 Report a "hollow failure"
"As 9/11 widows who fought tirelessly for the creation of the 9/11 Commission, we are wholly disappointed to learn that the Commission's Final Report is a hollow failure. We spent innumerable hours of our time away from our families to ensure that the 9/11 Commission had the tools and resources necessary to provide a complete and thorough accounting of the 9/11 attacks to the American people. We truly wanted to learn lessons from the 9/11 attacks so that we could all live in a safer environment. We find this latest revelation of the Commission's failure to adequately and aggressively pursue the complete truth surrounding 9/11 absolutely shameful." [September 11th Advocates, 8/10/2005]
August 23, 2005: Monograph shows Al Hamzi and Al Mihdhar in NY/NJ area in December 2000, Family Members release a statement asking for Commission to explain their "mistake"
"It has come to our attention that two of the 9/11 hijackers – Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar – were in the NY/NJ area in December of 2000. The evidence of this new piece of knowledge is found on page A-21 of the 9/11 Commission's visa travel monograph. On that page you will find two identification cards issued by USA ID to Al Mihdhar and Al Hazmi. Please note the expiration date of those identification cards – December 2006. It should also be noted that USA ID only provides identification cards for a six year duration. The date of issuance, therefore, can be ascertained by subtracting six years from the date of expiration. Thus, the date of issuance was December 2000. This information is highly relevant in that it reveals a glaring "mistake" in the Commission's timeline regarding the whereabouts of two of the key 9-11 hijackers. Namely, that both Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar were in the NY - NJ area nearly two months after the Cole bombing – an Al Qaeda attack that cost the lives of 17 US Sailors in Yemen in October 2000. We request the Commission explain their "mistake" to the American people and further investigate the concrete whereabouts of these two hijackers for the time period of June 2000 until the day of 9-11. Recall that the Commission reports that Al Mihdhar left the United States in June of 2000 not to return until July of 2001." [September 11th Advocates, 8/23/2005]
August 25, 2005: CIA Inspector General's Report not to be declassified, Family Members release a statement calling for its "immediate release"
"We are deeply disturbed to learn that an investigation of the CIA, conducted at the direction of the Joint House and Senate Congressional Intelligence Committees in 2002, will not be declassified and released as soon as possible. This report presumably discusses failures within the CIA and identifies performance deficiencies among high-ranking CIA officials. The findings in this report must be shared with all members of Congress and with the American public to ensure that the problems identified are addressed and corrected, thus moving to restore faith in this agency. We call for the immediate release of this report. To shield CIA officials from accountability and to continue to cover-up deficiencies in that agency puts the safety of our nation at risk. Four years post 9-11 this is truly unacceptable." [September 11th Advocates, 8/25/2005]
September 19, 2005: Pentagon calls for hearings regarding Able Danger to be closed to the public, Family Members release a statement
"We were stunned to learn that the Pentagon is calling for the Senate hearing regarding "Able Danger" scheduled for Wednesday, September 21st, to be closed to the public. Recall that Able Danger was the data mining operation run out of the Defense Intelligence Agency that allegedly identified four of the 9/11 hijackers one year prior to the attacks. There has been much controversy surrounding these findings and their significance cannot be overstated. This information, relating to Able Danger, changes the entire 9/11 "story" and would therefore impact many of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. After attempting to seek the truth for four years, it would be a travesty to keep the facts surrounding this operation from the public. The insistence on secrecy by governmental agencies only makes their motives suspect and ultimately serves to keep the American public at risk." [September 11th Advocates, 9/19/2005]
April 12, 2006: Lorie Van Auken and Mindy Kleinberg address journalism and media studies students about 9/11 investigation
At the Scholarly Communication Center of the Alexander Library, 9/11 Family Members Lorie Van Auken, and Mindy Kleinberg address journalism and media studies students. "The media didn't have the same want to find the truth," Van Auken said. "Conflicting facts began to raise issues to us. It became very clear to us that we were supposed to play the role of the unquestioning victims." "We've been operating in an environment that's a no-fault government," Kleinberg said. "Whatever glossing over of the topic they could do they would." Kleinberg talked of how she was disappointed with the end result of the 9/11 Commission report. "They did not do the job we were hoping," Kleinberg said. "Evidence was offered that they did not go after." [Daily Targum, 4/12/2006]
May 11, 2006: Families release a statement on Hayden, other rewarded after 9/11
"There has been an untenable pattern in this administration where abysmal failure gets rewarded and accountability is not found. For example: 1. Condoleezza Rice was promoted to Secretary of State: On May 16, 2002, Condoleezza Rice, as National Security Advisor, said, "No one could have predicted that planes could be used as missiles", despite many prior intelligence reports on that precise topic and the fact that she was in Italy in July 2001 with the President who had to sleep on a boat for fear that a plane might be used as a missile in an assassination attempt against him. On September 11, 2001, four planes were used as missiles. Our National Security Agencies were unprepared. 3000 people were killed. In 2005, Condoleezza Rice was promoted from National Security Advisor to Secretary of State. 2. George Tenet was heralded as a hero and given the Medal of Freedom: Tenet led the CIA through three of the US Intelligence communities largest failures: the U.S.S. Cole bombing, 9/11, and the lack of WMD in Iraq. George Tenet was given the Presidential Medal of Freedom, one of our countries most esteemed honors. 3. FBI agents Michael Maltbie and David Frasca were promoted within the ranks of the FBI: Moussaoui's arresting officer, FBI agent Harry Samit, tried some 70 times to get a FISA warrant to search Moussaoui's belongings before the 9/11 attacks. Samit testified during the Moussaoui penalty phase that he was thwarted by two agents at FBI HQ: Michael Maltbie, and David Frasca. These men scrubbed clean Samit's FISA requests of any references to terrorist ties that Moussaoui might have had, and then refused to allow the FISA requests to even be made. The US Government has asserted that had they been able to search Moussaoui's belongings, the 9/11 plot could have been prevented. Maltbie and Frasca were both promoted within the ranks of the FBI, where they are still employed today. 4. Steven Hadley was promoted to National Security Advisor: Steven Hadley is the man responsible for placing the misleading and erroneous 16 words in the State of the Union Address regarding WMD in Iraq. Steven Hadley was promoted to National Security Advisor in 2005. 5. Porter Goss was promoted to Director of the CIA: Porter Goss was the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee prior to and after 9/11. In such capacity he was responsible for the Congressional oversight of the intelligence community and its agencies. With an intelligence community still in complete disarray nearly 5 years post-9/11, Goss was at least in part responsible for that. President Bush appointed Goss to head the CIA in 2004. 6. General Michael Hayden is now being appointed to Director of the CIA: On September 10, 2001, two intercepts were received by the NSA: "tomorrow is zero hour" and "the match begins tomorrow". According to the official record, these intercepts were not translated until September 12, 2001. In the summer of threat, the NSA apparently had a shortage of translators. General Michael Hayden was head of the NSA in September of 2001. Moreover, Hayden is the architect of the president's illegal wiretapping program. The congressional intelligence committees were not briefed about this program, as is required by law. General Michael Hayden is now being promoted to head the CIA. Nearly five years post-9/11, the agencies that comprise our national security apparatus are floundering because no real reforms have taken place. This failure lies solely within the hands of President Bush and Congress who fail to take our homeland security seriously and make it a number one priority. However, one must remain mindful that any intelligence agency can only be as good as the individuals that comprise that agency and lead that agency. How can we expect optimal results from an intelligence community that continues to be led by incompetent individuals with clear records of failure? Why is our President choosing individuals who have clearly showed failures of judgment and failures of competence that have cost thousands of lives?" [September 11th Advocates, 5/11/2006]
June 7, 2006: "Jersey Girls" respond to Ann Coulter's slanderous remarks
"We did not choose to become widowed on September 11, 2001. The attack, which tore our families apart and destroyed our former lives, caused us to ask some serious questions regarding the systems that our country has in place to protect its citizens. Through our constant research, we came to learn how the protocols were supposed to have worked. Thus, we asked for an independent commission to investigate the loopholes which obviously existed and allowed us to be so utterly vulnerable to terrorists. Our only motivation ever was to make our Nation safer. Could we learn from this tragedy so that it would not be repeated? We are forced to respond to Ms. Coulter's accusations to set the record straight because we have been slandered. Contrary to Ms. Coulter's statements, there was no joy in watching men that we loved burn alive. There was no happiness in telling our children that their fathers were never coming home again. We adored these men and miss them every day. It is in their honor and memory, that we will once again refocus the Nation's attention to the real issues at hand: our lack of security, leadership and progress in the five years since 9/11. We are continuously reminded that we are still a nation at risk. Therefore, the following is a partial list of areas still desperately in need of attention and public outcry. We should continuously be holding the feet of our elected officials to the fire to fix these shortcomings. 1. Homeland Security Funding based on risk. Inattention to this area causes police officers, firefighters and other emergency/first responder personnel to be ill equipped in emergencies. Fixing this will save lives on the day of the next attack. 2. Intelligence Community Oversight. Without proper oversight, there exists no one joint, bicameral intelligence panel with power to both authorize and appropriate funding for intelligence activities. Without such funding we are unable to capitalize on all intelligence community resources and abilities to thwart potential terrorist attacks. Fixing this will save lives on the day of the next attack. 3. Transportation Security. There has been no concerted effort to harden mass transportation security. Our planes, buses, subways, and railways remain under-protected and highly vulnerable. These are all identifiable soft targets of potential terrorist attack. The terror attacks in Spain and London attest to this fact. Fixing our transportation systems may save lives on the day of the next attack. 4. Information Sharing among Intelligence Agencies. Information sharing among intelligence agencies has not improved since 9/11. The attacks on 9/11 could have been prevented had information been shared among intelligence agencies. On the day of the next attack, more lives may be saved if our intelligence agencies work together. 5. Loose Nukes. A concerted effort has not been made to secure the thousands of loose nukes scattered around the world – particularly in the former Soviet Union. Securing these loose nukes could make it less likely for a terrorist group to use this method in an attack, thereby saving lives. 6. Security at Chemical Plants, Nuclear Plants, Ports. We must, as a nation, secure these known and identifiable soft targets of Terrorism. Doing so will save many lives. 7. Border Security. We continue to have porous borders and INS and Customs systems in shambles. We need a concerted effort to integrate our border security into the larger national security apparatus. 8. Civil Liberties Oversight Board. Given the President's NSA Surveillance Program and the re-instatement of the Patriot Act, this Nation is in dire need of a Civil Liberties Oversight Board to insure that a proper balance is found between national security versus the protection of our constitutional rights." [September 11th Advocates, 6/7/2006]
August 4, 2006: 9/11 Commission admits lied to by NORAD, Family Members release a statement questioning the "veracity of the entire Commission's report"
"Recent stories in the Washington Post, the New York Times, as well as the release of the transcripts of the NORAD tapes in Vanity Fair, clearly show that the 9/11 Commission failed in its duties. According to current reports, the Commission knew that it had been deceived by NORAD. In May 2003, representatives of NORAD testified, in full regalia, before the 9/11 Commission equipped with an easel and visual aids to highlight NORAD's timeline for the day of 9/11. In June 2004, NORAD testified again, changing its previous testimony. The new timeline blamed the lack of military response on late notification by the FAA. The Commissioners never determined or explained why there was a discrepancy between the two sets of testimonies. Governor Kean is quoted in the Washington Post article as saying "we, to this day don't know why NORAD told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth ... It's one of those loose ends that never got tied". The fact that the Commission did not see fit to tie up all loose ends in their final report or to hold those who came before them accountable for lying and/or making misleading statements puts into question the veracity of the entire Commission's report. Individuals who came before the Commission to testify, after NORAD's appearance, had no reason to state the truth. It was abundantly clear that there would be no repercussions for any misrepresentations. Furthermore, the lack of tenacity and curiosity, by the Commissioners themselves, to determine why NORAD had deceived them is unconscionable. Knowing full well that the lack of military response was such a critical failure, begs the question of whether that same lack of tenacity and curiosity was applied to other critical areas of the 9/11 investigation. We fought to establish the 9/11 Independent Commission because we believed that American citizens would be better served if our nation's vulnerabilities were uncovered and then fixed. Unfortunately, once again the failure to fully and properly investigate all areas, not follow all leads and not address the need for accountability, whether it be bureaucrats lying at a hearing or personnel with questionable performance of assigned duties, continues to leave this Nation and its citizens vulnerable and at risk. The 9/11 Commission was derelict in its duties. What we needed from them was a thorough investigation into the events of September 11th. Inexcusably, five years later, we still do." [September 11th Advocates, 8/4/2006]
End Part I
Thanks to www.cooperativeresearch.org (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org), and a very special thanks to Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg, Patty Casazza, Kristen Breitweiser, and Monica Gabrielle. For everything. I'm so sorry you had to do any of it. For the most part, this was written by me, with the exception of the September 11th Advocate letters, and the July 9, 2003 entry.
September 11th, 2001: Kenneth Van Auken is murdered in the September 11th attacks
"I love you. I'm in the World Trade Center. And the building was hit by something. I don't know if I'm going to get out. But I love you very much. I hope I'll see you later. Bye." Those are the last words Lorie hears from her loving husband Kenneth who was a bond broker at Cantor Fitzgerald in 1 World Trade Center. [Larry King Live, 9/12/2001; New York Times, 12/14/2001] Over time, grieving starts to take place in "the cedar-wood arbor in the yard" completed by Kenneth a week before he died. Carpentry and gardening were his passion. [New York Times, 10/24/2001]
June 11, 2002: 9/11 Family Members hold rally for Investigation into the attacks of 9/11
Today, the "Jersey Girls" "marched through the halls of Congress" inspired by Bob Monetti, whose son died in the crash of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. ''He said: 'You're not getting any answers. It's time for a rally,' '' Ms. Van Auken, 47, of East Brunswick, said. ''We had no idea what we were doing, but we didn't think we couldn't do it.'' Up until this time, "President Bush has resisted the creation of an outside body, saying Congress can handle the job and suggesting that an additional investigation might interfere with national security." He said, "I don't want to tie up our team when we're trying to fight this war on terror." However, that did not dissuade the families demanding answers. "At a gathering across from the Capitol under a broiling sun, speaker after speaker described their cause as nonpolitical and a matter of grave national concern." [New York Times, 6/12/2002]
July 9, 2003: 'Jersey Girls' Lambast Zelikow over Author's Testimony Linking 9/11 to Iraqi Government
While some find neoconservative author Laurie Mylroie's testimony before the 9/11 Commission of a terrorist conspiracy between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda to be compelling (see July 9, 2003), others do not. One group that is not convinced is the so-called "Jersey Girls," the group of widows who lost their husbands in the 9/11 attacks and then worked to force the Bush administration to create the Commission (see March 31, 2003). They lambast Commission director Philip Zelikow for allowing Mylroie to testify. "Jersey Girl" Lorie Van Auken, who has learned a great deal about Mylroie's theories in her research, confronts Zelikow shortly after the hearings. "That took a lot of nerve putting someone like that on the panel," she tells Zelikow. "Laurie Mylroie? This is supposed to be an investigation of September 11. This is not supposed to be a sales pitch for the Iraq war." Van Auken later recalls "a sly smile" crossing Zelikow's face, as he refuses to answer. "He knew exactly what he was doing," Van Auken will say. "He was selling the war." After the hearing, Zelikow informs the staff that he wants them to aggressively pursue the idea of a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda. Author Philip Shenon will later write, "To some members of the staff, Zelikow seemed determined to demonstrate that whatever the evidence to the contrary, Iraq and al-Qaeda had a close relationship that justified the toppling of Saddam Hussein." [Shenon, 2008, pp. 130-134]
November 28, 2003: Members of the Family Steering Committee send letter citing Mayor Bloomberg's "Stonewalling" of the 9/11 Commission
"As members of the family steering committee of the 9/11 commission, we find it inconceivable that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg would stand in the way of turning over tapes of the first responders' experiences, which could yield invaluable information about preparedness, to the commission. No training sessions or military exercises could amount to lessons learned from actual experience. A theoretical plan could never anticipate every possible contingency, and even the most carefully designed exercise cannot possibly mimic reality. Instead of spending millions of tax dollars on theoretical exercises, why not use what was learned from the horrors of Sept. 11 by the first responders? Mayor Bloomberg is blocking our ability to gain access to that knowledge." [Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg; New York Times, 11/28/2003]
May 19, 2004: Rudy Giuliani testifies before the 9/11 Commission, Families begin to lose faith in 9/11 Commission
Because the "commission opted not to confront Mr. Giuliani directly with its critical findings", several of the family members spoke out about "how they had not heard the questions and answers they had come to hear." As a result, they began to "lose faith in the commission, saying it seemed to be committed to a sanitized history of that day." "We fought like crazy to get this commission established,'' said Lorie Van Auken, whose husband, Kenneth, died in the north tower. ''We want the truth. If we're not being told the truth, if we are only being told one side of the story, the commission is not doing its job properly.'' [New York Times, 5/20/2004]
June 16, 2004: As the 9/11 Commission comes to a close, Family Members cite several outstanding questions not answered
''I want the definitive timeline of Sept. 11,'' said Lorie Van Auken, of East Brunswick, N.J., whose husband died in the World Trade Center. Another widow, Beverly Eckert, echoed the sentiment, stating flatly, ''Information is still being concealed.'' Several of the families "have been doing their own investigative work and have spent hours poring over news clippings and Internet sites." Bill Doyle, who lost his son Joey, "wanted to know more about Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi student who befriended hijackers and helped pay their expenses." Kristen Breitweiser, who lost her husband Ron, "insisted that Richard A. Clarke, President Bush's former counterterrorism adviser, had conducted a ''post-mortem report'' after the attacks, analyzing intelligence files for all mentions of Al Qaeda in the 18 months before Sept. 11, 2001. ''Where is that report?'' she demanded. ''Where are the findings?'' Lorie Van Auken, who lost her husband Kenneth, "was irate that there was no mention of an accusation that Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of Pakistan's intelligence services, ordered the transfer of $100,000 to Mr. Atta. As to the other details -- that the plot initially included attacks in Southeast Asia and that the original target list included the White House, the Capitol and buildings in Los Angeles and Seattle -- she was dismissive. ''We know all that,'' she said. ''They're missing key elements that tell the story.'' [New York Times, 6/17/2004]
June 23, 2005: Family Members ask for CIA Inspector General's Report to be released
"Relatives of Sept. 11 victims on Thursday called on the CIA to release an internal report that scrutinizes the U.S. spy agency's counterterrorism efforts prior to the 2001 attacks." "The report by the Central Intelligence Agency's inspector general, which is said to be in its final stages, is expected to be sent in classified form to CIA Director Porter Goss and then to the intelligence oversight committees in Congress later this summer, officials said. But victims' relatives, whose lobbying overcame President Bush's initial resistance to the creation of the Sept. 11 commission, say they intend to step up public pressure on the CIA to release the report publicly. "There's information in there that's supposed to really name some names and finally go for some accountability," said widow Lorie Van Auken of the group known as the Sept. 11 Advocates, a driving force behind creation of the bipartisan commission that investigated the attacks. "Accountability would be fabulous because right now nobody's being held accountable for anything anywhere in this entire government," she said in an interview. [Reuters, 6/23/2005]
July 22nd, 2005: Lorie Van Auken, Mindy Kleinberg, and Monica Gabrielle Testify Before the 9/11 Congressional Briefing
Former Representative Cynthia McKinney holds a historic Congressional Briefing in Washington D.C. a year after the release of the 9/11 Report asking "did the Commission get it right?" Family Members Lorie Van Auken, Monica Gabrielle, and Mindy Kleinberg are the first to testify. Representing Monica and Mindy, Lorie Van Auken states, "Incredulous, but undeterred, we realized that it was necessary to take a thorough and independent look at what had gone wrong on 9/11. Our children were going to have to grow up in this changed world, and we needed to make sure that this would never happen again. We knew that with the 3,000 deaths on 9/11 there remained thousands of questions that needed to be answered, so, we fought for the creation of the 9/11 Commission. And with all of America by our side, we finally won that battle. The Commission was passed into law in the autumn of 2002, and by January, 2003 the Commission finally sat down to commence its very important work. The 9/11 Commission's report is one year old today. This report was supposed to provide the definitive account of what had transpired on September eleven, 2001. We hoped that our thousands of unanswered questions would be addressed and answered. Yet incredibly we have found that the Commission's definitive final report has actually yielded more questions than answers. Moreover, there are still so many areas that remain unexplained, or are only vaguely touched upon by the 9/11 Commission, so much so that it was quite difficult for me to decide where I should start my testimony to you today." [reprehensor.gnn.tv, 7/22/2005]
August 10, 2005: News about Able Danger is revealed, Family Members release a statement, declare 9/11 Report a "hollow failure"
"As 9/11 widows who fought tirelessly for the creation of the 9/11 Commission, we are wholly disappointed to learn that the Commission's Final Report is a hollow failure. We spent innumerable hours of our time away from our families to ensure that the 9/11 Commission had the tools and resources necessary to provide a complete and thorough accounting of the 9/11 attacks to the American people. We truly wanted to learn lessons from the 9/11 attacks so that we could all live in a safer environment. We find this latest revelation of the Commission's failure to adequately and aggressively pursue the complete truth surrounding 9/11 absolutely shameful." [September 11th Advocates, 8/10/2005]
August 23, 2005: Monograph shows Al Hamzi and Al Mihdhar in NY/NJ area in December 2000, Family Members release a statement asking for Commission to explain their "mistake"
"It has come to our attention that two of the 9/11 hijackers – Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar – were in the NY/NJ area in December of 2000. The evidence of this new piece of knowledge is found on page A-21 of the 9/11 Commission's visa travel monograph. On that page you will find two identification cards issued by USA ID to Al Mihdhar and Al Hazmi. Please note the expiration date of those identification cards – December 2006. It should also be noted that USA ID only provides identification cards for a six year duration. The date of issuance, therefore, can be ascertained by subtracting six years from the date of expiration. Thus, the date of issuance was December 2000. This information is highly relevant in that it reveals a glaring "mistake" in the Commission's timeline regarding the whereabouts of two of the key 9-11 hijackers. Namely, that both Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar were in the NY - NJ area nearly two months after the Cole bombing – an Al Qaeda attack that cost the lives of 17 US Sailors in Yemen in October 2000. We request the Commission explain their "mistake" to the American people and further investigate the concrete whereabouts of these two hijackers for the time period of June 2000 until the day of 9-11. Recall that the Commission reports that Al Mihdhar left the United States in June of 2000 not to return until July of 2001." [September 11th Advocates, 8/23/2005]
August 25, 2005: CIA Inspector General's Report not to be declassified, Family Members release a statement calling for its "immediate release"
"We are deeply disturbed to learn that an investigation of the CIA, conducted at the direction of the Joint House and Senate Congressional Intelligence Committees in 2002, will not be declassified and released as soon as possible. This report presumably discusses failures within the CIA and identifies performance deficiencies among high-ranking CIA officials. The findings in this report must be shared with all members of Congress and with the American public to ensure that the problems identified are addressed and corrected, thus moving to restore faith in this agency. We call for the immediate release of this report. To shield CIA officials from accountability and to continue to cover-up deficiencies in that agency puts the safety of our nation at risk. Four years post 9-11 this is truly unacceptable." [September 11th Advocates, 8/25/2005]
September 19, 2005: Pentagon calls for hearings regarding Able Danger to be closed to the public, Family Members release a statement
"We were stunned to learn that the Pentagon is calling for the Senate hearing regarding "Able Danger" scheduled for Wednesday, September 21st, to be closed to the public. Recall that Able Danger was the data mining operation run out of the Defense Intelligence Agency that allegedly identified four of the 9/11 hijackers one year prior to the attacks. There has been much controversy surrounding these findings and their significance cannot be overstated. This information, relating to Able Danger, changes the entire 9/11 "story" and would therefore impact many of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. After attempting to seek the truth for four years, it would be a travesty to keep the facts surrounding this operation from the public. The insistence on secrecy by governmental agencies only makes their motives suspect and ultimately serves to keep the American public at risk." [September 11th Advocates, 9/19/2005]
April 12, 2006: Lorie Van Auken and Mindy Kleinberg address journalism and media studies students about 9/11 investigation
At the Scholarly Communication Center of the Alexander Library, 9/11 Family Members Lorie Van Auken, and Mindy Kleinberg address journalism and media studies students. "The media didn't have the same want to find the truth," Van Auken said. "Conflicting facts began to raise issues to us. It became very clear to us that we were supposed to play the role of the unquestioning victims." "We've been operating in an environment that's a no-fault government," Kleinberg said. "Whatever glossing over of the topic they could do they would." Kleinberg talked of how she was disappointed with the end result of the 9/11 Commission report. "They did not do the job we were hoping," Kleinberg said. "Evidence was offered that they did not go after." [Daily Targum, 4/12/2006]
May 11, 2006: Families release a statement on Hayden, other rewarded after 9/11
"There has been an untenable pattern in this administration where abysmal failure gets rewarded and accountability is not found. For example: 1. Condoleezza Rice was promoted to Secretary of State: On May 16, 2002, Condoleezza Rice, as National Security Advisor, said, "No one could have predicted that planes could be used as missiles", despite many prior intelligence reports on that precise topic and the fact that she was in Italy in July 2001 with the President who had to sleep on a boat for fear that a plane might be used as a missile in an assassination attempt against him. On September 11, 2001, four planes were used as missiles. Our National Security Agencies were unprepared. 3000 people were killed. In 2005, Condoleezza Rice was promoted from National Security Advisor to Secretary of State. 2. George Tenet was heralded as a hero and given the Medal of Freedom: Tenet led the CIA through three of the US Intelligence communities largest failures: the U.S.S. Cole bombing, 9/11, and the lack of WMD in Iraq. George Tenet was given the Presidential Medal of Freedom, one of our countries most esteemed honors. 3. FBI agents Michael Maltbie and David Frasca were promoted within the ranks of the FBI: Moussaoui's arresting officer, FBI agent Harry Samit, tried some 70 times to get a FISA warrant to search Moussaoui's belongings before the 9/11 attacks. Samit testified during the Moussaoui penalty phase that he was thwarted by two agents at FBI HQ: Michael Maltbie, and David Frasca. These men scrubbed clean Samit's FISA requests of any references to terrorist ties that Moussaoui might have had, and then refused to allow the FISA requests to even be made. The US Government has asserted that had they been able to search Moussaoui's belongings, the 9/11 plot could have been prevented. Maltbie and Frasca were both promoted within the ranks of the FBI, where they are still employed today. 4. Steven Hadley was promoted to National Security Advisor: Steven Hadley is the man responsible for placing the misleading and erroneous 16 words in the State of the Union Address regarding WMD in Iraq. Steven Hadley was promoted to National Security Advisor in 2005. 5. Porter Goss was promoted to Director of the CIA: Porter Goss was the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee prior to and after 9/11. In such capacity he was responsible for the Congressional oversight of the intelligence community and its agencies. With an intelligence community still in complete disarray nearly 5 years post-9/11, Goss was at least in part responsible for that. President Bush appointed Goss to head the CIA in 2004. 6. General Michael Hayden is now being appointed to Director of the CIA: On September 10, 2001, two intercepts were received by the NSA: "tomorrow is zero hour" and "the match begins tomorrow". According to the official record, these intercepts were not translated until September 12, 2001. In the summer of threat, the NSA apparently had a shortage of translators. General Michael Hayden was head of the NSA in September of 2001. Moreover, Hayden is the architect of the president's illegal wiretapping program. The congressional intelligence committees were not briefed about this program, as is required by law. General Michael Hayden is now being promoted to head the CIA. Nearly five years post-9/11, the agencies that comprise our national security apparatus are floundering because no real reforms have taken place. This failure lies solely within the hands of President Bush and Congress who fail to take our homeland security seriously and make it a number one priority. However, one must remain mindful that any intelligence agency can only be as good as the individuals that comprise that agency and lead that agency. How can we expect optimal results from an intelligence community that continues to be led by incompetent individuals with clear records of failure? Why is our President choosing individuals who have clearly showed failures of judgment and failures of competence that have cost thousands of lives?" [September 11th Advocates, 5/11/2006]
June 7, 2006: "Jersey Girls" respond to Ann Coulter's slanderous remarks
"We did not choose to become widowed on September 11, 2001. The attack, which tore our families apart and destroyed our former lives, caused us to ask some serious questions regarding the systems that our country has in place to protect its citizens. Through our constant research, we came to learn how the protocols were supposed to have worked. Thus, we asked for an independent commission to investigate the loopholes which obviously existed and allowed us to be so utterly vulnerable to terrorists. Our only motivation ever was to make our Nation safer. Could we learn from this tragedy so that it would not be repeated? We are forced to respond to Ms. Coulter's accusations to set the record straight because we have been slandered. Contrary to Ms. Coulter's statements, there was no joy in watching men that we loved burn alive. There was no happiness in telling our children that their fathers were never coming home again. We adored these men and miss them every day. It is in their honor and memory, that we will once again refocus the Nation's attention to the real issues at hand: our lack of security, leadership and progress in the five years since 9/11. We are continuously reminded that we are still a nation at risk. Therefore, the following is a partial list of areas still desperately in need of attention and public outcry. We should continuously be holding the feet of our elected officials to the fire to fix these shortcomings. 1. Homeland Security Funding based on risk. Inattention to this area causes police officers, firefighters and other emergency/first responder personnel to be ill equipped in emergencies. Fixing this will save lives on the day of the next attack. 2. Intelligence Community Oversight. Without proper oversight, there exists no one joint, bicameral intelligence panel with power to both authorize and appropriate funding for intelligence activities. Without such funding we are unable to capitalize on all intelligence community resources and abilities to thwart potential terrorist attacks. Fixing this will save lives on the day of the next attack. 3. Transportation Security. There has been no concerted effort to harden mass transportation security. Our planes, buses, subways, and railways remain under-protected and highly vulnerable. These are all identifiable soft targets of potential terrorist attack. The terror attacks in Spain and London attest to this fact. Fixing our transportation systems may save lives on the day of the next attack. 4. Information Sharing among Intelligence Agencies. Information sharing among intelligence agencies has not improved since 9/11. The attacks on 9/11 could have been prevented had information been shared among intelligence agencies. On the day of the next attack, more lives may be saved if our intelligence agencies work together. 5. Loose Nukes. A concerted effort has not been made to secure the thousands of loose nukes scattered around the world – particularly in the former Soviet Union. Securing these loose nukes could make it less likely for a terrorist group to use this method in an attack, thereby saving lives. 6. Security at Chemical Plants, Nuclear Plants, Ports. We must, as a nation, secure these known and identifiable soft targets of Terrorism. Doing so will save many lives. 7. Border Security. We continue to have porous borders and INS and Customs systems in shambles. We need a concerted effort to integrate our border security into the larger national security apparatus. 8. Civil Liberties Oversight Board. Given the President's NSA Surveillance Program and the re-instatement of the Patriot Act, this Nation is in dire need of a Civil Liberties Oversight Board to insure that a proper balance is found between national security versus the protection of our constitutional rights." [September 11th Advocates, 6/7/2006]
August 4, 2006: 9/11 Commission admits lied to by NORAD, Family Members release a statement questioning the "veracity of the entire Commission's report"
"Recent stories in the Washington Post, the New York Times, as well as the release of the transcripts of the NORAD tapes in Vanity Fair, clearly show that the 9/11 Commission failed in its duties. According to current reports, the Commission knew that it had been deceived by NORAD. In May 2003, representatives of NORAD testified, in full regalia, before the 9/11 Commission equipped with an easel and visual aids to highlight NORAD's timeline for the day of 9/11. In June 2004, NORAD testified again, changing its previous testimony. The new timeline blamed the lack of military response on late notification by the FAA. The Commissioners never determined or explained why there was a discrepancy between the two sets of testimonies. Governor Kean is quoted in the Washington Post article as saying "we, to this day don't know why NORAD told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth ... It's one of those loose ends that never got tied". The fact that the Commission did not see fit to tie up all loose ends in their final report or to hold those who came before them accountable for lying and/or making misleading statements puts into question the veracity of the entire Commission's report. Individuals who came before the Commission to testify, after NORAD's appearance, had no reason to state the truth. It was abundantly clear that there would be no repercussions for any misrepresentations. Furthermore, the lack of tenacity and curiosity, by the Commissioners themselves, to determine why NORAD had deceived them is unconscionable. Knowing full well that the lack of military response was such a critical failure, begs the question of whether that same lack of tenacity and curiosity was applied to other critical areas of the 9/11 investigation. We fought to establish the 9/11 Independent Commission because we believed that American citizens would be better served if our nation's vulnerabilities were uncovered and then fixed. Unfortunately, once again the failure to fully and properly investigate all areas, not follow all leads and not address the need for accountability, whether it be bureaucrats lying at a hearing or personnel with questionable performance of assigned duties, continues to leave this Nation and its citizens vulnerable and at risk. The 9/11 Commission was derelict in its duties. What we needed from them was a thorough investigation into the events of September 11th. Inexcusably, five years later, we still do." [September 11th Advocates, 8/4/2006]
End Part I