Cover Up : What the Government Is Still Hiding About the War on Terror

Rating:
Summary: 9/11 Commission report conveniently leaves out many facts
Review: When the 9/11 Commission report came out I ran down to the bookstore and got 2 copies 45 minutes before the oficial release time. I had read over 2,000 articles on 9/11, and was eager to find out what the official report admitted, and what it omitted. Although it added many facts that had not been revealed before, I was disgusted to find that many facts showing government incompetence were left out entirely, and no accountability was demanded of those who incompetence cost hundreds of lives, and those who lied about it.
Did you know that:
[1] Condoleezza Rice perjured herself before the 9/11 Commission, and was not challenged?
[2] Two U.S. generals, including the now-famous General Myers, stated that when multiple aircraft were reported hijacked on 9/11 they did not think it was a COORDINATED PLOT until the first jet crashed into the World Trade center? Despite the fact that there had been only 1 hijacking in the U.S. in 15 years before that morning. Neither general has been fired or brought up on charges.
[3] In September 2001 The federal government released a timeline of the NORAD and FAA response to the news of the hijackings on 9/11 and the failure to scramble fighter jets in time to stop any of the attacks. This Spring (2004), in front of the live 9/11 Commission hearings, the government released an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT TIMELINE. As to which one, if either, is true we don't know. No one has been fired or brought up on charges for this coverup.
[4] In 2001 the French and Russian and other allied intelligence services and many CIA and FBI agents tried to warn our leadership of an imminent large terror attack against the United States. (Senator Feinstein of California even stated on Meet the Press on July 1, 2001 that a large terrorist attack against the U.S. was likely within 60 days - she was off by only 12 days.) Despite this, and despite an August 6 memo Bush received stating that Bin Laden wants to attack Washington, D.C. and preparations for hijackings are now underway, neither Bush or Cheney treated it urgently. A week before 9/11 the White House finally held a meeting about the threat, but neither Bush nor Cheney bothered to show up. In August Senator Feinstein sent Cheney information about the threat, and she was told that Cheney will take a look at it within 6 months.
[5] An FBI agent in Minnesota who had a terrorist named Zakarias Moussaoui in custody in August 2001 said to FBI HQ in Washington,

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Revelations Omitted from Commission Report
Review: COVER UP would be fascinating reading any time, but it's must reading right now while Congress is focusing on improving U.S. intelligence. This book opens up a whole new aspect about who the FBI was working with prior to 9/11, as if Lance's first book, 1000 YEARS FOR REVENGE (now in paperback) wasn't astounding enough. You'll find out what the 9/11 Commission ignored and left out of its report. If you are looking for accountability and the truth behind the 9/11 failures, you'll find that Lance's powerful investigative reporting makes a unique and critical contribution to your search.

Rating:
Summary: I am not sure
Review: Even though some of the questions raised are very reasonable and thought provocating the book fails to provide factual documentantation and back up logic


Rating:
Summary: Intrigue abounds..
Review: I applaud this book mostly for reminding us of the obstruction and obfuscation faced by the people who want the government to fess-up and come clean about the facts surrounding 9/11. Lance chronologically details the accounts of the creation of the 9/11 Commission and the frustration of the Jersey Girls in trying to get something, anything done and to get someone, anyone to take a serious look at the tragedy. And he is accurately able to portray that this has yet to happen.

My main bone of contention with this book is the many, many typos. It's extremely difficult, at least for me, to lend full credence to a source with so many glowing spelling defects and improper dating. Not only do I find it confusing but maddening, as well.

I don't know much about the Flight 800 specifics as this is the first opinion I've read of the conspiracy. As far as I can tell the gist of Lance's theory boils down to this: Jamie Gorelick and friends covered up a mob informants testimony to keep a bunch of New York mob guys in prison and protect the reputation of a corrupt FBI agent thereby disallowing damning information to come to light that inadvertently ends with the 9/11 tragedy.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent Analysis of TWA 800, Good on 9/11
Review: I'd say that we live in a time of conspiracy theories, except that they have been around seemingly forever. Certainly there were a bunch of them surrounding Lincoln's death, and Kennedy and Roswell. In this book, Peter Lance an award winning investigative reporter looks carefully into the TWA 800 case and the 9/11 incident.

He brings up a lot of interesting points. But I'm not sure just what to believe. For instance, he asks the question 'Why wasn't NORAD (the Air Force) alerted to the hijackings until eighteen minutes after air traffic controllers realized a hijacking was in progress.' I think that's pretty easy to answer. The controllers weren't sure it was a hijacking, they are government employees, they had to get permission first. And the boss was probably in the bathroom, in a meeting, on the phone. There are all kinds of reasons to use up 18 minutes. You don't want to charge conspiracy when simple incompetance may account for it.

You may accept, or reject his conclusions, (or like me, admit you don't know) but if you don't have the information, you can't even make that decision. Mr. Lynch has exhaustively researched the files, studies and news reports. The resulting book is an excellent summary of what happened. I was particularly impressed with the TWA 800 information as this has been less available than 9/11 information.

Rating:
Summary: We've All Been "Duped"
Review: Once again, Peter Lance delivers. I stumbled across "1000 Years for Revenge" 2 months ago because the cover caught my eye. It was one of the best books I have ever read. "Cover Up" is an amazing follow up to Lance's first look at the real face of terrorism that we are facing. Much like his first book on terrorism, this book leaves you with a very disturbing taste in your mouth in regards to our national security. The first half of the book basically revolves around the crash of TWA flight 800, and how new evidence that Lance was introduced to in early 2004 indicates that the plane did not crash as a result of a "mechanical failure", but rather as a direct result of one Ramzi Yousef as he sat in his prison cell in New York City. With his amazing ability to tell a story and keep you on the edge of your seat, Lance paints a fascinating picture of international terrorism, the mafia, corrupt cops, and even the murders of three civil rights workers in Mississippi in 1964 that would later become the focus of the movie "Mississippi Burning".

The second half of the book is dedicated to breaking down the 9/11 commission report piece by piece and cross examining it, exposing the Commission for the half-truths that it produced in its 18-month "investigation". Many questions are brought up, with too few answers.

This book, along with "1000 Years for Revenge" are must reads for anyone. I have recommended these books to every friend I have.

You will not be able to put the book down. In part due to Lance's amazing ability to make a story based on facts read like a fiction novel. But also because much of what you will be reading will astonish you.



Rating:
Summary: Half a book
Review: The first half is this book raises interesting questions about the Justice Department and how it may have comprimised national security to insurance organized crime prosecutions. The second part of the book talking about the 9-11 commission falls apart. The 9-11 discussion is rambling and raises questions that, when asked without context may be valid, but in the context of a continuing war on terror and a presidential election won't be asnwered. By using sources like Salon.com, Henry Waxman, and Richard Clarke I could tell you the conclusion before I read the chapter; the plea for unbiased accounting of the events of 9-11 can not be found with these sources.