Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WELDON REJECTS 9/11 COMMISSION CLAIM THEY NEVER HEARD OF "ABLE DANGER"
email from Weldon's office | 8-10-05 | Weldon office

Posted on 08/11/2005 7:29:46 AM PDT by doug from upland

WELDON REJECTS 9/11 COMMISSION CLAIM THEY NEVER HEARD OF "ABLE DANGER"

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Yesterday, Congressman Curt Weldon (R-PA), Vice Chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, sent the following letter to the Former 9/11 Commission Members, also known as the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, rejecting the Commission's claim that they were not briefed on "Able Danger".

In the letter, Congressman Weldon calls on the 9/11 Public Discourse Project to answer two fundamental questions:

#1) What lawyers in the Department of Defense made the decision in late 2000 not to pass the information from Able Danger to the FBI?

#2) Why did the 9-11 Commission staff not find it necessary to pass this information to the Commissioners, and why did the 9-11 Commission staff not request full documentation of Able Danger from the team member that volunteered the information?

Below is a copy of a letter sent by Congressman Curt Weldon to the Former 9/11 Commission members.

August 10, 2005

The Honorable Thomas H. Kean, Chairman

The Honorable Lee H. Hamilton, Vice Chairman

9/11 Public Discourse Project

One DuPont Circle, NW Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036

Dear Chairman Kean and Vice Chairman Hamilton:

I am contacting you to discuss an important issue that concerns the terrible events of September 11, 2001, and our country's efforts to ensure that such a calamity is never again allowed to occur. Your bipartisan work on The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States shed light on much that was unclear in the minds of the American people regarding what happened that fateful day, however there appears to be more to the story than the public has been told. I bring this before you because of my respect for you both, and for the 9-11 Commission's service to America.

Almost seven years ago, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 established the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, otherwise known as the Gilmore Commission. The Gilmore Commission reached many of the same conclusions as your panel, and in December of 2000 called for the creation of a "National Office for Combating Terrorism." I mention this because prior to 9/11, Congress was aware of many of the institutional obstacles to preventing a terrorist attack, and was actively attempting to address them. I know this because I authored the language establishing the Gilmore Commission.

In the 1990's, as chairman of the congressional subcommittee that oversaw research & development for the Department of Defense, I paid special attention to the activities of the Army's Land Information Warfare Activity (LIWA) at Ft. Belvoir. During that time, I led a bipartisan delegation of Members of Congress to Vienna, Austria to meet with members of the Russian parliament, or Duma. Before leaving, I received a brief from the CIA on a Serbian individual that would be attending the meeting. The CIA provided me with a single paragraph of information. On the other hand, representatives of LIWA gave me five pages of far more in-depth analysis. This was cause for concern, but my debriefing with the CIA and FBI following the trip was cause for outright alarm: neither had ever heard of LIWA or the data mining capability it possessed.

As a result of experiences such as these, I introduced language into three successive Defense Authorization bills calling for the creation of an intelligence fusion center which I called NOAH, or National Operations and Analysis Hub. The NOAH concept is certainly familiar now, and is one of several recommendations made by your commission that has a basis in earlier acts of Congress. Despite my repeated efforts to establish NOAH, the CIA insisted that it would not be practical. Fortunately, this bureaucratic intransigence was overcome when Congress and President Bush acted in 2003 to create the Terrorism Threat Integration Center (now the National Counterterrorism Center). Unfortunately, it took the deaths of 3,000 people to bring us to the point where we could make this happen. Now, I am confident that under the able leadership of John Negroponte, the days of toleration for intelligence agencies that refuse to share information with each other are behind us.

The 9-11 Commission produced a book-length account of its findings, that the American people might educate themselves on the challenges facing our national effort to resist and defeat terrorism. Though under different circumstances, I eventually decided to do the same. I recently published a book critical of our intelligence agencies because even after 9/11, they were not getting the message. After failing to win the bureaucratic battle inside the Beltway, I decided to take my case to the American people.

In recent years, a reliable source that I refer to as "Ali" began providing me with detailed inside information on Iran's role in supporting terror and undermining the United States' global effort to eradicate it. I have forwarded literally hundreds of pages of information from Ali to the CIA, FBI, and DIA, as well as the appropriate congressional oversight committees. The response from our intelligence agencies has been underwhelming, to put it mildly. Worse, I have documented occasions where the CIA has outright lied to me. While the mid-level bureaucrats at Langley may not be interested in what I have to say, their new boss is. Porter Goss has all of the information I have gathered, and I know he is ready to do what it takes to challenge the circle-the-wagons culture of the CIA. And Pete Hoekstra, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, is energized as well. Director Goss and Chairman Hoekstra are both outstanding leaders that know each other well from their work together in the House of Representatives, and I will continue to strongly support their efforts at reform.

All of this background leads to the reason I am writing to you today. Yesterday the national news media began in-depth coverage of a story that is not new. In fact, I have been talking about it for some time. From 1998 to 2001, Army Intelligence and Special Operations Command spearheaded an effort called Able Danger that was intended to map out al Qaeda. According to individuals that were part of the project, Able Danger identified Mohammed Atta as a terrorist threat before 9/11. Team members believed that the Atta cell in Brooklyn should be subject to closer scrutiny, but somewhere along the food chain of Administration bureaucrats and lawyers, a decision was made in late 2000 against passing the information to the FBI. These details are understandably of great interest to the American people, thus the recent media frenzy. However I have spoken on this topic for some time, in the House Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, on the floor of the House on June 27, 2005, and at various speaking engagements.

The impetus for this letter is my extreme disappointment in the recent, and false, claim of the 9-11 Commission staff that the Commission was never given access to any information on Able Danger. The 9-11 Commission staff received not one but two briefings on Able Danger from former team members, yet did not pursue the matter. Furthermore, commissioners never returned calls from a defense intelligence official that had made contact with them to discuss this issue as a follow on to a previous meeting.

In retrospect, it appears that my own suggestions to the Commission might have directed investigators in the direction of Able Danger, had they been heeded. I personally reached out to members of the Commission several times with information on the need for a national collaborative capability, of which Able Danger was a prototype. In the context of those discussions, I referenced LIWA and the work it had been doing prior to 9/11. My chief of staff physically handed a package containing this information to one of the commissioners at your Commission's appearance on April 13, 2004 in the Hart Senate Office Building. I have spoken with Governor Kean by phone on this subject, and my office delivered a package with this information to the 9-11 Commission staff via courier. When the Commission briefed Congress with their findings on July 22, 2004, I asked the very first question in exasperation: "Why didn't you let Members of Congress who were involved in these issues testify before, or meet with, the Commission?"

The 9-11 Commission took a very high-profile role in critiquing intelligence agencies that refused to listen to outside information. The commissioners very publicly expressed their disapproval of agencies and departments that would not entertain ideas that did not originate in-house. Therefore it is no small irony that the Commission would in the end prove to be guilty of the very same offense when information of potentially critical importance was brought to its attention. The Commission's refusal to investigate Able Danger after being notified of its existence, and its recent efforts to feign ignorance of the project while blaming others for supposedly withholding information on it, brings shame on the commissioners, and is evocative of the worst tendencies in the federal government that the Commission worked to expose.

Questions remain to be answered. The first: What lawyers in the Department of Defense made the decision in late 2000 not to pass the information from Able Danger to the FBI? And second: Why did the 9-11 Commission staff not find it necessary to pass this information to the Commissioners, and why did the 9-11 Commission staff not request full documentation of Able Danger from the team member that volunteered the information?

Answering these questions is the work of the commissioners now, and fear of tarnishing the Commission's legacy cannot be allowed to override the truth. The American people are counting on you not to "go native" by succumbing to the very temptations your Commission was assembled to indict. In the meantime, I have shared all that I know on this topic with the congressional committee chairmen that have oversight over the Department of Defense, the CIA, the FBI, and the rest of our intelligence gathering and analyzing agencies. You can rest assured that Congress will share your interest in how it is that this critical information is only now seeing the light of day.

Sincerely,

CURT WELDON

Member of Congress

cc:

Richard Ben-Veniste

Fred F. Fielding

Jamie S. Gorelick

Slade Gorton

Bob Kerrey

John F. Lehman

Timothy J. Roemer

James R. Thompson

Dennis Hastert

Peter Hoekstra

Frank Wolf

Pat Roberts

Richard Shelby


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 911; 911commission; 911coverup; abledanger; atta; gorelick; jamiegorelick; weldon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-129 next last
I received this via email from Congressman Weldon's office. My contact there will be updating us. I told them that the FReepers are ready to help in whatever way we can.
1 posted on 08/11/2005 7:29:47 AM PDT by doug from upland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

The message is Aug. 11. I should have put that date, not Aug. 10, at the top of this piece.


2 posted on 08/11/2005 7:31:45 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Congressman Weldon is doing the right thing for our country. Here's a link to this letter on the Congressman's web site:

http://curtweldon.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=32193
3 posted on 08/11/2005 7:33:11 AM PDT by advance_copy (Stand for life, or nothing at all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Why isn't the NY Times camping out in Jamie Gorelick's front lawn, demanding answers from her? Where are the Jersey Girls?


4 posted on 08/11/2005 7:33:33 AM PDT by GianniV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Why is it that since the November election, the 9/11 Commission doesn't seem to get the same press coverage that it used to?

Maybe it's just me.


5 posted on 08/11/2005 7:34:01 AM PDT by TravisBickle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

This is what happens when liberals roll RINOs. National Security becomes compromised as the left chases Bush and Company (truth be damned they had a Presidential election to win) and the RINO's on the Commission sat back and let it happen.


6 posted on 08/11/2005 7:34:11 AM PDT by stuckinNY-NJ (The difference between Al Pirro and Bill Clinton is that Al actually WENT to jail)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
The 9-11 Commission took a very high-profile role in critiquing intelligence agencies that refused to listen to outside information. The commissioners very publicly expressed their disapproval of agencies and departments that would not entertain ideas that did not originate in-house. Therefore it is no small irony that the Commission would in the end prove to be guilty of the very same offense when information of potentially critical importance was brought to its attention. The Commission's refusal to investigate Able Danger after being notified of its existence, and its recent efforts to feign ignorance of the project while blaming others for supposedly withholding information on it, brings shame on the commissioners, and is evocative of the worst tendencies in the federal government that the Commission worked to expose.

What a beautiful paragraph.

Let us know how we can help. I want Congressional hearings with under oath testimony as to why the information provided by Able Danger was ignored.

Let us know who to pressure. bbl

7 posted on 08/11/2005 7:35:46 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

NOW THEY'RE ADMITTING THAT THEY DID!


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1461205/posts


8 posted on 08/11/2005 7:36:24 AM PDT by airborne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

I told them that the FReepers are ready to help in whatever way we can.

I'm ready.


9 posted on 08/11/2005 7:36:42 AM PDT by BayouCoyote (The 1st victim of islam is the person who practices the lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Weldon is doing the right thing. I'm not so sure about the headline attached to this post, however.

Weldon's email makes it abundantly clear that it was Commission staffers, not Commission members themselves, who were briefed on this. Weldon's email confirms that by specifically asking why those staffers did not pass that information on to the actual members of the Commission.

The problem is that some people are incorrectly reading and repeating this story as if the members of the Commission themselves were briefed, and we have no evidence of that. In other words, people are spreading some bum scoop about this that is going to create an issue where none need exist.

10 posted on 08/11/2005 7:38:30 AM PDT by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach; GianniV

Maybe FReepers are the ones who should camp in front of Gorelick's and demand answers.


11 posted on 08/11/2005 7:38:36 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

There sure seems to be a lot of 911 stuff apprearing here today. I'm kind of curious...........why now? I'm also curious why the people who are responsible for the obstruction of information are not being held accountable for their actions. Doesn't anyone have to take responsibility any more?


12 posted on 08/11/2005 7:39:26 AM PDT by Sunshine Sister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Much as I'd love to do that, given the geography, I can't do that.

There must be people we can call and pressure.


13 posted on 08/11/2005 7:39:45 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead

I used when they provided in the email to me. Call his office and give your perspective.


14 posted on 08/11/2005 7:40:04 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

"what" they provided in the email


15 posted on 08/11/2005 7:40:43 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GianniV

> Why isn't the NY Times camping out in Jamie Gorelick's
> front lawn, demanding answers from her?

Because they'd have to get in line behind the Clintons.

Jamie was on the Commish precisely to prevent this sort
of information from ever seeing the light of day.
She blew it.


16 posted on 08/11/2005 7:43:24 AM PDT by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GianniV
Why isn't the NY Times camping out in Jamie Gorelick's front lawn, demanding answers from her?

Because she is not a Republican. So, it's okay to ignore this information that lead to the deaths of over 3,000 Americans and drew America into the War on Terror.

The NY Slimes and the libs would rather see this country completely wiped off the face of the earth rather than ever admit a liberal did something wrong. A childish, immature, ignorant and dangerous way to think and it borders on aiding and abetting the enemy.

17 posted on 08/11/2005 7:43:32 AM PDT by technomage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: technomage

Are you daring to question their patriotism? Yes. It is about damn time.


18 posted on 08/11/2005 7:44:30 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GianniV

The NYT is too busy looking into adoptions. Get your priorities straight man!


19 posted on 08/11/2005 7:47:03 AM PDT by homeywhite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland; Happy2BMe; PhilDragoo; MeekOneGOP; potlatch; ntnychik; Smartass; Alamo-Girl; ...
On this date, Aug, 11, 1945 (VJ Day) The ship I served on during the War had been doing carrier plane guarding for a battle group in the Pacific.

When the Atomic bomb was dropped on Japan on Aug 6th, 1945, my ship was immediately ordered back to Pearl Harbor,  Arriving there on Aug 11 we were treated to the fantastic once in a lifetime spectacle  of one of the most impressionable fire power demonstrations one could imagine.

Every ship in the harbor lit the night sky with every kind of star shell, tracers. H/E and just plane small arms fire. This went on for hours.

This was a scene I shall live with forever and will never forget.

I was sitting in the old Pompano high school auditorium where  we listened to President Roosevelts speach declaring war on Japan in 1941 and here I was in 1945 in the very place it started and ended. 

I doesn't get any better than this.
 



Bud Garner
 

20 posted on 08/11/2005 7:47:05 AM PDT by devolve (------- http://tinypic.com/a47v9u.gif --American Immigration ---- Good-Bad-or-Ugly?-- -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Yes, we are. Fax machine is warmed up if needed.


21 posted on 08/11/2005 7:48:36 AM PDT by MizSterious (Now, if only we could convince them all to put on their bomb-vests and meet in Mecca...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuckinNY-NJ
National Security becomes compromised as the left chases Bush and Company (truth be damned they had a Presidential election to win) and the RINO's on the Commission sat back and let it happen.

"RINO's" like who -- John Lehman??

The weaselly little staffers didn't pass this stuff on to him. That's why Lehman is pissed too. I've said elsewhere I would not be shocked to learn that staffers did contact a Commission member like Jamie Gorelick, and that she was the one who spiked this without telling the rest of the Commission.

22 posted on 08/11/2005 7:49:28 AM PDT by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: devolve

Thanks for that post.


23 posted on 08/11/2005 7:49:34 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sunshine Sister

In the end, the powerful will protect their own.


24 posted on 08/11/2005 7:50:09 AM PDT by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
The impetus for this letter is my extreme disappointment in the recent, and false, claim of the 9-11 Commission staff that the Commission was never given access to any information on Able Danger. The 9-11 Commission staff received not one but two briefings on Able Danger from former team members, yet did not pursue the matter. Furthermore, commissioners never returned calls from a defense intelligence official that had made contact with them to discuss this issue as a follow on to a previous meeting.
25 posted on 08/11/2005 7:50:25 AM PDT by stocksthatgoup (Polls = Proof that when the MSM want your opinion they will give it to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

bump


26 posted on 08/11/2005 7:51:17 AM PDT by TASMANIANRED (Conservatives are from Earth. Liberals are from Uranus.(c))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Thanks for posting. I think I heard you on hannity lately also.

In any event, it's clear (as others have already pointed out here) that the 9/11 commission appears to have been manipulated (or the coverage slanted, or both) to bash Bush and sweep Clinton-era failures under the rug.

Always remember: the Democrats are not to be trusted with national security. they're not up to the job.

And wouldn't it be interesting to see 9/11 widows picket Clinton's home, as is happening with Cindy Sheehan in Texas? What would the coverage be like for THAT?


27 posted on 08/11/2005 7:51:49 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
That is an amazing paragraph!

The 9-11 Commission took a very high-profile role in critiquing intelligence agencies that refused to listen to outside information. The commissioners very publicly expressed their disapproval of agencies and departments that would not entertain ideas that did not originate in-house. Therefore it is no small irony that the Commission would in the end prove to be guilty of the very same offense when information of potentially critical importance was brought to its attention. The Commission's refusal to investigate Able Danger after being notified of its existence, and its recent efforts to feign ignorance of the project while blaming others for supposedly withholding information on it, brings shame on the commissioners, and is evocative of the worst tendencies in the federal government that the Commission worked to expose.

28 posted on 08/11/2005 7:52:06 AM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

This guy Weldon is really OK.


29 posted on 08/11/2005 7:52:12 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead

The accountability for this stops at the Commissioners. That's the way its supposed to work. If the staffers didn't communicate this information, then the Commissioners failed to create an environment in which this information could be aired before the Commission.

These revelations confirm my suspicion about this Commission. It also confirms why the Bush administration treated the Commision as it did. Bush offered a clarifying moment with Ashcroft b-slapping Gorelick, but the Commission did nothing.

Chickens are roosting now.


30 posted on 08/11/2005 7:52:24 AM PDT by steveyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: devolve

God bless for your service.


31 posted on 08/11/2005 7:53:26 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead
Tom Kean. How about that? As for Lehman? I fear he may be too much of a gentleman. Happens to guys who spend too much time in DC. But look at that Commission and who was on it. Partisan junk yard Dog Democrat operatives, except for Tim Roemer, and a bunch of RINOs. Not a knock on Lehman personally, but you can't deny what I am saying
32 posted on 08/11/2005 7:53:33 AM PDT by stuckinNY-NJ (The difference between Al Pirro and Bill Clinton is that Al actually WENT to jail)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842
"Democrats are not to be trusted with national security" -- you are correct


33 posted on 08/11/2005 7:54:34 AM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming -- INDICTING HILLARY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Just heard a woman on ABC radio in NY state that two people were in charge of what got to the committee. They were the first tier of who gets to see the data.

JAMIE GORELICK was one and there was another person whose name I did not get and do not recognize.

Those two were first to see the info and then it went on down to the next level.

GORELICK was clearly put there for damage control.

34 posted on 08/11/2005 7:55:05 AM PDT by OldFriend (MERCY TO THE GUILTY IS CRUELTY TO THE INNOCENT ~ Adam Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

can start by contacting Gorelick at her DC law firm - http://www.wilmerhale.com/jamie_gorelick/ .


35 posted on 08/11/2005 7:55:06 AM PDT by GianniV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Now we know where the missing spine is in our Congresscritters. Rep. Weldon has it! Every Freeper needs to contact Congressman Weldon and express support for his dogged determination in this matter. We want the names of the Clinton Justice Dept. whose decision permitted 9/11 to happen and we want to know who stopped the 9/11 committee from finding out about Able Danger.


36 posted on 08/11/2005 7:56:44 AM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boundless

I agree as to why she was on the commission, but unfortunately the cover-up worked for some time.

Imagine if Kerry had won, and we found this out now.

The Republicans would have had only themselves to blame.

I expect this kind of deception from the modern-day Democrats. (And I WAS a Democrat for much of my life! This kind of crapola drove me out.) So my anger gets directed at the RINOs or whoever else it was who let her on the commission and didn't do their job.


37 posted on 08/11/2005 7:56:49 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: randog

I would not be so sure, what I read between the lines is "hey Broomhilda, catch"


38 posted on 08/11/2005 7:57:25 AM PDT by Rumplemeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: steveyp
If the staffers didn't communicate this information, then the Commissioners failed to create an environment in which this information could be aired before the Commission.

So maybe you nail them for bad management in delegating too much responsibility to staffers. That's fine, although given the volume of information, I'm betting it wasn't possible for them to hear each witness and look at each document personally.

My concern is that Weldon raises a tremendously important point, and I don't want to see it shunted off by a tangential defense that the Commission members themselves didn't get that information. Yet, you can hardly blame members of the Commission for asserting that. I think our interests are better served by making the accusation as targetted and uncontrovertible as possible. Force them to address the substance of the charge -- the "wall" erected by Gorelick -- rather than permitting them to throw up the smokescreen of "the Commissioners never knew."

Whether or not they knew is beside the ultimate issue raised by the underlying facts.

39 posted on 08/11/2005 7:57:27 AM PDT by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Exactly right!

And I used to BE a Democrat for much of my life.

The party I knew does not exist and has not for some time.

A familiar story by now, for many . . .


40 posted on 08/11/2005 7:58:19 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Sunshine Sister

Liberals have been all a-twitter lately...expecting that some kind of indictment against Bush/Cheney/Rove was in the works. What if, they are partially right...what if there ARE high profile indictments coming down...only not for anyone in the President's Administration.

*LOL*

We all know how everytime the Libs get riled up they wind up with a rather embarassing amount of egg on their face. I would expect something along these line again...and maybe, just maybe...this story about Able Danger is the egg containing the goo that will soon be all over the Libs yet again. Jamie Gorelick, in particular, has to be concerned. It was her memo that clearly allowed the intelligence failure to occur.

I'm looking forward to this. Expect the Libs to go into hyper-attack mode to try and cover up the issue...we need to make every effort we can, through every outlet we can...to let as many folks know as possible...that 09/11/2001 had many reasons for occurring...but chief among them was the utter failure of the Clinton Administration to handle the obvious threat we faced from terrorism


41 posted on 08/11/2005 7:59:09 AM PDT by GLH3IL (What's good for America is bad for liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Absolutely.

But who on our side let her get there? That's what's bugging me.


42 posted on 08/11/2005 7:59:13 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

"This guy Weldon is really OK."

He's a good rep, but he can go off the deep end occasionally. Didn't he also claim that Tehran is hiding Osama bin Laden? I'm not saying this 9/11 stuff isn't true, but I want to hear it from another source before I put too much stock in it.


43 posted on 08/11/2005 7:59:46 AM PDT by bigmac0707
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
I'm glad to see this is gaining some traction although I'm extremely pessimistic that the Clinton administration will ever be held accountable for any of the criminal/treasonous actions. Copied and emailed this one to a few friends.
44 posted on 08/11/2005 8:00:17 AM PDT by TBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: XJarhead

There was a heirarchy that allowed only two people could see the data. THEY decided who else got to see the data.......one of those two was JAMIE GORELICK.


45 posted on 08/11/2005 8:01:49 AM PDT by OldFriend (MERCY TO THE GUILTY IS CRUELTY TO THE INNOCENT ~ Adam Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Richard Ben-Vinesta, perhaps?


46 posted on 08/11/2005 8:04:19 AM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Conservatives look at Iraqi dual use chemicals and see WMDs. Liberals see tomato gardens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Do you have a link for that? If true, that's hugely damning. And it wouldn't surprise me at all. She should never have been placed on that Commission because of the conflict.


47 posted on 08/11/2005 8:04:28 AM PDT by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842
The President was against this commission from the start....and with good reason. Too bad the media made it impossible to keep saying NO.

All I can say is.....Heaven help the USA.

48 posted on 08/11/2005 8:06:04 AM PDT by OldFriend (MERCY TO THE GUILTY IS CRUELTY TO THE INNOCENT ~ Adam Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Ah Richard Ben Venista. His name continues to show up where their is disgraceful if not treasonous Democrate actions to cover up. I wonder what he is up to these days. For people like that, it is usually helpful to know their whereabouts. Inevitably it seems they are up to no good.


49 posted on 08/11/2005 8:06:47 AM PDT by rod1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GLH3IL

I sure hope you are right about getting this out in the general public. I'm not holding my breath however. 50+ years of experience tells me not to hold my breath!


50 posted on 08/11/2005 8:08:39 AM PDT by Sunshine Sister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-129 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson