"What did you know, Commissioner Ben Veniste, and when did you know it?"
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Posted on 08/11/2005 12:43:23 PM PDT by Pikamax
I find it very interesting that this article makes no mention of the fact that this occurred during the Clintoon administration and that Gore-licker was on the committee. It's almost like the Times was forced to publish it because the information is becoming too wide spread and being reported by many other sources. They are very careful to not embarrass the previous administration, and leave it up to the reader to figure it out for themselves. They even make a mention of the Bush administration in an effort to coerce the reader into thinking it's a Bush issue, because the committee was established while was president. Simply f%#*ing amazing.
LOL! The probability of equal justice is exactly zero. Gorelick won't be punished for her actions as an official of the US Federal government, any more than Ashcroft would be, or any more than Sandy Berger and Janet Reno would be.
At this point in the play-out of 9/11, the ramifications are purely political. Be careful who you vote for.
Also, recall that Sandy Berger was stuffing documents into his pants while talking to Clinton's lawyer on his cell phone.
"What did you know, Commissioner Ben Veniste, and when did you know it?"
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Many people saw the 9/11 Commission as a sham from the get-go. I'll "go out on a limb" and predict that the reputation of the 9/11 Commission will be protected by the present administration. That is, reasonable excuses will be offered for excluding pre-9/11 knowledge of Atta from public dialog.
The Wall Street Journal editorially brushed off the Sandy Burglar-Clinton coverup story. Maybe they'll have a closer look now.
Snell was one of the guys the Able Danger ops took information to on the 9/11 Commission.
Author Peter Lance later calls Snell “one of the fixers, hired early on to sanitize the Commission's final report.” Lance says Snell ignored evidence presented to the Commission that shows direct ties between the Bojinka plot and 9/11, and in so doing covers up Snell's own role in the failure to make more use of evidence learned from Murad and other Bojinka plotters. [FrontPage Magazine, 1/27/05]
Get a load of this.
Dietrich Snell is one of the guys approached by Able Danger operatives.
Author Peter Lance later calls Snell “one of the fixers, hired early on to sanitize the Commission's final report.” Lance says Snell ignored evidence presented to the Commission that shows direct ties between the Bojinka plot and 9/11, and in so doing covers up Snell's own role in the failure to make more use of evidence learned from Murad and other Bojinka plotters. [FrontPage Magazine, 1/27/05]
Get a load of this.
Dietrich Snell is one of the guys approached by Able Danger operatives.
Author Peter Lance later calls Snell “one of the fixers, hired early on to sanitize the Commission's final report.” Lance says Snell ignored evidence presented to the Commission that shows direct ties between the Bojinka plot and 9/11, and in so doing covers up Snell's own role in the failure to make more use of evidence learned from Murad and other Bojinka plotters. [FrontPage Magazine, 1/27/05]
From the article:
"Staff members now are searching documents in the National Archives to look for notes from the meeting in Afghanistan and any other possible references to Atta and Able Danger, Felzenberg said."
Sandy Bergler alert!!! Tell Felzenberg to check Bergler's trousers for the documents.
Snell denies that a jihadist told him about a 9/11 style day being planned.
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/on.htm
Roger that ~ you'll never get any action against the Clinton regime.
I have never been able to see the point in blocking info between intelligence agencies. Does anybody know the reasoning behind it?
If a Special Prosecutor can be appointed to investigate the mere utterance of the name Valerie Plame, surely this deserves the same treatment.
"sounds like a case of volitional amnesia" ....or incompetence as well. i remember the day that Clarke was to come before the commission, one of the members, unfortunately i think it was a Repub, was questioned on whether he was going to question Clarke on the apparent contradiction between testimony given earlier and the same info as recounted in C's book. the member seemed stunned, so obviously had no intention of pursuing that line of questioning. he said he HADN'T REVIEWED Clarke's previous testimony -- at all --- in preparation for his appearance before the commission. yikes - how ill prepared can you possibly be? what a joke. and our nation's well-being is at stake. EEEK.
"reasonable excuses will be offered for excluding pre-9/11 knowledge of Atta from public dialog."
Well, we don't live in the world of 1984, and we know that Atta and three of his cohorts were identified as Al Qaeda well in advance of 9/11.
Saw this on another thread. As someone who was actively involved in the Bojinka investigation and other pre-9/11 work, Snell shouldn't have been working for the Commisssion. He's an interested party.
True, true.
My general point is that we are being snookered by our leaders. The elite are NOT held to account by the same standards applied to you and me.
this gives me cause for pause. there were republicians on the committee correct? why would they comply with this coverup? i can only wonder if some liabilty of this administration was covered up as well in exchange?? either that of perhaps ole sandy-pants didn't filler-up as well as he thought he did.
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.