Posted on 08/15/2005 4:10:28 PM PDT by george76
The report of the September 11 Commission, once a best seller and hailed by the news media as the definitive word on the subject, must now be moved to the fiction shelves.
The commission concluded...the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon couldn't have been prevented.
Able Danger has changed all of that.
The problem was...Jamie Gorelick.
What may be a bigger scandal is that the staff of the September 11 Commission knew of Able Danger and what it had found, but made no mention of it in its report. This is as if the commission that investigated the attack on Pearl Harbor had written its final report without mentioning the Japanese.
When the story broke Lee Hamilton denied the commission had ever been informed of Able Danger...
"Had we learned of it, obviously it would have been a major focus of our investigation."
Mr. Hamilton later changed his tune...
Sandy Berger stole classified documents and destroyed some...Was he removing references to Able Danger? Someone should ask him before he is sentenced next month.
The dispute over Atta's whereabouts in Prague on April 9, 2001, to meet with Samir al Ani, an Iraqi intelligence officer.
Czech intelligence insists he was. Able Danger had information supporting the Czechs.
But acknowledging that possibility would leave open the likelihood that Saddam's regime was involved in the September 11 attacks. And that would have been as uncomfortable for Democrats as the revelation that September 11 could have been prevented if it hadn't been for the Clinton administration's wall of separation.
The September 11 Commission wrote history as it wanted it to be, not as it was. The real history of what happened that terrible September day has yet to be written.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
read later
Lee Hamilton is a grandfatherly, well-paid, professional LIAR.
Clinton + Reno + Gorelick + Berger + 911 Commission =
COVER UP
I can hope that this gets legs. I have not watched any news on TV today. Nothing on the radio news.
If Rush mentioned this I must have missed it.
bttt
I bought it last year and it just sat there. Maybe I can roast marshmellows over it or something.
Try to catch Michael Savage. I guarantee he'll mention it......at the top of his lungs!
they are whistling passed the grave yard. most radio and newsprint as well as the tv folks , are praying this is not real. if it is real , think of how many more of us will see the emperor undressed. good for us bad for them.
In this day and age, anyone who wears a bow-tie is a POSER! Saying "look at me, mommy"
He's a Democrat...they ALL lie.
I don't think I have listened to him, although I may have, there was a guy shouting and going on during morning drive time on a station here in Austin that say they are a conservative talk radio station. Way to early in the day to get into the rants with only one cup of coffee under my belt. I will search and try again.
Thanks for the heads up.
AMEN
Here's PRAYING that Sandy Burglar's sentence REFLECTS what he did....DESTROY EVIDENCE in the biggest terrorist attack on America!!
I don't get how Burglar is able to cop a plea without a complete allocution of his actions.
Its Washington and they don't have the same rules.
The real question is: "What documents did Sandy destroy and take from the National archives?" The federal government knows (since he copped a plea in this case and they evidently had evidence of his wrong-doing).
The next question is: Why does GWB continue to cover for the malfeasance of the Clinton administration? Here we stand at a point in time where this disgraced former president's wife would like to inherit the reigns of this country and instill the same disatrous policies. Why do they not "out" this man as the failure we all know that he was?
Keep up the posts as new news on issue becomes available.
One can only wonder if Curt had plans to provide a bit more impetus to make sure the burglary man is not left off with just a slap on the wrists, and a three year probation period where he is not allowed to hold public office.
Give 'em the Watergate treatment and be done with the Rat party once and for all.
Rats lied, patriots died!
It would be the same as a JFK Assassination Commission holding hearings after the Warren Report was issued. With Gerald Ford, Arlen Spectre, and Lee Harvey Oswald sitting on the frickin' Commission. They really do take us for fools.
Still have yours in the john?
CLINTON KNEW
BOTH OF THEM
He's a demorat. End of story.
Thank you for the support
check his website!
"Why does GWB continue to cover for the malfeasance of the Clinton administration?"
This is such an ignorant statement .. I hardly know where to begin .. so I won't!
If it is so ignorant, then why can it not be properly discussed? If the public, through the MSM, can demand hearings into September 11th resulting in the 9-11 Commission report, then how come, with the new evidence we are learning about the missed opportunities of the Clinton Administration can we not demand an investigation into this aspect of the story?
Fact is, terrorism existed before President Bush took office. Former President Clinton and his staff (the Burgler, Jaimie Gorelick, Janet Reno, et al.) knew about, but set up apparatus to avoid dealing with it. Why can we not expose this? Do you have an issue with the people's right to know?
By the way, why post a comment such as you did without addressing the issue? If you are too tired to deal with it, why post in the first place?
Just trying to help you budget your time.
Yeh, but Hamilton's the old reassuring, grandfatherly type that the government pulls out of moth balls when some real big deal lying needs done! (John Danforth- The Waco Report)
It's both parties. Mostly the Dems, but remember, Bush stood there and went on and on about what a grrreat guy Tenet was, while I and multitudes of Americans screamed uselessly at our radios and TVs.
That's a microcosm of his whole approach to make nice with those communist bastards. It was naive at best.
Well .. if rude and arrogant is your method of communicating .. you're on the wrong website. To come on this website and after reading all the information available to you here and you can still ask such an ignorant question .. then you're not a conservative and I have no idea why you're here except to launch your bombs at Bush.
Your question had no substance! Before Bush could cover up any "malfeasance by Clinton" - he would first have to know about it - and as Gov of Texas - I doubt he knew any more than we did. And .. after becoming President, why would Bush want to keep Clinton's face on the TV by brining up all that garbage .. Bush wanted to start with HIS own agenda, not continue with the Clinton stuff.
Bush did not become President so he could act like the Police Commissioner and go after Clinton. To assume that is the primary goal for Bush is just ignorant!!
I'm not so sure. How can we be sure?
"Thank you for the support"
Likewise.
BTTT
mega-bump!!!
Excellent column & Post!
Bravo!!
Heads up!!
"He's a demorat. End of story."
You mispelled a word. It's "demonrat"
????
Why? Berger would only lie.
Able Danger needs to come out of the cold and show their evidence.
Enough pussy-footing around and insinuation (that is what democrats do.)
Facts are what Republicans care about so they need to provide that now.
Rude and arrogant was only what I responded to being treated as I was by you. If that is not what you intended, then I apologize.
Second, I am fully behind the President, have been and need not prove my crednentials here.
Third, if President Bush did not want to keep Clinton in the limelight, why would he appoint him a point person for Tsunami relief? Why would the President take Clinton to Pope John Paul II's funeral, knowing that space was limited? Why would his father, granted not GWB himself, continue to be seen with this guy in public. I think it is a legitimate question to raise here and discuss.
While not having to act like a police commissioner, as you say, it is inherent that the President distance himself from Clinton and clean house of the individuals who Clinton appointed. As we have seen, keeping them around has only caused the President problems in the perception of the public when these useful idiots have launched their conspiracy theories and book signings afterward.
This is important, the stronger the President appears to the public, the stronger message he projects to the people that he is the right man for this crucial time in our history (which I agree that he is), the more leeway he will have to deal with foreign policy and do the right thing abroad without dealing with the anti-war, leftists here at home who are constantly banging the drum of "it's all Bush's fault." Hence, the importance of showing the public what really happened.
Finally, why use the word ignorance again? Because I can read the same information here and come to a different conclusion than you makes me ignorant? That, my friend, is not conservative or constructive.
Different strokes for different folks. But, in the end, its us against them is what I say.
You must understand .. in President Bush's position, he cannot afford to make such a mistake as dressing down or embarrassing someone in public. It's not only bad taste, it does more damage to Bush than to anyone else.
And .. if you're so sure Bush was lauding Tenant, you should read the transcript of Bush's speech to the Clintons when their official portraits were unveiled. If you really read what Bush said - knowing what we know about Clinton - it was all one great nuance - or diplo speak - exactly what the liberals said Bush was not capable of doing.
While all the liberals thought Bush was praising Clinton - I was laughing and laughing because the supposed great diplomats didn't catch on. It was too funny.
So .. I've said all that to explain that if you go back and read what Bush said to Tenant - I think you might be surprised to find out it was not the applause you thought it was.
Thanks for the great post.
Weldon was on Hannity today and said that the Able Danger folks would be coming out in a few days with their stories. He promised Hannity that one and perhaps all of them would be on his T.V. show. Said it was going to be a big story. He sounds intent on making certain the story gets told, and determined that these guys aren't destroyed in the process.
ping
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,126428,00.html
"White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Wednesday that the Justice Department notified the office of White House legal counsel Alberto Gonzalez about the probe before news of it leaked to the media Monday.
"My understanding is that this investigation has been going on for several months and that some officials in our counsel's office were contacted as part of the investigation," McClellan told reporters. "The counsel's office is the one that is coordinating with the Sept. 11 commission the production of documents and since this relates to some documents, the counsel's office was contacted as part of that investigation."
The Justice Department is investigating whether Berger committed a crime by removing from the National Archives (search) copies of documents about the government's anti-terror efforts and notes that he took on those documents. Berger was reviewing the materials to help determine which Clinton administration documents to provide to the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks."
I agree with your view that the President must stay above the fray from these attacks.
But, the public needs to see what the MSM is failing to show them, that what we are in the midst today is due in part to the lack of action taken by the Clinton Administration. While I do not think that the President need do it himself, his subordinates should take charge in this instance.
He's a professional politician. THEY ALL lie==left, right, good or bad.
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.