Posted on 09/10/2006 11:54:36 AM PDT by khnyny
Lee Hamilton (co-chair) of the 911 Commission is on the Board of Directors of Sandy Berger's company - Stonebridge International. I saw another freeper post this and thought it warranted its own vanity thread.
http://www.stonebridge-international.com/pages/page01a.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165268,00.html
And just WHAT does Stonebridge International do??? Teach other leaders how to STEAL and DESTROY Classified Documents in your pants and sox out of the National Archives???? Why not name it StoneWALL International??
http://www.stonebridge-international.com/pages/page01a.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165268,00.html
http://www.stonebridge-international.com/pages/page01b.html
There, that's better.:)
"According to a 1998 Senate testimony of former CIA director James
Woolsey, powerful financier Khalid bin Mahfouz’ younger sister is
married to Osama bin Laden,. (US Senate, Senate Judiciary
Committee, Federal News Service, 3 Sept. 1998, See also Wayne
Madsen, Questionable Ties, In These Times,12 Nov. 2001 )
Bin Mahfouz is suspected to have funneled millions of dollars to the Al
Qaeda network.(See Tom Flocco, Scoop.co.nz 28 Aug. 2002)
Now, "by sheer coincidence", former New Jersey governor Thomas
Kean has business ties with bin Mahfouz and Al-Amoudi.
Thomas Kean is a director (and shareholder) of Amerada Hess
Corporation , which is involved in the Hess-Delta joint venture with
Delta Oil of Saudi Arabia (owned by the bin Mahfouz and Al-Amoudi
clans)...
Now you would think that being a business partner of the brother in
law and alleged financier of "Enemy No. 1" would also be considered a
bona fide "conflict of interest", particularly when your mandate --as
part of the 9/11 Commission's work-- is to investigate "Enemy No. 1".
"(Michel Chossudovsky, New Chairman of 9/11 Commission had
business ties with Osama's Brother in Law,
Centre for Research on Globalization, December 2002 )
Commissioner Kean: "Ms Gorelick is one of the finest members
of the commission and one of the most bipartisan members.
People ought to stay out of our business"
THE REAL DEAL:
On Aug. 22, 1996, just before the Democratic National Convention,
Ms. Gorelick oversaw a critical Justice Department meeting with the FBI.
mmediately after this meeting, as it happened,
all serious inquiry into the fate of TWA 800 came to an end.
MORE?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1117579/posts
GORELICK GATE - various FR links
Berger repeatedly rebuffed Sudanese offers to hand Osama bin Laden
to the United States in a deal brokered by a $900,000 contributor to Democrat campaigns.
Source 1 - National Review, "Clinton & Khobar", Rich Lowry
Source 2 - Washington Times, "Miniter Responds", Richard Miniter
Berger stonewalled the Energy Department about Chinese spying in Los Alamos for three years.
It was Berger who for Hillary Clinton let bin Laden go
both from the Sudanese and was he was briefly vulnerable to missile attack.
[e.g. US News & World Report, Paul Bedard, 15 Mar 2003]
"Mr. Berger, calling Mr. Sandy Berger. THIS IS IMPORTANT. Please. This is urgent.
We can take out Osama, now. Please answer!!! We have him in our sight."
Berger-Burglar: "Nope. Forgetaboutit. No big deal. Bill and I are too busy watching the West Wing on TV."
"I was summoned to the office of National Security adviser Sandy Berger,
who chewed me out for not having a national security adviser (on the West Wing).
So I opened the next season with Anna Deavere Smith as the national security adviser" -
Aaron Sorkin
ROTFL!!!!! Judging from their reaction to "The Path to 911," the DemocRATS obviously think that this "commission" was a farce also.
Bttt for disappearing truth............. :>(
Wow. Great post.
Looks like the "bad guys" are all in bed together.
Sandy probably removed some references re Able Danger at the archives. BTW, the dems are going after Weldon big time.
LOL. The fact that Sandy did not do jail time continues to bother me. What a clown.
Berger's company does a lot of business with China today (according to the company website). I guess while he was at the White House he was setting himself up for retirement.
It looks like the revolving door which is DC has jeopardized US security.
+
And just WHAT does Stonebridge International do??? Teach other leaders how to STEAL and DESTROY Classified Documents in your pants and sox out of the National Archives???? Why not name it StoneWALL International??StoneWALL International is a fully owned subsidiary.
Burglar showed up on C-Span a few months back under a banner printed with a Stonebridge thinktank name. Looks as if he's changed it to 'international'. Going big time. Well, and why not. Sandy'll be back in the money if Hill takes over.
Being former Air Force and having spent two tours at Khobar Towers, this crap is what inspired my screen name.
After 3 years? That really is insane. Why, so he can stuff more documents down his pants? Did he miss something?
Revisionist History: "Path to 9/11" Prompts the Question; Are Disney/ABC or the Clinton Administration Guilty?
By John E. Carey
September 10, 2006
Let’s just review for a moment the affair of one Samuel “Sandy” Berger and the National Archives.
On Thursday, July 22, 2004, Washington Post staff writers John F. Harris and Susan Schmidt, wrote “Last Oct. 2, former Clinton national security adviser Samuel R. ‘Sandy’ Berger stayed huddled over papers at the National Archives until 8 p.m. What he did not know as he labored through that long Thursday was that the same Archives employees who were solicitously retrieving documents for him were also watching their important visitor with a suspicious eye.”
The employees of the National Archives suspected that Sandy Berger was stealing classified government archives about terrorists from his tenure as President Clinton’s National Security Advisor.
They were right.
John F. Harris and Susan Schmidt wrote, “The documents that Berger has acknowledged taking -- some of which remain missing -- are different drafts of a January 2000 ‘after-action review’ of how the government responded to terrorism plots at the turn of the millennium. The document was written by White House anti-terrorism coordinator Richard A. Clarke, at Berger's direction when he was in government.”
Harris and Schmidt also reported that, “Sources have told The Washington Post, and other news organizations, that Berger was witnessed stuffing papers into his clothing.”
Transporting classified government documents without proper authorization is a serious offense. Stealing historical records from the national Archives is equally heinous.
But the real crime that Sandy Berger, and other Clinton Administration personnel, may be guilty of is this: “revisionist history.”
After September 11, 2001, everyone in Washington DC asked the same questions: How could this happen and why weren’t we forewarned?
In fact, “we” were forewarned. There were many events that should have set off alarm bells during President Clinton’s Administration.
A few of the events among these warning signs include: the first World trade center bombing (February 1993), the discovery of the Lincoln and Holland tunnel plots (Spring 1993), the car bombing of the U.S. military headquarters of the United States in Saudi Arabia (November 1995), the truck bombing of the U.S. military housing facility Khobar Towers (June 1996), the truck bombings at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (August 1998), and the bombing of USS Cole (October 2000).
Less than one year later, the World Trade Center and the pentagon were hit on September 11, 2001.
This brings us to the loud and vocal protestations from Clinton Administration loyalists to the Disney/ABC production which starts to air tonight, “Path to 9/11.”
Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Clinton Foundation head Bruce Lindsey and Clinton adviser Douglas Band all wrote in the past week to Robert Iger, CEO of ABC's parent The Walt Disney Co., to express concern over “The Path to 9/11.”What do they have to hide?
And what respect do they have for freedom of speech?
When Oliver Stone made his movie “J.F.K.” depicting the president’s assassination as the product of a government conspiracy, do you recall this level of protest?
So we take caution and pause when we hear these vociferous protestations from the Clinton Camp.
We don’t much like revisionist history. And we wonder what the members of the Clinton Administration want to shroud from public view.
http://peace-and-freedom.blogspot.com/
Thank you.
Gorelick ( and the 9/11 Commission Report Dietrich L. Snell was a Senior Counsel & Team Leader ) were put in charge of disseminate what information got seen by the full Commission.
So the woman who created the Wall which blocked the flow of information, was again put in charge of blocking information to the Commission which was charged with finding out why information got blocked.
[So the woman who created the Wall which blocked the flow of information, was again put in charge of blocking information to the Commission which was charged with finding out why information got blocked.]
Thanks for the explanation. That one sentence seems to encapsulate and highlight the problems of the Clinton admin. and really the whole 911 Commission Report.
Explains why the commission tried so wanted to crucify the prez but couldn't find the evidence to support their desires. However, the commission REFUSED to condemn clintoon & his administration and even had the evidence to support the condemnation.
This was well put too, IMHO.
"When the director of the National Archives found out that Berger was being investigated by the FBI for stealing classified documents, the director's first call went to.... Bruce Lindsey.
That National Archives director was subsequently fired, but I suspect that before he left he likely destroyed the originals at Lindsey's request."
by Lancey Howard
Interesting thanks.
Great. All he needs to do now is hire Jamie Gorelick, Richard Ben-Veniste, and Richard Clarke. Then he would have a complete crew of lying incompetents.
Berger's Firm to Aid Oil Interests in Iraq
By Judy Sarasohn
Washington Post
Thursday, September 16, 2004; Page A29
Stonebridge International, the "global strategy firm" founded by Clinton administration national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, has taken on an interesting client, Gulfsands Petroleum Ltd., a private Houston-based oil and gas company. Gulfsands, along with its larger partner Devon Energy Corp. of Oklahoma City, has oil and gas exploration and development interests in Syria. And now Gulfsands is looking to Iraq.
"Stonebridge is assisting Gulfsands in organizing meetings in Washington with administration officials to discuss the company's business interests in Iraq and U.S. policy toward Syria," Stonebridge Vice Chairman H.P. Goldfield said in an e-mail response to written questions. The lobby registration was filed with Congress by Goldfield and colleague Joy Drucker.
Goldfield, who served in senior jobs in the Reagan administration, said Gulfsands "is conducting business development activities in Iraq" but "is not pursuing any U.S. funded contracts in Iraq." Its discussions with the government of Iraq are confidential for now, Goldfield said. "Our proposed energy project will be privately funded and will have significant economic and environmental benefits to the people of Iraq.
The project would create thousands of jobs for Iraqi citizens and would introduce more environmentally beneficial technologies into Iraq's development of its oil and gas sector," Goldfield said. Berger is not involved with the work for Gulfsands, Goldfield said.
Whatever happened to the Able Danger thing?
EXCERPT Sticky-fingered Clinton aide Sandy Berger got off a lot easier than Martha Stewart — no jail time and no aggravating ankle bracelet — because he only lied to the press about purloining top-secret documents. "He may have lied to the press when he suggested he did it by mistake, but lying to the press isn't a federal crime. If he had lied to us, we would have prosecuted," said prosecutor Noel Hillman, who heads the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section.
Berger copped a misdemeanor plea and got off with a $10,000 fine after admitting he sneaked out of the National Archives five top-secret memos hidden in his clothes, ostensibly to review them in his office. He also admitted using a scissors to cut three of them into little pieces to destroy them — his excuse appears to be that he was afraid of getting caught if he tried to sneak them back into the National Archives. "It's reasonable to conclude that disposal was a better alternative than sneaking them back," Hillman said as he provided new details on questions still swirling around Berger's deal.
He said the originals had been scanned into an Archives' computer and Berger only got copies printed from it. Asked if he's sure Berger didn't take originals, too, he said there's no evidence of that.
Meanwhile, the probe seems to have shifted to whether Clinton appointees at the Archives tried to cover for Berger. Archives chief John Carlin, a Clinton appointee, was bounced soon after the incident.
It's a violation of law to take classified documents, so Archives staffers should have called the FBI when they saw Berger do it — instead, they called Clinton's Mr. Fix-it, lawyer Bruce Lindsey.
The memos were multiple drafts on the millennium terror plot that concluded the Clinton administration escaped a terror attack by sheer luck and identified "glaring weaknesses" in Clinton-era security. Berger was at the Archives to vet documents for the 9/11 commission. Some early drafts of the still-classified memo are said to be much more scathing in rapping Team Clinton than the final version.
SOURCE http://www.nypost.com/commentary/23114.htm
Thanks for that great find.
[Whatever happened to the Able Danger thing?]
That's a great question - I'm not sure. Perhaps other posters are more informed and can let us know.
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.