Posted on 08/17/2005 12:32:44 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
What remains of the former Clinton administration's facade regarding its malfeasance in dealing with the terrorist threat posed by bin-Laden is crumbling faster than one can parse a Bill Clinton denial.
Recent revelations by Curt Weldon [R, Pennsylvania] that military intelligence had identified parts of a New York based terror cell led by 911 mastermind Mohammed Atta - but were blocked from disclosing the information to the FBI by WH lawyers and Justice Dept. second in command Jamie Gorelick's "wall" - were preceded by allegations [substantiated in a June 16, 2004 article for PipeLineNews The Clinton Administration And The Extradition Of bin-Laden - The True Story by former registered agent for Sudan and key player in the affair, Janet McElligott] that the Clinton team refused on three separate occasions the Sudanese government's offer to extradite bin-Laden to the United States.
Now a July 18, 1996 declassified State Department document shows that the Clinton administration was warned that allowing bin-Laden to "set up shop" in Afghanistan would have grave consequences:
“His prolonged stay in Afghanistan - where hundreds of “Arab mujahadin" receive terrorist training and key extremist leaders often congregate – could prove more dangerous to US interest in the long run than his three year liaison with Khartoum. - Declassified State Dept. Report Terrorism/Usamma Bin Laden
Of note is the apparent quickening of revelations regarding the defects in Clinton’s almost non-existent policy on Islamic terror [former Clinton officials are steadfastly refusing to comment on the new developments, not a good sign for “the man from Hope’s" tattered legacy] with principles in Abel/Danger now coming forward we must conclude that this story is now just starting to assume critical mass.
Looks like Mad Albright's about to make herself scarce!
Wow, great find! You must have an excellent momory.
Gee I thought I was pretty clear.
We should care much more about imrpoving our methods of stopping terrorism before they strike than we should about hanging Rats.
Able Danger had fantastic success. They were shut down. Under which admin were they shut down? Why are they not up and running now?
The Clintons were distracted by all that Red Chinese cash, your honor...
Coincidentally, we all feel exactly the same way, which laterally grades your statement from non sequitur to completely redundant. However, we still feel that Rats should hang if the failures are the Rats' responsibility. Justice and rule of law is important too, especially when possible criminal negligence led to the 9/11/01 attacks. Nobody should have to explain the obvious to you.
By who's recommendation were they shut down?
Classic attempt to redirect the argument. Seen it before.
Outstanding Info, thanks!
So Gorelick was the top Pentagon lawyer, then she came over to Reno's dept in what? 1994, right?
Who replaced Gorelick at the Pentagon?
Dunno, but dollars to donuts Gorelick was involved in the hire, which would not be unusual...
Thank Enchante for the research and original post(and thank you for your service)...
FYI, LTC Shaffer on Fox now.
Fox deprived here, but thanks for the heads up. In any event, I've heard him on Hannity, last night on Savage and this morning on Tony Snow. LOL. Do tell if something new comes out....
IMO, the more important information is this:
"One of Ms. Gorelick's principal priorities was to help prepare the Justice Department to be able to respond effectively to the new challenges of transnational crime and terrorism. To do this, she forged new relationships and administrative protocols with the Departments of State, Treasury and Defense, and with the intelligence community."
She built the wall that caused the problem, then sat on the Commission to investigate intelligence failures caused by the wall.
Hmmmm....maybe nobody replaced her. Didn't Clinton put ALL intelligence gathering under the pervue of the NSA (and ultimately the White House) in 1994? That was the same time he fired all those Justice Dept employees and Gorelick was guaranteeing China had access to all the US intelligence they wanted.
"She built the wall that caused the problem, then sat on the Commission to investigate intelligence failures caused by the wall."
--->
This was pointed out by MANY articles on FR and repeated over and over by FReepers well before the 9/11 Commission reported. We maintained there was no sense in the Commission even reporting anything if "G" did not resign.
Nothing has changed that assessment - a great understatement...
".... this story is now just starting to assume critical mass."
Question: How will Republicans benefit from proving all of this, about Clinton and his administration?
Bush ain't running again. Clinton ain't running again. Hillary may run, but can disavow anything to do with this.
So the only thing I can see being derived, is evidence that democrats in general can't be trusted with National Security.
So taking that a step further, there will be 435 democrats running for the House and 100 democrats running for the Senate.
Have any of them left their fingerprints on Abel Danger?
Be certain. I fully support proving the dems covered this up, on the 9/11 Commission. That much is true.
Would like to see Gorelick ruined, professionally. But these types seem to have Nine Lives, as bad as they are. Ramsey Clark, for example.
Hey HEG, do you have anything on the CIA's "Bin Laden Issue Station"? I'm kinda backtracking myself.
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.