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

Skip to comments.

Gorelick's Commission Counterpart
WABC radio ^ | 4/16/04 | conservatism_IS_compassion

Posted on 04/16/2004 10:03:54 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: Freedom4US
The Republican members of the commission, it seems, are:
21 posted on 04/16/2004 11:54:29 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (No one is as subjective as the person who knows he is objective.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Who was that person? Anyone remember?

Gorelick's counterpart in that administration? Hmmm... Clintonlick?
22 posted on 04/16/2004 12:34:39 PM PDT by broadsword (The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for Democrats to get elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFC__VRWC
Tommy Daschel did NOT scour the rats' records, though... As usual, it only applies to Rs. (And R's allow it almost everytime! :(
23 posted on 04/16/2004 12:35:25 PM PDT by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Libertina
Jamie Gorelick was quietly asked by Commission Chairman Thomas Kean to resign from the 9/11 commission due to conflict of interest. According to an unnamed staffer, she refused.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1118941/posts?page=1,50
24 posted on 04/16/2004 1:00:44 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Maybe we can help Jamie to decide to "step down"...



info@9-11Commission.gov
25 posted on 04/16/2004 1:10:21 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: broadsword
You need to read this....This was written in the winter of 1998....

Catastrophic Terrorism: Elements of a National Policy

By

Ashton B. Carter,

John M. Deutch

and

Philip D. Zelikow

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/visions/publication/terrorism.htm

Gorelick is a "contributor" as well as a WHOLE host of Clintoon cronies this article and others listed LEADS right to the "selling of technology to the Chinese...

OHHHHHHHH if you notice of the three names listed as the "writers"...

Philip Zelikow is the executive director of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, better known as the "9/11 Commission."

We all know who Deutch is and read up on Carter...

Here is the "list" of the "others" for contributions...

The authors would like to thank the members of the Catastrophic Terrorism Study Group:


26 posted on 04/16/2004 1:21:58 PM PDT by antivenom ("Never argue with an idiot, he'll bring you down to his level - then beat you with experience.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
talk radio is going to destroy the commission.

The Clintons will be happy with that, since the report was going to be critical of them.

27 posted on 04/16/2004 2:03:29 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: antivenom
What a list of Washington insiders. Corrupt all!

Too bad that Ron Brown had sold out all the seats on his flying trade mission. He missed a few potential passengers!
28 posted on 04/16/2004 2:44:34 PM PDT by aShepard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
I've been rying to assist her ;)
29 posted on 04/16/2004 2:51:22 PM PDT by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Does anyone know by whom and how commission members were appointed?
30 posted on 04/16/2004 2:52:52 PM PDT by ontos-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antivenom
Kristen Breitweiser, a 9/11 widow, insists Zelikow has a "clear conflict of interest." And she suspects he is in touch with Bush's political adviser, Rove, which she says would explain why the White House granted him, along with just one other commission official, the greatest access to the intelligence briefing Bush got a month before the 9/11 suicide hijackings.

The two-page memo in question mentions "al-Qaida" and "hijackings," that much we know. What we don't know is if it gets any more specific about the threat. And the White House won't let us find out. It refuses to declassify any of the August memo (or any of the other briefings Bush got before 9/11, for that matter), and it won't even let most commissioners review it.


snip


9/11 relatives like the wife of the late Ronald Breitweiser want to know they are getting an honest investigation into what their government did to protect their loved ones from a foreign-ordered attack on American soil.

31 posted on 04/16/2004 3:00:50 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: antivenom
You need to read this....This was written in the winter of 1998....

Bigtime *BUMP* to that advice. Great link. A tidbit to whet the reader's appetite ...

Readers should imagine the possibilities for themselves, because the most serious constraint on current policy is lack of imagination. An act of catastrophic terrorism that killed thousands or tens of thousands of people and/or disrupted the necessities of life for hundreds of thousands, or even millions, would be a watershed event in America's history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented for peacetime and undermine Americans' fundamental sense of security within their own borders in a manner akin to the 1949 Soviet atomic bomb test, or perhaps even worse. Constitutional liberties would be challenged as the United States sought to protect itself from further attacks by pressing against allowable limits in surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects, and the use of deadly force. More violence would follow, either as other terrorists seek to imitate this great "success" or as the United States strikes out at those considered responsible. Like Pearl Harbor, such an event would divide our past and future into a "before" and "after." The effort and resources we devote to averting or containing this threat now, in the "before" period, will seem woeful, even pathetic, when compared to what will happen "after." Our leaders will be judged negligent for not addressing catastrophic terrorism more urgently.

32 posted on 04/16/2004 3:02:12 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
BUMP
33 posted on 04/16/2004 3:03:31 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: expatpat
talk radio is going to destroy the commission.
The Clintons will be happy with that, since the report was going to be critical of them.
It was always inevitable that the Clintons get some of the blame for 911; in truth they deserve it all for not getting ben Laden before the end of 2000.

The existence of the Gorelick Commission didn't change the fact that the Clinton Administration had to get some blame - but when you deserve all of it and you are able to deflect half of it to your opponent, you dance in the streets. And that is what the Gorelick Commission is designed to do, and was doing - until Ashcroft torpedoed the commission amidships.

Now the issue is no longer "What did Bush know, and when did he know it?" Now the issue is, "What part of the government's failure to effectively respond to the series of antiamerican Islamic terrorist acts which lead up to 9/11 does not have Jamie Gorelick's fingerprints on it?" And in reply to Kean's "stay out of our business," the issue is "What kind of dork is it who thinks the prime suspect in the case should be the investigator of the case?"

Even more pointedly the question must be, "Even if you put the prime suspect in the witness chair instead of the commission bench, how does the commission question her if all the remaining commissioners, especially their chairman, are on record as rejecting the idea of investigating her?" It appears that the commission is hopelessly compromised. It should disband.

34 posted on 04/16/2004 5:25:53 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (No one is as subjective as the person who knows he is objective.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
STOP and think....we have been hearing about suitcase NUKES...ohhh for how many years? We all know that the Pope doesn't have them and neither does the US...for if we did we wouldn't fear them. SO let us just imagine just WHO would be able to buy such a commodity and has the intent to use one?

Let's get real...the US knows and has really been gearing up for a nuke attack...not a missle attack with stolen airplanes.

GET ready the US knows that the WMD are about to surface...I suspect we will see the "first appearance" in Saudi Arabia...the US is getting our folks out...Bin Laden is revving up the hate speech...I really have this gut feeling things are about to ignite in Saudi Arabia (possibly Falluija) who knows...but someone has an itchy trigger finger sitting on some ignored WMD and I think the sh*t is about to hit the fan...TOO MANY people, administrations, countries, leaders, ETC have "KNOWN" that the threat of WMD in Iraq is and has been a real threat...I really have this stinking suspicion that we will find out "where they are" very soon...

35 posted on 04/16/2004 6:15:28 PM PDT by antivenom ("Never argue with an idiot, he'll bring you down to his level - then beat you with experience.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
All of the "sticky areas" that the Clinton's were being investigated on...had to be stopped...so they had the "wall" put in place.

It is a "drag" to have Whitewater, Travelgate and Vince Foster's death all in the limelight and being actively investigated and reported upon...can't have all the "different investigating authorities "talking to one another" now...can ya???

I found it interesting that the 911 commission is nothing more than a well orchestrated panel to "clear the way" for Hillary in 2008.

Hillary knows these issues will resurface if the BLAME isn't immediately and permanently cast and not associated with the "Clinton (still struggling) Legacy".

36 posted on 04/16/2004 6:23:31 PM PDT by antivenom ("Never argue with an idiot, he'll bring you down to his level - then beat you with experience.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
BUMP & PING
37 posted on 04/17/2004 1:14:08 AM PDT by AnimalLover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 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