Posted on 06/02/2004 9:22:54 AM PDT by quidnunc
Washington (Apocryphal Press) September 11, 2005 – Meeting deep below a still radioactive Capitol in a special bunker, the Joint Senate-House Armed Services and Nuclear Emergency committee began grilling leaders of the CIA, FBI, and Justice and Defense departments today about how a radiological dispersal device, or "dirty bomb," could have been detonated near the nation’s capital.
In their prepared statements, Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) told the top-ranking generals and Pentagon officials before them that they were determined to find out who was to blame for allowing the bomber or bombers to set off the device.
Members of the 9/11 Commission were expected to grill all concerned tomorrow and begin assessing blame among the survivors.
Several high-ranking members of the administration began their formal presentations by referring to the difficulty of isolating suspects and detecting terrorist threats after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling late last year in Rumsfeld v. Padilla that assured all terrorist suspects of a Miranda warning and full legal representation in the civil courts, effectively ending military interrogations at Guantanamo, Cuba.
"We were able to track Padilla, aka Abdullah al Muhajir, from the time he landed at O’Hare [Airport in Chicago]," said one still dazed FBI agent, "and squeeze him for information, but now that we have to get lawyers to represent suspects and material witnesses, and the new EU (European Union] rules won’t let us ask visa applicants for personal information…. ’’ His voice trailed off as he shrugged his sagging shoulders.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at nwanews.com ...
"Why were all these warnings ignored?" asked one indignant member of the joint congressional committee, who last year had been equally indignant on learning that intelligence officials had denied suspected terrorists legal representation.
Greenberg could have gone even further and characterized these people as the same ones who had also previously accused the administration of not connecting the dots prior to 9/11.
ACLU
The whole, excellent piece is saying that, without saying it outright.
Our criminal justice system is based on the premise that it is better to free a guilty man than risk punishing one who is innocent. That philosophy was fomulated before one guilty man was capable of killing tens of thousands of people, and disrupting the economy and security of the free world. Civilian courts are quartered in ivory towers and play abstract social and philosophical games with the notion of justice, and the fools who live in gated communities have mistaken these games for reality. That's the purpose of using military courts instead.
Too good to miss!
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette: obviously shills for the VRWC.
Kudos, well said! Sadly, the entire democrat party is more than willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of Americans in order to empower the democrat party and protect the power of liberal, leftists ideology that now guides democrat party political functioning.
Publishers note: After you read this, realize that McCain, Collins, Kennedy, Snowe, Biden, Kerry and others who do nothing positive for our coutnry are in office because of people like you and me. It is our vote or lack of it that puts out and out US freedom haters in the US Senate and US Congress.
Y'know, I actually polish all my ammo. It flies straighter and true.............FRegards
Thanks for the ping. It is a very well done column. I think he is making several points:
1. The next attack will bring investigations from people who have done things to hinder the prevention of such attacks.
2. There will be future attacks that may not be preventable.
3. The next attack will cause a great and longer public outcry than the 9-11 attacks, whether long enough to stay the course remains to be seen. [Heck whether the 9-11 attack is enough to stay the course remains to be seen but it certainly focused the US better than say the first World Trade Center attack.]
NY Times June 4, 2005
Today, Jamie Gorelick, Attorney general to President Kerry, accused officials from the Bush administration with "not doing enough" to fight terror over the previous four years.
"This problem escalated over the last four years and the only thing the Bush administration did regarding WMD was to pay lip service to it", Gorelick stated to the AP. "We told the world that Iraq had WMD and it was only time before it got into the hands of the terrorists. Rather than go after the terrorist infrastructure in Iraq, the Bush administration took a tepid view on terrorism at best."
President Kerry, in a speech to the United Nations stated that the US will do everything in its power to bring the people responsible for this atrocity to justice. He repeated his call to create a "coalition of the strong", that will join together to rid the world of terrorism. France, the primary sponsor of the UN resolution denouncing the current Iraqi government once again suggested that 200,000 UN troops be deployed to Iraq.
"I believe that we have all been remiss in our duties as world leaders to rid the world of this treacherous virus", Kerry opened with. On the subject of North Korea, Kerry proclaimed that the food and fuel program given to North Korea in exchange for reducing the amount of nuclear weapons produced by North Korea was a success. "Kim Il Jong has assured the security council that North Korea will not export any more of its nuclear weapons. I strongly believe that the United Nations will welcome North Korea back into the world community in the next several months, Kerry said."
In response to Kerry's speech, Senator Pat Leahy (D. Vermont) praised President Kerry as a true visionary and communicator. "John Kerry's strength as President is what will get us through these difficult times. Our nation remains strong in the face of evil."
Hi quid! Thanks for finding good articles.
Placemark for later reading.
There will be no attack til after Election Day. Old Osama isn't a fool. An attack now will keep Bush in power. No, he will wait till after the election or do what he can to get Kerry to win. If Kerry wins there will be attacks to force him to make concessions to Osama and his band of thugs. So, enjoy this space of time because, I feel, all h*ll will break lose after November.
Hmmm, you really think they will wait? I'm not sure of that. They are very calculating but they are also psychotic with rage and anger, which cloud thinking.
--Boot Hill
That is exactly what I have been telling friends. I think we are in for a REALLY BAD two year period, no matter who wins the election.
I think there will be at least one attempt at a major attack before the election just to see if the "Madrid Effect" works. I have no doubt that terrorists would prefer to see Querrie elected and are willing to do their utmost to put him there.
A dirty bomb would be no more immediately damaging than an ordinary car bomb or truck bomb. Ordinary, what a world! There would be casualties of the level we are unfortunately familiar with. However the residue would render the neighborhood uninhabitable until it is cleaned up, and that could take a long time. The economic dislocation could be severe in the community. It would take thousands of such dirty bombs to dislocate the national economy of any major country. That means we should not hyperventilate excessively over the prospect of a dirty bomb or even a few dirty bombs. At the same time if we can stop a dirty bomb or a truck or car bomb, we should do so and should not let the threat or actual use of a dirty bomb change our course or our vote in November.
Not only that but our system punishes after the crime has been committed.
With terrorists we have a situation where we can't afford to allow them to commit their deed. Our system has no provision for these circumstances.
Well stated. Thanks.
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.