Skip to comments.
9/11 PANEL: ATTA TALE WAS BUM TIP
NY Post ^
| 8/13/05
| DEBORAH ORIN
Posted on 08/13/2005 4:35:41 AM PDT by jimbo123
The 9/11 commission yesterday defended its decision to ignore a Navy officer's report that military spies targeted lead hijacker Mohamed Atta more than a year before the attacks and claimed the Navy man wasn't "sufficiently credible."
The statement from commission chiefs Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton came after a flip-flop, in which the panel's staff first denied and then admitted it was told Pentagon spies had linked Atta to an al Qaeda cell in New York in 2000.
-snip-
"The commission's staff concluded that the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation."
A skeptical Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) said the statement does nothing to answer why the Able Danger warning wasn't passed on to the FBI.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 911; 911commission; abledanger; atta; gorelick
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-163 next last
To: txrangerette; hotshu
Thanks and Thanks. I forgot about the Senate's delay in appointing Ashcroft. If I recall correctly, the Senate finally approved him in July. I suspect that Clintoon holdovers continued to run the show until Ashcroft was firmly in place.
To: jimbo123
The Cover-up Commission was charged with covering up the cover-ups.
Gorelick and Benvenista were not on the Commission because thy didn't have anything else to do during that time. They were on the Commission to ensure that the content and direction did not land on the Clinton Administration.
What other investigative bodies would have a person who was instrumental in creating the situation as one of the investigators?
Gorelick was former CIA and former Deputy Attorney General under Clinton. Her fingerprints are on The Wall between agencies, the investigation of TWA800, possibly on the phone call to FBI in OKC after the Murrah bombing instructing them to drop any investigation into foreign terrorism involvement in Murrah, etc.
Benvenista was one of Clintons personal/business attorneys.
Surprisingly, Sandy Bergler didn't get a seat on the Cover-up Commission, but he was busy elsewhere -- at the National Archive stealing and destroying classified documents [for which, it appears, he will only get a slap on the wrist, a little fine and a suspension of the NSA clearance for 3 years. Martha Stewart got worse punishment and her crime was lying to the investigators.].
===
Check the FR archives during the Commission hearings. Numerous threads showed the massive numbers of complaints the Committee Chairs received against Gorelick and her being on the Committee. But she got to stay. The Commission was intended to whitewash; it was a farce from the start; it was supposed to answer a few questions, cover-up and limit fingerpointing.
I look for the same to happen with this follow-up by Weldon. He might get a few hearings, and then the politicians (both parties, Executive Branch and Legislative Branch) will 'reach a conclusion' and relegate (aka, whitewash) the issue to the toiletbowl of historical obscurity---for the sake of National Security, of course.
42
posted on
08/13/2005 5:33:23 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: jimbo123
and claimed the Navy man wasn't "sufficiently credible."Let's face it, the Commissionwanted a foo-foo, feel-good report that could make recommendations that told Bush to do a lot of things he was already doing. They did not want the absolute truth to come out because Hitlery hasn't had her time having sexual encounters in ther Oval Office.
43
posted on
08/13/2005 5:41:28 AM PDT
by
trebb
("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
To: jimbo123
"What else is the commission covering up?"
TESTIMONY BEHIND CLOSED DOORS! MANSOOR IJAZs, for example!
44
posted on
08/13/2005 5:42:50 AM PDT
by
combat_boots
(Dug in and not budging an inch. NOT to be schiavoed, greered, or felosed as a patient)
To: TomGuy
This is making me sick to my stomach.
It's not stupidity... it's deliberate indifference.
45
posted on
08/13/2005 5:49:11 AM PDT
by
johnny7
(“I like ya, Lloyd. I always liked ya. You were always the best of 'em.”)
To: MinuteGal
I was dead wrong about these Gubbermint trough feeders. I agree with your every word after I looked into it
46
posted on
08/13/2005 5:50:18 AM PDT
by
dennisw
( G_d - ---> Against Amelek for all generations)
To: jimbo123
The military has been in the "intelligence" (spy) business since its inception. There is a reason for that, namely, they cannot trust civilian agencies to give them unfiltered intelligence.
47
posted on
08/13/2005 5:53:07 AM PDT
by
cynicom
To: johnny7
Same thoughts here.
And I'm willing to bet some serious money that the Bush administration, Congress, or anyone else for that matter will do a single thing to hold the perppetrators responsible. I cannot remember a time when I was more disgusted with every single elected official in our government.
48
posted on
08/13/2005 5:57:03 AM PDT
by
frankiep
To: frankiep
I meant to say will not do a single thing
49
posted on
08/13/2005 5:57:54 AM PDT
by
frankiep
To: Peach
"Ever wonder how we knew that the 19 hijackers were responsible for 9/11 within hours of the attacks?"
Good point and YES! And now we know why. I suspect that early on that the rats were trying to hide their culpability and Clinton's failure to deal with Terrorists, and at the same time key rats of the 9/11 Commission were primarily trying to derail GWB's run for a 2nd term by hiding info such as this.
50
posted on
08/13/2005 6:02:14 AM PDT
by
SeaBiscuit
(God Bless all who defend America and Friends, the rest can go to hell.)
To: frankiep; johnny7
Something that has bothered me:
Remember back to Ashcroft's appearance before the Commission. Ashcroft was the #1 target of the Left/Dems at that time, so the Dems on the Committee were really gunning for him. Their questioning was very antagonistic toward the AG.
Gorelick was one of the most antagonistic. During her questioning, almost berating, it was as if Ashcroft had had enough. He made mention of the Gorelick memo (classified) and told the Committee he would de-classify the memo if the Committee really wanted to be serious.
Memo? Secret memo? Of course, the MSM went wild. Ashcroft did read parts of the documentation that revealed Gorelick's involvement in 'The Wall'. That broke the dam on 'The Wall'. Of course, since it pointed right into the heart of the Clinton Justice Department, the MSM quickly went silent.
Gorelick went silent.
==
What bothered me was the reaction of GWB to Ashcoft's revelation of Gorelick and The Wall. Remember that GWB demands loyalty from his underlings. So, did GWB criticize Gorelick? No. Did GWB criticize x42? No. Did GWB criticize Tenet? No. Who did GWB criticize? Ashcroft. His own AG.
Not many picked up on GWB's treatment of Ashcroft. It was anything but 'team loyalty'. I always felt that one experience was instrumental in Ashcroft bowing out at the end of GWB's first term.
51
posted on
08/13/2005 6:09:38 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: Peach
I want to know why Gorelick, the woman responsible for The Wall, was put in charge of looking at all the information coming in to the 9/11 Commission and deciding what got disseminated to the full Commission.I didn't know this. WOW! She should go to jail for this and the Wall.
52
posted on
08/13/2005 6:10:14 AM PDT
by
OrioleFan
(Republicans believe every day is July 4th, DemocRATs believe every day is April 15th. - Reagan)
To: Peach; All
Does anyone remember how quickly the ID on the 9/11 guys came about? I recall it was pretty quick.
53
posted on
08/13/2005 6:11:37 AM PDT
by
Tarheel
(Tarheel born, Tarheel bred, When I die I am Tarheel dead.)
To: Tarheel
Please let me know if you get an answer: I seem to recall it was less than 24 hours after the attacks.
54
posted on
08/13/2005 6:13:07 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: jimbo123
Typical BS gubmint coverup.
You cover my a$$, I'll cover yours.
BTW, heard of any firings yet?
55
posted on
08/13/2005 6:17:49 AM PDT
by
iconoclast
(Wastin' away again in hearts-and-minds'ville.)
To: Peach
Remember how quickly we saw the video tape at the airport that had Atta on it--how did they pull it that fast if they d/n know who they were looking for. It is not as though he had a sign around his neck that said --Look at Me , I'm Atta!
56
posted on
08/13/2005 6:22:56 AM PDT
by
Tarheel
(Tarheel born, Tarheel bred, When I die I am Tarheel dead.)
To: Peach
IIRC, it was within hours of the first attack at the WTC when some of the names of the hijackers started to emerge.
Probably, the live thread during that day might show the timeframe. [I don't have a link to that live thread and have no idea how to search back to find it.]
57
posted on
08/13/2005 6:23:10 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: Peach
Please let me know if you get an answer: I seem to recall it was less than 24 hours after the attacks.The stewardesses on the flights gave the seat numbers of the hijackers to HQ. The hijackers used their real names for ticketing, etc. Many of them were already known by the CIA and other agencies.
58
posted on
08/13/2005 6:27:41 AM PDT
by
mikegi
To: jimbo123
What else is the commission covering up?Why did Bubba feel the need to bring Bruce Lindsey?
59
posted on
08/13/2005 6:29:10 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: jimbo123
""The commission's staff concluded that the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation."
What they really are saying is "Although the information turned out to be TRUE, we ignored it because it would have made BJ and Hillary look bad and GW Bush look good."
There. That's better.
60
posted on
08/13/2005 6:29:38 AM PDT
by
Bigh4u2
(Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-163 next 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson