[jimbo123]

What else is the commission covering up?

[Peach]

Sen. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) told Fox News on Wednesday that commission staffers were briefed at least once on Able Danger, but he does not believe that panel members were told about it.

[JRios1968]

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."

A Navy officer is not "sufficiently credible," yet Jaime Gorelick and her Wall between Law Enforcement and Intelligence is?? Can you spell "Cover Your A$$"??

[johnny7]

Something smells...

[Peach]

Ever wonder how we knew that the 19 hijackers were responsible for 9/11 within hours of the attacks?

It's because of Able Danger and others within the intelligence community. They WERE watching them...they just couldn't talk to each other or actually do anything.

One would think the Commission members would have been at least a LITTLE bit curious as to how we identified the 19 and the mastermind within hours of 9/11.

[wotan]

He wasn't sufficiently credible?

They thought he just made up Mohammed Atta's name and it just happened to be the same as the 9/11 hijacker?

[Just mythoughts]

These people are idiots, their job was not to give credibility, but to find out what the .ell happened.

Obviously Atta existed and somebody within government knew who he was.

[RedEyeJack]

"The commission's staff concluded"

This is a cover-up. Some anonymous, unaccountable person made the decision. Now we are told that this was proper.

NO! This should have been public knowledge and the creditability of the report debated in front of the American people. Better later than never. Support Congressman Wheldon. Write your Representative and Senators personally and ask them to weigh in on this issue. Bring ALL the facts into the SUNSHINE and let the chips fall where they may.

I don't trust the "staffers" or the Commission for that matter. Too many "fixers" including Gorelick and Richard Ben Veniste. This smell to high heaven

[dennisw]

Some staffers are partisan Donks and probably told Able Danger to take a hike since it made Bill Clinton and Jamie Gorelik look culpable. Committee staffers are young and ambitious. They blew it and are covering up.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

ummm..apparently it was reliable...oh, no that's right, with 295,734,134 plus people running around the place- it could just be a coinky-dink. (leftists!)

[kittymyrib]

We need a special prosecutor to find out what the Clinton administration knew and when did they know it. This should have been done in October 2001, but better late than never. And Congress should investigate the 9/11 Commission's dereliction of duty. We paid for an investigation, and we got a coverup.

[Labyrinthos]

I have some questions about this whole Goreleck situation. I apologize if they have already been asked and answered, but I am just now getting into this.

Where does Goreleck (or any other assisatant attorney general) get the legal authority to set policy and enact regulations dealing with national security issues? One would think that Reno and/or Clinton would have had to have signed-off on this wall that Gorelick created between Dept. Defense Intel and the FBI, particularly since the Dept. of Defense is not part of the Dept. of Justice.

If Goreleck had the power to unilaterally create this wall, why didn't Ashcroft remove the wall after President Bush was sworn in alamost 9 months before 09.11?

Is the "Gorelick Wall" still on the books today, and if so, why?

[TomGuy]

I was watching FoxNews earlier this morning and happened to watch the usual weekend exchange between Ellen Ranting Ratner and Jim Pinkerton. [I try to avoid those two whenever possible, but accidents happen and I turned on the TV too early this morning. But I digress.......]

'Rantner', surprisingly, was right on. She was saying the 'problem' was a failure of agency communications.

DING DING DING We have a winner.

Disappointingly, Pinkerton failed to take advantage of that admission and rambled an incoherent excuse of a lack of policy as early as 2000.

===

Pinkerton should have taken Rantner's admission of the failure of agency communications and used Rantner's own words against her to drive the point down the court and make an easy and obvious score. It would have been a slam-dunk to bring up the Gorelick Wall.

Pinkerton wasn't up to the task. Rantner gave him the gun and even gave him the bullet. Pinkerton dropped it on his foot.

[TomGuy]

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.

[trebb]

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.

[combat_boots]

"What else is the commission covering up?"

TESTIMONY BEHIND CLOSED DOORS! MANSOOR IJAZ’s, for example!

[cynicom]

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.

[iconoclast]

Typical BS gubmint coverup.

You cover my a$$, I'll cover yours.

BTW, heard of any firings yet?

[mewzilla]

What else is the commission covering up?

Why did Bubba feel the need to bring Bruce Lindsey?

[Bigh4u2]

""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.

[tarheelswamprat]

"The commission's staff concluded that the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation."

Commissioner Tom Kean also added, "As I said before, people need to mind their own business.