Posted on 09/22/2005 8:56:11 AM PDT by stan_sipple
Pentagon lawyers during the Clinton administration ordered the destruction of intelligence reports that identified September 11 leader Mohamed Atta months before the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, according to congressional testimony yesterday. A lawyer for two Pentagon whistleblowers also told the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday that the Defense Intelligence Agency last year destroyed files on the Army's computer data-mining program known as Able Danger to avoid disclosing the information.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
W H Y ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Yeah..why would they do that before 9/11 - it was only after 9/11 that he papers made them look bad.
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
A lawyer for two Pentagon whistleblowers also told the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday that the Defense Intelligence Agency last year destroyed files on the Army's computer data-mining program known as Able Danger to avoid disclosing the information.I don't see what the Bush administration would have to gain by this either.
"9/11 commission" worse than Pearl Harbor coverup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
You can't blame the Clinton administration for covering up information about 9/11. You can blame the Bush administration for destroying information last year, in order to avoid disclosing information.
Could you please stop mentioning Clinton? Rumsfeld is the one holding up the investigation.
I'm thinking Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.................
Well, you can blame the Clinton Administration for its erroneous interpretation of the law, which led to the Able Danger information being destroyed. You can do that at the very least. Either get informed, or go back to DU.
Is that sarcasm?
If you heard the discussion yesterday, you found out the governments DOD requirements to keep documents on US citizens for only 90-days to find out if they are revelant. After 90-days they are suppose to be destroyed.
This however was all under the Clinton administration. Having listened to those involved yesterday, this has nothing to do with Rumsfeld.
RUmfield just asked that the meetings not be public. He is not holding them up. Imagine that National Security is involved.
Lies
Lies
Lies
Evil
Evil
Evil
No kidding.
Why would they destroy information like this in 2004? during an election year?
Is your timeline correct? Plus I believe it was the 9/11 commission, Gorelick et al, that ignored any reference to a group who's job it was to follow Al Queba. Thus it may be Bush Buswh Bush but that is unlikely. More likely the result of other Government types that have alternate agendas.
Well, I'm glad that's all settled, then. Dirty business, that...so move along, nothing to see here.
Stop meddling in the gubmint's business, and go earn your paycheck so you can pay your taxes like a good little citizen.
Guess Sandy Berger didn't burn ALL the clintoonian damaging papers.
Houston, we have a BIG problem, and its name is Clinton.
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.