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

Skip to comments.

Sandy Burglar's Letter
CNN ^

Posted on 09/08/2006 10:52:16 AM PDT by npg

PDF file, click link

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/images/09/07/berger.iger.pdf


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: docksinsocks; docsinsox; doxinsox; pathto911; sandyburglar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last
Here is the Burglar's letter to ABC.

I would never suggest that anyone call the Stonebridge number at the bottom of the page.

1 posted on 09/08/2006 10:52:17 AM PDT by npg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: npg

Why this man wasnt hung or publically ridiculed in the town square is beyond me. Washington would have frog marched him behind the barn the day after the pants stuffing felony.


2 posted on 09/08/2006 10:54:06 AM PDT by samadams2000 (Somebody important make....THE CALL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: npg

3 posted on 09/08/2006 10:55:09 AM PDT by msnimje (What part of-- "DEATH TO AMERICA" --do the Democrats not understand?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: npg; All
Proof Sandy Berger is LYING IN THIS LETTER
(Hat tip: Little Green Footballs)
4 posted on 09/08/2006 10:57:06 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I am SO glad to no longer be associated with the party of "dependence on government"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: npg

Sandy stole a copy of the script???


7 posted on 09/08/2006 11:01:31 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jasoncann

thanks for posting that for me. I was having trouble.


8 posted on 09/08/2006 11:02:13 AM PDT by npg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: npg
From Sandy's letter to ABC...:

"There is nothing in the 911 Commission Report (the purported basis of your film) to support this portrayal...."

Let me finish the sentence as it should be:.....

"because all the relevant evidence was either in my pants or my socks when I left the National Archives"

9 posted on 09/08/2006 11:02:54 AM PDT by HardStarboard (Hey, march some more - its helping get the wall built!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

This video link from MSNBC shows how the Clintoons/Berger failed to stop Ben Laden and enabled him to kill 3000 Americans on 9/11.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JuH1xwLUnbg


10 posted on 09/08/2006 11:02:54 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (There's a dwindling market for Marxist Homosexual Lunatic lies/wet dreams posing as news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: npg
Everyone knows that Sandy Berger is a honorable and honest man of highest integrity and unquestioned character.

His comments must be taken in that context. /s

11 posted on 09/08/2006 11:04:36 AM PDT by stockstrader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: npg; neverdem

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1177555/posts

Berger rejected four plans to kill or capture bin Laden
THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | July 24, 2004 | James G. Lakely


Posted on 07/23/2004 11:12:30 PM PDT by neverdem


President Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, rejected four plans to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, worrying once that if the plans failed and al Qaeda launched a counterattack, "we're blamed."

According to the September 11 commission's 567-page report, released Thursday, Mr. Berger was told in June 1999 that U.S. intelligence agents were confident about bin Laden's presence in a terrorist training camp called Tarnak Farms in Afghanistan.


Mr. Berger's "hand-written notes on the meeting paper," the report says, showed that Mr. Berger was worried about injuring or killing civilians located near the camp.

Additionally, "If [bin Laden] responds" to the attack, "we're blamed," Mr. Berger wrote.

The report also says that Richard Clarke, Mr. Berger's expert on counterterrorism, presented that plan to get bin Laden because he was worried about the al Qaeda leader's "ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction."

These revelations come as Mr. Berger is under investigation by the Justice Department for smuggling several copies of classified documents that dealt with the Clinton administration's anti-terror policies out of the National Archives.

Commission Co-chairman Lee Hamilton said Thursday, however, that the missing documents Mr. Berger has acknowledged taking doesn't affect "the integrity" of the final report.

According to the report, the first plan of action against bin Laden presented to Mr. Berger was a briefing by CIA Director George J. Tenet on May 1, 1998. Mr. Berger took no action, the report says, because he was "focused most" on legal questions.


12 posted on 09/08/2006 11:12:36 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (There's a dwindling market for Marxist Homosexual Lunatic lies/wet dreams posing as news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: npg

Why do people insist on using their business letterhead to write letters like this? To me that is the most unprofessional thing a person can do. You don't use your employer/business address to write personal letters on. I worked for the State of New York. If I'd used letterhead to write personal letters on, I'd have been brought up on charges. Why would you use a business letterhead if what you are writing about doesn't even pertain to the company's business? If Burglar wanted to write a letter to Disney, he should have used his own personal letterhead, or he could have at least use the back of the papers he pilfered from the Archives. What a pathetic loser.


13 posted on 09/08/2006 11:13:08 AM PDT by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway~~John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mass55th

probably because it says he's Chairman.


14 posted on 09/08/2006 11:15:36 AM PDT by npg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: npg
"probably because it says he's Chairman. "

He may be a Chairman, but he's still wrong in using his business letterhead to write a letter pertaining to a personal issue. It's a gross misuse of that organization's name. It's as if he's speaking for the whole Stonebridge group...not just himself.

15 posted on 09/08/2006 11:26:02 AM PDT by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway~~John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: npg
"I didn't do it!!!"
16 posted on 09/08/2006 11:34:06 AM PDT by weegee (Remember "Remember the Maine"? Well in the current war "Remember the Baby Milk Factory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mass55th
Of course you are right, but the clowns at the Stoneridge Group hired this felon to run their company. I assume they expect unprofessional behavior to be part of the "package".
17 posted on 09/08/2006 11:34:49 AM PDT by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
You have to "parse" his response ....

"There is nothing in the 9/11 Commission Report .....

(IF THEY DIDN'T PRINT IT IN THE REPORT, YOU CAN'T PROVE IT!)

..... (the purported basis of your film) to support this portrayal and the fabrication of this scene (of such apparent magnitude) cannot be justified under any reasonable definition of dramatic license. In no instance did President Clinton or I ever fail to support a request from the CIA or US military .....

(WE ALWAYS SUPPORTED THEM - EVENTUALLY - SOME TIME OR ANOTHER - A WEEK OR SO LATER)

..... to authorize an operation against bin Laden or al Qaeda."



See he didn't lie - you have took closely at what these POS lawyers say. They are experts in subterfuge and deceipt!
18 posted on 09/08/2006 11:37:13 AM PDT by TimesDomain (When a judge declares himself "MASTER", you become his "SLAVE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: npg

The guy is the laughingstock of the decade.


19 posted on 09/08/2006 11:39:49 AM PDT by subterfuge (If Liberals hated terrorists like they hate Bush the war would be over by now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Notice how they somehow put patial blame on the military. The target is in sight, they request to fire. Get no response and somehow have to take the blame for not "requesting to fire" What? more loudly? What the hell is the military supposed to do?


20 posted on 09/08/2006 1:19:34 PM PDT by grapeape (Hope is not a method - Gen Hugh Shelton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 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.

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