Skip to comments.
Congress, White House clash over declassifying 9/11 report
USA TODAY ^
| Kathy Kiely and John Diamond
Posted on 05/30/2003 1:59:12 PM PDT by TLBSHOW
Edited on 04/13/2004 1:40:42 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
WASHINGTON -- A behind-the-scenes dispute over how much the public should be allowed to see of a report on the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks could touch off a constitutional confrontation between Congress and the White House.
The House and Senate intelligence committees spent most of last year investigating why the nation's spy and law enforcement agencies failed to prevent the attacks. The committees filed the approximately 800-page report in December, but it was classified so that intelligence agencies could review it first.
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: 911; 911commission; congress; declassifying; report; whitehouse
1
posted on
05/30/2003 1:59:12 PM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
To: TLBSHOW
Under an obscure, 26-year-old rule, the House and Senate could vote to declassify the intelligence committees' report over administration objections. ''If we want, we could have the entire thing printed,'' said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Then do it. What a bunch of wimps.
To: TLBSHOW
I would like to know how dubya after hearing a second plane had hit the wtc, knowing he had seen briefings in august about terorists crashing jets into buildings, could sit in a florida elmenatary school for another 15 minutes reading a story about a "pet goat"...?
Why didn't they get him out of there? It was a publicly annouced visit. Couldn't he have been targeted? And why in the hell didn't he jump up and say: "Kids I have to go, there is something happening that requires my immediate attention..."
3
posted on
05/30/2003 2:25:50 PM PDT
by
jd777
To: jd777
There is one reason why government tries to resist the truth and attempts to classify reports. That reason is that they are culpable and look bad if the truth is released. I cannot understand why there is any debate, either the administration is incompetent or guilty of malfeasence or a combination of both. If not guilty, the administration would welcome the opportunity to clear itself of any rumor or speculation.
4
posted on
05/30/2003 2:42:24 PM PDT
by
meenie
To: jd777
I would like to know how dubya after hearing a second plane had hit the wtc, knowing he had seen briefings in august about terorists crashing jets into buildings, could sit in a florida elmenatary school for another 15 minutes reading a story about a "pet goat"...?Hey, pal, it's a pretty riveting story, alright?
5
posted on
05/30/2003 2:44:48 PM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(I've decided to cut back my tagline, one word at a)
To: jd777
Most important things in this entire report are the two countries id'ed as virtual state sponsors.
All this fuss about Bush sitting still for 15 minutes. When conditions are uncertain and in a state of flux, you continue to stick to normal. This was a normal pre9/11 response despite the terror threats prevalent then.
There is some indication Bushwas targeted at the hotel where he stayed. A crew of Arab types posing as a TV newscrew were turned away at the hotel entrance after there was no record of their supposedly scheduled appointment. Same MO was used against Massoud a couple of days earlier. Local papers had the story.
To: TLBSHOW
Anything not a threat to national security should be publicized. End of story.
7
posted on
05/30/2003 4:01:30 PM PDT
by
Sparta
(Tagline removed by moderator)
To: Sparta
Anything not a threat to national security should be publicized.That's the problem: much of this report deals with sources and methods. Even printing some of the information without attribution can easily give away the source or method.
8
posted on
05/30/2003 4:07:44 PM PDT
by
Poohbah
(Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
To: Poohbah
Your #8. I agree. Sources and methods have long been a reason for keeping things classified. It's a 2 edged sword. Spy cases are perfect examples. You sometimes have to convict on lesser charges for fear of giving up sources and methods. Yet, there are those who would use the Sources and Methods (S&M for short) as an excuse (pure CYA) for not releasing info to Congress, and/or to the public.
9
posted on
05/30/2003 4:51:16 PM PDT
by
Fizzie
To: TLBSHOW
I WANT TO REVIEW THE REPORT, PERIOD!
10
posted on
05/30/2003 5:00:03 PM PDT
by
Brian S
To: Brian S
The elected ones should best understand that they (WORK FOR US) we don't work for them. If they don't do their job and then cover it up and then try and hide the report. Well they sure look like they are hiding something to me. I said day one that they should get this out front and over with. But know they want to drag it on and make it look like they are hiding something. Fools all of them.
11
posted on
05/30/2003 6:29:22 PM PDT
by
TLBSHOW
To: TLBSHOW
If I had to fault Bush for anything, it is an inordinate need for keeping things secret.
12
posted on
05/30/2003 8:51:25 PM PDT
by
gcruse
(Vice is nice, but virtue can hurt you. --Bill Bennett)
To: Brian S
I WANT TO REVIEW THE REPORT, PERIOD!
DITTO
13
posted on
05/31/2003 12:14:55 PM PDT
by
Marianne
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