Posted on 04/12/2004 9:44:47 AM PDT by kattracks
In her first year as Deputy U.S. Attorney General in the Clinton administration, Sept. 11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick was warned that lax U.S. immigration policies made the U.S. a tempting target for terrorists, former FBI Director Louis Freeh revealed on Monday, suggesting that Gorelick did little to remedy the situation.
"Protecting our homeland from attacks by foreign terrorists had long been the FBI's priority," said Freeh, in a lengthy Wall Street Journal op-ed piece.
"Back in September 1994, I recommended to Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick that the DoJ strengthen investigative powers against suspected 'undesirable aliens,' accelerating deportation appeal proceedings and limiting U.S. participation in a visa waiver pilot program under which 9.5 million foreigners entered the U.S. in 1994."
Freeh that he also recommended "that we include provisions for the detention and removal of undesirable aliens, under a special, closed-court procedure."
"I also criticized alien deportation appeal procedures which often took years to conclude. Finally, I recommended legislation to provide the FBI with roving wiretap authority to investigate terrorist activities in the U.S."
But if Gorelick took Freeh's warnings seriously, she didn't make much headway with her superiors.
By 1996, under the Clinton administration's Citizenship USA program, thousands of criminal suspects were rushed through the naturalization process without proper background checks in order to get them on the voting roles on time for that year's presidential election.
According to former Justice Department investigator David Schippers, under the accelerated procedures, the U.S. was swarmed with:
• More than 75,000 new citizens who had arrest records when they applied.
• An additional 115,000 citizens whose fingerprints were unclassifiable for various technical reasons and we're never resubmitted.
• Another 61,000 people who were given citizenship with no fingerprints submitted at all.
At least one new citizen was already in jail by the time he was naturalized under the Clinton administration program.
According to Schippers's 1999 book, "Sell Out," Jamie Gorelick was tasked with expediting the new rules under which criminal background checks were suspended for new immigrants.
Please don't; unless 'blue' is your favorite color. Was really hoping at least Condi, might redirect a question or two, to Gorelick; offering she might have a more in depth answer to say; one of Kerry's or Benpeniste's antagonistic and self-indulgent questions.
But no reason to hold one's breath; waiting for a Dem to be brought up short by a Repub.
And after watching the Dems grandstand; thought it would have been fair-play, if even an honest panel member had turned and asked Gorelick for some 'clarification'. Or better; just suggest that she should recuse herself. . .
Under a 'don't go there' directive; maybe these Dems have already discussed Freeh's choice of legacy with him. Fall on a small sword; and be spared their many; already drawn.
I hope, as you do, that Freeh will take them all out; where they belong.
She'd probably fail at that, too.
Jamie Gorelick was on C-SPAN yesterday morning and a caller asked why Monsoor Ijaz, the man who made the deal happen with Sudan to give up bin Laden, asked why Ijaz wasn't being called to testify and Ms. Gorelick blew it off as just another "conspiracy" that she was unfamiliar with and didn’t believe anyway (and during the horrible reign of the co-presidents’ Clinton, this woman was in a position of power and actually drew a sizable salary -- boggles the mind). They are the masters of screaming right wing conspiracy, all the way back to the Vince Foster murder and onward for eight, long years; yet now, every valid question to come down the pike about the real felonious behaviour of the Clintons is turned and spun to look like Bush was really at fault and it's all his doing the terrible mess we are in today.You may remember Gorelick (she of ugly mug and downturned mouth -- looking like a prison matron ready to screw with the inmates at every turn, just for the sheer amusement of it)--she was at DOJ when all those FBI files (on Republicans, of whom Dick Clarke was one) wound up in Hitlery's Little Black Book of blackmail.
Certainly, this pig Gorelick is your typical, corrupt, scumbag Democrat - - that's old news - - but refreshing the memory with this information about her role in the Clinton Administration's scheme helps to clarify why it was that the Democrats wanted her on this political witch-hunt, aka "The 9-11 Commission".
Kudos again to NewsMax.
Sabotage in Cyberspace: The Coming Electronic Pearl Harbor by Mark Ward
Convinced that an electronic Pearl Harbor is imminent, the US is already taking steps to protect itself. Jamie Gorelick, deputy attorney general, has called for an effort similar to the Manhattan Project, which developed the first atomic bomb, to harden federal computer systems against electronic attack. In a speech in June about information warfare, Gorelick warned: "As we become more interconnected, we are also more vulnerable to attack." /font>
The survivors of 911 can sleep better at night, knowing the Dynamic Duo was obsessed about Cyberspace.
Hardly. I'm not negative at all. I'm practical and logical which may be hard for you to understand. Phone calls have a much higher rate of effectiveness than do e-mails. E-mails, when compared to other means of communication, have limited effectiveness. Personal contact is ALWAYS regarded as higher value. A meeting is tops, a phone call second, a personal letter third, and then an e-mail.
In terms of blitzing the media on issues important to readers, phone calls to the editorial department, the reader rep, or the editor's office will have a greater effect than e-mails. E-mails and letters to the editor are very important as to what gets published. However, other means are more effective at driving IMPACT.
I don't know why, but I am very suspicious that you are not who you say you are. But .. nevertheless .. with your negative attitude, I would never hire you to do anything.
First, you couldn't afford me. Secondly, be suspicious all you want, it won't matter. Third, I'm sure you regard ANYONE who dare contradict you as a person with a "negative attitude." Finally, your condescension comes through loud and clear. I'm sure lecturing your volunteers on the correct way to do literature drops, work the phone banks, and initiate e-mail campaigns will do wonders for your precinct.
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.