Posted on 08/11/2005 5:57:46 PM PDT by TonyInOhio
It behaved disgracefully and in a nakedly partisan fashion, with former officials of the Clinton administration attempting to use the platform to damage the president's reelection chances. Then, after months of ludicrous conduct, out of nowhere came the brilliantly conceived and written report that set a new standard of eloquence and coherence for government documents, became a major bestseller and redeemed the commission's reputation.
Well, that didn't last long.
In a story filed at 7:10 PM, the Associated Press is now confirming all the particulars of what will now forever be called the Able Danger disaster. The 9/11 Commission staff did hear about intelligence-gathering efforts that hit pay dirt on the whereabouts of Mohammed Atta -- in 1999 -- and deliberately chose to omit word of those efforts.
And why? Because to do so might upset the timeline the Commission had established on Atta.
And why is that significant? Because the Mohammed Atta timeline established by the Commission pointedly insisted Atta did not meet with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague.
And why is that significant? Because debunking the Atta-Iraq connection was of vital importance to Democrats, who had become focused almost obsessively on the preposterous notion that there was no relation whatever between Al Qaeda and Iraq -- that Al Qaeda and Iraq might even have been enemies.
I was very skeptical of this Able Danger stuff about Atta, thought it was just sme way Rep. Curt Weldon was trying to sell a book. No longer. This is clearly becoming the biggest story of the summer -- the fact that, as Andy McCarthy alluded to, the "intelligence wall" set up by 9/11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick when she was in the Justice Department did, in fact, cause the linchpin of the 9/11 attacks to evade capture by American law enforcement.
So was the staff a) protecting the Atta timeline or b) Jamie Gorelick or c) the Clinton administration or d) itself, because it got hold of the information relatively late and the staff was lazy?
More important, what will co-chairmen Tom (pound his fist on the table) Kean and Lee (look sorrowful) Hamilton do and say in the next 36 hours about this calamity?
THANKS!!!! I've been looking all over for that graphic.
That needs to be published far and wide right now, throughout FR and the blogosphere.
(That's the first time I've used the term "blogosphere"...and it felt GOOD!)
But LOL anyway!
Identify the player on the Left? (OK, they're all on the left... but I assume the others are Bill, Madeleine, and Sandy?)
A Question to ponder:
What did Sandy Burg[l]er take out of the National Archives?
Why was he there, what did he stuff down his pants?
Clinton, Burg[l]er, and the whole bunch should be thoroughly investigated on this issue.
Under little-known, but established, US Supreme Court-sanctioned precedent, Jamie Gorelick, as a former Federal bureaucrat, can & should be sued civilly for gross dereliction of duty, for contributory negligence and culpability in 3,000 deaths (& counting), and for gross negligence as the DOJ "Wall of Separation" memo author, which greatly & unconscionably expanded the "letter of the law" to, in effect, protect spies and terrorists.
This in turn may lead to other higher up Clinton Administration officials being revealed as complicit or culpable under discovery, deposition and courtroom testimony.
Certainly the infamous Gorelick DOJ memo was consistent with the highly cautious and overly legalistic approach of the Clinton Administration (& The Clinton White House) toward National Security, espionage, and terrorism issues.
Ping for later (thanks for posting)
See the Atta..Able Danger keyword list for the rapidly growing list of threads.
It is Clinton's Secretary of Defense, William Cohen
bttt
"I know the AD story is new. Was wondering why Gorelick's memo did not hit the fan earlier. Did it require the military to leak the rest of the story?"
I'm not sure of the exact answer, but to me, it seems like the difference is that there is a congressman running a congressional inquiry. The mainstream media can usually ignore practically anything else.
I don't have cable, so I can't evaluate Fox directly. But it seems to me that they are generally complicit with covering things up like the other networks. Once a story breaks, they have a more fair view.
thanx
thanx
You must be joking. The only thing that will get Natalie off the headlines is another missing blonde. RATmedia concentration on these news lite stories is deliberate just as its suppression of any antiRAT story and wild overplaying of any antiBush story are deliberate.
There is no greater danger to this nation that the RATmedia and FOX is no exception.
Though you would never find out from the RATmedia Joe Wilson was a SPECIAL ASSISTANT to President Bill Clinton. Just the guy one would send to discredit a Bush statement.
Yes I know but FReepers have been very effective at switching the media's attention. We have to keep the pressure on.
Credit to Echotalon for graphic.
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.