Replies

"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."

This guy is wrong. Atta's supposed trip to Prague was in 2001.

If the omission of the Able Danger information had a political purpose it was to absolve Clinton under the perception if Atta was here under Clinton's rule, Clinton himself is responsible.

I think it is as silly as blaming Bush for Atta's presence here in 2001, but a lot of people make those type of connections as "proof" of responsibility.

You're both missing it. The fact the commission failed to include the report shows that the "wall" put in place between law enforcement and intelligence allowed Atta to continue Bin Laden's elaborate plan that led to 9/11 and the murder of 3,000+ innocent countrymen, women and children. Had there been no wall, Atta could have been nabbed then and there.

Had the commission followed up on this report, the implication would have laid a great deal of blame for 9/11 on the Clinton administration.

The question also before us is just what was the purpose of having Ms. Gorelick on the commission, when it was her "wall" that might have had such a tragic bearing on 9/11, and why did staffers on the commission refuse to include this important information on Atta, or brief the higher-ups on it? It gives the appearance that Ms. Gorelick was there to CYA (cover yer arse) herself and the Clintons, on the commission that was supposed to be the end all of all, to leave no stone unturned, etc, etc, to ensure a 9/11 couldn't happen again.

Do you have a warm fuzzy that the commission met its objective? I don't. It makes me want to vomit! Politics and CYA trumps the lives of innocent Americans. That's indescribably despicable. Unless this is completely exposed, we are doomed to repeat performances of 9/11 like events.

If the omission of the Able Danger information had a political purpose it was to absolve Clinton under the perception if Atta was here under Clinton's rule, Clinton himself is responsible.

I think it is as silly as blaming Bush for Atta's presence here in 2001, but a lot of people make those type of connections as "proof" of responsibility.

We can give Clinton the opportunity to apologize for something other than his show apologies for past acts or omissions of other people.

As I understand it, the Czech intelligence community still stands by it's assertion that said meeting did indeed take place in Prague. I've never seen a retraction by the Service anywhere.

If you can update me on that aspect of it, I will stand corrected.

CA....