"Why did staff and O-missioners not press for that document??? Granted, they will claim they had an overwhelming amount of work to get through, but that kind of after-action report, covering the ONLY significant strike ever attempted on Bin Laden's network, would seem likely to be among the 5-10 most significant documents of the Clinton years on Al Qaeda....."
I fully agree with what all are bring out. Very valid questions we are formulating in this datamining process. I only wish to stress, that perhaps we place to much emphasise on what Sandy Burger removed from the NA. I wish someone could provide us with a definitive answer as to how the NA handles their archives. Less then two weeks back someone did make a comment to the effect they where certain the NA only provides copies in written/typed form, e.g. paper copies.
In no way however, do my comments on this particular matter elude that I am not fully concerned with all the stuff we continue to examine. Burger is as guilty as a fox holding a hen in it's mouth on so much stuff it is pathetic. So I by no means intend to diminish the gravity of what we discuss.
Just want to appeal to folks that burgler removing stuff from the NA may be only a punishable crime in that he removed things off premise that he was not supposed to do.
Obviously we can without a doubt tie in what he might have removed with so many of the allegations he could be charged with in so many areas, e.g. Chicom give aways, shielding Clintoon from wrong doing, very very sloppy proffesional work ethic that lead to many a blunder as far as breaches in national security, outright actions that protected Al Quaeda operatives from being apprehended etc.. So I do not mean to mininize his offenses.