Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/30/2002 11:46:13 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: kattracks
... "To the families and victims of September 11th - on behalf of [FBI Special Agents] John Vincent, Barry Carmody, and myself -- we're sorry," Wright said before walking out of the room ...
Imagine, if you can, a state or nation or polity where every government official were so grimly honest, and so noble. What did we used to call it in more enlightened times? Honor, I think. But I forget.
2 posted on 05/30/2002 11:54:17 AM PDT by Asclepius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Sounds like Wright ought to head the FBI. He, at least, understands the depth and breadth of the problem.
3 posted on 05/30/2002 12:02:06 PM PDT by TADSLOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
The finger continues to point to Clinton, Reno, and Freeh.
4 posted on 05/30/2002 12:06:21 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
I am so totally disgusted with all this weeping by men who are suppose to be men! Aren't there any real men left in America?? I am so sick of these pity seeking crybabies who think a few crocodile tears will excuse them from everything from negligence to murder! What happened to the MEN who won WW11 and fought in Korea and Nam?? No wonder every wacko Arab thinks he can terrorize us.
11 posted on 05/30/2002 12:28:31 PM PDT by GeorgeHL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
On 9-11 or a day or two after, a reporter, a live T.V. dialogue, quoted an unnamed and much shaken Pentagon survivor; as my memory permits:

"We have failed the American people."

At that time (of broadcast), it seemed to imply, "forgive us...we have failed you". I have not seen this clip or references to it since. Has anyone else? The FBI has company on the current blame-gaming tables.

Finger pointing at this stage is kind of moot. We have 10 fingers. Let us use them all well. If we don't, our hands will be chopped off and nothing positive shall be accomplished.

14 posted on 05/30/2002 12:53:12 PM PDT by poetknowit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
...on behalf of [FBI Special Agents] John Vincent, Barry Carmody, and myself -- we're sorry...

There goes a man with great honor.

23 posted on 05/30/2002 1:17:24 PM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Here's a link to the video taped news conference. CSPAN archives, 5/30/02. 1.25 hours in length.

Judicial Watch news conference

28 posted on 05/30/2002 1:25:26 PM PDT by KirkandBurke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Bush's refusal to play hardball with the Democraps when he neglected to clean out the FBI and CIA after 9/11 is coming back to bite him in the A**...the leftists and demoscum are doing everything they can to deflect this from 2 termer Clintoon and onto a president who was in office for all of 6 months...
29 posted on 05/30/2002 1:26:02 PM PDT by Frances_Marion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
"the FBI has proven for the past decade that it cannot identify and prevent acts of terrorism"

He says the problems go back a decade, which would mean that the problems went uncorrected during the entire length of the Clinton administration. Don't expect that point to get much emphasis by the mainstream press.
43 posted on 05/30/2002 2:45:03 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
My response to the FBI agent is: "We forgive you. You're fired." When is Bush going to start holding incompetents and haters of America to account!?? Bush is seemingly afraid to step on anyone's wittle toes. We need someone who will step up and fight these pathetic clinton cronies and appointees and liberal bureaucrats who thwart everything conservatives try to do. It's time to clean house - now we just need to find a president who has the guts to do it. I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK.
67 posted on 05/31/2002 8:04:49 AM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Why FBI Agents Don't Record Interviews
[quote]When asked about the backwardness of the FBI in not having its agents tape record their interviews, Dr. Whitehurst said this is because they don't want to be tied down to what the person being interviewed actually says. They want to be able to embroider the interview or trim it. He said he had recommended equipping all the agents with eyeglasses that have a built-in video camera that will record both what is said and what the agent can see. He said that was rejected. It would deprive the agents of their freedom to misreport what the witnesses had said. [end quote] Source - Accuracy In Media
__________________________________________________________________

The Unprofessional and Unreliable FBI "302" Interview
The purpose of interviews during criminal or civil investigations is to objectively determine everything the person interviewed knows - and doesn't know - about a matter being investigated and properly document it in the best possible way to avoid any later dispute about exactly what was said by the person interviewed and the person(s) conducting the interview. The best way to do that is to conduct the inteview at the earliest possible time and record the interview in its entirety. The most effective way to do it is to use 2 or more recorders, keeping in mind that opposing counsel has the right to listen to the tape, have it examined for possible tape tampering - and to a transcript in the event a duplicate original recording isn't made for that purpose during the interview. An added benefit to duplicate recordings arises when one of the tapes becomes damaged, as sometimes happens. Keep in mind that the investigator's job is to expertly gather evidence - and preserve it.

The FBI 302 Form Interview Procedure
Routinely, two agents conduct the interview, usually one asking the questions while the other takes notes on a pocket pad and sometime later dictates a summary of the interview which dictation is sometime later transcribed on a 302 form which is eventually returned to the agent for review and signature (or any corrections, additions or deletions he might consider appropriate). It's not evidence of what the agents or the person interviewed actually said. At best, it's the agent's recollection of what was said. At worst, it's an invitation to skullduggery and - keeping in mind the information is Intelligence - potentially horrendous peril for all Americans as the obvious Intelligence breakdown prior to the events of 11 September 2001 dramatized.

The 302 procedure guarantees that even the interviewing agents' Supervisors have no way of knowing what was actually said - and not said - by any of those present, much less whether the interview was thorough and complete.</font size>

http://www.ntsb.gov/events/TWA800/Transcript_8_23_3.htm
[excerpt][quote] " . . . . . the FBI did not make any transcripts or recordings of these interviews. Documents are written in the words of the FBI agents who prepared them. Some of the documents contain incomplete information or are vaguely worded. In other words, the documents may not always say what the witness said." [end quote]

http://www.law.emory.edu/4circuit/june96/945902.p.html
[excerpt][quote] "Thus, when a government agent interviews a witness and takes contemporaneous notes of the witness' responses, the notes do not become the witness' statement- - despite the agent's best efforts to be accurate- - if the agent "does not read back, or the witness does not read, what the [agent] has written." Goldberg v. United States, 425 U.S. 94, 110- 11 n.19 (1976). And a government agent's interview notes that "merely select portions, albeit accurately, from a lengthy oral recital" do not satisfy the Jencks Act's requirement of a "substantially verbatim recital." Palermo, 360 U.S. at 352. [end quote]

In short, the FBI 302 form interview summaries are not "witness reports" or "witness statements" or "witness declarations" and don't document anything said during the interviews.

Why does the FBI cling to the 302 interview procedure?
To tilt the playing field in the prosecutions' favor in the event of an arrest by avoiding the documentation of any suggestive "leading" questions by the agents and any exculpatory statements that might be made by those being interviewed or even the agents themselves.

Trial lawyers dealing with cases involving FBI 302 form interview summaries instead of recorded interviews and the transcripts of those recorded interviews routinely raise hell about it not just those reasons but also for the the obvious reason that they can neither hear for themselves everything both the witness and the interviewer actually said nor read everything both the witness and the interviewer actually said.

The press is well aware of the problem, as the following documents, but have done a poor job of bringing it to the attention of the public.

http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/speeches/1998/jan1598.htm
[quote]
QUESTION: After the Nichols trial, there was some concern on the part of some of the jurors there about the fact -- and this comes up from time to time -- that the FBI does not transcribe interviews, it does this form 302. And every once in a while somebody says, you know, that it is not the best evidence, 302's are summaries of what something thinks somebody said. And people, every once in a while, look at whether the FBI should change that.

Is that anything that is being looked at? During the time you have been Attorney General, has anyone ever suggested that the FBI ought to change that practice?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I have heard it on occasions and have discussed it with Director Freeh. I cannot discuss it in the context of this particular case.

QUESTION: But as a general matter, is that something that is pretty much a dead letter now?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: As always, we continue to review each issues, the circumstances of the issue in the context it arises, to see what is appropriate. But, again, with respect to this matter, in this case, I cannot discuss it.

QUESTION: Yes, but as a general matter, does it strike you as a good idea, the way the FBI does the 302's? Do you see any need to change that?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think, each case, you have got to look at it on a case-by-case basis, and I think that is what the Bureau does.

QUESTION: Are you saying that they sometimes use a tape recorder?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Again, I think you have to look at the specific examples of each case and make the best judgment of what is right in that case.

QUESTION: (Off microphone) -- some have suggested the FBI should no longer use this form 302, and should go to a transcription of interviews. Would that be a good idea, in your view?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Again, you are going to have to look at the whole matter: each case, when you interview, who you interview, what the circumstances are.

QUESTION: But the FBI has a policy that applies to all cases all the time, that they do not tape record their interviews.

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I will be happy to check with Director Freeh and clarify anything that I have said. But, again, I cannot comment on this particular case. And I think you have got to look at the larger picture. [end quote]
Janet Reno obviously chose to engage in wiggleworming when publicly confronted with the indefensible FBI 302 form interview procedure.

Los Angeles Times 7-31-2001 Hearings Open on Mueller
Senate: Bush's pick to head the FBI tells panel his "highest priority" is to restore public's trust in the battle-weary bureau. [excerpt] " . . . . . he said he would consider expanded tape-recording of FBI interviews to give its investigations greater credibility--another idea the bureau has resisted through the years." [end excerpt]

FBI Crime Lab Misconduct

71 posted on 05/31/2002 12:18:42 PM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks

Tearful FBI Agent Apologizes To Sept. 11 Families and Victims


By Jeff Johnson
CNSNews.com Congressional Bureau Chief
May 30, 2002

Editor's note: Corrects length of investigation to four years rather than ten.

Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - In a memorandum written 91 days before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, an FBI agent warned that Americans would die as a result of the bureau's failure to adequately pursue investigations of terrorists living in the country.

FBI Special Agent Robert Wright, Jr., who wrote the memo, led a four-year investigation into terrorist money laundering in the United States.

Wright began crying as he concluded his remarks at a Washington press conference Thursday.

"To the families and victims of September 11th - on behalf of [FBI Special Agents] John Vincent, Barry Carmody, and myself - we're sorry," Wright said before walking out of the room. Vincent and Carmody have also expressed a desire to expose information regarding alleged FBI missteps prior to Sept. 11.

Wright's June 9, 2001 "Mission Statement" memo warned that, "Knowing what I know, I can confidently say that until the investigative responsibilities for terrorism are transferred from the FBI, I will not feel safe.

"The FBI has proven for the past decade it cannot identify and prevent acts of terrorism against the United States and its citizens at home and abroad," he continued. "Even worse, there is virtually no effort on the part of the FBI's International Terrorism Unit to neutralize known and suspected international terrorists living in the United States."

The summary of Wright's attempts to expose the alleged failures of the FBI's anti-terrorism efforts ended with a solemn conclusion.

"Unfortunately, more terrorist attacks against American interests - coupled with the loss of American lives - will have to occur before those in power give this matter the urgent attention it deserves," he wrote.

Wright had written a manuscript, entitled "Fatal Betrayals of the Intelligence Mission," for presentation to Congress.

"The manuscript outlines, in very specific detail, what I believe allowed September 11th to happen," he explained.

Wright spearheaded the investigation code-named "Vulgar Betrayal," which led to the 1998 seizure of $1.4 million of U.S. funds "destined for terrorist activities."

The investigation determined that U.S.-based Hamas terrorists were using not-for-profit organizations "to recruit and train terrorists and fund terrorist activities in the United States and abroad, including the extortion, kidnapping, and murder of Israeli citizens."

The criminal investigations were initiated over the objections of FBI intelligence officers, who Wright charges did not want their probes of terrorist suspects interrupted or ended by the suspects' arrests for criminal activities.

"Vulgar Betrayal" was the first operation that culminated with the use of civil forfeiture laws to seize the U.S. assets of terrorist groups. The confiscated funds were directly linked to Saudi Arabian businessman Yassin Kadi, also known as Yassin al-Qadi, who has since been identified as one of the "chief money launderers" for Osama bin Laden.

Investigators believe he provided as much as $3 billion to the al Qaeda terrorist network before Wright's investigation closed his operations.

Wright says that FBI management "intentionally and repeatedly thwarted and obstructed" his attempts to expand the investigation to arrest other terrorists and seize their assets.

On August 4, 1999, the FBI removed Wright from the "Vulgar Betrayal" operation, which was terminated shortly thereafter. All but the final three pages of his manuscript were completed in the following months. Those pages were added after Sept. 11.

"As a direct result of the incompetence and, at times, intentional obstruction of justice by FBI management to prevent me from bringing the terrorists to justice, Americans have unknowingly been exposed to potential terrorist attacks for years," he charged.

Nine factors entered into the FBI failures alleged in Wright's manuscript, including:

- Incompetent managers who are not held accountable for mistakes;
- Lack of independent oversight of the bureau;
- Bias on the part of the FBI's internal affairs unit, the Office of Professional Responsibility;
- Antiquated computer technology; and
- Overlapping investigative jurisdictions of other federal law enforcement agencies such as the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.

In a May 29 letter to Wright's attorneys, John Collingwood, assistant director of the FBI's office of public and congressional affairs, forbid Wright to disclose the contents of the manuscript - in writing or orally - to anyone not approved by the bureau.

"Pursuant to [Wright's] employment agreement and FBI procedures, he is still not authorized to publicly disseminate information we have previously advised is prohibited from disclosure at this time," Collingwood wrote.

The letter also contained what Wright and his attorneys considered a threat, meant to intimidate them.

"We feel obliged to inform you [that] breach of an employee's employment obligations may be grounds for disciplinary action, a civil suit, or both," Collingwood warned. "In some instances, unauthorized disclosure may also constitute cause for revocation of a security clearance or be a criminal offense."

Those warnings seem to directly contradict the statements of FBI Director Robert Mueller Wednesday while announcing a "wartime reorganization" of his agency.

"It is critically important that I hear criticisms of the organization including criticisms of me in order to improve the organization, to improve the FBI," he said. "Because our focus is on preventing terrorist attacks, more so than in the past, we must be open to new ideas, to criticism from within and from without, and to admitting and learning from our mistakes."

Collingwood claimed in his letter that the opposition to Wright's public comments was not "solely" because Wright's comments might be "critical or disparaging of the FBI, the government, or its employees."

But Larry Klayman, chairman and general counsel of Judicial Watch, says Collingwood's "threats" prove that Mueller's words are meaningless.

"This new policy of the FBI was not sincere," Klayman said, "because at 5 p.m. [after Mueller's press conference] we got [Collingwood's] letter."

Judicial Watch, along with former House Judiciary Committee Special Counsel David Shippers, is representing Wright in a lawsuit against the FBI and five "unknown officials" for violation of his First Amendment free speech rights.

Wright has also filed complaints with the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility and the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, and wants his manuscript and testimony subpoenaed by Congress.

"I truly believe I would be derelict in my duty as an American if I did not do my best to bring the FBI's dereliction of duty to the attention of others," he said. "I have made it my mission ... to legally expose the problems of the FBI to the President of the United States, the U.S. Congress, and the American people."

E-mail a news tip to Jeff Johnson.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.

78 posted on 06/02/2002 9:22:17 PM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub;ATOMIC_PUNK;EOD GUY;Alamo-Girl;amom;Mercuria;DoughtyOne;RippleFire...

79 posted on 06/02/2002 9:28:50 PM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
How terrible for this poor man. For so many years, the Clinton adminstration had dismantled the FBI, turning it from an investigative arm to a hit man team against it's own perceived enemies. This according to several members of the agency who left in disgust.
The sad thing is, the Clinton's were heroes walking among the survivors of NY hugging people and getting publicity, and this broken man, cries.
80 posted on 06/02/2002 9:33:18 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
"Unfortunately, more terrorist attacks against American interests -- coupled with the loss of American lives -- will have to occur before those in power give this matter the urgent attention it deserves," he wrote.

Let me start by saying that we have no right to whine about this because WE let it happen. . Oh, we can whine and complain but what good will it do? And who will listen?

What really needs to happen is American citizens RISING UP and DEMANDING a competant FBI. Demanding responsible government. If more citizens were on the steps or in the lobbys of their legislators offices demanding accountability, our govt would be working harder.

There will always be some Whine, Moan and Complain liberals who want to handle this war by DIALOG with the enemy. But most of us with a brain know that you have to fight FIRE with FIRE. Lets eliminate terrorists, at home as well as abroad. Speak out!!!

84 posted on 06/03/2002 2:52:30 AM PDT by dokmad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson