NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-scheer19oct19,1,6762967.column
(registration required)

excerpt:

It is shocking: The Bush administration is suppressing a CIA report on 9/11 until after the election, and this one names names. Although the report by the inspector general's office of the CIA was completed in June, it has not been made available to the congressional intelligence committees that mandated the study almost two years ago.

"It is infuriating that a report which shows that high-level people were not doing their jobs in a satisfactory manner before 9/11 is being suppressed," an intelligence official who has read the report told me, adding that "the report is potentially very embarrassing for the administration, because it makes it look like they weren't interested in terrorism before 9/11, or in holding people in the government responsible afterward."

When I asked about the report, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee, said she and committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) sent a letter 14 days ago asking for it to be delivered. "We believe that the CIA has been told not to distribute the report," she said. "We are very concerned."

According to the intelligence official, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity, release of the report, which represents an exhaustive 17-month investigation by an 11-member team within the agency, has been "stalled." First by acting CIA Director John McLaughlin and now by Porter J. Goss, the former Republican House member (and chairman of the Intelligence Committee) who recently was appointed CIA chief by President Bush.

The official stressed that the report was more blunt and more specific than the earlier bipartisan reports produced by the Bush-appointed Sept. 11 commission and Congress.

"What all the other reports on 9/11 did not do is point the finger at individuals, and give the how and what of their responsibility. This report does that," said the intelligence official. "The report found very senior-level officials responsible."

By law, the only legitimate reason the CIA director has for holding back such a report is national security. Yet neither Goss nor McLaughlin has invoked national security as an explanation for not delivering the report to Congress.

time for the AP to break out the freedom of information forms

time for the AP to break out the freedom of information forms

The problem with an overly secretive and aggressive government is that things tend to come out when it hurts you most.

Bump

time for the AP to break out the freedom of information forms
No, they can stall for long enough to stop a court case from happening.

No, they can stall for long enough to stop a court case from happening.

Dot indefinitely. Sure, it may be too late for the election, but it certainly wouldn't be too late for an impeachment.

Screw that, I want to read the Kennedy files. Lone gunman my ass!

Dot indefinitely. Sure, it may be too late for the election, but it certainly wouldn't be too late for an impeachment.
"National Security"


Aren't they planning on releasing this anyway? It would be hard to unseat Bush in a republican house.

"National Security"


Aren't they planning on releasing this anyway? It would be hard to unseat Bush in a republican house.

The article states that Goss has not brought up national security. I also have faith that some Republicans will face facts.

bump

Interesting how this is an opinion piece and not a news story, yet we all take it as fact...

It does refer to a source in the intelligence community and references two memebers of the House Intelligence Committe. It is likely that there is indeed a report, so it's not exactly just an opinion piece. The contents of said report are unknown though, so we will have to see.

Hypothetical Question: If the report is released and it is damning to senior members of the administration, would it be enough to sway your vote?

It does refer to a source in the intelligence community and references two memebers of the House Intelligence Committe. It is likely that there is indeed a report, so it's not exactly just an opinion piece. The contents of said report are unknown though, so we will have to see.

Hypothetical Question: If the report is released and it is damning to senior members of the administration, would it be enough to sway your vote?

Which is more intellectually honest and better for our democracy, to vote in favor of a candidate because you support them and their policies, or to vote for a candidate regardless of what he espouses simply because he's not the other guy?

Which is more intellectually honest and better for our democracy, to vote in favor of a candidate because you support them and their policies, or to vote for a candidate regardless of what he espouses simply because he's not the other guy?

What's most intellectually honest is to weight all factors and then make up your mind. You didn't answer my question.

What's most intellectually honest is to weight all factors and then make up your mind. You didn't answer my question.


Yes, I did.

Yes, I did.

where?

Which is more intellectually honest and better for our democracy, to vote in favor of a candidate because you support them and their policies, or to vote for a candidate regardless of what he espouses simply because he's not the other guy?

First off, I can't stand Bush's policies, (I'm not really sure what they are, it is obvious the administration doesn't want me to know) and I can't understand why anyone else would (who isn't Psylos).

Second, almost all of those who are going to vote for Kerry don't necessarily disagree with Kerry's position (most actually agree), they just don't feel he would be their first choice.

Lastly, I will use an old saying: "What's the best thing about banging your head against a wall? Stopping." and translate it to this: "What is the best thing about the Bush presidency? Electing John Kerry."

9/11 was a tradegy but too many connections are now coming out that the Government actually perpretrated the attacks evidence like Passports and Mobile phones found in blatantly obvious places no terrorist is stupid and certainly wouldnt leave their passports and cellulars in stoopid places to frame themselves and their idenities and the hijackers idenities were also convinently pulled outta the hat after the attack through CCTV? surely they would have been blown to atoms not a remain to compare with anything let alone CCTV

thus a war has started but the attacks couldnt go unavenged to do so would have sulled the memory of 3,000 people who died with out warning or reason

but i leave you with one more consideration

14 planes vanished mysteriously off radar on the day of the attack and radar wasnt reestablished until after the attack and F16s in the air at the time werent even armed lapse of alert I think not!

9/11 was a tradegy but too many connections are now coming out that the Government actually perpretrated the attacks evidence like Passports and Mobile phones found in blatantly obvious places no terrorist is stupid and certainly wouldnt leave their passports and cellulars in stoopid places to frame themselves and their idenities and the hijackers idenities were also convinently pulled outta the hat after the attack through CCTV? surely they would have been blown to atoms not a remain to compare with anything let alone CCTV

thus a war has started but the attacks couldnt go unavenged to do so would have sulled the memory of 3,000 people who died with out warning or reason

but i leave you with one more consideration

14 planes vanished mysteriously off radar on the day of the attack and radar wasnt reestablished until after the attack and F16s in the air at the time werent even armed lapse of alert I think not!
They are dead, I don't think they care if you track them down.

I'm crossing my fingers hoping that this report comes out.

They are dead, I don't think they care if you track them down.


well I know but thats not the point 9/11 now stinks of conspiracy up and down which ever way you look at it!

Submit it to TOTSE.