Obama and the 9/11 Cover-Up?

i think it possible that good people can be blackmailed, or otherwisely strong-armed into doing bad things for good reasons.

not all politicians are bad/evil. however, they all have to play the same game on the same field.

i would investigate further the OLDER works of sandy berger and lee hamilton before i would paint them with the 'in on it' brush. perhaps, it was more like 'run away and live to fight another day'.

nothing is simple. (

Originally posted by Mad_Hatter
I'm not trying to flame you SD, but answer this simple question, why would obama choose this man in light of the information presented here?

The price for getting the Dem. nomination....

Originally posted by jamie83

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Yep, ill admit thats pretty damn discouraging.

But I wouldnt tie Obama to the 911 coverup in anyway.

To be clear, I'm not saying Obama was INVOLVED in the cover-up.

Title of this thread: Obama and the 9/11 Cover-Up?

What are you saying then? Or are the titles to all your Obama related threads purposefully misleading?

I also wonder why you choose to try to connect Sandy Berger to his ties to the '9-11 coverup' but make no mention of the others who have to be connected, like the President who dragged his feet for years over the Commission, and then refused to testify under oath. Or How you choose to focus on the Democratic Vice Chairman of the commission, instead of the Republican Chairman. Why is the cover-up Lee Hamiltion's fault, and his alone.

Honestly, I find it amazing that you even believe there was a cover-up. You still have never denying getting paid for the McCain campaign...
DocMoreau

PS... How many anti-Obama threads are you at now? It has to be over 20. You were at 17 the last time I counted. At least you are providing some sort of 'links' to back up your ridiculous claims, unfortunately your facts don't support your thesis.

Obama and the 9/11 Cover-Up? Highly Doubtful....

jaime83 and the McCain Web Troll Campaign? Highly likely....

Originally posted by grover
So the most Berger is guilty of is stealing and destroying COPIES not original documents as has been, ...

And you believe what the guy who stuffed documents down his pants and stole them says?

Grover, the guy STOLE and DESTROYEd classified documents.
He should be in jail.

I can tell you this much, long ago when I worked with classified documents it wouldn't matter if somoene stole an original or a copy ... we would have had him arrested faster than you could believe possible.

Copies are no less important then originals.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

I can tell you this much, long ago when I worked with classified documents it wouldn't matter if somoene stole an original or a copy ... we would have had him arrested faster than you could believe possible.

Copies are no less important then originals.

According to the Congressional Oversight Committee, Berger had access to originals, and equally important, the documents were only indexed by document, and not by individual pages. This means there's no way to know what specific pages he stole and destroyed.

And let's not forget about the 2 ton pink elephant in the living room. WHY was Berger selected to be the ONLY representative of the Clinton administration to testify? Why did Berger ask to go into the National Archives and review ANY documents? What was so important that he had to steal? Why did the powers that be look the other way?

And more importantly, why did Lee Hamilton, the man responsible for investigating 9/11, decide to go work for Berger's lobbying company after the whole fiasco ended?

And now most importantly, why would Obama choose to have a guy like Hamilton, who is working for a 9/11 criminal, advise him on anything??

well i think that if obahama has choosen lee

is for something good reason

don't be so hard with him

Thank you for posting this important information in a media world asswirl with Obama-mania. This revelation about Lee Hamilton is critical to depicting Senator Obama as an insider, just like Hillary of John McCain.
Whenever people start singing the praises of Obama, I simply tell them of Obama's choice of Jimmy Carter's foreign advisor, Zgnev Brezinski (sorry the spelling is off). So, they will get the same foreign policy that Jimmy Carter gave us 30 years ago. Wasn't that a lovely time.
Keep stacking it up - not to mention Obama's membership in the CFR and his not so secret meeting with the Bilderberg group in Chantilly, Viriginia several weeks ago.
The now late George Carlin summed it up best in one of his comedic rants that it doesn't matter Demo/GOP, they are just the fronts for the MONEY people. This nation (sob) of ours is run by the golden rule; thems who have the Gold rule.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


Sure the current election relates to a 911 CT. When the current administration is no longer in office somebody has to cover/hide the facts of the past from ever making it into the light right?

The first red flag in the stolen documents case is the fact that if it had been you or me that strolled into that building and walked off with highly classified documents and destroyed them with intent to cover up perjured forthcoming testimony under oath, guess what? We'd be in jail, no questions asked, end of story.

Then after getting no jail time and a small fine, you end up hiring the guy who allowed you to get off in the first place? No sorry, that is just a little too suspicious for my liking.

Keep in mind it really doesn't matter who wins this election, not in the least. None of them care about us anymore. You might as well vote Mickey Mouse into office for all that matters.

The bottom line is that if you want to come out and preach "change," you really need to walk to the walk.

I find it interesting that this is the best America can do. And every four years it's like a bad rerun with these people repeating the same catch phrases over and over again. Not all of us have memory loss and our guided by what TV tells us. Some of us out here actually do some homework and work from facts; not conjecture or assumptions, or name calling.

No, this isn't change, and YES it is business as usual.

Jamie, good article, and nice groundwork.

Peace...

You do some good digging jamie. It seems to strike a nerve with Obama fans. Isn't it funny how uncovered dirty truths do that? So much so that two posters have not bothered to post contrary evidence but attack thread titles, imply statements that were never posted, and various other forms of deflection.

On topic:
As the case is so far, one can bring to light the dirtiest secrets or the most incriminating facts and the only retort from the other side is slander; not "that isn't true." Now that I think about it, unless someone has the information on-hand, I'm going to see if I can find out what kind of "foreign policy" experience this gentleman really has.

dhc

Misleading thread title. If you have agreed that Obama had nothing to do with 9.11, then why the title.

Also - Guilt by association while removing context. How many policy advisors does Obama have?

Lastly

On August 15, 2006, a book by Kean and 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee H. Hamilton, titled Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission, was released regarding the September 11 attacks and the September 11 Commission.[8]

In the book, Kean and Hamilton write that the 9/11 Commission was so frustrated with repeated misstatements by officials from The Pentagon and Federal Aviation Administration during their investigation that they considered a separate investigation into possible obstruction of justice by Pentagon and FAA officials

** Doesn't sound lke a man looking to sweep any questions under the rug...He wrote a book about how he didn't get what he needed from the pentagon and CIA......

A case could be made that he has buddied up with Obama in hopes of once Obama is in office he can get the evidence he was denied as co-chair of the 9.11 commision.

edit - removing a double post.

[edit on 24-6-2008 by maybereal11]

reply to post by jamie83

Obama and the 9/11 Cover-Up?

I liked the story.....but not the title. Obama is irrelevant as far as having any part in their previous doings.
The Hamilton-Berger connection is the real story. This reeks of a conflict of interest any way you look at it, and that is to say the least.

I already know the neo-con argument.....so, here is my response:

He needs foreign policy experience, so he gets some.
It doesn't matter WHO he picks to be his advisers...
At least it's not Wolfowitz.

A case could be made that he has buddied up with Obama in hopes of once Obama is in office he can get the evidence he was denied as co-chair of the 9.11 commision.

I hope for that. I'm thinking congress is waiting until the administration is out of power to make a move. Gaining a few seats will be a plus as well.
Imagine.....no more immunity for all shrub's croonies. I would start with obstruction of justice charges against them all....

The Bush administration resisted pressure to form an independent commission to investigate the attack for more than a year. Finally, in the fall of 2002, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, or 9/11 Commission, was formed, and Bush appointed Henry Kissinger as chairman. Kissinger withdrew rather than reveal his client list, and was replaced by New Jersey governor Thomas Kean. However the work of the Committee and the Report was shaped by the Commission's executive director Philip Zelikow and his staff. Zelikow has intimate connections with the Bush administration.

Link to source.

After almost 8 years of distortion and manipulation how much of the evidence still exists?