Revealed: Ashcroft, Tenet, Rumsfeld warned 9/11 Commission about 'line' it 'should not cross'

Revealed: Ashcroft, Tenet, Rumsfeld warned 9/11 Commission about 'line' it 'should not cross'

rawstory.com

Senior Bush administration officials sternly cautioned the 9/11 Commission against probing too deeply into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, according to a document recently obtained by the ACLU.

The notification came in a letter dated January 6, 2004, addressed by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and CIA Director George J. Tenet. The ACLU described it as a fax sent by David Addington, then-counsel to former vice president Dick Cheney.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Here is the link to the document.

Link

Yet another example of a compromised investigation.
What is it going to take before a critical mass is attained?

Will there ever be a new investigation?

"In response to the Commission's expansive requests for access to secrets, the executive branch has provided such access in full cooperation," the letter read. "There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross -- the line separating the Commission's proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government's ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks."

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Leo Strauss]

Originally posted by Leo Strauss

"There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross -- the line separating the Commission's proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government's ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks."

It's funny I was just commenting on another thread about "national security." It kinda seems like any facts that would incriminate the administration is not allowed to be talked about on the grounds of "national security." It's a catch 22. I don't know what it will take for all the facts to come out but I have faith they will

John Ashcroft also threw out the court case of FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds citing state secrets privilege and threats to national security. Of course Sibel is still going ahead anyway, slowly but surely, with a team of lawyers behind her, but it still goes to show how rotten the feds really are.

There's nothing like a bit of moral blackmail to keep the truth hidden.

...

All I can say is NEW INVESTIGATION. Treason charges are also in order as I would say this was an abuse of power to interfere with national security of the people of the US, not the political establishment.

Just so no one forgets, Bush Jr. was having heated discussions with Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle who was threatening a 911 investigation within days after 911 because Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice and others had received a CIA intelligence report in August 6, 2001 and as such Daschle was pressing for investigations into who knew and why they did nothing.

Second on the list of key things to remember is that also at this same time frame, Tom Daschle was fighting Bush and the Republicans about warrant-less searches and the early version of the Patriot Act that Bush offered up right after 911. For these two reasons, Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy became political enemies and were in the days to follow would receive the infamous Anthrax envelope addressed to Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy, Tom Brokaw and others.

This Anthrax attack to me said that telling Bush within days of 911 that there needed to be an investigation over the CIA Intelligence report and into 911 was something that had to nipped in the bud. They then authorized the Anthrax attack and people died and guess what? Tom Daschle dropped his quest for a 911 investigation. Imagine that.

While the next majority leader tried to pick it up, by that time Cheney had already begun to swing his weight and who knows, he may have used most likely that secret military assassination team to take care of loose ends. At least we know the investigation demands ceased and we know the investigation we got was bogus or at least false, contrived and full of holes.

The other matters of who knew what when and where is another issue, but Tom Daschle was on to something when he was within days of 911 aware enough to see that Bush and the gang had prior knowledge and allowed 911 to occur by doing nothing to stop it.

This latest revelation about the rest of the Bush team is no surprise. Everyone had to be on the same sheet of music and if the boss says make sure no one stirs up any type of investigation that he cant control from behind the scenes, then that is what the boys are going to do no matter what. This is raw, criminal political power but without the threat to kill you, it means nothing.

Well, most know the investigation is a joke and who knows, if Tom Daschle had actually gotten some early support for the investigation but alas, remember that the media was not always willing to challenge the Cowboy from Texas because remember Bush stated " you're either with us or you're with the terrorists" Now who could stand up to that challenge? Or is it a threat? Oh well, I think I made my point.

Thanks for the posting.

Also in related news, we now know that the CIA was well informed of the 9/11 attacks prior to them occurring. The CIA informed the FBI to not investigate the terrorists that eventually flew a plane into the pentagon.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.observer.com...

Things are coming unglued.

reply to post by warisover


So, wiil I just have to Assume that Any Administration can Deflect Serious Questions pertaining to 9/11 simply on the basis of Information being Denied to Investigators because of " National Security " Reasons alone ? Isn't this just some kind of " Loop Hole " for those in high Goverment Positions that wish to not Incrimidate themselves Under Oath to use as an Excuse to not be Accountable for their actions ? ..Geez......

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Zanti Misfit]

Osama Bin Laden will never be captured, because then there would have to be a trial with evidence, and that is the last thing that they want. That is why he was allowed to escape in Tora Bora.

I am reading the CIA FOIA releases now. Apparently the 9/11 commission questioned the validity of written statements from interrogators at CIA regarding the 9/11 terrorists involvement. The request was that 9/11 commission be able to hear the questions being asked to the detainees. The CIA refused this request and stated to the 9/11 commission:

There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross. The line separating the, Commission's proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government's ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks. The Commission staffs proposed participation in questioning of detainees would cross that line.

Page 26

www.aclu.org...

reply to post by ExPostFacto


" There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross. The line separating the, Commission's proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government's ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks. The Commission staffs proposed participation in questioning of detainees would cross that line. "


in Other words , a COP OUT . I see...........

reply to post by Zanti Misfit


It looks to me like the CIA didn't want the commission knowing they were torturing, to gain confessions. Since Bush authorized the 'enhanced interrogation techniques' later found to be torture, CIA must have been protecting that national security directive from the commissions need to know.

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
reply to post by Zanti Misfit

 

It looks to me like the CIA didn't want the commission knowing they were torturing, to gain confessions. Since Bush authorized the 'enhanced interrogation techniques' later found to be torture, CIA must have been protecting that national security directive from the commissions need to know.

I'm not buying that line of reasoning because Central Command's Abu Ghraib investigation was already in full swing at that point. Attempting to cover-up the torture and abuse would have been futile. They wanted to keep the content of the interrogations secret. Perhaps because they didn't obtain any confessions, only denials, which would have just added to the pile of treasonous lies told to justify wars of aggression against people who had nothing to do with the events of 9/11.

www.dod.mil...

reply to post by Crito


I don't think I have ever starred someone for disagreeing with me...but you get one. I was sugar coating a bit and you called me on it

If Obama really did stand for hope, transparency, courage, freedom and the truth..

.. he wouldn’t be assisting these traitors, by not conducting another investigation.

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Here is the link to the document.

Link

Yet another example of a compromised investigation.
What is it going to take before a critical mass is attained?

Will there ever be a new investigation?



[edit on 17-3-2010 by Leo Strauss]

Not that there shouldn't be but the answer is no. Who's going to initiate it? The Obama administration?

n the message, the officials denied the bipartisan commission's request to question terrorist detainees, informing its two senior-most members that doing so would "cross" a "line" and obstruct the administration's ability to protect the nation.

In other words, "leave it alone or it will happen again".



Totally uncool.

EDIT: had to change my thumbs up to a thumbs down.

[edit on 18-3-2010 by KyleOrtonArmy]

Originally posted by Kailassa
There's nothing like a bit of moral blackmail to keep the truth hidden.

...

Bull crap, if anyone, including the Commission wanted to get the TRUTH, then the first place they should have started was with "Able Danger" and Janet Reno. Any "Commission" that didn't start with those two is a farce.

Shizaam

[edit on 18-3-2010 by NOTurTypical]

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Here is the link to the document.

Link

Yet another example of a compromised investigation.
What is it going to take before a critical mass is attained?

Will there ever be a new investigation?

"In response to the Commission's expansive requests for access to secrets, the executive branch has provided such access in full cooperation," the letter read. "There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross -- the line separating the Commission's proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government's ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks."

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Leo Strauss]

This document is bit funny....
Link


The document was scanned, then OCR'd with the OCR Text placed
on top of the Scanned Images. It is neither an Original Scanned Image,
or a Text Reproduction but still looks like a really bad Image Scan.
The other thing, the Text on pages appears to have been bashed on
a Typewriter, as the characters on the Pages are different shapes and
the letters are not sitting on a straight line. And is also written in a
Mono Spaced Font, consistant with typewriters.

Am I to beleive the White House still uses Typewriters instead of
Printers for their Corespondence?

On the other hand, why would somebody who wanted to fake a document
use a Typewriter?