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

reply to post by skeptic_al


I think Adobe had an update recently where you can copy automatically from any document...in other words the OCR is automatic.

We are all mushrooms in the UK too - Fed with crap and kept in the dark. The war in Iraq being a typical example.



[edit on 18-3-2010 by Adamus]

reply to post by MaxBlack

Well said!

IMO this warning of a "line" the 9/11 commission "should not cross" is at best a Red Herring. The extensive list of fallacies used by the creators, champions, and defenders of the os are vital reasons why there will never be justice brought to the perpetrators of this appalling crime.

Extensive list, you ask?

Ad Hominem, Ad Hominem Tu Quoque, Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Belief, Appeal to Emotion, Appeal to Fear, Appeal to Ridicule, Appeal to Tradition, Bandwagon, Begging the Question, Biased Sample, Burden of Proof, Circumstantial Ad Hominem, Confusing Cause and Effect, Division, False Dilemma, Gambler's Fallacy, Guilty by Association, Hasty Generalization, Ignoring a Common Cause, Misleading Vividness, Personal Attack, Poisoning the Well, Post Hoc, Questionable Cause, Slippery Slope, Special Pleading, Straw Man, Two Wrongs make a Right...

Does anybody remember the outing of Valerie Plame? What was that all about? Any justice served there? Who was behind it? Anybody remember those reports of Cheney's visits to the CIA? Curveball? September Dossier anybody?

W/out 9/11 there is no Iraq War. Who profits from the Iraq War? Is who perpetrated 9/11.

These criminals did/do as they please, and the only way to do anything about it is to change the channel. The game is fixed. The judges bought. National Security is a license to kill. And, the majority of the citizenry doesn't want to "go there" because only losers can't "get over it".

So, get over it. We lost. Cup's half empty tonight. I dare a Grey or Reptilian to visit tonight!

It's clear to me that Cheney and the others realized that all they had to hold their version of events together were a few false confessions and luckily for them a cowardly and subservient 9/11 Commission they knew damn well these guys would never rock the boat they allowed themselves to be lead by the nose by Philip Zelikow because they did not want to touch this in the first place.

Originally posted by CRASHPROJECT
reply to post by MaxBlack

Well said!

IMO this warning of a "line" the 9/11 commission "should not cross" is at best a Red Herring. The extensive list of fallacies used by the creators, champions, and defenders of the os are vital reasons why there will never be justice brought to the perpetrators of this appalling crime.

Extensive list, you ask?

Ad Hominem, Ad Hominem Tu Quoque, Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Belief, Appeal to Emotion, Appeal to Fear, Appeal to Ridicule, Appeal to Tradition, Bandwagon, Begging the Question, Biased Sample, Burden of Proof, Circumstantial Ad Hominem, Confusing Cause and Effect, Division, False Dilemma, Gambler's Fallacy, Guilty by Association, Hasty Generalization, Ignoring a Common Cause, Misleading Vividness, Personal Attack, Poisoning the Well, Post Hoc, Questionable Cause, Slippery Slope, Special Pleading, Straw Man, Two Wrongs make a Right...

Does anybody remember the outing of Valerie Plame? What was that all about? Any justice served there? Who was behind it? Anybody remember those reports of Cheney's visits to the CIA? Curveball? September Dossier anybody?

W/out 9/11 there is no Iraq War. Who profits from the Iraq War? Is who perpetrated 9/11.

These criminals did/do as they please, and the only way to do anything about it is to change the channel. The game is fixed. The judges bought. National Security is a license to kill. And, the majority of the citizenry doesn't want to "go there" because only losers can't "get over it".

So, get over it. We lost. Cup's half empty tonight. I dare a Grey or Reptilian to visit tonight!

That's true, if people cross the Line the real trurth "might" be known.
And it has nothing to do Inside Jobs, Freedom or Democracy.

All these people in this 911truth thingy...
There actually helping the government, steering people away from
the real reason. It's brilliant actually, not even the government could
have hoped for anything better.

The Governemt could have squashed those theories ages ago by
releasing information. But not releasing it keeps the theories alive.

Just like, as Bush said once, were not interested in Bin Laden any more.
Catching him, would have no cause to continue the fake war on Terror.
A quarter of a Million Millitary Personel can not find one Man, using
Radar, Sonar, Infrared, Night Vision, Satellites May be they should
catch him, maybe he can teach the Military how to do things Undercover.

Originally posted 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.

This quote, wisely brought in by ExPostFacto, is the main aspect of what this thread SHOULD be about! I call for less drama and reactivity and MORE denying ignorance.

The commission isn't being asked anything out of the ordinary - they are being told that it is the job of law enforcement to question alleged criminals and NOT the job of the commission. I totally agree with this imposed "line".


[edit on 18-3-2010 by Thermo Klein]

Woah, I'm surprised to see members on here admitting terrorists were involved and that the Bush administration knew and did nothing to prevent the 9/11 attacks...

Usally, the "truthers" would come in claiming there was no plane that hit the Pentagon or there were no passengers on the other planes.

Perhaps a sensible thread for once?


Anywho, to stay on topic. It's obvious it's time for a new investigation. Bush was fully aware of what was going to happen. Why he didn't do anything? Either these warnings weren't taking seriously or there was an agenda behind it.

I'm going with the agenda of invading Iraq in 2003.

Unbelievable. The document presented basically shows the US government saying, "Crap. We've made a huge mistake, but we still have to agree to THESE rules. Let's try to find the easiest way out, without dumping on everything we've done thus far."

I've got more to say, but I'll save it for a later post. This is ridiculous. How do you all feel?



Cheers,
Strype

Originally posted by wanderingwaldo
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.

Have you heard the response to the idea of him facing a trial?

Apparently our government is inclined to kill him on the spot if they find him.

How much you want to bet they’ll claim they accomplished this very task but the guy lying in a body bag won’t be him? I think that’s the road we’re headed down; they want the Bin Laden topic to die off already.

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Woah, I'm surprised to see members on here admitting terrorists were involved and that the Bush administration knew and did nothing to prevent the 9/11 attacks...

Usally, the "truthers" would come in claiming there was no plane that hit the Pentagon or there were no passengers on the other planes.

Perhaps a sensible thread for once?


Anywho, to stay on topic. It's obvious it's time for a new investigation. Bush was fully aware of what was going to happen. Why he didn't do anything? Either these warnings weren't taking seriously or there was an agenda behind it.

I'm going with the agenda of invading Iraq in 2003.

Sure,yet another Investigation.

Can't be that hard to find some more Jewish members of Government,
to ask exactly the same questions as the previous Jewish Investigation and
to arrive at the same conclusion as the previous Jewish Commitee.

The question they should be asking What is the Special Bond that
exists between the US Government and Israel, and Why does the
US Government have this Special Bond with Israel. What Power does
Israel hold over the US. Once these are known, you're on the right road
to find the truth.

That won't happen, does the Phrase "Your Anti-Semitic" ring a Bell.

Originally posted by Adamus
We are all mushrooms in the UK too - Fed with crap and kept in the dark. The war in Iraq being a typical example.



[edit on 18-3-2010 by Adamus]

Sad but true. The US and the UK are the two main countries in a group of countries trying to make some type of Global Government where countries will become like states under this new One Government World.

I was sad to see that Asian proffessor who's always on the Science channel actually subscribing to this idea, saying it is needed in order for us to move from a 0-Civ to a 1-Civ. On the 0,1,2,3 Civilization scale that is set-up. I'm not too sure who's brainchild that scale was either, anyone know?

Originally posted by Thermo Klein


The commission isn't being asked anything out of the ordinary - they are being told that it is the job of law enforcement to question alleged criminals and NOT the job of the commission. I totally agree with this imposed "line".

I would refer you to PDF page 29 of the ACLU obtained files (The document is the second page of the draft dated January 14, 2004) here: (The very same as posted above, presented here for your convenience) ACLU Documents

In which the Commission makes a sound argument to be allowed to interview (interrogate may be substituted, but I don't think the decorum of a closed Congressional Hearing would be any more than an official inquiry).

The commission has developed considerable expertize on the 9/11 plot that may well exceed the knowledge base of current interrogators.
Our participation can help in the evaluation of conspirators' statements that are incomplete or conflict directly with other evidence.

In their eyes, the Commission has been duly investigating the 9/11 event and as such have accumulated a commanding knowledge on the subject.

And, let's face it ... They had questions!

They only asked to interview seven prisoners. And would abide by whatever security (in terms of secrecy of prisoner status; e.i. whereabouts, etc)

Why would any line need to be drawn here? Wouldn't cooperation be a more sanguine position to take for all involved?

Unless, of course ... allowing the Commission access to them would 'rock the cart' of the Administration.

Personally, I think it will take until the current administration is out ... whenever that is - this term or after the next if re-elected, until any real effort has support in Congress to star a new investigation.
Remember JFK and the 15 years between Warren and the USHSC on Assassinations.

reply to post by Nola213

A Soviet astronomer named Nikolai Kardashev.
I think in the 60's or maybe early 70's he developed the Kardashev classification scheme to rank civilizations' level of advancement ... should we ever (officially) encounter any.

Corruption breeds in secrecy.

These secret agencies (CIA, NSA, DIA, Federal Reserve, etc) do more harm than good, because there is no way to expose the corruption that will naturally occur under the veil of secrecy.

Secrets are a threat to National Security and the human race.

Originally posted by LatentElement

Originally posted by Thermo Klein


The commission isn't being asked anything out of the ordinary - they are being told that it is the job of law enforcement to question alleged criminals and NOT the job of the commission. I totally agree with this imposed "line".

I would refer you to PDF page 29 of the ACLU obtained files (The document is the second page of the draft dated January 14, 2004) here: (The very same as posted above, presented here for your convenience) ACLU Documents

In which the Commission makes a sound argument to be allowed to interview (interrogate may be substituted, but I don't think the decorum of a closed Congressional Hearing would be any more than an official inquiry).

The commission has developed considerable expertize on the 9/11 plot that may well exceed the knowledge base of current interrogators.
Our participation can help in the evaluation of conspirators' statements that are incomplete or conflict directly with other evidence.

In their eyes, the Commission has been duly investigating the 9/11 event and as such have accumulated a commanding knowledge on the subject.

And, let's face it ... They had questions!

They only asked to interview seven prisoners. And would abide by whatever security (in terms of secrecy of prisoner status; e.i. whereabouts, etc)

Why would any line need to be drawn here? Wouldn't cooperation be a more sanguine position to take for all involved?

Unless, of course ... allowing the Commission access to them would 'rock the cart' of the Administration.

Personally, I think it will take until the current administration is out ... whenever that is - this term or after the next if re-elected, until any real effort has support in Congress to star a new investigation.
Remember JFK and the 15 years between Warren and the USHSC on Assassinations.

Hi Latent,
That's mostly how I read it too. But also, it seems that the Commission were already unhappy with the security info they had already been given by the CIA, so in that sense they were being proactive in trying to get to the bottom of things. The actual content of what the CIA gave them is not discussed, (no surprise there) but it looks like the Commission smelled a rat in that info. Also, the January 14th letter from the Commission states that the Commission wanted to sit in on a questioning, and then to ask supplementary questions to the seven named individuals...is that something that the government would be afraid of ie; the Commission would have questions that the CIA had not tackled?

[edit on 18-3-2010 by smurfy]

Originally posted by LatentElement
reply to post by Nola213

 

A Soviet astronomer named Nikolai Kardashev.
I think in the 60's or maybe early 70's he developed the Kardashev classification scheme to rank civilizations' level of advancement ... should we ever (officially) encounter any.

Thank you very much. Always wondered who's brainchild that civ-0,civ 1 ,civ-2 ect. was.

As well as who layed out all the ground rules as to which makes each jump from one to another.

But it seems pretty good, and fair imo. An easy but intelligent way to quickly guage the level of a civilization and species based on it's technologies, spaces capabilities, and how they power things on thier home world, or multiple home worlds.

I'd love to see us jump to 0 to 1 in my lifetime, but if have a 1 world goverment is criteria for that....I don't know. I suppose a more advanced civilization "spiritually" could put all war aside, and work together as a species. As Reagan's famous speech pointed out would happen fairly quickly IF we ever encountered another race of beings from out of our Solar System. I do believe he was right, and who knows, perhaps they will stage such an event to be the catalyst of this "one world government".

I woudln't put anything past the supreme power countries of the world.

Thanks again for the answer to my question though

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Woah, I'm surprised to see members on here admitting terrorists were involved and that the Bush administration knew and did nothing to prevent the 9/11 attacks..

Terrorists were definitely involved -- Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Abrams, Feith, Kristol, Podhoretz, and the rest of the Bush neocons.

As for the Arab "terrorist" patsies, well, seven of them are still alive.

Those immortal Arab "hijackers" sure were clever!

reply to post by smurfy


Hey there, smurfy ...
Yeah, you're right. The CIA's stonewalling and then subsequent releasing of info that was incongruous to what the Commission knew as fact. (presumably ... the documents of that exchange are blacked out). I agree. We can infer the Commission got a whiff of something bad ... and were not satisfied with whatever the CIA gave them.
Yeah, why not let them sit in the questioning and be allowed to pursue their own queries? They would get the direct testimony from the 'alleged' criminals ... without the lag time they already experienced when dealing with the CIA and Administration to get info second hand. (Remember, part of the problem was the limited schedule the Commission was allotted to fulfill their mandate) The CIA's position that security was at issue, and that current and future ops stemming from the interrogations would be at risk just doesn't wash with me. For one, whatever info the CIA deemed too sensitive to release would fall under the NSA's realm and can be ordered undisclosed to the public to maintain National Security. That info would have been sealed upon penalty of imprisonment ... clearly within the power of the NSA. But it may have been info that the secret squirrels needed to stay hidden ... hence all this drama in the aftermath.
Again, these are agencies and elected officials who were supposed to be working together in order to find answers, right?
Yeah, I know .. I know ... I'll say it ...
"In a perfect world that would be the case."
Me thinks our world is not ... or our part of it at least ... does seem to be a bit askew.
Maybe we should just learn to tilt our heads like the 'trusters' and then everything will look straight ?

Hmmm.

reply to post by Nola213

It is my humble pleasure and am happy to be of service, Ms Nola.

I'd love to see us jump to 0 to 1 in my lifetime

You and I both! We aren't all that far away from ascending to level one. Technologies are taking leaps ahead almost daily. Our growing scientific understanding of ... well, everything ... from quarks to the universe itself ... add to that the human desire and clever engineering to master it ... We could realize the potential in 50 years time. Yeah, the one world order thing is required ... But it doesn't mean we'd have to allow current PTB be any part of it. It would be more of a central government than a world order, with all parts of the globe represented and equal.

President Reagan is one of the few elected civil servants I respect and admire. Say what they will, He had vision. Long term and profound, not just "what can you do for me now" government we always seem to have leading us. The man brought us to peace with the USSR - after more than forty years of saber rattling, proxy wars and all that cloak and dagger stuff ... without a shot fired ... or a finger pushing a button (thank God).
He was right ... in that speech. It is the only way the whole world would unite without the petty squabbles like the UN puts up with. Once everyone sees we are not alone .... and by no means as powerful as our arrogance allows us to believe ... we would transition from being a segregated and bordered people to becoming "a global" race ... The human race.
Oh, man ... My apologies to the OP ... A bit of topic, I reckon.

Originally posted by litmuspaper

Originally posted by wanderingwaldo
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.

Have you heard the response to the idea of him facing a trial?

Apparently our government is inclined to kill him on the spot if they find him.

How much you want to bet they’ll claim they accomplished this very task but the guy lying in a body bag won’t be him? I think that’s the road we’re headed down; they want the Bin Laden topic to die off already.

That definitely sound like something they would do.

It would be no good for us to let the Bin Laden issue die off, especially his "confessions" tapes.

What makes it more interesting is the fact that Bin Laden could already be dead.