Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Breitweiser exposes *'s phony 9/11 justification for warrantless wiretaps

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:43 PM
Original message
Breitweiser exposes *'s phony 9/11 justification for warrantless wiretaps
Pass this one around. It's a brilliant column that asks all the right questions.



The King's Red Herring
by Kristen Breitweiser


Recently, President Bush has admitted to carrying out surveillance on U.S. citizens in the interest of national security. He unabashedly admits to doing it. He offers no apologies. With his bellicose swagger, he once again uses 9/11 as his justification for breaking our constitutional laws. The President's justification of 9/11 to carry out such surveillance begs a closer examination. President Bush should be stopped in his tracks with regard to his use of 9/11 scare tactics to circumvent constitutional laws that are meant to protect U.S. citizens. His justification for doing so -- the inability to conduct surveillance on the 9/11 hijackers -- is a red herring. History will bear out the truth -- our intelligence agencies held a treasure trove of intelligence on the 9/11 hijackers, intelligence that was gathered through their initially unencumbered surveillance. President Bush should busy himself by investigating why that information was then stymied and not capitalized upon to stop the 9/11 attacks.

MOUSSAOUI, FISA, and FBI SURVEILLANCE -- MISUNDERSTANDING #1:

When it comes to the FBI and Zaccarias Moussaoui, one must understand that the FBI met all evidentiary standards to both apply for and be granted a FISA warrant. The information the FBI had to support their FISA request was two files on Moussaoui that were given to the FBI by the French and British intelligence services. Inexplicably, FBI lawyers and supervisors at FBI HQ "misunderstood" the evidentiary standards needed to apply for and receive a FISA warrant, and they refused the FISA request from the FBI agents in Minneapolis. Thus, the Moussaoui search warrant paperwork was never submitted to the FISA court. One need only read Colleen Rowley's memorandum to confirm these facts.

Had FBI HQ not denied the FISA request, the FISA court would have issued the search warrant to search Moussaoui's belongings. Whether gaining access to Moussaoui's belongings would have stopped the 9/11 attacks remains unknown at this time. Hopefully, Moussaoui's upcoming penalty phase hearing will reveal more information as to what the FBI/CIA/DOD/NSA already knew about Moussaoui during the summer of 2001 and whether getting the FISA warrant to search Moussaoui belongings would have even made a difference.

None of the FBI lawyers and/or supervisors responsible for this glaring error and "misjudgment" has been held accountable.

more...

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1220-22.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Bless you Kristen Breitweiser.
If anyone is an expert if the wrongdoings of this administration, it he Kristen and the other Jersey Girls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcane1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. wow, I didn't know she was writing now...
cool! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RazzleDazzle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
25. She has a law degree -- don't know if she's practicing law, or even
if she ever passed any bar, but she's one sharp cookie who knows her stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. Kristin Breitweiser and the Jersey Girls are my heroes
Edited on Wed Dec-21-05 05:50 PM by JulieRB
I can only wish that I would deal with a terrible and very public loss the way they have -- still searching for answers for all.

Bless 'em.

In the meantime, the biggest intelligence and defense failure in the history of our nation, and NOBODY is held accountable?

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BamaBecky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #3
19. mine too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
4. And David Fucking Brooks is peddling this huge LIE -
He's on the talkshows announcing that Colleen Rowley's whole complaint was that the FISA COURT'S were too durn slow, and THAT is the problem BUSH was faced with too. A COMPLETE FALSEHOOD. The request NEVER EVEN GOT TO THE COURT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. God, that makes me sick.
I'm sure both Breitweiser and Rowley would tear him a new one if he had the guts to face them. He doesn't, gutless lying bastard!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I'll try to find it - I think it was on the Newshour Monday night
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Thanks Stephanie!
I'm trying to find it too. I'd love to see another example of just how boneheaded a wingnut can get.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. Found it. Even a shameless apologist like Brooks admits * made a mess.
Defending the spy program

GWEN IFILL: David Brooks, we saw the president sit down three times last week for nationally televised interviews. We saw him do an Oval Office prime time address last night, a year-end press conference today and what has been the running theme throughout all of this is how far should the president be allowed to go? Are there impediments, as Sen. Cornyn said, or is the president taking advantage of his claim to executive authority as Sen. Feingold said, what is all this? What's going on?

David BrooksDAVID BROOKS: Well, people who want to defend the president, it has become a little hard. I think one thing that can be said is the FISA procedure is not working terrifically well. FISA, itself, is working well, but Colleen Riley's whole point in that memo about Musawi years ago was that getting through the FISA procedure, through the FBI directory took a long time.

GWEN IFILL: She's the whistleblower.

DAVID BROOKS: The whistleblower from the FBI in Minnesota.

GWEN IFILL: Right.

DAVID BROOKS: And then the 9/11 commission said that the FISA -- getting to FISA was long and slow.

So there was some concern about the delay. And I can see why the administration back in those days would want to say we've got a very long, slow process getting to FISA; let's go around it.

But should they have tried to change the procedure as opposed to just doing it surreptitiously, yes. Why didn't they try to do that -- no good answer from the president this morning.

And, secondly, I think the big question is you can't get so far outside of your opponent -- you know, the Democrats on Capitol Hill or anybody on Capitol Hill that when something becomes public everyone's against you.

And from what I can read in the papers and even here on Capitol Hill, everyone is against him. And so they -- they've just made a mess out of this for what could have been - you know -- they might have had a legitimate concern originally.

But by going, you know, going so far alone without consultation, I think they've created a big backlash.

more...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/political_wrap/july-dec05/sbnsa_12-19.html

Again, what a shameless LIAR!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. See how he's spinning it?

The FISA court did not fail - it was the FBI that failed in the Mousaoui case. The request never GOT to the FISA court. So what's he talking about? It's irrelevant to Bush's crime.


I think one thing that can be said is the FISA procedure is not working terrifically well. FISA, itself, is working well, but Colleen Riley's whole point in that memo about Musawi years ago was that getting through the FISA procedure, through the FBI directory took a long time.

GWEN IFILL: She's the whistleblower.

DAVID BROOKS: The whistleblower from the FBI in Minnesota.

GWEN IFILL: Right.

DAVID BROOKS: And then the 9/11 commission said that the FISA -- getting to FISA was long and slow.

So there was some concern about the delay. And I can see why the administration back in those days would want to say we've got a very long, slow process getting to FISA; let's go around it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #4
22. Sen Biden on Hardball: FISA courts granted 19,000 requests...
and only a few were denied ! Statistically the Rowley case mathematics odds favor 'sandbagging' by the Bush administration. LIHOP or MIHOP is out of the 'conspiracy theory' zone now into the high probability zone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Speaking of Rowley...
She's also got a few words about pResident Snoop:

Where Have all the Conservatives Gone?
by Coleen Rowley


In George Orwell's 1984, the Party had three slogans: "War is peace," "Freedom is slavery" and "Ignorance is strength." In 2005 we could easily add another one: "Radical is conservative."

For in almost every sense — but certainly in the principle areas of fiscal responsibility, applied federalism, adherence to the rule of law, conservation of natural resources and national security — extremist elements have seized control of the so-called "conservative" (Republican) party and turned it 180 degrees, leaving most true conservatives behind and more than a bit confused.

Clarity can be regained, however, by turning off far-right television and radio and picking up a dictionary. In it you'll find "conservative" defined as "tending to preserve established traditions or institutions; cautious; avoiding excess." Huh? In other words ….

President Bush's record achievement — borrowing more money from foreign countries than our 42 preceding administrations combined — isn't conservative, it's radical. Converting record surpluses into a massive deficit practically overnight isn't conservative, it's wasteful.

There's nothing conservative about the executive order we've just learned eliminated judicial oversight over the National Security Agency's electronic monitoring of American citizens, a secret order that opens the door to Big Brother abuse. And certainly bypassing the Constitution and well-established international treaty law like the Geneva Convention in order to detain suspects at will, engage in secret renditions and even torture isn't conservative, it's downright evil.

more...

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1220-24.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. W has his plate full and cannot be fettered by the niceties of ours laws
and Constitution. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Of course!
I wouldn't put it past * to say something like "It's just a goddamned piece of paper" about our Constitution. He should know, he's wiped his ass with it enough times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Ben Franklin would put him in his place with this quote
From Benjamin Franklin

This quotation, slightly altered, is inscribed on a plaque in the stairwell of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

http://www.bartleby.com/73/1056.html

(My favorite from ol Ben is "Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy !' Too bad I can't 'stike a blow for liberty' as Truman would say or I'd invite you over ! Carry on RP, good show !)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #22
46. I now read in Reuben Navarette's column that only 5 out of 18,748
requests have been rejected by FISA since 1978...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tim Howells Donating Member (224 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #4
36. Here's the real scoop on Rowley (and anthrax attacks for good measure) ...
4. FBI INVESTIGATIONS THAT COULD HAVE PREVENTED SEPTEMBER 11 WERE
DELIBERATELY SABOTAGED BY FBI HEADQUARTERS

I pointed out earlier that Atta and the other hijackers operated quite
openly in the United States, as if they enjoyed guaranteed protection.
It appears that this was in fact the case. We now have several
detailed reports of crucial investigations of the September 11
hijackers, both before and after the fact, being sabotaged by high
ranking government officials.{4} Possibly the most vivid example of
this is the way in which the investigation of the "twentieth
hijacker," Zacarias Moussaoui, was sabotaged by FBI Headquarters.

In August 2001 Moussaoui enrolled in Pan American's International
Flight School in Minneapolis. He aroused suspicions on his very first
day. He paid a deposit for the course in cash in the amount of $6,800
(the full price of the course is $19,000). He had a heavy Middle
Eastern accent, and waved off concerns about his lack of preparation
for such a course, saying that he was not interested in professional
certification. However, he showed great interest in learning how to
work the airplane's doors and control panel.

"A Nation Challenged: The Conspiracy Cherge; E-Mail Sent to Flight
School Gave Terror Suspect's 'Goal'," Jim Yardly, The New York Times,
Late Edition--Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 5, February 8, 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/08/national/08HIJA.html?pagewanted=1

"Threats and Responses: The 9/11 Defendant; Early Warnings on
Moussaoui Are Detailed," Philip Shenon, The New York Times, Late
Edition--Final, Section A, Page 13, Column 1, October 18, 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/18/politics/18SUSP.html

It soon became clear the Moussaoui had lied about his personal
background, and that he had no qualifications at all as a pilot. The
potentially frightening implications of training this particular
student were not lost on Pan Am's flying instructors, according to
John Rosengren, director of operations at the school. In a faculty
meeting the next day,

*
"There was discussion about how much fuel was on board a 747-400 and
how much damage that could cause if it hit anything."

{"A Nation Challenged: The Conspiracy Cherge; E-Mail Sent to Flight
School Gave Terror Suspect's 'Goal'," Jim Yardly, The New York Times,
Late Edition--Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 5, February 8, 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/08/national/08HIJA.html?pagewanted=1 }
*

Soon one of the flight instructors was on the phone to the FBI:

*
"Do you realize how serious this is?" the instructor asked an FBI
agent. "This man wants training on a 747. A 747 fully loaded with fuel
could be used as a weapon!"

{"Eagan flight trainer wouldn't let unease about Moussaoui rest," Greg
Gordon, Star Tribune, December 21, 2001
http://www.totalobscurity.com/mind/wtc/flight-instructor.htm }
*

The local FBI agents concurred. They checked out Moussaoui, and found
out that he had overstayed his visa. They persuaded the INS to take
him into custody and keep him there. If not for this good luck and
prompt action Moussaoui would surely have participated in the attacks
of September 11, because from that point on the investigation met
determined opposition from high level FBI officials who did their best
to completely shut it down.

The sickening story is spelled out in a long, agonized letter written
after the events of September 11 by Coleen Rowley, one of the Field
Agents in Minneapolis on the case. The letter was promptly declared to
be classified by the Bureau, but portions have been leaked to the
press:

"Coleen Rowley's Memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller--An edited
version of the agent's 13-page letter," TIME, May 21, 2002
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,249997,00.html

Immediately after Moussaoui's arrest, the Field Agents in Minneapolis
wanted to apply for a warrant to search his apartment and the hard
drive of his computer. FBI Headquarters, however, denied that they had
probable cause for such a search. Then within just a few days the
Field Agents received information from the French Intelligence Service
that "confirmed {Moussaoui's} affiliations with radical fundamentalist
Islamic groups and activities connected to Osama Bin Laden." At this
point the Field Agents "became desperate," but incredibly Headquarters
continued to stonewall and deny the existence of probable cause for a
search. Rowley, who has been an FBI division legal advisor for 12
years, and an FBI agent for 21 years, was at the time and remains
today completely baffled by Headquarters' determination to stop the
investigation. She flatly states that probable cause "was certainly
established."

At that point Rowley tried another route. The FBI can apply for
so-called FISA warrants if their aim is to gather intelligence rather
than evidence for a criminal proceeding. The granting of a FISA
warrant is practically guaranteed; the FBI only has to ask for them.
To her amazement, FBI Headquarters "continued to, almost inexplicably,
throw up roadblocks and undermine Minneapolis' by-now desperate
efforts to obtain a FISA search warrant."

By this time the Field Agents were "in a frenzy ... absolutely
convinced {Moussouai} was planning to do something with a plane." One
agent speculated in a memo that that Moussouai had been planning with
unidentified confederates to "fly something into the World Trade
Center."

"Unheeded Warnings," Michael Isikoff, NEWSWEEK, May 20, 2002 Issue
http://www.bulatlat.com/news/2-16/2-16-readerNEWSWEEK.html

Then came September 11.

Coleen Rowley agonizes in her letter, searching for an explanation for
the betrayal by FBI Headquarters. Were they simply too busy? Was it
normal bureaucratic inertia? Ultimately, she is unable to accept these
convenient but implausible explanations: "The issues are fundamentally
ones of INTEGRITY." (Her emphasis.)

An almost identical story is coming out of the Phoenix FBI office
which was similarly thwarted by FBI Headquarters in their attempt to
investigate Hani Hanjour, who is believed to have crashed an airliner
into the Pentagon on September 11:

"The Man Behind the Hot Memo," James Poniewozik, TIME, May 19, 2002
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,238574,00.html

"FBI Was Warned of Sept. 11 Hijacker--Informant Says He Provided Facts
About Phoenix Hijacker," John McWethy, ABCNEWS, May 23, 2002
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/FBI_informant020523.html

Some of the Field Agents involved in these and still other similar
cases have applied for whistleblower status, and are taking legal
action to try to force the Bureau to declassify the relevant documents
and come clean about their role in September 11. These agents are
being represented by David Schippers, former Chief Investigative
Counsel for the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, and head prosecutor
responsible for conducting the impeachment against former President
Bill Clinton.

"Did Bush Know?--Warning Signs of 9-11 and Intelligence Failures,"
Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, May 18, 2002
http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq36.html (This is a long file. A
string search on "Schippers" will get you to the right paragraph.)

In the meantime Coleen Rowley notes in her letter that in the
aftermath of September 11 the official most responsible for blocking
her investigation of Moussaoui has received a promotion. That's not
all. The FBI Department responsible for repeatedly blocking Rowley's
desperate attempts to obtain authorization to search Moussouai's
apartment and computer is the National Security Law Unit (NSLU). In
the month of December 2002, the head of the NSLU, Marion Bowman,
received the most prestigious and generous award the Bureau could
confer on him:

*
At a quiet little ceremony earlier this month, Marion (Spike) Bowman
was one of nine people in the bureau to receive an award for
"exceptional performance." The reward carries with it a cash bonus of
20 to 35 percent of the recipient's salary and a framed certificate
signed by the president.

{"FBI performs a nasty little sequel to whistle-blower saga," Doug
Grow, Star Tribune, December 22, 2002
http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/3772006.html
}
*

The President of the United States is showering praise and bonuses and
promotions on those responsible for thwarting the investigations that
could have prevented the horrific events of September 11.

And keep in mind Atta's bizarre behaviour when he applied for a
Department of Agriculture loan to purchase crop-dusting equipment in
May of 2000. Atta used his real name, and he made sure the interviewer
(Johnelle Bryant) spelled it correctly. He told her that he wanted to
buy a crop-duster and to "build a chemical tank that would fit inside
the aircraft and take up every available square inch of the aircraft
except for where the pilot would be sitting." Atta then fixated on an
aerial photo of Washington, D.C. hanging on the office wall, and
wanted to purchase it:

*
"He pulled out a wad of cash," she said, "and started throwing money
on my desk. He wanted that picture really bad." Bryant indicated that
the picture was not for sale, and he threw more money down.

"His look on his face became very bitter at that point," Bryant
remembers. "I believe he said, 'How would America like it if another
country destroyed that city and some of the monuments in it,' like the
cities in his country had been destroyed?" ...

Atta also talked about life in his country. "He mentioned al Qaeda, he
mentioned Osama bin Laden," ... He boasted about the role that they
would one day play. "He said this man would someday be known as the
world's greatest leader," she said.

{"Face to Face With a Terrorist--Government Worker Recalls Mohamed
Atta Seeking Funds Before Sept. 11," Brian Ross, ABCNEWS, June 6, 2002
http://billstclair.com/911timeline/2002/abcnews060602.html }
*

Bryant, perhaps to provide us with some much needed comic relief,
finishes her story by asking, "How could I have known {that this man
was a terrorist}?"

The point is that Atta was operating completely openly, and even seems
to be DELIBERATELY drawing attention to himself as a terrorist
suspect. This makes sense if, as I believe, Atta was laying a false
trail of evidence which he WANTED to be discovered after the attacks
(more on this later). The attacks of September 11 were planned and
carried out with impressive military discipline and efficiency. Atta
is not exposing himself out of stupidity or carelessness. He must have
expected that Bryant would immediately notify the FBI (although she
did not). We now know that this would not have mattered--that any
attempt to investigate would have been killed by FBI Headquarters.
Clearly, at the time, Atta must have known this as well. The question
of exactly why Atta would have wanted to incriminate himself in this
way will be addressed in section 8.

5. THE ANTHRAX ATTACKS

So ... whoever perpetrated September 11 obviously has tons of money
and a tight military organization. You would expect that this would
not be an isolated event, but the start of a coordinated campaign. If
this was the work of Islamic fundamentalists, then where is the Jihad?
Where are the Holy Warriors who should have been positioned and ready
to follow up on the opening shot of the war?

There was a second wave of attacks--the dissemination of anthrax
letters to both random and carefully selected targets. However,
everyone now acknowledges that this was an inside job--that the
weapons grade anthrax used would only be available to a very limited
number of scientists and military/intelligence officers working in the
United States on highly classified projects.

In fact, according to the leading expert on the anthrax attacks,
Professor Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, the FBI has long known exactly who
was behind these attacks--attacks that have so far have killed at
least five American citizens--but the Bureau has decided to let the
perpetrator off the hook, just as the sponsor of the September 11
hijackings has been let off the hook. Professor Rosenberg is a
microbiologist and an expert on biological warfare who has served as a
Presidential Advisor and testified before congress on this subject.
She was selected by the Federation of American Scientists to
investigate the anthrax attacks. Over one year ago, in January 2002,
Professor Rosenberg stated:

*
The FBI has surely known for several months that the anthrax attack
was an inside job. A government estimate for the number of scientists
involved in the US anthrax program over the last five years is 200
people. According to a former defense scientist the number of defense
scientists with hands-on anthrax experience and the necessary access
is smaller, under 50. The FBI has received short lists of specific
suspects with credible motives from a number of knowledgeable inside
sources, and has found or been given clues ... that could lead to
incriminating evidence. By now the FBI must have a good idea of who
the perpetrator is.

{"Analysis of the Anthrax Attacks," Professor Barbara Hatch Rosenberg,
Federation of American Scientists, January 17, 2002-September 22, 2002
http://www.inesap.org/bulletin19/bul19art02a.htm }
*

Another leading expert on biological warfare, Professor Francis Boyle
of Indiana University, concurs with Rosenberg's opinion. Professor
Boyle is a renowned expert on international law who has testified
before Congress on legal issues concerning biological warfare. He was
instrumental in drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of
1989. His analysis of the anthrax attacks has led him to the same
conclusion reached by Professor Rosenberg, which he states even more
bluntly:

*
I believe that the FBI knows exactly who was behind these attacks and
that they have concluded that the perpetrator was someone who was or
is involved in illegal and criminal biological warfare research
conducted by the US government (the Pentagon or the CIA) or by one of
the government's civilian contractors. For that reason, the FBI is not
going to apprehend and indict the perpetrator.

{"Bio-Warfare and Terrorism," Francis Boyle, Professor of
International Law, University of Illinois School of Law,
Synthesis/Regeneration 30, Winter 2003
http://web.greens.org/s-r/30/30-12.html }
*

As with the investigation of the funding channel for the September 11
hijackers, the anthrax investigation started off fast and made great
progress only to come to a screeching halt with the perpetrator in
easy reach.

The most obvious pieces of evidence were the notes that accompanied
the anthrax mailings. These contained crude misspellings and praised
Allah while calling for the downfall of the United States. These notes
were quickly recognized as a transparent hoax. As Professor Rosenberg
has stated:

*
Expert analysts for the FBI believe that the letters were written by a
Westerner, not a Middle Easterner or Muslim, although the text was
clearly intended to imply the latter.

{"Analysis of the Anthrax Attacks," Professor Barbara Hatch Rosenberg,
Federation of American Scientists, January 17, 2002-September 22, 2002
http://www.fas.org/bwc/news/anthraxreport }
*

The anthrax strain used was consistent in all letters. A detailed
genetic analysis narrowed the search to a single laboratory: the U.S.
Army's Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID)
at Fort Detrick, Maryland:

"Riddle of the spores--Why has the FBI investigation into the anthrax
attacks stalled? The evidence points one way," George Monbiot, The
Guardian, May 21, 2002
http://www.guardian.co.uk/anthrax/story/0,1520,719367,00.html

Further, the sophisticated weaponization process used to treat the
spores, and the highly specialized expertise needed to store and
handle the spores, narrows the search even much further. This leaves
us with just a handful of suspects involved in the Fort Detrick
program:

"Analysis of the Anthrax Attacks," Professor Barbara Hatch Rosenberg,
Federation of American Scientists, January 17, 2002-September 22, 2002
http://www.fas.org/bwc/news/anthraxreport

With the field narrowed down so drastically, Professor Rosenberg
points us to what I believe is the key piece of evidence in
identifying the perpetrator:

*
On Sept. 21, three days after the first anthrax mailing and before any
letters or anthrax cases were in the news, an anonymous typed letter
was mailed to Quantico accusing an Egyptian-American scientist,
formerly of USAMRIID, of plotting biological terrorism. The accused
scientist was quickly exonerated by the FBI. The letter's writer
displayed familiarity with work at USAMRIID and claimed to have
formerly worked with the accused scientist.

{"The Anthrax Case: What the FBI Knows," Barbara Hatch Rosenberg,
Ph.D., June 13, 2002
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/fas-01.html }
*

Obviously the anonymous accuser himself fits the profile of the actual
perpetrator. Furthermore he was able to correctly anticipate that
there would be an anthrax attack and that the strain of anthrax used
would lead to Fort Detrick. The conclusion seems inescapable that the
anonymous author of this false accusation was the author of the attack
itself.

The falsely accused was an Egyptian born scientist, Dr. Ayaad Assaad
who worked at USAMRIID during the 1990's. During his employment there
he was the target of racist attacks from a Jewish coworker, Lt. Col.
Philip Zack. In one incident Zack mailed Assaad a rubber camel with a
huge model sexual appendage attached, together with an eight page poem
that described Dr. Assaad among many other things as a "life form
lower than yeast."

"Arab scientists recount hostility and harassment at military anthrax
lab," Lynne Tuohy and Jack Dolan, The Hartford Courant, December 19,
2001
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=detrick19&date=20011219

As a result of this and a string of similar racist attacks by Lt. Col.
Zack, Assaad filed a harrassment suit and Zack was forced to resign
his position at USAMRIID. However, Zack continued to have access to
the lab illegally with the help of a personal friend there:

"Anthrax Easy To Get Out Of Lab--Security Was Based On Trust In
Scientists," Jack Dolan, Dave Altimari and Lynne Tuohy, The Hartford
Courant, December 20, 2001
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/hcourant.html

Certainly Lt. Col. Zack must be considered to be the prime candidate
as the author of the letter falsely accusing Dr. Assad. In my view
this also makes him the prime suspect in the attacks
themselves--especially when you take into account the fact that his
illegal comings and goings at Fort Detrick occurred at the time when
anthrax spores matching the genetic profile of those used in the
attacks went missing there.

"Deadly specimens disappeared from Army research lab in '90s," Jack
Dolan and Dave Altimari, The Hartford Courant, January 21, 2002
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/134393798_anthrax21.html

In any event, the suspects in this crucial investigation are certainly
NOT fanatical Islamic fundamentalists. Everyone close to the
investigation agrees that the perpetrator is a highly qualified
bio-warfare expert who has worked on highly classified projects for
the United States government. He has very specific and rare skills
that in themselves narrow the field to a mere handful people, without
even taking into account the evidence surrounding the mailings
themselves. The postmarks provide a series of time stamps associated
with specific locations. An investigation like this can stall when
there are thousands of possible suspects; it cannot stall when there
are a handful of suspects and abundant clues to resolve the
perpetrator's identity. Professors Rosenberg and Boyle are quite
correct: the FBI is deliberately shielding the perpetrator of these
terrible crimes, which have taken the lives of five innocent American
citizens and which attack the foundations of our free and open
society.

But not everyone is going unprotected. With exceptional foresight so
notably absent elsewhere in this case, Vice President Dick Cheney was
able to anticipate that anthrax would become a problem in the Capitol.
He and his staff started taking an anti-anthrax medication (Cipro) on
the night of September 11, before the letters containing anthrax
started to arrive:

"White House mail sorters anthrax-free," Sandra Sobieraj, Associated
Press, October 24, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20021021135126/http://www.phillyburbs.com/terror/news/1024beth.htm

"Judicial Watch Sues Bush Administration For Anthrax Documents--Group
Says Government Had Braced In Advance For Anthrax Attacks," Associated
Press, June 9, 2002
http://cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/2002/ap060902.html

Obtaining and preparing the anthrax will have been a difficult and
lengthy process. The attacks, beginning just seven days after
September 11, must have been prepared well in advance by a highly
sophisticated government insider. Like the hijackers themselves and
their sponsors in the ISI, the perpetrator clearly has powerful
protectors high inside the U.S. government. The two attacks seem to
have been perfectly coordinated to work towards the same objective.
The ever-incisive Professor Rosenberg observes:

*
The perpetrator was probably ready before Sept. 11 and simply took
advantage of the likelihood that Sept. 11 would throw suspicion on
Muslim terrorists. Was the perpetrator trying to push the US toward
some retaliatory military action?

{"Analysis of the Anthrax Attacks," Professor Barbara Hatch Rosenberg,
Federation of American Scientists, January 17, 2002-September 22, 2002
http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/cbw/issues/anthrax_attack.shtml }
*

6. THE ULTRA-RIGHTWING AGENDA ALREADY IN PLACE FOR A WAR AGAINST THE
ARAB STATES

...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #36
44. Fantastic research Tim Howells! Well worth bookmarking.
I've already read a lot of those links in the past, but there's a bunch I haven't seen. Thanks for putting this whole thing together in one post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quakerfriend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
5. Light and strenght to her for continue to speak
truth to their lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
6. Good find RP
We'll get em yet!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Thanks shraby!
It's amazing how everything is coming around. * faces a Perfect Storm of Progressive Fury!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Absolute power doesn't only corrupt
absolutely, it makes the perps brave enough to come out into the sunlight where we can see what they're doing. Just good it's coming out early enough to be able to do something about it besides storm the Bastille.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Hey, did you read Justin Raimondo's column?
Bush's Wartime Dictatorship
The threat of presidential supremacism
by Justin Raimondo

In defending his edict authorizing surveillance of phone calls and e-mails originating in the United States, President Bush reiterated legal arguments, long made by his intellectual Praetorians, that imbue the White House with wartime powers no different from those exercised by a Roman emperor. As Barton Gellman and Dafna Linzer pointed out in the Washington Post the other day:

"Bush's constitutional argument, in the eyes of some legal scholars and previous White House advisers, relies on extraordinary claims of presidential war-making power. Bush said yesterday that the lawfulness of his directives was affirmed by the attorney general and White House counsel, a list that omitted the legislative and judicial branches of government. On occasion the Bush administration has explicitly rejected the authority of courts and Congress to impose boundaries on the power of the commander in chief, describing the president's war-making powers in legal briefs as 'plenary' – a term defined as 'full,' 'complete,' and 'absolute.'"

The new presidential absolutism infuses not only Bush's foreign policy, which asserts the "right" of the White House to make war on anyone, anywhere, anytime, and for any reason, but also, increasingly, his domestic policies. The doctrine of wartime presidential supremacy has been dramatized, in recent days, in a series of disturbing developments on the home front: the utilization of "national security letters" by the FBI to snoop on thousands of U.S. citizens, the creation of a permanent database that amounts to an electronic "enemies list," and just this past week the revelation that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping on phone calls and e-mails originating in the U.S. – without going to the FISA court that normally oversees such activities.

This doctrine of presidential supremacy is derived, in substance and style, from the unrestrained militarism of the regime. That we are now in a state of permanent war requires that our government undertake a perpetual war on what is left of our civil liberties. Given the nature of this conflict with a formless, stateless enemy, more a concept than a combatant, there is no longer any division between the "home front" and the struggle against the worldwide Islamist insurgency, between domestic and foreign policy. We spy on Americans because we fight in Iraq, and, as time goes on, the converse will be true: we will continue the overseas battle in order for the regime to win the fight against its political opponents in the U.S. That the antiwar opposition, already demonized by neoconservative ideologues as "appeasers" and worse, will wind up being treated as "the enemy" should surprise no one.

more...

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #17
31. Just checked this thread again RP,
no I didn't read Raimondo, but I'm going to right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. She nails those questions....
she is so articulate in her writing as well as her speech. Thank's for the link:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Yep, recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
12. Kristen Breitweiser voted for Bush in 2000.
She's more then redeemed herself!

:toast:

Bookmarked - recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
journalist3072 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Exactly right...and what's more...
She said that in reference to the creation of the 9/11 Commission "President Bush thrwated our attempts at every turn."

Kristen Breitweiser, unlike many people today, knows how to vote her own best interests.

In 2000, she thought she was voting for a particular kind of candidate.

And sadly, it took the murder of her husband to understand that George Bush was not the person she thought he was.

I am talking about this on my blog today, as a matter of fact:

http://progressiveminds.bloghi.com/2005/12/21/required-reading-from-9-11-widow-kristen-breitweiser.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #15
45. I'll never understand how Bush couldn't be seen for what he was, upfront
Edited on Thu Dec-22-05 01:55 PM by quiet.american
I didn't even know what a blog was in 2000. I followed the 2000 campaign through newspapers and newsmagazines, and I keenly understood what a doofus, and dangerous man-child Bush was, even with news coverage of him that was so controversy-averse it had the taste of plain oatmeal. Bush's record of incompetence, cronyism, racism and murderous policies as Governor of Texas still came through loud and clear. And to hear the man speak erased any benefit of the doubt I may have given him.

I'll always remember him in the aftermath of the campaign -- lurking behind James Baker during press conferences with an arrogant and curious smirk on his face, like a difficult teenager hiding out behind his dad while his dad speaks to the grownups.

I'll never understand why ANYONE voted for him, other than that they saw and celebrated in him the worst aspects of themselves.

That said, it would have been an even greater tragedy if Kristen Breitweiser had contined to place her faith in him after losing her husband in 9/11, as some have done. She does us all a tremendous service with her activism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
16. See Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken's Ratings
of the 9/11 Commission's responses to their questions here:

http://www.justicefor911.org/Appendix4_FSCQuestionRatings_111904.php

Most of the questions the 9/11 Commission failed to address.


Transcript of Ms.Van Auken's statement in DC last summer:

http://www.nowpublic.com/node/16472
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
18. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Binka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Oh God She Is Beautiful And Strong
Only a bully would stop this woman. Bush. Cheney. Of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #20
33. There's an intensity in her eyes.
I'm sure glad she is on our side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicasista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
23. Girl Power!!
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cults4Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
26. I was hoping she would come out and say something.
Glad she was quick about it. The Jersey girls are a powerful voice and I really wish more politicians would seriously give them consideration.

Also glad that this didn't automatically get moved to the 9-11 bunker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
27. Okay, it's now very clear that Kristen Breitweiser
needs to run for office. What an asset she would be for this country.:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 01:42 AM
Response to Original message
34. Exactly
If it was in the name of "security" as they are claiming why did they not go to the NSA? The NSA would have given them the authority if it was in security and they had the proof the NSA needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
35. The U.S.S. Bush is finally sinking under the weight of Rove's lies. (eom
:hurts::nopity:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
37. Each day I am getting more and more livid on this - thanks for the info
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
38. 9/11 Happened because of Incompetence By Key Admin Personell;
Its the elephant in the room that no one (except the Jersey Widows) has recognized for 3 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pauldp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #38
43. Criminal Negligence NOT just incompetence. Big difference. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
39. Bush radio address on 12/17 mentioned two hijackers
This is the 9th paragraph of the radio address where Bush states that we did not know they were here until it was too late. Kristen Breitweiser's article appeared after the last radio address, she mentions these highjackers by name in her article under misunderstanding #2. According to her information not only did we know they were here, but inspectors were told not to detain one of the highjackers???

"As the 9/11 Commission pointed out, it was clear that terrorists inside the United States were communicating with terrorists abroad before the September the 11th attacks, and the commission criticized our nation's inability to uncover links between terrorists here at home and terrorists abroad. Two of the terrorist hijackers who flew a jet into the Pentagon, Nawaf al Hamzi and Khalid al Mihdhar, communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al Qaeda who were overseas. But we didn't know they were here, until it was too late."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051217.html


"...September 5 -- INS entered the September 4 notice of revocation of Mihdhar's visa into the INS lookout system. The State Department identified Mihdhar as a potential witness in an FBI investigation, and inspectors were told not to detain him.

For what FBI investigation was al Mihdhar a potential witness? Why was it first ordered to detain al Mihdhar because he was armed and dangerous and thereafter ordered to not detain him because he was a potential witness in an FBI investigation? Al Mihdhar was "armed and dangerous" and "participating in terrorist acts" that were defined as "airline hijackings" and using "weapons of mass destruction." Who ordered his non-detainment a mere five days before 9/11? Perhaps current Secretary of State Rice (former National Security Advisor on 9/11) or her State Department counsel, Philip Zelikow, (former 9/11 Commission Staff Director) might have some answers?"

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051217.html

I think she is right on with this statement in the first paragraph of her article.

"History will bear out the truth -- our intelligence agencies held a treasure trove of intelligence on the 9/11 hijackers, intelligence that was gathered through their initially unencumbered surveillance. President Bush should busy himself by investigating why that information was then stymied and not capitalized upon to stop the 9/11 attacks."





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peekaloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
40. I really wish she would run for public office.
:toast: KB!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
41. Ashcan never brought Moussaoui case before FISA court
The late, great TruthIsAll spelled it out quite nicely with hellacious links...



Denial of Moussaoui FISA Warrant: The Smoking Gun?

From The Wilderness Publications...

EXCERPT...

According to The Wall Street Journal, the FBI did not tell the White House about Moussaoui until after Sept. 11.

But it is a safe bet that the CIA's Tenet did. Even before learning about Moussaoui, Tenet's President's Daily Brief of Aug. 6 bore the title 'Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.' When analysts working in Tenet's Counterterrorist Center were warned about Moussaoui a few weeks before Sept. 11, it is inconceivable that they would not have told Tenet. He is, by law, 'the principal advisor to the president for intelligence matters related to national security,' and is entitled to 'all intelligence related to the national security, which is collected by any department, agency or other entity of the United States.'

Tenet's people learned about Moussaoui in a back-door message from the FBI Field Office in Minneapolis enlisting the CIA's help in obtaining information on Moussaoui from French intelligence. The French promptly pointed out Moussaoui's affiliations with radical fundamentalist groups and Osama bin Laden. (The French service had been keeping close tabs on the likes of Moussaoui, having foiled a plan by Algerian terrorists to crash an airplane into the Eiffel Tower in 1994.)<29>

This was not news to anybody who had read the Rowley Memo, but it really was newsworthy, because it came from someone closely associated with the Agency. And McGovern has been generous with his political capital on more recent occasions; he spoke at the 9/11/03 second anniversary events in New York, and though he concentrated his fire on the Neocons' Iraq fiasco, the event at which he spoke (the panel, the agenda, the literature in the lobby, the subjects of the other talks, even the date of the event) was entirely focused on 9/11.<30> Even if Mr. McGovern had adjusted his tie and quietly recited the alphabet, there would still be heavy symbolism in the sight of an ex-CIA analyst seated on a dias with Mike Ruppert, John Judge, Kyle Hence, and Cynthia McKinney.<31>

The sight of McGovern on the stage was more significant than anything he was at liberty to say.

CONTINUED w LINKCITY on the subject ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1429777



Thank you for Mrs. Breitweiser's important article, Robert.

Truly dynamite information, packed with the Truth.

And it's blowing up in the BFEE's faces.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #41
47. Thank you so much Octafish!
I can't believe I missed this thread the first time around. It looks amazing. Now I've got it bookmarked for future reference.

Merry Fitzmas to you!

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. You're welcome, robertpaulsen. Hey, d'ya remember Oberstar's role?
Why Bushler didn't connect the dots:

The flight instructors where Moussaoui learned to turn a 747 called the FAA and said their student might be a hijacker in training. The FAA said to call the FBI.

The Minneapolis FBI said they were aware of the situation. The flight instructors said a jumbo jet loaded with fuel made one big ass bomb. They begged the FBI to investigate, to no avail according to the flight instructors.

So, the flight instructors called their Congressman, John Oberstar. Oberstar then called the FBI in Washington who finally ordered the arrest of Moussaoui.

Then Ashcan's FBI kept the Minneapolis office from getting a FISA warrant to check out Moussaoui's laptop -- the one containing stolen materials needed to navigate a 747. Who knows what else was on that laptop.

BTW: A historical oddity: one of the Minneapolis flight instructors who spotted Moussaoui, and from whom Moussaoui pirated a CD-ROM of a 747 flight controls, died as the co-pilot of Paul Wellstone's plane.

The facts are there for all to see. These BFEE are mass-murdering traitors.

The Truth will out.



Merry Christmas to you and yours, robertpaulsen!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-23-05 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #41
49. Thanks for the additional link/links!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-22-05 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
42. I love her and all the 'Jersey Girls'
but not for them, there would have been no 9-11 commission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-26-05 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
50. Happy to see this thread has had a lot of reads on GOOGLE
Just in case you missed it, here's my take on the subject:

http://www.dailykos.com/tag/FISA%20warrants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-26-05 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
51. I Read This Several Days Ago On HuffPo
and was so impressed that I kept talking about it at the gatherings I attended. My first impression when I read it was, "she knows", she knows it all and more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 10:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC