http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x110092paulthompson (1000+ posts) Sat Aug-26-06 04:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Yes
I've been in contact with Lance and helping him find info for this book. He's discovered some stunning things. I don't know what I can or can't say so I'll hold off until at least the show comes out. But what he discovered certainly makes Patrick Fitzgerald look very bad. I had high hopes for Fitzgerald with the Plame case, but it now appears he is just another cover up artist. For instance, the pieces Lance put together shows Fitzgerald to be very clearly lying under oath. Fitzgerald told Congress under oath after 9/11 that he had no idea who Ali Mohamed was until Mohamed showed up to be interviewed shortly after the 1998 embassy bombings. Fitzgerald went on and on about "the Wall" and how "the Wall" (rules limiting sharing of evidence between intelligence and prosecutors) meant that even then he couldn't tell if he should charge Mohamed with a crime or not. Bull honkey. Fitzgerald actually had dinner with Mohamed twice where Mohamed blatantly admitted to crime after crime and even hinted at future plots, and yet Mohamed was allowed to continue to run his al-Qaeda cell openly in California.
In retrospect, it looks like the fix was in with the Plame case. It did seem strange at the time that the Bush Administration would appoint someone so supposedly morally upright and competent for the vital Plame case, but now it just seems they picked the cover up guy with the best reputation. And we've seen the results: Fitzgerald interpreted his mandate very narrowly and in the end only charged Scooter Libby.
The fix is doubly in, too, because of the way National Geographic watered down the documentary. I've found out that the National Geographic Society no longer controls the channel and in fact it's now majority owned by Fox News. So I guess that shouldn't be too much of a surprise. At least all the info will still be in the book (though the book publisher is also owned by a company ultimately controlled by Rupert Murdoch, Lance hasn't had any pressure to water the book down).
As far as I know, Lance never speculates beyond incompetence as to why these things happened. But there's certainly fodder in the book to get many a conspiracy theorist's dander up. For instance, he shows many ways in which the evidence that the 1998 embassy bombings were going to happen was known by US intelligence in advance. But as to whether that was incompetence or another LIHOP is up for the reader to decide. I think he at least makes the case that the "incompetence" was at a minimum criminal negligence that should result in prison terms for key officials. Fitzgerald is a good example. There's no way one can claim a smart guy like Fitzgerald forgot about those meetings with Mohamed when he testified under oath or that he didn't understand what Mohamed was saying when he gave very clear warnings of future attacks. Fitzgerald should be one of many officials behind bars right now.
Anyway, it should be a "must read" book for people interested in terrorism. One can argue about conclusions, but he's a good researcher who has dug up a lot of new information. It makes one wonder where all the other journalists are and what are they doing aside from being stenographers for official pronoucements. Another thing I like about Lance's work is that he plays no favorites with Democrats or Republicans. A lot of the failures in this book took place during the Clinton administration, but then things just get worse during the Bush administration and the worst characters are the ones who seem to always get promoted up to and including the present day. Clearly, the intelligence agency problems shown here go a lot deeper than just political party. The whole system is rotten.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
