Return Home Members Area Experts Area The best AskMe alternative!Answerway.com - You Have Questions? We have Answers! Answerway Information Contact Us Online Help
 Sunday 19th May 2024 09:31:16 PM


 

Username:

Password:

or
Join Now!

 

Home/Government/Politics

Forum Ask A Question   Question Board   FAQs Search
Return to Question Board

Question Details Asked By Asked On
More of the same ... Saladin 10/30/04

    The Bush administration continues with its tired old plicies of "Lies, Deny, and Cover Up"

    When will the American people be told the truth about 9-11?

    Consider this:

    =======================================================


    Part of 9/11 Report Remains Unreleased; An Inquiry Is Begun
    By JIM DWYER

    Published: October 30, 2004


    One last chapter of the investigation by the Sept. 11 commission, a supplement completed more than two months ago, has not yet been made public by the Justice Department, and officials say it is unlikely to be released before the presidential election [no prize for guessing why not!], even though that had been a major goal of deadlines set for the panel.

    Drawing from this unpublished part of the inquiry, the commission quietly asked the inspectors general at the Departments of Defense and Transportation to review what it had determined were broadly inaccurate accounts provided by several civil and military officials about efforts to track and chase the hijacked aircraft on Sept. 11. [Broadly inaccurate = ???]

    David Barnes, a spokesman with the Department of Transportation, said yesterday that if the reviews found wrongdoing, the inspector general could recommend administrative penalties or ask federal prosecutors to begin a criminal investigation.

    "The investigation is ongoing,'' Mr. Barnes said, "and we don't know when it will be done."

    In testimony before the commission, officials had described a quick response to the hijackings that narrowly missed intercepting some of the planes, but the commission's investigators later determined from documentary evidence that none of the military planes were anywhere near the four airliners.

    In addition, officials at the Federal Aviation Administration testified that they had notified the military within a few minutes of each hijacking, but the investigation found that tape recordings contradicted that assertion.

    The commission, in its final report, said that the true picture "did not reflect discredit" on individuals, but that unreliable testimony about the events had made it harder to understand the problems.

    Besides the pursuit of the hijacked planes, the supplement, a monograph 60 to 70 pages long, revisits other subjects in the commission's final report of July - telephone calls made from the hijacked airplanes, airline security and orders issued that morning by President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney - and provides additional detail or context, former commission members said.

    The monograph also finds shortcomings in the Transportation Security Administration, the agency formed to buttress airline security after the hijackings, said Bob Kerrey, the former Democratic senator from Nebraska and a commission member.

    Mr. Kerrey suggested that presidential politics were behind the delay in the report's release, but a spokesman for the Justice Department, Mark Corallo, said that an ordinary review of the material for national security clearance was complicated when the commission shut down in August.

    "It's unlikely in the next few weeks," Mr. Corallo said of when the supplement would be released. "It was a real legal quandary."

    The monograph was submitted to the Justice Department just as the commission's term expired on Aug. 21, a date selected by Congress after long negotiations to avoid bringing out the commission's report at the height of the presidential campaign.

    It arrived not only as the commission became legally defunct, but also as many commission members and the staff lost their security clearances, Mr. Corallo said.

    That meant no one from the commission could discuss with the Justice Department lawyers how to edit material that needed to be changed for security reasons, he said.

    "Had the commission gotten it to them two or three days before the deadline, they could have resolved any issue in minutes, as they usually do," Mr. Corallo said.

    As a result of these complications, the supplement is the first of the commission's documents to be completely controlled by the Bush administration.

    While the commission was still in business, it was able to exert pressure on the White House when all 10 members, 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans, simply issued a public request for cooperation.

    "I am surprised that the process has dragged on this long, and I think it's inappropriate," Richard Ben-Veniste, a Democrat on the commission, said. "It is longer than any other review of written material."

    Discussions on the monograph's fate are being held between the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department and Daniel Marcus, the commission's former general counsel.

    "I think I've convinced them that even though we don't exist anymore, it ought to be viewed as a public document," Mr. Marcus said.

    The monograph has two sections, he said. One concerns airline security, discussing the Federal Aviation Administration and the Transportation Security Administration.

    The other section, he said, provides a detailed timeline of the movements of the hijacked planes the morning of Sept. 11 and the response by the civil and military aviation officials.

    On July 29, Mr. Marcus wrote to the inspectors general of the Transportation and Defense Departments requesting reviews of the testimony of those officials.

    He would not comment this week on the request or the letters, but representatives for both departments confirmed that investigations were under way.

    =======================================================

    "Lie, Deny, Cover Up"

    No thank you.

    Sal

      Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 11/01/04 4:29 pm:
      Sal,

      If we're voting for honesty then I'm afraid we don't have a candidate, but I have no doubt which one is less honest, and his name is John Kerry. But, if you can prove Bush is "mentally deficient" I might actually consider voting for Kerry.

      Maybe this will enlighten you on the facts. :)

      Steve

 
Summary of Answers Received Answered On Answered By Average Rating
1. HI Salad, I don't understand this. Much of the informati...
10/30/04 ChouxExcellent or Above Average Answer
2. Aren't these the same people who believe the Oklahoma bom...
10/30/04 elgin_republicansExcellent or Above Average Answer
3. Kerry supporters continue on with "spin" and doctering...
10/31/04 drgadeExcellent or Above Average Answer
4. After we know the truth about the Kennedy killing, the Roswe...
10/31/04 Bishop_ChuckExcellent or Above Average Answer
5. besides the obvious partisan swipes that will be used;what w...
11/01/04 tomder55Excellent or Above Average Answer
6. Sal, Then you'll be voting for Bush? Steve ...
11/01/04 ItsdbExcellent or Above Average Answer
Your Options
    Additional Options are only visible when you login! !

viewq   © Copyright 2002-2008 Answerway.org. All rights reserved. User Guidelines. Expert Guidelines.
Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.   Make Us Your Homepage
. Bookmark Answerway.