FAIR : Turning Questions into "Conspiracy Theories"

[G_j]

http://www.fair.org/activism/nyt-ashcroft-airplanes.html
ACTION ALERT:
Turning Questions into "Conspiracy Theories"
The New York Times looks for the lighter side of September 11

April 16, 2004

In its eagerness to find a lighter side to the September 11 commission hearings, the New York Times ended up trampling on the news.

In a "Reporter's Notebook" feature in the Times' April 15 edition, reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg wrote a series of what might be called human interest items on the hearings: A former FBI director doesn't know how to type; the audience chuckled at Janet Reno's being flummoxed by an acronym. The last item, however, presented a legitimate question about pre-September 11 warnings as a joke.

"It wouldn't be a Washington investigation without conspiracy theorists," the item began, signaling that what was to follow shouldn't be taken seriously. Stolberg continued:

"So it was no accident on Tuesday that one commissioner, Richard Ben-Veniste, asked Attorney General John Ashcroft about reports that he stopped flying on commercial aircraft before the attacks. Mr. Ashcroft was only too glad to set the record straight, saying he 'never ceased to use commercial aircraft for my personal travel.'

"Mr. Ben-Veniste was pleased, too. 'By putting that in the public domain,' he said on Wednesday, 'I think we can at least take the step toward reducing the number of conspiracy theories, of which there are many.'"

The short concludes with a description of "an elderly man carrying an overstuffed satchel" full of documents, whom Ben-Veniste smiles at politely-- apparently illustrating the attitude readers are supposed to take toward those who peddle "conspiracy theories."

The problem with placing this item in the "Reporter's Notebook" section, and framing it as a cute example of the kooky things some people believe, is that Ashcroft's avoiding commercial flights before September 11 is not a conspiracy theory, but a documented fact. On July 26, 2001-- about six weeks before September 11-- Dan Rather introduced a CBS Evening News segment with a question: "Why is the attorney general of the United States doing all his air travel by specially chartered jet at taxpayer expense?" CBS's Jim Stewart attempted an answer:

..more..http://www.fair.org/activism/nyt-ashcroft-airplanes.html

...ACTION: Please ask the New York Times public editor to correct the misleading impression given by the paper that John Ashcroft's avoidance of commercial airline flights before September 11 was just a conspiracy theory.

CONTACT:
New York Times
Daniel Okrent, Public Editor
[e-mail]

[redqueen]

1. Now this is good news!

It seems as if we're getting some awareness of how easy it is to hide things simply by saying any questioning of them is 'conspiracy theory nonsense'.

Ahhh, hope. :)

[buddy22600]

2. I have a question.

I listened to the ashcroft testimony. He stated that it was not a chartered jet, but one owned by the government for official travel. He stated that the FBI had informed him that there were threats against the office of the attorney general. If this is not in fact true and the jet was chartered and not owned by the government then he lied under oath. Isn;t lying under oath an impeachable offense? Can ashcroft be impeached?

[redqueen]

3. Not sure -

I think that because he wasn't elected, he can't be impeached.

If that's true, then all we can do is press for his resignation / firing.

If I'm wrong would appreciate more info.

And thanks for the info... good catch!

[Junkdrawer]

4. Most of the administration officials who testified committed perjury...

what is surprising is that not one Democratic leader has called them on it. Do you think Frist would have been as restrained?

[redqueen]

5. Of course not

but then he's not in the enabling party.

[G_j]

9. More lies from Ashcroft,

ASHCROFT'S RECORD OF LYING TO CONGRESS ABOUT 9/11

With Attorney General John Ashcroft testifying before the 9/11 Commission
today, a quick analysis of his previous statements shows he has repeatedly
lied to Congress about the Bush Administration's counterterrorism record.
Specifically, when questioned by Congress in 2002 about why he tried to
de-prioritize and slash funding for counterterrorism before 9/11, Ashcroft
resorted to dishonest denials -- even in the face of budget documents that
proved he was not telling the truth.

For instance, in testimony before the House of Representatives, Ashcroft
said that before 9/11, his "number-one goal" at the Justice Department "was
the prevention of terrorist acts" and that he immediately "began to shape
the department and its efforts in that respect" (1). But according to the
Washington Post, internal Administration documents from before 9/11 "show
that Ashcroft ranked counterterrorism efforts as a lower priority than his
predecessor did" (2). The documents "indicate that before Sept. 11, Ashcroft
did not give terrorism top billing in his strategic plans for the Justice
Department, which includes the FBI. A draft of Ashcroft's 'Strategic Plan'
from Aug. 9, 2001, does not put fighting terrorism as one of the
department's seven goals, ranking it as a sub-goal beneath gun violence and
drugs."

Ashcroft tried to blame his negligence of counterterrorism on the previous
Administration, telling Congress that "the five-year plan that had been put
in place by my predecessor didn't mention counterterrorism" (3). But
according to the New York Times, "the plan issued by Attorney General Janet
Reno in 2000 said the Justice Department would have to devote more attention
and resources to terrorism, citing sophisticated computer and bomb-making
technology and the 'emerging threats of chemical, biological, radiological
and nuclear weapons'" (4).

Ashcroft has even been dishonest about events after 9/11, telling Congress
that when the Administration was writing the emergency counterterrorism
funding bill after the attacks, the FBI "came to me with a $670 million
request, and we counseled them to take that to $1.1 billion" (5). But
according to the Washington Post, "In the early days after the Sept. 11,
2001, attacks, the Bush White House cut by nearly two-thirds an emergency
request for counterterrorism funds by the FBI... The document, dated Oct.
12, 2001, shows that the FBI requested $1.5 billion in additional funds to
enhance its counterterrorism efforts with the creation of 2,024 positions.
But the White House Office of Management and Budget cut that request to $531
million" (6). Ashcroft "cut the FBI's request for items such as computer
networking and foreign language intercepts by half, cut a cyber-security
request by three quarters and eliminated entirely a request for
'collaborative capabilities.'"

Sources:
1. Attorney General John Ashcroft testimony, 02/28/2002.
2. "FBI Budget Squeezed After 9/11", Washington Post, 02/22/2004,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1333383&l=28144 .
3. Attorney General John Ashcroft testimony, 02/28/2002.
4. New York Times, 03/01/2002.
5. Attorney General John Ashcroft testimony, 02/28/2002.
6. "FBI Budget Squeezed After 9/11", Washington Post, 02/22/2004,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1333383&l=28144 .

Visit Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion. -->
< http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1333383&l=28145 >

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

Subscribe to the Daily Mislead! Go to http://www.misleader.org and enter
your e-mail address in the "Receive the Daily Mislead" box in the
top-left corner of the page

[Junkdrawer]

11. Here's EarlG's Condi Perjury thread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1390849

[G_j]

12. what can ordinary citizens do

if Congress will not do anything? These cases of perjury (Ashcroft and Rice) are clear. Can we file a lawsuit? Would it do any good?
Perhaps they knew quite well before testifying that they could commit perjury and nothing would happen.

[lapfog_1]

6. Actually both stmts are true

Ashcroft "leased" a Gulfstream (I've actually been on this plane)
from NASA. So the Dept of Justice transferred money to NASA's budget
to pay for operating expenses and so on. Probably cheaper than a
commercial lease. And NASA's Gulfstream isn't used all that much
for NASA business.

I've only read reports that this is what happened, but it sounds
plausible.

Now, as to Ashcroft's stmt regarding "not ceased using commercial
planes for personal travel"... does anyone have evidence that
he ever traveled commercial after the switch was made to the
Gulfstream and before 9/11?

[Junkdrawer]

7. As for commercial travel, his testimony was very specific...

"I have exclusively traveled on commercial aircraft for my personal travel; continued through the year 2000, through the entirety of the threat period to the nation."

The CBS link shows this to be flat out perjury.

[lapfog_1]

8. Uh huh

that's what I thought. Have they published documentation?

Remember that Ashcroft could always drop in on the local Federal
Prosecutors office or FBI office for a quick meeting before going
on a vacation at the same place, thus making the trip "official
business".

[Junkdrawer]

10. Here's the CBS Link...

Ashcroft Flying High

WASHINGTON, July 26, 2001

(CBS) Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.

In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

More....

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml

[G_j]

13. wow

I hadn't seen that. thanks