Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Waxman/Maloney call for re-opening 9/11 investigation

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
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:25 PM
Original message
Waxman/Maloney call for re-opening 9/11 investigation
Edited on Thu Feb-17-05 10:33 PM by Bluebear


The Honorable Tom Davis
Chairman
Committee on Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

We are writing to request that our Committee hold hearings to investigate two extremely serious questions raised by an article that appeared in this morning's New York Times. The first question is whether the Administration misused the classification process to withhold, for political reasons, official 9/11 Commission staff findings detailing how federal aviation officials received multiple intelligence reports warning of airline hijackings and suicide attacks before September 11. The second question relates to the veracity of statements, briefings, and testimony by then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice regarding this issue.

Background

This morning's New York Times reported that in "the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations." <1> The article explained that the Federal Aviation Administration "received 52 intelligence reports" that mentioned Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda prior to September 11, 2001, and that the FAA warned airports that if "the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable."

This information was included in a staff report by the 9/11 Commission dated August 26, 2004. The 9/11 Commission report found that there was "intelligence that indicated a real and growing threat leading up to 9/11," but that this intelligence "did not stimulate significant increases in security procedures." Although the report did not find that the government had advance information about the specific September 11, 2001, attacks, it reported that the FAA took various measures to warn airport security officials about "the possibility of a suicide hijacking."

Declassification Process

The first question Committee hearings should address is whether the Bush Administration abused the classification process to improperly withhold the 9/11 Commission findings from Congress and the public until after the November elections and the confirmation of Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State. Although the 9/11 Commission staff completed its report on August 26, 2004, the Bush Administration refused to declassify the findings until January 28, 2005, less than 48 hours after Ms. Rice was confirmed as Secretary of State. <2> At that time, the Department of Justice delivered both a classified version and an unclassified version to the National Archives, the agency charged with collecting and retaining all 9/11 Commission documents.

During the period between August 26 and January 28, the Administration was reportedly reviewing the Commission's report to determine whether it contained any information that should be classified in the interest of national security. Problems with this process had been raised previously by the 9/11 Commission. <3>

The Committee should investigate the process by which the Administration handled the declassification, redaction, and release of this 9/11 Commission report. Specifically, the Committee should investigate the following questions:

(1) What was the process for declassifying, redacting, and releasing this report, and who specifically was responsible for these actions?

(2) Were there political considerations behind the declassification, redaction, or timing of the release of the report?

(3) What were the specific rationales for each redaction in the report? Were these redactions appropriate?

On December 2, 2004, we joined with Rep. Christopher Shays, Chairman of the National Security Subcommittee, and 23 other members in a letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft specifically requesting the 9/11 Commission report at issue. <4> We noted that "there have been a number of calls for its release, to no avail," and we expressed concern that "politics may be playing a role in its release." This specific congressional request was apparently ignored by the Administration. When the staff report was declassified on January 28 and sent to the National Archives, no notice was provided to us.

Statements by Ms. Rice

The Committee should also examine the process by which Ms. Rice investigated and researched intelligence reports regarding airline suicide attacks prior to making public statements regarding this issue, testifying before the 9/11 Commission on April 8, 2004, and advising President Bush.

During her tenure as President Bush's National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice made several categorical statements asserting that there were never any warnings that terrorists might use airplanes in suicide attacks. On May 16, 2002, for example, Ms. Rice made the following statement at a White House press briefing:

I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. <5>

When Ms. Rice testified under oath before the 9/11 Commission on April 8, 2004, the Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean, asked her about her knowledge of a possible suicide attack using airplanes. After acknowledging that her previous statement generated "concern about what I might have known or we might have known," she stated as follows:

I said no one could have imagined them taking a plane, slamming it into the Pentagon - I'm paraphrasing now - into the World Trade Center, using planes as a missile. As I said to you in the private session, I probably should have said "I" could not have imagined, because within two days, people started to come to me and say, "Oh, but there were these reports in 1998 and 1999, the intelligence community did look at information about this."

To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Chairman, this kind of analysis about the use of airplanes as weapons actually was never briefed to us. I cannot tell you that there might not have been a report here or a report there that reached somebody in our midst. All that I can tell you is that it was not in the August 6th memo, using planes as a weapon, and I do not remember any reports to us, a kind of strategic warning that planes might be used as a weapon. In fact, there were some reports done in '98 and '99. I think I was - I was certainly not aware of them at the time that I spoke. <6>

The President, who was advised by Ms. Rice about national security matters, also repeatedly made definitive statements claiming absolute ignorance regarding the possibility of terrorists using airplanes in suicide missions. For example, President Bush stated on national television:

Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to strike America, to attack us, I would have used every resource, every asset, every power of this government to protect the American people. <7>

One possibility raised by these facts is that Ms. Rice was unaware of the FAA warnings when she appeared before the press and testified before the 9/11 Commission. This would raise serious questions about her preparation and competency. Another possibility is that Ms. Rice knew about the FAA warnings but provided misleading information to the public and the Commission. Neither of these possibilities would reflect well on Ms. Rice. Perhaps there are other more innocent explanations for these seeming inconsistencies.

Given the gravity of these questions and significance of the new disclosures, the Committee should investigate what Ms. Rice knew, when she knew it, and why she testified as she did. The public has the right to expect that senior Administration officials will be candid on matters of national security, especially when they involve the tragic events of September 11. An investigation is needed to determine whether this standard was met in this instance.

Document Request

Finally, we request that the Committee obtain from the Administration the following documents identified in the New York Times article this morning:

(1) A full, unredacted copy of the classified version of the 9/11 Commission report on FAA intelligence warnings delivered to the National Archives;

(2) Full and unredacted copies of the 52 intelligence reports received by the FAA;

(3) Full and unredacted copies of the CD-ROM presentation distributed to airlines and airports in 2001; and

(4) Full and unredacted copies of slides, reports, or other documents used in classified briefings for security officials at 19 airports in mid-2001.

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Minority Member

Carolyn B. Maloney
Member of Congress

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021705W.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ms Rice is the new darling of global diplomacy--no one will touch this
I predict.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. They will keep her flying around like a top so they can't get at it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. Great.
I've been reading "The Terror Timeline" by our own DUer Paul Thompson. It has everything written about 9/11 up to the time of publication that is credible. This book if any should indicate the need for a thorough investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. He didn't include the Clarke memo from Jan25, 2001.
Rice lied about that, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. Can you say:
The shortest tenure of a Secretary of State ever?

Gee, I just can't imagine that the administration would play politics with 9/11, can you?

How do you like your rice? Boiled or fried?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. forget the repukes
have your own hearings, in public, broadcast on television and radio, with democratic house and senate members and anyone else who cares to speak the truth. there are plenty of people that want to talk and dont need to be put under oath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Merlot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
31. I agree. We can't "ask permission" to the repubs
to investigate. The last time anyone aked permission, it was the repubs, and clinton said yes. You think the repubs are going to do that to themselves????

Take it to the people and the media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
7. There's that little matter of justice for 3,000 people who died on 9/11.
The 9/11 Whitewash Committeee didn't deliver it.

Damn right this should be investigated. 52 warnings and no official reaction? They wanted it to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
8. They Are Quite Right To Do So, Mr. Bear
There is little room for doubt Rice has committed perjury.

The incompetence displayed by national security organs in the early months of this current regime, while within the normal range for elephantine bureaucracies, was certainly at the high end of normal, and high enough that heads really ought to roll for it.

The official commission, in its effort to maintain a bipartisan consensus, did not probe nearly hard enough. Histories written in the next couple of decades will contain explosive materials about incompetence, and missed opportunities to have halted the al'Queda plots, and lay the blame directly at the door of the criminals of the '00 Coup for the endemic malfeasance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Absolutely. I celebrate it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. There Are Real Questions To Be Asked, Sir, In This Matter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
9. She must apologize to Senator Dayton.
And let's get used to her scrimping up her face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wishlist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
10. She lied to protect the Liar in Chief from blame he deserves over 9/11
Good to see something more being done to expose the coverup of warnings prior to 9/11. No Democrat should have voted for her confirmation in light of her blatant lies, even before this new info about the FAA warnings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
11. she looks even uglier and scarier than usual.
is it a female thing? why can a man kill 100,000 and still smirk like Bush while Condi's face looks more and more evil every day?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-17-05 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
12. BAMM!
Edited on Thu Feb-17-05 11:44 PM by bpilgrim
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
14. kick for getting the truth out. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. I'll second that kick
This is great stuff and the American people need to have this HEARD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddysmellgood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
15. This is exactly what we need. What did they know, and when did they know
it. Once it's spelled out, it will be painfully clear that Dubya was sitting in that school WAITING for the second plane to hit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
18. Waxman is a relentless pursuer. He's going to keep probing until he finds
a soft spot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 02:33 AM
Response to Original message
19. Investigation?
I have had the fortunate misfortune of having to spend a high percentage of the last four years with a hose in my arm and repeatedly falling victim to the wonderful folks dressing in green scrubs and wielding those VERY sharp little knives. This enforced idleness has had the consequence of allowing me the opportunity to observe a lot of the BS goings on available on CSPAN/II. I am, by nature a calm, forgiving and ridiculously trusting person, but even with all the redaction, the classification, and the misdirection, I am very clear about a few things, as follows:

1. The 9/11 commission was only allowed to come into being when the ruling monarchy could be absolutely sure that its only mission was a complete and utter whitewash and a powerful damage control device.
The commission succeeded beautifully. By neglecting to investigate truly important issues, covering up and ignoring the constant lieing and double-dealing, giving a free pass to any of the perpetrators who needed it, agreeing to muzzle any of their members who objected to the actual purpose, and protecting the little hitlers, this bunch sold the 911 survivors, their families, and the American public a total cheat-a bill of goods. Whatever you wish to call it, it was a vast coverup.

2. The people of good will who know or suspect the truth are either paralyzed with fear, disempowered to the point of abject uselessness, or complicit in the conspiracy. In the not so distant past, a senatorial request (such as was made to the white house press office) was the equivalent of a direct order and could not be ignored. Now, however, if that order comes from a democrat, it is ignored with impunity and the requester is basically told to go piss up a rope.

As much as I applaud the effort to expose the rotten underbelly of these monsters, the unfortunate public has already been handed over to the executioner. I can't avoid a slim glimmer of hope, since I'm still alive and suffer from that common human frailty (or vanity,) but the pragmatic side of me tells me that such effort should probably be invested in some sort of fifth column approach that could produce a real chance of change, such as a constitutional amendment to guarantee the vote and instant runoff elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
20. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. Yes. let's hear the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Unfortunately, this won't happen with the 911 Commissioners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karmadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
22. Why must the Democrats be so divisive? We all know
we're supposed to be focused like a laser on destroying social security and whipping up war hysteria against Iran. Can't we ever be team players?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueheeler Donating Member (163 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
23. This letter is confusing!!
Why are they writing in response to "an article that appeared in this morning's New York Times?"

This is something that they should already have access to, correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TNOE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
24. I think time to act is now
Yesterday I read this:

http://www.dreamscape.com/morgana/pan.htm

"World War III will be started by those peoples who first revealed the light (the divine wisdom or intelligence) in the other old countries (India, China, Islamic Nations, Africa). The United States will be destroyed, land and people, by atomic bombs and radioactivity. Only the Hopis and their homeland will be preserved as an oasis to which refugees will flee. Bomb shelters are a fallacy. "It is only materialistic people who seek to make shelters. Those who are at peace in their hearts already are in the great shelter of life. There is no shelter for evil. Those who take no part in the making of world division by ideology are ready to resume life in another world, be they Black, White, Red, or Yellow race. They are all one, brothers.

And last night I thought this:

Time is short - it will not be long before there is another terrorist attack, martial law, etc. Unless the issue of 9/11 is honestly dealt with and the truth brought to light, I belive we can expect this administration to unleash the bombs and hell on earth. Personally, I'm to the point where I am at peace with myself and could care less about death, I'm ready to move on. But if the future is indeed fluid and not set in stone - I belive this is our only opportunity to really change things.

Make a huge stink, large numbers of people need to write daily to their Congress critters and Senators - all of them - and the media. If this story still refuses to see the light of day - then we know that most of our elected government officials are all a part of the treason perpetuated against the United States - and they will all need to be removed.

The Revolution started in times where small communities had to travel miles and miles to other small communities to unite. We now have the internet at our disposal to communicate easily and widely. I truly believe that if people choose not to deal with the 9/11 issue - we can all grab our ankles and kiss our asses goodbye. We've let a 3-4 year window of opportunity go by already - although millions of Americans know or suspect the truth of the matter and the rest of the world pretty much knows the truth, the media has refused to touch this and thus has perpetuated the big lie.

Who was it that said - they've got all the guns, but we've got the numbers? But its going to take action from a whole lot of people and a whole lot of work, but our future probably depends on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. Yes-- we must be united. There is a huge number of people starting
to question this administrations' lies and the consequences of our actions couldn't be more important.

I really worry about a bleak future as you outline unless there is some major shift in what is happening with this country-- there needs to be a large popular uprising. As the cliche goes-- "we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
26. Good job! Emailing Waxman support and Davis to demand same!
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
27. What I want to know is what exactly did the FAA do about these warnings.
We have a DU member who is an air traffic ontroller, and he says he never received any hijacking warnings before 9/11? Why not? Who was shutting down these warnings at the FAA?

Was it really just the FAA trying to streamline air travel, or was someone higher up in the administration trying to override these warnings?

I suspect the latter, frankly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imalittleteapot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. FAA = Government = Bush
Enough said?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
29. Good!
There are far too many questions still unanswered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Callboy Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. gotta love a transparent document with blacked out pages..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TNOE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
32. The Second Wave
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##
==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sleepless In NY Donating Member (749 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-18-05 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. kick
They have to reopen that investigation. They just have too. If anything should sink bush, it should be this.
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 Sun May 05th 2024, 01:00 AM
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