Five more US soldiers have died in Iraq. For what? How
many more will die as a result of the Bush cabal's
neo-con wet dream? There is a profound revulsion and
revolt in the US military, the US intelligence
community, the US foreign policy establishment, and
across the entire political spectrum (center, left AND
right)...There is one simple way to guarantee that the
Bush abomination ends in DEFEAT this November. BUT
will the 9/11 Commissioners wimp out? Their
questioning, at least in public hearings, has been too
often painfully chummy, facile, non-confrontational
and off-the-mark? And if, by some miracle of American
spirit, the 9/11 Commission's final report does tell
the truth about the Bush abomination, will the "US
mainstream news media" provide appropriate CONTEXT and
CONTINUITY? Or will they just blurt out some ugly
truths in half-truth packings and then run and hide?
Or will perhaps the 9/11 Commission itself explode --
with some staff member and even one or two
commissioners resigning and speaking out publicly? IF
the 9/11 Commission, or a sufficient number of
individuals associated with it as staffers or
commissioners, decides to speak the truth about pre-9/11
criminal negligence, they will succeed in
finishing off the Bush cabal -- politically...The
future of this Republic is very bleak for many years
to come if we fail...
Ray McGovern, www.tompaine.com: Will the Sept. 11
Commission follow the example set by Congress and the
Intelligence Community and let itself be intimidated
by Vice President Dick Cheney?
Now that the commission’s staff report has pulled the
rug out from under the notion so successfully fostered
by the administration that Iraq played a role in the
attacks of 9/11, no one should be surprised if the
commissioners pull the rug out from under the staff.
There are disquieting signs that this has already
begun to happen.
Repudiate the 9/11 Cover-Up and the Iraq War Lies,
Show Up for Democracy in 2004: Defeat Bush (again!)
http://www.tompaine.com/print/will_the_commissioners_cave.php
Will The Commissioners Cave?
by Ray McGovern
June 21, 2004
Amid the feeding frenzy over last week’s staff report
of the 9/11 commission, the press downplayed an
important fact: the report was produced by the staff
and not the commissioners themselves. This matters
greatly as we approach the July 26 deadline for the
commission’s final report. The Democratic
commissioners are saying the staff report reflects the
commission’s findings, while the Republican
commissioners disagree. McGovern, a former CIA
analyst, explains the partisan wrangling we can expect
during the next month.
Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst for 27 years, is
co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for
Sanity.
Will the Sept. 11 Commission follow the example set by
Congress and the Intelligence Community and let itself
be intimidated by Vice President Dick Cheney?
Now that the commission’s staff report has pulled the
rug out from under the notion so successfully fostered
by the administration that Iraq played a role in the
attacks of 9/11, no one should be surprised if the
commissioners pull the rug out from under the staff.
There are disquieting signs that this has already
begun to happen.
The stakes could not be higher for the president and
vice president. Arguably, the commission is in
position to play in 2004 a role analogous to that
played by the Supreme Court in 2000 in ensuring the
election of George W. Bush and Cheney. This, I
believe, accounts for the dyspeptic reaction of the
two to the staff report and the press play accorded it
last week.
New York Times pundit William Safire is also outraged.
In his column today he lashes out at the commission
chairman, Republican Tom Kean, and the vice chairman,
Democrat Lee Hamilton, for letting themselves be
“jerked around by a manipulative staff.” Safire
drives home the point that the staff conclusion
concerning Iraq and 9/11 was “not a judgment of the
panel of commissioners,” but rather “an interim report
of the commission’s runaway staff.”
Republican Commissioners Fall Into Line
Appearing Sunday on ABC’s This Week, Sept. 11
commission chairman Kean fell in line, saying
repeatedly that the staff report is only an “interim
report.” Not only did he note it is “not finished,”
the commissioners themselves have not been involved in
it so far and the final report will include whatever
“new information” becomes available.
It is not hard to see what is coming. On Thursday
Cheney told the press that he “probably” had more
intelligence information than had been made available
to the commission. Commissioner John Lehman, another
Republican stalwart, told Meet the Press Sunday “the
vice president was right when he said that he may have
things that we don’t have. And we are now in the
process of getting the latest intelligence.”
Flash back, if you dare, to other “intelligence”
promoted by Cheney: the aluminum tubes that turned
out not to be suitable for fashioning nuclear
materials after all; the mobile “biological warfare
labs” that produced nothing more lethal than hydrogen
for weather balloons; the infamous report, based on
forged documents, alleging that Iraq was seeking
uranium in Africa.
The Perils Of Partisanship
What is clear is that Washington is in for a month of
partisan wrangling among the commissioners and staff
before the July 26 deadline for the
report—partisanship of the kind demonstrated at the
grilling of former counter-terrorism chief Richard
Clark. This time it will all take place behind closed
doors. Lehman conceded on Meet the Press, “We’re
under tremendous political pressure…in this election
year.”
Indeed, the commission was highly politicized from the
get-go, with its work carefully choreographed.
Subpoena power, for example, requires a majority vote
among the five Republican and five Democrat
commissioners. And, as the public hearings have
already shown, the White House can count on seasoned
protection from heavy hitters like Fred Fielding,
legal counsel to Presidents Nixon and Reagan, as well
as from Lehman and the other Republican commissioners.
Once again, “intelligence” will be front and center,
with Cheney in the background as super-analyst. CIA
Director George Tenet is packing his bags for his July
11 departure, and there is zero chance his
well-mannered deputy, John McLaughlin, will depart
from what has become customary practice—at the CIA and
elsewhere— and stand up to the vice president.
The Neuralgic Point
When Meet the Press’ Tim Russert quoted The New York
Times’ contention that the commission staff report
“directly contradicts public statements by Bush and
Cheney regarding Iraq and 9/11,” Lehman, borrowing
from Cheney’s lexicon, branded the Times report
“outrageously irresponsible journalism.” Echoing
Kean’s remarks, Lehman added parenthetically, “And,
again, this is a staff statement; the commissioners
have not yet addressed this issue.”
Democrat Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste had just
told Russert, “There was no Iraqi involvement in 9/11.
That’s what our commission found. That’s what our
staff, which included former high-ranking CIA
officials, who know what to look for (found).”
Interesting. Ben-Veniste saying it is what the
commission found; Kean and Lehman saying the
commissioners have not yet addressed the issue. A
harbinger of the wrangling to come.
That Troublesome Constitution Again
Most observers are familiar with the rhetorical
landscape with which Bush and Cheney persuaded a large
majority of Americans that Iraq played a role in the
attacks of 9/11, and many shrug this off as familiar
spin by politicians inclined to take liberties with
the facts. So far little attention has been given to
the fact that a constitutional issue is involved.
On March 19, 2002, the day the war began, President
Bush sent a letter to Congress in which he said that
the war was permitted under legislation authorizing
force against those who “planned, authorized,
committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that
occurred on September 11, 2001.” If the staff’s
finding that there is “no credible evidence that Iraq
and Al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United
States” is allowed to stand, the Bush administration
will be shown to have gone afoul of the Constitution
yet again.
Watch For New “Intelligence”
So expect new “intelligence” (and hope against hope
that there is time to give it the smell test).
Lehman’s assurance that the commission report will be
updated with new intelligence “right up until we go to
press” is by no means reassuring. If it is the truth
that is sought, there should by now be widespread
awareness of the pitfalls of cherry-picking
unevaluated, uncorroborated, “this-just-in” pieces of
intelligence.
Also watch for administration attempts to change the
final draft report, if the Republican commissioners do
not succeed in neutralizing offending passages.
Tim Russert called attention Sunday to reports that
the White House had been allowed to review the staff
reports just made public, and asked if that was
appropriate. Ben-Veniste indicated that the purpose
of reviewing the reports is supposed to be to find and
eliminate any classified information. He also said,
though, that the White House “went somewhat beyond
that and took issue with some of what the staff had
concluded.”
Indeed, an early draft of one draft report was
changed, according to Newsweek. A passage expressing
skepticism about the account of Cheney getting Bush’s
approval for the shoot-down order was reportedly
removed after the White House objected.
Ben-Veniste told Russert that the White House will
review the final report before it is made public.
Thus, there will be considerable opportunity for the
manufacture of “insurmountable” classification
problems, for delay and for other mischief—given the
potential political explosiveness of the commission’s
final report.
It will not be surprising if the final report is not
made public until well after the target date of July
26 (the same day the Democratic Convention opens in
Boston). If the report does meet that target, it is
likely that it will appear in significantly truncated
form.