Damning 9/11 Report Held Till After Election

And it’s going to reveal that everything Richard Clarke said about this administration’s negligence towards terrorism is true.

It’s hard to know what to say anymore…who cares what they do to America, the important thing is that they win the election right?

What’s really sad is that people praise Bush because we haven’t been attacked since 9/11 because he’s so “tough on terror” and “the war in Iraq has made us safer” and that’s his strongest position in the election. Yet if we get attacked again before the election, supposedly people will rally behind him!? How f***ed-up would that be?

Of course the reality will be the emergence of Bin Laden right before the election, no doubt. The rumor is we’re in possible negotiations with China for his handover…

Either of those two scenerios should automatically lose him the election. If we get attacked then nothing has really changed since 9/11 (except for average American citizens being arrested for carrying “bookmarks” on planes or wearing the wrong t-shirt that is)…and at this point the Bin Laden thing would just be too STUPIDLY obvious…to at least 54% of us anyway.

The 9/11 Secret in the CIA’s Back Pocket
By Robert Scheer
The Los Angeles Times
Tuesday 19 October 2004

The agency is withholding a damning report that points at senior officials.

It is shocking: The Bush administration is suppressing a CIA report on 9/11 until after the election, and this one names names. Although the report by the inspector general’s office of the CIA was completed in June, it has not been made available to the congressional intelligence committees that mandated the study almost two years ago.

“It is infuriating that a report which shows that high-level people were not doing their jobs in a satisfactory manner before 9/11 is being suppressed,” an intelligence official who has read the report told me, adding that “the report is potentially very embarrassing for the administration, because it makes it look like they weren’t interested in terrorism before 9/11, or in holding people in the government responsible afterward.”

When I asked about the report, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee, said she and committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) sent a letter 14 days ago asking for it to be delivered. “We believe that the CIA has been told not to distribute the report,” she said. “We are very concerned.”

According to the intelligence official, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity, release of the report, which represents an exhaustive 17-month investigation by an 11-member team within the agency, has been “stalled.” First by acting CIA Director John McLaughlin and now by Porter J. Goss, the former Republican House member (and chairman of the Intelligence Committee) who recently was appointed CIA chief by President Bush.

The official stressed that the report was more blunt and more specific than the earlier bipartisan reports produced by the Bush-appointed Sept. 11 commission and Congress.

“What all the other reports on 9/11 did not do is point the finger at individuals, and give the how and what of their responsibility. This report does that,” said the intelligence official. “The report found very senior-level officials responsible.”

By law, the only legitimate reason the CIA director has for holding back such a report is national security. Yet neither Goss nor McLaughlin has invoked national security as an explanation for not delivering the report to Congress.

“It surely does not involve issues of national security,” said the intelligence official.

“The agency directorate is basically sitting on the report until after the election,” the official continued. “No previous director of CIA has ever tried to stop the inspector general from releasing a report to the Congress, in this case a report requested by Congress.”

None of this should surprise us given the Bush administration’s great determination since 9/11 to resist any serious investigation into how the security of this nation was so easily breached. In Bush’s much ballyhooed war on terror, ignorance has been bliss.

The president fought against the creation of the Sept. 11 commission, for example, agreeing only after enormous political pressure was applied by a grass-roots movement led by the families of those slain.

And then Bush refused to testify to the commission under oath, or on the record. Instead he deigned only to chat with the commission members, with Vice President Dick Cheney present, in a White House meeting in which commission members were not allowed to take notes. All in all, strange behavior for a man who seeks reelection to the top office in the land based on his handling of the so-called war on terror.

In September, the New York Times reported that several family members met with Goss privately to demand the release of the CIA inspector general’s report. “Three thousand people were killed on 9/11, and no one has been held accountable,” 9/11 widow Kristen Breitweiser told the paper.

The failure to furnish the report to Congress, said Harman, "fuels the perception that no one is being held accountable. It is unacceptable that we don’t have [the report]; it not only disrespects Congress but it disrespects the American people."

The stonewalling by the Bush administration and the failure of Congress to gain release of the report have, said the intelligence source, “led the management of the CIA to believe it can engage in a cover-up with impunity. Unless the public demands an accounting, the administration and CIA’s leadership will have won and the nation will have lost.”


And all this should surprise exactly who?

So this whole article is based on an interview with one anonymous “intelligence official” and one Democratic Congresswoman speculating?

Come back when there’s something to this story.


BTW, this is an opinion column, not a news story:

Perhaps the columnist will turn reporter and unearth some evidence for his claims?]

Wasn’t the LA Times one of the papers that got caught making shit up and publishing it as news?

So, let’s see here - After the election we will have a draft, higher gas prices, the truth about 9/11, and in January - privatized Soc. Sec.

When does the killing of the oldest male child begin?

If Bush loses the election, will the evil man that he is become manifest in some final act of treachery?

I think someone has their foil hat on too tight.

This may be your October surprise… someone at the CIA leaks the report to the press.

Senior intelligence officers are said to be ‘at war’ with Team Bush for the way the CIA has been scapegoated for 9-11 by the White House. Think that’s good for America? Think that’s good for Shrub’s political career?

I’m guessing the report slams Condi Rice pretty hard (she’s clearly incompetent as National Security Advisor) and John Ashcroft (who told acting FBI head to stop bugging him with warnings about Al Qaeda, pre-9-11)