Why the pre-Patriot Act “Wall” did not take the fall for 9/11: Those who read the government’s report of how our nation came to be attacked on September 11th, 2001, may have to rethink their conclusions. At the time of the 9/11 Commission’s work, citizens were cautioned about the make-up of the commission itself. The Wall Street Journal editorialized about Gorelick’s Wall, believing that commissioner Jamie Gorelick belonged in the witness chair instead of on the commission. Everyone knew why she was a member; to protect Gorelick’s Wall from taking the fall for 9/11. The tactic succeeded for the Clintonistas.
The Commissioner belongs in the witness chair
Thursday, April 15, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
We predicted Democrats would use the 9/11 Commission for partisan purposes, and that much of the press would oblige. But color us astonished that barely anyone appreciates the significance of the bombshell Attorney General John Ashcroft dropped on the hearings Tuesday. If Jamie Gorelick were a Republican, you can be sure our colleagues in the Fourth Estate would be leading the chorus of complaint that the Commission’s objectivity has been fatally compromised by a member who was also one of the key personalities behind the failed antiterror policy that the Commission has under scrutiny. Where’s the outrage?
At issue is the pre-Patriot Act “wall” that prevented communication between intelligence agents and criminal investigators–a wall, Mr. Ashcroft said, that meant “the old national intelligence system in place on September 11 was destined to fail.” The Attorney General explained:
“In the days before September 11, the wall specifically impeded the investigation into Zacarias Moussaoui, Khalid al-Midhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi. After the FBI arrested Moussaoui, agents became suspicious of his interest in commercial aircraft and sought approval for a criminal warrant to search his computer. The warrant was rejected because FBI officials feared breaching the wall.”
The New York Times is now reporting that the 9/11 Commission did not include “Able Danger” in its report because the information was not consistent with what they knew about Mohammed Atta. Oh, how convenient. The Commission, has now been found out and has confessed the truth about Operation “Able Danger’s” inability to surmount the Clinton administration’s “Gorelick’s Wall”.
Michelle Malkin explains “Abel Danger” as a U.S. Army data mining project “which identified Mohammed Atta and several other hijackers as potential terrorists prior to the September 11 attacks. The Able Danger team recommended that Atta and the other suspected terrorists be deported. That recommendation, however, was not shared with law enforcement officials, presumably because of the “wall“ between intelligence activities and domestic law enforcement.”
Captain Ed of Captain’s Quarters writes that the esteemed 9/11 Commission did not mention the U.S. Army’s “Able Danger” operation even one time in its report. He continues that the commission’s “report never included the fact that the ‘wall’ for which Commission member Jamie S. Gorelick had so much responsibility specifically contributed to Atta’s ability to come and go as he pleased, building the teams that would kill almost 3,000 Americans”.
Let’s not forget former Clinton National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, who, while the commission was in full grear, was “researching” at the National Archives. He became so emersed in the materials that many of the classified documents found their way into the hidden folds and wrinkles of his underwear. That was so bizarre that he was given only a slap on the wrist for his “misbehavior”. Now the psychiatrist, Dr. Sanity, wonders too about “ Sandy ‘docs in his socks’ Berger’s inexplicable actions in removing classified documents at the National Archives at about the same time as the 9/11 Commission was reviewing documents associated with terrorism.”