White House Trying to Block Congressional Report on 9/11

[Dissident Dan]

Senior White House officials have been classying huge sections of the 800-pages report on intelligence leading up to 9/11 that was commissioned jointly by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/907379.asp?0cv=KA01

 

[Zero]

And even congressional staffers close to the process say it is unclear whether the administration’s resistance to public disclosure reflects fear of political damage or simply an ingrained “culture of secrecy” that permeates the intelligence community—and has strong proponents at the highest levels of the White House.

That's the Bush cabal...everything must be secret...because you never know when they'll need to lie about something!

 

[kyle_soule]

That's the Bush cabal...everything must be secret...because you never know when they'll need to lie about something!

...or maybe you don't know what they know and, more likely, they are keeping it secret (imagine this) for a reason!

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
...or maybe you don't know what they know and, more likely, they are keeping it secret (imagine this) for a reason!

Maybe you believe that...but why are they trying to clasify things that have already been said in public? Seems like they are trying to edit history.

 

[russ_watters]

And even congressional staffers close to the process say it is unclear whether the administration’s resistance to public disclosure reflects fear of political damage or simply an ingrained “culture of secrecy” that permeates the intelligence community—and has strong proponents at the highest levels of the White House.

Well there's some nice liberal media spin - they ignore the possibility that the information is being classified because it is sensitive information.

I'm not naive enough to think that's the whole reason, but certainly it is part of the reason.

...but why are they trying to clasify things that have already been said in public?

Unless you've read the report and the information that they classified in the report, that's an ASSUMPTION on your part, Zero.

 

[damgo]

^^^ It's not a liberal thing, alas, looks like standard CYA tactics.

Graham is “increasingly frustrated” by the administration’s “unwillingness to release what he regards as important information the public should have about 9-11,” a spokesman said. In Graham’s view, the Bush administration isn’t protecting legitimate issues of national security but information that could be a political “embarrassment,” the aide said. Graham, who last year served as Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, recently told NEWSWEEK: “There has been a cover-up of this.”

Graham’s stand may not be terribly surprising, given that the Florida Democrat is running for president and is seeking to use the issue himself politically. But he has found a strong ally in House Intelligence Committee Chairman Goss, a staunch Republican (and former CIA officer) who in the past has consistently defended the administration’s handling of 9-11 issues and is considered especially close to Cheney.

“I find this process horrendously frustrating,” Goss said in an interview. He was particularly piqued that the administration was refusing to declassify material that top intelligence officials had already testified about. “Senior intelligence officials said things in public hearings that they [administration officials] don’t want us to put in the report,” said Goss. “That’s not something I can rationally accept without further public explanation.”

Unlike Graham, Goss insists there are no political “gotchas” in the report, only a large volume of important information about the performance and shortcomings of U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies prior to September 11.

And even congressional staffers close to the process say it is unclear whether the administration’s resistance to public disclosure reflects fear of political damage or simply an ingrained “culture of secrecy” that permeates the intelligence community—and has strong proponents at the highest levels of the White House.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Zero
Maybe you believe that...but why are they trying to clasify things that have already been said in public? Seems like they are trying to edit history.

If it is already public knowledge, why is anybody concerned with its classification?

 

[Dissident Dan]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
If it is already public knowledge, why is anybody concerned with its classification?

Ask the bush administration people who classified it.

Russ, it's not spin. Anybody and everybody should be alarmed by this. They classified huge sections of it. They classified the part about the Phoenix Memo. There is no legitimate reason for that.

 

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Dissident Dan
Ask the bush administration people who classified it.

Russ, it's not spin. Anybody and everybody should be alarmed by this. They classified huge sections of it. They classified the part about the Phoenix Memo. There is no legitimate reason for that.

Alarmed, over already made public information? This doesn't make sense!

Would you call for alarm if they classified Einsteins papers on relativity?

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
Alarmed, over already made public information? This doesn't make sense!

Would you call for alarm if they classified Einsteins papers on relativity?

You know that if the government tried to suppress it, you would be up in arms too. On the other hand, we saw what happened with Nixon and his overwhelming urge to suppress information...and Bush is his spiritual child.

 

[Dissident Dan]

If they tried to suppress distribution and/or reading of Einstein's papers on Relativity (or Newton's work on gravity or Calculus (or Leibneiz's (sp?)), I would most definitely be alarmed and enraged. That would make me very scared as it would give me some insight into the mindset of our leaders.

I will also say that there is stuff in the report which hasn't been exposed to the public. I used the fact that some of it has already been exposed to the public to refute claims that they have good reasons for classifying the report.

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by Dissident Dan
If they tried to suppress distribution and/or reading of Einstein's papers on Relativity (or Newton's work on gravity or Calculus (or Leibneiz's (sp?)), I would most definitely be alarmed and enraged. That would make me very scared as it would give me some insight into the mindset of our leaders.

Would it? I've heard that Eisntein himself seriously considered supressing that information. If the government thought they could prevent the A-Bomb from ever coming into existence, would you know that was their reason for covering up Einstein's work? I'm just saying, don't be too quick to judge when you don't have all the facts. There may be information in that report that would comprimise intelligence sources, reveal technologies or methodologies, or expose the gaps in our defenses to a potential attacker in ways you are unable to see.

The fact that you don't see how this information might create risk is actually a good thing. So long as you are unable to see how this information could be used against the US, our would-be attackers will be unable to see it, as well.

 

[Hurkyl]

If it is already public knowledge, why is anybody concerned with its classification?

Public disclosure is not grounds for declassification. You don't abandon all hopes of security just because of a couple little violations here and there. For example, you still use passwords when running windows, don't you?

 

[Zero]

Hmmmm...the problem is, as many of us see it, is that every time that there is suspicion that Bush's administration screwed something up, they work double hard to make the evidence disappear, either by claiming national security, or executive privilege.


I think in 30 yeahs, we'll know the truth...unless the records disappear permanently

 

[Dissident Dan]

Originally posted by LURCH
Would it? I've heard that Eisntein himself seriously considered supressing that information. If the government thought they could prevent the A-Bomb from ever coming into existence, would you know that was their reason for covering up Einstein's work? I'm just saying, don't be too quick to judge when you don't have all the facts. There may be information in that report that would comprimise intelligence sources, reveal technologies or methodologies, or expose the gaps in our defenses to a potential attacker in ways you are unable to see.

What did Relativity have to do with the A-bomb? I know that Einstein realized the E=mc^2 relationship, but was that part of Relativity? Anyway, if whatever body of work led to the knowledge to create an A-Bomb was classified to prevent the A-Bomb from being created, I'm not sure if I would have a problem with that, only because Einstein I don't believe that Einstein was working for the government, and that has some implications for how the government is allowed to intrude on civilians.

Anyway, with the real situation at hand, we have an example of the stuff that they're trying to cover up--the Phoenix Memo. We have Democratic Senator Bob Graham and Republican Representative Porter Goss both wanting this report made available. I don't think that they would want that if it had information that would be dangerous to our security or whatnot if revealed. Goss said, "I find this process horrendously frustrating." The article also mentions that they classified or are trying to classify (I'm not sure of which) testimony from public hearings!

In the words of Goss, “That’s not something I can rationally accept without further public explanation.”

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Hurkyl
Public disclosure is not grounds for declassification. You don't abandon all hopes of security just because of a couple little violations here and there. For example, you still use passwords when running windows, don't you?

This is a case where 'everyone' knows the info, but there is a push to keep it out of the public record...that's something that needs to be looked at closely.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

" [Dan]
If they tried to suppress distribution and/or reading of Einstein's papers on Relativity (or Newton's work on gravity or Calculus (or Leibneiz's (sp?)), I would most definitely be alarmed and enraged. That would make me very scared as it would give me some insight into the mindset of our leaders.
"

There are plenty of schools where fundamental principles of biology are suppressed, to please a political base.

" [Dan]
What did Relativity have to do with the A-bomb? I know that Einstein realized the E=mc^2 relationship, but was that part of Relativity? "

Yep.

" [Zero]
This is a case where 'everyone' knows the info, but there is a push to keep it out of the public record...that's something that needs to be looked at closely."

If senior intelligence officials have already spoken publicly, why can't they (the curious) use those records?

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
[B

If senior intelligence officials have already spoken publicly, why can't they (the curious) use those records? [/B]

I would suppose(and this is conjecture, but I know it is possible) that if there is a further investigation, only certain types of records would be admissible for review. Transcripts of discussions may not carry as much weight as the 'official' results of the investigation.

 

[Dissident Dan]

I have a big problem with people trying to cover up the past or change it. Our "Ministy of Truth" at work. And, even though there are parts that were already released, that doesn't mean that it's o.k. to cover it up, because people may have already found out about it, because
1) It limits the number of people who have accessed that info. If the report is made public, more people will hear about it that haven't already.
2) Like I believe I already said, it is indicative of their intentions in the cover-up, as the already-disclosed information is information that does not warrant classification.
3) Even the people who have already heard parts will probably be more likely to forget than they would if this report was unclassified and reported on.

There are probably more valid reasons to oppose the classification, but that's all I have for now.