911 Subpoena Threat

To White House

10-26-3

(AFP) -- The White House could face court action to force it to hand over documents relating to the September 11 attacks.

 

The chairman of a commission investigating the September 11 attacks says he is prepared to subpoena some documents relevant to his probe from the White House, if it fails to turn them over within weeks, The New York Times reported in its Sunday edition.

 

Former New Jersey governor Thomas Kean told the newspaper the White House was continuing to withhold several highly classified intelligence documents.

 

Kean also said in an interview on Friday that he believed the bipartisan 10-member commission would soon be forced to issue subpoenas to other executive branch agencies because of continuing delays by the Bush administration in providing documents and other evidence needed by the panel, according to the report.

 

"Any document that has to do with this investigation cannot be beyond our reach," Kean is quoted by The Times as saying.

 

The remarks were his first explicit public warning to the White House that it risked a subpoena and a politically damaging courtroom showdown with the commission over access to the documents, including Oval Office intelligence reports that reached President Bush's desk in the weeks before the September 11 attacks, the paper said.

 

"I will not stand for it," Kean said. "That means that we will use every tool at our command to get hold of every document."

 

He said that while he had not directly threatened a subpoena in his recent conversations with the White House legal counsel, Alberto Gonzales, "it's always on the table, because they know that Congress in their wisdom gave us the power to subpoena, to use it if necessary," according to the report.

 

White House spokeswoman Ashley Snee said that the White House believed it was being fully cooperative with the commission. The Times quotes Snee as saying the White House hoped to meet all of the panel's demands for documents.

Got something to hide?

No doubt they're hiding all those documents that prove that 9-11 was a Bush/Israel/CIA false flag operation so that we could expand our empires with the conquering of...Afganistan and Iraq.

Oh what a rich bounty.

>>No doubt they're hiding all those documents that prove that 9-11 was a Bush/Israel/CIA false flag operation so that we could expand our empires with the conquering of...Afganistan and Iraq.<<

No one said that that was what they were trying to show by getting the documents. Of course you want to bring that up to try and "debunk" theories that haven't even been stated in THIS thread. The fact that ANYthing concerning 9/11 is hidden is unacceptable.

Let's just see if your boys cough up the papers, and after they find what they're looking for, you can kiss some more Bush.

I believe that George Bush should reveal the

documents the Saudis wanted him to release them.

does the reluctants to do so say to the

American Public that hehis adcministration had

something to do with the 911 tragedy.

"Barbara", that post is a joke.

"does the reluctants to do so say to the

American Public that hehis adcministration had

something to do with the 911 tragedy."

Yes. It's all the evidence we need. Hang him!

Let's see the damned evidence.

WE don't need no stinkin' evidence. We're the Indymediaites. We have our own ways to determine guilt apart from standard recognized practices.

"No one said that that was what they were trying to show by getting the documents. Of course you want to bring that up to try and "debunk" theories that haven't even been stated in THIS thread.



Fuck THIS thread. THIS thread like every other 9-11 thread on this site will always sink to the IMC LCD of the Bush / Israel/ CIA conspiracy lunacy. Give it time. This is IMC after all.



The fact that ANYthing concerning 9/11 is hidden is unacceptable. "

To a point I agree totally. That said, some info is potentially sensitive enough that it would be a national security risk to release it.

You are my favorite right-winger here, did you know that ? You can argue a point, and you can even concede that another's POV may be correct. That's why I like you. You just....argue with a little more integrity than others.

But all the 9/11 bullshit aside...

The weapons inspectors have said, once and for all seemingly, that there are no WMD, no materials to produce them, and that there hasn't been any extensive weapons work done since '91.

With that being said, do you think that since our move to war was based on the threat of WMD (and it was) and there are none, that our Gov't (we'll leave Bush out of it for now) made a HUGE mistake? And if so, who's to blame ?

If our "intelligence" goofed on info that sent 190,000 troops to Iraq, some of whom won't be coming back, then what makes anyone think that releasing the 9/11 papers would further endanger national security ? We've done that by going to Iraq and not finding anything. Let me know, brotha.

This is the Governments own investigative committee into 911 if anyone has a legitimate purpose in seeing ALL the available data it is them.

It is being hidden and kept away.

Why?

All the Kooks (shills) can post diversionary comments till the Cows come home and it does not change anything.

The Bush People are trying to prevent the FULL data from becoming available.

Why?

WHENEVER THIS HAS OCCURRED IN THE PAST (such as with the Pentagon Papers) it has meant Government misdeeds are being covered up.

It is not unreasonable to see the obvious.

Got something to hide?

Thanks. We can all go home now.

Past government cover-ups, and Pentagon papers aside, why would the Bush administration withold info from the 9/11 Investigative commitee ? The fact that they may have to subpoena to get the info is even more astonishing.

You don't have to show the American people the papers (as we've seen before) in the interests of national security, but why wouldn't you give ALL AVAILABLE documents and info to the people who were elected to be piecing this together. It seems totally suspect, that's all...

First of all, thanks for the "props". (thought I'd make the other guy happy and through in a little "jive").

"With that being said, do you think that since our move to war was based on the threat of WMD (and it was) and there are none, that our Gov't (we'll leave Bush out of it for now) made a HUGE mistake? And if so, who's to blame ? "

Here's what I think.

I've said all along that I believe from all evidence that Iraq certainly had WMD at some point close to the beginning of the war. Within a year or so. I don't beleive that He neccessarily had nukes or massive stockpiles of bio agents but I believe that the precursors were there. I beleive this simply because we know he had them in the past and ther eis no evidence of them being completely destroyed. There.

Whatever.

But I do think that Bsh and company did make a HUGE mistake in claiming that the war was over WMD.

I've always thought that the war was needed and justified simply to once and for all get rid of Sadam and preclude any potential for future aid to al queda et.al. I don't believe (with the evidence available) that Iraq had anything to do with 9-11, but because of 9-11 I think it's lunacy to allow a potential risk like a Sadam/ al queda cooperation to exist in the future. And the fact that such a tyrant would be taken out is simply icing on the cake.

The fuck up on Bush's part was to sell this whole thing on finding massive WMD which he had to have known was a longshot. I still believe that WMD by definition will or have been found but not enough to be considered a smoking gun.

I was never someone who feared a WMD direct attack from Iraq. That's simply right wing nonsense. But considering Sadam's direct support of groups like Hamas et. al., helping Al Queda with even logistical help is too much to risk.

And I don't by the old " They'd never help each other because Sadam and Bun laden hate each other..they don't see eye to eye on Islam" bullshit. People as ruthless as those two don't have many scrupples when it's time to seek aid and help.

So there's my two cents.

And believe me, it's hard not to be considered right wing when having even a remotely opposing view around here. The fact is is that when not confronted with such nonsensical shit as is often on this board I'm much less conservative than imagined.

And by the way, this is type of discussion is why I originally came here to begin with but it's very rare with all the flat earth and chemtrail folk abounding.

From what I read, the White House is parsing through the paperwork with the appropriate Nat'l Security agents to make sure that no material of a sensitive nature is being included, they have already delivered over 2000 pages of docs, and have told the committee they are getting them out as quickly as they can get thru past Nat'l Security. The main one's making noise are the Dems who are grasping for anything in the coming election cycle on which to hang their hat. When the whole thing comes out, which it will, there will be nothing there and they'll be embarrassed again. That this is "suspect" is not unusual to hear from the Hate Bush & Blame America First crowd.

Notice the long post on an issue off topic to the current question i.e., why is the Bush Government withholding information from it's own Investigatory Committee?

fresca in diversionary mode trying to spin the discussion off into an unproductive line.

Warren, it's time to take your meds.

I do agree with Fresca when he says that-and I will try and paraphrase-he comes here for intellectual conversation, and more often than not, hears some radical bullshit from some idiot-I agree TOTALLY.

But, again, when you say:

"I've always thought that the war was needed and justified simply to once and for all get rid of Sadam and preclude any potential for future aid to al queda et.al."...

Whether or not Saddam needed to go is seemingly, a moot point, or as you say "icing on the cake." I still side with you there though.

But for my question again-Where does the blame for tens of billions of dollars used in Iraq, 350 lives lost, and no apparent end in sight to the conflict, fall ?

"But for my question again-Where does the blame for tens of billions of dollars used in Iraq, 350 lives lost, and no apparent end in sight to the conflict, fall ?"

I blame Saddam. UN 17 resolutions and he thumbed his nose at all of them. His neighbors wanted him gone, rest assured of that, they didn't like him around. I blame the Baathists and other militant groups over there now who don't want to give up their power to rule the people of Iraq with an iron fist. And just because we don't see an end now doesn't mean it's not right around the corner. No one ever said ridding the world of terrorism and the states that sponsor them would be a weekend job.

"Notice the long post on an issue off topic to the current question i.e., why is the Bush Government withholding information from it's own Investigatory Committee? "

Damned if I do and damned if I don't.

Please notice that I was directly answering a question from Brandon T.

So...brandon

"But for my question again-Where does the blame for tens of billions of dollars used in Iraq, 350 lives lost, and no apparent end in sight to the conflict, fall ?

"

Well, in as much as I feel that the war was in our best interests ultimately, I don't think anyone is to blame. I think that the way the war was "sold" and justified to the world and us was wrong and that Bush and compnay are to blame for degrading our credibility. But the action itself I have no problem with.

As far as casualties go, I think they're awful. I wish we could fight a war somehow and not lose any troops . But how do you do that? The whole notion of, don't go to war because you might lose troops is like a snake eating it's tail. Of course troops will be lost. That's what happens in war. I understand being against the war. But to be against war because it's so much like...war, is silly.

I hope that answered your question.

BTW caveat emptor. If you can manage the scroll bar on the right side of your browser you'll find that I flat out addressed the main topic about White House stonewalling of intelligence further up on the thread.

Sorry! I hadn't taken my meds today.

Warren V. Palin esquire, Caveat Emptor esquire

Repost

Let's see the godamned evidence.

I don't have any goddamned evidence I told ya. I'm a liberal. We don't need no fuckin' evidence!