• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Clinton-Gorelick wall and the Clinton coverup

Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Unless you have been living under a rock for the last month or so you have heard the story of the able danger operation that is said to have identified five of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers (including the supposed ringleader Mohammad Atta) nearly a year before that fateful day of 2001. Furthermore, this information was blocked from being shared with the F.B.I. because of the wall that existed b/w that organization and the intelligent community as a result of the Clinton-Gorelick wall which was proposed by former deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick. So why would such an obviously idiotic policy be enacted in the first place? It is my contention that it was a direct result of Clinton attempting to block any serious investigation into the illegal campaign contributions given to him by agents of Red China (9-11 can be said to have been collateral damage in the Clinton ass saving campaign). So why was it that this information was not presented in the 9-11 commission report? Very simple because Jamie Gorelick was (as a member of the 911 commission) in an excellent position to block such inquiries. If you recall the 9-11 commission was a totally bi-partisan body, however, each party was able to select its own representatives in the commission. So why would the Democrats have selected Gorelick as a member of the commission knowing full well that she would be a major focus of any investigation of possible wrong doing by the Clinton administration? . . . can you say cover up any one? I knew that you could.
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If you will examine the record, in particular the 9-11 commission''s report, you'll see that "the wall" is not what it's reported to be by some hyperbolizers in the popular media. Rather than preventing sharing, it was misunderstandings of "the wall" that prevented sharing.

Given this, the rest of your theory falls.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Yes, but why would such a wall exist in the first place? Either it was intended as use for a coverup since day one or it was complete
incompetence. I mean, to force all info. to go directly through the president first would have helped serve to create the information overload which resulted in pertinent intel from going unnoticed amongst the back log of information. And you don't have to know the 9-11 commission report backwards to forwards to understand what the Clinton-Gorelick wall actually is all you have to do is read the Gorelick memo I'll look for a link.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Simon W. Moon said:
Given this, the rest of your theory falls.
To bad that's not a given here's the Gorelick memo in its entirety pay special attention to section three.

http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=659679

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh and Hunter S. Thompson kicks f****n ass nice avatar just figured I'd say that.

when the going gets weird the weird turn pro-Thompson

an apple a day keeps the Dr. away . . . s**t I am the Dr. - Thompson
 
Last edited:

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

cherokee

Devil Dog
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,486
Reaction score
789
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sorry guys but they ALL droppppped the ball on 9/11.
 

sargasm

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Unless you have been living under a rock for the last month or so you have heard the story of the able danger operation that is said to have identified five of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers (including the supposed ringleader Mohammad Atta) nearly a year before that fateful day of 2001. Furthermore, this information was blocked from being shared with the F.B.I. because of the wall that existed b/w that organization and the intelligent community as a result of the Clinton-Gorelick wall which was proposed by former deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick. So why would such an obviously idiotic policy be enacted in the first place? It is my contention that it was a direct result of Clinton attempting to block any serious investigation into the illegal campaign contributions given to him by agents of Red China (9-11 can be said to have been collateral damage in the Clinton ass saving campaign). So why was it that this information was not presented in the 9-11 commission report? Very simple because Jamie Gorelick was (as a member of the 911 commission) in an excellent position to block such inquiries. If you recall the 9-11 commission was a totally bi-partisan body, however, each party was able to select its own representatives in the commission. So why would the Democrats have selected Gorelick as a member of the commission knowing full well that she would be a major focus of any investigation of possible wrong doing by the Clinton administration? . . . can you say cover up any one? I knew that you could.
Yes, you are totally right, the clinton administration was building a "wall" to prevent intelligance from preventing 9/11.










Some people have too much time on their hands.
 

Missouri Mule

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
1,406
Reaction score
48
Location
Hot Springs, Arkansas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The only way this is going to be cleared up is to reconvene the 9/11 Commission and call in all the participants of the "Able Danger" group to give public testimony. What we are hearing flies directly in the face of such luminaries as Richard Clarke and other people blaming this on Bush or "intelligence" failures. This was not an intelligence failure. It was a political failure; specifically political corrrectness that has virtually brought common sense to a halt in this country for the past two decades. If you don't follow the official "party line" your head will be sawed off in a NY second (figuratively speaking of course.)
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
sargasm said:
Yes, you are totally right, the clinton administration was building a "wall" to prevent intelligance from preventing 9/11.










Some people have too much time on their hands.
I didn't say it was to prevent info from being shared on 9-11 it had to do with the illegal campaign contributions from agents of Red China.
 
Top Bottom