Report: Berger Hid Classifed Documents


By LARRY MARGASAK, Associated Press Writer
Thursday, December 21, 2006

07:59 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) -- President Clinton's national security adviser removed classified documents from the National Archives, hid them under a construction trailer and later tried to find the trash collector to retrieve them, the agency's internal watchdog said Wednesday.

The report was issued more than a year after Sandy Berger pleaded guilty and received a criminal sentence for removing the documents.

Berger took the documents in the fall of 2003 while working to prepare himself and Clinton administration witnesses for testimony to the Sept. 11 commission. Berger was authorized as the Clinton administration's representative to make sure the commission got the correct classified materials.

Berger's lawyer, Lanny Breuer, said in a statement that the contents of all the documents exist today and were made available to the commission.

But Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., outgoing chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, said he's not convinced that the Archives can account for all the documents taken by Berger. Davis said working papers of National Security Council staff members are not inventoried by the Archives.

"There is absolutely no way to determine if Berger swiped any of these original documents. Consequently, there is no way to ever know if the 9/11 Commission received all required materials," Davis said.

Berger pleaded guilty to unlawfully removing and retaining classified documents. He was fined $50,000, ordered to perform 100 hours of community service and was barred from access to classified material for three years.

Officials told The Associated Press at the time of the thefts that the documents were highly classified and included critical assessments about the Clinton administration's handling of the millennium terror threats as well as identification of America's terror vulnerabilities at airports and seaports.

Inspector General Paul Brachfeld reported that National Archives employees spotted Berger bending down and fiddling with something white around his ankles.

The employees did not feel at the time there was enough information to confront someone of Berger's stature, the report said.

Later, when Berger was confronted by Archives officials about the missing documents, he lied by saying he did not take them, the report said.

Brachfeld's report included an investigator's notes, taken during an interview with Berger. The notes dramatically described Berger's removal of documents during an Oct. 2, 2003, visit to the Archives.

Berger took a break to go outside without an escort while it was dark. He had taken four documents in his pockets.

"He headed toward a construction area. ... Mr. Berger looked up and down the street, up into the windows of the Archives and the DOJ (Department of Justice), and did not see anyone," the interview notes said.

He then slid the documents under a construction trailer, according to the inspector general. Berger acknowledged that he later retrieved the documents from the construction area and returned with them to his office.

"He was aware of the risk he was taking," the inspector general's notes said. Berger then returned to the Archives building without fearing the documents would slip out of his pockets or that staff would notice that his pockets were bulging.

The notes said Berger had not been aware that Archives staff had been tracking the documents he was provided because of earlier suspicions from previous visits that he was removing materials. Also, the employees had made copies of some documents.

In October 2003, the report said, an Archives official called Berger to discuss missing documents from his visit two days earlier. The investigator's notes said, "Mr. Berger panicked because he realized he was caught."

The notes said that Berger had "destroyed, cut into small pieces, three of the four documents. These were put in the trash."

After the trash had been picked up, Berger "tried to find the trash collector but had no luck," the notes said.

Significant portions of the inspector general's report were redacted to protect privacy or national security.


This movement is NON-PARTISAN.

The Time For Debate Is Over

You don't make it into high

You don't make it into high office or a high position unless you're a scumbag.

The only thing is, Democrats

The only thing is, Democrats are amateurs when it comes to criminal behavior like this. Berger was downright stupid. Republicans, however, had an excellent learning experience called Watergate.


Ironically, I think O'Reilly asked one of the best questions to Barrett. If 9/11was an inside job, then why isn't the anti-Bush press covering it? Why hasn't this been front page and all over the news? Barrett responded to this question that 9/11 truth issues have been covered, citing the example of BBC report on alleged hijackers still living. But in a sense, that didn't answer O'Reilly's question. I hoped Barrett would have replied that the media has not been reporting the 'biggest' story in the world because they are in essence complicit in the cover-up. 9/11 truth is working against all major political parts -- Dem and Repub and corporate controlled media are complicit. It's clear that both Dems and Repubs are covering-up, willfully ignoring the voluminous evidence so freely discussed here and elsewhere. The crux for this movement is therefore, breaking into the major media coverage of 9/11.

Why hasn't this been front page and all over the news?

Gee, I don't know Bill. I was hoping you would tell me. For instance, where's Fox News' coverage of the family members calling for a new investigation at the National Press Club on 9/11/2006? They were right across the hall from Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton, and none of your crackerjack reporters were able to find them?


You're asking me why the mainstream media isn't covering this after you just finished focusing on the most important news of Miss USA?

That's what I wished Kevin would have said.

The Time For Debate Is Over

I would have...

Given my left ___ to see the first one.

The Time For Debate Is Over


That would have been an awesome responce!

You Bet

You bet the media is complicit in the cover-up. They are as guilty as Bush and co. With an honest media there would be no need for a truth movement. The power elite have complete control of the media. It's their biggest asset. Without it they can do nothing. We are the new media. Without the internet we wouldn't have a chance. Because of the net we will win this thing. Also, don't pin your hopes on the Democrats. They are just as complicit as the Republicans. They are just different sides of the same coin. What we Americans need is a complete house cleaning. The US government is the most corrupt government in history. Sad but true.

In the great little

In the great little 20-minute beginner's intro video to 9/11 called "Secret Evil of 9/11", there's a clip of Sandi Berger saying:

"September 11, uh, the extraordinary events, tragic events of September 11, did create a new reality. As with every event, there are opportunities that arise from it."

See it here
Secret Evil part 2, about 40 seconds in

and here, at 11:32

or at !

(shameless plug for my own domain)

///////////////////// - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Yes, 9/11 is a non-partisan

Yes, 9/11 is a non-partisan issue. Criminal elements of both the Clinton and Bush Administrations were involved.

What is the significance of

What is the significance of this? What does it mean?

good question

good question


Another "unanswered question." Although, I seem to remember mention of Sandy Berger having Saudi Ties...

The Time For Debate Is Over


From Sibel's latest piece...

Included in ATC’s management, board of directors, and advisors; in addition to Turkish individuals of ‘interest;’ is a dizzying array of U.S. individuals. The ATC is led by Ret. General Brent Scowcroft, who serves as Chairman of the Board; George Perlman of Lockheed Martin, the Executive Vice President; other board members include: Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, Ret. General Elmer Pendleton, Ret. General Joseph Ralston, Ret. Col. Preston Hughes, Alan Colegrove of Northrop Grumman, Frank Carlucci of Carlyle Group, Christine Vick of Cohen Group, Representative Robert Wexler, Former Rep. Ed Whitfield…Basically many formers; statesmen, ‘dime a dozen generals,’ and representatives.

Granted, this doesn't answer your question, but it's interesting nevertheless.

The Time For Debate Is Over

ABC News muses if Damascus attack was false flag

While they dont use the word "false flag", this new ABC report muses if the attack on a US embassy in Syria was a false flag attack:

Of course, it's more anti Arab proaganda, but still interesting to see them cover "theories".

yeah, i saw that on

yeah, i saw that on Nightline last night actually. they said that Syria "let it happen" and then went in for the kill, hahahaha. so ironic.

Good one, Steve

From the comments below that story:

""This is one of the most closely guarded areas in Damascus in an authoritarian state. It's so unlikely that something like this, of this nature and scale, could happen," said David Schenker of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy."

The Pentagon is the most heavily defended building in the USA. How was it that a hijacked aircraft was allowed to impact it?

Posted by: Steve Lane | Dec 20, 2006 4:02:17 PM

damn, that is a good one and

damn, that is a good one and im surprised it even showed up there. somebody is sleeping at

DALLAS, TX: Where JFK's head was blown off and home of W library

DALLAS (AP) -- The committee studying where to place the George W. Bush Presidential Library said Thursday it is entering into discussions with Southern Methodist University.

First lady Laura Bush's alma mater had been rumored to be the front-runner ahead of the two other finalists, Baylor University near the couple's Crawford ranch and the University of Dallas.

The library's site selection committee said it was entering into its next phase of deliberations and was entering into "further discussions" with SMU, according to a statement by committee member Donald L. Evans, former commerce secretary.

A final decision is expected in a few months, said Evans' spokesman Taylor Griffin.

SMU officials planned to comment at an afternoon news conference.

SMU has never publicly discussed its library proposal or other aspects of trying to land the library. Officials have said they have several site options for the library if the school were chosen.

The 11,000-student school bought a condominium complex as a possible library complex site but then was sued last year by two men accusing SMU of intimidating residents to make them vacate.

Earlier this month a judge ruled that SMU has clear title to the condominium complex, clearing the way for the university to evict the remaining residents and tear down the condominiums.

Bush's library is expected to cost at least $200 million, financed with private donations. The library is expected to draw 500,000 visitors annually and bring millions to the local economy.

I feel sorry for the future

I feel sorry for the future janitors who will have to clean off the endless shower of phlegm laden spit at various pictures of George W. Bush.

Bush Presidential Library?

.. Doesn't it sound a little sacrilegious? How would they commemorate his legacy? By misspelling the section labels: Histiry, Polytiks? By conducting airport security searches at the door?

What else could be possibly named after Bush? Perhaps a criminal justice center? Or a human rights organization?

9/11 Truther Next British Prime Minister?

Meacher set to announce he's running in Labour leadership race; could anti-war rebel really stand a chance?