Congressman Holt Introduces Anthrax Commission Legislation - Modeled After 9/11 Commission
Submitted by GeorgeWashington on Wed, 03/04/2009 - 2:29pm
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2009/03/congressman-holt-introduce...
Congressman Holt wants an anthrax investigation modeled on the 9/11 Commission.
Senators Leahy and White house want a torture investigation modeled on the 9/11 Commission.
But - according to the 9/11 Commission itself - the whole thing was a joke:
- The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton) now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political considerations
- The co-chairs also said that the CIA (and likely the White House) "obstructed our investigation"
- Indeed, they said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free subscription required)
- 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only "the first draft" of history
- 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn't have access . . . ."
- 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting"
- Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up"
- 9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said that “We purposely put together a staff that had – in a way - conflicts of interest"
- The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff's inquiry, said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described .... The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years.... This is not spin. This is not true."
And see this.
Are we going to fall for yet another whitewash?
- GeorgeWashington's blog
- Login to post comments
Holt.
A couple years back, Congressman Holt introduced legislation about voting machines that would have required voting machines to deliver a paper trail, but the software and databases would have remained unaltered, so his legislation was ultimately deemed cosmetic.
I wouldn't put a cosmetic commission past him.
Agreed, but it is
Agreed, but it is something.
________________
JFK on secrecy and the press
Holt is also making a 3rd attempt at
institutionalizing a corruptable, non-accountable voting system- BradBlog.com 2/20/09:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6932
New Version of Holt's Election Reform Bill Would Institutionalize Touch-Screen Voting, Secret Software
Bill 'improved' to require paper ballots, but they may be marked or printed by computer devices which offer most of the same dangers as current Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) devices...
Additional concerns remain in the previously-defeated, newly-rewritten draft version of the landmark legislation...
There hasn't been any news on Grassley's Anthrax investigation, has there?
http://911reports.com
Political skill lies in adapting to new conditions as they arise
I agree with all of the negative comments about this commission or Leahy's idea or Congress or the US gov't. It's true--the process is a total sham usually producing only lies, disinfo, and cover-ups.
We all know that.
It's the only process we have, though, and occasionally it actually does work. We have moved the political process to the point where there is talk of investigative commissions, so why not take the next step and--despite our total cynicism-- encourage the formation of these bodies?
I have not looked into the Holt thing yet, but Leahy's proposed commission seems pretty good to me because it may very well allow for unexpected testimony from people who want to clear their records.
I agree with the cynicism, but do not think it should render us passive with regard to these new opportunities. Political conditions necessarily change all the time. Political skill requires adapting to new conditions when they arise and making the most of them.
________________
JFK on secrecy and the press
It's possible that
"modeled after the 9/11 Commission" is just code for the public and the opposition, a phrase that suggests "trustworthy" for those parties.
Though, Rep, you make a good point about Holt's electronic voting bill.
Contact the Old Man.
http://holt.house.gov/contact.shtml
Let him know what you think and what's on your mind.
Edit: Actually his form allows you to successfully submit messages from anywhere in the U.S., but I just got sent an email saying I wasn't in his district, so this might not be the best method. He probably has another email address somewhere where staff reads through them. We'll see.
blood pressure
Boy do I feel my blood pressure rise when I read the words "independent 9/11-style commission."
Is Holt SERIOUSLY not aware that the heads of the 9/11 Commission wrote a book stating that it was "set up to fail"?
Jesus.
"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
Modeled After THIS????
http://www.911blogger.com/node/19520
The 9/11 Commission, which you want to model your commission after, is a perfect example of that flawed process.
The 9/11 Commission was mandated to follow the facts surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 to wherever they might lead and make national security recommendations based upon those facts. Sadly, prior to even beginning their investigation, like you, the 9/11 Commissioners agreed amongst themselves that their role was to /fact find, not fault find/.
This decision resulted in individuals not being held accountable for their specific failures. These people were shown to be incompetent in the 9/11 Commission’s Final Report but were left in their positions, or worse, promoted. No one should be allowed to make this compromise on behalf of the American people. How can any agency be deemed fixed or reformed if the people working there are inept? How can anyone feel safer?
At the 9/11 Commission hearings, little actual evidence was ever produced. Many individuals were not sworn in, critical witnesses were either not called to testify or were permitted to dictate the parameters of their own questioning, pertinent questions were omitted and there was little follow-up. Whistleblower testimony was suppressed or avoided all together. The National Security Agency, an intelligence agency that is responsible for the collection and analysis of foreign communications and foreign intelligence, was barely investigated at all.
With the narrative of the 9/11 Commission’s final report predetermined and with the preexisting intention to never hold anyone accountable in place, the 9/11 Commission was doomed to fail as a real investigation.
The end result of the 9/11 Commission’s work was that some of the recommendations that they produced were in fact, based on distortions and omissions. Since their mandate of a complete accounting was ignored, the recommendations were incomplete at best.
There was clearly no desire on the part of Congress to force the Commission to meet its legislative mandate. Accordingly, there were no repercussions for the fact that the investigation and its recommendations were incomplete. It could be surmised that holding no one accountable was more important than uncovering and disclosing the truth. This could compromise the future safety of American citizens.
Why then would you want to model another Commission after it? Why would you want another Commission at all?
9-11 Commission style
may simply be a buzz word for another cover up. They certainly need a cover up, because the anthrax attack demonstrates that the government was involved in the events of 9-11. It's a blatant and embarrassing "smoking gun."
A really excellent post, GW.
It's great to have all of this information summarized so concisely, and in a timely manner, given that new commissions appear intent on patterning themselves after a failure. Thank you for this!