9/11 Commission Report Omits Relevant Information
Much has been made of the supposed failure of the Bush Administration and others to “connect-the-dots” regarding intelligence available prior to the attacks of September 11, as if doing so would have prevented it. Maybe. Maybe Not. The fact is that 19 terrorists boarded 4 airliners armed with little more than box cutters and a willingness to die for their cause. It is incredibly difficult to stop a group of terrorists with such an intense motivation and determination to complete their assignment. Not impossible, but not at all guaranteed, regardless of the steps taken to prevent it.
I have always felt the 9/11 Commission would amount to little more than an organized witch-hunt. They had the benefit of hindsight and used it, in my opinion, to place blame instead of solve problems. However, it now appears they have withheld evidence that should have been included in their report. They didn’t fail to connect-the-dots; they just failed to include the dots that didn’t fit within their preconceived notions.
The Sept. 11 commission knew military intelligence officials had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as a member of al-Qaida who might be part of U.S.-based terror cell more than a year before the terror attacks but decided not to include that in its final report, a spokesman acknowledged Thursday.
Al Felzenberg, who had been the commission's chief spokesman, said Tuesday the panel was unaware of intelligence specifically naming Atta. But he said subsequent information provided Wednesday confirmed that the commission had been aware of the intelligence.
It did not make it into the final report because the information was not consistent with what the commission knew about Atta's whereabouts before the attacks, Felzenberg said
I suppose it’s fairly simple to connect-the-dots when you can pick and choose which dots to use! It takes a lot of nerve to accuse others of missing links that may have prevented 9/11 only to turn around and omit relevant information from the final report. I think they call this hypocrisy.
Michelle Malkin notes:
The 9/11 Commission was supposed to give the
I think it is now safe to assume that the 9/11 Commission was nothing more than an exercise in hypocrisy and a waste of taxpayer money. What little credibility the commission had, has now vanished as a result of the swollen egos and self-righteousness of its members.