PDA

View Full Version : CAUSE and EFFECT


05-20-2004, 09:56 AM
The following information provides a VERY VERY good illuminating look at the CAUSE and EFFECT that I (and others) have been referencing as we discuss the latest Iraq/9-11/etc. issues.

You will note (and the statements CAN be verified independently!!) that it was one of the CURRENT 9-11 Commission members who - as a member of the (Gasp) CLINTON ADMINSTRATION..

HAMSTRUNG the FBI from getting the data they needed.
MADE IT IMOSSIBLE for the FBI to KNOW what was going on
MAKES IT CURRENTLY VERY HARD to accurately deal with KNOWN terrorist States

I am ONLY sorry that Ashcroft DID NOT name GORELICK PERSONALLY.. it would have put it ON THE RECORD!

once again.. we see the WONDERFUL 'HARD LEFT LIBERALS' who made it IMPOSSIBLE for 'those mean, hateful, nasty, Republican/Conservatives to DO THEIR JOB!

THANK YOU!! On behalf of the thousands who died.. THANK YOU JAMIE GORELICK and the rest of you addleminded idiots.

NOW.. for all you left sided folks.. Go ahead.,. SPIN THAT and 'blame' President Bush, Aschcroft andthe 'Great Right Wing Consipracy'....

==============================
THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING UNITED, MR. BIN LADEN
Thu Apr 15, 8:02 PM ET Add Op/Ed - Ann Coulter to My Yahoo!


By Ann Coulter

Last week, 9/11 commissioner John Lehman revealed that "it was the policy (before 9/11) and I believe remains the policy today to fine airlines if they have more than two young Arab males in secondary questioning because that's discriminatory." Hmmm ... Is 19 more than two? Why, yes, I believe it is. So if two Jordanian cab drivers are searched before boarding a flight out of Newark, Osama bin Laden could then board that plane without being questioned. I'm no security expert, but I'm pretty sure this gives terrorists an opening for an attack.

In a sane world, Lehman's statement would have made headlines across the country the next day. But not one newspaper, magazine or TV show has mentioned that it is official government policy to prohibit searching more than two Arabs per flight.

Meanwhile, another 9/11 commissioner, the greasy Richard Ben-Veniste, claimed to be outraged that the CIA (news - web sites) did not immediately give intelligence on 9/11 hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar to the FBI (news - web sites). As we now know -- or rather, I
alone know because I'm the only person in America watching the 9/11 hearings -- Ben-Veniste should have asked his fellow commissioner Jamie Gorelick about that.


In his testimony this week, John Ashcroft explained that the FBI wasn't even told Almihdhar and Alhazmi were in the country until weeks before the 9/11 attack -- because of Justice Department guidelines put into place in 1995. The FBI wasn't allowed to put al-Qaida specialists on the hunt for Almihdhar and Alhazmi -- because of Justice Department guidelines put into place in 1995. Indeed, the FBI couldn't get a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui's computer -- because of Justice Department guidelines put into place in 1995.

The famed 1995 guidelines were set forth in a classified memorandum written by the then-deputy attorney general (Gorelick) titled "Instructions for Separation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations," which imposed a "draconian" wall between counterintelligence and criminal investigations.


What Ashcroft said next was breathtaking. Prohibited from mounting a serious search for Almihdhar and Alhazmi, an irritated FBI investigator wrote to FBI headquarters, warning that someone would die because of these policies -- "since the biggest threat to us, OBL (Osama bin Laden), is getting the most protection."

FBI headquarters responded: "We're all frustrated with this issue. These are the rules. NSLU (National Security Law Unit) does not make them up. But somebody did make these rules. Somebody built this wall."

The person who built that wall described in the infamous 1995 memo, Ashcroft said, "is a member of the commission." If this were an episode of "Matlock," the camera would slowly pan away from Ashcroft's face at this point and then quickly jump to an extreme close-up of Jamie Gorelick's horrified expression. Armed marshals would then escort the
kicking, screaming Gorelick away in leg irons as the closing credits rolled. Gorelick was the deputy attorney general in 1995.

The 9/11 commission has finally uncovered the proverbial "smoking gun"! But it was fired by one of the 9/11 commissioners. Maybe between happy reminiscences about the good old days of Ruby Ridge, Waco and the Elian
Gonzales raid, Ben-Veniste could ask Gorelick about those guidelines.

Democrats think it's a conflict of interest for Justice Scalia to have his name in the same phonebook as Dick Cheney. But there is no conflict of interest having Gorelick sit on a commission that should be investigating her.

Bill O'Reilly's entire summary of Ashcroft's testimony was to accuse Ashcroft of throwing sheets over naked statues rather than fighting terrorism. No mention of the damning Gorelick memo. No one knows about the FAA No-Searching-Arabs counterterrorism policy. Predictions that conservatives have finally broken through the wall of sound coming from the mainstream media may have been premature.


When Democrats make an accusation against Republicans, newspaper headlines repeat the accusation as a fact: "U.S. Law Chief 'Failed to Heed Terror Warnings,'" "Bush Was Told of Qaida Steps Pre-9/11; Secret Memo Released," "Bush White House Said to Have Failed to Make al-Qaida
an Early Priority."


But when Republicans make accusations against Democrats -- even accusations backed up by the hard fact of a declassified Jamie Gorelick memo -- the headlines note only that Republicans are making accusations: "Ashcroft Lays Blame at Clinton's Feet," "Ashcroft: Blame Bubba for 9/11," "Ashcroft Faults Clinton in 9/11 Failures."

It's amazing how consistent it is. A classic of the genre was the Chicago Tribune headline, which managed to use both constructs in a single headline: "Ashcroft Ignored Terrorism, Panel Told; Attorney General Denies Charges, Blames Clinton." Why not: "Reno Ignored Terrorism, Panel Told; Former Deputy Attorney General Denies Charges, Blames Bush"?

Democrats actively created policies that were designed to hamstring terrorism investigations. The only rap against the Bush administration is that it failed to unravel the entire 9/11 terrorism plot based on a memo titled: "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States."

I have news for liberals: Bin Laden is still determined to attack
inside the United States! Could they please tell us when and where the next attack will be? Because unless we know that, it's going to be difficult to stop it if we can't search Arabs.
================

ki4bgo
05-20-2004, 11:39 AM
WAAAAAH! WAAAAAAAAAHHH!!! Stop this thing I wanna get OFF!! #They just keep grasping at straws to make THEIR "administration's" many screw-ups seem minor.... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif #...Professional HELP I tell ya! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif I'll be so glad when bushie gets tossed out on his a$$ and all this rhetoric/propaganda stops (for a while...maybe...?) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

nx6d
05-20-2004, 11:54 AM
FT, the word "troll" is starting to sound more and more appropriate...

k6pme
05-20-2004, 01:26 PM
I always knew that the 911 Commission was a politically motivated sham. In all truthfulness, the minute I saw one of the 'principle players' on the commission (Gorelick) I knew it was going to be a joke.

But hey FT, Nice to see another Ann Coulter fan around. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

BGO, Hey, come on now, use some common sense here. Something like 911 doesn't just happen in less than one year. An event like that takes years of planning to make happen. Bonehead Ladin was active way before Bush came into office.

WA5KRP
05-20-2004, 02:28 PM
Here's the Gorelnick authored document: #Instructions on Seperation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations (http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document_1995_gorelick_memo.pdf)

Draw your own conclusions.



WA5KRP
Hamstrung, Texas

n0ov
05-20-2004, 02:37 PM
Common now folks

Now is not the time for finding solutions, now is time for placing blame and play the election year games.

This public commission stinks of election year politics.

You are 100% right -- things like 911 do not happen over night. #And if the Clinton bozos were serious about their jobs they would have started taking action after the Cole bombing. #(Bill was too busy dodging White water and Hilliary, who thought those cigars were........a little off)

Then was then, now is now. #I appreciate this post because it show a cause and effect. #If they continue the cause analysis they will find lots of things went wrong on everyones part. #

Unfortunately what is getting lost is also the things that went right -- alot of planning, training, and courage when into saving those people impacted by 911.

Consider this -- how many people worked in the places that were attacked and how many made it out safe. #

I sincerely hope when the finger pointing is set a side someone does a cause and effect on what went right so we can mirror some of these good things and be better prepared for the next round of attacks

ky5u
05-20-2004, 05:07 PM
Jamie Gorelick. Hmmmm. Guess we should be glad Gore did not get elected.

05-20-2004, 09:36 PM
Those who think my thread/postings are 'troll postings' SERIOUSLY need to learn the definitoin of the word.

The fact that my post has been CORROBORATED by others who POSTED links to the ACTUAL documents only shows that my information is..

1) ACCURATE
2) NOT 'grasping at straws'
3) Not troll posting.

Have you EVER noticed that when a liberal/leftie runs out of valid ammunition to respond to a posting or something that contains valid information they USUALLY resort to some type of emotionally laden comment OR some kind of ad hominem type of response..?


".. I ain't SAYIN' nuthin... mind you... " <grin>

The evidence speaks for itself.

The 9-11 Commission is being used as a CHEAP vehicle for political purposes INSTEAD of what it SHOULD be used for...

a vehicle to ARRIVE at an understanding (as they publicly say they are TRYING TO DO) what went wrong.. what the root cause(s) were and HOW to fix them.

But.. as we've seen, read, and heard.. it's a vehicle that the rabid 'GET BUSH AT ANY COST, PRICE, OR BY ANY MEANS!' folks are using to continue their irrational attacks.

(That's NOT an emotionally laden or ad hominem attack. It's based on the fact that it is WELL DOCUMENTED that these types take quotes, comments, and statements OUT OF CONTEXT to build their 'cases' out of whole cloth.)

Ahh well..

The truth, will, as it always does, come out and the left JUST can't have that happen as it casts a VERY VERY unkind light upon them...

K3FT

ki4bgo
05-20-2004, 09:56 PM
Right wing TROLL ALERT! ...TROLL ALERT! DIVE! DIVE! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

kc0ebm
05-20-2004, 11:16 PM
Troll MY EYE,

FT speaks the TRUTH. And its high damn time it came foreward.

Thanks for this post FT. It speaks for itself. So does the link to Gorelicks document.

Its time for the lefty's to fish or cut bait.

Bravo Zulu, FT

EBM

nx6d
05-20-2004, 11:25 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K3FT @ May 20 2004,13:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The truth, will, as it always does, come out and the left JUST can't have that happen as it casts a VERY VERY unkind light upon them...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
FT:

Someone who uses Ann Coulter as a source can't expect
ANYONE to take them seriously...

Lots of words, not a lot of content, other than toady talk show heresay.

Troll? Uh yeah. Everyone one of your &quot;factual&quot; posts includes either a dare to respond or an insult.

When all of your &quot;facts&quot; and &quot;truths&quot; are nothing but oft-repeated rightwing boilerplate, long on emotion and short on substance it's hard to take anything you say with more than a grain of salt.

Do you get paid for this?


WX7B

05-21-2004, 03:04 AM
WX7B noted &quot;Someone who uses Ann Coulter as a source can't expect ANYONE to take them seriously...Lots of words, not a lot of content, other than toady talk show heresay.&quot;

DE K3FT..

Umm.. gee.. well.. I mean... I don't recall ANN COULTER being my source. I believe I quoted Ann's article which PROVIDED the source that was being quoted. I also believe I commented on the GORELICK report as being the SOURCE.

If I had used Coulter as a source I would not have included the text which SPECIFICALLY pointed to the Gorelick report which COULTER quotes as a source.

Lest you had forgotten .. I repeat the post from WA5KRP...

&quot;Here's the Gorelnick authored document: Instructions on Seperation of Certain Foreign Counterintelligence and Criminal Investigations&quot; LINK -
http://www.nationalreview.com/documen....f&quot; (http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document_1995_gorelick_memo.pdf&quot;)

There's the EXACT document that CORROBORATES Coulter's story. NOw.. what where you saying about 'not a lot of content and talk show hearsay??'

So, providing a SOURCE link to the SOURCE document is considered (by you) as being nothing more than &quot;.... &quot;facts&quot; and &quot;truths&quot; are nothing but oft-repeated rightwing boilerplate, long on emotion and short on substance it's hard to take anything you say with more than a grain of salt.&quot;

Then I have to ask.. WHAT would you consider to be reputable evidence? Would you have to hear Gorelick, herself, personally say to you &quot;I WROTE THAT DOCUMENT AND COULTER IS CORRECT?&quot; or would you need to actually have Gorelick say it live to you one-on-one for you to believe it?

Me? A troll? I hardly think so.

Unless of course.. you consider providing accurate sourcing data to back up the post to be the mark of a troll.

If so.. then you have just painted EVERY person who EVER provided sourcing for a statement a TROLL. ERGO.. you have just called scientist or investigator a TROLL.

Ahhh, the broad brush.. it covers much and covers wide! (Again.. a MARKED tactic of the left. You continue to exemplify, in actual action, that which I have described. Thanks for the factual demonstration. I'm sure others are learning from what you exhibit.)

K3FT

KA8NCR
05-21-2004, 03:07 AM
Clinton is to blame for many things in this country, without fail.

Like, uhm, 7 years of prosperity?

wd0ct
05-21-2004, 10:25 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WX7B @ May 20 2004,16:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K3FT @ May 20 2004,13:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The truth, will, as it always does, come out and the left JUST can't have that happen as it casts a VERY VERY unkind light upon them...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
FT:

Someone who uses Ann Coulter as a source can't expect
ANYONE to take them seriously...

Lots of words, not a lot of content, other than toady #talk show heresay.

Troll? Uh yeah. Everyone one of your &quot;factual&quot; posts includes either a dare to respond or an insult.

When all of your &quot;facts&quot; and &quot;truths&quot; are nothing but oft-repeated rightwing boilerplate, long on emotion and short on substance it's hard to take anything you say with more than a grain of salt.

Do you get paid for this?


WX7B[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I've also been wondering if ft gets paid for his postings. I think he on on Anne Coulter's payroll and without a doubt the biggest troll on the internet.

In fairness though, his strident 'you got to believe ME cause I KNOW posts' are a reliable source of amusement. Neocons are the best source of laughter medicine.

N0PU
05-21-2004, 03:58 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ May 21 2004,05:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One should have humor and laughter in their life it aids the digestion and calms the nerves. I really don't know if the Neocons are an amusing lot or not having never met them. But it is no brainer that the Democrats are not funny,in fact what they do, scares me at times. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Thats ok...
What the Neocons are doing scares me ALL the time...

These PNAC folks are dangerious to our country's health...
And more dangerious to those of us who live here...
And even more dangerious to anyone who doesn't live here...

K0YNE
05-21-2004, 04:18 PM
More noise from the republican &quot;noise machine&quot;. The noise machine has been around for about 30 years. It has focused on how bad the democrats really are, Or so the machine says they are. You have the big mouths of the republican party, Rush Limbaugh, Imus in the morning espousing their hatred everyday of the week except maybe Sunday.
Would the country be better off if it had just the Republican party? Maybe the United States should go to a one party system whereas if the republicans are always free from sin and errors, this country could become what it should be. I think Russia, China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, so on so forth ARE ONE party countries? So, If the Republicans are always right and they can guarantee our freedoms, won't amend the constitution, They why don't we all give in and never question our government. Now you are free to vote for stupid George Bush. There, that solves the problem. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

KB9YCO
05-21-2004, 04:19 PM
Seems to me we should blame a government that constanly gets weighed down with partisan politics as opposed to blaming one party over the other. They are clearly both equally to blame, the more you read these things, the more obvious it becomes. I've read just as much garbage about the woefully ignorant decisions that the democraps make as to what decisions the republicrooks make. It's sad that we have allowed ourselves to be restricted to having to rah-rah for one team all the time, in light of common sense, logic, tolerance, compromise, the good of the country as a whole instead of one groups agenda, etc. etc. etc. etc. Truly sad and truly un-American.

n0ov
05-21-2004, 05:19 PM
Government Blame Game.

Do you know what impresses me about Powel and Edwards?

When it comes to the blame game, both of these leaders seem to take a pass and focus on the task at hand and what can be done to make things different vs pointing fingers.

Why can't these folks, and more like them, run for office -- allowing some of the career criminals (like Kennedy) to move on?

That also raises the question why in the heck did the party pick Kerry over Edwards? #Makes no sense to me.

KG4CGC
05-21-2004, 05:33 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC0LNU @ May 21 2004,06:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That also raises the question why in the heck did the party pick Kerry over Edwards? #Makes no sense to me.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I know the answer to that one, Edwards was not a member of Skull and Bones and Kerry is.
You see, Kerry can't win this one. This leaves the door wide open for Hilliary in 2008 which is exactly what the Dems want. It's all a sham run for office this time around as far as the Dems go and the Reps know it. It's all a game and we, the American People, are paying the price.
If the Reps get serious in 2008, I hope they put Condi Rice up against Hilliary! Man what a catfight that would be! Besides, have you all not figured it out yet? Hilliary is the anti-Christ!

WA5KRP
05-21-2004, 06:07 PM
http://smilies.jeeptalk.org/contrib/blackeye/lol.gif BONK!

OMG! #Duzzat make Bill the Messiah?



WA5KRP
http://mindscraps.com/s/contrib/ruinkai/peepwallA.gif

ki4bgo
05-21-2004, 06:40 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wd0ct @ May 21 2004,05:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've also been wondering if ft gets paid for his postings. I think he on on Anne Coulter's payroll and without a doubt the biggest troll on the internet.

In fairness though, his strident 'you got to believe ME cause I KNOW posts' are a reliable source of amusement. Neocons are the best source of laughter medicine.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
He must, to keep spewing this dribble constantly the way he's been lately!.....DIVE! ...DIVE! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

K0YNE
05-21-2004, 06:52 PM
Oh, by the way. American products aren't as popular around the world as they were a year ago. American products sold has gone from 30 percent to 27 percent. That a way Bush http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

05-22-2004, 02:42 PM
DCT and YNE


Umm.. did you actually READ Gorelicks report? I mean REALLY read it?

All I and KRP and others commented on was the GORELICK report. Now, if reporting on the fact that the report exists.. exposing it for others to read said report makes me a part of someone's payroll.. well, so be it.

I am, always, quite happy to provide amusement! I know, by doing so it helps you stay healthy because it helps you release endorphins and they keep you happy!

No need to thank me and others. We are justdoing our bit to ensure you stay around a good long time to see the truth of things come out.

Glad to be of service.

BTW.. I noted.. amongst all your comments (along with BGO's) that you made ZERO reference to the report that Gorelick wrote but spent a lot of words speaking at me?

Is there a reason WHY you are pointedly ignoring the Gorelick report as the issue?

HMMMMM..... Methinks I see your silence speaking louder than your words...

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

05-22-2004, 07:24 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ki4bgo @ May 20 2004,04:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">WAAAAAH! WAAAAAAAAAHHH!!! #Stop this thing I wanna get OFF!! #They just keep grasping at straws to make THEIR &quot;administration's&quot; many screw-ups seem minor.... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif #...Professional HELP I tell ya! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif I'll be so glad when bushie gets tossed out on his a$$ and all this rhetoric/propaganda stops (for a while...maybe...?) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
LMAO. Many screwups? Like gorelick? Like your hero Clinton bombing a aspirin factory in sudan (a direct act of war, no less), like Clinton refusing Pakistans offers (3 TIMES) to hand over Bin Laden? Like Clinton baldly lieing to a federal grand jury?...And, lets not forget Al gore and the monks, or, Hillary and the subopenaed papers that magicly turned up after a year of stonewalling that was claimed to be a screwup and appeared only after the judge was about to impose jail time.

You mean screwups like that?

KG4CGC
05-23-2004, 07:11 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KG4CGC @ May 21 2004,06:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC0LNU @ May 21 2004,06:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That also raises the question why in the heck did the party pick Kerry over Edwards? #Makes no sense to me.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I know the answer to that one, Edwards was not a member of Skull and Bones and Kerry is.
# You see, Kerry can't win this one. This leaves the door wide open for Hilliary in 2008 which is exactly what the Dems want. It's all a sham run for office this time around as far as the Dems go and the Reps know it. It's all a game and we, the American People, are paying the price.
# If the Reps get serious in 2008, I hope they put Condi Rice up against Hilliary! Man what a catfight that would be! Besides, have you all not figured it out yet? Hilliary is the anti-Christ![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
And, let us not forget the current effort to make it possible for Govna' Ahnold to run for president in 2008.
I think the Terminator would stomp Hilliary into mud.
Wrestling fans here in the South like to use this phrase and I think it would apply here if the two ever went head to head in 2008. &quot;I'm gonna stomp you a new mudhole and walk it dry! Cause Stone Cold said so!&quot;
Living in &quot;these here parts&quot;, wrestling fan or not, you will here that one from time to time.

K8ERV
05-23-2004, 08:58 PM
Who is Ann Coulter?

TOM K8ERV

k6pme
05-25-2004, 05:47 PM
Ann Coulter is a conservative political pundit. A good looking blond attorney that likes to both snow ski and shoot guns. My kinda girl.

n0ov
05-25-2004, 06:45 PM
Cause and effect.

Because the Democratic party chose an idiot as their canidate for President -- President Bush was elected.

Hm........... #anyone see a pattern here?

Democrats? #Gore? Kerry? #Hillary?

K0RGR
05-25-2004, 06:54 PM
I read the memo.

It seems to spell out the process that is to be followed for the foreign intelligence unit to notify the criminal division if it discovers evidence that a federal crime has been committed. It also says that the criminal investigation is &quot;walled off&quot; from the foreign intelligence.

As Mr. Ashcroft well knows, and as Mr. Freeh and others have testified, prior to 9/11, the focus of the FBI was to seek criminal convictions in these cases. The purpose of this memo was to insure that these ongoing, and very important criminal cases were not tainted by inadmissible evidence gathered under foreign intelligence rules. Otherwise, those cases would likely have been tossed out of court, and terrorists we already had in hand would walk free to bomb again.

Obviously, when the fecal matter hit the wind tunnel on 9/11, the FBI's focus changed somewhat.

I don't know why this is new news. Whatever mainstream media I was watching that day covered the allegation in some detail (you can wager it was not FOX).

As for Ann Coulter, just go read www.anticoulter.com - it's old material, but shows how her stuff works. She did write a column suggesting that we invade all the Muslim countries, kill their leaders, and force them to convert to Christianity. Even neo-con David Horowitz, who agreed with that idea, wrote a column tearing apart her book Treason as containing too many claims that cannot be supported. The conservative historian who actually did most of her research for that book said that while the facts she presents are correct, he cannot in any way support the conclusions that she draws from them. In short, she's a Republican attack dog... and foams at the mouth a lot.