9/11 Investigation Panel Subpoenas FAA Documents

9/11 Investigation Panel Subpoenas FAA Documents

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 16, 2003; Page A05


The independent panel investigating government failures before and after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks issued its first subpoena for documents yesterday, demanding material from the Federal Aviation Administration and announcing that it will target other agencies that resist turning over information.

more

The developments brought to a head an increasingly contentious dispute between the 10-member bipartisan commission and the Bush administration, which initially opposed the panel's creation and has since been accused by the commission of dragging its feet in producing sensitive documents and witnesses. Legal experts said such quasi-independent panels rarely issue subpoenas, particularly ones aimed at federal agencies.

more

The commission said in a statement that it voted to issue a subpoena after discovering through its own investigation that the FAA had not turned over dozens of boxes of material, including "various tapes, statements, interview reports and agency self-assessments."

In May, the commission asked for "all documents related to the FAA's tracking of hijacked airliners on 9/11," including communications with NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command that dispatched fighter jets in response to the attacks. Officials said some of the documents center on whether air defenses were activated quickly enough.

more

"We were told that documents didn't exist and that we had everything we asked for, but our own research showed differently," Kean said. "I would rather feel that it was a lack of priority or knowledge of what they had, and not that they intentionally tried to hide things from us. But we don't know for sure."

snip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32232-2003Oct15.html

Will it finally come out that the conspiracy theorists are right and that Bushco LET the tragedy happen? Or will it show the incredible callousness and stupidity of this Administration who simply didn't care how many people were killed and looked on it as an opportunity to push through their right-wing, Constitution-destroying agenda?

My head spins just reading about them every day..and waiting..and waiting...for the whole house of Bush to collapse....waiting..

...the requested info long ago.

would not be the question they ask themselves.

"What do we have to gain or lose?"

is the way people think.

Finally....

<snip>The panel's move could send the fight to the federal courts. And if Congress were to approve an extension of the deadline, the administration could face renewed debate over the terrorist strikes during the heat of a presidential reelection campaign.

"What we have here is a very angry commission," Chairman Thomas H. Kean (R), the former governor of New Jersey, said in an interview. "This is a sign that we are not loath to use a subpoena on other agencies if we need to. . . . Hopefully this will tell other agencies that haven't complied with our requests to get on the stick and do so."

:bounce:

... two weeks ago or so, as a warning. So the agencies had had time to deliver the documents and knew that they would be facing trouble if they did not comply.

since 9/11 for an investigation. Right on, ladies!

The widows are getting on the consciences of some pretty powerful people. From all their foot dragging, it seems many of the guilty work for Uncle Sam.

BTW: When will the 9-11 Commission subpoena Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice to testify? They really should be required to PUT ON THE RECORD what they knew, what they did or didn't do, and when. Specifically, Bush needs to testify why, knowing Osama bin Laden was ready to hijack US airliners, the commander-in-chief (sic) didn't warn the airlines or public.

and didn't want to be bothered with work. In David Corn's book, he suggests Bushco. learned of this threat in July and then again in August (while he was on vacation). The day or two before the attacks he was telling the press the difference between his dogs. That sounds like a man who was really worried about a threat that was literally days away.

They were warned this was coming and I hope someday that becomes fact rather than speculation.

Our safety and freedom depend on the Truth. Thank Goodness Corn, some on the 9-11 commission and others like you are putting together the dots Bush and all his toadies couldn't be bothered with.

The Little Turd from Crawford needed a month-long vacation after being in office for six months because he was so exhausted from all the fundraising he does. If he wasn't so tired from counting the $100,000 bills his donors stuff in his war chest, he'd be able to see the facts: Osama was going to hit the US. What we on DU can see: Bush knew and didn't do a thing about it. In my book, that's Treason.

I'd say that there has been concerted effort to misdirect (Iraq) and distract the American people from examining the root cause of our 9/11 failures.

If the truth becomes known, how can any American deny that this administration is directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of 3000 people on that day?

Their efforts to thwart, slow-walk, obstruct a complete airing of all the details on our government's response on 9/11 leads convinces me that there was enough culpability in the administration's actions (or non-actions) that capital crimes were committed....if so, is it any wonder that they'd take us down the road to Armmegeddon if this would save their miserable hides?

For the most part whatever investigation, or rather "investigation", that has taken place seems to be focused on "intelligence" failures. What about the "defense" failures that occured that day. Misdirection, indeed.

They all got their cowardly butts out of DC before the attack, because after all the briefings and warnings, they knew it was coming. So did they issue warnings to the airlines, beef up security, alert NORAD? NO, all they did was get themselves "out of harm's way."

www.msnbc.com/news/907379.asp?0cv=KA01

The Secrets of September 11
The White House is battling to keep a report on the terror attacks secret. Does the 2004 election have anything to do with it?

April 30 — Even as White House political aides plot a 2004 campaign plan designed to capitalize on the emotions and issues raised by the September 11 terror attacks, administration officials are waging a behind-the-scenes battle to restrict public disclosure of key events relating to the attacks.

<snip>Some sources who have read the still-secret congressional report say some sections would not play quite so neatly into White House plans. One portion deals extensively with the stream of U.S. intelligence-agency reports in the summer of 2001 suggesting that Al Qaeda was planning an upcoming attack against the United States—and implicitly raises questions about how Bush and his top aides responded. One such CIA briefing, in July 2001, was particularly chilling and prophetic. It predicted that Osama bin Laden was about to launch a terrorist strike “in the coming weeks,” the congressional investigators found. The intelligence briefing went on to say: “The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning.”

The substance of that intelligence report was first disclosed at a public hearing last September by staff director Hill. But at the last minute, Hill was blocked from saying precisely who within the Bush White House got the briefing when CIA director Tenet classified the names of the recipients. (One source says the recipients of the briefing included Bush himself.) As a result, Hill was only able to say the briefing was given to “senior government officials.”


www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A15957-2001
Summer Spinning
To GOP, Vacation Boosted Bush Agenda; To Democrats, Voters See a Shirk Ethic
Aug 29, <2001>

<snip>The White House had announced that Bush would stay at his 1,600-acre ranch in Crawford from Aug. 4 through Labor Day on Sept. 3, a 31-day stretch that would have broken a modern record for a presidential vacation, held by Richard M. Nixon for a 30-day trip to San Clemente, Calif., in 1969. News reports played up the record, and a Gallup Poll found that 55 percent of respondents thought Bush's vacation was too long.

The length of the trip revived old questions about Bush's work ethic, and the poll and the news coverage caused consternation in the White House. Aides said they had planned an ambitious schedule for Bush as long ago as late June, but reporters were not told about it, even after they landed here. The White House, suddenly defensive, took every opportunity to show Bush on the go and even created a "Western White House" logo for the briefing room at Crawford Elementary School. Bush revealed that his ranch had new video conferencing equipment for keeping in touch with his national security team.

www.jacksonholenews.com/Archives/NewsArchive/2001/010815-News.html
News story - Aug. 15, 2001
A Working Vacation
Vice President Cheney plans to fish, travel during month-long valley sojourn.
By Angus M. Thuermer Jr.

Vice President Dick Cheney took time off from his month-long working vacation Monday to outline his plans for August in Jackson Hole and to reflect on "an amazing year."

Cheney, who will live at his Teton Pines home about six miles west of Jackson until Labor Day, defended his energy policy, supported a local decision to limit drilling around the Gros Ventre Wilderness, recalled a life of service in Washington and said his health problems are not affecting his ability to fish for trout on his favorite Western waters.

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml
Ashcroft Flying High
WASHINGTON, July 26, 2001

(CBS) Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.

In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

"There was a threat assessment and there are guidelines. He is acting under the guidelines," an FBI spokesman said. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department, however, would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it.

All on this thread are absolutely right-on! The badministration KNEW what was coming. When it happened, they wanted to ATTACK IRAQ!

Why? The situation was just like in 1983 in Beirut. The US embassy had been destroyed by a suicide bomber, but the US Marines barracks was virtually unproteced a few months later. So, Pruneface Reagan attacks Grenada and kills a bunch of Cuban construction works in the name of saving some kids in an offshore medical school. In the process, the headlines dropped the Marine barracks story and it's Morning in the Pentagon.

Regarding John Ashcan: That low and smoking turd was WARNED off COMMERCIAL! That was my first post on DU, way the heck back when I was Oblomov. The fact he was warned is what the 9-11 commission should use to make headway on getting to the truth of the matter: TREASON!

PS: Sorry about all the caps. I get so steamed about this, it would drive me nuts were not for the fact DU is filled with good people I can talk with. Thanks for your kind attention, Stephanie, Not-So-Old, skypilot and every other DUer who knows WTF is going on.

Not that it happened but of the no response to the event. As a former USAF member and former Air Traffic Controller this is where that question should be answered. I wish they just got all the controllers from Newark who worked that day to come in and give their accounts of that day.

Something is in here. Everything thing they did is time stamped.
They KNOW who contacted who and what the normal response time is.

I know one day we will find out but as long as Bush is in office they will do whatever they have to do to hide it. Remove Bush and his buds and we might have a chance.

A few weeks ago on NOW with Bill Moyers they did a segment about the four
9/11 widows who are pushing for more information. In that segment it was stated that the FBI had gone to the FAA on or shortly after 9/11 and seized documents, recordings, logs, etc. If that is true then the FAA should let that be known if they are subpoenaed. And why is the commission just getting around to this? The FAA and the air traffic controllers that worked on 9/11 should have been among the first people to testify. I've read transcripts of independent commission testimony and the commissioners are busy questioning NORAD officials who are not forthcoming with information; information such as what time NORAD was notified of the first hijacking. NORAD officials seem to be determined not to answer this question. The FAA could answer it but if it's true that the FBI confiscated their records and logs, then...

and never miss him watching him.

I fear that stall tactics are being installed to run out the clock on this investigation. I hope I'm wrong!

a conspiracy.

What's the Administration's record with the 9/11 commission? First of all, it didn't want an investigation. Then, succumbing to pressure, Bush reluctantly agreed, and named, as his first choice, Henry "Mr Transparency" Kissinger as commissioner. His second choice, Thomas Kean, had - as had Bush himself - business ties with Khalid bin Mahfouz, alleged terrorist financier and Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law.

The commission was ridiculously underfunded, given a non-negotiable deadline (made shorter when members' security clearances were held up), stonewalled, slowmarched, misdirected. It's heard contradictory testimony, documents have been withheld, it's been lied to about the existence of FAA records, and the Pentagon and Justice Department have been singled out as particularly uncooperative. Commission leaders have even accused the White House of "intimidation," for insisting that sensitive witnesses testify only in the presence of "minders" from their agencies.

Without even looking at the events of September 11, what should this tell you about the Bush Administration?

:hi:

"I must tell you, after reading some of these 200 page classified materials, you put them down and wonder, 'Why is that classified? I read all that in the papers before.'"

Sounds like we have a decent guy as a Repub commissioner.

Or am I just smokin crack???

:shrug:

Is the 9/11 commission getting tough?

Subpoena against FAA suggests signs of life -- and victims' families are suddenly hopeful.

By Eric Boehlert



Weeks ago Kean and Dean laid down an Oct. 6 deadline for all White House documents to be delivered, but they were not, and the commissioners agreed to continue negotiating for them. The commission won't confirm, but it's assumed one of the still-missing documents is the crucial Aug. 6, 2001, daily presidential briefing that Bush received while vacationing in Crawford, Texas, which, according to published accounts, warned of Osama bin Laden's intention to hijack planes in the United States. The White House has since said the warnings were vague in nature.

snip

As for the FAA and NORAD, their timid reaction on the morning of Sept. 11, has long baffled experts who have reviewed the tragic timeline in detail. They wonder, for instance, why it took the FAA 29 minutes, from 8:55 a.m. to 9:24 a.m. to notify NORAD that American Airlines Flight 77 bound for Los Angeles was drastically off course and heading for Washington, D.C. That, after two hijacked planes had already crashed into the World Trade Center.

Even more mysterious was fact that NORAD fighter jets were not scrambled from the closest Air Force base. Instead, the jets that were eventually scrambled in a vain attempt to intercept Flight 77 came from Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, Va., rather than Andrews Air Force Base right outside D.C.

If the truth about 9/11 does not come out by November of 2004, it never will. Go Kean!!!!!!!!!!

The below excerpt paragraph has always bugged me:

Aviation Week & Space Technology
December 17, 2001

Crisis At Herndon: 11 Airplanes Astray

By David Bond, Washington

<....>

The kind of government-industry coordination Herndon relies on to deal with bad weather turned instead to crisis management. As usual, the Air Transport Assn. (ATA) and the National Business Aircraft Assn. were represented on the operational floor. In a fluke, so was what Herndon calls "the military cell"--the Air Traffic Services Cell, created by the FAA and the Defense Dept. for use when needed to coordinate priority aircraft movement during warfare or emergencies. The Pentagon staffs it only three days per month for refresher training, but Sept. 11 happened to be one of those days.

<....>

------

I got this here originally:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/message/15611

(Fairly certain I verified this some time back on Aviation Week's site, but do not have link handy).

The "military cell" just happened to be there on 9/11, yet somehow the standing orders on how to deal with hijacks were not followed?

http://www1.faa.gov/ATpubs/MIL/Apdices/milapd17.html

The rest of that article is interesting too and worth a read; just that one line that sticks in my craw, and I'm not big on the tin foil stuff.

--Snazzy

(edit: fixed formatting issues)

I'll bet that staffing had to do with the hijacking exercise that was underway that day.....wonder if these people will be subpeoned?