On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:46:27 -0400, John Gaquin wrote:


It's clear he took a number of copies, plus the notes he had
contemporaneously generated, which were also supposed to be subject to
censorship. But I understood from reports that there are, in fact, a
small number of originals now unaccounted for.

On further reading, I believe you are right. I found this:

"The missing documents involve two or three draft versions of the report
as it was evolving and being refined by the Clinton administration,
officials and lawyers say. The Archives is believed to have copies of some
of the missing documents."

Still, as they are draft versions, it's criminal, but unlikely revisionist.

http://news.lawinfo.com/story/3_ds_34549.cfm

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message

More black helicopters. The documents Berger took were copies. It
would
be difficult to revise Clinton's legacy while the originals are still in
government hands.

It's clear he took a number of copies, plus the notes he had
contemporaneously generated, which were also supposed to be subject to
censorship. But I understood from reports that there are, in fact, a
small
number of originals now unaccounted for.

And.....the note taking was probably to make sure that Clarke's story will
jive with his previous reports.

I have to wonder what Clinton has from Berger's FBI raw files to make Berger
to take the risk........................

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:54:50 -0400, P.Fritz wrote:


And.....the note taking was probably to make sure that Clarke's story will
jive with his previous reports.

I have to wonder what Clinton has from Berger's FBI raw files to make
Berger to take the risk........................

Wow, that is an incredibly paranoid statement. I have know people who
have thought there was a commie behind every tree, but only two Clintons
can cause all this fear?

"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message news:gTWKc.5015


It seems that Mr. Wilson *lied* about who really sent him.

Virtually every aspect of Wilson's story has been discredited.
About
the
only fact remaining is that he did, in fact, go to Africa.



Virtually every aspect of everything Bush has done since presuming
office has been discredited.

It's not Bush people who under investigation by the Justice Dept. for
stealing classified info from the 9/11 Commission reading room. What
do
he
and the Clinton administration have to hide? We already know that
their
leader-in-thief is a liar. Now we're learning that his closest
advisors
are
crooked too...which really is no surprise.



Amazing timing, eh? And three leaks to CNN from the Bush White House.
Gosh...could it be political?


Cheney shoved the papers down Berger's pants, right?



Probably the notes from Cheney's secret energy policy meetings.

Cheney didn't hide them. He openly told the Dems to go **** themselves.
They sued him in court...and lost.

Berger stole top secret info. Even if done "by accident", it's a felony.

So....you've already convicted him, huh? Good Patriot Act thing, I'd
bet. No need for a trial, no need for evidence, no need for anything
but the Bush gestapo....

thunder wrote:

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:54:50 -0400, P.Fritz wrote:


And.....the note taking was probably to make sure that Clarke's story will
jive with his previous reports.

I have to wonder what Clinton has from Berger's FBI raw files to make
Berger to take the risk........................

Wow, that is an incredibly paranoid statement. I have know people who
have thought there was a commie behind every tree, but only two Clintons
can cause all this fear?


Clinton is the excuse right-wing trash uses to change the subject from
the failings of their idiot president Bush.




--
A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush;
A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse.

basskisser wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message news:gTWKc.5015


It seems that Mr. Wilson *lied* about who really sent him.

Virtually every aspect of Wilson's story has been discredited.
About
the
only fact remaining is that he did, in fact, go to Africa.



Virtually every aspect of everything Bush has done since presuming
office has been discredited.

It's not Bush people who under investigation by the Justice Dept. for
stealing classified info from the 9/11 Commission reading room. What
do
he
and the Clinton administration have to hide? We already know that
their
leader-in-thief is a liar. Now we're learning that his closest
advisors
are
crooked too...which really is no surprise.



Amazing timing, eh? And three leaks to CNN from the Bush White House.
Gosh...could it be political?


Cheney shoved the papers down Berger's pants, right?



Probably the notes from Cheney's secret energy policy meetings.

Cheney didn't hide them. He openly told the Dems to go **** themselves.
They sued him in court...and lost.

Berger stole top secret info. Even if done "by accident", it's a felony.

So....you've already convicted him, huh? Good Patriot Act thing, I'd
bet. No need for a trial, no need for evidence, no need for anything
but the Bush gestapo....


Sandy will do ok, but this January, as we give Bush his happy send-off
into retirement, let's not forget to tar and feather those chimp ears of
his.

--
A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush;
A vote for Bush is a vote for Apocalypse.

"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:46:27 -0400, John Gaquin wrote:


It's clear he took a number of copies, plus the notes he had
contemporaneously generated, which were also supposed to be subject to
censorship. But I understood from reports that there are, in fact, a
small number of originals now unaccounted for.

On further reading, I believe you are right. I found this:

"The missing documents involve two or three draft versions of the report
as it was evolving and being refined by the Clinton administration,
officials and lawyers say. The Archives is believed to have copies of some
of the missing documents."

Still, as they are draft versions, it's criminal, but unlikely
revisionist.

http://news.lawinfo.com/story/3_ds_34549.cfm

Today, I went back and read the transcript of Berger's testimony before the
9/11 commission from March 24th, 2004. An interesting exchange took place
between Commission member Fielding and Mr. Berger, in which they were
discussing the "after-action" report from the time period between December
'98 and mid-'99. I believe this is the same after-action report (and its
various versions) that Berger is now accused of stealing from the archives.

Anyhow, here's the exchange:

FIELDING: But there was an after-action report.

BERGER: I'm sure there was.

FIELDING: Thank you.

BERGER: No, excuse me. Let me correct the record. I'm not sure there was. I
believe there was, Mr. Fielding. And I remember being told that and but I've
never seen an after-action report.

http://tinyurl.com/3jjtq



In light of the fact that Berger stole the after-action report 9 months ago,
and then testified under oath that he'd "never seen an after-action report",
I'd say that he's lying. Wouldn't you?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:54:50 -0400, P.Fritz wrote:


And.....the note taking was probably to make sure that Clarke's story
will
jive with his previous reports.

I have to wonder what Clinton has from Berger's FBI raw files to make
Berger to take the risk........................

Wow, that is an incredibly paranoid statement. I have know people who
have thought there was a commie behind every tree, but only two Clintons
can cause all this fear?


Clinton is the excuse right-wing trash uses to change the subject from
the failings of their idiot president Bush.

FIELDING: But there was an after-action report.

BERGER: I'm sure there was.

FIELDING: Thank you.

BERGER: No, excuse me. Let me correct the record. I'm not sure there was. I
believe there was, Mr. Fielding. And I remember being told that and but I've
never seen an after-action report.



In March, Berger denied seeing the after-action report that he is now
accused of stealing 9 months ago. In fact, Berger freely admits that he
"inadvertently" removed the after-action report! So why did he lie to
Commission member Fielding when asked about the report in March?



What did the "other versions" of the report say? Did Clinton turn down a
chance to get bin Laden in late '98-mid '99. Did Clinton ignore irrefutable
evidence that bin Laden (and/or Iraq) was behind the Cole bombing? Did the
after-action report discuss Iraqi or Iranian ties to the terrorist attacks
on the WTC in 1993, the Khobar Towers, the USS Cole, or our embassies? Did
the alternate versions of the report maybe mention TWA 800 as being a
terrorist attack? (Berger made mention in his testimony that at first it was
thought that TWA 800 was a terrorist attack).

It has become apparent that Berger went to great lengths to hide something
that was contained in those "alternate versions" of the after-action report.
What was it?

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message news:gTWKc.5015


It seems that Mr. Wilson *lied* about who really sent him.

Virtually every aspect of Wilson's story has been discredited.
About
the
only fact remaining is that he did, in fact, go to Africa.



Virtually every aspect of everything Bush has done since
presuming
office has been discredited.

It's not Bush people who under investigation by the Justice Dept.
for
stealing classified info from the 9/11 Commission reading room.
What
do
he
and the Clinton administration have to hide? We already know
that
their
leader-in-thief is a liar. Now we're learning that his closest
advisors
are
crooked too...which really is no surprise.



Amazing timing, eh? And three leaks to CNN from the Bush White
House.
Gosh...could it be political?


Cheney shoved the papers down Berger's pants, right?



Probably the notes from Cheney's secret energy policy meetings.

Cheney didn't hide them. He openly told the Dems to go **** themselves.
They sued him in court...and lost.

Berger stole top secret info. Even if done "by accident", it's a
felony.

So....you've already convicted him, huh? Good Patriot Act thing, I'd
bet. No need for a trial, no need for evidence, no need for anything
but the Bush gestapo....

Res ipsa loquitur

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
basskisser wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message news:gTWKc.5015


It seems that Mr. Wilson *lied* about who really sent him.

Virtually every aspect of Wilson's story has been
discredited.
About
the
only fact remaining is that he did, in fact, go to Africa.



Virtually every aspect of everything Bush has done since
presuming
office has been discredited.

It's not Bush people who under investigation by the Justice
Dept. for
stealing classified info from the 9/11 Commission reading room.
What
do
he
and the Clinton administration have to hide? We already know
that
their
leader-in-thief is a liar. Now we're learning that his closest
advisors
are
crooked too...which really is no surprise.



Amazing timing, eh? And three leaks to CNN from the Bush White
House.
Gosh...could it be political?


Cheney shoved the papers down Berger's pants, right?



Probably the notes from Cheney's secret energy policy meetings.

Cheney didn't hide them. He openly told the Dems to go ****
themselves.
They sued him in court...and lost.

Berger stole top secret info. Even if done "by accident", it's a
felony.

So....you've already convicted him, huh? Good Patriot Act thing, I'd
bet. No need for a trial, no need for evidence, no need for anything
but the Bush gestapo....


Sandy will do ok, but this January, as we give Bush his happy send-off
into retirement, let's not forget to tar and feather those chimp ears of
his.

Berger stole the alternate versions of an intelligence after-action report
from the archives, and then perjured himself before the 9/11 commission 5
months later. When specifically asked by the Commission on March 24th,
2004, he testified that he never saw the report. Yesterday, he claimed that
he inadvertently took the report from the archives.


FIELDING: But there was an after-action report.

BERGER: I'm sure there was.

FIELDING: Thank you.

BERGER: No, excuse me. Let me correct the record. I'm not sure there was. I
believe there was, Mr. Fielding. And I remember being told that and but
*I've never seen an after-action report*.



----------------------------------------------------------

This is just the tip of the iceberg. And Daschle is just fueling the fire
by filing a Freedom of Information Act claim demanding that all of the
correspondence between the White House and the Justice Department be made
public. He's playing right into Republican hands. Republicans *want* the
info in those alternate versions of the after-action report to be made
public...and Daschle is unwittingly getting that info unclassified. What a
doofus!