Archive for June 21st, 2007

h1

His Royal Cheneyness

June 21, 2007

There’s already a consensus that Dick Cheney is the most powerful VP in our nation’s history, and it’s no secret that he has a long history of being a proponent of almost unlimited power for the executive branch, but this is getting pretty surreal: Vice President Exempts His Office from the Requirements for Protecting Classified Information

The Oversight Committee has learned that over the objections of the National Archives, Vice President Cheney exempted his office from the presidential order that establishes government-wide procedures for safeguarding classified national security information. The Vice President asserts that his office is not an “entity within the executive branch.”

As described in a letter from Chairman Waxman to the Vice President, the National Archives protested the Vice President’s position in letters written in June 2006 and August 2006. When these letters were ignored, the National Archives wrote to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in January 2007 to seek a resolution of the impasse. The Vice President’s staff responded by seeking to abolish the agency within the Archives that is responsible for implementing the President’s executive order.

For documentation purposes:   Fact Sheet on the Vice President’s Efforts to Avoid Oversight and Accountability (pdf)

In my quest to figure out what that really means, I spotted a great post from Scholars:

Having the Vice President, and a Republican at that, responsible for egregious breaches in national security sets a very poor example. After all, if the Vice President’s office can be exempt from secrecy requirements, then other offices could be as well. How long will it be before the entire Justice Department uses the identical argument (its duties are split between the executive and judicial branches, after all) to exempt itself from annual ISOO oversight?And what are the sanctions for breaking this particular EO?

Is “What the hell is he hiding?” a fair question?  Does it have anything to do with what happened to Scooter Libby?  

If you’re not part of the legislative, judicial, or executive, I suppose that leaves some sort of position of royalty.  How should we address thee?

h1

Right Wingers Find Their Inner “Truther”

June 21, 2007

I happened to stumble upon a blog post over at Right Wing Nut House concerning this story about the possibility that Osama himself chartered a flight for a couple handfuls of Saudis shortly after 9/11.  Check this out:

Another nagging question is what the 9/11 Commission staffers made of these memos when they read them? One would think that a mention of Osama Bin Laden in an FBI report on the Saudi flights would have raised every red flag possible and led to hauling Mueller, Clark, and the investigating agents before the Commission to explain themselves. The fact that Commission staffers either missed these reports or never acted upon them is just more evidence that the Commission itself had flawed investigative procedures.

Or they never saw the reports at all. This raises other, more troubling questions, about what else the FBI failed to give the Commission.

Looks like they’ve discovered some unresolved issues with the 9/11 commission report, doesn’t it?  Perhaps they should be added to the list?

Disclaimer:  I don’t consider myself part of the “9/11 truth movement”.  I pretty much put my curiosity about the event itself or any possibilities of a conspiracy to bed years ago.  I do, however, believe that we are all entitled (as Americans) to know the whole truth about that day and related events both before and after.  So I’m making this post to prove the point that it’s OK to have questions about 9/11.  While it’s irresponsible to put forth theories that have little basis in fact, the quest for truth is a good thing.   No one on the right or left should be afraid to ask questions about those events.