This page was last updated on August 26, 2004.

As of August 14, 2004, this letter had not been published on the Times web site.  Since I was unable to cut-and-paste the letter, I apologize up front for any transcription errors.

I can’t explain this letter.  It quotes an August 6, 2001, Department of Justice memo stating the intelligence-sharing “wall” strengthened by Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick in 1995 was to continue in effect.  Somehow, Mr. Kislock concludes this is proof the Bush administration built the wall.  To be fair, Ms. Gorelick didn’t invent the wall either.  Its foundation was laid in 1978; Ms. Gorelick simply increased its height.

I don’t lay all of the blame for the 9/11 attacks on the Clinton administration because there’s plenty of blame to go around.  Beginning with former President Jimmy Carter, every administration – Democrat and Republican – sent the wrong message to terrorists.  I don’t exempt the Bush administration from responsibility, but I don’t understand how anyone can place the entire blame on President Bush when he was in office less than eight months at the time of the attacks.  We know planning for the attack began in the mid 1990s.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“In response to Tuesday’s letter to the editor Blame Clinton for 9/11:

“Blame Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson.

“On Aug. 6, 2001, Thompson issued a memorandum to the Criminal Division, Office of Intelligence Policy and Review of the FBI.

“The subject of this memorandum was “Intelligence Sharing.”  This memorandum states in the first paragraph ‘that the 1995 procedures for contact between the FBI and Criminal Division concerning foreign intelligence and foreign counter-intelligence investigation will remain in effect today.’

“So much for being a problem for information sharing.”

[RWC] Mr. Kislock did not provide an accurate quote.  The memo really says, “On July 19, 1995, the Attorney General adopted Procedures for Contacts Between the FBI and the Criminal Division Concerning Foreign Intelligence and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations (1995 Procedures).  The 1995 Procedures remain in effect today.”  The 1995 Procedures were set forth in a memo by then Deputy AG Jamie Gorelick.

Inaccuracies aside, the excerpt clearly indicates 1995 procedures restricting information sharing would remain in effect.  How can Mr. Kislock conclude the opposite, or did I misunderstand “So much for being a problem for information sharing?”

“In paragraph four, Thompson wrote, ‘The Core Group is to resolve disputes concerning application of the 1995 procedures in particular cases.  The Core Group will then make a recommendation to me or to the Attorney General for a finial [sic] decision on the matter.

“This constitutes the real ‘wall.’

“For those that missed this article or just plain want to blame President Clinton for everything, please see the Sept. 11 commission report and President Bush’s statements to this body.”

 [RWC] There are a couple of problems here.  First, the Kislock-edited excerpt comes from point four on page four of the memo.  It is not from paragraph four.  The second problem is Mr. Kislock fails to mention the Core Group – as part of “Interim Measures” – was formed during the Clinton administration in January 2000.  The subject memo even states this.  Apparently, Mr. Kislock wants us to believe a procedure put in place during the Clinton administration was a Bush administration creation.

Again, the memo merely states intelligence-sharing rules defined by the Clinton administration in 1995 and 2000 would remain in place.  We can fault the Bush administration for not immediately tearing down the wall that had been built over a period of 23 years, but we can’t blame the Bush administration for building it.

Cannot Mr. Kislock read or is he intentionally trying to deceive us?

“In fact, the president too the rare step of publicly rebuking one of his own cabinet members, Attorney General John Ashcroft, for engaging in a smear campaign ‘designed to discredit (9/11) commission member Jamie Gorelick.’”

 [RWC] A smear campaign?  AG Ashcroft declassified and made public a 1995 memo written by 9/11 Commission member Jamie Gorelick in which Ms. Gorelick raised the height of the existing intelligence-sharing wall.  He let Ms. Gorelick’s words do the talking.  When did producing truthful, relevant information become a smear?

Regarding the “public rebuke,” here’s the White House statement issued by White House spokesman Scott McClellan.  “That’s what the Justice Department did.  We were not involved in it.  I think the president was disappointed about that.  The president does not believe we ought to be pointing fingers in this time period.  We ought to be working together to help the commission complete its work.”

I have to agree the theatrics were not ideal, but AG Ashcroft did nothing illegal and indeed presented information we needed to know.

I don’t know where Mr. Kislock got the quote excerpt, “designed to discredit (9/11) commission member Jamie Gorelick,” but it didn’t come from President Bush as Mr. Kislock implies.

It’s odd Mr. Kislock didn’t comment on the propriety of Ms. Gorelick sitting on the 9/11 Commission when – as Janet Reno’s second in command – she was one of the people who should have been answering questions.

“The ‘wall’ and all its credits go to Thompson and Ashcroft.  These credits include the 9/11 terrorist attack!”

 [RWC] Please explain how a reaffirmation on August 6, 2001, of rules in effect for six+ years results in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.  Are we to believe the previous 23 years of the wall caused no problems but its eight months of life during the Bush administration is responsible for 9/11?  What am I missing, other than blind partisanship on the part of Mr. Kislock?  Other than blind partisans, no one claims immediate destruction of the wall by the Bush administration would have prevented the 9/11 attacks.  It’s a nice fantasy for Bush bashers, but it’s not true.

“Partisan politics shines through the Justice Department of John Ashcroft.  He calls a press conference and declassifies files to satisfy his own ambition.  Ashcroft has brought nothing but discredit to the term ‘Justice Department.’”

[RWC] I have to admit, Mr. Kislock knows something about partisanship.  He also knows how to repeat the party line bashing AG Ashcroft.  Perhaps Mr. Kislock will provide verifiable facts the next time he writes a letter.  Perhaps he will also get his quotes correct.

© 2004 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.