Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Secret Service in FOIA request says sources cited by 9/11 CR on Cheney and PEOC don't exist?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:31 PM
Original message
Secret Service in FOIA request says sources cited by 9/11 CR on Cheney and PEOC don't exist?
Permission obtained to reproduce full article.

The documents requested in the FOIA are the SS logs confirming the arrival times of Cheney and others at the PEOC bunker on Sept. 11. This is important, many will remember, in figuring out who's telling falsehoods in the conflicting versions between Cheney and his entourage vs. Mineta and Clark, and whether Cheney was really in the PEOC prior to the Pentagon crash and handling Flight 77 and possibly ordering a defense standdown.

I wonder whether the original FOIA request cited directly the documents as listed in the 9/11 CR footnotes. Perhaps the SS is simply pretending they don't get what the request is actually for, which could only be a play-dumb strategy, a lie. Alternatively, they or the 9/11 Com lied when they pretended the documents were genuine in the first place during the 9/11 com investigation.

Bit by bit, nothing will be left of the 9/11 CR. Almost not a single source cited in it will be taken seriously - especially the CIA reports on torture interrogations of supposed prisoners the 9/11 Com never saw and who may or may not said what is attributed to them, or be the same people they're identified as, or even exist except as actors (like, "KSM"). Torture of interrogations, tapes of which at first didn't exist, then got "destroyed," and which form the core of the 9/11 CR.

---

http://911truth.org/article.php?story=2008050770616110

Secret Service--No Records of Cheney's Arrival in the Bunker on 9/11


May 5, 2008
by Aidan Monaghan

The following is a response from the U.S. Secret Service to a Freedom of Information Act request for the arrival time of U.S. vice president Richard Cheney at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) on September 11, 2001, as well as the names of all those granted entry there that day.

Dear Requester:

Reference is made to your Freedom of InformationlPrivacy Acts requests originally received by the United States Secret Service on April 17, 2008, for information pertaining to the following:

File no. 20080330: copies of documentation pertaining to the names of persons admitted entry into the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) located within the White House on September 11, 2001 ;

File no. 20080331: copies of documentation which reveal the time on September 11, 2001, Vice President of the United States Richard Cheney entered the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) located within the White House.

A review of the Secret Service's systems of records indicated that there are no records or documents pertaining to your requests in Secret Service files. Enclosed is a copy of your original request.

If you disagree with our determination, you have the right of administrative appeal within 35 days by writing to Freedom of Information Appeal, Deputy Director, U. S. Secret Service, Communications Center, 245 Murray Lane, SW, Building T-5, Washington, D.C. 20223. If you choose to file an administrative appeal, please explain the basis of your appeal and reference the case number listed above.

Craig W. Ulmer
Special Agent In Charge
Freedom ofInformation &
Privacy Acts Officer

From the History Commons:

(9:10 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Rice and Cheney Apparently Go to White House Bunker; Other Accounts Have Cheney Moving Locations Later

According to counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke and others, Vice President Dick Cheney goes from his White House office to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), a bunker below the East Wing of the White House, at about this time. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, after initiating a video conference with Richard Clarke in the West Wing, goes to the PEOC to be with Cheney. There is no video link between response centers in the East and West Wings, but a secure telephone line is used instead. One eyewitness, David Bohrer, a White House photographer, says Cheney leaves for the PEOC just after 9:00 a.m. White House adviser Karl Rove, who is with the president in Florida, appears to corroborate this account, later telling NBC News that when Bush tries phoning Cheney at around 9:16 a.m., he is unable to contact him because “the vice president was being… grabbed by a Secret Service agent and moved to the bunker” (see (9:16 a.m.-9:29 a.m.) September 11, 2001). And Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta says that when he arrives at the PEOC, at around 9:20-9:27, Cheney is already there (see (Between 9:20 a.m. and 9:27 a.m.) September 11, 2001). However, there is a second account claiming that Cheney doesn’t leave until sometime after 9:30 a.m. In this account, Secret Service agents burst into Cheney’s White House office. They carry him under his arms—nearly lifting him off the ground—and propel him down the steps into the White House basement and through a long tunnel toward the underground bunker. According to journalist and author Stephen Hayes, it takes “Less than a minute” for the Secret Service agents to escort Cheney from his office down to the secure tunnel leading to the PEOC. At about the same time, National Security Adviser Rice is told to go to the bunker as well. Despite admitting that there “is conflicting evidence about when the vice president arrived” in the PEOC, the 9/11 Commission will conclude that the “vice president arrived in the room shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.” <9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 40> In addition to the eyewitness accounts of Clarke, Mineta, and Bohrer, several accounts claim that Cheney is in the bunker when he is told Flight 77 is 50 miles away from Washington, at about 9:26 a.m.

(Between 9:20 a.m. and 9:27 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Transportation Secretary Mineta Reaches Bunker, Meets Vice President Cheney

Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta arrives at the White House bunker—the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC)—containing Vice President Dick Cheney and others. Mineta will tell NBC News that he arrives there at “probably about 9:27,” though he later says to the 9/11 Commission that he arrives at “about 9:20 a.m.” He also later recalls that Cheney is already there when he arrives. This supports accounts of Cheney reaching the bunker not long after the second WTC crash (see (9:10 a.m.) September 11, 2001). Questioned about this in 2007 by an activist group, Mineta will confirm that Cheney was “absolutely… already there” in the PEOC when he arrived, and that “This was before American Airlines went into the Pentagon,” which happens at 9:37. Yet, while admitting there is “conflicting evidence about when the vice president arrived” in the PEOC, the 9/11 Commission will conclude that the “vice president arrived in the room shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.” Mineta also later claims that when he arrives in the PEOC, Mrs. Lynne Cheney, the wife of the vice president, is already there. Yet the 9/11 Commission will claim she only arrives at the White House at 9:52 (see (9:52 a.m.) September 11, 2001). <9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 40; 911truthseattle (.org), 6/26/2007> Once in the PEOC, Mineta establishes open phone lines with his office at the Department of Transportation and with the FAA Operations Center.

(9:26 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Cheney Given Updates on Unidentified Flight 77 Heading toward Washington; Says ‘Orders Still Stand’

According to some accounts, Vice President Cheney is in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) below the White House by this time, along with Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and National Security Adviser Rice. Mineta says that, while a suspicious plane is heading toward Washington, an unidentified young man comes in and says to Cheney, “The plane is 50 miles out.” Mineta confers with Acting FAA Deputy Administrator Monte Belger, who is at the FAA’s Washington headquarters. Belger says to him, “We’re watching this target on the radar, but the transponder’s been turned off. So we have no identification.” According to Mineta, the young man continues updating the vice president, saying, “The plane is 30 miles out,” and when he gets down to “The plane is 10 miles out,” asks, “Do the orders still stand?” In response, Cheney “whipped his neck around and said, ‘Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?’” Mineta says that “just by the nature of all the events going on,” he infers that the order being referred to is a shoot-down order. Nevertheless, Flight 77 continues on and hits the Pentagon. However, the 9/11 Commission will later claim the plane heading toward Washington is only discovered by the Dulles Airport air traffic control tower at 9:32 a.m. (see 9:32 a.m. September 11, 2001). But earlier accounts, including statements made by the FAA and NORAD, will claim that the FAA notified the military about the suspected hijacking of Flight 77 at 9:24 a.m., if not before (see (9:24 a.m.) September 11, 2001). The FBI’s Washington Field Office was also reportedly notified that Flight 77 had been hijacked at about 9:20 a.m. (see (9:20 a.m.) September 11, 2001). The 9/11 Commission will further contradict Mineta’s account saying that, despite the “conflicting evidence as to when the Vice President arrived in the shelter conference room ,” it has concluded that he only arrived there at 9:58 a.m. It also claims that Condoleezza Rice only entered the PEOC shortly after Cheney did. <9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004> According to the Washington Post, the discussion between Cheney and the young aide over whether “the orders” still stand occurs later than claimed by Mineta, and is in response to Flight 93 heading toward Washington, not Flight 77.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great post again JR.
A new investigation must be made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. sources cited by 9/11 CR on Cheney and PEOC don't exist
sources cited by 9/11 CR on Cheney and PEOC don't exist




sources cited by 9/11 CR on Cheney and PEOC don't exist
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Which ones are those?
Please cite the footnotes to which you refer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
3. Perhaps the FOIA request asked the wrong question
A review of the Secret Service's systems of records indicated that there are no records or documents pertaining to your requests in Secret Service files.

The 9/11 commission report references

2. Edward Marinzel interview (Apr. 21, 2004); USSS memo, interview with Edward Marinzel, Oct. 3, 2001;
President Bush and Vice President Cheney meeting (Apr. 29, 2004);Ari Fleischer interview (Apr. 22, 2004);Deborah
Loewer meeting (Feb. 6, 2004);White House record, PEOC Watch Log, Sept. 11, 2001.

180. See White House record, Situation Room Log, Sept. 11, 2001;White House record, Presidential Emergency
Operations Center (PEOC) Watch Log, Sept. 11, 2001; DOD record, Senior Operations Officer log, Sept.
11, 2001.

213. On the Vice President’s call, see President Bush and Vice President Cheney meeting (Apr. 29, 2004). For
the Vice President’s time of arrival in the shelter conference room, see White House record, PEOC Shelter Log,
Sept. 11, 2001 (9:58);

216. In reconstructing events that occurred in the PEOC on the morning of 9/11, we relied on (1) phone logs
of the White House switchboard; (2) notes of Lewis Libby, Mrs. Cheney, and Ari Fleischer; (3) the tape (and then
transcript) of the air threat conference call; and (4) Secret Service and White House Situation Room logs, as well
as four separate White House Military Office logs (the PEOC Watch Log, the PEOC Shelter Log, the Communications
Log, and the 9/11 Log).



216 is the only reference to Secret Service logs, and they are lumped in with the White House logs. It's possible White House record keeping is separate from SS record keeping, or that SS records related to WH activities are maintained in the WH. The point being the records may not be lost, but the requester simply asked for the wrong records.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Excuses, excuses...
How many logs are there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Please don't interrupt "Operation Vigilant Water Carrier"...
it confuses them too much...

:evilgrin:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. OVWC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I think it's rather catchy, don't you?
:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I'm not making excuses
I only pointing out that perhaps the requestor was not specific enoungh in the FOIA request.

I was once involved in requesting documents from my local government. I made the mistakes of not being very specific in my request and recieved about 10 documents when I was expecting about 500 documents. I figuured out that because I did not specify with exactness what I wanted, they were free to interpret my request in a way that suited them. Once that was corrected I got what I wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. No, Lared makes a very valid point.
It appears as though Monaghan made his request to the wrong entity. A governmental agency in receipt of FOIA requests has no obligation whatsoever to go looking to other governmental agencies in order to respond to requests. Their obligation extends only to searching their own records.

Perhaps Monaghan will submit a request to the sources identified in the footnotes, and he may get different results. Or, you could make a request to the listed sources yourself, of course.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. I can't help but wonder if the request was made knowing
Edited on Sat Jun-21-08 09:36 PM by LARED
the results it would deliver, just so the 9/11 inside job industry could get a lift. I hope not, but it sure makes me wonder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Are you suggesting a *conspiracy*??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:26 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Yes I am
I think it pretty obvious people market idiotic 9/11 theories in order to profit and for political "people management" purposes. I really don't think that's the case here, but I'm just asking question you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mhatrw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Yes, exactly! It's the fault of the people who want to know the truth.
And surely not the fault of the people suppressing the truth.

Or are you saying everyone conspired together to keep this information from being released?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. No, I'm saying
it is possible that the FOIA requester purposefully asked for information in a way that would make it appear files were destroyed or hidden for the purpose of disseminating false information. This may have been done to market 9/11 memes or it may have been for political purposes or it could just be a simple mistake. I'm just asking questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 06:06 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. You have no evidence of that whatsoever! nt
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Just connect the dots
Simple inductive reasoning can easily bring one to the conclusion that Mr. Monaghan is simply doing this to market 9/11 CT's, hence improving his slice of the market. If true it's certainly a clever market differentiation strategy.

Look at the facts

The original FOIA request is nowhere to be found so no one can get the evidence.
The FOIA response sure seems to indicate he asked for the wrong information
Mr. Monaghan is a seasoned 9/11 investigator, who is unlikely to make an error like this.
This new story is uncritically accepted by the 9/11 truther media with little critical review.
Mr. Monaghan clearly has a financial incentive to expand the 9/11 truther movement.

And I'm just asking questions

You have a problem with asking questions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. There is no question in your post.
Assertions.

No questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. I'm just speculatiing. What's wrong with that? - nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. No connecting the dots is CT!
You must have evidence or else you're a nutcase conspiracy theorist! Isn't that how it's been working here in the dungeon? :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. So are you skeptical about the motives of the requester or not?
9/11 CT's are virtually built on inductive reasoning (much of it borders on the irrational) that is dressed up like evidence.


So if you want to be intellectually honest you must admit my speculation is worth investigating.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. How many PEOC logs do you think they had to consider?
It's not as if it's some obscure document.

You'd think the WH would be keen to clear this up once and for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. We do not even know if the WH was aware of the request
It was apparently sent to the SS. I certainly believe the WH knew, but are you expecting the SS or WH to go out of it's way to provide this information if they may not be legally required to do so?

Why is this a difficult concept for you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Does the SS have a log of it's actions?
Like when then dragged Cheney off to the PEOC?
Who mans the door the of PEOC?
The SS must have some record of their actions to do with moving Cheney to the bunker.
Absolutely must!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. How would I know. I suggest you submit a FOIA request
asking for the protocols the SS use in the event someone is hustled off to the PEOC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #36
45. A FOIA request has been submitted
the log wasn't found.

They know which log it is, it's not exactly obscure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #33
40. Yeah, I'm sure in all the panic and confusion...
they stopped to log every detail. Are you sure you think you're logical?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. For legal purposes I'm pretty sure that what they did
got logged otherwise they are open to all kinds of trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #42
48. Legal purposes?
You think the primary function of any log the SS keeps is for legal purposes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Lared? Do you admit any speculation is worth investigating?

"9/11 CT's are virtually built on inductive reasoning (much of it borders on the irrational) that is dressed up like evidence. "
That's your opinion lared. We disagree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Did you discover material evidence regarding a 9/11 inside job
Please share.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. The actions of Bush, Card and the SS in the Florida classroom..
all indicate forknowledge.

It's never been explained and that needs to be dealt with under a new investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. Your kidding right? The actions in the classroom
indicate whatever someone wants them to indicate. That's not evidence of diddlesquat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #35
43. It's demands an explanation...
so far I haven't seen one that makes sense other than they knew what was happenening and Card was merely updating Bush, and they knew they were safe because the SS didn't move them.

Rove's first attempt "he didn't want to scare the children" is ridiculous.

It's evidence alright.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 05:22 AM
Response to Reply #43
46. So you are demanding an explanation you like
verses the explanation that was already given. Yes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 06:24 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. What is the explanation already given? nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #43
49. Look at the tape again, Bassman...
Bush is clearly startled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. Oh, bullshit, Bassman
there are plenty of other reasonable explanations for it. I think your claim to be logical is, to put it mildly, risible. In fact, many illogical people think they're logical simply because they lack the congnitive skills to recognize their illogicality. I'd highly suggest you read, "Unskilled and Unaware of it".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. Give me a reasonable explanation then!
Edited on Mon Jun-23-08 01:26 AM by Bassman66
Explain to me why Bush asked no questions and Card expected no questions.

Explain to me how the SS knew they were safe even though they couldn't know a plane wasn't being hijacked over their heads at that very moment.

This will be interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #44
50. Jesus, Bassman...
Edited on Mon Jun-23-08 12:32 PM by SDuderstadt
I am, in no way, defending Bush's response. For my part, what I think he should have done is politely excuse himself, find the first fucking secure phone he could find and call the NSC and find out exactly what the hell was going on. You have zero idea what was gong through Bush's mind at all, nor Card's, for that matter. You are more than entitled to question their response. But you go off half-cocked and make screwy assumptions with NO knowledge of what was going on outside camera range, no idea of SS protocol, etc. How do you know that the perpetrators didn't plan the attack for that time because they WANTED him away from the Capitol in order to further hamstring the response?

How in the fuck do you know the SS thought they were safe? How do you know exactly what the SS was doing in those moments? What information were they seeking? Do you honestly think that, without more information, they should just move him willy-nilly out into the open? Did anyone know for sure the only potential threats were hijacked planes? Do you honestly believe that staying in the school was less safe than moving him to a vehicle?

You've claimed before to be a very logical person. However, if you were, you'd ask yourself the very questions I've posed instead of just leaping to the conclusions you've leapt to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seatnineb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
37. For once I actually agree with you...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. You would think someone would be eager to...
..clear this matter up.

How many bunker logs are there? It's hardly confusing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
21. Hmmm...
Reference is made to your Freedom of InformationlPrivacy Acts requests originally received by the United States Secret Service on April 17, 2008, for information pertaining to the following:

Who is responsible for the PEOC log?

It doesn't matter which filing system it's in.

Like I said, there's no confusion here, it's obvious which log the requester was referring to. Is it that difficult to find?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Bases on the 9/11 CR it would appear that the WH is
Edited on Sun Jun-22-08 12:20 PM by LARED
responsible for the PEOC log. And it does matter what filing system it is in. If the FOIA requester makes a request to the SS for information they don't have they are not going to forward it to the WH because they might have the records. They are going to write a letter saying sorry we don't have that information. That's just the way the system seems to work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Based on the 9/11 CR report it's not clear at all.
Would the SS keep a log of when they moved Cheney to the PEOC?
Who mans the door of the PEOC?

It's pretty obvious which log the FOIA requestor was referring to, is this another case of obstruction? You'd think someone in the WH would actually be eager to clear this up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. "It's pretty obvious which log the FOIA requestor was referring to"
Is it? I have not seen the FOIA request. Have you? What we do know is the FOIA request was denied because the SS did not have the information requested. Since we know the information exists, either the SS is lying and really do have the information, or the requester asked the wrong people for the information. Without seeing the actual request there is no way to know.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bassman66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. We know which document they are referring to.
So did the SS.

How many logs are there for recording entry to the PEOC?

Sounds like wilful obstruction to me and not at all in the spirit of the FOIA.

You'd think the WH would be eager to clear this up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
38. Okay, let's start with 216 (4): Secret Service logs. Where's that? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-22-08 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. As I said this is the only ref where the SS is even mentioned
And it is somewhat ambiguous. The footnote states "Secret Service and White House Situation Room logs" The SS could have taken it technically as "Secret Service and White House Situation Room logs" and said nope there is no such thing. Or perhaps those logs are maintained by the WH and the SS can say nope we don't have those on file here.

My point is that without seeing the FOIA request, there is no way to know if this is just run of the mill bureaucratic wordsmithing to prevent the information from being made public, (something very common) or if this is a willful obstruction by the SS.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. Which sources are those?
Please cite the specific footnotes to which you refer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC