Letters to the Editor

This letter is associated with the following article:
Did the attorney general just reveal a critical, previously unknown fact about the 9/11 attack, or did he lie about it to demand new spying powers?
  • My Email to Lee Hamilton

    Borrowing liberally from Glenn's post, here is what I sent to Lee Hamilton:

    "Subject: Michael Mukasey / Alleged Pre-9/11 Terrorist Call

    Last week, during a question-and-answer session following a speech he delivered in San Francisco, Attorney General Michael Mukasey claimed that, prior to 9/11, the Bush administration was aware of a telephone call being made by an Al Qaeda Terrorist from what he called a "safe house in Afghanistan" into the U.S., but failed to eavesdrop on that call. In that speech, Mukasey blamed FISA's warrant requirement for the failure to eavesdrop on that call -- an assertion which is, for multiple reasons, completely false. As you are aware, the 9/11 Commission Report -- intended to be a comprehensive account of all relevant pre-9/11 activities -- makes no mention whatsoever of the episode Mukasey described.

    As Vice-Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, it is your duty to confirm the veracity of these claims. The purpose of the 9/11 Commission was to ensure that there was full-scale investigation and disclosure of all facts relevant to the 9/11 attacks, including the Government's actions and inactions in preventing that attack from occurring. As such, preventing high government officials from lying about the 9/11 attacks or exposing concealment of key 9/11 facts is your obligation as Vice Chairman.

    I was heartened to read that you endorse Barack Obama for the presidency, and I agree that he will bring the right balance of diplomacy, judgment and toughness to the myriad foreign policy issues that confront us. But his mission will be severely hampered if this discrepancy is left unresolved.

    As the person with the authority to get to the truth, I strongly urge you to look into this critically important issue."