Commission Coverup? Able Danger

Deborah Orin's New York Post editorial:

"IT'S starting to look as if the 9/11 Commission turned a blind eye to key questions that could embarrass one of its own members — Clinton-era Justice Department honcho Jamie Gorelick."

"Now that the 9/11 staff acknowledges there was intelligence about an Atta cell more than a year before the terror attacks, it's fair to ask if the attacks might have been stopped were it not for the Reno-Gorelick wall of separation."

US Attorney Mary Jo White, a Clinton appointee, wrote directly to Janet Reno in 1995 that the wall was a big mistake: "The most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating."

"The CIA may have failed to detect the hijackers, but it appears that military intelligence did better. Maybe the real problem wasn't an intelligence failure — as the 9/11 Commission concluded — but, rather, the Reno-Gorelick wall."

Related: Able Danger
-- LynZee

John Podhoretz:
"The 9/11 Commission staff did hear about intelligence-gathering efforts that hit pay dirt on the whereabouts of Mohammed Atta -- in 1999 -- and deliberately chose to omit word of those efforts."

"And why? Because to do so might upset the timeline the Commission had established on Atta."

"And why is that significant? Because the Mohammed Atta timeline established by the Commission pointedly insisted Atta did not meet with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague."

"And why is that significant? Because debunking the Atta-Iraq connection was of vital importance to Democrats, who had become focused almost obsessively on the preposterous notion that there was no relation whatever between Al Qaeda and Iraq."

Power Line: Whitewashing the Wall?

Update:
Power Line -- Whitewashing the wall? Part II
"Jim Geraghty at TKS has a nice summary of the Able Danger revelations." (what we know, what we don't)

Michelle Malkin has a roundup.