home

Waxman Asks Whether Politics Influenced Decision Not to Release Terrorism Data

by TChris

As TalkLeft noted here, the State Department, having issued a misleading report last year concerning worldwide terrorist attacks, decided not to release the statistics this year. Rep. Henry Waxman has written to State Department Acting Inspector General Cameron Hume, complaining that the State Department is denying "public access to important information about the incidence of terrorism." Waxman wonders whether the Bush administration is releasing information selectively, and asked the IG whether the State Department's decision was based on politics.

"There appears to be a pattern in the administration's approach to terrorism data: favorable facts are revealed while unfavorable facts are suppressed," Waxman wrote. "This is wrong," he added. "Regardless of whether disclosure of the terrorism data is in the political interests of the White House, the public has a right to know basic facts about the number of attacks launched by terrorists in 2004."

Waxman isn't alone in recognizing the administation's pattern of concealing data that doesn't support its warped perception of reality. The State Department claims that the data will be released by the National Counterterrorism Center, but that seems to be news to the NCTC. The CIA, speaking on behalf of the newly formed NCTC, said "no decisions had been made on whether to release the data."

< Minutemen End Patrols | Which One Is the Candidate? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    really does make you wonder WTF is going on with this Administration. General Clark was right: "I think we're dealing with the most closed, imperialistic, nastiest administration in living memory. They even put Richard Nixon to shame."

    Re: Waxman Asks Whether Politics Influenced Decisi (none / 0) (#2)
    by Darryl Pearce on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 03:40:19 PM EST
    I found CounterTerrorism to be an interesting website.

    Re: Waxman Asks Whether Politics Influenced Decisi (none / 0) (#3)
    by marty on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 05:11:31 PM EST
    A big AMEN! to Gen. Clark's views.......this has been apparent for some time. This is government by willful deception and propaganda. I was one who wanted Clark and/or Dean to be elected, but even came to proudly vote for Kerry. Any of those three are light-years of ahead of W as both leaders....and as men. That this ill-informed, shallow deceiver can go about speaking about his love of "liberty" and "freedom" and sending others to die for it, while running the type of Administration he does is sickening and profoundly un-American. 2006 and 2008 cannot come soon enough. We want our country back!!

    Re: Waxman Asks Whether Politics Influenced Decisi (none / 0) (#4)
    by paige on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 05:56:06 PM EST
    Does Waxman ever receive answers (even if they are entirely unsatisfactory)? I read many blog entries about Waxman asking for answers; I never read blog entries about the answers he receives.

    Re: Waxman Asks Whether Politics Influenced Decisi (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 07:04:02 PM EST
    You can't trust the information from the USDA; you can't trust the information from the FDA; you can't trust the information from the CIA; you can't even trust the information from Fish and Wildlife; you can't trust the information from any US agency anymore, it's all tainted.

    Waxman should be careful. Challenging the military industrial complex may be hazardous to your health.

    marty wrote: "2006 and 2008 cannot come soon enough." The change of the calendar isn't going to mean anything if you live in one of the TWENTY-EIGHT states that no longer have a right to recount honored by the state. Demand recountable elections NOW, or get ready to cry some more in a couple of years. Go, Waxman! In response to Paige, no, he is getting stone-walled. Go to his website -- it's very interesting. And, CA, no one needs to note that at this point. It is quite heroic to oppose these felons, and America needs its heroes. Kerry won the election. We've fielded two excellent leaders already since the millenia, and the bench is fairly deep with great Americans. And even the Rs are starting to get nervous about what is going down.

    A good question on Henry's part. And as a follow up: Did politics influenced Waxman's decision to ask this question? The answer seems obvious in both cases.

    Waxman's JOB IS TO ASK QUESTIONS, so, no politics had nothing to do with it. It's his job. And the stonewalling White House is not his fault, at all. But thanks for another nonresponsive head-feint attempt to distract from the real issue. Go get your lollipop -- you earned it. Rep. Waxman has a long history of sticking it to both parties in gov't.

    I love this guy. He is a standup guy. So was Paul Wellstone. Be careful Henry and keep asking those questions. Paul in LA and I agree on the absolute necessity of a vote that can be counted and recounted. As many times as it takes. Otherwise we truly get the candidates that the machine selects for us. As others have said, I get a receipt when I pump $10 worth of gas, but I can't get a receipt in the polling booth?

    Even if you get the receipt, CA, you don't get the recount right that goes with it, you've got nothing. We PAID the $125,000, donation by donation, that supposedly secured for us a recount of the votes that did get recorded in Ohio (nevermind the tens of thousands that Bush & Blackwell didn't let get recorded). And...BUPKIS. They dragged their feet, and shut down the effort, and got threatened by the court, but then, surprise, the clock ran out. And then we get AFFIDAVITS from election officials around the state that Triad systems' techs went around changing out the circuit boards in the tabulation machines, statewise -- A STACK OF FELONIES -- and also conveniently supplied FALSE numbers to be reported "regardless of what the machines say." Another set of felonies. Justice Dept? See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil about Prince Bush, the Unelected. So it's not just receipts -- it's the RIGHT to TIMELY recounts, the elimination of partisan top election officials (SecStates), the elimination of partisan voting companies (including their partisan 'testing and certification' set-ups), the commitment to record and count ALL the votes of the voters who want to vote, and the 28th Amendment (Right to Vote), Jesse Jadckson Jr's or similar.

    Right. Politics had nothing to do with a politician doing his job. It's utterly inconceivable that he might have asked this question for anything other than pure historical interest. He couldn't possibly be interested in furthering his own political ambitions or in making those of who he opposes a little harder to achieve. Please. Henry asked a good question, but he didn't do it based on the purity of his heart.

    Agree entirely Paul in LA. Our election system has become a republican machine apparatus. This is very scary. Justpaul - so you can now see into another person's heart. That must be a useful skill.

    CA, Given the frequent claims here and elsewhere as to the motivations of Bush, Ashcroft, Gonzalez, et al., I'm just joining the faithful, aren't I? When we stop seeing politicians as political creatures, we are all in trouble.