Kissinger Associates, Inc.

The final report of the bipartisan Congressional committee investigating lapses in the performance of the CIA, FBI, NSC, and other intelligence agencies related to the 9/11 attacks was not released today.

The committee has finished its work and submitted their report but the Bush administration, citing "national security", declined to declassify much of the information uncovered during the 10-month, $2.6-million investigation. As reported in the St. Petersburg Times, Steven Aftergood, an intelligence analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, noted:

"The Bush administration is withholding information from the panel's report on national security grounds when the true motive may be to avoid political embarrassment. For example, the inquiry was denied information it sought about Saudi Arabia's role in international terrorism."

The most generous interpretation of this is that the Bush Administration does not want to further upset the poor Saudis while we are trying to get their help in the "War on Terrorism ®." More realistically, the administration knows that the information will be acutely embarrassing to the Saudis and US government or business interests, particularly some of the oil, defense and industrial cronies of the Bush-Cheney junta.

When Bush named Henry Kissinger to head up the independent cover-up commission, the reaction was, to put it mildly, sceptical. Now he has resigned, citing the fact that to disclose his client list and to untangle all of the potential conflicts of interest would require him to liquidate his consulting firm. This was preceded by the resignation of Ex-Sen Mitchell, who also cited potential conflicts of interest which would require him to sever all ties with his law firm. Who exactly do they represent and what have they been getting for their clients from the US government?

The trial lawyer's dictum is "You should never ask a question for which you don't know the answer." The Bush administration has been forced into this inquiry. They know the answers so their only strategy is not to ask the questions. They could depend on Kissinger. They knew, even if the answers came out, they would be buried. Now, they need to delay the appointment of the commission and to appoint compliant members. So, expect a long delay in naming the Republican appointees, scheduling the Congressional hearings to approve the appointees, and an equally long delay in approval by the Congress. Then, once the commission is named, there will be much wrangling and accusations of "politicizing the investigation" from the Republican side and "stonewalling" from the Democratic side. When the report comes out, it will be classified and highly redacted by the administration, on the grounds of "national security." In their best case scenario, the report will be issued after the 2004 election, then either be buried or discredited by the GOP media machine.

When Henry Kissinger was named by President Bush to head the "independent" probe of the September 11 attacks, the reaction was nearly unanimous scepticism and doubt. His history and assumed conflicts of interest were defended by none other than prior Kissinger gadfly William Safire. His back-handed endorsement was slammed by the New Republic:

"Of all the idiotic thoughts William Safire cobbles together in his tortured defense of Henry Kissinger's selection to head the government's 9/11 commission, this one stands out: Just as F.D.R. appointed Joseph P. Kennedy as first chairman of the S.E.C. because that predator knew all the manipulative tricks, Bush chose Kissinger because the old operator can see through the secret obfuscations he mastered long ago.

"Ignore the fact that this is the point apologists always make when a conflict-of-interest-ridden candidate is asked to perform some function in the public interest. In this case it doesn't even make sense. That is, a shady financier like Joe Kennedy probably did know a lot about the shady financial practices the SEC was created to crack down on. Whether or not he was especially eager to blow the whistle on them is another matter. But in this case it's not 'secret obfuscations' that the 9/11 commission is supposed to be rooting out. (If it was, God knows Kissinger would be the right man for the job.) It's general incompetence on the part of the nation's intelligence apparatus. (Though there is the possibility of intentional oversights by the administration with respect to the Saudi government, which would be closer to Kissinger's area of expertise.) For getting to the bottom of these matters, Kissinger's record of obfuscation (some would say lies)--not to mention his desperate need to be liked by those in power--are, needless to say, the exact opposite of what you'd want."

Despite the wrong-headedness of this appointment, criticism was muted on the right and in the press. As Joe Conanson said in Salon:

"The mainstream press has performed poorly, as predicted, in the face of Henry Kissinger's outrageous appointment to chair the 'independent' commission on 9/11. Although a few mildly worded editorials have questioned Kissinger's past record and present conflicts of interest, notably in the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, the media's investigation of the investigator has been noticeably limp.

"In response to the very mildest questions about his private clients, the old reprobate spouts his usual non sequiturs: 'No law firm discloses its clients,' he declares in the New York Times today. Of course, that's false on two counts: His firm doesn't practice law, and law firms are required to disclose their lobbying clients on Capitol Hill, in every state capital and in most city halls. He also noted that he 'had no clients in the government of Saudi Arabia,' but he represents no governments at all – just corporations that want favors from governments. (I'm familiar with this phony routine because I investigated Kissinger's ties to the U.S. Iraq-Business Forum, a Washington lobby that fronted for Saddam, before the Gulf War. My editors at the New Republic received a furious letter from Henry that addressed none of the facts in the article.)"

Last week, the criticism intensified as, first, Dr. Kissinger promised that he would drop any client of his "consulting" firm if there was a conflict of interest. At the risk of being pedantic, let's be clear on this. These so-called consulting firms of ex-office-holders are arrangements where wealthy persons and businesses pay politically connected people for access to administration and legislative figures. Like Ex-President Bush (that does have a nice ring to it, doesn't it?) and his consulting with Carlyle Group providing inside access for the Saudis, the client list is likely to be embarrassing.

Kissinger's promise of probity was unconvincing, not surprisingly. Members of the press and Congress called for disclosure of the potential conflict of interests. The White House attempted to stonewall this with the bizarre assertion that Mr. Kissinger was a Presidential appointee and did not have to disclose his client list. Vocal protests by relatives of the 9/11 victims forced Mr. Kissinger to meet with them, where he next proposed revealing his client list to a third party, chosen by the victims' groups, who would review the list but still keep it secret. However, on Dec. 12, a legal opinion the Senate Ethics Committee said that all members of the commission would have to comply with Congressional financial disclosure requirements.

So, yesterday, rather than to put the interests of his country ahead of those of his clients and money, Kissinger resigned the appointment. Citing time demands and entanglements with his law firm, Mitchell had also resigned. This is the same man who tried to broker a peace in Northern Ireland, yet this was to close to home. I mean, business is business and the business of America is business. These resignations are becoming epidemic in the second Bush term.

It is sobering to consider that many Americans aid and abet the terrorists which have killed thousands of their countrymen and still continue to kill. The revolving door of ex-Congressmen and administration officials becoming lobbyists and "consultants" has been going on for years. People like Kissinger and Mitchell certainly represent oil companies and Saudi interests. With their influence, these companies make money in the US market, money which flows back to the Middle East and into the hands of terrorists and their supporters. Yet, now it seems the corruption reaches to the highest levels. Administration policies specifically benefit politically- and economically-connected cronies. The Bush family's years of association with the oil industry and the Saudis make all of their decisions suspect. They cannot even find a single trusted associate for this commission who is not also connected to this nexus of evil.

Out-going Senate Majority Lader Daschle replaced Mitchell with former Rep. Lee Hamilton and appointed four other members to the panel: outgoing Sen. Max Cleland, outgoing Rep. Timothy Roemer, attorney Richard Ben-Veniste, and Jamie Gorelick, an ex-deputy attorney general during the Clinton administration.

On the Republican side, there are major issues. Soon-to-be Majority Leader Sen. Lott appointed former Sen. Slade Gorton to the panel. In an agreement with the White House, Sens. Shelby and McCain have the remaining appointment to the commission. Shelby and McCain want former Sen. Warren Rudman in the post. Lott appears to be blocking Rudman's appointment, as detailed also by Dwight Meredith. Like the appointment of Mr. Friedman as economic advisor, Rudman's independent reputation and association with the Concord Coalition opposing tax cuts and deficits has made him unsuitable to the current Republican leadership. The issue is important because it will take six votes on the 10-member commission to issue subpoenas. GOP political strategists believe Rudman is more likely than a White House loyalist to side with the other five Democrats on the commission in disputes over issuing subpoenas. Thus, they stand the risk that the commission will actually investigate and release its findings, instead of creating a slick cover-up as planned.

Posted by Gordon at December 15, 2002 12:52 AM | E-mail Author | Back to main page