Well, considering that what I've said isn't what Podhoretz said, I feel no special need to consider his apology as anything more than apology for one word he used. It in no way obviates my point nor is he the "initial perpetrator". You may note that I talked at length about the Gorelick "wall" during the 9/11 Commission hearings. This isn't a new subject to me, though I believe it may be to you.

If you're looking for an apology, you're not going to find it here today. I will tell you what I know about the Gorelick "wall", learned by reading her actual memo, the transcripts and reports from the 9/11 Commission, and Mary Jo White's memos in response to Gorelick.

I'll also give you a link to start you off: an article by Andrew McCarthy who was an chief assistance US Attorney in the 1990s (the Clinton administration) who successfuly prosecuted a dozen terrorists. He has firsthand experience with the "wall" and the overall mood that procedure cast on the entire government. You might find it interesting reading.

What Gorelick did was to erect a procedural wall between the investigative and intelligence parts of the Justice Department. That was one aspect of the "wall". The other aspect, which was equally important, was not a matter of procedure but of attitude. You could call it "cultural" if you want. That aspect was born of Gorelick's demand that the government go beyond the requirements of the wall – to extend the limitations beyond what the law required.

The idea was that Gorelick wanted to shield federal criminal investigations from the possibility of being tossed out of court because of the influence of intelligence information. The emphasis was on law enforcement – catching terrorists and sending them to jail after they had already committed the crimes. That's fine if you're willing to ignore the corpses those crimes caused. You may be. I honestly don't know.

The current culture is to share information, regardless of the impact on after-the-fact prosecutions, in order to prevent terrorist attacks. Had that culture been in place years ago, there was at least the possibility that 3000 people would be alive who are not today. It's not by any means a certainty, but there was that possibility.

Many details about the Able Danger revelations are still up in the air. What is not, at least not by anyone informed on the matter and capable of critical thinking, is that the Gorelick "wall" played a definite role in the information not getting to the FBI.

I welcome your sending visitors to the site. I'm always glad to have more readers. All I ask is that the comments remain relatively decent and refrain from ad hominem attacks. I give you a little more leeway than normal because you're a friend of Grace's and because your posts make me laugh.

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/19/podhertz-liar… http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individ…

But the initial perpetrator of the lie RECANTS:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/20/podhoretz-fin…

But nothing said on this site about, "oops, we got this wrong!"

I'll be sure and send people over here who are looking for false information since that seems to be your stock-in-trade.

Great article here about one a military officer who says he did, in fact, report about Able Danger to the 9/11 Commission, and that he is sure Atta was on the list.

If he’s telling the truth, then the entire history of the last five years needs to …

A 'Politically Correct' Footnote

Even tho it's from Karen Feld's gossip column, it's still valid. Just trust me on this one.

So many missed opportunities. Frankly, I’m at a loss as to what else to say at this point about this.