Clinton: The FBI's Favorite Distraction?

There is much that the average person does not understand about 9/11—no, I am not referring to conspiracy theories, per se, but an understanding of the kind of thinking that actually permeated some of our institutions charged with the protection of the country and its citizenry. One case in point pertains to the FBI under the direction of Louis Freeh.

In 1960, an activist out of New York and living in West Palm Beach and I got together via the Internet and carried forward an idea of creating a newspaper/online presence that would probe all aspects of governance and legislation affecting the common good of the people.

Up til that time, no one else had gone from an Internet presence to a political journal; no one else had taken it upon themselves to create a news vehicle that had as its focus a government that was intent upon dismantling itself through essentially programs and legislation that were bad for the American people and destructive of the democratic concept.

When the venture started, I agreed to handle marketing and do some editorial work. We were beginning to get off the ground, when 911 hit and we discovered that no red-blooded American would criticize their government when facing off against some terrorist plot. We lost our funding and our mandate. The point of all of this, however, is that in our last issue we were going to print an interview with a fairly high level CIA contact who had opened some avenues for exploration for us.

One of the avenues had to do with Louis Freeh and relations between the CIA and the FBI.
As you may or may not know, Louis Freeh hated Bill Clinton with a passion and he would have done anything in his power to eliminate him. They were people of very different cultures. Louis Freeh was a member of Opus Dei; he was religious to the point that it was said that he would feel comfortable wearing a hair-shirt or practicing self-flagellation.. Clinton was a liberal, a progressive—the antithesis of what Louis Freeh stood for and Monica Lewinsky was the last straw as far as he was concerned.

Towards the end of Clinton’s administration, Clinton issued a warning that bin Laden and al Qaeda posed a serious threat to this country. Therefore, it became very curious that the FBI seemed to make such a tenuous effort to zero in on the challenges that were emerging here at home--especially in light of the first attempt on the WTC and, later, the incident with the Cole and the attacks on the embassies in Africa. It was later learned that those who had originally attacked the WTC had detailed plans in their possession of the building that were seized at the time of the raid; only nobody bother to check the files. However, at the time, we had virtually nobody with the appropriate language skills who could read through and translate the many dozens of records obtained through the raid.

Why were we so poorly prepared even though threats were issued to the US and that there had been attempts and warnings about the potential for terrorist hi-jackings?

One of the answers given to us that enabled the terrorists to fulfill their threat, was that instead of concentrating their efforts on bin Laden and al Qaeda, Louis Freeh had mobilized his ‘troops’ to focus full time on gaining additional evidence against Bill Clinton. We had been told that more than two hundred of the FBI’s best agents had been focused on Bill Clinton and not the enemy.

I later learned that our informant also explained the problem the CIA had in working with the FBI. The FBI, through its culture or arrogance or both would not accept any information gleaned from CIA sources. Their explanation: It would not be admissible in a court of law. That was at least partially true as a result of a law passed during the Carter years; however, the FBI’s tendency to block out the CIA seemed to evolve more from culture than anything else and proved detrimental in a deadly way to any progress on terrorism. .

John O’Neill, the only agent in the FBI it seemed who was fully cognizant of the challenges posed by terrorist organizations, was defeated at every turn when he attempted to ratchet up the FBI’s anti-terrorist activities post the original attack on the WTC. He felt the frustration keenly and was eventually forced to resign and, ironically, became Director of Security for the WTC where he lost his life at the time of the attacks..

Later on, after the terrorist attacks on the WTC, Louis Freeh simply walked away from his job returning only to give testimony about his view of the world and then disappearing once again into the background. Unfortunately, many of the questions surrounding the FBI's failures have not been adequately answered or explained to the public's satisfaction. In the end, for America to become whole again, the people must feel confident in the work their government is doing to protect the American way of life. To date, this has not happened and too many are cynical about how we've been manipulated and our questions and inquiries shunted aside. Clearly, this entire subject needs to be revisited with fresh eyes and perhaps greater objectivity that is less prone to political advantage.