Millions of taxpayer dollars were spent on a so-called National Commission on Terrorism, a bipartisan group which officially released its report on June 5th. The chairman was Paul Bremer of Kissinger Associates. But like so much of what happens in Washington, D.C., it was leaked beforehand to the Washington Post, which put its recommendations in a page one story, and the New York Times which carried a story back on page 6. The bottom line: the commission wants more taxpayer dollars spent on terrorism, and it thinks the CIA and the FBI need more power.

The controversy, from the viewpoint of the Washington Post, was that giving the government more power would provoke the opposition of civil libertarians. This is a legitimate concern. But the real story is why the commission failed to subject the Clinton Administration's policy on terrorism to serious scrutiny. It's true that the commission was critical of the Administration' handling of Iran and Libya, but it failed to explain why a policy of appeasement is being implemented toward Libya in particular.

The report suggests that the Pan Am 103 terrorism trial is a sham. This 1988 bombing of an American airliner killed 270 people, including 189 Americans. Two Libyans are now on trial for the crime. The report says that "prosecuting and punishing two-level operatives for an act almost certainly directed by Gadhafi is a hollow victory, particularly if the trial results in his implicit exoneration." It fails to explain that a deal was brokered by the U.N. to let Gadhafi off the hook for the bombing if he turned over those two operatives.

Why is such a policy being pursued? Ed Badolato, executive director of the International Association of Counterterrorism and Security Professionals, recently told a Capitol Hill luncheon that the pro-Libya policy was being driven by Conoco and other oil companies, which are desperate to get back into Libya and make oil deals with Gadhafi. The commission didn't talk about this, and the media didn't ask why. Another issue ignored by the commission and the media was the alleged foreign connection to the Oklahoma City bombing, and why the government has failed to pursue it. Convicted bomber Terry Nichols had connections to the Philippines, where Muslim terrorists are very active. Middle East analyst Laurie Mylroie believes Iraq was behind Oklahoma City. So does Stephen Jones, lawyer for the other convicted bomber, Timothy McVeigh.

Still another matter is what caused the TWA 800 explosion. More than 200 eyewitnesses saw a missile hit the plane. Was this because of terrorists? Or was the Navy testing a system designed to shoot down enemy missiles? The government is scheduled to release a report on what caused the explosion in August. It apparently wants the public to believe that a mysterious fuel tank explosion caused the crash, but the National Transportation Safety Board recently test-fired Stinger missiles to determine if this is what those witnesses may have seen.

Terrorism is a serious issue, but it hasn't been handled seriously by this panel or the media reporting its findings. This commission report can't be said to be a cover-up, but it was clearly a superficial effort. The media coverage wasn't any better.

 

America’s Survival, P.O. Box 146, Owings, MD 20736 www.usasurvival.org