Sandy Berger convicted

Sandy Berger the scum bag steals classified documents from the National Archives. Documents dealing with Bin Laden and on terrorism. Berger has returned some of the documents but he but could not locate two or three copies of the highly classified millennium terror report. Seems he admitted to destryoing them to the judge.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39535


What was on those documents that he destroyed?


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39612
And why did berger block plans to get Bin laden 4 times?


This scumbag deserved more than the hand slap he recieved. Berger plead guilty and that he deliberately destroyed 3 copies dealing with terror threats during the millennium celebration. Could those copies have contained edvince opf Bin Laden's plans for 2001?


He gets a 10,000 US dollar fine and he loses his security clearance for 3 years. He should of recieved jail time and never been able to have top secret clearance again.

Scum bag? Pull your head in.We are talking misdemeanor with maximum sentence of one year. we'll never know exactly what was in those documents, but Berger was working on submissions to the 9/11 enquiry at the time, and it was terribly convenient that this story broke just before the damning report on the attack.
Leaders of the September 11 commission said they were able to get every key document needed to complete their report, so Bergers actions have not compromised any evidence gathering.The documents in question have been destroyed, so they're not going to fall into the wrong hands,and were never intended to.Even if they did, they are out of date intelligence reports, of no value to anyone.
The Republicans responsible for this 'prosecution of convenience' got what they wanted.Berger was the Democrat's adviser on national security for the Kerry campaign, and finding a tiny bit of mud that would stick removed a key player who may have shot down Bush's election claims.Bush based his whole re-election strategy on defence, and he wasn't going to risk being outsmarted by a better man such as Berger.

Berger has lost his security clearance, and as such, will be of no use to the Democrats election effort for the next election.I'm certain that he has been silenced for political purposes, and that the only scumbags in this whole matter are those responsible for this whole charade.

Really, Flatrater, I can't see what your problem is.It's perfectly normal behaviour for politicians to try and discredit each other.Demanding that your opponents be jailed to shut them up is reminiscent of the worst excesses of the McCarthy era, or the Hitler Youth.

But, he DID steal classified documents. You have to admit that although he said the destroyed them, they could have been put into the wrong hands. This man stole national security documents, and his credibility is shot.

Correct point about politicians seeking to discredit each other; however this doesn't seem to be a set-up by the republicans, since he did in fact remove the documents of his own volition.

He should of got the year in jail and the 10K US fine.

The documents in question have been destroyed, so they're not going to fall into the wrong hands

It wasn't his job to destroy anything. What was he trying to coverup? And can we be sure he destroyed them?

Even if they did, they are out of date intelligence reports, of no value to anyone.

Now couldn't the 911 commission used those reports? We'll never know what was on those documents that Berger wanted to destroy and we'll never know who he was trying to protect.

Really, Flatrater, I can't see what your problem is.It's perfectly normal behaviour for politicians to try and discredit each other.Demanding that your opponents be jailed to shut them up is reminiscent of the worst excesses of the McCarthy era, or the Hitler Youth.

I accept that it's normal behaviour but when you break the US laws you need to be punished. I can care less if it is a demcorat or republican. No man is above the law. If I did something like that I am sure I would of received the max punishment. Berger didn't get the max because of who he is.

And maybe if Berger didn't block 4 plans to go after Bin Laden we wouldn't of had a 911, we wouldn't of had an Afganistan or an Iraq conflict. We also wouldn't of had Taranki's trashing of Bush. The last one may be alittle bit overboard but no harm in wishing.

And maybe if Berger didn't block 4 plans to go after Bin Laden we wouldn't of had a 911, we wouldn't of had an Afganistan or an Iraq conflict. We also wouldn't of had Taranki's trashing of Bush. The last one may be alittle bit overboard but no harm in wishing.

Do give more details on that claim.

And try and spell my name right.

And stop whining, it's pathetic.:rolleyes:

He is a slimeball. Someone in his position knows exacly what they are doing. They don't 'accidently' walk off with top secret documents stuffed in their pants. His punishment amounts to a minor slap on the wrist. He needs a few years behind bars.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I'd think it would be treason if they could prove he didn't destroy the documents.

Do give more details on that claim.

Since your into bashing everything I post you must not be reading the posts. If you look in my first post you will see this link.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/a...RTICLE_ID=39612 (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39612)
And why did berger block plans to get Bin laden 4 times?

And try and spell my name right.
Well I'm sorry for the mis-spelling Mr. Taranaki.

And stop whining, it's pathetic.:rolleyes:

And this coming from the guy who has whined for more than a year about Bush and about not being able to fish on private property.:rolleyes:

Since your into bashing everything I post you must not be reading the posts. If you look in my first post you will see this link.
Actually, if you read your own link you'll find the answer to this question. The plans to 'get' Bin Laden were blocked because there was not enough evidence to convict him.For you to ask the question again after having posted a link with the answer implies that you believe the national security adviser acted improperly.Of course, you are mistaken.Only a fucking moron attacks an enemy because they 'might' be a threat 'some time in the future'.

Berger was right to block the attemps to extradite otr kidnap Bin Laden.The attacks on the WTC can be laid squarely at the feet of those in the intelligence services who knew that there was a threat but failed to identify its precise nature.

I beg to differ; Berger is, or was the National Security Advisor. His job was not to make policy, but to report to those who do, using the information he had. If he wanted to make policy, he should have run for an office where he could. Removing classified documents that he had no business removing was wrong.

Too bad the penalty is so small, for the potential damage he did.

We'll never know if the 9/11 attacks could have been stopped, had that information stayed where it belonged.

He is a slimeball. Someone in his position knows exacly what they are doing. They don't 'accidently' walk off with top secret documents stuffed in their pants. His punishment amounts to a minor slap on the wrist. He needs a few years behind bars.

Documents were in a leather case, the note cards were stuffed in his clothes, read the article.

Flatrater, that site is about as credible as Moveon, which is to say, it's not especially credible. When they're referring to Democrats as Dems, and to the Schiavo death as a murder in their headlines, you can suspect some bias.

Here's a great article from these guys.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43591