T3 B25 Naftali Draft Section Fdr- Ghw Bush Tab- Emails And Withdrawal Notice 119
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View T3 B25 Naftali Draft Section Fdr- Ghw Bush Tab- Emails And Withdrawal Notice 119 as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,459
- Pages: 6
Message
Page 1 of 5
Mike Hurley From:
Warren Bass
Sent:
Friday, July 09, 2004 4:38 PM
To:
'[email protected]'; Timothy J. Naftali'
Cc:
Mike Hurley
Subject: RE: Appendix
Sounds great on all counts, Tim. If you have any concerns about individual edits, just note them in a memo and we'll work it out. Great catch by T2: tearlines are unclassified versions of intel warnings designed for wide distribution to officials without clearances, often including law enforcement, airline security types, INS officials, etc. My current plan is to have all the comments from the staff to you by COB Wednesday. There may be a few stragglers, but I'll nag people again early next week. Yes, please take 'til Friday, and beyond: I was trying to give you several days to collate the changes, including the weekend. The idea would to have the latest versionincorporating professional staff comments—make it to the Front Office around July 19. The final timing depends on how we're doing with the final report; if we're going to have it out, the/D be snowed, but if it's going to slip a bit, they may have more time to buckle down in July to look at it. I'll try to get a sense of their preferred timing. But for now, that's what I think we should shoot for. Best, Warren Original Message From: Timothy J. Naftali [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 2:11 PM To: Warren Bass; Timothy J. Naftali1 Cc: Mike Hurley Subject: RE: Appendix Dear Warren, The edits that didn't get in were left out because of time pressures. I am inclined to take all of your edits and should I doubt any will write a memo to that fact. I am not inclined to fret over this. I want the job to get done. By the way the Team 2 edit has already turned up a major get -- TERROR LINE is actually a tear line report. I checked back with Fred Turco who initiated the use of this system by CTC. He has also provided other helpful suggestions that I will incorporate. You needn't apologize I have an inkling of the time pressures you are under. When will I get the comments from the rest of the staff -- Tuesday? Can I have until Friday to do my work? Tim.
Original Message From: Warren Bass [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 12:21 PM To: Timothy J. Naftali
7/9/2004
Page 2 of5
Message Cc: Mike Hurley Subject: RE: Appendix
Got 'em, Tim—many thanks for the turnaround. I've put the new versions in with the email we've just sent to the full staff. This is a good way forward, I think-the FedEx fiasco really hurt us, but what can you do. This gives people five days to weigh in if they're so inclined and then lets us get the piece forward to the Front Office for their very important review. One other thing: my quick glance showed that some of my edits hadn't yet made it in. That may just be for time, in which case feel free to circle back and add them. If an edit from a Commission staffer is foolish and you don't want to take it, please note it in a memo so we can consider it. But my personal view is that there should be a very strong presumption that all professional staff edits should be taken. Philip and Chris both want their staff to be able to weigh in, and so do Mike and I. We'll cheerfully admit that having this many editors is no fun at all, but the checks and balances provided by collective expertise of the fantastic staff that Philip has assembled has been an important part of the Commission's success. Through the staff statement process, we've developed a good feel for what type of comments may get us in trouble, create a damaging distraction, or deviate from the commissioners' reasonable expectations of what constitutes our collective style. Thanks again for being a trooper on all of this, Tim. We know it's a painful, brute-force way to get this done. But it's all we've got amid a hellacious workload; at least you've started writing your monograph, which is more than I can say... Thanks again for bearing with us. Best, Warren
Original Message From: Timothy J. Naftali [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 4:42 PM To: Warren Bass; Mike Hurley; 'Timothy J. Naftali1 Cc: Marquittia Coleman; Alice Falk; Melissa Coffey Subject: RE: Appendix Warren and Mike, I have attached new versions of the RWR chapters. I have cut all of the sections Warren found objectionable but did not have time to change much else. I will later. Please send these chapters and the previous versions of the other chapters to everyone. I would rather suck up the additional criticism than allow a further delay to kill any remaining chance that my report is published as
7/9/2004
Page 3 of 5
Message one of your monographs. Thanks for working with me on this. Tim.
Original Message From: Warren Bass [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 4:51 PM To: [email protected]; Mike Hurley; Timothy J. Naftali Cc: Marquittia Coleman; Alice Falk; Melissa Coffey Subject: RE: Appendix
Thanks, Tim. Glad to hear at least part of it made it! Your spelling guidance: Hezbollah Muammar Qadhafi Shia If you have other spelling questions, please pool 'em and then pass them to Alice Falk, our crack copy editor, and she'll get you a ruling. Mike and I were just talking, and we're both leaning—in light of today' s FedEx disasters—toward just sending out the current version to all teams. Ideally, we'd have liked to have them work off the new version incorporating my and Team 2's edits, but I fear that the Dublin fiasco just cost us the margin of error. So whaddya think? I suggest sending them out as files, asking people to mark
7/9/2004
Page 4 of5
Message
changes in Track Changes, and then sending them straight on to you. The comments will vary in weight, I suspect; some people will let it sail on by, others will want to wade in. This will also catch issues such as the FBI questions you raise in your note. Mull for a minute, then let us know. If you're OK, we can circulate it today. Cheers, Warren
Original Message From: Timothy J. Naftali [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 3:11 PM To: Mike Hurley; 'Timothy J. Naftali' Cc: Marquittia Coleman; Warren Bass Subject: RE: Appendix
Mike, Team 2's annotated copy arrived. Please thank Melissa. It is full of suggested emendations, so I have an idea of what changes will be required. Besides the stylistic cuts, which do not present any unpleasant surprises, I will do what I can to fill in gaps in content. I did focus more heavily on the use of military force by the RWR administration because of its novelty in the evolution of CT to that point. Please convey my appreciation to however did them. Please also tell me the accepted transliteration for
7/9/2004
Page 5 of5
Message
Hizb'allah, Gaddafi/Qaddafi and shi'ite. I used what I found in the specialist lit on Lebanon and, in the case of the transliteration of Gaddafi, the NYT. The comments suggest you are going to single out the FBI for praise for its work on Pan Am 103. The Bureau played an important role and helped find the key piece, but were they the ones who identified it? I'll go back over the material I have. The comments also suggest that the VP's report on CT was better than I assumed. Since I could not see the classified version, could someone steer me away from embarrasing myself if the report was more searching and demanding that the public version seemed to be. It was good thing to do, of course, but I found that gaps remained and RWR was not really informed that those gaps existed. Besides the fact that I am eager for Warren and Team 3's suggestions, I noticed that Team 2 only looked at the last three chapters. Has Warren commented on all of them? In the meantime, I will be working through the edits. They will certainly make my piece much better. Thanks. Tim.
7/9/2004
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission NND PROJECT NUMBER:
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 12/18/2008
BOX: 00008
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
TAB: 24
DOC ID: 31209642
1
The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Tim Nafatli's Draft Section for Study on CT DOCUMENT DATE: 07/09/2004
DOCUMENT TYPE: E-Mail Printout/(Profs Notes)
FROM:
TO: SUBJECT:
Naftali's Report
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Personal Privacy
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
Page 1 of 5
Mike Hurley From:
Warren Bass
Sent:
Friday, July 09, 2004 4:38 PM
To:
'[email protected]'; Timothy J. Naftali'
Cc:
Mike Hurley
Subject: RE: Appendix
Sounds great on all counts, Tim. If you have any concerns about individual edits, just note them in a memo and we'll work it out. Great catch by T2: tearlines are unclassified versions of intel warnings designed for wide distribution to officials without clearances, often including law enforcement, airline security types, INS officials, etc. My current plan is to have all the comments from the staff to you by COB Wednesday. There may be a few stragglers, but I'll nag people again early next week. Yes, please take 'til Friday, and beyond: I was trying to give you several days to collate the changes, including the weekend. The idea would to have the latest versionincorporating professional staff comments—make it to the Front Office around July 19. The final timing depends on how we're doing with the final report; if we're going to have it out, the/D be snowed, but if it's going to slip a bit, they may have more time to buckle down in July to look at it. I'll try to get a sense of their preferred timing. But for now, that's what I think we should shoot for. Best, Warren Original Message From: Timothy J. Naftali [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 2:11 PM To: Warren Bass; Timothy J. Naftali1 Cc: Mike Hurley Subject: RE: Appendix Dear Warren, The edits that didn't get in were left out because of time pressures. I am inclined to take all of your edits and should I doubt any will write a memo to that fact. I am not inclined to fret over this. I want the job to get done. By the way the Team 2 edit has already turned up a major get -- TERROR LINE is actually a tear line report. I checked back with Fred Turco who initiated the use of this system by CTC. He has also provided other helpful suggestions that I will incorporate. You needn't apologize I have an inkling of the time pressures you are under. When will I get the comments from the rest of the staff -- Tuesday? Can I have until Friday to do my work? Tim.
Original Message From: Warren Bass [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 12:21 PM To: Timothy J. Naftali
7/9/2004
Page 2 of5
Message Cc: Mike Hurley Subject: RE: Appendix
Got 'em, Tim—many thanks for the turnaround. I've put the new versions in with the email we've just sent to the full staff. This is a good way forward, I think-the FedEx fiasco really hurt us, but what can you do. This gives people five days to weigh in if they're so inclined and then lets us get the piece forward to the Front Office for their very important review. One other thing: my quick glance showed that some of my edits hadn't yet made it in. That may just be for time, in which case feel free to circle back and add them. If an edit from a Commission staffer is foolish and you don't want to take it, please note it in a memo so we can consider it. But my personal view is that there should be a very strong presumption that all professional staff edits should be taken. Philip and Chris both want their staff to be able to weigh in, and so do Mike and I. We'll cheerfully admit that having this many editors is no fun at all, but the checks and balances provided by collective expertise of the fantastic staff that Philip has assembled has been an important part of the Commission's success. Through the staff statement process, we've developed a good feel for what type of comments may get us in trouble, create a damaging distraction, or deviate from the commissioners' reasonable expectations of what constitutes our collective style. Thanks again for being a trooper on all of this, Tim. We know it's a painful, brute-force way to get this done. But it's all we've got amid a hellacious workload; at least you've started writing your monograph, which is more than I can say... Thanks again for bearing with us. Best, Warren
Original Message From: Timothy J. Naftali [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 4:42 PM To: Warren Bass; Mike Hurley; 'Timothy J. Naftali1 Cc: Marquittia Coleman; Alice Falk; Melissa Coffey Subject: RE: Appendix Warren and Mike, I have attached new versions of the RWR chapters. I have cut all of the sections Warren found objectionable but did not have time to change much else. I will later. Please send these chapters and the previous versions of the other chapters to everyone. I would rather suck up the additional criticism than allow a further delay to kill any remaining chance that my report is published as
7/9/2004
Page 3 of 5
Message one of your monographs. Thanks for working with me on this. Tim.
Original Message From: Warren Bass [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 4:51 PM To: [email protected]; Mike Hurley; Timothy J. Naftali Cc: Marquittia Coleman; Alice Falk; Melissa Coffey Subject: RE: Appendix
Thanks, Tim. Glad to hear at least part of it made it! Your spelling guidance: Hezbollah Muammar Qadhafi Shia If you have other spelling questions, please pool 'em and then pass them to Alice Falk, our crack copy editor, and she'll get you a ruling. Mike and I were just talking, and we're both leaning—in light of today' s FedEx disasters—toward just sending out the current version to all teams. Ideally, we'd have liked to have them work off the new version incorporating my and Team 2's edits, but I fear that the Dublin fiasco just cost us the margin of error. So whaddya think? I suggest sending them out as files, asking people to mark
7/9/2004
Page 4 of5
Message
changes in Track Changes, and then sending them straight on to you. The comments will vary in weight, I suspect; some people will let it sail on by, others will want to wade in. This will also catch issues such as the FBI questions you raise in your note. Mull for a minute, then let us know. If you're OK, we can circulate it today. Cheers, Warren
Original Message From: Timothy J. Naftali [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 3:11 PM To: Mike Hurley; 'Timothy J. Naftali' Cc: Marquittia Coleman; Warren Bass Subject: RE: Appendix
Mike, Team 2's annotated copy arrived. Please thank Melissa. It is full of suggested emendations, so I have an idea of what changes will be required. Besides the stylistic cuts, which do not present any unpleasant surprises, I will do what I can to fill in gaps in content. I did focus more heavily on the use of military force by the RWR administration because of its novelty in the evolution of CT to that point. Please convey my appreciation to however did them. Please also tell me the accepted transliteration for
7/9/2004
Page 5 of5
Message
Hizb'allah, Gaddafi/Qaddafi and shi'ite. I used what I found in the specialist lit on Lebanon and, in the case of the transliteration of Gaddafi, the NYT. The comments suggest you are going to single out the FBI for praise for its work on Pan Am 103. The Bureau played an important role and helped find the key piece, but were they the ones who identified it? I'll go back over the material I have. The comments also suggest that the VP's report on CT was better than I assumed. Since I could not see the classified version, could someone steer me away from embarrasing myself if the report was more searching and demanding that the public version seemed to be. It was good thing to do, of course, but I found that gaps remained and RWR was not really informed that those gaps existed. Besides the fact that I am eager for Warren and Team 3's suggestions, I noticed that Team 2 only looked at the last three chapters. Has Warren commented on all of them? In the meantime, I will be working through the edits. They will certainly make my piece much better. Thanks. Tim.
7/9/2004
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission NND PROJECT NUMBER:
52100
FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107
WITHDRAWAL DATE: 12/18/2008
BOX: 00008
FOLDER: 0001
COPIES: 1 PAGES:
TAB: 24
DOC ID: 31209642
1
The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file: FOLDER TITLE: Tim Nafatli's Draft Section for Study on CT DOCUMENT DATE: 07/09/2004
DOCUMENT TYPE: E-Mail Printout/(Profs Notes)
FROM:
TO: SUBJECT:
Naftali's Report
This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s): 9/11 Personal Privacy
WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
Related Documents
More Documents from "9/11 Document Archive"
Letter To 9/11 Commission About John Kerry
April 2020 0
