More On "Able Danger"

[jyl]

Does anyone recall the flap over "Able Danger", the military intelligence operation that some say identified one of the 9/11 hijackers while he was still alive?

Here is the start of a multi-part series on Able Danger, from a Washington Post author who seems to be digging into what Able Danger actually was and how its data-mining worked. I don't know if he's got it right - only part 1 is online so far - but anyhow I thought it might interest some.

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/

[Mulhollanddose]

Not only is the agenda of this WashingtonCompost reporter in question, but also what exactly was it that Sandy Bergler stole from the National Archives prior to his testimony before the 9-11 Kangaroo Court.

[Mulhollanddose]

Curt Weldon:

"Yes. When I heard it was 2.5 terabytes of data, I figured I’d call the Library of Congress and see what is that really? They said, well, Congressman, it’s equal to ¼ all the printed material that the Library of Congress has in its collection. You know that the Library of Congress is the largest library in the world. So we’re talking about a massive amount of data. It’s not about 1 chart, it’s not about 1 photograph, it’s about a massive amount of data, about the largest and most aggressive international terrorist organization in the world. And it was destroyed. And on top of being destroyed, the customer for that data, a Special Forces general, General Lambert, was never consulted before the data was ordered to be destroyed. And he was livid when he found out that his data had been deleted and had been destroyed by the gentleman who testified today."

[Mulhollanddose]

Curt Weldon:

Well I’ve learned, Michael, not to try to predict the American media. They have their own agenda. In fact if the New York Times hadn’t run this story a month after I first gave this speech on the House floor, most of the major networks would never have bothered to even check into it. Because this story was not a new story in August. I actually told this story from the House floor in the end of June in a floor speech for 45 minutes on June 27th. The New York Times didn’t pick up the story until August 2nd. But when they ran it front page above the fold, and then for 3 straight days they followed up with stories it became the national and international news story in every major print paper and on all the major networks worldwide.

What we’re fighting here is both the Pentagon and the 9-11 Commission who are trying to spin this story away, and say it’s much ado about nothing, it really didn’t matter. The 9-11 Commission called it historically insignificant. And that’s why this 23 year career Navy commander, an Annapolis graduate, said I’m not going to have my work labeled as historically insignificant. So he risked his entire career to come out in the public, in the open and say that he would swear on his entire career and his life that in January and February of 2000 his team and Able Danger identified Mohammad Atta and 3 of the other terrorists in the New York Al Quaeda cell. And he tried to get that data to the FBI and consistently, 3 times was refused.

[Mulhollanddose]

Lt. Colonel Shaffer audio

[kach22i]

Originally posted by jyl
I don't know if he's got it right

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/

The Secret History of Able Danger

The matter was to have come to a head last week when the Senate Judiciary Committee held a special Able Danger hearing. But the Pentagon declined to allow even unclassified testimony at the open hearing, arguing that the matter better rested with the Intelligence Committee

Unfortunately most articles of this kind don't come supplied with the same set of footnotes/endnotes that books do.

Some of what he says is verifiable, all he seems to be saying is things are still smoked screened, even trying to find out why has become difficult. I wish the author luck, does not look like the government wants to admit to too much of anything.

[Mulhollanddose]

Mr. Arkin is a leftist with an agenda...This is what motivates this piece.

[Mulhollanddose]

Staff at the 9-11 commission say nothing they received from the Pentagon backed up Shaffer's claim.

"None of the documents turned over to the commission mentioned Mohamed Atta or any of the future hijackers," a commission spokesman told the news channel.

Shaffer disputes that fact.

"I'm told confidently by the person who did move the material over that the 9-11 commission received two briefcase-sized containers of documents," Shaffer noted. "I can tell you for a fact that would not be one-twentieth of the information Able Danger consisted of during the time we spent."

WorldNetDaily

[Mulhollanddose]

[jyl]

Not even going to wait a day or two to read this writer's full article, before shouting it down, eh?

Guess we know how objective you are about this.

[Mulhollanddose]

He is a leftist and he is either intentionally or unintentionally erroneous in his language and conclusions. The Pentagon disagrees with him as do 3 eyewitnesses...Files are missing and/or stolen (Arkin spends no time on this inconvenient fact)...He has a history of hostility to Bush...I do not need a day or two to figure that out.