Lindaland
  Global Unity
  No "Able"

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   No "Able"
proxieme
unregistered
posted August 16, 2005 11:48 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

'Able Danger' Barred From Informing FBI
Email this Story

Aug 16, 10:28 PM (ET)

WASHINGTON (AP) - An Army intelligence officer says his unit was blocked in 2000 and 2001 from giving the FBI information about a U.S.-based terrorist cell that included Mohamed Atta, the future leader of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer said the small intelligence unit, called "Able Danger," had identified Atta and three of the other future Sept. 11 hijackers as al-Qaida members by mid-2000. He said military lawyers stopped the unit from sharing the information with the FBI.

The commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks left the Able Danger claims out of its official report.

In an interview with Fox News Channel and The New York Times, Shaffer said the panel was not given all the information his team had gathered.

"I'm told confidently by the person who did move the material over that the 9/11 commission received two briefcase-size containers of documents," Shaffer said in the interview, part of which was aired by Fox News Tuesday night. "I can tell you for a fact that would not be ... one-20th of the information that Able Danger consisted of during the time we spent."

Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, has said the Sept. 11 commission did not adequately investigate the claim that four of the hijackers had been identified more than a year before the attacks.

Former commission chairman Thomas Kean and vice chairman Lee Hamilton said last week that the military official who made the claim had no documentation to back it up.

Shaffer rejected that remark. "Leaving a project targeting al-Qaida as a global threat a year before we were attacked by al-Qaida is equivalent to having an investigation of Pearl Harbor and leaving somehow out the Japanese," he said.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 18, 2005 12:38 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ond day and no response..,

IP: Logged

Petron
unregistered
posted August 18, 2005 01:23 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
thats because there is no debate....no matter how they try to spin their hindsight the fact remains....clinton at least declared the taliban an enemy and pummeled bin ladens afghanistan locations with cruise missile strikes that could have killed him.....

while bush jr did nothing.....nothing at all
with all the same information....in fact even better developed information...he did nothing...except go on vacation......


you gotta be crazy to think they didnt still have those guys under surveillance all during the summer of 2001...

quote:
An Army intelligence officer says his unit was blocked in 2000 and 2001

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 18, 2005 01:56 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yeah Petron, after every attack Commander Corruption fired off a cruise missile or two at empty terrorist training camps and declared victory.

Of course we all know the first thing terrorists would do after bombing a US target would be to go back to their training camps and await a cruise missile attack in retaliation. Hell, everyone knows that.

IP: Logged

Petron
unregistered
posted August 18, 2005 02:13 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
he fired like 50+ cruise missiles and killed a bunch of people there, but missed bin laden....

what did jr do again?

besides vacation?

IP: Logged

Petron
unregistered
posted August 18, 2005 02:29 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
i know!!

you could say clinton forgot to tell jr we were at war!! there ya go...!! clintons fault again!!

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 18, 2005 12:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yeah, I remember Commander Corruption launching a missile attack against a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan...to get that woman Monica Lewinsky, that woman, Monica Lewinsky who Commander Corruption didn't have sex with off the front pages of all the news papers and also off the news at 6 and 11, the day she was to appear in front of a federal grand jury.

It is true Commander Corruption killed 50 or so innocent Sudanese civilians in his quest to divert attention from Monica's federal grand jury testimony but the notion Osama bin Laden was there or perhaps ever had been there is as phony as Commander Corruption.

There must be a disconnect between your eyes, brain and mouth Petron. The idea that Commander Corruption declared war on bin Laden, al-Qaida, terrorists or terrorism is laughable.

The WTC was bombed by radical terrorists in 1993. Osama bin Laden is named as an unindicted co-conspirator....and Commander Corruption does....nothing!

The Kobar Towers was bombed in Saudi Arabia by al-Qaida, killing US service personnel...and Commander Corruption does....nothing!

US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania are bombed by al-Qaida, killing US State Department personnel and others....and Commander Corruption does....nothing!

Three times, the Sudanese government attempts to hand bin Laden and his senior terrorist staff and documents over to the United Stated...and Commander Corruption does...nothing!

The USS Cole is bombed in Yemen killing US military personnel...and Commander Corruption does....nothing!

Instead of declaring war on bin Laden, terrorists or terrorism, Commander Corruption actually pardons 16 Puerto Rican nationalists affiliated with FALN terrorists.....the Puerto Rican vote being beneficial to Hillary's NY Senate election campaign.

Any substantive review of Commander Corruption relative to terrorists, terrorism or Osama bin Laden would reveal Commander Corruption was the best friend terrorists ever had in the White House....beating out the incompetent, bungling boob, Jimmy Carter for the honor.

IP: Logged

Petron
unregistered
posted August 18, 2005 05:52 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
It is true Commander Corruption killed 50 or so innocent Sudanese civilians--jwhop

huuh?? at least your getting closer than you were before....

quote:
Do you also call Bill Clinton a murderer for killing a couple of thousand people at a pill factory in the middle east?--jwhop
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/001101.html

quote:
US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania are bombed by al-Qaida, killing US State Department personnel and others....and Commander Corruption does....nothing!--jwhop

huuuhh??

*****
On August 20, 1998, the United States attempted to retaliate against Osama bin Laden for his alleged role in the East Africa U.S. embassy bombings. On that day the U.S. launched dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles against two targets--several bin Laden training camps in Afghanistan and a pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan.

As early as August 12--five days after the embassy bombings--sources say a "small group" of foreign policy advisors met with President Clinton to let him know they believed Osama bin Laden was behind the bombings. (Early breaks in the case had led to the quick arrests of two men who linked the attacks to bin Laden.)

In Afghanistan, approximately 70 cruise missiles hit three alleged bin Laden training camps. An estimated 24 people were killed. But if they wanted to kill bin Laden, they failed. Bin Laden was not at the camps when the bombs hit. In the Sudan, approximately 13 cruise missiles hit a pharmaceutical plant. The night watchman was killed.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/bombings/retaliation.html

******


oh yea, and you apparently missed the question again, what did jr do to try and prevent 9/11?

IP: Logged

Petron
unregistered
posted August 18, 2005 06:14 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
oh i should have known, you cut and paste your disinfopinion from ann coulter...lol

********

March 31, 2004
Ann Coulter

How 9-11 Happened

On Aug. 7, 1998, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim extremists.
Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/000294.html

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 18, 2005 07:20 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Well Petron, since Commander Corruption's administration built a high wall between intelligence services and law enforcement...including the FBI, the Bush administration didn't know about Able Danger, didn't know 4 terrorists linked to al-Qaida were milling around in the US finalizing their plans to bomb the WTC. Of course, Commander Corruption knew and his administration knew...because Clinton administration lawyers knew and prevented them from sharing the information they had with the FBI.

Fact it Petron, Commander Corruption was corrupt in every way and had his head up his ass when it came to terrorism, terrorists and bin Laden. All the so called plans to get bin Laden came to nothing at all. Even the offer..3 times, to turn bin Laden over to the US came to nothing because Clinton lied about there being nothing to hold him on here. Bin Laden was an un-indicted coconspirator in the 1993 WTC bombing.

How do you figure the bombing of the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan only killed a night watchman? That plant made medicines..for malaria among other medicines. Thousands have already died because Commander Corruption bombed the plant which made more than 50% of all the medicines manufactured in Sudan. My estimate of 50 was way low and we'll never know how many innocent Sudanese civilians Commander Corruption killed to get Monica off the front pages of the newspapers.

Well actually Petron, I typed that myself But it's nice to know you're taking Ann Coulter more seriously.

Too bad Commander Corruption took Monica more seriously than his job or there wouldn't have been a 9-11.

IP: Logged

Petron
unregistered
posted August 23, 2005 12:23 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

No Evidence of Atta Claims, Pentagon Says

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 23, 2005; Page A02

The Pentagon said yesterday that Defense Department investigators have found no evidence to support allegations by a GOP congressman and others that a secret program had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta more than a year before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The findings by the Pentagon further challenge assertions by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) and two military officers that a small data analysis program called "Able Danger" had identified Atta and three other hijackers as early as 1999, but that Defense Department lawyers prevented the information from being shared with the FBI.

Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) asserted that hijacker Mohamed Atta had been identified by 1999.
Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) asserted that hijacker Mohamed Atta had been identified by 1999. (Alex Wong - AP)

"While we continue to review the documentation and conduct interviews, and while there are some who allege specific documents exist, the Defense Department has not discovered any documentation that shows Mohamed Atta connected to al Qaeda prior to the attacks of 9/11," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.

The allegations surrounding Able Danger were first made by Weldon in a little-noticed paragraph in his recent book, "Countdown to Terror," which focuses primarily on assertions about Iran that U.S. intelligence officials have dismissed as fabrications. But the story took off two weeks ago with several prominent news accounts that relied on Weldon and Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, and led to internal reviews by the Pentagon and the Sept. 11 commission.

Yesterday, Fox News broadcast a statement from the second officer, Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, contending that Atta was identified in the first two months of 2000. "My story has remained consistent," he said in the statement.

Shaffer, whose security clearance has been suspended since March 2004, acknowledged last week that his central allegation -- the identification of Atta -- was based on other people's recollections rather than his own. In the accounts given by Shaffer and Weldon, other details have varied.

Shaffer's attorney, Mark S. Zaid, criticized the remarks by Whitman and other defense officials yesterday.

"The Pentagon's public relations campaign to discredit Mr. Shaffer simply reveals that it is looking for documents in the wrong places and talking to the wrong people," Zaid said.

But a Pentagon official, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing probe, said the investigation "has been both broad and deep" and has included interviews with those involved in Able Danger.

In July 2004, the Sept. 11 commission interviewed Phillpott, who told investigators that he had briefly seen Atta's name and photograph on an Able Danger chart between February and April 2000, according to a commission account. Shaffer has since said that Phillpott's recollection formed the basis of his allegations.

But the Sept. 11 panel said it did not find Phillpott's assertions credible because there were no documents to support them, and because Atta did not first travel to the United States until June 2000. The commission has also dismissed Shaffer's assertion that he mentioned an early identification of Atta to commission staffers during a 2003 meeting in Afghanistan.

Thomas H. Kean, chairman of the now-disbanded Sept. 11 commission, called on the Bush administration yesterday to provide more information about what it knows regarding Able Danger and the Atta allegations.

Kean focused specifically on an assertion in Weldon's book about Stephen J. Hadley, then deputy director of the National Security Council. Weldon wrote that shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, he gave Hadley a 1999 Able Danger chart that "diagrammed the affiliations of al Qaeda and showed Mohammed [sic] Atta and the infamous Brooklyn Cell." Weldon repeated the allegation last week.

"At some point, somebody has to say this is true or this is not true," Kean said. "He's supposed to have a list of names of terrorists in his possession. He either does or he doesn't. . . . It's a very significant question."

The NSC press office has repeatedly declined to comment, referring questions to the Pentagon.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/22/AR2005082201299.html

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 23, 2005 12:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Unable!

Friday, Aug. 19, 2005 10:35 a.m. EDT
Clinton Lawyers Fretted Over bin Laden's Comfort

The CIA's former bin Laden desk chief revealed Thursday night that Clinton administration lawyers warned counterterrorism agents that Osama bin Laden had to be kept as comfortable as possible if they captured him during planned raids into Afghanistan.

"The lawyers were more concerned with bin Laden`s safety and his comfort than they were with the officers charged with capturing him," former bin Laden desk chief Michael Scheuer told MSNBC's "Hardball."

"We had to build an ergonomically designed chair to put him in, [for] special comfort in terms of how he was shackled into the chair," Scheuer explained. "They even worried about what kind of tape to gag him with so it wouldn't irritate his beard."

"The lawyers are the bane of the intelligence community," the former CIA man lamented.

Concerns like that, as well as foot-dragging by the White House, resulted in one missed opportunity after another to get the al-Qaida terror mastermind, Scheuer said.

"We had at least eight to 10 chances to capture or kill Osama bin Laden in 1998 and 1999. And the government on all occasions decided that the information was not good enough to act," he claimed.

Although sharply critical of President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq, the CIA counterterrorism specialist put the blame for bin Laden's escape firmly on Clinton.

"In terms of which administration had more chances, Mr. Clinton's administration had far more chances to kill Osama bin Laden than Mr. Bush has until this day," Scheuer said.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/19/103756.shtml

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a