Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ABLE DANGER: WHAT WE KNOW, WHAT WE DON'T KNOW
Junk yard blog ^ | August 12, 2005

Posted on 08/14/2005 10:38:56 AM PDT by george76

Grab yourself a cup of coffee and head on over to TKS for the best summation of Able Danger as things presently stand. Or stay here and I'll summarize it for you.

In very, very brief summation: The 9-11 commission did know about Able Danger; some of its staff were briefed on it twice, and the information got to some but not all of the commissioners

What seems increasingly likely, based on the TKS summary and others, is that the commissioners who knew of Able Danger dismissed it because its Mohammed Atta timeline didn't agree with theirs. That in and of itself is no reason to dismiss evidence unless your outcome is predetermined, which it may well have been to one or more commissioners and staff. Intriguingly, the Able Danger timeline seems to leave room for the Atta meeting in Prague, which to this day Czech intelligence insists happened and to this day is only refuted by US sources because Atta's cell phone was used in the US when he was supposed to be in Prague. Like one of his cellmates couldn't have used it to order pizza or something. That has always struck me as an awfully flimsy data point to use to sink a credible report from an allied intelligence agency.

From Captain's Quarters, we learn that not only was Gorelick's wall relevant to all this, but that it generated complaints from inside the Reno justice department. Mary Jo White, prosecutor of the 1993 WTC bombers, complained in two separate memos--both of which are still secret, and neither of which figured into the 9-11 commission's final report--that the wall would make it next to impossible to prevent terrorist attacks on US soil and would probably result in loss of life.

From FrontPage, we find a most intriguing lead. One Dietrich Snell seems to have a Carmen Sandiego quality--he turns up wherever you look. He was a co-prosecutor on the 1993 WTC case. He appears to have turned down a terrorists' offer to betray Operation Bojinka, which was an aborted al Qaeda op that eerily foreshadowed 9-11.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 911; 911commission; able; abledanger; atta; bojinka; clinton; commission; corruption; danger; g74; gorelick; gorelickswall; hillary; illegalaliens; illegalimmigration; illegals; immigrantlist; immigration; mohammed; mohammedatta; operation; operationbojinka; reno; russia; terrorism; wall; wot; wtc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last

1 posted on 08/14/2005 10:38:56 AM PDT by george76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: george76

TKS?


2 posted on 08/14/2005 10:40:12 AM PDT by beyond the sea ("If you think it's hard to meet new people, try picking up the wrong golf ball." - Jack Lemmon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76
One Dietrich Snell ---

a name to remember...

3 posted on 08/14/2005 10:44:40 AM PDT by beyond the sea ("If you think it's hard to meet new people, try picking up the wrong golf ball." - Jack Lemmon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Sounds like Snell's conflict is as malodorous as Gorelick's.


4 posted on 08/14/2005 10:45:34 AM PDT by NonValueAdded ("Freedom of speech makes it much easier to spot the idiots." [Jay Lessig, 2/7/2005])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea

Who is Dietrich? I'd never seen his name before.


5 posted on 08/14/2005 10:45:45 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea
TKS......WHAT WE KNOW, AND WHAT WE DON’T KNOW
6 posted on 08/14/2005 10:47:46 AM PDT by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: george76

bttt


7 posted on 08/14/2005 10:48:10 AM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

Good one.


8 posted on 08/14/2005 10:49:38 AM PDT by spycatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76
From FrontPage, we find a most intriguing lead. One Dietrich Snell seems to have a Carmen Sandiego quality--he turns up wherever you look. He was a co-prosecutor on the 1993 WTC case. He appears to have turned down a terrorists' offer to betray Operation Bojinka, which was an aborted al Qaeda op that eerily foreshadowed 9-11.

If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Snell (actually I think it's "Schnell") was also a fairly high-ranking member of the 9/11 Commission staff. I'll try to find a link for that; I'm certain that I've seen it cited here on FR.

9 posted on 08/14/2005 10:50:33 AM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea

TKS....

What we know:

* In 1999, the Pentagon established an intelligence unit called Able Danger, assigned to seek out and identify al-Qaeda cells and members for U.S. Special Operations Command. This group reportedly used data mining from open sources.

* Approximately August or September 2000, Able Danger identified an al-Qaeda cell in Brooklyn. An intelligence official and Rep. Curt Weldon claim that the AD unit identified Mohammed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Mihdar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, and included a photo of Atta. (Weldon claims that he has spoken to four persons involved with the program.) At least two of those men were pilots on the hijacked flights.

* Able Danger analysts recommended the information be passed on to the FBI so that the cell could be rounded up. Accounts in Government Security News, the New York Times, and the Associated Press indicate that Pentagon lawyers decided that anyone holding a green card (as it was believed the cell members did) had to be granted essentially the same legal protections as any U.S. citizen. Thus, the information Able Danger had gathered could not be shared with the FBI, the lawyers concluded. This is in keeping with “the wall” philosophy and policy established in 1995 by Assistant Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, in which intelligence and law enforcement were directed to go beyond what the law requires to keep intelligence-gathering and criminal law enforcement separated.

* The prohibition against sharing intelligence on Atta and the others should not have applied since they were in the country on visas. They did not have permanent resident status.

What we don’t know:

* Just how many names Able Danger wanted to forward to the FBI. However, the wording in the Government Security article indicates that these four names were the only four that popped up on AD’s data-mining operation.

Thus, the information Able Danger had amassed about the only terrorist cell they had located inside the United States could not be shared with the FBI, the lawyers concluded.
Unless the former intelligence officer quoted in the story is lying, these four guys were all that Able Danger found.

* Whether the military lawyer who denied Able Danger’s request to pass on the information checked with any superiors.

* It seems very hard to imagine this information would not be passed on to Secretary of Defense William Cohen, National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, and the White House’s point man on counterterrorism, Richard Clarke. Yet, as of this moment, we have no direct confirmation that this information went any higher than the Pentagon lawyer.

What is speculation, but is interesting speculation:

* The 9/11 Commission staffers who felt the information about Able Danger wasn’t worth mentioning to their bosses could, conceivably, be imbeciles.

* No one has concretely tied this new information to the strange, felonious behavior of Sandy Berger, smuggling documents out of the National Archives. But boy, if the document in question related to Able Danger’s warning and the decision to not act upon it, his actions would make a lot more sense, wouldn’t they?





http://tks.nationalreview.com/archives/072802.asp


10 posted on 08/14/2005 10:51:16 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: george76

The point to remember is that the 9/11 Commission
public hearings were nothing but a staged attack
on President Bush. What more is there to said about
whether they would lie to protect themselves?


11 posted on 08/14/2005 10:52:05 AM PDT by Hans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76
Mary Jo White, prosecutor of the 1993 WTC bombers, complained in two separate memos--both of which are still secret, and neither of which figured into the 9-11 commission's final report--that the wall would make it next to impossible to prevent terrorist attacks on US soil and would probably result in loss of life.

Collusion in it's highest form. The memos could be the Blue Dress, how can the New york Times, Time, News Week, The Globe, LA Times, not be interested in what these memos have to say. The only answer is their exposure would be devastating to the Liberals.

12 posted on 08/14/2005 10:54:06 AM PDT by BIGZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob
Found one:

Link to FR post

13 posted on 08/14/2005 10:54:54 AM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hans

Putting Gorelick on the Committee does seem to stack the deck.

Go Curt Weldon! You have our support. Get'r done!


14 posted on 08/14/2005 10:56:03 AM PDT by Lone Red Ranger (FD/TRODPINT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: beyond the sea
TKS?

Formally know as "The Kerry Spot"

15 posted on 08/14/2005 10:56:22 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: george76

"Czech intelligence insists happened and to this day is only refuted by US sources because Atta's cell phone was used in the US when he was supposed to be in Prague."

Sorry. But this is intellectually lazy. The 9/11 report listed quite a number of reasons to disbelief the Czech account. The cell phone was just one of many.

It is misinformation like this that hurts getting to the truth.


16 posted on 08/14/2005 10:59:24 AM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76
"One Dietrich Snell seems to have a Carmen Sandiego quality--he turns up wherever you look. He was a co-prosecutor on the 1993 WTC case. He appears to have turned down a terrorists' offer to betray Operation Bojinka, which was an aborted al Qaeda op that eerily foreshadowed 9-11."

The *co-prosecutor* in the 1993 WTC case turned down information regarding another terrorist plot? What?

That isn't all. Snell was also made Senior Counsel and was part of the a "team leader" for the 9/11 Commission!

Oh. It gets better! One of the possible scenarios of Operation Bojinka was to crash dive an airliner into CIA headquarters.

So... Snell turned down an offer regarding information that had direct implications concerning 9/11. And guess as to who hired Mr. Snell? Anyone?

17 posted on 08/14/2005 11:00:32 AM PDT by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reactionary

Sorry. "Any." I can't type. Again.


18 posted on 08/14/2005 11:01:00 AM PDT by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: george76

* No one has concretely tied this new information to the strange, felonious behavior of Sandy Berger, smuggling documents out of the National Archives. But boy, if the document in question related to Able Danger’s warning and the decision to not act upon it, his actions would make a lot more sense, wouldn’t they?
------
I wonder WHY the public does not know this ?? Deliberately being kept secret by the "Washington Criminal Country Club"...???


19 posted on 08/14/2005 11:02:39 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lone Red Ranger

Putting Gorelick on the Committee does seem to stack the deck.
-----
It was deliberate to keep Gorelick off the stand, which SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED, and which should STILL HAPPEN.
A dozen people should be put under oath to testify, and find out WHO engineered "the wall" -- I think we already know WHY but exactly who is needed to throw the rope up over the tree branch...

This is the key time in which all Ameicans need to watch VERY CLOSELY at what happens and how Washington handles this. It will expose an interesting reality... :-)


20 posted on 08/14/2005 11:08:24 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: george76

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/

Good blog on the subject, check his blogs from the past few
days. Found him on Hugh Hewitt's web page.


21 posted on 08/14/2005 11:09:39 AM PDT by Burlem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/

Good blog on the subject, check his blogs from the past few
days. Found him on Hugh Hewitt's web page.


22 posted on 08/14/2005 11:09:40 AM PDT by Burlem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
The 9/11 report listed quite a number of reasons to disbelief the Czech account.

What were the other reasons?

23 posted on 08/14/2005 11:10:06 AM PDT by Valpal1 (Crush jihadists, drive collaborators before you, hear the lamentations of their media. Allahu FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: george76
Backtracking on the Able Danger story now on NRO's The Corner

Even if Atta wasn't specifically mentioned, the whole Able Danger program and all the leads still were not passed on to the FBI due to the Gorelick wall right? And none of this was mentioned in the 9/11 report so I think we still have a major problem. Also the Commission buried Mary Jo White's second memo.

24 posted on 08/14/2005 11:11:25 AM PDT by spycatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: george76

This article states that apparently Able Danger puts Atta in Prague with an Iraqi intel officer.

Has anyone heard Weldon or anyone else state that Able Danger can place Atta in Prague? If we can do this, it will virtually kill the left and their mantra that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/pp/05226/553271.stm


25 posted on 08/14/2005 11:15:42 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valpal1
What were the other reasons?
Paragraph #1064 (on page 228)
The allegation that Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in April 2001 originates from the reporting of a single source of the Czech intelligence service. Shortly after 9/11, the source reported having seen Atta meet with Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al Ani, an Iraqi diplomat, at the Iraqi Embassy in Prague on April 9, 2001, at 11:00 A.M. This information was passed to CIA headquarters.
[ [clusters] ]

 
Paragraph #1065 (on page 228)
The U.S. legal attaché (“Legat”) in Prague, the representative of the FBI, met with the Czech service’s source. After the meeting, the assessment of the Legat and the Czech officers present was that they were 70 percent sure that the source was sincere and believed his own story of the meeting. Subsequently, the Czech intelligence service publicly stated that there was a 70 percent probability that the meeting between Atta and Ani had taken place.The Czech Interior Minister also made several statements to the press about his belief that the meeting had occurred, and the story was widely reported.
[ [clusters] ]

 
Paragraph #1066 (on page 228)
The FBI has gathered evidence indicating that Atta was in Virginia Beach on April 4 (as evidenced by a bank surveillance camera photo), and in Coral Springs, Florida on April 11, where he and Shehhi leased an apartment. On April 6, 9, 10, and 11,Atta’s cellular telephone was used numerous times to call various lodging establishments in Florida from cell sites within Florida.We cannot confirm that he placed those calls. But there are no U.S. records indicating that Atta departed the country during this period. Czech officials have reviewed their flight and border records as well for any indication that Atta was in the Czech Republic in April 2001, including records of anyone crossing the border who even looked Arab.They have also reviewed pictures from the area near the Iraqi embassy and have not discovered photos of anyone who looked like Atta. No evidence has been found that Atta was in the Czech Republic in April 2001.
[ [clusters] ]

 
Paragraph #1067 (on page 228)
According to the Czech government,Ani, the Iraqi officer alleged to have met with Atta, was about 70 miles away from Prague on April 8–9 and did not return until the afternoon of the ninth, while the source was firm that the sighting occurred at 11:00 A.M. When questioned about the reported April 2001 meeting,Ani—now in custody—has denied ever meeting or having any contact with Atta.Ani says that shortly after 9/11, he became concerned that press stories about the alleged meeting might hurt his career. Hoping to clear his name, Ani asked his superiors to approach the Czech government about refuting the allegation. He also denies knowing of any other Iraqi official having contact with Atta.
[ [clusters] ]

 
Paragraph #1071 (on page 229)
The available evidence does not support the original Czech report of an Atta-Ani meeting.
[ [clusters] ]

 
Paragraph #1040 (on page 223)
7.2 THE 9/11 PILOTS IN THE UNITED STATES The Hamburg Pilots Arrive in the United States In the early summer of 2000, the Hamburg group arrived in the United States to begin flight training. Marwan al Shehhi came on May 29, arriving in Newark on a flight from Brussels. He went to New York City and waited there for Mohamed Atta to join him. On June 2, Atta traveled to the Czech Republic by bus from Germany and then flew from Prague to Newark the next day. According to Ramzi Binalshibh,Atta did not meet with anyone in Prague; he simply believed it would contribute to operational security to fly out of Prague rather than Hamburg, the departure point for much of his previous international travel.
[ [clusters] ]

 
Paragraph #3041 (on page 522)
69. Reports that Atta was in the Prague airport on May 30–31, 2000, and that he was turned back because he lacked a visa appear to be a case of mistaken identity: a Pakistani traveler with a name similar to Atta’s attempted to enter the Czech Republic from Saudi Arabia via Germany but was forced to return to Germany because he lacked a valid Czech visa. CIA cable, report re traveler to Prague, Dec. 8, 2001.

There are more:

Vivísimo - 9/11 Report Demo - Clustered search on Atta

http://tinyurl.com/c8xq4

Mind you, I'm not defending the report. Just telling you what they said.

26 posted on 08/14/2005 11:18:51 AM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Bob

Author/reporter Peter Lance on Snell:

As soon as I heard Snell’s name I suspected that what my source had been telling me was true: that the Commission staff was limiting the scope of the investigation and cherry picking evidence.

Snell had been the Assistant U.S. attorney who co-prosecuted Ramzi Yousef for the “Bojinka” case in 1996. In my first book 1000 Years For Revenge I recounted how the Justice Department, during Snell’s tenure, had limited the scope of the Bojinka case.

http://www.readersread.com/features/peterlance.htm


27 posted on 08/14/2005 11:20:07 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Peach; All

Follow the NRO link at post #24, and the one there to TKS...........everyone seems to be backing off of the ABLE DANGER story........


28 posted on 08/14/2005 11:23:04 AM PDT by MamaLucci (Mutually assured destruction STILL keeps the Clinton administration criminals out of jail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All

Too bad the 9/11 Commission didn't know that Atta had fake passports.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1462192/posts?page=12#12


29 posted on 08/14/2005 11:29:12 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci

I saw that. And I'll believe it when it happens.

There is so much the 9/11 Commission got wrong, or didn't report on, that I don't believe they did a good job. They had a pre-determined outcome and as such, had blinders to any other information.

For instance, the satellite photos and information about Salmon Pak did not make it into the final report. Only a staff report released on December 2003 mentioned Salmon Pak.

So we have jihadists training on a 747 fuselage in Iraq and it doesn't make the report? Doesn't pass the smell test.


30 posted on 08/14/2005 11:30:46 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: george76

Another thing: could there be two Mohammade Attas?


31 posted on 08/14/2005 11:33:04 AM PDT by HitmanLV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill


The 9/11 report listed quite a number of reasons to disbelief the Czech account. The cell phone was just one of many


Such as?


32 posted on 08/14/2005 11:33:42 AM PDT by sgtyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill; ravingnutter

Credit ravingnutter which disputes everything you posted from the 9/11 Commission report with regard to Atta:

In Washington, the FBI moved to quiet the Prague connection by telling journalists that it had car rentals and records that put Atta in Virginia Beach, Va., and Florida close to, if not during, the period when he was supposed to be in Prague. The New York Times , citing information provided by "federal law enforcement officials," reported that Atta was in Virginia Beach on April 2, 2001, and by April 11, "Atta was back in Florida, renting a car."

Newsweek reported that, "the FBI pointed out Atta was traveling at the time [in early April 2001] between Florida and Virginia Beach, Va.," adding, "The bureau had his rental car and hotel receipts." And intelligence expert James Bamford, after quoting FBI Director Robert Mueller as saying that the FBI "ran down literally hundreds of thousands of leads and checked every record we could get our hands on," reported in USA Today , "The records revealed that Atta was in Virginia Beach during the time he supposedly met the Iraqi in Prague."
All these reports attributed to the FBI were, as it turns out, erroneous. There were no car rental records in Virginia, Florida, or anywhere else in April 2001 for Mohamed Atta, since he had not yet obtained his Florida license.

His international license was at his father's home in Cairo, Egypt (where his roommate Marwan al-Shehhi picked it up in late April).

Nor were there other records in the hands of the FBI that put Atta in the United States at the time. Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet testified to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in June 2002, "It is possible that Atta traveled under an unknown alias" to "meet with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague." Clearly, it was not beyond the capabilities of the 9/11 hijackers to use aliases.

http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/PragueConnection.htm


33 posted on 08/14/2005 11:34:47 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Peach
"This article states that apparently Able Danger puts Atta in Prague with an Iraqi intel officer..."

You have an excellent point.

I enjoy your comments.

I will continue to look deeper into this to find more information, as we all are.

34 posted on 08/14/2005 11:36:51 AM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: george76

Thank, George.

I hope that newspaper wasn't expanding on Weldon's assertion that Able Danger had tracked Atta and knew he wsa part of the Brooklyn cell.

I'm trying to find out if anyone has heard Weldon or read in his book that Able Danger is able to place Atta in Prague meeting with an Iraqi goverment official in April 2001.


35 posted on 08/14/2005 11:41:08 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

Sorry I responded before seeing your list.

However paras 1066 and 1067 are pretty weak. For example being 90 miles from a city should easily allow a meeting to take place in a two day window.

Several of the other paras are just restatements, no additional details. Similarly, if Atta went to a couple of other countries en route to Prague, that would be very tough to uncover.


It would be a lot easier to believe that a thorough and reliable investigation had been produced if commissioner Gorlick hadn't had a major role. It didn't have to be this way. We need to know the truth so we can be sure that we have security.


36 posted on 08/14/2005 11:44:48 AM PDT by sgtyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: george76

Of significance, IMO, is Reagan's Executive Order 12333, which specifically directs the FBI, DOD and CIA to cooperate and share info. (Summarized here http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/abledanger.asp)

By all accounts, the failure to prevent 911 was the result of intelligence failures and the failures to share info.

Why, because the Clinton Whitehouse, Reno and Gorelicker told them not to share intel info!


37 posted on 08/14/2005 11:45:43 AM PDT by Smartaleck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lone Red Ranger

rtsp://cspanrm.fplive.net/cspan/project/ter/ter_wj081005_weldon.rm


38 posted on 08/14/2005 11:48:44 AM PDT by GregoryFul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA
Does anybody think that the Sheehan affair could have been timed to overshadow this ABLE DANGER info?

Gosh, I am so cynical

39 posted on 08/14/2005 11:48:56 AM PDT by ncpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ncpatriot

Does anybody think that the Sheehan affair could have been timed to overshadow this ABLE DANGER info?
------
Well, I don't see how one whacko low-life can overshadow the significance of ABLE DANGER. The AD issue IS SO BIG relative to corruption in Washington and the security of our nation that it must get blown wide open.

Sheehan is just another useful idiot of the left -- she will be history soon.


40 posted on 08/14/2005 11:52:16 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: george76
ARTICLE..."No one has concretely tied this new information to the strange, felonious behavior of Sandy Berger, smuggling documents out of the National Archives. But boy, if the document in question related to Able Danger’s warning and the decision to not act upon it, his actions would make a lot more sense, wouldn’t they?"

I agree...Sandy is in this up to his eyeballs. I wouldn't get too hung up however, wondering whether the documents Sandy stuffed were in themselves directly referencing Able Danger IN THE TEXT...ie...Able Danger documents.

They could also have been multiple review copies of Clarkes report...all with different HANDWRITTEN NOTATIONS on multiple documents...comments which were added by each reviewer...these HANDWRITTEN COMMENTS COULD MENTION ABLE DANGER EXPLICITLY, and the decision to defer passing of info over to the FBI.

Although Gorelick wrote the infamous memo..I think that all security related decisions were passed up directly to Sandy...who of course immediately consulted with his CAPOs Bill or Hill.

IMHO, these documents with comments referencing Able Danger, were probably missed in the 2000 transition push to destroy security related documents...essentially because they WERNT explicit Able Danger documents.
41 posted on 08/14/2005 12:00:57 PM PDT by Dat Mon (still lookin for a good one....tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: george76

save


42 posted on 08/14/2005 12:01:47 PM PDT by Eagles6 (Dig deeper, more ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sgtyork

I'm not saying that their arguments obviate Atta being in Praque. Just listing their other reasons. And that is probably not a definitive list, as it is just what comes back from that cluster.

If you go to the link, you can see that there are many other references to Atta (of course) and probably a lot more to his Prague visit. There is also a lot of documentation at the bottom, which I did not include.

I hope the Able Danger story is true. But so far it looks a little shaky. And you'll notice that some people are pulling back, like Podhoretz and NR. But they make mistakes too, of course.

What we need is a lot more details.


43 posted on 08/14/2005 12:08:43 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA
Good!

I see your point. I just have this fear when it comes to the libs. I'm still living in the past ie when they had a monopoly on information.

44 posted on 08/14/2005 12:10:35 PM PDT by ncpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: george76

the information got to some but not all of the commissioners

Do we know WHO received it?
If it was Gorelick, that would be damning.


45 posted on 08/14/2005 12:13:20 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach

I see a lot in the 9/11 report that is not disputed, such as:

"The FBI has gathered evidence indicating that Atta was in Virginia Beach on April 4 (as evidenced by a bank surveillance camera photo), and in Coral Springs, Florida on April 11, where he and Shehhi leased an apartment."

If you go to the link or just search the report, you will see that they provided documentation for these claims. Again, I'm not saying they are right. Just reporting what they said.


46 posted on 08/14/2005 12:13:31 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

I hear your caution. But you know, this was a pivotal commission. A report like "Able Danger" should have been extensively run down instead of just saying 'a single navy officer's report wasn't credible'. It doesn't add up to a thorough and transparent report.


47 posted on 08/14/2005 12:15:27 PM PDT by sgtyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: sgtyork

I agree.


48 posted on 08/14/2005 12:17:20 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Peach

"I'm trying to find out if anyone has heard Weldon or read in his book that Able Danger is able to place Atta in Prague meeting with an Iraqi goverment official in April 2001."

I have not read his book nor heard Weldon...yet.

Other than what has been recently posted.


49 posted on 08/14/2005 12:19:29 PM PDT by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

I did go to some of the links but didn't see that they provided actual phone records or videotape at the Bank. And the Slate article I linked says they don't have physical evidence to back up their claims.


50 posted on 08/14/2005 12:24:29 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson