Posted on 08/16/2005 9:36:09 AM PDT by Perdogg
Pentagon lawyers, fearing a public-relations "blow back," blocked a military intelligence unit from sharing information with the FBI that four suspected al Qaeda terrorists were in the country prior to the September 11 attacks, after determining they were here legally,
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
And after 9-11 a JAG lawyer held up a sure hit on the Taliban leader Omar.
I prefer the simple "TREASON" answer to how the Dems approached national security...don't buy this backblow ramification arguement.
"Oops...that's, BRAVO SIERRA."
BS is BS no matter how you spell it. ;^)
I have this feeling the DUmmies will now suddenly climb on the Able Danger bandwagon, saying the holding back of info to the 9-11 commission happened under Bush's watch. Yet days ago they were dismissing this as nothing when it was revealed it happened under Clinton, and Gorelick's wall of separation.
Uhhh, dear Pentagon lawyers. There is a Grand Canyon chasm of difference between a BATF and FBI raid motivated by Clinton stooges hell bent on "gun control" on a home in Texas that housed women and children, and Islamic terrorists.
If we have to point that out to you, your IQ must be 60.
...and no matter how they sugar coat it too.
You are giving them too much cedit.
Accusations that commission staffers were briefed on the Able Danger operation but ignored the information in the final report came from Rep. Curt Weldon, Pennsylvania Republican, who said potential political fallout was one reason he was given for the information not being turned over to the FBI.
" How could a top-secret operation against al Qaeda not be mentioned in the 9/11 document?" he said. "It's outrageous. It looks like someone at the staff level decided not to pursue that information."
The intelligence official said he tried to broker meetings between the FBI and the Special Operations Command to turn over information that Able Danger had uncovered, including that hijackers Marwan Al-Shehhi, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhamzi were with Atta in the United States.
Able Danger was created in 1999 by SoCom to track al Qaeda cells worldwide.
The intelligence official said he was interviewed in October 2003 by members of the September 11 commission staff, including Executive Director Philip Zelikow, and sought to arrange a follow-up meeting that the staff had requested when he returned from Afghanistan in January 2004, but was rebuffed.
"They took good notes and scribbled the entire time I talked. Two staffers took four to five pages of notes each. Other members from Special Ops Command also were in attendance," he said, adding that he was "shocked" in January 2004 when the staff members told him, "We don't need to talk to you."
Mr. Weldon said he wants to know "who made the decision and why was it never mentioned in the final document. ... It would have changed the completion on the final 9/11 report."
The MSM stayed away just long enough until the rats could start applying some pressure and orchestrate their BS machine.
"The intelligence official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Pentagon lawyers "were afraid of a blow back""
And I would love to know who this IO is.
This was even talked about (very briefly) on C-SPAN today. It's starting to grow legs ...
Rush just read some of this article.
Catherine Herridge To Interview Member Of ABLE DANGER Tonight
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1464369/posts
You mean you didn't get the RNC talking points on this? Neither did I, but Rush and every "conservative" columnist are all singing from the same page. More "how can we fool them today" and it's a bipartisan effort just like the 911 commission. IMO
You wrote: "And I would love to know who this IO is."
And I would like to know who this person voted for in the past couple of elections!
You must mean the "Goelick Wall". Come on, it will get easier to say the more times you say it.
The intelligence official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Pentagon lawyers "were afraid of a blow back"
I know the Times is more credible than the post, but I hate it when articles are written around someone speaking on the condition of anonymity. I figure Weldon must have some powerful people backing him up and my guess would be that many of them are from the Pentagon.
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.