Navy Officer Affirms Assertions About Pre-9/11 Data on Atta

NY Times ^ | August 22, 2005 | PHILIP SHENON

[neverdem]

WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 - An active-duty Navy captain has become the second military officer to come forward publicly to say that a secret defense intelligence program tagged the ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks as a possible terrorist more than a year before the attacks.

The officer, Scott J. Phillpott, said in a statement today that he could not discuss details of the military program, which was called Able Danger, but confirmed that its analysts had identified the Sept. 11 ringleader, Mohamed Atta, by name by early 2000. "My story is consistent," said Captain Phillpott, who managed the program for the Pentagon's Special Operations Command. "Atta was identified by Able Danger by January-February of 2000."

His comments came on the same day that the Pentagon's chief spokesman, Lawrence Di Rita, told reporters that the Defense Department had been unable to validate the assertions made by an Army intelligence veteran, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, and now backed up by Captain Phillpott, about the early identification of Mr. Atta.

Colonel Shaffer went public with his assertions last week, saying that analysts in the intelligence project had been overruled by military lawyers when they tried to share the program's findings with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2000 in hope of tracking down terror suspects tied to Al Qaeda.

Mr. Di Rita said in an interview that while the department continued to investigate the assertions, there was no evidence so far that the intelligence unit had come up with such specific information about Mr. Atta and any of the other hijackers.

He said that while Colonel Shaffer and Captain Phillpott were respected military officers whose accounts were taken seriously, "thus far we've not been able to uncover what these people said they saw - memory is a complicated thing."

The statement from Captain...

[ravingnutter]

This is an active duty captain? I think he can forget about ever getting those stars on his collar.

We have known about him for days:

Aug 22, 2005 - Shaffer said he and a Navy officer disagreed with that and tried to set up meetings with the FBI, but each time the idea was rejected by lawyers from the Special Operations command. The statement by Kean and Hamilton said only Atta was mentioned to the commission staff as being identified by Able Danger. They were told by a Navy officer about Atta 10 days before the commission released its report in July 2004, but the officer did not have documentation to back it up, the statement said. Several defense officials on Wednesday identified the Navy officer as Capt. Scott Phillpott.

Washington Times

He had declined to speak to the media earlier, he had to get clearance to publicly comment, so I don't think I'd be worried about his status.

[EQAndyBuzz]

"The big question is, why is the New York Times printing stories that may prove immensely damaging to their politics? It's totally out of character."

Because the Slimes are going to try to innoculate Hillary from all of this. They want this addressed now so it doesn't come up again in 2006.

This is Hillary damage control at its finest.

[jwalsh07]

Me too. I ask myself who do I trust, career officers or politicos. No contest.

[navyblue]

"Lt. Col is an O-5, isn't a Navy Captain a pretty high rank?"

Yep! Equivalent to full col.

[El Gato]

Again it is the "LAWYERS"

The Klinton LAWYERS.

Lawyers are like guns, it's who uses them and for what, that makes all the difference. As with a gun, when you need a lawyer, you really, really need one.

[El Gato]

I'm laughing, because the makers of "Inside 9/11" came up with corroboration for Shaffer and Phillpott, without ever talking to them.

I didn't catch that the first time, but I did the second time I watched part one.

However we don't know they didn't talk to one or the other, or both, of them, since they didn't identify the source of that particular piece of information.

[chgomac]

Thanks!

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

This guy has some nuts. I'd like to buy him a beer. Heck, I'd buy him a case.

[kennyboy509]

Do ya think Sandy Berger going to be an Arkasas suicide????

HHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOO WWWWWWWWWWWWWEEEEE!!

Comone RUSH Predict this before I do.

(Oh I just did. Sorry)

I beat Rush I beat Rush!!!!!!!

[AnimalLover]

BUMP

[RobbyS]

An active duty captain.

[Natty Bumppo@frontier.net]

Getting promoted to O-6 in the Navy brings a profound degree of freedom to most officers.

The probability of selection to Rear Admiral is extremely slight. Unless you are in certain warfare specialties on certain career paths, it is nonexistent.

You have devoted a lifetime of service to the Navy and now have three to eight years to improve all of the things you identified on your way up the ranks.

As long as you don't do it for personal gain, don't involve prodigious quantities of alcohol, or get involved in inappropriate relationships, you are bulletproof.

It is a target rich environment, you have all the authority and responsibility you need, you just need to be judicious in your goal setting.

It's a beautiful thing!

CAPT Scott J. Phillpott is a patriot. Our Navy and our Nation are honored by his service.

[jackieaxe]

Nothing like the light of day to show what traitors Jamie Garilick and her crowd are!