Skip to comments.Navy Officer Affirms Assertions About Pre-9/11 Data on Atta
Posted on 08/22/2005 4:13:55 PM PDT by 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...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Hope this story hangs in there. Something happened and we have a right to know.I tend to believe the Lt. Col.I don't tend to trust bureaucrats.
Another voice is heard...
ping a ling a ding dong!
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.
Who cares? What does Cindy Sheehan have to say about this?
That is what matters.
Thanks to documentaries like NGC's "Inside 9-11", this story isn't going away. With yet another source, and the inevitable Weldon hearings, this story has legs.
You'r assuming that they don't want to redeem their reputation. Money talks!
Hmmm, lets see, they seem to have known the name of this Atta insect a full year before he managed to pull off the single worst atrocity ever commit ed against the American people but this doesn't seem to constitute "proof" in Mr. Di Rita's vacuous little head. Simply amazing.
"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."
This statement is simply too asinine to comment on.
They aren't going to be able to unscramble an egg soon. I believe it's reached a point to where the genie can't be put back into the bottle. It's growing daily.
This is an active duty captain? I think he can forget about ever getting those stars on his collar.
"My story is consistent"
Interesting. does he think others' stories aren't?
"The former contractor, James D. Smith, said that Mr. Atta's name and photograph were obtained through a private researcher in California who was paid to gather the information from contacts in the Middle East."
Doesn't sound much like data mining, but old fashioned-humint.
"Mr. Smith said that he had retained a copy of the chart for some time and that it had been posted on his office wall at Andrews Air Force Base. He said it had become stuck to the wall and was impossible to remove when he switched jobs."
Oh yeah, the old "sticky wall" excuse. He should have just said he didn't think to take it. Instead he creates a story where no poster will be found on his old wall, therefore there was a conspiracy.
Smart. I remember hearing Rep. Weldon say there were a dozen of these folks lined up - not necessarily all willing to go public, but there are quite a few sources form which to draw info/corroboration.
How was that, by the way?
Remember Hilary on MSM news...... "What did this President know, and when did he know it?". I so want her face rubbed in her own s&%t!
Shaffer, an Army reservist, has been on paid administrative leave for the past 16 months, Zaid said. He was an active Army major during his involvement with Able Danger, Zaid said.
Several defense officials on Wednesday identified the Navy officer as Capt. Scott Phillpott. They discussed matters related to Able Danger only on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the program and the investigation into it.
A Navy spokesman said Phillpott was declining requests to speak with reporters.
Phillpott is now assigned as a Navy staff officer with a program called "Deep Blue," which is developing futuristic concepts for naval warfare, officials said.
Phillpott is the Navy official who approached the 9/11 commission's Dieter Snell in July 2004 and said that he had briefly seen a chart that showed AD had ID'd Atta a year in advance of the attacks
USS Estocin Decommissioned
Naval Station Mayport Public Affairs, NAVAL STATION MAYPORT, Fla., Apr. 6, 2003
Cmdr. Scott Phillpott, Estocin's commanding officer, said he is enthusiastic about the transfer. "The Turkish Navy is getting a fine warship," he said. "My crew has Estocin in pristine condition, and it will serve the government of Turkey proudly."
Excellent ... Pt 1 is being rebroadcast now!
"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."
now that all the documents have been destroyed there is no evidence. These 2 guys better be careful they don't get destroyed. Me, I'm just watching my old X-files tapes.
I'm sure hoping that someone, somewhere kept copies of the (oh, what a surprise) missing documents.
"Smart. I remember hearing Rep. Weldon say there were a dozen of these folks lined up - not necessarily all willing to go public, but there are quite a few sources form which to draw info/corroboration."
good memory. now I remember too.
This is the proverbial tipping point. With two career officers coming out on this, it can not be ignored. They may be slimmed; but I believe, like the Swift Boat Vets, this NOW has legs, and will go on. Especially if a few more officers offer verification. Moreoever, in my opinion, Gorelick is toast and Clinton's legacy will be forever tarnished with this (even though it was not much to begin with)
If the dots are ever, ever connected (and published by "respected" historians), and those dots connect any coverup by Clinton of any Chinese fundraising with the "Wall," then you have a scandal the likes which this country has never seen. The ghost of Benedict Arnold will certainly appreciate his name no longer being used as THE benchmark for betraying one's country.
KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.KLINTON KNEW.
WOO WOO WOO!!!
The storm is building..... even the NY Times has taken notice.... how long can the Clintonistas keep the scandal under control??
Knew what? It was known under both the Clinton and Bush II admins that some of the 9/11 terrorists were potential threats, but not Atta.
All this Able Danger stuff adds is a govt. agency that had the name Atta. Maybe.
That's it. And Weldon trying to sell something.
he knew there were terrorists in this country that wanted to fly planes into buildings since 96. "Dereliction of Duty"
If that's all that was involved, I'd agree with you that it's not much except 20/20 hindsight and a darned shame. But the part that I find VERY troubling is the 9/11 Commission's OMISSION, its changing stories, Jamie Gorelick's role on that joke of a commission, and Sandy Burglar's criminal behavior (which may or may not be related).
Well, at least in the battle between bureaucratic CYA and the truth, the truth appears to be winning.
It's funny how the Clintons are so quiet lately. Are they on some island paradise dancing by the beach for reporters, or is the senatrix throwing table lamps at Bill's head right about now? No doubt, they're planning their next round of lies and coverups.
I worry that your ping-a-ling to radio producer will do any good for 2 WEEKS....arggghh
I know if John Gibson subbed, he would talk about it..but anyone else is iffy.
You must break out your Clintonese dictionary. :-)
but Gibby will be subbing at one point! :-)
True ... however, every two decades or so the NY Times comes thru with the whole story, in a more, or, less unbiased fashion. I applaud the NY Times for doing the right thing this time ...
slade gordon on OReilly now trashing Shaffer.
".I tend to believe the Lt. Col.I don't tend to trust bureaucrats."
That needs to be repeated.
The weiny politicized people there will be much more likely to throw someone (on the ground, in the field etc.) overboard.
They don't want to burn bridges when the 2008 elections happen and they have a new boss.
Are you shocked?
OReilly going toe to toe with Gordon over Gorelick. Gordon is total scum.
O'Reilly has on Slade Gordon right now...and Gordon says that Schaeffer is not telling the truth about telling their staffers about Atta....and that now the woman that schaeffer refers to is saying she doesn't know what he is talking about...
First he said that the defense dept told them they knew about AD, but not about Atta...now he is saying DOD is denying any knowledge of what Schaeffer is saying..
BTW, O'Reilly tapes early so there is no mention of this new witness..
but I can fake it.
Slade Gordon is a pitiful weasel RINO like Kean.... the only member of the 9/11 O-MISSION I trust even slightly is Lehman, and that trust will evaporate if he doesn't force this issue to the max......
For an honorable man, there are things more important than those stars. I trust you agree.
From time to time, Ill ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
That's the point.
The omission of Able Danger makes the 9/11 Commission report a better paperweight than the Warren Commission report.