Intrigue Over Able Danger Grows

WTOP News ^ | Aug. 30, 2005

[tarheelswamprat]

"...most importany of all, who told Gorelick to do this."

That's not the most important question. The most important question is "who is behind the coverup, and why?"

There is a good probability that it is the same people.

[tarheelswamprat]

2 points: You are correct in stating that the military can not conduct "domestic" intelligence investigations (some exceptions exist, but that just muddies up the waters...) You are incorrect in stating that the military is free to gather information on US Person abroad! This requires special authorizations and is often denied. Even NSA must get approval to conduct such operations from the AG!!

Thanks for the clarification.

There is another curious aspect to these issues of intelligence investigations. Concomitant with the prohibition on the CIA, DOD, NSA, et al. conducting domestic intelligence operations, there was, for as long as I can remeber, a corresponding prohibition on the FBI from conducting foreign operations. They were supposed to be "domestic" only. Today, however, the FBI has offices and is operating all over the world.

Do you have any information on where and when, in law, this change was made?

[bw17]

Once again, whenever there's a scandal, all roads lead back to Janet Reno and her Department of inJustice.

This is from Zelikow's statement during the 9/11 Commission hearings:

"New procedures issued by Attorney General Reno in 1995 required the FBI to notify prosecutors when facts and circumstances are developed in a foreign intelligence or counterintelligence investigation that reasonably indicate a significant federal crime has been, is being or may be committed.

The procedures, however, prohibited the prosecutors from, quote, "directing or controlling," close quote, the intelligence investigation.

Over time, the wall requirement came to be interpreted by the Justice Department, and particularly the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as imposing an increasingly stringent barrier to communications between FBI intelligence agents and criminal prosecutors.

Despite additional guidance on information sharing issued by Attorney General Reno in February 2000 and by Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson in August 2001, the wall remained a source of considerable frustration and concern within the Justice Department. "

[OESY]

Nice find. Looks like the 9/11 Commission wittingly or unwittingly used a fox to protect the hen house.


September 18, 2002: First 9/11 Inquiry Hearing Amidst Protests About Lack of Government Cooperation




Senate Intelligence Committee staff director Eleanor Hill.


The 9/11 Congressional Inquiry holds its first public hearing. The inquiry was formed in February 2002, but suffered months of delays. The day's testimony focuses on intelligence warnings that should have led the government to believe airplanes could be used as bombs. [9/11 Congressional Inquiry, 9/18/02] However, the Washington Post reports, “lawmakers from both parties ... [protest] the Bush administration's lack of cooperation in the congressional inquiry into September 11 intelligence failures and [threaten] to renew efforts to establish an independent commission.” Eleanor Hill, the joint committee's staff director, testifies that, “According to [CIA Director Tenet], the president's knowledge of intelligence information relevant to this inquiry remains classified even when the substance of that intelligence information has been declassified.” She adds that “the American public has a compelling interest in this information and that public disclosure would not harm national security.” [Washington Post, 9/19/02] Furthermore, the committee believes that “a particular al-Qaeda leader may have been instrumental in the attacks” and US intelligence has known about this person since 1995.

-- http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=eleanor_hill

[Realism]

That's not the most important question. The most important question is "who is behind the cover up, and why?"

Why? Because the Pentagon was conducting a MASSIVE secret operation which spied on U.S. citizens. Our military has obviously decided that they are above the law, why would they tell people this? This is stuff we see in the movies and dismiss as fiction.

[OESY]

It would seem that working for the Clinton administration didn't wear well.




Former Department of Defense Inspector General Eleanor Hill.

[Lancey Howard]

BUMP

[Dat Mon]

Judging from this thread....it sounds like AD was just another rogue outfit...operating outside federal statutes and directives of DOJ. Seems like they wouldn't have a charter to do much of anything.

And yet...AD flowed out of a directive originating from Shelton, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, was a top secret military group operating on top secret and secure DOD computers within a top secret secure facility, using ultra secure DOD networks, with access to other highly classified data and operations within DOD...etc..you get the point.

You don't get near this kind of stuff unless you have 'a demonstrated need to know'...rank alone wont do it. These types of computer facilities have guys with loaded weapons standing guard..they will enforce that edict without hesitation.

It takes a high level directive to set this kind of thing up...and to shut it all down too.

Now the destruction of highly classified archived data, especially the programs SOURCE CODE and documentation...now thats another issue...

Then theres the question of Weldon, Shaffer, and Philpot (a high level career Navy officer who is still on ACTIVE duty)...would they be all going out on a limb over a rogue outfit?

I guess well all find out in due course...stay tuned....

[OESY]

Links to testimony delivered can be found at:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa092502a.htm


Testimony of Sept. 18, 2002
Ms. Kristen Breitweiser, Co-Chairperson September 11th Advocates
Mr. Stephen Push, Treasurer Families of September 11, Inc. Washington, D.C.
Ms. Eleanor Hill, Staff Director Joint Inquiry Staff


Testimony of Sept. 19, 2002
Richard Armitage, Deputy Secretary of State
Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Anthony Lake, former National Security Advisor
Samuel R. Berger, former National Security Advisor


Testimony of Sept. 20, 2002
Ms. Eleanor Hill, Staff Director Joint Inquiry Staff
Michael Rolince, FBI Special Agent in Charge of Washington Field Office
FBI New York Agent
Chris Kojm, Deputy for Intelligence Policy and Coordination Bureau of Intelligence and Research Department of State


Testimony of Sept. 24, 2002
Ms. Eleanor Hill, Staff Director Joint Inquiry Staff

[ravingnutter]

Hate to throw in a monkey wrench, but AD used "open source" data mining...meaning that info was already in the public domain, IOW, on the internet. Why did they even consider that "intelligence"? Why would it be considered spying...if so, I guess am guilty of being a spy for all the research I do on FR. Cool! Guess I oughta demand my super duper secret spy decoder ring now...

[Marine_Uncle]

"Yes, but it was a great demonstration of how ... the power that modern computer technology with skilled personnel could turn up information.....and some folks maybe saw that as a serious threat....!!!!"

What I find interesting, is short of the specialty software that they used, and was shown via. a Freeper's web links to the company that made the software, AD used, we do much generic "datamining" using simple search engines such as Google.com etc.. Thanks for ping on this latest AD post.

[Marine_Uncle]

"But, as I have posted on other AD threads - once the lawyers (grrr) determined, rightly or wrongly, that AD was in violation of the FISA, EO 12333 and others, ANY person along the chain of command could have (and would have been required to) shut down AD and have the data collected destroyed (it was not legal to retain / disseminate such information)"

And that precisely is probably went down when the still unnamed Colonel told Smith, looks like my career is over, as AD was shut down, and the total 2.5 tera bytes plus databases/files etc., where wiped off all hard disks. And if so, there is no smoking guns in this area. The DoD did exactly by law what it was supposed to do. Kill the operation and destroy the data. I hope Weldon is not under any form of delusions that there is something to go at in this particular instance.

[Dat Mon]

Id venture a guess that the software running on the AD computer system cannot be purchased by you or I on the open market from any vendor at any price.

[Dat Mon]

YOU SAID..."And if so, there is no smoking guns in this area."

With no smoking guns of any kind...with the absence of ALL data, files, source code, documentation, classified reports, briefings, logs, etc, etc,....

And with the current and past administrations unwilling to go any further....

...Clinton walks and BS talks...once again.


Except for the detail of the CHART.....

[Dat Mon]

Oh...I left out one other thing...

Sandy gets his ultra high level security clearance back in three years...just in time to jump in and contribute as security adviser on Hillary's campaign.

[Marine_Uncle]

"Id venture a guess that the software running on the AD computer system cannot be purchased by you or I on the open market from any vendor at any price."
Perhaps what you say is true. Wish I could remeber what Freeper article gave the links I went to, in order to view the various packages the company sells to Intel orgs, police, etc..

[Marine_Uncle]

" Except for the detail of the CHART....."

And that is probably what will keep Weldon and company in the game, as well as the sworn oath of what may become a half dozen involved that what they did and is being presented is totally true and accurate. Sounds like the CHART could work to their demise to some effect, as not being valid admitted materials, in that it was supposed to be destroyed along with everything else, per DoD proceedures. If it ends up being the case, we obviously have been had yet once again, this time by a perhaps legal loop hole.

[Dat Mon]

YOU SAID..."in that it was supposed to be destroyed along with everything else, per DoD proceedures."

I don't think its been established to my satisfaction that the destruction of ALL AD program related materials, amounting to in effect the complete erasure of this highly classified program was required of or is normal DOD procedure.

IMHO...this program would have to be considered a rogue program operating outside its scope or charter to merit that treatment. Chances are, Shaffer and / or Philpott would have also been given letters in their files and would have retired by now.

Deleting surveillance data on an individual is one thing....

Deleting a report is one thing...

Erasing an entire program including the program source code, all program documentation, all security logs and briefing materials etc. involves destruction of government property (the program). That requires a high level directive..as Ive said all along.

Somebody would have to provide a rationale why a program would be completely erased after having turned up a terrorist connection...i.e the CHART (which was given to the WH / NSC).

There should be a political cost in any case.

[Marine_Uncle]

All you wrote, I agree with. That is the stand I took on posts a week back plus. Then it was brought to our attention that when a program is terminated, all materials are removed from existence, hard drives dirs/files erased then the area of a disk or whole disk totally overwritten by say NULL characters.
As for paper documentation? Apparently AD was allowed to store some 15 boxes( whatever that means), of paper documentation in at least to safes, one close to McDill, that represented the AD teams stuff, and one in northern Virginia (Col. Schaffers's copies). So obviously not all as you correctly state was totally purged.
Your statement is backed up by the fact they had a paper trail, and perhaps had floppies, removable media etc.. But if the colonels's stuff is now gone and the DA stuff is now gone, removed from the safes. All that may remain is a few briefcases that where used to show the 9/11 staffers. That is what I am concerned about. Perhaps the CHART will suffice. Who knows. We obviously wait for more information to drip....drip....drip.

[gaspar]

Eleanor Hill is a lawyer out of Florida who joined the senate staff in 1980. In the nineteen eighties she made her bones as Sam Nunn's hitwoman in the Iran-Contra investigation. Is the picture becoming clear?