PDA

View Full Version : Pentagon: No Evidence To Support Able Danger Claims



Nbadan
08-24-2005, 03:52 AM
No Evidence of Atta Claims, Pentagon Says
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 23, 2005; Page A02


The Pentagon said yesterday that Defense Department investigators have found no evidence to support allegations by a GOP congressman and others that a secret program had identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta more than a year before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The findings by the Pentagon further challenge assertions by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) and two military officers that a small data analysis program called "Able Danger" had identified Atta and three other hijackers as early as 1999, but that Defense Department lawyers prevented the information from being shared with the FBI.

"While we continue to review the documentation and conduct interviews, and while there are some who allege specific documents exist, the Defense Department has not discovered any documentation that shows Mohamed Atta connected to al Qaeda prior to the attacks of 9/11," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.

The allegations surrounding Able Danger were first made by Weldon in a little-noticed paragraph in his recent book, "Countdown to Terror," which focuses primarily on assertions about Iran that U.S. intelligence officials have dismissed as fabrications. But the story took off two weeks ago with several prominent news accounts that relied on Weldon and Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, and led to internal reviews by the Pentagon and the Sept. 11 commission.

Yesterday, Fox News broadcast a statement from the second officer, Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, contending that Atta was identified in the first two months of 2000. "My story has remained consistent," he said in the statement.

Shaffer, whose security clearance has been suspended since March 2004, acknowledged last week that his central allegation -- the identification of Atta -- was based on other people's recollections rather than his own. In the accounts given by Shaffer and Weldon, other details have varied.

Shaffer's attorney, Mark S. Zaid, criticized the remarks by Whitman and other defense officials yesterday.

"The Pentagon's public relations campaign to discredit Mr. Shaffer simply reveals that it is looking for documents in the wrong places and talking to the wrong people," Zaid said.

But a Pentagon official, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing probe, said the investigation "has been both broad and deep" and has included interviews with those involved in Able Danger.

In July 2004, the Sept. 11 commission interviewed Phillpott, who told investigators that he had briefly seen Atta's name and photograph on an Able Danger chart between February and April 2000, according to a commission account. Shaffer has since said that Phillpott's recollection formed the basis of his allegations.

But the Sept. 11 panel said it did not find Phillpott's assertions credible because there were no documents to support them, and because Atta did not first travel to the United States until June 2000. The commission has also dismissed Shaffer's assertion that he mentioned an early identification of Atta to commission staffers during a 2003 meeting in Afghanistan.

Thomas H. Kean, chairman of the now-disbanded Sept. 11 commission, called on the Bush administration yesterday to provide more information about what it knows regarding Able Danger and the Atta allegations.

Kean focused specifically on an assertion in Weldon's book about Stephen J. Hadley, then deputy director of the National Security Council. Weldon wrote that shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, he gave Hadley a 1999 Able Danger chart that "diagrammed the affiliations of al Qaeda and showed Mohammed [sic] Atta and the infamous Brooklyn Cell." Weldon repeated the allegation last week.

"At some point, somebody has to say this is true or this is not true," Kean said. "He's supposed to have a list of names of terrorists in his possession. He either does or he doesn't. . . . It's a very significant question."

The NSC press office has repeatedly declined to comment, referring questions to the Pentagon.

Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/22/AR2005082201299.html?nav=hcmodule)

Just as I have posted before, this whole Able Danger fiasco has been a big smoke-screen by the Republican controlled media-echo chamber to sour the field, so to say, for a real uncoming report that will be really critical about the WH handling of critical intelligence in the months leading up to 911, especially intelligence dealing with Bin Laden, Al-Queda, and terrorism.

boutons
08-24-2005, 05:41 AM
Does anybody think the military is going to come clean on anything?

Here's a second person who says Able Danger identified Atta before WTC. This guy is active duty officer, so he's taking a real risk of destroying his career.

==================================

August 23, 2005

Second Officer Says 9/11 Leader Was Named Before Attacks

By PHILIP SHENON, Washington Post

WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 - An active-duty Navy captain has become the second military officer to come forward publicly to say that a secret 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 on Monday 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 were overruled by military lawyers when they tried to share the program's findings with the F.B.I. in 2000 in hopes of tracking down terrorist 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 came 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 Phillpott , a 1983 Naval Academy graduate who has served in the Navy for 22 years, was provided to The New York Times and Fox News through the office of Representative Curt Weldon, a Pennsylvania Republican who is vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and a longtime proponent of so-called data-mining programs like Able Danger.

Asked if the Defense Department had questioned Captain Phillpott in its two-week-old investigation of Able Danger, another Pentagon spokesman, Maj. Paul Swiergosz, said he did not know.

Representative Weldon also arranged an interview on Monday with a former employee of a defense contractor who said he had helped create a chart in 2000 for the intelligence program that included Mr. Atta's photograph and name.

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. Mr. Smith said that he had retained a copy of the chart until last year and that it had been posted on his office wall at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland. He said it had become stuck to the wall and was impossible to remove when he switched jobs.

In its final report last year, the Sept. 11 commission said that American intelligence agencies were unaware of Mr. Atta until the day of the attacks.

The leaders of the Sept. 11 commission acknowledged on Aug. 12 that their staff had met with a Navy officer last July, 10 days before releasing the panel's final report, who asserted that a highly classified intelligence operation, Able Danger, had identified "Mohamed Atta to be a member of an Al Qaeda cell located in Brooklyn."

But the statement, which did not identify the officer, said the staff determined that "the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation" and that the intelligence operation "did not turn out to be historically significant."

With his comments on Monday, Captain Phillpott acknowledged that he was the officer who had briefed the commission last year. "I will not discuss the issues outside of my chain of command and the Department of Defense," he said. "But my story is consistent. Atta was identified by Able Danger by January-February of 2000. I have nothing else to say."

Nbadan
08-24-2005, 12:46 PM
Ummm...Boutons,


In July 2004, the Sept. 11 commission interviewed Phillpott, who told investigators that he had briefly seen Atta's name and photograph on an Able Danger chart between February and April 2000, according to a commission account. Shaffer has since said that Phillpott's recollection formed the basis of his allegations.

But the Sept. 11 panel said it did not find Phillpott's assertions credible because there were no documents to support them, and because Atta did not first travel to the United States until June 2000. The commission has also dismissed Shaffer's assertion that he mentioned an early identification of Atta to commission staffers during a 2003 meeting in Afghanistan.

Nbadan
08-25-2005, 01:53 PM
The Able Danger story seems to be coming back to haunt the NeoCons thanks to some nifty investigative work...


So the responsibility for stopping DIA program Able Danger, which had Identified Atta and 3 other hijackers and linked them to 56 other al-Queda terrorists overseas, has been laid at the feet of Bill Clinton--except he and Richard Clarke were never told about it at all.

That's right. Bill Clinton was never told about Able Danger and the ID of Atta because Richard Clarke was never told about AD. How do I know? He never wrote about it in his book, nor did he testify about it's existence before the 9-11 Commission!

You see Richard Clarke was known for being obsessed with Osama Bin Laden and HE was the guy the neo-con moles did not want to find out about Atta and the gang. Schoomaker and the neo-cons knew telling the FBI would inform Clarke and then Mr. Laser Beam himself, President of the United State William Jefferson Clinton, would have gotten involved--and the Pearl Harbor-type attack would never take place (the neo-cons talked about the need for a Pearl Harbor-type attack before the PNAC Plan would be accepted by the American people--so when one presented itself, they let it happen).

General Pete Schoomaker, who were later heavily rewarded by the neo-cons in the Bush Administration, blocked the upward motion of the DIA information by having Shaffer and Philpott meet with Pentagon lawyers opinions--lawyers who were rubberstamping ridiculous legal opinions to carry out the neo-con plan. These certain people were neo-cons in the Clinton Administration, covertly carrying out the PNAC plan to let a Pearl Harbor-type attack occur so Iraq and 6 other countries could be invaded.

HOW DARE WELDON AND THE RIGHT WING TRY TO LAY ABLE DANGER AT THE FEET OF BILL CLINTON, WHEN HE WAS DELIBERATELY PREVENTED FROM KNOWING ABOUT IT BY SCHOOMAKER AND THE OTHERS! THEN THE NEO-CONS ENDED THE PROGRAM IN FEB. 2001 ALTOGETHER!

The heroic intel agents of Able Danger repeatedly tried to get the FBI to roll up the cell but were stopped by the secret neo-con cell within the Clinton Administration, especially General Pete Schoomaker, in command of Able Danger--and who was later asked by Rumsfeld to come out of retirement and replace Shinseki in 2003 as Army Chief of Staff!

*sic*

Here is Lieutenant Colonel Tony Shaffer as blogger Anon on Intel Dump talking about meeting the DoD lawyers, who had no doubt been ordered by higher-ups to ignore the clear exception to the Gorelick Wall that a terrorist presented:


I was there and I lived through the ABLE DANGER nightmare.

First - yes - The lawyers involved in this (and similar projects) did interpret the 9-11 terrorists as "US persons" - so while you can second guess them all you want - but that was their "legal" call as wrong as it was and is. Unfortunately, the chain of command at SOCOM went along with them (and this, I expect, will be a topic that will become more clear in the near future).

And lawyers of the era also felt that any intelligence officer viewing open internet information for the purpose of intelligence collection automatically required that any "open source" information obtained be treated as if it was "intelligence information"...does this sound like idiocy to you? It did to me - and we fought it - and I was in meetings at the OSD level, with OSD laywers, that debated this - and I even briefed the DCI George Tenet on this issue relating to an internet project.

And yes, Virgina - we tried to tell the lawyers that since the data identified Atta and the others as linked to Al Qaeda, we should be able to collect on them based on SecState Albright's declaration of Al Qaeda as transnational terrorist threat to the US...well the lawyers did not agree...go figure...so we could not collect on them - and for political reasons - could not pass them to the FBI...I know because I brokered three meetings between the FBI and SOCOM to allow SOCOM to pass the informaton to the FBI. And, sadly, SOCOM cancelled them every time...

So Schoomaker and the Pentagon lawyers blocked the Atta Chart and request for arrest of the "Brooklyn Cell" from going to the FBI, Clarke and Clinton--who would have acted on it--and 9-11 would likely have never happened, with 3 of the 4 pilots and the leader of the gang arrested.

But then the neo-cons stole the election and came into power proper with Bush, Rice and Cheney. Rice, in charge of the transition, demoted Richard Clarke on Jan. 5, 2001, with the assistance of Philip Zelikow, who later became Executive Director of the 9-11 Commission! Like Schoomaker, Zelikow has now been rewarded with a plum job, directly under Rice at State.

Able Danger was then "unceremoniously axed" by the DoD in February 2001 when the neo-cons officially took over the Pentagon, no doubt on the orders of Cheney and Rice.

Much more: Sherlock Google, Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/24/124834/678)

Murphy
08-25-2005, 04:43 PM
is the able danger claim is so-called uncredible, then why is congress going to investigate it?

JoeChalupa
08-27-2005, 01:56 AM
If we can investigate a blow job we can investigate this.