Posted on 08/16/2005 8:28:18 AM PDT by mware
Hope someone creates a thread and a ping list for this show..and reminds all to watch..Worth setting the VCR/TIVO..
Under the original article, there is a link that says "Click to Add Keyword".
I believe it. They'll spin it so that data mining is some sort of evil.
Most days I cheer Krautheimer on, Kristol is like a picket fence.
bttt
Thanks Ken I will attach this post to tony snow thread.
This is from Andrew McCarthy at NRO:
I had to be AWOL yesterday and couldn’t respond to John’s “blather and palaver” post. For now, though, it’s more important to note some new developments.
The Washington Times has a very interesting story this morning. A former military intelligence officer anonymously told the paper that Able Danger did indeed identify Mohammed Atta and three of the other eventual suicide hijackers before the attacks but were blocked by Pentagon lawyers from sharing this information with the FBI.
Significantly, reading this story side-by-side with the memorandum the Commission issued last week to rebut Congressman Curt Weldon’s allegations, it seems certain that this former intelligence officer is a source additional to the naval intelligence officer interviewed by the Commission staff in July 2004, right before the final report was issued). (That naval intelligence officer is the source whose claims are what John referred to as uncorroborated “blather and palaver” in arguing against my contention that the Commission should have disclosed and rebutted those claims in a footnote.)
The former intelligence officer also told the Washington Times that he “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.” If that is true, there may be other identifiable people at the FBI and the Pentagon who can shed light on whether this really happened.
This former intelligence official is plainly not anonymous to everyone in government, because he claims to have been one of those interviewed by the 9/11 Commission staff in Afghanistan in October 2003 – and to have been rebuffed when he asked for a follow-up meeting with the staff when he returned Stateside in January 2004. In any event, he alleges that at least two of the staffers appeared to take copious of what he said.
The passage of the WashTimes article that I found most intriguing is this one (italics is mine): "But Pentagon officials have said they have uncovered no specific intelligence data from the Able Danger unit concerning an Atta-led terrorist cell, other than a few intelligence analyses that mention his name[.] …"
Come again? The aforementioned memorandum the Commission issued last week asserted pointedly that there was no mention of Atta's name either at the October 2003 briefing the staff acknowledges receiving on Able Danger, or in any of the documentation the Defense Department made available at the Commission’s request after that briefing. Is the Pentagon now saying that there are pre-9/11 intelligence analyses generated by Able Danger that do allude to Atta by name? It would be nice to know that officially from the Defense Department rather than relying on unattributed Pentagon statements to the media.
Further, assuming it is true that this former intelligence official is known both to the 9/11 Commission staffers who interviewed him, to the Pentagon, and to the Washington Times to whom he is speaking out publicly but anonymously, is there any good reason why the public should not get to hear from him directly so that his credibility can be assessed?
And shouldn’t we (a) be shown any pre-9/11 Able Danger work product that mentions or refers to Atta and his cohorts (sanitized to avoid disclosing any vital intelligence methods and sources), or (b) told flatly and officially by the Defense Department that no such documents exists?
If it turns out that there are such documents, shouldn’t we be told whether they were disclosed to or withheld from the Commission when it made its comprehensive request for Able Danger documentation? And shouldn’t Congress be making its own inspection of the notes made by the Commission staffers in connection with the October 2003 briefing?
There are very good reasons to be skeptical about this story – the charges are explosive, Congressman Weldon appears to have backtracked on some critical details, and it is hard (though not impossible) to believe government pre-9/11 knowledge of the hijackers could have stayed under wraps this long, especially after a lengthy, high profile investigation. Skepticism is a good reason to proceed with caution. But it is important to proceed and get answers to these questions.
Probably. He'd rather talk about his golf game or pat himself on the back for the brilliance of his Roberts parody ad. {"Patting myself on the back with one hand tied behind it, along with half my brain.")
Also, don't miss DougFromUpland on Rightalk radio tomorrow at 2 pm. He will interview Gordon Cucullu and Jayna Davis to discuss Able Danger.
I work 2nd shift and don't have cable so I'm looking forward to what's said here.
If anyone can post the transcript or provide a link it would be appreciated.
Catherine Herridge. Hubba, hubba!
Be careful what you wish for, ken5050.
Michael Shreuer is a rabid Bush-hater.
There is absolutley no way that this ABLE DANGER story gets legs unless the story somehow manages to implicate Bush as well as the Clinton crowd. No way ABLE DANGER is solely laid at the feet of Clinton. No way. No way. No way.
bttt
Dont' forget mediating between T.O. and McNabb
Michael Smerconish on radio 1210 in Philadelphia is having Rep. Weldon on his show tomorrow morning along with a representative from the Able Danger group, who Smerconish says will identify himself and present his bona fides. His show comes on at 5:30 a.m. and I don't get up until 7:00, but I will listen and report if he does this segment later in the morning.
Thanks for the ping!
Tony's show comes on at 9 est. So Michael is going to lead. Let me know what you hear.
Yeah, McNabb is Rush's buddy.
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.