OKAY, HERE IT IS [Re: Lt. Col. Shaffer/Able Danger]

NRO the Corner ^ | 8/18/05 | [John Podhoretz]

[Wheens]

If he's telling the truth, then the entire history of the last five years needs to be rewritten. His name is Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, and he's one of the two military intelligence officers alleging that the Defense Department had located Mohammed Atta and other hijackers in America in 2000.

He's now gone public on cable television and in this interview with the New York Times.

What's perfectly credible about what Shaffer says is that his unit, Able Danger, developed information about an Al Qaeda cell in Brooklyn and that Pentagon lawyers thrice blocked meetings between his unit and the FBI because they feared being accused of spying illicitly inside the United States. (He was not an intelligence analyst, but rather Able Danger's liaison with the Defense Intelligence Agency.)

But Shaffer does not have proof that Atta and three others were among those named. To be fair, he should NOT have proof because any such documentation would be classified material that should not be in his possession.

So now we have some manifest contradictions:

He says he told 9/11 commission staffers about this in Afghanistan in 2003. They dispute it. So somebody isn't telling the truth.

The Able Danger papers shown to the 9/11 Commission at the Pentagon after the Afghanistan meeting did not feature anything mentioning Atta. So the 9/11 Commission says. So either the Commission staff is lying. Or no paper mentioned Atta and Shaffer is just wrong. Or the Defense Department misplaced the paperwork mentioning Atta. Or somebody at the Defense Department deliberately didn't give the Commission the material.

In the first case, if the 9/11 commission staff is lying, the hell to be paid is going to be colossal. Among other things, it could shake the current State Department to its foundations, since the 9/11 commission staff director, Philip Zelicow, is one of Condi Rice's most trusted aides.

In the second case, if the Defense Department withheld critical information on this matter, it's almost impossible to imagine the intensity of the bloodletting that will follow.

With nothing more to go on than Shaffer's name and his statement, I think it's appropriate to remain skeptical. Since we have heard that the list Shaffer tried to forward to the FBI contained 60 names, it is legitimate to question whether his memory and the memory perhaps of other Able Danger folks has been enhanced by knowledge learned later on -- whether the otherwise obscure name of "Mohammed Atta" might have become part of their recollections after the fact because it became so famous.

Which is to say, Shaffer isn't lying, and he isn't a scoundrel. He's someone who ran afoul of the hyperlegal mindset that kept the intelligence "wall" growing ever higher until it became a hiding place for Al Qaeda.

[Peach]

Schaefer spoke live for over an hour on Michael Savage tonight. I know Savage is half nuts (or more), but it was a great interview.

Schaefer has the full support of his 4 star Colonel Shoomaker (I think I have the title correct) and he and Weldon met yesterday with a DOD guy tasked with finding a way for all the Able Danger guys to speak publicly. They want to speak but many of them have covert positions which makes this difficult.

I typed notes as best I could from this lengthy interview tonight; just punch in my name under the search function and read my posts about Schaefer's comments.

And, he DID have Atta identified.

[Peach]

Oh, good for you, Dog. I'm so glad you did this.

[atomicpossum]

Schaefer has the full support of his 4 star Colonel Shoomaker

Peach, Shoomaker is the Army Chief of Staff (even bigger!).

[zendari]

I doubt Clinton knew the details...any national security issue he just swept under the rug.

[Phsstpok]

staff director, not director

that means he was the senior Republican staffer.

So some (Democrat?) staffers either screw up, let their prejudices get in the way or actively cover up info because it could be bad for billary, and the spin is that this is gonna look bad for the Republican?

Sorry, they'll have to try again. This balloon just popped.

[kerryusama04]

I just want someone to ask the question. CLINTON KNEW on the cover of the Weekly Standard would do.

[Coop]

I suspect Shaffer has been around the business long enough to be a realist.

I agree - unless you're implying the pessimistic view is the realistic view. Of course the LtCol knows there are risks. And he's decided he's willing to accept those risks and go public.

[Peach]

Whoa. I think someone told me that earlier tonight but I was busy typing Schaefer and it didn't really compute.

[Stellar Dendrite]

"Podhoretz has convinced me in recent days that it is not worth listening to Podhoretz. His hissy fit the other day is all I needed."

Hear, Hear! He called on weldon to apologize to the 9/11 commission!

[Cosmo]

They've got an elitist streak among a few of them (particularly Goldberg, Ponnoru and, most egregiously, Pod) . I did, however, actually have dinner with Rich Lowry about 5 years ago and found he was very down to earth and gracious. His posts at the corner always reflect that . Some of these other guys (especially the Pod) didn't get enough butt-kickings in middleschool.

[Stellar Dendrite]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1464673/posts

[Cosmo]

Well, every bio I read (via google) has that he was the executive director of the 9/11 commission. Got another link?

here's one of the ones I found:

http://hnn.us/articles/5280.html

[Enchante]

The MSM may well try to spin it as a function of Zelikow, except for the small problem that the Able Danger info clearly seems to undermine the Clinton administration, not the Bush/Cheney era. More relevant is that the 9/11 Commission was absolutely STACKED with Clintonlite drones focused upon controlling the treatment of intel and legal issues, so we'd have to know a lot more about everyone who dealt with the Able Danger info and might have had a role in suppressing this info. None of these types would have allowed a focus upon such an egregious failure if they could distract attention to something else; and issues of "the Wall" or the related catastrophic mis-judgments of the Clinton years were not adequately addressed by the 9/11 Commission.... WHY???.... At the very least, there seem to be two commission members and four key senior staff members who have a clear-cut conflict of interest between service to nation and service to Bill and Hillary Clinton. Check it out, Clinton drones identified to date on 9/11 Commission and staff:

(1) Jamie Gorelick: Clinton flunky at DOD (General Counsel) and Justice (Associate Attorney General), creator of "the WALL" and key gatekeeper of classified info flowing to the commission members and staff. I have written on another thread that we need to know whether she created any DOD policies analogous to "the WALL" that were still in effect in the Pentagon in 2000, which could have led "Pentagon lawyers" to block information-sharing with the FBI. CONFLICT OF INTEREST??

(2) Richard Ben Veniste: vicious hack lawyer for Clinton 'Whitewater' defense team, Democratic hit-man and all-around scum. CONFLICT OF INTEREST??

(3) Dan Marcus: Senior Counsel for Clinton White House, put in place as GENERAL COUNSEL for 9/11 Commission. CONFLICT OF INTEREST???

(4) Christopher Kojm, had been key official under Clinton State Dept. in intelligence matters, became Deputy Executive Director for 9/11 Commission. May well have had a central role in how intel and counter-terror issues were handled under Clinton State Dept. CONFLICT OF INTEREST??

(5) Dietrich Snell, key prosecutor for US Attorney's office in NYC under Clinton/Reno..... knew of all kinds of vital counter-terror info (due to his prosecution of WTC '93 bombers) -- such info was withheld from Clinton intel officials because prosecutors were on the other side of the Gorelick/Reno 'WALL'.... CONFLICT OF INTEREST??

(6) Peter Rundlet, 9/11 Commission staffer who had worked in Clinton White House, both for the White House Counsel's office and then the Chief of Staff's office -- and get this, Rundlet is now on the payroll of the Soros-Podesta "Center for American Progress"..... CONFLICT OF INTEREST???

The 9/11 Commission and staff was well-seeded with Clintonites with obvious MASSIVE conflicts-of-interest, with Jamie Gorelick + Richard Ben Venisted + Christopher Kohm + Dietrich Snell + Daniel Marcus + Peter Rundlet....any or all of these people easily could have diverted, suppressed, and/or simply ignored vital info such as the "Able Danger" revelations. CONFLICT OF INTEREST????

THE FIX WAS IN on the 9/11 Commission.....

[Chena]

The fact that Lt. Col. Shaffer has come forward, knowing the risks he's taking, is surely intriguing. Makes one think that he is being honest. If he wasn't absolutely sure of Atta's name being on that list, would he have come forward? Interesting.

[popdonnelly]

Thanks to you and to oceanview!

[Lancey Howard]

BUMP for excellence in posting!

[STARWISE]

I PRAY FOR COL. SHAFFER'S SAFETY AND HEALTH.

[Enchante]

"Schaefer has the full support of his 4 star Colonel [sic] Shoomaker"

That is HUGE, for GENERAL Schoomaker was formerly head of SOCOM and is now Chief of Staff for the entire US Army!! If Schoomaker is indeed supporting this revelation then that is extremely significant, I would think, and it seems to add a lot of credibility to Col. Schaefer.

http://www.army.mil/leaders/csa/bio.htm

[Cosmo]

Pretty comprehensive list you got there:)

I still don't believe that any of these salient facts will deter the MSM from finding a "Bush Knew" angle