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 ...
Steve Emerson is backing the concept that the "Wall" impeded anti-terror efforts.
They need to look in Sandy Berger's pants..
There have been others. Did you miss these ones too?
The Taking, and Keeping, of Purple Heart Boulevard: Now an Iraqi Military Mission (Good News!)
Gorton is uninformed and/or mis-informed.... let's watch how many of the 9/11 O-missioners are willing to defend the report now on this matter..... who is out in front in public willing to defend their work, and who is hiding??? Why on earth is GORELICKER allowed to hide??? I thought the O-missioners said they wanted to have a great "public discourse" project now to follow up on the report -- here is O'Reilly offering GORELICKER free air time to 2+ million viewers and she is skulking in the basement.....
the fact that any republican member of that 9-11 commission could say otherwise, tells you how useless that commission was. I still do not understand why the republican selections for this committee were so weak.
He was going to be sentenced in July. I just hope someone saw this coming and the Judge was tipped off about it. If there is a connection to Berger, maybe he can be squeezed a bit.
One story means nothing. How many consecutive days did they put Abu Ghraib on the front page?
The word "Fix" comes to mind...
Tony Snow, on his show last Thursday warned his listeners of the ABLE DANGER 5 Step process that will ensue:
The 5 steps:
1). Deny the story (and lie and spin);
2). Attack the source;
3). Intimidate the source;
4). Destroy the evidence;
5). Change the topic. (Done for posterity.)
Looks like we are already at numer 2
This is gonna be big. This coverup is gonna make Watergate look exactly like it was, a small time burgalary. Thats my prediction, MSM be danged.
My first thought was "Scott J. Phillpott'? - The guy must still be undercover!
But your comment reminds me that an O-6 does pretty good by retirement (and many get a BG equivalent (RA?) for ego-in-retirement purposes).
More to the point, in intelligence matters, even the Navy gets short shrift from the civies.
It must kill the NY Times to print this stuff.
I wonder, do their editorial writers have a subscription to the rest of the paper?
He was "too" energized .. I didn't like it at all. The evidenciary documentation under Gorelick's signature is being swept and discounted BIG time. Shame on him.
The denial is rendered more difficult by the appearance of yet another source.
Yeah? Well Slate Gorton says Shaffer is a liar. So Philpott must be lying to.
Gorton also says that Gore Lick was doing nothing but reiterating and supporting regulations that grew out of the Church Commission's work from the '70s.
This on O'Reily.
Nope, its been covered up and you know what they say about coverups. Ask a Nixon biographer if you don't.
That's why they hab to move on to number 2 - Attack the source.
I didn;t watch O'Reilly but from what I am reading it sounds like Gordon is trashing Shaffer.
Oh yes ... but then Steve Emerson not so obliquely eviscerated Gorton's claims.
FYI
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.