Posted on 08/29/2005 3:53:39 AM PDT by johnny7
BUMP!!!!!
Bump!
btt
Is it fair to say that both the Clinton and Bush administrations should have "some 'splainin' to do?"
Enchante - Is this report accurate?
If so, the Pentagon and the 9/11 Commission have reached a new level of sucking. If the guy who made these claims in the first place had the chart the whole time and displayed it, and you're still unable to come up with evidence of that said chart ever existing, THAT is sucking. Hell, it redefines sucking.
BUT, IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY ABLE DANGER WAS ENDED... [John Podhoretz]
...it may have been due to the fact that its "data-mining" work led it to name Condi Rice as a potential Chinese agent -- evidently due to the fact that she had provost of Stanford University.
That's according to my paper, the New York Post: "Cyber-sleuths working for a Pentagon intelligence unit that reportedly identified some of the 9/11 hijackers before the attack were fired by military officials, after they mistakenly pinpointed Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other prominent Americans as potential security risks, The Post has learned. The private contractors working for the counter-terrorism unit Able Danger lost their jobs in May 2000. The firings following a series of analyses that Pentagon lawyers feared were dangerously close to violating laws banning the military from spying on Americans, sources said.
"The Pentagon canceled its contract with the private firm shortly after the analysts who were working on identifying al Qaeda operatives produced a particularly controversial chart on proliferation of sensitive technology to China, the sources said.
"Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, the veteran Army officer who was the Defense Intelligence Agency liaison to Able Danger, told The Post China 'had something to do' with the decision to restructure Able Danger.
"Sources said the private contractors, using sophisticated computer software that sifts through massive amounts of raw data to establish patterns, came up with a chart of Chinese strategic and business connections in the U.S.
"The program wrongly tagged Rice, who at the time was an adviser to then-candidate George W. Bush, and former Defense Secretary William Perry by linking their associations at Stanford, along with their contacts with Chinese leaders, sources said."
This will, I am sure, launch a thousand conspiracy theories, but here we have the downside of "data mining," not to mention super-secret programs that surface years later with explosive allegations.
Now, really, this is my last Able Danger post of the weekend. I swear.
Posted at 08:53 AM
It defines corruption to a criminal level. Its called perjury.
bump bump btt
I hope this holds up
"This will, I am sure, launch a thousand conspiracy theories . . ."
Me too.
Has anyone checked Sandy Burglar's pants?
btt
I agree. It's just going to get very, very muddled before we know the truth - if we ever know the truth.
LOL! I do think that the investigators used too much speculation to be credible, once these allegations emerged.
I would interpret this as referring not to Bush but a person who would know how to handle the situation like Clarke. In other words, a Dem holdover, a possible coverup in the making.
Hadley should have gone to Rice and that ain't a man.
And the 'really bad information'(illegal) contains the necessary information in order to connect-the-dots.
Quite a nut-buster... and the stuff that cover-ups are made of???
Gosh, by virtue of Condi Rice being at Stanford University, that automatically makes her a suspect as a Chinese agent????
LOL! I learn so much every day!
Have a happy day! :-)
..the Pennsylvania Republican has repeatedly insisted that he gave a copy of the chart shortly after the 9/11 attacks to then-Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley.
Ok...so where did Weldon keep the original then and...
where is he keeping it now?
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.