Posted on 09/20/2005 9:08:30 PM PDT by bobsunshine
Able Danger: Pentagon Spikes Witnesses While Shaffer Reveals New Source
The New York Times reports this evening that the Pentagon has blocked its military witnesses from testifying on Able Danger at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings tomorrow. Senator Arlen Specter registered his surprise but plans on holding the hearings anyway (h/t: AJ Strata):
The Pentagon said today that it had blocked a group of military officers and intelligence analysts from testifying at an open Congressional hearing about a highly classified military intelligence program that, the officers have said, identified a ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks as a potential terrorist more than a year before the attacks.
The announcement came a day before the officers and intelligence analysts had been scheduled to testify about the program, known as Able Danger, at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee. ...
Mr. Specter said his staff had talked to all five of the potential witnesses and found that "credibility has been established" for all of them.
"There are quite a few credible people who are prepared to testify that Mohamed Atta was identified long before 9/11," he said. "Now maybe there's more than one Mohamed Atta. Or maybe there's some mistake. But that's what we're trying to find out."
The Pentagon might think that withdrawing its witnesses will keep Able Danger from breaking wide open, but they will find themselves sorely mistaken. This only demonstrates that the program found something that the Pentagon still wants hidden. If that includes a finding that their program not only found Atta and other AQ terrorists over a year before the attacks, but also predicted the USS Cole attack three weeks before it happened, and that the Pentagon shut down the program anyway, eighteen Senators will want to know why.
In fact, the withdrawal of the witnesses clearly shows that the story has substance and isn't a case of mistaken identity. Had this just been an identification of a second Mohammed Atta, as Specter postulates, the Pentagon should have no problem putting its witnesses on the stand. Nothing about a mistaken identity would create a classification problem for the hearing tomorrow.
QT Monster has a transcript from tonight's interview of LTC Tony Shaffer on the Jerry Doyle radio show. Shaffer says Donald Rumsfeld himself gave the order to stop the witnesses from appearing at the Judiciary Committee hearing:
JD: Well, when you say DoD, where's this coming from at DoD? Is this instructions to DoD from higher ups? Is this people in DoD who are afraid of what information gets out? I mean who is the person who's making this happen? AS: What I will tell you is I was told by 2 DoD officials today directly that it is their understanding that the Secretary of Defense directed that we not testify tomorrow. That is my understanding.
However, Shaffer says that former Major Eric Kleinstadt, now a civilian contractor, will still testify at the panel. Kleinstadt received the orders to destroy the Able Danger database. Specter's insistence that the hearings go forward probably hinges on Kleinstadt's ability to testify to the information that got destroyed, who ordered its destruction, and why. From that point, the committee could unravel an entire command sequence that will uncover how Able Danger got missed by the 9/11 Commission.
Another interesting fact got mentioned in Shaffer's interview. He spoke about a Dr. Eileen Pricer. One of the more mysterious potential sources of the Able Danger story involved a female PhD that could corroborate Shaffer and Phillpott, the woman who actually developed the Atta identification in the first place. I Googled Eileen Pricer and got just one hit -- but it's a doozy.
It turns out that Dr. Pricer testified before a closed session of Congressional subcommittee on national security exactly one month after 9/11. That testimony isn't available, but Rep. Christopher Shays mentions her on the record in the next day's public testimony:
Mr. Shays. In a briefing we had yesterday, we had Eileen Pricer, who argues that we don't have the data we need because we don't take all the public data that is available and mix it with the security data. And just taking public data, using, you know, computer systems that are high-speed and able to digest, you know, literally floors' worth of material, she can take relationships that are seven times removed, seven units removed, and when she does that, she ends up with relationships to the bin Laden group where she sees the purchase of chemicals, the sending of students to universities. You wouldn't see it if you isolated it there, but if that unit is connected to that unit, which is connected to that unit, which is connected to that unit, you then see the relationship. So we don't know ultimately the authenticity of how she does it, but when she does it, she comes up with the kind of answer that you have just asked, which is a little unsettling. Unsettling? Christopher Shays described Able Danger thirty-one days after the 9/11 attacks. What else did Eileen Pricer tell the Congressional subcommittee on national security on October 11, 2001? Did Pricer tell Shays that the information no longer existed but did at one time?
Senator Specter should invite Christopher Shays to have a seat on the witness bench, and he should also start issuing subpoenas for the witnesses that the Pentagon wants to silence. We need answers, and we need to know that our country will fight terrorism with every tool at its disposal.
The data was destroyed in 2000. Clinton.
But some blame regarding not letting AD guys testify belongs with the Rumsfeld, sadly.
See #184...a Tony Gentry ordered it.
It could be a Rovian maneuver to create more media attention, though.
"Let the chips fall."
Agreed--wherever it leads.
Maybe they are trying to cover up someone who was named in a cell. I suppose it could all boil down to a cover up so they dont look like idiots but it seems there is something else behind it.
Bill Dugan up.
He's responsible to the Secretary DOD oversight program. Purpose is to allow DOD intel to carry out their functions and ensure their program affects US persons.
US persons is defined as more than just US citizens. Term also includes permanent resident aliens, corporations in the US, associations composed of resident aliens. Broader than just US citizens.
We operate under Executive Order issued by President Reagan in 1981.
Bill Dugan up.
He's responsible to the Secretary DOD oversight program. Purpose is to allow DOD intel to carry out their functions and ensure their program affects US persons.
US persons is defined as more than just US citizens. Term also includes permanent resident aliens, corporations in the US, associations composed of resident aliens. Broader than just US citizens.
We operate under Executive Order issued by President Reagan in 1981.
Also, LTC Schaeffer's classified info was destroyed in 2004!
Wm Dugan up, defining "person" under the Const. They needed to be protected
Dugan: Info on anti-war protestors, etc., collected. Info mis-used.
Ooooo, the dreaded 900 files of myth strike again. Those files have created more and stopped more than a hundred armies. There is nothing of importance in them in reality.
But don't let that stop you from answering all questions and solving all mysteries.
You all are getting your info ahead of me. I'm listening via the internet on C-Span.
Are you watching on T.V.?
Dugan: No one is tasked with collecting info on US citizens. We sometimes come across info that id's US citizens. THat's when the rules I mentioned kick in.
If the info is necessary to the conduct of counter-terrorism and falls into one of the 13 categories, then the intelligence component can collect it.
The list of 13 categories won't be listed entirely, but the ones most likely to be used are foreign intelligence, and threats to safety from terrorist agencies.
If the intel is proper for them to keep, then the information can be kept for 90 days to determine whether they can permanently be retained.
Dugan: I didn't think information I heard about was classified.
watching c-span 3 on my computer, and follo9wing this thread simultaneously.
Specter: And it was your job to know if anything was classified and to object?
Dugan: Yes.
Specter: Is this a posse comitatus issue?
Dugan: No.
Dude is hedging about hearing classified information. Says he hasn't heard anything he thinks is classified but his knowledge is limited. Why isn't there someone there that is well versed that could object?
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.