Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Able Danger: Pentagon Spikes Witnesses While Shaffer Reveals New Source
Captains Quarters ^ | September 20, 2005 | Captain Ed

Posted on 09/20/2005 9:08:30 PM PDT by bobsunshine

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 621-629 next last
New Source and new congressman
1 posted on 09/20/2005 9:08:32 PM PDT by bobsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
Let the sunshine,
Let the sunshine in.
The sun, shine in!
2 posted on 09/20/2005 9:19:07 PM PDT by philman_36 (Remember Alberto Sepulveda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
YIKES!! Dr. Eileen sounds very interesting!!

I couldn't be more disappointed than I am at Rumsfeld....I can't figure this out.

3 posted on 09/20/2005 9:19:12 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
I beginning this could get w's good billy boob in serious trouble if everybody is trying to piss on it.
4 posted on 09/20/2005 9:19:51 PM PDT by dts32041 ( Robin Hood, stealing from the government and giving back to tax payer. Where is he today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

He is trying to get a handle on it before it blows up, but it may have already done so?


5 posted on 09/20/2005 9:22:44 PM PDT by dts32041 ( Robin Hood, stealing from the government and giving back to tax payer. Where is he today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
I've covered this in more detail on another thread. It is both a criminal act and a civil wrong for anyone to interfere with a government employee's honest testimony before a congressional committee. The only exception is that the President is immune from the civil suit.

I know this for sure, because I represented Earnest Fitzgerald against Richard Nixon in the US Supreme Court on this precise issue.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Kathleen Blanco: Beyond Gross Public Dumb"

6 posted on 09/20/2005 9:45:50 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob (This Freeper was linked for the 2nd time by Rush Limbaugh today (9/13/05). Hoohah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine

Everyone up to Rumsfeld himself must be dragged in to answer for this. If Rummy won't permit their testimony, he should be removed from office.


7 posted on 09/20/2005 9:48:24 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine

How far will Bush go to protect the Clintons? We are about to find out.


8 posted on 09/20/2005 9:50:51 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I don't know... I really have mixed feelings about this.

It is very difficult for me to believe that Rumsfeld would do this capriciously or just to cover someone's POLITICAL posterior.

The only way I could see it is that it is to protect some intellegence asset(s) currently "in place" and producing high value intel... So high a value that keeping them in place is more important for the future than pulling them out so that we can further discredit the previous administration and the joke of a 9-11 Commission.

As much as I'd like to see the evil and / or incompetent people in the previous (and current) administrations and the bureaupaths in the Defense and Intel agencies brought down, if there is a good source at risk I'd rather wait a couple of years than lose someone that might be able to give us information that will prevent a major terror attack or even worse.

You certainly can't tell a Senate Committee oe even a Congressional investigation any sensitive, much less critical, life or death secret.... It will be leaked within minutes. There aren't three Senators or more than a dozen Representatives that can be trusted with national security secrets.

Other than that though, if this is just political posterior covering.... Then Sec. Rumsfeld (Who I have always admired and always thought was the best SecDef we ever had) deserves to hang with whoever is responsible for this debacle in the first place.


9 posted on 09/20/2005 10:26:27 PM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: montag813
How far will Bush go to protect the Clintons?

How does this protect Clinton?

10 posted on 09/20/2005 10:56:36 PM PDT by fooblier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

Rummy may be concerned that the Democrats on the Committee will ask questions regarding OTHER classified information and/or operations.


11 posted on 09/20/2005 10:57:34 PM PDT by singfreedom ("Victory at all costs,.......for without victory there is no survival."--Churchill--that's "Winston")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fooblier

If I recall correctly, the assumption is that Able Danger reported its findings during the Clinton adminstration and were squelched by the wall built between the CIA and FBI. The Bush administration likely would have had little knowledge of the Able Danger findings since the CIA under Clinton dismissed the info.

I'm sure we will find out more.


12 posted on 09/20/2005 11:03:59 PM PDT by BigYellowDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine

After all the things Bill Clinton said about the President this past week, Bush's administration STILL is going to incredible lengths to protect Clinton's administration. Unbelievable. The worst part is that this is at the sacrifice of our national security.


13 posted on 09/20/2005 11:10:16 PM PDT by SunnyD1182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

This may not be Rummy's fault. Although staffed my military personnel, DoD's legal department is mainly semi-autonomous and not always answerable to either the military or civilian chain of command.


14 posted on 09/20/2005 11:19:36 PM PDT by tanuki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine

More information is great, but Hurricane Rita will dominate the news. If all of this drips out in a quieter time it is more likely to get the attention in deserves.


15 posted on 09/21/2005 12:31:32 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
My read of this is that Rumsfield is moving to force Specter to issue subpoenas and go behind closed doors. This is top secret stuff and needs to stay that way. More important than hanging Clintoon and Gore lick. Maybe there will surface a way to do all.
16 posted on 09/21/2005 12:39:45 AM PDT by mercy (THY Kingdom come. THY will be done. On earth .... as it is in heaven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
Members of the now disbanded commission and the Pentagon have dismissed Weldon's claim as bogus, saying that no confirmation could be found despite a massive search of Pentagon files and numerous interviews with military intelligence officials.

"Bluntly, it just did not happen," said commissioner Slade Gorton, a former senator from Washington State, at a press conference here last week.

Well then.... the 9/11 Commission says there's nothing to all this silly "Able Danger" stuff, nothing at all.
And after all, they should know. They investigated the terror attacks thoroughly and in an objective, non-partisan manner.
Jamie Gorelick and Company left no stone unturned.

17 posted on 09/21/2005 12:56:24 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
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.

Let the butt-covering begin!

18 posted on 09/21/2005 2:42:53 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (Stop the looting! The IRS hates competition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bobsunshine
Mr. Specter said ... ....

"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."

What a very curious thing to say "... more than one ..." -- by someone who always chooses his words and phrases so very carefully, especially when he lies. And no, I don't trust Domocrat/Republican Specter as far as I could throw him.

19 posted on 09/21/2005 4:02:15 AM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank

That's a laughable statement. Specter knows it was THE Atta. They also identified others in his Brooklyn cell, IIRC.
I think this was said more for a diplomatic purpose than nay other.

But I don't trust him either.


20 posted on 09/21/2005 4:10:39 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (Stop the looting! The IRS hates competition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 621-629 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson