Posted on 09/21/2005 3:08:42 AM PDT by ovrtaxt
With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
For the story behind the story...
Wednesday, Sept. 21, 2005 12:55 a.m. EDT Pentagon Blocks Able Danger Testimony
Pentagon lawyers have ordered five members of the Able Danger intelligence team not to testify at an open Senate in hearing scheduled for Wednesday morning about information they developed on lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta a year before the 9/11 attacks.
"We have been told I cannot testify tomorrow," Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity. "We have been told to stand down."
Lt. Col. Shaffer, who was the Defense Intelligence Agency's liaison officer to Able Danger, said he was preparing his testimony for the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday afternoon when he was told that the hearing "will be classified, it will be secret."
Hours after Lt. Col. Shaffer revealed that he'd been muzzled, Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman told the New York Times that open testimony on Able Danger "would not be appropriate."
"We have expressed our security concerns and believe it is simply not possible to discuss Able Danger in any great detail in an open public forum."
However Shaffer maintained that he intended to discuss only details on the program already made public by Pennsylvania Congressman Curt Weldon, a chief advocate of the intense data mining developed by Able Danger.
Lt. Col. Shaffer's lawyer, Mark Zaid, told United Press International that Able Danger team members "were told verbally that they would not be allowed to testify," and that he had requested the decision about his client be put in writing.
Zaid said that the team leader, Navy Capt. Scott Philpott, a civilian analyst named James Smith and other members of the team had all been denied permission to testify.
Judiciary Committee Chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter told the New York Times late Tuesday that he intended to go ahead with the hearing on Wednesday and hoped that it "may produce a change of heart by the Department of Defense in answering some very basic questions."
Lt. Col. Shaffer was clearly frustrated by the bid to muzzle him and the other Able Danger witnesses.
"I'm past the point of no return here. I'm committed to this course of action," he told Hannity. "I'm truly sorry that it appears right now that the Department of Defense is more worried about saving face than they are about getting the truth out."
It is time for them to speak and tell the American people the truth.
Can you say cover up.
Can you say cover up.
You can say that again! haha
I am beginning to believe the White house is protecting that rascal brother billy the boob and the current political class.
No doubt. Some "what and see" idiot made a p*ss poor call and is now trying to play CYA. It should be an open forum, sans any classified info, and let the chips fall where they may. Of course, it'll probably follow the below method of resolution via DoD.
1. Search for the guilty.
2. Punishment of the innocent.
3. Awards for all non-participants.
Yes, it seems that way- the ruling class, the status quo, the DC elite 'royalty', running for cover before the eyes of We The People.
Same as it ever was. The founders meant for us to run the show- and we have abdicated that responsibility to the politicians because, apparently it's more compelling to watch Paris Hilton and her latest boob job than be responsible citizens.
I for one refuse to sit down and shut up. Hopefully, there are enough of us left.
This is bigger than we can imagine.
First, the Pentagon was probably working with NSA and the CIA in these activities, and accidently stumbled on the 9/11 hijackers.
So, for those reasons alone, we have to be careful what we tell the world - and our enemies - about what we do and what we know.
Second, they were probably breaking the law, and that can cost you your job, your pension, and your freedom. This is the kind of thing the Jerkoff Administration would've loved to prosecute.
No matter that the law is stupid and wrong, it's the law, and breaking the law has severe consequences.
So, we want these activities to continue, and we want the laws changed, but we don't want to tell the world what we're doing.
I hope they find a way to fix this.
They'd have to grow a pair first.
Bush should have cleaned house (I would have) when he was elected in 00. Tenet and Freeh, gone ASAP. All of the Klintoon leftovers in State would have gotten the boot. An old saying at the CIA is:
The only things not here (CIA HQ) is Communists and Republicans. (They should add the State Dept to that)
Says volumes about how they think.
How can you think of such a thing when there is so much populist hyperbole just waiting to be posted? Why should disclosure of possible uncompromised intel sources be the sole provenance of the left?
It wasn't illegal- Able Danger used publicly available information as input, and produced accurate relationship information which targeted Atta as a threat.
The loyahs in DoD refused to allow the findings to go to the FBI, where something could have been done about it, because of Gorelick's wall, the residual effects of the Church commission, and probably because of cultural infighting between agencies too.
Some of this has been corrected, but much more can be done. Meanwhile, the nation is at risk because these institutionalized career politicians are trying to preserve their hides rather than ours.
Echelon is all over the Internet. Do a search.
Oh never mind,.. You're correct, the gov't IS supposed to be "by the people". We certainly don't want what they have in Canada or Germany. Congress critters are supposed to be the way we make our immediate wishes known. I'd say let them know we want to get to the bottom of this or they're gone. Raise the alarm.
Yeah we wouldn't want any populist hyperbole, we might coem up with something that resembles the Constitution.
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.