Claim Atta Was Named Debated [Hadley denies being given 'Atta chart']

Washington Post ^ | September 24, 2005 | By Dan Eggen

[johnny7]

Security Chief Denies Getting Chart Identifying Hijacker

National security adviser Stephen J. Hadley yesterday denied receiving a Defense Department chart that allegedly identified lead terrorist Mohamed Atta before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, dealing a blow to claims by a Republican congressman that have caused a political uproar in recent weeks.

Rep. Curt Weldon (Pa.) wrote in his book, "Countdown to Terror," earlier this year that he provided a chart to Hadley produced in 1999 by the Pentagon's "Able Danger" program, a secret effort to identify terrorists using publicly available data. Weldon said the chart identified Atta in connection with a Brooklyn, N.Y., terrorist cell. Politics Trivia

[Reactionary]

Oh, I get it. There was no such thing as Able Danger. But, then again, there was. And if there was, well, they never identified Atta. Or maybe they did. And there was no chart.

That's just crazy talk, see?

[Mia T]

"To leave Iraq now would be to repeat the costly mistakes of the past that led to the attacks of September the 11th, 2001.

[Osama bin Laden declared war on America and committed acts of war against America throughout the clinton years... and watched us do... nothing.]

The terrorists saw our response to... the first World Trade Center attack, the killing of American soldiers in Somalia, the destruction of two U.S. embassies in Africa, and the attack on the USS Cole. The terrorists concluded that we lacked the courage and character to defend ourselves, and so they attacked us."

President George W. Bush
September 22, 2005
The Pentagon

 

President's Remarks view

FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU! FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME!

 

THE CLINTONS--AMERICA'S BIGGEST BLUNDER
Hear Bush 41 Warn Us--October 19, 1992*

 

 

 

 

hear
*Thanx to Cloud William for text and audio

 

 

LEHRER: President Bush, your closing statement, sir.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Three weeks from now--two weeks from tomorrow, America goes to the polls and you're going to have to decide who you want to lead this country ...

On foreign affairs, some think it's irrelevant. I believe it's not. We're living in an interconnected world...And if a crisis comes up, ask who has the judgment and the experience and, yes, the character to make the right decision?

And, lastly, the other night on character Governor Clinton said it's not the character of the president but the character of the presidency. I couldn't disagree more. Horace Greeley said the only thing that endures is character. And I think it was Justice Black who talked about great nations, like great men, must keep their word.

And so the question is, who will safeguard this nation, who will safeguard our people and our children? I need your support, I ask for your support. And may God bless the United States of America.

(Applause)

 

[Aggie Dad]

"...Why wasn't A-D even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report? Why did staffers bury it? Why has there been an apparent effort to downplay it without airing the info?..."

The 9-11 Commission was quite thorough and I believe they left very few stones unturned. You have to remember that LOTS of military commands who worked terrorism targets did similar work. Some were authoritative while others were "bicycle shops."

And you need to understand the whole Analyst Notebook program and how it works. Like any other "display" it is garbage in-garbage out. While you can run terabytes of data, there is NOT analysis done. It only displays "relationships" between diverse data elements based on the data alone. It is the "man-in-the-loop" analyst that needs to review each background data card to ensure the data is relevant & accurate. For example you can have a data card that associates an individual with a company. But if the source of that information is questionable, then the analyst is responsible for scrubbing that data card or entering it with the appropriate caveats. But if that isn't done right - - and it is an art and not a science - - then garbage in = garbage out.

Over the course of the ABLE DANGER project bonafide DOD terrorism experts & analysts were brought in review the ongoing work. They all left shaking their heads over the amateurism and lack of analytical rigor in the project. That could be why that once the product was delivered to the Pentagon the Pentagon shelved it.

[CyberAnt]

Well .. the chart could have been given to a member of Hadley's staff - and not to him directly. That's one possibility .. and the other possibility is that at the time Hadley may have been given the chart .. did he really know what he had - and WHO was Hadley referring to when he said, "chief" ..??

[CyberAnt]

And .. the other name they use a lot is "controversial".

[CyberAnt]

The staffers burried it because it didn't fit Gorelick's pre-approved agenda as to who was responsible for 9/11.

But .. since Gorelick has called Weldon's office and said, "I didn't do anything wrong". I suspect this is even much bigger than we thought.

[CyberAnt]

There is evidence of the chart - it's on a video which Weldon has possession of.

And .. according to reports - Atta's picture is easily distinguished. If this is true - the dems are in real trouble.

[CyberAnt]

But .. you're ignoring the statements by Shaffer that he briefed the commission's staff - and when he returned from deployment - he tried to re-brief them but they told him they didn't need the information.

They didn't need the information, because it would have exposed the Clinton cabal even more .. and Gorelick was on the commission to put a stop to Clinton exposure. Hillary has to be able to shut down this investigation - and the usual tricks of "I can't remember" will be used, along with the personal destruction of Weldon and anyone else who dares to testify.

[Aggie Dad]

"But .. you're ignoring the statements by Shaffer that he briefed the commission's staff - and when he returned from deployment - he tried to re-brief them but they told him they didn't need the information...."

And it is my understanding that during that 9-11 Commission presentation, Atta did not come up as evidenced in Shaffer's own notes. And by the time he returned from deployment there was no need to re-interview him because the Commission saw what a bogus effort it was.

[muawiyah]

Remember, the owner of the Washington Post, Donald Graham Jr., has hereditary schizophrenia and bipolar disorder in his own background ~ his father committed suicide as a consequence ~ and his mother was Hell on Earth to anyone who went crosswise to her liking.

That's one of the reason the "posties" are always so quick to suggest that yet someone else is "unstable" ~ they live with that possibility every day ~ the fear is palpable over there!

[CyberAnt]

Well .. if your premis is already established that it was a "bogus effort" .. you have already made up your mind.

On the otherhand, I believe there was no need to re-interview him because the documents had been destroyed - and there was no reason to even bring it up - Gorelick had already successfully CYA'd the issue .. she thought!

The whole 9/11 commission had one goal: IT'S ALL BUSH'S FAULT! That was their established premis, and no other information was going to be allowed to change their agenda.

If you believe it was bogus .. fine .. I don't believe it was bogus.

[bvw]

You are way off. You do not understand what heasay is.

Sworn testimony of a direct witness to an event is NOT hearsay. Such testimony to an event directly witnessed, sworn or not, is not hearsay.

Go educate yourself -- or bear the label of propagandist.

[bvw]

Could you please generate smaller graphic files? One fifth the size of those monsters? Please?????

[bvw]

The whole attempt to put the kiboosh on the facts and slander or ruin anyone coming forward reminds me very much of the tactics still employed against those who would hold the the RC Church and its Cardinals accountable for the rampant sex abuse and more rampant institutionalized cover-ups. Especially as the Federal Grand Jury in Philadelphia discovered in the last few years -- as now being reported in the Philadelphia papers.

[gaspar]

Your excellent report has one major flaw. Clinton has said that there was no legal basis to allow the US to take OBLaden from the Sudan. Wrong. OBLaden was an unindicted co-conspirator in the first Trade Tower bombing and he was so named by the Southern District of New York's, Mary Jo White. All Clinton had to do was ask White to call a Grand Jury and issue an indictment and the deal was sold.

[truth_seeker]

"The ABLE DANGER project was flawed from the get-go and everyone who saw the results saw that and that is why it was shelved and/or destroyed."

You look very much like a newcomer, sent here to defend somebody.

Gen. Schoomaker liked AD.

Signup date Sept. 21, 2005. ???????

[YaYa123]

From the article: "The NSC findings echo the results of earlier probes into the Able Danger claims by the Sept. 11 commission and the Defense Department, neither of which found documents or other evidence that Atta was identified by the program."

The NSC and 9-ll Commission have finally coordinated their stories. But not before both the Pentagon and 9-11 Commission changed their version of events several times over. And who's surprised the Commissison and DOD couldn't find documents or other evidence that would prove them liars? JEEZ!

" Weldon and others who have made the charges have contradicted themselves or provided shifting explanations for important details at the heart of the case, according to interviews, news reports, transcripts and hearing testimony."

This is the funny part. Kean and Hamilton changed their stories, making it impossible to believe one version without knowing they flat out, intentionally lied about the other. But The Washington Post says Weldon "shifted" his story. BULLHOCKEYDOODOO!

[ovrtaxt]

BOOM! You two are johnny-on-the-spot tonight!

[Mia T]

You are correct that there was a legal basis to take bin Laden. clinton was wrong in stating otherwise. I neglected to address that point.

My focus was in the other direction, on clinton's overarching error, i.e., on his failure to understand that this wasn't about crime, that we were at war with the terrorists, and that this was the case irrespective of his preening deconstructionism. (It doesn't depend on what the meaning of the word "war" is.)

Your point is important, however, for it underscores clinton's unwillingness to defeat (capture or kill) bin Laden, or take on terrorism, generally. (According to none other than Madeleine Albright (and reported by Richard Miniter), clinton calculated that if he did so, he would not get his (phony) Mideast peace accord, which was his ticket to a Nobel Peace Prize.)

[strategofr]

""Mr. Hadley does not recall any chart bearing the name or photo of Mohamed Atta," said the spokesman,"

Hadley doesn't say he never saw it, only that he doesn't remember seeing it.