Skip to comments.Washington Post Trashes Able Danger Witnesses
Posted on 09/24/2005 10:55:28 AM PDT by wagglebee
The Washington Post is challenging the credibility of five members of the Army's elite Able Danger intelligence unit, saying there's no evidence they ever produced a chart identifying lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as a terrorist threat.
The paper declined, however, to dispute the authenticity of a videotape showing a copy of the Able Danger chart, which was displayed by Rep. Curt Weldon during a May 2002 speech to the Heritage Foundation.
Launching the attack in Saturday editions, the Post insisted that investigators and counterterrorism experts find it "improbable -- if not impossible -- that an obscure Defense Department program that used open-source records could identify Atta by name and photograph in early 2000 when he was living in Germany under a different name and had yet to obtain a U.S. visa."
The paper sought to portray Rep. Weldon as a crackpot, saying:
"Weldon is a controversial figure who is vice chairman of the House homeland security and armed services committees and is known for carrying a replica of a suitcase nuclear bomb. His book, which devoted one paragraph to the claim about Atta, focused primarily on allegations by an Iranian intelligence source whom the CIA has dismissed as a fabricator."
Without offering any examples, the Post said Able Danger witnesses had changed their stories:
"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."
Most damaging to Weldon's claims, the paper said, was the denial it obtained from National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley on Friday - whose spokesman challenged Weldon's assertion that he had given Hadley a copy of the Atta chart two weeks after the 9/11 attacks.
"Mr. Hadley does not recall any chart bearing the name or photo of Mohamed Atta," Frederick L. Jones II told the paper. "NSC staff reviewed the files of Mr. Hadley as well as of all NSC personnel. That search has turned up no chart."
The Post also quoted former 9/11 Commissioner Slade Gorton, who declared: "No evidence turns up to corroborate what people think they saw."
In fact, the video of Weldon's Heritage Foundation speech offers strong - albeit circumstantial - evidence that the Able Danger chart did indeed exist - and that it identified lead hijacker Atta.
After unveiling the chart during his presentation, Weldon explained: "I went to the White House. I don't mean to embarrass this guy cause he's a good friend of mine. But I took a mini version of this chart in Nov.  and I turned it over to him - Steve Hadley, who works directly for [then-National Security Advisor] Condi Rice."
While the online version of the Heritage video is too blurry to make out details of the chart, Weldon's description of Hadley's reaction suggests it contained shocking new information.
"This is unbelievable," Hadley allegedly said. "Where'd you get this?"
After being told about Able Danger, Weldon said Hadley told him: "I've got to show this to the man" - meaning President Bush.
In an interview last month, Able Danger Defense Department liaison Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer confirmed that the chart Weldon gave to Hadley featured a photo of Mohamed Atta.
Discussing the Atta chart with ABC Radio host Sean Hannity, Shaffer explained:
"Within two weeks of the attack, this colleague of mine ... she took that very poster to Congressman Weldon. And I have to say he took it right to [Stephen] Hadley, I believe, over at the NSC. It's my understanding that he gave him that chart and Hadley had a great deal of interest in it."
Though the online video of Weldon's Heritage speech isn't clear enough to discern the Atta photo, video enhancement techniques applied to the original recording may yield more than just circumstantial evidence that such a chart existed.
To view the online video of Rep. Weldon's May 23, 2002 Heritage Foundation address, go to: http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/2002archive.cfm He displays the Atta chart approximately 34 minutes into his presentation.
Pure undiluted mind-control of the Beltway -- yet everyone there just drinks it up happily. I'd imagine the same slanders are being spread by DC talk radio and all the hallway buzz. Mind-numbed animals. With too-cushy jobs and pensions that sustain and encourage this vileness borne of the unearned position and wealth.
Or else they see Able Danger as a missile headed straight for the Clinton legacy. It's too big to ignore so they have to try to shoot it down.
The witnesses and Weldon will be trashed in the press from now until the hearing resumes.
"Or else they see Able Danger as a missile headed straight for the Clinton legacy. It's too big to ignore so they have to try to shoot it down."
But why would the Bush White House be so keen to assist? Do you think it's likely that Stephen Hadley is lying about being shown the chart and, if so, what is he so keen to keep covered up?
Must be a lot to the story if the ComPost is baring it's teeth this much.
What the Washington Post is really saying is "HOW DARE YOU TRY TO SHIFT THE BLAME ON WILLIAM J. CLINTON!"
I hope that one day (probably at least 25 years away) we will finally find out what was in all of those pilfered FBI files, because it amazes me that so many people and organizations are willing to "take a bullet" to protect the Klintoons.
They loved and adored all of the anti-Bush witnesses. Whether it was Joe Wilson, Richard Clarke, etc. They get glorified. Anyone who dare crosses the dems will be destroyed. They are also not covering the Lt. Gov. Steele credit report story.
are there any links as to how this rag treated the we-can't-find-the Downing Street Memo?? thanks in advance.
The Washington Post is siding with the Pentagon???
"are there any links as to how this rag treated the we-can't-find-the Downing Street Memo??"
The 'Downing Street Memo' was just minutes of a meeting attended by several people, so there was never any actual dispute as to its existence.
The Washington Post should just change its name to the "Washington Enquirer." No, on second thought, that would probably insult The Enquirer, I think the Enquirer has more credibility...
Maybe just the "Washington Trash." For "all the news that's not really fit to print!"...
ANTI-DNC Web Portal at ---> http://www.noDNC.com
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.