Slaying Able

Investor's Business Daily ^ | Novemeber 23, 2005 | Editorial

[gaspar]

I don't buy that "liberals in the Pentagon" bit. If Rumsfeld wanted this taken care of he could order a report be placed on his desk in ten days and the bureaucracy would have to snap-to, or else. So why hasn't he taken the lead. I would suggest that the fault lies with the White House and President Bush himself who, for whatever reason, does not wish to publicly shake up the Pentagon, any more than he does the CIA, the DIA or the State Department.

[EarlyBird]

but the paper proof went down Sandy Buglar pants and through a shredder

Damn, you beat me to it! That's obviously what happened to this evidence, as well as evidence of who knows what other screws ups the Clintonians made that led directly to 9/11.

[VOYAGER]

What keeps GWB from going after the corruption of the last Administration is his respect for the office he holds.

GWB believes the Executive Branch has been under assault for the past two decades and wants to make sure the Executive powers are not ignored as the RATS exercise their Bury your head in the sand approach to National Security>

And that is the very reason dirtbag Clinton and his old woman are living the good life without fear of deserved punishment

Another prime example of Bush's idiotic "Compassionate Conservativism"!

[RoadTest]

" Shaffer has been stripped of his security clearances, in effect being fired from his post at the Defense Intelligence Agency "

But - - - but - - - but this is a REPUBLICAN administration doing this!

No wonder Michael Savage became in Independent. That's appealing about now. Are the Communists gaining control of BOTH parties, as an article on this page states is their goal?

[RoadTest]

I guess MJY1288; Jim Robinson answered my questions.

[AliVeritas]

Let's roll out the info again ping.

[RoadTest]

I just like the tag line.

[Alia]

One thing keeps ringing a bell whenever I ponder the Able Danger situation: During the 90s, the Democrats, across the board, were making every possible attempt to TAX the Internet. Republicans throughout were having to work to fight that. I know CA Gov Pete Wilson fought it and put a future time-cap on legislation to prevent that taxation.

I know this appears as a "long-shot" hypothesis; but at the time, the counter was that "taxation was a form of censorship"; and that Dems were only attempting to foist this and because they like taxing everything. There were moves afoot (by Dems and ISPs) to have EMAIL charges to user, per email.

But now, with spider programs (like google-search, etc.).. and all the other facts (Gorelick's wall, etc.)..

Well, it just seems to me that Able Danger and those involved with Able Danger are being/have been punished for not "Paying For Their Intel." As tho "not-paid-for-intel" is deserving of no credibility tribute whatsoever. Which then fits into the Dem agenda of making "bloggers" pay for having opinions.

Censorship. Retro-active punishments and "taxations". Hmmm...

This censorship of Able Danger really does point the finger straight at the Democrats.

I've spent hours attempting to redig up via internet old "gopher articles" (pre-90s) which were highly revealing of liberal agenda plots and communications, and these can no longer be found. Just wondering.

[SERKIT]

The stink you smell is more than just the foul aroma of Clinton & Gorelick...

This is all part of the bathtub ring and dung heap from the Clinton days. The entrenched bureaucrats in both CIA and DIA are self-preserving. A good cleaning is in order.

[freema]

The tag line piqued my interest, and when I 'saw' the title of the thread again...my little mind just started smokin'

http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/cain.html
http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/cainabel.htm

Nay, even while Adam was alive, it came to pass that the posterity of Cain became exceedingly wicked, every one successively dying one after the other, more wicked than the former. They were intolerable in war, and vehement in robberies; and if any one were slow to murder people, yet was he bold in his profligate behaviour, in acting unjustly, and doing injury for gain.

Josephus
Antiquities of the Jews, A.D. 93
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/markofcain.html

there is some very interesting stuff out there...Cain built Babylon........and is King Nimrod of Babylon, in the Bible......"In early Jewish and Christian texts he is depicted as a fierce tyrant, a giant who hunted humans, and a king who 'waged war against God'."

waaaaaaaaaaaaay too deep for me this morning.

[Louis Foxwell]

The DC bureaucracy is more powerful than elected officials. Brats are the permanent government. Clinton understood this better than most modern presidents. A special office of the president replaced government employees with loyalty-oath liberals during his entire term. This was done systematically and, in some cases such as the Att'y Gen's office, in wholesale measure. Bush has not attempted the same.
It is popular wisdom in DC that government officials are in control. They find ways to work around belligerent administrations or simply stonewall the implementation of their policies. Political control of the government is an impossibility. Brats are willing to give up the occasional high profile issue in order to maintain their iron grip over hundreds of millions of routine procedures.
The buckram is not political. It is self-reinforcing. The primary goal of a b'cracy is to increase its power, authority, influence, budget and ranks. A government office, for example, charged with the responsibility to respond to a social problem will make certain that its activities perpetuate the problem. To do otherwise puts them out of business.
The only solution to overcoming the power of the bureaucracy is to substantially reduce the size of government. A 50% reduction is plausible, reasonable and desirable. This would have to correlate with a return to Constitutional government in which state's rights were affirmed and the federal government was limited to its designated powers.
The court system is the only possible means of bringing on sea changes in government. Once there are a preponderance of conservative justices they will assert their authority over the government. For them the change will be away from attempting to control society to controlling government. As the third branch they have the authority to assume control of government. In short order they will have the will to do so.

[Alia]

I don't know about any of what you assert.

Still, it makes me wanna go back and better understand the Clintonoids case against Microsoft. And not for just the "reasons" given at the time. A "bundled monopoly". Microsoft has always had fascinating backdoors. And still remains the one experiencing the most "hack attacks".

Dems wanted something out of Microsoft.

Yeah, I know... "what's this gotta do with Able Danger"..

[strategofr]

"My guess, the outgoing administration of idiots passed a truckload of files onto the Bush adminstration. They can probably prove it; and they were either never read prior to 9/11...or read by someone who didn't realize their significance."

I have no doubt the truth is something like this.

We know the Clinton administration was a hundred times more at fault in this than the Bush administration. And personally, I am interested not so much in embarrassing Bill for old times sake but in throwing up a roadblock on Hillary's march to the Presidency.

But look at it for a second from the Bush administration's point of view. The MSM is facilitating this cover-up to help the Clintons. but if it does blow up, the whole story will be about Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush. 24/7. Realistically, it would probably be enough to destroy the Bush administration's potential effectiveness over the next three years. And yeah, maybe take Hillary down too.

Bush just isn't willing to fall on this hand grenade. Really, its not even so simple to see what the best outcome would be.

[BILL_C]

"what's this gotta do with Able Danger"..

Well, the ABLE DANGER story and Sandy Berger, the terrorist attacks of 1995/1996 all tie together in a nice story of Clinton not wanting to deal with terrorists so he came up with a center fuel tank explosion, a couple of idiot patsies who blew up a truck while the terrorists blew up a building, then the 9/11 hearings featuring Jamie Gorelick and assorted other screwups, led by Sandy Berger's stuffing his shorts.

No matter how bad it gets, the lies will continue.

The Bush administration looks at this as protecting the office of the Presidency, but unfortunately it is bringing us closer to the destruction of our constitution.

But I can't fit Microsoft into the above scenario.

[Alia]

I agree with you about all the lies during Clinton years. Man, can I remember so much of all of it with "flash bulb" memory. Whew...

The Bush administration looks at this as protecting the office of the Presidency, but unfortunately it is bringing us closer to the destruction of our constitution.

I'm no so sure that's the case, here, actually. President Bush has already accomplish that task (restoring the dignity of the office) during first term. This current term is about winning the WOT, rebuilding the security/safety net around the US, freeing other countries from the same terrorists we fight, and rebuilding the intelligence (worldwide) system of checks and balances, as well as domestic reforms as well as the US and international economies.

But I can't fit Microsoft into the above scenario.

I understand. I'm not sure where or how, but that dastardly case by Dems against Microsoft keeps ringing bells for me. I'll figure it out eventually. Thanks for your input.

[Enchante]

I think there are plenty of careerist liberals throughout the DoD bureaucracy, and especially in the DIA and the General Counsel's office, from what we have seen about how various intel was mishandled there and AD was shut down by DIA and Gen. Counsel bureaucrats. What Rumsfeld knows and how much he feels able to intervene, I don't know, but I sure hope we will soon see Rumsfeld shake up the DIA and the legal eagles who wrecked AD. I doubt that Rumsfeld or his immediate staff had much of an inkling about Able Danger before this summer, but now that they have had time to get up to speed I would hope that the top brass will be raising hell and demanding full cooperation from all levels in the most thorough investigation possible. I know Rumsfeld has a zillion things on his plate, but correcting the mess around AD is crucial, not simply for understanding what happened in the past but for doing it all much better in the future. Some liberal careerists have to be run out of town on a rail, especially the ones who have been persecuting Col. Shaffer, else this intel situation will never improve.

[Enchante]

Louis Freeh had a recent op-ed column which nicely linked the problems of the Able Danger cover-up and the operations of the 9/11 O-missioners:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007559


Everything about AD and the 9/11 O-mission, not to mention charlatans like Joe Wilson, Sandy Burglar, and Richard Clarke, et al must be thoroughly investigated and exposed. Rumsfeld, Goss, and Negroponte must appoint some real investigators to turn over all the stones and find out what's really gone on in the past 5-10 years with Clintonistas and career bureaucrats working hand-in-glove to subvert the security of the USA. All of this is much too important to let slide, and it is NOT just ancient history since the same mistakes will continue to be made unless a thorough accounting and house-cleaning is forced upon the intel bureaucracies.

[BILL_C]

et al must be thoroughly investigated and exposed.

I respectfully disagree. They all know what happened, I mean those in power. (Some of the other Congresional criters don't.)

What actually happened was the terrorist attacks of the 95-96 timeframe, specifically OKC and TWA800, were potentially huge political liabilities that would probably have cost Clinton the 1996 election.

You say "What terrorist attacks?"

If you look at Jayna Davis' book "The Third Terrorist" you'll find a far different story than what is in the official McVeigh/Nichols story. Have you ever resolved the differences?

The answer is Probably NOT.

Jayna says there were eight Iraqi defectors from Gulf War I in OKC, assisting in the explosion. The two patsies blew up a truck in the parking lot, the Iraqis blew up the building.

TWA800: Hundreds saw a missle, but the official version is a center fuel tank explosion.

What's this got to do with 9/11? Since the terrorists were being "ignored", time to escalate. Since the coverup of the 1995/1996 actions meant blinding the intelligence agencies, 9/11 was the result.

Fiction you say, right? They could NEVER pull off a deception like this, could they?

Well, that is what happened, but nobody believes it, not yet.

Explain ABLE DANGER, explain Sandy Berger stuffing TOP SECRET documents in his underwear. And explain WHY we went into Iraq while responding to 9/11.

IT ALL FITS with my story, but nothing else makes sense.

Call it a conspiracy and people STOP THINKING, it becomes an open invitation for the government to tell ANY lie.

http://www.twa800.com/eyewitnesses.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1175272/posts

Look at all the craziness occurring, and the explanation begins to converge on the presidents, Clinton and Bush. Bush is covering for Clinton because you can't know what Clinton did, it would ruin the "party" for everybody. So we went into Iraq but you don't even suspect WHY we did it.

Iraqis were killing American citizens in the United States but Bill Clinton didn't want you to know, it was a political decision for him. And George Bush isn't going to let you know what Clinton did. He Can't!

It all makes sense to me!

[Burf]

IMO LTC Shaffer is being treated in the same manner as Linda Tripp was treated when she talked about the Lewinsky affair. I was hoping for better from the Bush Administration.

[p23185]

There is interest in this issue, I just hope there is enough to save the career/life of this whistle blower.

Why isn't the MSM and the left loonies interested in protecting this whistle blower? They become indignant about the CIA cases and their journalistic rights for "bringing the truth to the American public". Is that only when it is to take out a Repub President, and in this case it might make their CLINTOON look bad?