I'm with you on this one. They were going after him with waaaaaay too much gusto.
I'm concerned they have more on him... he's got to be brave and just tell all. It's the only path to safety.
We are all clamoring for more info about ABLE DANGER and what exactly happened with DOD lawyers, etc. Below is a more detailed account (about some aspects) than I have seen elsewhere, and the blog inteldump claims that they have learned that these comments come from Col. Shaffer himself!! The remarks below were posted by 'Anon' on Aug. 12, just when the story was breaking.
http://inteldump.powerblogs.com/archives/archive_2005_08_14-2005_08_20.shtml#1124340108
[INTELDUMP CLAIMS THEY HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THE FOLLOWING 'ANON' REMARKS WERE WRITTEN BY COL. SHAFFER]:
OK smart guys - with your "smell tests" and "Thats just flat out wrong" opinions shown above - I hope you don't mind, but let me clear up a few things - I was there and I lived through the ABLE DANGER nightmare.
First - yes - The lawyers involved in this (and similar projects) did interpret the 9-11 terrorists as "US persons" - so while you can second guess them all you want - but that was their "legal" call as wrong as it was and is. Unfortunately, the chain of command at SOCOM went along with them (and this, I expect, will be a topic that will become more clear in the near future).
And lawyers of the era also felt that any intelligence officer viewing open internet information for the purpose of intelligence collection automatically required that any "open source" information obtained be treated as if it was "intelligence information"...does this sound like idiocy to you? It did to me - and we fought it - and I was in meetings at the OSD level, with OSD laywers, that debated this - and I even briefed the DCI George Tenet on this issue relating to an internet project.
And yes, Virgina - we tried to tell the lawyers that since the data identified Atta and the others as linked to Al Qaeda, we should be able to collect on them based on SecState Albright's declaration of Al Qaeda as transnational terrorist threat to the US...well the lawyers did not agree...go figure...so we could not collect on them - and for political reasons - could not pass them to the FBI...I know because I brokered three meetings between the FBI and SOCOM to allow SOCOM to pass the informaton to the FBI. And, sadly, SOCOM cancelled them every time...
Oh - and as to your opinion that ABLE DANGER was a precursor to the IDC - you are flat out wrong - and obviously not keeping up with what is coming out in the press. ABLE DANGER partnered with LIWA/IDC to use the LIWA/IDC capability to obtain the data on Atta and the other 9-11 terrorists. I brokered the relationship...
And - wrong again on the IDC using only "classified" databases - IDC used 2.5 terabytes (a whole hell of a lot of data) - all open source - to identify Atta and the others that have been identified. Classified data bases were only use to "confirm" the links subsequent to the open source data runs.
Oh - and DATA MINING is not overt or clandestine - it just "is" - it is something that is done with either open source or classified information. ABLE DANGER used an array of both open and close databases...
So...good try, gentlemen - good to see there is intellectual rigor here...but before you start doubting the story, perhaps you need to do better research.
8.12.2005 11:27pm