Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pentagon Blocks Testimony at Senate Hearing on Terrorist (Able Danger Hearing)
The New York Times ^ | September 20, 2005 | PHILIP SHENON and ANNE E. KORNBLUT

Posted on 09/20/2005 6:25:39 PM PDT by 4mor3

September 20, 2005 Pentagon Blocks Testimony at Senate Hearing on Terrorist By PHILIP SHENON WASHINGTON, Sept. 20 - The Pentagon said today that it had blocked a group of military officers and intelligence analysts from testifying at an open Congressional hearing about a highly classified military intelligence program that, the officers have said, identified a ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks as a potential terrorist more than a year before the attacks.

The announcement came a day before the officers and intelligence analysts had been scheduled to testify about the program, known as Able Danger, at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Bryan Whitman, a Defense Department spokesman, said in a statement that open testimony about the program "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." He offered no other detail on the Pentagon's reasoning in blocking the testimony.

Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who is chairman of the committee, said he was surprised by the Pentagon's decision because "so much of this has already been in the public domain, and I think that the American people need to know what happened here."

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abledanger; atta; coverup; gorelickwall; weldon; whitewash
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 281-295 next last
To: BlackRain
This can only be a coverup by the Pentagon.

I disagree. You want to believe it is a cover-up, so you refuse to allow for any other possible interpretation of the evidence. Your mind is closed to two-way traffic; there is only one destination possible in your mind.

In my mind I see the possibility of a cover-up. I also see the possibility that this was a bleeding-edge Pentagon initiative that foundered on the shoals of Clinton-era political correctness. That much is in the public domain already, placed there by Shaffer without interference from the DoD, so there certainly was no "cover-up" to that extent. But Able Danger was apparently a highly sophisticated software/data analysis program that merited the highest security classification. There are likely many legitimate concerns about puking these secrets all over the media so our enemies can get smart at no expense to themselves.

"Cover-up" implies CYA carried out by criminals who have reason to fear for their own protection and well-being if the truth is made known. Sorry. I just don't see Rumsfeld as falling into that category. Rummy is nothing if not straight-up, fearless, and brutally candid. He is a man of integrity, not a fearful desperate coward. So although I am able to see more than one possible interpretation of the evidence, I tend toward a more innocent and honorable explanation consistent with the character of the man who apparently ordered Shaffer not to testify under the hearings as presently constituted.

201 posted on 09/21/2005 5:29:40 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

I agree about Rumsfeld personally- but it still doesn't add up.


202 posted on 09/21/2005 5:50:10 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (Stop the looting! The IRS hates competition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
"My military experience leads me to believe there are valid security issues at the heart of this. Rumsfeld has not refused to allow testimony. He has balked at allowing open hearings before the world, including our current enemies who will be looking on and taking detailed notes."

Rumsfeld didn't just "balk". He prevented open hearings, but I'll give you, maybe for valid reasons. I have no doubt the 9-ll Commission will make the same claim as to why they didn't include Able Danger info in their Report. But that doesn't preclude other, sinister reasons for their actions.

Both the Clinton and Bush administrations, the Pentagon, and the 9-11 Commission seem unified in not wanting the American people to know how inept our country was in protecting the country from terrorists prior to 9-11. Knowing that would affect how Americans feel they can trust the government to protect them now.

Believe me, I'd like to put a positive spin on why the 9-11 Commissison didn't include Able Danger in their Report, why the Pentagon wants Able Danger buried and forgotten, and why this administration apparently, concurs. But the reason isn't "current enemies who will be looking on and taking detailed notes"

That's a joke. Congressman Weldon and his group of whisle blowers have already exposed Able Danger. If you and I know it was a massive data mining project, you can bet our enemies knew it first. If you and I know Pentagon lawyers ordered Able Danger dismantled and all information destroyed, our enemies knew it first.

I'm not discounting that somewhere in the bowels of some secret location, a top secret clone of Able Danger is still operating. Able Danger was supposedly halted in the fall of 2000, with all info "ordered" erased. That's what we're being told. But somehow, within hours of 9-ll, Mohammed Atta was identified as one of the hijackers. His name and his face had to be on record some place. Maybe that's what Rumsfeld is keen to protect.

203 posted on 09/21/2005 6:01:24 AM PDT by YaYa123 (@ God Bless President Bush As the MSM and Democrats Seek To Destroy Him.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Crim
IMHO...9/11 was a by-product of a cover up...a cover up to protect the dems for illegal donations to the 96' campaign...

WHAT?! You rattled off a bunch of names from Chinagate but no proof of any connections to 9/11. Tin foil hat BS alert.

204 posted on 09/21/2005 6:05:22 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: angcat

Look at the circumstances. Atta is in the country before our country says he was in the country. It is getting out that our country knew he was here. There are people that were prevented from sending the information on to others.

Atta very well could have been an asset. Now why would they cover it up? I don't for one second think the CIA was behind 9/11 but there are people who do think the goverment was behind it. Can you imagine what would happen if it got out that Atta had been an asset?

Also, things in place could be jeopardized if it got out.
The CIA often does thing that only certain people will know about. It could be that most of the CIA knew nothing about this at the time. In fact, it could be that only a very very few knew about it. His handler and maybe a couple of other people.

Think about how the 9/11 commission has tried to whitewash all of this.

Also, the CIA is not allowed to operate in the US. I don't for one second think that they don't operate in the US.



205 posted on 09/21/2005 6:27:22 AM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: 4mor3
Damn, these Pentagon guys have been positively Clintonian about this career sustainment operation.
206 posted on 09/21/2005 6:31:53 AM PDT by .cnI redruM ("They're thin and they were riding bicycles" - Ted Turner on NK malnutrition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

YELP


207 posted on 09/21/2005 6:36:43 AM PDT by hoosiermama ( Blanco, Landrieu, Nagin & Witt.. good name for a flood control business...Motto:"We got dikes!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Well, next step is to issue subpoena's to the individuals to force them to testify. Even Rumsfeld doesn't trump a congressional subpoena.


208 posted on 09/21/2005 7:00:16 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: blu

"Could you add "Able Danger" to the title? I think it'd get more views."

Good suggestion.


209 posted on 09/21/2005 7:06:51 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March ("Rome wasn't burned in a day." [This message brought to you by Addams Family supporters of Blanko].)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Now the story is quiet PUBLIC!
Spectre is now asking questions....

CSPAN3


210 posted on 09/21/2005 7:12:16 AM PDT by Wolverine (A Concerned Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Dog

A single gigabyte of information could go a long, long way to fighting terror, depending on how useful that gig is. A terabyte is a whole lot of information! Yikes!

And the Pentagon is saving some officer's tail. Of course, that officer would have gotten orders from someone even higher up....

Good find!


211 posted on 09/21/2005 7:13:28 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March ("Rome wasn't burned in a day." [This message brought to you by Addams Family supporters of Blanko].)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Wolverine

TY!


212 posted on 09/21/2005 7:14:21 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March ("Rome wasn't burned in a day." [This message brought to you by Addams Family supporters of Blanko].)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Wolverine

charts being roled out right now. will the national media cover this? Or, will they help cover it up?


213 posted on 09/21/2005 7:29:22 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (never surrender, this is for the kids)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: FreeAtlanta
...will the national media cover this? Or, will they help cover it up?
 
It will receive passing reference only... Intel Community is now scrambling!

214 posted on 09/21/2005 7:34:41 AM PDT by Wolverine (A Concerned Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

Obviously Able Danger was a success... at the very least in hindsight it 'could' have been.

Perhaps what they are doing is technically legal, but 'creepy'... you don't need secret info, you just need MASSIVE amounts of open source information, and a way to digest it, connect different bits and pieces and some kind of heuristic searching.

Perhaps whatever they were doing with Able Danger is still being done, and is very useful, and 'technically' legal, but would still "creep out" the public with how much 'they' can know about all of us.

Who knows... but it is certainly being covered up.


215 posted on 09/21/2005 7:42:11 AM PDT by FreedomNeocon (I'm in no Al-Samood for this Sheiite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Able Danger is nothing more than data mining, and "data mining" is not some kind of top secret government technology.

Thank you, many FReepers seem to think this is "James Bond" technology, LOL. Take every email and post on FR, input to a data base and then build files on each FReeper. Given enough time, data mining would reveal profiles on every FReeper, complete with home locations, political philosophy, work habits, employment status, occupation, family, contacts, hobbies......etc, etc. Increase the capacity and scope and you have Able Danger. The information gathered isn't classified, but the results could be.....

216 posted on 09/21/2005 8:09:33 AM PDT by ScreamingFist (Peace through Stupidity. NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: tennmountainman

Another thing you is NEVER reveal who may or may not know anything.

These are simple basic security rules.

Save your bloodlust for someone else. You aren't going to get any here.


217 posted on 09/21/2005 8:16:17 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Hey Fox News, MORE MOLLY, LESS Greta van Talksoutthesideofhermouth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Dolphy

well didn't ya know it's just the big bad government...

I mean we need heads on a platter dammit!!!


I know what you are saying and it's sad, but most haven't ever worked in INTEL before.


218 posted on 09/21/2005 8:17:14 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Hey Fox News, MORE MOLLY, LESS Greta van Talksoutthesideofhermouth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

yeah, but the rules are the rules.

If you expose one person now for political reasons, you think the Dems or someone else wouldn't do the same?

Security rules are supposed to trascend politics and it will with this administration, unlike the previous one in the 90's....


219 posted on 09/21/2005 8:18:29 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Hey Fox News, MORE MOLLY, LESS Greta van Talksoutthesideofhermouth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288

yep...

as usual, common sense has taken a back seat on this thread....


220 posted on 09/21/2005 8:19:18 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Hey Fox News, MORE MOLLY, LESS Greta van Talksoutthesideofhermouth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 281-295 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson