Final Verdict On "Able Danger"?

[NATO AIR]

Is this the end?

The Final Verdict on Able Danger
Distrust of the White House and Congress has become so epidemic, vast numbers of Americans now accept conspiracy theories about September 11, 2001, including the most diabolical: that the U.S. government somehow was complicit and even responsible for the events.

A strange corollary is a collective penchant to lionize retired generals, former ambassadors, career bureaucrats and CIA officials who "speak out." People who otherwise think the CIA or the military are responsible for the world's ills witlessly quote and defend these supposed heroes against imagined Rove-ian and Darth-Cheney assaults.

This tendency is on display in the "scandal" over a top-secret, special-operations effort -- "Able Danger" -- that existed before Sept. 11 to develop a "campaign plan" to fight al-Qaeda. A mélange of government and industry flunkies came forward in August 2005, egged on by conspiracy monger Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) to claim that Able Danger had identified Mohamed Atta and other Sept. 11 hijackers more than a year before the attacks. The operation, the whistleblowers said, was subsequently shut down by -- and here you can fill in whatever conspiracy blanks pleases you -- Clinton administration baddies, military toadies or Pentagon "lawyers."

Now a new Defense Department inspector general report (caution: huge file provided courtesy of the Federation of American Scientists) on the scandal lays to rest the Able Danger fantasy: Mohamed Atta was never identified. Lawyers never stopped the organization from doing anything. There is no conspiracy. But the real story of Able Danger is one of secret "off-the-books" organizations and "outside-the-box" efforts and the potential corrosive and negative impact they have. It is a phenomenon that affects Republicans and Democrats alike.

The Defense Department Inspector General (IG) has concluded that pre-Sept. 11 top-secret intelligence and planning programs -- collectively known as Able Danger -- "did not identify Mohammed Atta [sic] or any other of the Sept. 11 terrorists before the Sept.11 attack."

The IG report shows, however gingerly and circumspectly, that a principal public face of Able Danger, an Army reserve lieutenant colonel named Anthony Shaffer, who has worked in a variety of Defense Intelligence Agency "special" and secret projects as an officer on active duty and as a civilian, exaggerated, lied and possibly worse. Shaffer, who is shown in the IG's report to be peripheral to the Able Danger effort and less knowledgeable than he claims, also is shown to have a selective and inconsistent memory. On the one hand, Shaffer remembers specifically seeing photographs of Mohamed Atta on charts and documents that by his own telling he only saw once or twice six years ago. Yet Shaffer's mind goes blank and he can not recollect if he had or set up a meeting with an FBI official who also happens to be a best friend from high school.

MORE AT LINK BELOW

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/09/the_final_verdict_on_able_dang.html

 

[Annie]

Is this the end?

Eddie, I'm going to wait on this. Read the previous blog entries. One side or the other doth protest too much.

 

[NATO AIR]

Eddie, I'm going to wait on this. Read the previous blog entries. One side or the other doth protest too much.

Absolutely, but I do find it quite interesting that the only scandal in the post 9/11 era to hold "weight" has been the Oil For Food Scandal. Plamegate, Able Danger, etc, maybe I'm being too dismissive, I'm rather tired of being led along by all these domestic issues, ignoring the big picture, big ticket issues.

 

[Annie]

Absolutely, but I do find it quite interesting that the only scandal in the post 9/11 era to hold "weight" has been the Oil For Food Scandal. Plamegate, Able Danger, etc, maybe I'm being too dismissive, I'm rather tired of being led along by all these domestic issues, ignoring the big picture, big ticket issues.

I think that what we see domestically is the combination of MSM and politics that keep the issues in a fog. As a country, regardless of how 'European' our press may sound on 'issues', there is an inherent distrust of international organizations, (read alliances), that while reporting may be held to a very few, (Rosette), the hordes of reporters do not attack. It's not true on what turn into political issues.

 

[NATO AIR]

I think that what we see domestically is the combination of MSM and politics that keep the issues in a fog. As a country, regardless of how 'European' our press may sound on 'issues', there is an inherent distrust of international organizations, (read alliances), that while reporting may be held to a very few, (Rosette), the hordes of reporters do not attack. It's not true on what turn into political issues.

Yes, the "fog of war". and things lesser than war. I do look forward to 2008 when we can have a decent debate, because I think the best and brightest will come out to avoid the disaster of 2004 and to avenge the conservative disapointments of 2004-2008.

There are a lot of good Demos out there, but I fear they have been shouted out by the left and horrified by the Dobson/Buchannan types of the right. Willl the solid center remain though?

 

[Annie]

Yes, the "fog of war". and things lesser than war. I do look forward to 2008 when we can have a decent debate, because I think the best and brightest will come out to avoid the disaster of 2004 and to avenge the conservative disapointments of 2004-2008.

There are a lot of good Demos out there, but I fear they have been shouted out by the left and horrified by the Dobson/Buchannan types of the right. Willl the solid center remain though?

Perhaps there are good dems, I am not finding many. Then again, can't say I find a lot of good repubs either. Funny on Obama, even the Chicago papers are not as 'big' on him as NYTimes, etc. There is something funny there.

 

[NATO AIR]

Perhaps there are good dems, I am not finding many. Then again, can't say I find a lot of good repubs either. Funny on Obama, even the Chicago papers are not as 'big' on him as NYTimes, etc. There is something funny there.

People need hope and appreciate frankness. Obama seems to be very skilled at showing off both in large amounts. I see him as a fantastic president one day, if the Senate does not corrupt him, or worse, if the Democratic Party does not make him radioactive with their increasing insanity.

The clouds of confusion over Iraq and the irrational hatred of George Bush, the culture of political warfare we have right now, etc etc, all this creates a toxic mixture of terrible proportions for political leadership and opposition.

I wouldn't trust Pelosi and co. with a used car, let alone a country, but I certainly have no love or respect left for the current crowd in GOP political leadership. JUST IMHO though. That's why I wait for 2008, Brownback, Obama, Coburn, Romney, etc. New leaders for a new era.

 

[Annie]

People need hope and appreciate frankness. Obama seems to be very skilled at showing off both in large amounts. I see him as a fantastic president one day, if the Senate does not corrupt him, or worse, if the Democratic Party does not make him radioactive with their increasing insanity.

The clouds of confusion over Iraq and the irrational hatred of George Bush, the culture of political warfare we have right now, etc etc, all this creates a toxic mixture of terrible proportions for political leadership and opposition.

I wouldn't trust Pelosi and co. with a used car, let alone a country, but I certainly have no love or respect left for the current crowd in GOP political leadership. JUST IMHO though. That's why I wait for 2008, Brownback, Obama, Coburn, Romney, etc. New leaders for a new era.

Well I hope you are not disappointed with Obama, the question is which way will the corruption go? Word to the wise, when a politician comes from Chicago to the national stage so suddenly, with little criticism/noise from Chicago, watch out. Just saying...

 

[NATO AIR]

Well I hope you are not disappointed with Obama, the question is which way will the corruption go? Word to the wise, when a politician comes from Chicago to the national stage so suddenly, with little criticism/noise from Chicago, watch out. Just saying...

Oh they all disapoint, but isn't that the fun and thrill of it?

Excellent observation from you though. Chicago politics is a world of its own . As one could say about LA, Baltimore, Miami, NYC, etc.

But perhaps we expect too much from our politicians? I would love for us to have a president who cheated on his wife, lied to many others, accepted bribes in the past, etc, as long as he was competent, ruthless and absolutely unwavering in his committment to securing America's future.

 

[trobinett]

Oh they all disapoint, but isn't that the fun and thrill of it?

Excellent observation from you though. Chicago politics is a world of its own . As one could say about LA, Baltimore, Miami, NYC, etc.

But perhaps we expect too much from our politicians? I would love for us to have a president who cheated on his wife, lied to many others, accepted bribes in the past, etc, as long as he was competent, ruthless and absolutely unwavering in his commitment to securing America's future.

I don't expect TOO MUCH from politicians.

I certainly DON'T expect our president to cheat on his wife, lie, take bribes, or any other morally bankrupt behavior.

I DO expect him to be competent, and absolutely unwavering in his commitment to securing America's future.

I don't think that's anymore than I would expect from myself. Why allow the people that represent us to subscribe to a lower moral agenda?