| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Enormous Likelihood of Mistaken Identity of Atta by Able Danger |
| 2005-08-27 |
| From The Los Angeles Times, an opinion piece by Terry McDermott, a staff writer and the author of Perfect Soldiers: The Hijackers -- Who They Were and Why They Did It .... I know nothing about Able Danger other than what I've read, so I can't speak with authority on what the program uncovered about Atta, or when. But, having spent the better part of the last four years investigating Atta's life, I can speak to what is otherwise known about him and his whereabouts. Atta's academic, immigration, credit, transit and telephone records provide a fairly complete account from the time he left his native Egypt in autumn 1992 to his death. This includes the period during which Able Danger is said to have identified him as a terrorist in the United States. The story those records, and corroborating interviews, tell is that Atta was not in the United States and made almost no contact with the U.S. until June 2000. .... In May [2000], he applied for a visa from the U.S. Embassy in Berlin. Six weeks later he landed in Newark, N.J. It is hard to see how computers could have named Atta as a member of an American cell before he got here. .... He was listed on airline flight manifests as Mohamed el-Amir, not Atta. His full name was Mohamed Mohamed el-Amir Awad el-Sayed Atta. El-Amir is how Atta was known to friends at school, to the banks that issued his credit cards and to the immigration service in Germany. It's the name on his high school and college diplomas. Even if Able Danger somehow produced a name, "Mohamed Atta," that might not mean much. Variations of "Mohamed" are overwhelmingly the most common name in the Muslim world. It is James, John and Robert combined. Atta isn't Smith or Jones, but it isn't Einstein either. There are plenty of Mohamed Attas — and plenty of Mohamed el-Amirs too. The likelihood of mistaken identity is enormous. But there is another possibility. Over the last four years I have interviewed dozens of people who swore they saw Atta somewhere he wasn't. This includes an assortment of waiters, students, flight instructors, taxi drivers and, more dramatically, two women who each claim to have been married to Atta, this despite the fact that they were never in the same city at the same time he was. .... I think people subsequently, subconsciously placed that face where it made sense to them. There is no reason that a congressman or even two career military men searching for solutions are any less susceptible to seeing what they need to see, where they want to see it. Whatever the resolution of the Able Danger imbroglio, there were plenty of missed opportunities on the road to 9/11. German law enforcement knew in mid-1999 that Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi, another Sept. 11 hijacker, were acquaintances of an Al Qaeda recruiter. This information was passed on to the CIA. The name of a third hijacker, Ziad Jarrah, was given to U.S. intelligence agencies in early 2000 when he was interrogated at length as he passed through customs in the United Arab Emirates en route from Afghanistan to Germany. He told Emiratis he was going to the United States to become a pilot. The Emiratis say they passed this information to the Americans. More famously, the CIA tracked two known Al Qaeda operatives through eight CIA stations from the Middle East to Malaysia, then somehow didn't notice as they walked onto a jetway and a plane bound for Los Angeles. .... |
| Posted by:Mike Sylwester |
| #9 I have been fearful that the right, I include myself in that movement or political spectrum, has jumped the shark on Operation Able Danger. However, as more persons come forward, this is one instance where I am so happy to be wrong. Seems that O.A.D. is the real deal! |
| Posted by: The Angry Fliegerabwehrkanonen 2005-08-27 17:10 |
| #8 And there are plenty of Mark Johnstons and Anne Smiths. The data mining crowd have ways of handling multiple people with the same name. The fact there are 2 mohamed Attas who were terrorists is irrelevant. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-08-27 15:09 |
| #7 Somebody else who doesn't understand data mining. See my and others earlier posts on the topic. Businesses spend very large amounts of money on data mining precisely because it produces surprising and accurate results that can not be produced in other ways and specifically cannot be produced by a roomful of the best analysts. Otherwise Mark is correct. The man's argument is 'I don't understand how Able Danger could have identified Atta, therefore it didn't.' |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-08-27 14:55 |
| #6 But the liklihood of mistaken identity is enormous! I'll bet we're talking billions and billions of percents. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-08-27 11:35 |
| #5 had his photo.... On the chart.... Before sept 11th. Whether mistaken or not, they knew there was "A" Mohammed Atta, if not "the" Mohammed Atta running around. |
| Posted by: Mark E. 2005-08-27 11:22 |
| #4 Abel Danger tied Atta to Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh of 1993 WTC bombing fame. Here's two degrees of separation from Rahman to Atta: 1. Rahman closely, closely associated with El Sayyid Nosair, the man who murdered Meir Kahane in 1990. 2. El Sayyid Nosair had a hit list which included the judge and DAs responsible for the deportation of Mohammad Atta. The problem is that THIS Atta was not the 911 Atta. This Mohammad Atta was the one who attacked a bus in Israel. The chance for mistaken identity is real. More data please. |
| Posted by: Marlowe 2005-08-27 11:05 |
| #3 MS must have ben transferred from the defence of Kofi to discrediting of Able Danger. Nothing indicates more to me that this story has legs. Is this a promotion for Mikey? Let's hope things work out better than they did on Annan watch. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-08-27 10:56 |
| #2 Jayson Blair is alive and well... |
| Posted by: Snease Pheath5636 2005-08-27 10:01 |
| #1 Relevant quote: "I know nothing about Able Danger other than what I've read, so I can't speak with authority on what the program uncovered about Atta, or when." But then he continues... 3 arguments here: 1) I studied him and didn't find evidence he was in the US. Therefore any i.d. of him is wrong. 2) Mistake of name. Atta wasn't the name he used regularly, or something like that. Those fools probably got the name wrong. 3) Individuals have a propensity to make up the past in accordence with what they know of the present. "There is no reason that a congressman or even two career military men searching for solutions are any less susceptible to seeing what they need to see, where they want to see it." Stupid, stupid Congressmen and Military officers! In summary, the writer's arguments hinge around how he is better at his job and staying free of mistakes and prejudices than those professional individuals trained to do their job, and who have been doing it for years, and have access to the most sensitive information. How pompous and self important. Allow me to retort: Third Source Backs Able Danger Claims Relevant quote: ""I am absolutely positive that he [Atta] was on our chart among other pictures and ties that we were doing mainly based upon [terror] cells in New York City," Smith said. Smith said data was gathered from a variety of sources, including about 30 or 40 individuals. He said they all had strong Middle Eastern connections and were paid for their information. Smith said Able Danger's photo of Atta was obtained from overseas." I don't know what bothers me more; the fact that the comission ignored this, or that fact that some people continue in precisely the same mindset which got us to this situation: I know the answer I'm looking for, so I'll only see the evidence I want. The writer of this piece did it, and you're doing it right now, Mike. |
| Posted by: Mark E. 2005-08-27 08:41 |