Article

2005-09-21 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by lotp 2005-09-21 08:51|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Congress has the authority to issue warrants and compel testimony. An officer's oath is to obey lawful orders. Lawful is the operable word. If the powers to be at the Pentagon are engaged in a coverup, then such orders are unlawful. 'Secret' and 'Classified' have far too often been used to cover bad behavior and incompetence and not real national security. Ever hear of a senior officer ever fired or disciplined for over classifying? If the Dem's ever wanted Rummey's head, this could be the opportunity.

Posted by Hupaimble Elmolurt2226 2005-09-21 10:19|| 2005-09-21 10:19|| Front Page Top

#2 "Defense Department lawyers have blocked members of a data-mining intelligence team from testifying Wednesday before a congressional committee probing their claims that they identified the ringleaders of the Sept. 11 hijackers more than a year before the attacks."

It's a cover-up I tells ya! The media must be up in arms demanding to know why... oh, never mind...

Posted by Hyper">Hyper 2005-09-21 10:49|| 2005-09-21 10:49|| Front Page Top

#3 In his statement this morning before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Congressman Curt Weldon said:

âI have never alleged any wrong doing, conspiracy or cover-up. However, I have been bewildered by the response to Able Danger â both by the 9-11 Commission and the Pentagon.â

âFundamental questions need to be answered: Why was Able Danger a historically insignificant event even thought we knew that Al Qaeda was responsible for the1993 Bombing on World Trade Center, the Khobar Towers, the Embassy Bombings in Africa, the USS Cole? Who ordered the destruction of 2.5 terabytes of data about Al Qaeda and why? And why wasnât the customer at SOCOM ever consulted or briefed? Who stopped the meetings between the FBI and Able Danger personnel in September 2000 and why? What was the extent of the 3-hour brief provided to General Shelton in January 2001 regarding Able Danger? Why did the 9/11 Commission change their response several times when queried about Able Danger and attempt to spin Able Danger based on misinformation? Why have threats been made to Able Danger witnesses who were simply telling their stories?â

âAs it stands now, the 9/11 story has not been fully examined and told. The families of the victims and the American people deserve answers and we must not stop until we get them.â

Posted by Steve">Steve 2005-09-21 12:54|| 2005-09-21 12:54|| Front Page Top

#4 According to Philpott, that chart -- produced in January or February 2000 -- bore the name and likeness of Mohamed Atta, and linked him to a mosque in Brooklyn which has been a center of Islamic extremism for more than 20 years.

See if the NYPD's intelligence unit has anything on Maggot boy hooking up with a Brooklyn mosque prior to 2000. I figure after the first WTC bombing they might've been real interested in what and was happening and who was showing up at the local mosques.

Posted by tu3031 2005-09-21 13:09|| 2005-09-21 13:09|| Front Page Top

#5 I don't blame the Pentagon for not trusting Specter & Co. to run public hearings on intelligence. Remember, leaky Leahy is the minority leader on the Senate Judical Committee.

Still, the 9/11 Committee should rightfully be castigated for their arrogant denial.

Posted by Captain America 2005-09-21 14:26|| 2005-09-21 14:26|| Front Page Top

#6 At this point I trust the Pentagon more than I do some congress critter or Senator.

Posted by Sock Puppet OÂ´ Doom 2005-09-21 15:19|| 2005-09-21 15:19|| Front Page Top

#7 At this point I trust Congress more. Why would the Republicans block Able Danger whose origins were under the Clintonistas? Now this is a real conspiracy theory requiring answers. HMMMM!

Posted by Art">Art 2005-09-21 23:27|| 2005-09-21 23:27|| Front Page Top

#8 I don't buy this, I just don't. When Atta first became known to be the ring leader Able Danger would have come out then, or in intel sessions following up, or any number or cases which tracked the where-abouts of any of the hijackers. That this is coming out now is too suspicious.

Posted by Charles 2005-09-21 23:29|| 2005-09-21 23:29|| Front Page Top

#9 Ever had a security clearance? One you sorta wanted to keep, not to mention stay out prison?

I'm thinking no.

Posted by .com 2005-09-21 23:31|| 2005-09-21 23:31|| Front Page Top

#10 If Atta had sold hashpipes we would have taken concerted action. What is happening now is that we will never know the truth only coverups of coverups.

Posted by Gleregum Elmaimp9510 2005-09-21 23:38|| 2005-09-21 23:38|| Front Page Top

#11 Channels. Gotta play it by the rules - or get burned. Guessing at a scenario that fits the facts...

I'd wager that, after the 9/11 Circus, some of these guys did the "WTF?" email routine. That takes time. At some point, some agreed that it should be publicized that not everyone is a sucker and that 9/11 was a partisan joke - but they had a new punchline. Col Shaffer started up the chain with a request to come out of the closet. Somewhere upstream, someone who thought he could and should, said "Yes - go public... but don't expect 'official' Pentagon backing." The proviso added for political reasons. And so it began. One by one they came out - if they thought they could weather the storm and the MSM BS. Then, some legal beagles said, "Whoa, hold on there! This involves domestic turf, methods, sources - we have a lot of vulnerability, political sniping and potential losses with little upside, here. We don't need this shit. Where's the payoff, other than tweaking the noses of that coven of circus clowns? There isn't one - not worth it. Second-check that everything has been deleted / shredded. We're outta this. Let 'em squeal... no proof." And cold feet set in, from top to bottom.

Who knows, but that makes a helluvalot more sense than calling an Army Colonel and a Navy Captain liars.

Fire at will.

Posted by .com 2005-09-21 23:47|| 2005-09-21 23:47|| Front Page Top

00:00 rjschwarz
23:57 MunkarKat
23:47 .com
23:43 jules 2
23:42 jules 2
23:38 Gleregum Elmaimp9510
23:38 Grunter
23:38 Beau
23:35 LC FOTSGreg
23:31 .com
23:29 Charles
23:28 MunkarKat
23:27 Art
23:25 Slutch Phaviling3447
23:24 Silentbrick
23:21 11A5S
23:14 MunkarKat
23:13 Redneck Jim
23:10 jules 2
23:09 Redneck Jim
23:03 Phil Fraering
23:01 Alaska Paul
22:55 Redneck Jim
22:42 Redneck Jim