| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Fuller discussion of Able Danger situation |
| 2005-09-24 |
| The Defense Department on Friday reversed its earlier decision to bar key witnesses from testifying about just how much information the U.S. government had on the Sept. 11 hijackers before they led the attacks that killed 3,000 people. The Senate Judiciary Committee has therefore scheduled a second hearing for next week on the formerly secret Pentagon intelligence unit called "Able Danger". Former members of Able Danger say the group identified Sept. 11 hijackers, including Mohamed Atta, more than a year before the attacks. Although those Able Danger analysts say they told the Sept. 11 commission about their findings, former members of the panel have so far dismissed the claim. The Senate Judiciary Committee said in a statement Friday that the Pentagon now will allow five witnesses to testify. Among those are Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott and defense contractor John Smith. Shaffer said in written testimony last week that the Pentagon blocked him from offering information on Able Danger and its identification of Atta â the lead hijacker. Committee Chairman Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., had suggested that the Pentagon's refusal to allow the testimony "may be an obstruction" to the committee's work. The second hearing will focus on what happened with pre-attack charts and information allegedly destroyed at the behest of military leaders. The committee held its first hearing Wednesday, after which senators still had questions. "I think the Department of Defense owes the American people an explanation about what went on here," Specter said. "The American people are entitled to some answers." Shaffer's attorney, Mark Zaid, also said that the Pentagon prevented testimony from a defense contractor that he also represents. Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Defense Department had a representative at the hearing and that it had provided sufficient information to committee members. âI think there are aspects of this as a classified program that we have expressed some concerns with respect to the appropriateness of some things in an open hearing,â Whitman told reporters after the first hearing on Wednesday. âWe are working very closely to provide all the information that [committee members] need to assess Able Danger.â Zaid fielded questions from committee members on behalf of Shaffer and contractor Smith. He testified that Able Danger, using data mining techniques, identified four of the terrorists who struck on Sept. 11, 2001. Zaid said Shaffer would have testified about charts his team created dealing with Al Qaeda and a grainy photo on file of Atta. âShaffer remembers it specifically because of the evil death look in Mohamad Attaâs eyes,â Zaid said. Pentagon officials had acknowledged earlier this month that they had found three people who recall an intelligence chart identifying Atta as a terrorist prior to the Sept. 11 attacks. Specter asked the official representing the Department of Defense at the hearing, William Dugan, the acting assistant to the secretary for intelligence oversight, if the department had any information about an Al Qaeda cell and Atta. "I don't know," Dugan replied. Specter asked Dugan to "find out the answers to those questions" relating to what the department knew about the workings of Able Danger. Able Danger personnel have said they tried to give the FBI information three times, but Defense Department attorneys refused, citing legal concerns about investigations run by the military on U.S. soil, Zaid said. Former Army Major Eric Klein Smith also testified that he was instructed to destroy data and documents related to Able Danger in May and June of 2000, in accordance with Army regulations that limited the collection and holding of information of U.S. persons. Klein Smith said the order to destroy data was not hostile or aggressive, it was a matter of policy. Asked if this information could have prevented Sept. 11, the major said he could not speculate, but believed it would have been significant and useful. Klein Smith said that he did not remember seeing a picture of Atta, but said he believed "implicitly" claims by Shaffer and Phillpott that they had seen Atta's picture. Zaid told committee members that some of the secret unit's records were also destroyed in March 2001 and spring 2004. Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., was the first lawmaker to come forward with claims that the Sept. 11 commission that investigated pre-attack intelligence failed to accept offers from Able Danger staff about the data it had before the attacks. Weldon said their refusal to hear from Able Danger's members makes the government record of intelligence incomplete. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #5 CA6709---Hit the nail on the head. This has to do with the consequences of the actions taken or not taken by some Pentagon lawyers. The technical details are not necessary to divulge. The biggest concern is whether the same structure and "corporate culture" still exists in the agencies that could bring on more 9-11s. PC will get us all killed if we don't get rid of it. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-09-24 13:03 |
| #4 Let's make this clear. The committee doesn't need to know anything on data/intel gathering methodologies or techniques. All the committee needs is the information on whether terrorists and terrorists activities were discovered, when they were discovered, and then the decision makers who withheld the information from the government offices to act upon the information. That does not compromise 'critical' intelligence material or operations. Regardless of what a JAG or civilian lawywer may or might have said, there is nothing in the books that prohibits the chain of command to kick the issue all the way up to the President. That is the process that the committee has to review. However, they will not get that till they issue warrants and compel testimony under oath. |
| Posted by: Chineck Angitch6709 2005-09-24 09:24 |
| #3 Finally, the Senate Judical Committee is populated with Kennedy, Biden, Schumer, and DiFi. I can say no more. Rumsfeld isn't opposed to hearing provided they are conducted by the appropriate committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and performed in closed hearings. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-09-24 01:09 |
| #2 I remain apprehensive about the public airing of intelligence matters, including Able Danger. First off, Leahy has leaked classfied intelligence in the pass that could have gotten people killed. Second, the data mining techniques are still being utilized today. Its the same techniques that lead to the apprehension of Saddam and the shoot down of his loony boyz. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-09-24 01:07 |
| #1 Will lawyers and Jags please explain to us citizens why the chance of a foreign national living in the US having his privacy violated in a minor way is more important then the safety of thousands? I await their keen eagle eye arguments and note that some of us think their arguments are so poor they should be the stars in a necktie party. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-09-24 00:40 |