Article

2005-09-24 Home Front: Politix

Fuller discussion of Able Danger situation

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 Dan Darling 2005-09-24 00:23|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#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|| 2005-09-24 00:40|| Front Page Top

#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|| 2005-09-24 01:07|| Front Page Top

#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|| 2005-09-24 01:09|| Front Page Top

#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|| 2005-09-24 09:24|| Front Page Top

#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">Alaska Paul 2005-09-24 13:03|| 2005-09-24 13:03|| Front Page Top

23:51 Sleath Elmetle2853
23:45 Sleath Elmetle2853
23:19 Cheaderhead
22:47 Redneck Jim
22:33 Laurence of the Rats
22:26 Laurence of the Rats
22:08 mojo
22:05 trailing wife
22:05 Snaviting Snaiter1250
22:04 Snaviting Snaiter1250
21:58 trailing wife
21:52 Snaviting Snaiter1250
21:47 trailing wife
21:35 Mrs. Davis
21:35 DMFD
21:32 DMFD
21:30 Mrs. Davis
21:28 trailing wife
21:19 trailing wife
21:15 trailing wife
21:15 Jackal
21:12 Anonymoose
21:08 Jackal
20:59 trailing wife