"Able Danger" and 9/11 Commission's Omissions.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Brutus1964, Aug 20, 2005.

  1. Brutus1964 We are not alone! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    608
    Controversy has erupted regarding the 9/11 commission with evidence that Mohammed Atta and some of the other highjackers were known Al Qaeda members over a year before 9/11, and probably even longer than that.

    From The Washington Post

    The Sept. 11 commission will investigate a claim that U.S. defense intelligence officials identified ringleader Mohamed Atta and three other hijackers as a likely part of an al Qaeda cell more than a year before the 2001 hijackings but did not forward the information to law enforcement.
    Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, said yesterday that the men were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger." If true, that is an earlier link to al Qaeda than any previously disclosed intelligence about Atta.

    Lee H. Hamilton, co-chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, said the information warrants a review. He said he hoped the panel could issue a statement on its findings by the end of the week.
    "The 9/11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohamed Atta or of his cell," Hamilton said
    Now many of the 9/11 families are questioning why this information is only now coming out? Why was this not known by the commission until now and why was this not investigated by them?


    From USAToday

    Rep. Curt Weldon, a Pennsylvania Republican who serves as vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, said a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger" identified the men in 1999.
    A group of 9/11 widows called the September 11th Advocates issued a statement Wednesday saying they were "horrified" to learn that further possible evidence exists, and they are disappointed the 9/11 Commission report is "incomplete and illusory."
    "The revelation of this information demands answers that are forthcoming, clear and concise," the statement said. "The 9/11 attacks could have and should have been prevented."
    With the 9/11 commission disbanded for a year under provisions of the legislation that created it, some of the panel's members have said congressional committees should investigate Weldon's assertions.
    According to Weldon, Able Danger identified Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Mihdar and Nawaf al-Hazmi as members of a cell the unit code-named "Brooklyn" because of some loose connections to New York City.
    Weldon said that in September 2000 Able Danger recommended that its information on the hijackers be given to the FBI "so they could bring that cell in and take out the terrorists." However, Weldon said Pentagon lawyers rejected the recommendation because they said Atta and the others were in the country legally, so information on them could not be shared with law enforcement.


    Why didn’t “Able Danger” report their finding to the FBI? Why wasn’t Atta and other 9/11 terrorists put on a watch list even though there was evidence of their terrorist ties?
    The truth is that “Able Danger” was barred from sharing information with the FBI. The reason lies with one of the 9/11 commissioners herself, and is neck deep in Clinton scandals including Chinagate. Jamie Gorelick was Janet Reno’s right hand “man” in the Justice Department.

    On April 10, 2004 Insight magazine reported:

    The 1995 memo by then Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick - now a member of the 9/11 commission - explains that the new rules dictated by the Clinton administration to separate criminal investigations from intelligence gathering "go beyond what is legally required." The Gorelick rules were meant to ensure that "no 'proactive' investigative efforts or technical coverages" of terrorist suspects be carried out on U.S. soil.

    The result of the 1995 Gorelick rules, Ashcroft said, were devastating, and hampered the ability of U.S. intelligence agencies to communicate the identify of two of the 9/11 hijackers to law-enforcement agencies, even after they had entered the United States. That failure specifically contributed to 9/11. Click here to read the contents of the Gorelick memo or view in PDF format.

    This directly relates to the Chinagate scandal. Bill Clinton and Janet Reno did not want the CIA and the FBI cooperating with each other in their investigation of illegal campaign contributions from China to the Clinton campaign. Through Jamie Gorelick they built a wall between the agencies to hamper the agencies from investigating the Clinton Administration. It also hampered other investigations such as Mohammed Atta and others. The legacy of Chinagate could very well be 9/11 itself, and someone who was neck deep in it all was Jamie Gorelick, ironically a member of the 9/11 commission itself.

    Now the answer to the question as to why this new information is just coming out now, and why wasn’t it investigated by the 9/11 commission? It is because Jamie Gorelick was on the commission for the express reason to hide information such as this in order to protect the Clinton’s.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2005
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Thanks, Brutus, I was curious how that would all come out in the wash. The truth is sometimes something that we have to wait a bit to find out, huh? Perhaps that's why we shouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions .....like so many news reports are want to do ....ditto for many of the sciforums posters, too.

    Baron Max
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Imperfectionist Pope Humanzee the First Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    338
    It's always Clinton's fault, right?

    retards
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    No, I think you're not reading enough into it. You're seeing only the name, and so jump to conclusions too rapidly. This is all about politics, power politics, in the world's governments ...not just in American government. The article is simply pointing out how powerful some people are and how others wnat to become more powerful .....and they use these petty issues in order to gain power or to lessen the political power of others.

    As long as we, the people, allow politicians to gain such power, we've only ourselves to blame. If we had political terms limits, the rise to power would be virtually eliminated ...no one would have time to gain such power. But we'll never do anything about it ....I fear it's because we'd rather sit on our fat asses and bitch n' moan, than to actually do something.

    Baron Max
     
  8. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,671
    Having worked with the DOJ, and discussing this very law with both sides, I have yet to hear this "Clinton didn't want the FBI and the CIA working together on Chinagate" theory. Both sides, on the inside of the issue, seem to agree that it was a civil liberties issue.
    Where they disagree is on the usefullness of such protection.
     
  9. nirakar ( i ^ i ) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,383
    We need a real 9-11 commision. There are so many questions that the 9-11 commision avoived. Clinton and Jackson Stephens and Vince Foster tie into BCCI which ties into many things that tie into 9-11. For Clinton and Bush senoir there is also Mena. It seems Ken Starr wanted to get Clinton on something that would not also get Republicans.

    Cheney was responsible for the war games that took out US air defense radar on 9-11. Did somebody tip off the 9-11 terrorists that 9-11 would be the best day to not have the third and fourth planes get shot down by fighters before hitting their marks? If the 9-11 commision looked for a leak they never told us.

    Meanwhile on 9-11 Porter Goss and Senator Grahm were having a meeting with the Pakistani ISI man who's assistant is reported to have given Khaled Sheik Mohamed the money that he then gave to Mohammed Atta.

    There are a thousand little connections like that. Able Danger needs investigating. I can't rule out the possibility that Bush and Clinton and Pakistani ISI were working together to sponsor Khaled Sheik(h) Mohamed's Mohammed's 9-11 opperation against the USA. If you bomb other people for "US" interests why shouldn't you bomb Americans if that is what well make crucial "US interests" safe? Perhaps the only role Bin Laden had was introducing willing suicide bombers to Khaled Sheik Mohamed.

    I just learned about homeland security secretary Chertoff's ties to Magdy El-Amir that tie Chertoff to 9-11.

    The site below is not easy reading but it is one of those ard core seemingly high quality 9-11 conspiracy searching sites. It has the Chertoff connection that I just heard about on the radio the other day. http://www.spitfirelist.com/f498.html
     
  10. Neildo Gone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,306
    Bush, Clinton; they're all the same.

    - N
     

Share This Page