Able Danger

[ELVIS]

Stay tuned...

Kurt Weldon in DA HOUSE !!

[FORD]

If Weldon really gave a damn about the truth, he would reveal ALL of what is revealed in the Able Danger case, namely the involvement of "Al Qaeda terraist" Mohammad Atta in the BCE family agricultural imports business, which was based in the infamous Florida flight school that allegedly trained Atta and his partners in jihad.

[ELVIS]

Maybe that day is comming...

[DrMaddVibe]

DAY OF INFAMY 2001
Weldon expects green light
for 'Able Danger' hearings
Says American people will finally hear what 9-11 commission failed to pursue
Posted: December 13, 2005
4:20 a.m. Eastern

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., expects Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to green light public hearings before Congress this week in connection with the military operation "Able Danger," to disclose more information about what was known about Islamist cells in the U.S. before the terror attacks of 2001.

Weldon says he's received "preliminary indication" that an agreement has been reached to conduct hearings with open testimony on Capitol Hill.

"This will be a full hearing, and finally the American people will get to hear what the 9-11 commission didn't pursue, and that is information about what happened before the attacks on Sept. 11," Weldon said on CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" program.


Able Danger is described as a secret data-mining operation that allegedly named Mohammad Atta as an al-Qaida operative a year before Sept. 11, 2001. It was a small, highly classified operation reportedly created at the behest of then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Hugh Shelton in 1999 to develop a campaign against international terrorism and, in particular, al-Qaida.

According to reports, the Able Danger team had identified Atta, the lead attacker, and three others as probable members of an al-Qaida cell operating in the U.S. by mid-2000. That assertion, however, contradicts earlier government denials U.S. agencies had any prior knowledge of Atta or any others eventually associated with the attacks.

Weldon is optimistic the hearings will get to the bottom of some questions left untouched by the commission charged with assessing holes in the nation's security.

"Why did the 9-11 commission pick 1996 and not go back beyond that?" he asked rhetorically. "There is some very interesting material that needs to be tied in. The '93 attack on the Trade Center. The blind sheik's trial. None of that was looked at by the 9-11 commission, and the American people need to ask the question why. We will be asking that question during the Able Danger hearings."

Dobbs pointed out that former members of the commission have suggested there's nothing new to be contributed from Able Danger members and "that it's historically irrelevant."

"I can tell you I have talked to every Able Danger principal," responded Weldon. "None of them interviewed except for two, who went in on their own, Tony Shaffer and Scott Philpot, and each of them were rebuked by the commission. Tony Shaffer was told they didn't want to hear from him. They didn't want to meet with him. And when Scott Philpot met, they said what do you want us to do now? It's too late. So they didn't pursue anything. They didn't get into the details of Able Danger and all the information.

"This is not about a chart [of terrorists] as they try to spin it. It's about what did we know and why didn't act. Why didn't we transfer information to the FBI? Louis Freeh said if he had that information, the FBI might have been able to stop 9-11."

As WorldNetDaily reported, former FBI chief Louis Freeh rebuked the 9-11 commission in a Wall Street Journal column last month for ignoring recent revelations by Able Danger, which concluded Atta had been identified as an al-Qaida agent operating in the U.S. prior to the attacks he helped orchestrate.

Freeh asks, "What did the 9-11 commissioners and their staff know about Able Danger and when did they know it?"

The panel concluded the intelligence about Atta "was not historically significant."

Freeh writes: "This astounding conclusion – in combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into its findings – raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself."

[Nickdfresh]

I'm all for a full hearing, then maybe Congress can have a hearing on why they haven't adopted any of the precautions recommended by the 9/11 Commission, and tell why we're no more prepared for a terror attack than we were five or ten years ago...

[ELVIS]

I think we're a little more prepared...

[Nickdfresh]

I think we're wasting billion$ in pork...

And I still think these guys are full of it, or vastly exaggerating their efforts, because they all have an axe to grind...

[DrMaddVibe]

Well, on 9-11 the axe fell with a couple of swings and a near miss.

Unless you're a complete ford eye-blinker then why would you NOT want to get to the bottom of the plot and see who is responsible?

[FORD]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
Well, on 9-11 the axe fell with a couple of swings and a near miss.

Unless you're a complete ford eye-blinker then why would you NOT want to get to the bottom of the plot and see who is responsible?

I already know who's responsible and so do you You just refuse to accept it.

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by ELVIS
I think we're a little more prepared...

Are you kidding me?

The TSA? aka The Scissor Police??????


Ports = unprotected

Borders = please.......

Railways = unprotected

FOOD = Unprotected

Nuclear plants? - 2 girl scouts with dad's side cutters can get it.....

Water supply = unprotected


JUST WHERE ARE WE MORE PROTECTED, E????????

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
Well, on 9-11 the axe fell with a couple of swings and a near miss.

Unless you're a complete ford eye-blinker then why would you NOT want to get to the bottom of the plot and see who is responsible?

Yeah, I'd like to know how 19 idiots with box cutters fooled our entire military defenses, and managed a DIRECT hit on our Pentagon.

How many billions do we spend to get hit by our own planes?

That dog don't hunt.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Are you kidding me?

The TSA? aka The Scissor Police??????


Ports = unprotected

Borders = please.......

Railways = unprotected

FOOD = Unprotected

Nuclear plants? - 2 girl scouts with dad's side cutters can get it.....

Water supply = unprotected


JUST WHERE ARE WE MORE PROTECTED, E????????

Well, the Bumfuck, North DAKOTA Fire /Police Dept. has new firetrucks, HAZMAT gear, and a small arsenal of automatic weapons now to protect their....um......

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Are you kidding me?

The TSA? aka The Scissor Police??????


Ports = unprotected

Borders = please.......

Railways = unprotected

FOOD = Unprotected

Nuclear plants? - 2 girl scouts with dad's side cutters can get it.....

Water supply = unprotected


JUST WHERE ARE WE MORE PROTECTED, E????????

In a free society such as ours, we'll NEVER be fully protected in a physical sense as you've outlined above. It would be simply too expensive, not to mention the Draconian measures needed to make it happen. Laws that would make the Patriot Act look like child's play.

Just how do you proprose to protect the above entities you mentioned? Hmm? Let's hear your plan.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
In a free society such as ours, we'll NEVER be fully protected in a physical sense as you've outlined above. It would be simply too expensive, not to mention the Draconian measures needed to make it happen. Laws that would make the Patriot Act look like child's play.

Just how do you proprose to protect the above entities you mentioned? Hmm? Let's hear your plan.

Really? I didn't know that inspecting incoming cargo and better port/border security necessitated any new "Draconian" measures...

Or concentrating HMS funding on high value targets required civil liberties to be threatened...