Able Danger, arrests show Dunn off-base

[jbfam4]

Account #1 for Oc Register.com from Bug me not.com
ivflavius
cetflav


http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2005/08/23/sections/commentary/orange_grove/article_644641.php


COMMENTARY


Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Able Danger, arrests show Dunn off-base
Military professionals have no interest in spying on their fellow Americans.

By Chuck Devore
Assemblyman Devore, R-Irvine, also is a major in the Army National Guard.


What do plots to blow up National Guard armories and synagogues, 9/11, well-intentioned liberals, the war on terror and residue from the Vietnam-era have in common? They all are playing out in California in three seemingly unconnected stories.


The final story regards the growing revelations that a Pentagon-based military unit known as "Able Danger" identified the 9/11 hijackers by name a year before the attacks but was blocked by Clinton administration Pentagon lawyers from alerting the FBI to their presence in America - a fact withheld from the 9/11 Commission report by staffers covering for the Clinton administration's bungling of information that could have saved thousands of lives.


We are fighting a war against Islamo-fascist terrorists. In this war, some policy makers persist in reacting strongly against any domestic measures the military takes to protect America, as well as military assets, from attack. Hence, the Able Danger unit in the Pentagon was barred by lawyers from the Clinton administration from sharing information on the 9/11 terrorists with the FBI a year before the 9/11 attacks. This parallels Sen. Dunn's accusations that force the California National Guard on the defensive as it tries to provide for a common defense even as three suspected terrorists were arrested for targeting California synagogues and National Guard facilities.

The Able Danger revelations tell us that the residue from the Vietnam-era anti-war movement may have killed over 3,000 Americans on 9/11 by mentally immobilizing our ability for self-defense. Military professionals on active duty or in reserve status have no interest in spying on their fellow Americans. They know it is wrong. Let's allow them - no, encourage them - to do the job they volunteered to do.

[newscott]

1. I told you how these morans would spin it!

And they are spinning hard and fast now. Trying as best they can to cover for * and his falling ratings.

Blame Clinton. Works every time.

[Bob3]

2. I am not sure of all the facts here but this just reads like BS

Clinton, as I remember was howled at by these same brave GOP defenders of America for playing wag the dog games with Osama Ben Laden - he wasn't important we were told, this was just trying to distract us from Monica so a case can made that the GOP's trying to oust Clinton contributed to the death of 3,000 americans. And during the 9/11 hearings (as tepid as they were) Ashcroft tried to play this card to excuse his own obsession with brothels in New Orleans and statues of Naked women.

and bunky while military professionals may have no interest in spying on their fellow americans - their masters have proven time and time again that they just absolutely love it to death, shit they roll around in it that power like it was catnip - and will order said military professionals to do so without a seconds hesitation. And military professionals are only a small part of the staggeringly huge US security network which includes the NSA, CIA the FBI and intelligence services of each service - all of whom have wasted a hell of a lot of time investigating singers and actors and activists at the behest of their masters.

[walkon]

3. My question,

Able Danger aside, is who in government/military was invested in protecting Atta, bin Laden, et al?

The article above is pure spin and propaganda as it pronounces speculation as fact. It really gets extreme when it blames Viet Nam era war protesters for 9-11.

[jbfam4]

4. You are right .......it is BS

In case you want to write here's the info.

Letters to the Editor:
[e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

I just wrote to them and told them their readers deserve better and suggested they publish this artile in the Washington Post.

No Evidence of Atta Claims, Pentagon Says
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/22/AR2005082201299.html?nav=hcmodule