MUST READ - RE: ABLE DANGER INFO

[whosinpower]

Not sure if this has already been posted - so if it has, my apoligies to the mods -

Must Read! The Neo-Con Able Danger Scandal -- Atta Coverup! UPDATE 4
by Sherlock Google

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/24/124834/678

snip - DIA Agents were ordered to put yellow Post-its over Atta's face and the face's of 3 other 9/11 terrorists

"We were directed to take those 3M yellow stickers and place them over the faces of Atta and the other terrorists and pretend they didn't exist," the intelligence officer told GSN."

Intel agents Michael Shaffer and Scott Philpott have confirmed Rep. Weldon's claims that a chart with Atta's face, soon the photos of 3 other members of the 9-11 terror team, were known to DIA team Able Danger by early 2000.

This diary will show that Pete Schoomaker and Philip Zelikow are two of the main Perpetraitors in this scandal, that they deliberately withheld information from the President of the United States that would have prevented 9/11, that they and their neo-con rulers Let It Happen On Purpose.

Of this there can no longer be any doubt.


DU'ers - go read it. Last night I was watching Schaffer in an interview and he stated that much more would be coming out in regards to Able Danger........

[wli]

1. nah, they'll just produce a more plausible story to cover up MIHOP n/t

[seemslikeadream]

2. pretend they didn't exist

Thanks

LIHOP at least

[Octafish]

31. These things don't just happen by accident.

Twice and it's a coincidence.



Three times and it's enemy action.

[vickitulsa]

3. Just read this at Daily Kos, and some of the backup material

preceding. I hope more people start tuning in to this story!

I saw Michael Shaffer (I'm pretty sure that's who it was, I tried to fix the name SHAFFER in my memory at the time) a couple or three days ago when he made the rounds of the so-called cable "news" networks, talking about the Able Danger operation and how info on it did NOT get included in the 9/11 Commission report.

This guy comes across as extremely forthright and frustrated as hell by the inattention to -- the quashing of, in fact -- information on this very important operation. Shaffer said when he appeared on the news shows that he would not make any appearances after that day. He said he found "this path" a very hard one to take, and indicated that he had been pressured by "authorities" to stop giving interviews. To, basically, SHUT UP, before something terrible happened to him or to his career in intel....

Apparently true to his word, he hasn't appeared on any news shows I've seen since then. I believe Mr. Shaffer needs some SUPPORT. His *ss may well be in the wind for his superiors to hang him out to dry if he doesn't get enough solid backing by those who can protect him and help us all by getting what he knows OUT THERE. I remember being so surprised that someone who appeared to be an "active duty" CIA agent was revealing this information on TV. Usually those intel types don't make appearances like that. But this Able Danger info is or should be "old news" and therefore not something in an active file that he's giving out. It SHOULD be declassified and available to the public!

I'm going to try to find a way to contact Mr. Shaffer and let him know he can expect some strong support from a lot of citizens out here!

Last I heard on cable news, the 9/11 Families (the group that has pushed hardest to get at the truth) were going to start pressing Washington for more answers on Able Danger. Looks like it is happening, and it can't be soon enough for me! Or millions of other Americans who are sick of the lies and coverups.

~VV

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[seemslikeadream]

4. Post it

:kick:

[vickitulsa]

21. Okay, it appears the name "Shaffer" led to some confusion.

But as I searched for contact info on the Able Danger intel person I saw on the news shows, thinking he was probably the Michael Shaffer mentioned in the article referenced in this thread, I came across some very interesting stuff.

Not contact info -- yet, anyway -- but at least one Website where these issues re Able Danger are being discussed currently and in some depth.

Check out this piece.

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/abledanger.asp

At least I'm hoping that link gets you to what I just read. Here is a bit of the article:


Sadly, The 9/11 Commission Has Failed Every American

By Douglas J. Hagmann, Director (My note: He is director of something called the Northeast Intelligence Network.)

19 August 2005: Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer is a true American patriot of great character and integrity. Placing the unbridled truth over potential negative career ramifications and harassment, the Army intelligence officer yesterday publicly charged that the unit in which he worked had identified two al Qaeda cells inside the U.S. and 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta more than a year before the terrorist attacks. Properly handled, according to Lt. Colonel Shaffer, that information might have prevented the terror attacks.

Lt. Col. Shaffer stated that his unit, code-named Able Danger, provided this very information to the 9/11 commission headed by former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean; nonetheless, the commission failed to include any reference to this vital information in its final report.

... Also missing from the final report are any references to declassified documents proving that State Department analysts repeatedly warned the Clinton administration as early as 1996 that Osama bin Laden posed a major threat to U.S. interests.

From an outright lie to a twisting of the facts and onward to a minimization of the “significance” of the data, the 9/11 commission continues to fail every American citizen to cover their own failings and political cover-ups.

~*~*~*~*~

Now this clarifies my muddled memory of the guy I saw interviewed on several news programs not long ago -- one of them being Wolf Blitzer's show. I had not been certain if he was a CIA operative or a military intel person since I knew I'd heard the man MENTION the CIA, at least. However, the Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer cited in the article at this URL is the one I heard blowing open the doors on national TV with information about Able Danger.

Fits my memory in several respects, actually. I was certain I had fixed his rank -- Lt. Colonel -- in my mind as well as his surname. When a CIA operative named Michael Shaffer was mentioned in the piece originally referenced in this thread, I thought maybe I'd been mistakenly recalling the guy I saw to be military when he was actually CIA. I didn't think they had a "Lt. Colonel" rank in the CIA! :think:

BUT -- I believe the man I saw wore a military uniform in his appearances on the TV news shows. That's something ya don't generally mistake for anything else, even though I'm legally blind so my vision is not good. I also remember that I felt some grave concern for the man's career security seeing as how he was going public with information that SOME very powerful people apparently did NOT want to see made public.

So I'll stop here and see if some of you can check this article out and give us your take on it.

But that's the deal -- I am now certain the intel person I saw just a few days ago on television was Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, NOT Michael Shaffer of the CIA.

Thanks for bearing with me as I sort this out!

~VV

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[seemslikeadream]

22. So he's saying Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer is really CIA?

Well this could get interesting?

Thanks

:hi:

[seemslikeadream]

24. I can't seem to find that article

Can you help me a bit more to find it?

[Norquist Nemesis]

30. Is it possible you're thinking of Michael Schuyler?

(could be a mistake on the spelling, but it's close)

I saw him on several news shows talking about it. IIRC, he's the CIA guy that wrote 'Anonymous'. One of the interviews I saw him on about AD a few days ago was with Paula Zahn. Paula asks who he thinks had a better chance of catching bin Laden: Clinton or the Bush Administration. His anwwer: "Oh, Clinton! Of course!" Paula quickly speaks to begin another line of questioning leaving the viewer to believe it's all Clinton's fault. :rolleyes:

[robertpaulsen]

5. Does anyone doubt a 9/11 COVER-UP anymore?

This is from dailykos, the sight that banned people from posting on the London bombings because they were getting too tinfoily.

Negligence? BULLSHIT!

[petgoat]

6. I read the comments at Kos--kind of disturbing how naive so many of the

commenters are. But then again, that just means that when they finally
get wise, this stuff will really start moving.

I'd sure like to see Zelikow get nailed. For him to serve as executive
director of the 9/11 Commission investigation of events in which he
participated (and for which he even served as a witness) was incredibly
sleazy.

[staticstopper]

7. Hate to bring in childhood experiences but

some people had a very secure life while growing up and are most likely emotionally healthy - they can "trust" - so they have a hard time believing, and in fact, cannot fathom that deeply evil actions could be undertaken by their "leaders". imo

I'm afraid there might be a lot of people in for a shock in the coming months.

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

19. My childhood was pretty peachy generally

but my critical thinking skills developed just fine. BS meters develop just fine even in comfortable settings. Given your theory only unfortunate folks understand crap when they see it. Not true.

[dbeach]

8. tumblin dice

as the MM gets ready for a feedin frenzy BUT the sharks busheviks may be the main meal..

'the hunter becomes the hunted.."

[robertpaulsen]

9. Can we get one more recommendation for the Greatest page?

If there are any Moran Freepers still trying to blame the Clenis for 9/11, this article completely vindicates him:

So the responsibility for stopping DIA program Able Danger, which had Identified Atta and 3 other hijackers and linked them to 56 other al-Queda terrorists overseas, has been laid at the feet of Bill Clinton--except he and Richard Clarke were never told about it at all.

That's right. Bill Clinton was never told about Able Danger and the ID of Atta because Richard Clarke was never told about AD. How do I know? He never wrote about it in his book, nor did he testify about it's existence before the 9-11 Commission!

You see Richard Clarke was known for being obsesses with Osama Bin Laden and HE was the guy the neo-con moles did not want to know about Atta and the gang. Schoomaker and the neo-cons knew telling the FBI would inform Clarke and then Mr. Laser Beam himself, President of the United State William Jefferson Clinton, would have gotten involved--and the Pearl Harbor-type attack would never take place (the neo-cons talked about the need for a Pearl Harbor-type attack before the PNAC Plan would be accepted by the American people--so when one presented itself, they let it happen).

General Pete Schoomaker, who were later heavily rewarded by the neo-cons in the Bush Administration, blocked the upward motion of the DIA information by having Shaffer and Philpott meet with Pentagon lawyers opinions--lawyers who were rubberstamping ridiculous legal opinions to carry out the neo-con plan. These certain people were neo-cons in the Clinton Administration, covertly carrying out the PNAC plan to let a Pearl Harbor-type attack occur so Iraq and 6 other countries could be invaded.


So let's reopen the 9/11 investigation! Our side has nothing to hide!

[DemReadingDU]

10. Nominated!

[robertpaulsen]

12. Thanks! n/t

[bobbieinok]

11. Savage interviewed reporter who wrote 1st story about this

Savage said army didn't pass on info b/c they knew 'bleeding heart liberals wouldn't pay any attention; too concerned about civil rights of people with green cards'

also that Clinton's and Reno's DOJ was still hurting from their 'Waco mess' and wouldn't touch anything else

IOW, all Clinton's fault all the time.....b/c 'treasonous liberals are overly concerned with outdated concepts of civil rights---that horrific hold-over from the 60s'

[jsamuel]

13. "The Great Post-its Cover Up"

[seemslikeadream]

16. ""The Great Post-its Cover Up""

I like it :thumbsup:

http://www.gsnmagazine.com.nyud.net:8090/images/aug_05/atta.jpg

[jsamuel]

18. Thanks, pass it around :)

[mom cat]

14. I just wonder if this will convieniently blame someone at a mid level

instead of focusing on the huge body of info about 9-11 that shows that the "official" story is false.

[bleever]

15. So very kicked and nominated.

:nuke:

[Nothing Without Hope]

17. Sounds like the beginnings of new scapegoating to protect Bush and his

top partners in crime. As if Rice, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumfeld and others - I'm betting these included Bolton - didn't know about the 9/11 attack conspiracy! It was THEIR plot to engineer an excuse for the Iraq War and steal power from the other branches of government by shocking and terrifying the pubic.

[hootinholler]

20. But I thought * was the designated scapegoat...

At least from the PNAC perspective...

Always thought it poetic he was reading My Pet Goat.

-Hoot

[Supersedeas]

23. Withholding info from two administrations...but then there's the PDB

in August

[Octafish]

25. Traitors

Thanks, whosinpower! Now that's real reportage. You won't read a more important post, anywhere. It documents treason on the part of the Secret Government for which the little turd from Crawford fronts.

EXCERPT...

I was there and I lived through the ABLE DANGER nightmare.

First - yes - The lawyers involved in this (and similar projects) did interpret the 9-11 terrorists as "US persons" - so while you can second guess them all you want - but that was their "legal" call as wrong as it was and is. Unfortunately, the chain of command at SOCOM went along with them (and this, I expect, will be a topic that will become more clear in the near future).

And lawyers of the era also felt that any intelligence officer viewing open internet information for the purpose of intelligence collection automatically required that any "open source" information obtained be treated as if it was "intelligence information"...does this sound like idiocy to you? It did to me - and we fought it - and I was in meetings at the OSD level, with OSD laywers, that debated this - and I even briefed the DCI George Tenet on this issue relating to an internet project.

And yes, Virgina - we tried to tell the lawyers that since the data identified Atta and the others as linked to Al Qaeda, we should be able to collect on them based on SecState Albright's declaration of Al Qaeda as transnational terrorist threat to the US...well the lawyers did not agree...go figure...so we could not collect on them - and for political reasons - could not pass them to the FBI...I know because I brokered three meetings between the FBI and SOCOM to allow SOCOM to pass the informaton to the FBI. And, sadly, SOCOM cancelled them every time...

CONTINUED...

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/24/124834/678

Would that more understood what we are dealing with here. 9-11 was no accident.

[Corgigal]

26. I think they wanted 9-11 to happen under

Clinton. They wanted to get their war on with a President who was being strong armed by the nutty republicans in congress.

Being American, they forgot that terrorist have their own timetable.

[QuettaKid]

27. been following this story with great interest....what I am not

seeing anywhere is why didn't these Able Danger officers come forward immediately after 9/11 happened? Why wait until 4 years later?

[kestrel91316]

28. Very interesting - I hadn't considered this possibility.

[jsamuel]

29. Don't think so AT ALL. It would have given Clinton the same spike as Bush

got in the polls. They would have hatted ending Clinton on a 90% spike.

The purpose seems to be directly tied to PNAC and the plans to invade countries like Iraq and Iran. Without 9/11 this could not have happened.

[Corgigal]

32. possible

but just for a little while and then they would start the attack on why the President wasn't doing his job to protect the American people.

Again, it's just something that came to mind.

[robertpaulsen]

33. Kick this important story!

:kick: