Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hannity not giving up on Able Danger reports

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:47 PM
Original message
Hannity not giving up on Able Danger reports
Edited on Tue Aug-23-05 02:48 PM by underpants
Never let it be said he let facts get in his way.

Just tuned in, so far:

-Two CREDIBLE witnesses have put their name on the line
-If this had happened during the Bush administration (didn't it?) this would be the main story the defining moment of HIS administration
-This is the result of the liberal media trying to cover for Clinton
-Cited National Review article (who cares)
-9/11 Commission was dead set on the time line
-What documents DID Sandy Burger take? (none)
-This is the result of the liberal media trying to damn Bush
-Blaming it on Jamie Gorelick. 9/11 Commission covered for her (who approved the commission members?).
-If this had happened during the Bush administration this would be the main story the defining moment of HIS administration.

News you won't find any place else, we'll be right back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. Jamie responded with a letter to someone but I can not find it now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sunkiss BlueStar Donating Member (232 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. You are BRAVE
I cant stomach the SOB.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Welcome to DU
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sunkiss BlueStar Donating Member (232 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Thank You
:loveya: Im lovin DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
4. If they didn't track the hijackers
how did they find out who they were, where they had been and their photos so quick after 9/11. That info must have been passed on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. "If these stories all turned out to be false, which they aren't,...
and all these people turned out to be manipulative liars, which they aren't, would we have been any worse off for investigating it?"
-Hannity just now

Apparently they got a report that didn't blame anyone now they want to have another one to support their conclusion that it was Clinton's fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. tThe report blamed Reagan/Bush - but only by saying "80's and
noting the "wall" was created back then - and then reauthorised by Bush in Aug 2001.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
7. Interesting diary at kos about Able Danger and Cheney
Edited on Tue Aug-23-05 03:02 PM by hiley
Confirmed: Able Danger ID of Atta before Bushco Shut it Down
The neo-cons and the Pentagon are deperately trying to deny, cheat and stall on this Atta revelation because it was Cheney that ended Able Danger in February 2001 to prevent any more investigation of the people who were planning to Pearl our Harbor.

This was deliberate, IMHO, on Bushco's part, as they needed Atta to succeed on 9/11 so they would the excuse they wanted to invade Iraq and Iran and Pipelanistan.

snip--
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/23/134727/558
http://www.timesherald.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15032471&BRD=1672&PAG=461&dept_id=33380&rfi=6
edit to add
Complete 911 Timeline
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&timeperiod=2001%20-%200:05am%2011%20Sept%202001
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Wow that is damning
1-800-940-7326 (SEAN)

He calls it "Camp Cindy"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:56 PM
Original message
did Hannity not get the memo yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
18. No, he couldn't get past a caller saying that W tried to block
the 9/11 Commission.

He isn't going to go anywhere NEAR that Times-Herald report (if he has been allowed to see it).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magnetism Donating Member (159 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. didn't each side
pick their own members for the 9/11 commission?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. All had to be approved by the White House
That was part of the negotiates to establish, then fund, then properly fund the commission

Welcome to DU :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magnetism Donating Member (159 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. searching the 9/11 website
I found this link:

http://www.9-11commission.gov/about/107-306.pdf

Pages 26 and 27 define the composition of the commission and Page 30 defines the appointment process. I do not see where * HAD to approve. I see that the Chairman and Vice Chairman approved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Best link I can find on it now
http://www.justiceblind.com/hide.html

COngress is such a rubber stamp of the White House so anywhere you read "Congress" subsitute "Bush Administration"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magnetism Donating Member (159 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. ok
Thanks for the link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
11. InsHannity still thinks there are WMDs in Iraq
and that Saddam and Osama were in love.

He's fucking nuts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikelewis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Not nuts just well paid.
He doesn't believe this bullshit. He pedals it for a very stiff price.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Actually you are right
Just an immoraal RW propaganda peddler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
12. RE: Gorlick
Media Matters here: http://mediamatters.org/items/200508180007 has a great debunking of the "wall" that the ratbastard right is using to put the blame on Clinton.

It's titled: Memo to NY Post, et al: So-called Gorelick "wall" could not have been responsible for military failure to share alleged Atta intel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
20. Let's assume he's right...
Suppose it was the case that the Clinton Administration refused to allow military intelligence about Atta to be turned over to FBI. What's the RW's answer to why they didn't try again when W came into office?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Exactly but of course no one wants to mention that
It is as if it were a one shot deal. Ridiculous.

See post #& and read the times-Herald (Philly) link. *Someone* shut down Able Danger in February 2001 (and no I am not in the LIHOP/MIHOPcrowd) ......probably Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
22. Weldon gave the "chart" to Stephen Hadley, Condi's #2, 2 wks. after 9/11
Edited on Tue Aug-23-05 04:28 PM by flpoljunkie
You know the same Stephen Hadley who took responsibiity for the 16 words in Dubya's SOTU regarding "uranium in Africa." Hadley was also a member of the White House Iraq Group in 2002.

Why doesn't someone ask Hadley, who now has Condi's old job, head of the NSA, what he did with the frickin' chart? White House remains mum.

By the way, "Able Danger" which was a Pentagon data mining program, was terminated four months before 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
23. Sen. Gorton (R) Smacks down O'Reilly
""Nothing Jamie Gorelick wrote had the slightest impact on the Department of Defense or its willingness or ability to share intelligence""

http://mediamatters.org/items/200508230008
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC