The Bush administration terminated Able Danger in Feb 2001!

[spooked911]

Right after taking office. This is the program that identified an Al Qaeda cell in the US-- the same guys who committed 9/11!

http://www.timesherald.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15032471&BRD=1672&PAG=461

"A small group of Defense Intelligence Agency employees ran the Able Danger operation from fall 1999 to February 2001 - just seven months before the terrorist attacks - when the operation was unceremoniously axed, according to a former defense intelligence official familiar with the program."

Is this incompetence or maliciousness on the part of the Bush administration? If they were planning a terrorist attack, would they do something so obvious?

Were the main Bush administration officials really just totally clueless about Al Qaeda-- and about the capacity of elements of the government to sponsor synthetic terrorism?

Or did someone lower down the chain terminate the program (perhaps as a way to set-up the incompetence defense that administration critics seem to accept far too easily)?

[blm]

1. No surprise. They refused the HartRudman Report on Global Terror that was

handed to them on Jan 30, 2001.

[jsamuel]

2. SEE THIS THREAD:

Able Danger: Short Time-line
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4441903

[seemslikeadream]

5. And this one

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

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1727804&mesg_id=1727804

[sam sarrha]

3. i was already convinced * Corp did Nine/11, more justification

[DoYouEverWonder]

4. More proof that BushCo wanted a terrorist attack

That is the only reason why they would ignore all the warning signs. They did it on purpose.

[KeepItReal]

6. They also axed the submarine tasked with cruise missiles strikes again OBL

Like someone said, "It is almost as if Al Qaeda has people in this administration working for them."

[WiseButAngrySara]

15. "'Almost'" is probably stretching it.......n/t

[spooked911]

19. good point-- someone should make a list of all the ways the Bush admin

cut off/terminated/ignored terror programs prior to 9/11.


Has any one ever seen a comprehensive list like this?

I bet it would be amazingly damning.

The question is-- why would they do something so obvious? Just because they knew they could get away with it once 9/11 happened? Or were they that stupidly allergic to anything the Clinton administration did? I mean they may be dumb, but they can't have been THAT dumb.

[underpants]

7. THREE (pre-war)chances to hit Zarqawi stopped by Bush administration

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself — but never pulled the trigger.

In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide.

The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.

Four months later, intelligence showed Zarqawi was planning to use ricin in terrorist attacks in Europe.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.

“People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,” according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.

In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq.

The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.

[Supersedeas]

22. more obsessed with the overthrow of Saddam...no way

[DemonFighterLives]

8. So it wasn't Enable Danger

Then it had to be stopped for the PNAC agenda to be realized. Take all intelligence that was reasonable and throw it out, the regime had an agenda and the man behind the curtain is cheney/poppy.

[jobycom]

9. Just part of Bush's pathological need to undo everything Clinton

Not just on terrorism. He also killed Gore's hybrid research funding, overturned Clinton's arsenic ban in drinking water... It didn't matter. If Clinton did it, Bush tried to kill it.

I think Bush was hoping for an excuse to invade IRaq and Afghanistan (the India Times predicted Bush would invade in October long before 9-11), and I think he deliberatly withdrew US surveillance to give them a window of opportunity. That's why he ignored his memo, too. He probably expected something smaller. Remember the look on his face in the classroom when he learned about the plan hitting the tower? First he just nodded and looked unsurprised. But you can watch his face as the horror sinks in. He expected the hijacking, but not the crash, I think.

[underpants]

10. ABC- the Ergonomics study results and the park land use rules

Anything But Clinton.

I don't share in LIHOP/MIHOP theories (sorry I just won't go there) but I do think that they ignored/overturned/rejected the Clinton emphasis on counter terrorism basically because Clinton supported/improved/enacted it. We know that the first NSC meeting included contrived "intelligence" and discussion on invading Iraq.

[pberq]

14. You don't have to go for the theories, but instead take a look

at the mountain of unanswered questions about 9/11, such as:

Why was there no official inquiry into the many wargames that took place on 9/11?

What about the insider trading on 9/11? Why no attempt to follow the money trail?

How come the 9/11 Commission altered the timelines provided by NORAD and the FAA?

etc, etc, etc, etc.

I am not proposing any theories, just wanting answers to these and the many other questions. Don't you think that's reasonable considering that this was the worst attack on this country in decades?

The above story just adds one more unanswered question.

It goes beyond a partisan thing with Clinton.

[me b zola]

21. Those are not only unanswered questions...

Those are unmentioned facts. The media is scared to consider the evil that it has enabled to be unleashed on the world. It seems to be operating under the rule of: hear, see, speak no evil.

[lostnfound]

18. Some of the recent Sibel Edmonds interviews are making it easier

to believe LIHOP/MIHOP.

[Al-CIAda]

11. .

[Joanne98]

12. Oh well, Back to.....Where's Natalie?

[MADem]

24. And don't forget the student-model!!!

She's the fallback player if they find Natalee...

[TexasLawyer]

13. MIHOP

Yet more evidence for the Made It Happen On Purpose theorists. I think I'm coming around to the MIHOP view myself. Lord help this planet.

[WiseButAngrySara]

16. Same here! Insanity......n/t

[lateo]

26. Or LIHOP

The Bush team probably just sat back, watched and waited.

[WiseButAngrySara]

17. Kick, recommended and bookmarked....TU for the post...n/t

[seabeyond]

20. they ignored clinton adm and albrieght, bush stopped

the cole investigation, saying it would just be swatting at flies with a flyswatter. the refused to listen to clarke (terror) and tenet (cia) and oneil (fbi) even though there was much to share. i am sure there were other things, just has been a while since this research. always things to remember with this administration

[EVDebs]

23. Compartmentalized, a.k.a 'sanitized' ,for your protection

""A small group of Defense Intelligence Agency employees ran the Able Danger operation from fall 1999 to February 2001 - just seven months before the terrorist attacks - when the operation was unceremoniously axed, according to a former defense intelligence official familiar with the program.""

The trademarks of an intelligence operation; with 'plausible' deniability. Now it's not so plausible, so you've got 'blowback' and damage control going on right now...

[seemslikeadream]

25. Third Source Backs 'Able Danger' Claims About Atta

Third Source Backs 'Able Danger' Claims About Atta
Saturday, August 27, 2005

WASHINGTON — A third person has now come forward to verify claims made by a military intelligence unit that a year before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, it had information showing that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta (search) and other terrorists were identified as being in the United States.

J.D. Smith, a defense contractor who claims he worked on the technical side of the unit, code-named "Able Danger" (search), told reporters Friday that he helped gather open-source information (search), reported on government spending and helped generate charts associated with the unit's work. Able Danger was set up in the 1990s to track Al Qaeda activity worldwide.

"I am absolutely positive that he was on our chart among other pictures and ties that we were doing mainly based upon cells in New York City," Smith said.

Smith said data was gathered from a variety of sources, including about 30 or 40 individuals. He said they all had strong Middle Eastern connections and were paid for their information. Smith said Able Danger's photo of Atta was obtained from overseas.
more
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167130,00.html





DO THE MATH

THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A MILITARY ORDER
http://www.bushflash.com/buddy.html

[spooked911]

27. This is big-- but we have to make sure the rightwing doesn't spin it as a

Clinton thing (though I'm sure they will).

I love that Bushflash movie!

[seemslikeadream]

28. I can't find this New York Post article "Military 'Spied' on Rice."

that this guy is talking about but

http://newsbusters.org/node/720

Today's New York Post (27 August) carries a story by Niles Lathem entitled "Military 'Spied' on Rice." The good news is that the story ran at all. The bad news is the reporter demonstrated a brass-plated ignorance of how the Able Danger program operated.

The lead from the article says, "Cyber-sleuths working for a Pentagon intelligence unit that reportedly identified some of the 9/11 highjackers before the attack were fired by military officals, after they mistakenly pinpointed Secretary of State Rice and other prominent Americans as potential security risks..."


found another link
http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002423.html

[spooked911]

29. Whoa Nelly! That is interesting!

The Post article:
"The Pentagon canceled its contract with the private firm shortly after the analysts — who were working on identifying al Qaeda operatives — produced a particularly controversial chart on proliferation of sensitive technology to China, the sources said.

Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, the veteran Army officer who was the Defense Intelligence Agency liaison to Able Danger, told The Post China "had something to do" with the decision to restructure Able Danger.

Sources said the private contractors, using sophisticated computer software that sifts through massive amounts of raw data to establish patterns, came up with a chart of Chinese strategic and business connections in the U.S.

The program wrongly tagged Rice, who at the time was an adviser to then-candidate George W. Bush, and former Defense Secretary William Perry by linking their associations at Stanford, along with their contacts with Chinese leaders, sources said.

The program also spat out scores of names of other former government."

Seems to ME, Rice WAS a security risk! But what do I know-- I'm just a tinfoil-hat-wearing kook.

[spooked911]

30. I guess this is why Able Danger was cancelled so quickly by the Bush admin

It's funny how the Clinton admin didn't seem to mind this but the Bush admin got very touchy about this program...

[spooked911]

31. Key Points About "Able Danger"

1) It succesfully identified Atta and other 9/11 hijackers well before the attacks, and as non-citizens, these apparent terrorists should have been put in a special class

2) The "Able Danger" administrators tried to go to the FBI with the names of suspect terrorists, but were blocked by Pentagon lawyers (apparently)

3) Someone in the Defense Department apparently put Atta in the protected category of US citizen/permanent resident-- WHY????

4) The program identified Atta in the US several months before he officially entered the US. Isn't this a problem for the official 9/11 story?

5) The Clinton administration did not seem to have trouble with this program.

6) There is a strong sense that most people in Washington would just like to see this story "go away" (hmmm, why would that be?)