Demand Mainstream Coverage of ABLE DANGER.

[reprehensor]

Demand Coverage of Able Danger.

The House Armed Services Committee recently held a hearing about the controversial Able Danger data-mining program. The secret intelligence program, which used advanced computerized link and pattern analysis techniques, purportedly identified four 9/11 hijackers a year before the worst terror attacks on American soil.

Analysts associated with the secretive Able Danger program, including Army Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer and Navy Captain Scott Phillpott also say their team passed on warnings to high officials at both Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and Central Command (CENTCOM) about al Qaeda activity in Aden, Yemen before the October 2000 attack there on the USS Cole. Seventeen US military personnel were killed and thirty-nine wounded in the terror attack.

Republican Congressman Curt Weldon believes that the National Commission's work investigating the 9/11 attacks has proven “to be a disappointment and a failure, especially as it pertains to Able Danger.” Possible explanations for this, says Weldon, include “gross incompetence either on the part of the Commissioners or the Commission staff, or both,” or more alarmingly, “a deliberate cover-up that would make the Watergate scandal pale in comparison.”

“The origin of the plot is the key to the 9/11 Commission investigation,” says journalist Peter Lance, who wrote the best seller Cover Up. "I believe the Commission fix was in, however, and that a decision and a deal was made to limit the damage across three administrations to avoid blame and obscure accountability for massive intelligence failures…. The 9/11 Commission is looking more and more like the Warren Commission of our time—an official body that purposely limited the scope of its investigation, cherry-picked evidence, and allowed political considerations on the left and the right to influence its final conclusions."

Petition at link...

[zanne]

1. Why--So we can all blame Clinton? nt

[democraticinsurgent]

3. anything that spotlights 9/11 controversy is good

Clinton may get dragged into it, but so will all of Bushco.

I still can't understand why Weldon is fixated on this. I have to believe that most of Congress is clued into the flaws of the official story even if they don't know what really happened. Having a Republican challenge the official story is the best possible scenario as far as I'm concerned. It's harder for Buscho to "blame the enemy/Democrats" if it's one of their own that's pulling on the curtain.

[reprehensor]

6. Weldon funded the LIWA project...

Which was part of ABLE DANGER. He's got a dog in the fight.

But, yes, he's an a**hole, and must be watched. McKinney is keeping an eye on him for now.

http://reprehensor.gnn.tv/blogs/13036/Tony_Shaffer_s_ABLE_DANGER_Statement_Part_1

[democraticinsurgent]

7. ah, thank you

great link, lots of good info. makes more sense that this would be an attempt at a 2nd coverup, since the first one has failed so miserably.

glad that McKinney is tuned into this. She is a national treasure.

Rick

[Dinger]

4. Exactly. I'd Rather See Coverage Of The Breaking California/DIEbold ...

disaster. Oh my God, this just can't happen. No fucking way.

[reprehensor]

5. No.

It's a common misconception that this is a Dem issue, fueled by Weldon's partisanship.

Fortunately, there are Democrats involved with this investigation, notably Rep. Cythia McKinney and Kucinich, (and most of the CBC). At the hearings on Wednesday, McKinney was there personally to ask questions that Weldon wasn't asking.

If you still think this is a Partisan attack, please bear in mind that Weldon has been on his own with this. At first he DID try to make it a Dem issue, throwing Sandy Berger's name into the mix, for no good reason. He's not doing that anymore.

You see, no Republicans would stand with him on this. Except Shays.

I encourage you to read Lt. Col. Shaffer's written statement on this issue, this is NOT a partisan issue, it's about entrenched power and bureacracy at the DIA, which has been screwing, and continues to screw, with the flow of information.

Clinton isn't blocking this investigation, W's, or rather, Rumsfeld's Pentagon is. Some of the players do extend across two and even three administrations. There is a cover-up afoot.

http://reprehensor.gnn.tv/blogs/13036/Tony_Shaffer_s_ABLE_DANGER_Statement_Part_1

I've transcribed some of this, but there is a PDF of the whole thing at the link.

[Pharaoh]

2. So ya think the MSM will actually cover news?

:eyes: