This message is available on the Internet at
http://www.WantToKnow.info/051126abledangerlouisfreeh


"The Able Danger intelligence, if confirmed, is undoubtedly the most relevant
fact of the entire post-9/11 inquiry. Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably
concluded that it "was not historically significant." This astounding
conclusion--in combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and
incorporate it into its findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's
credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission
historically insignificant itself."
  -- Former FBI Director Louis Freeh in the Wall Street Journal, 11/17/05

November 26, 2005
Dear friends,

The below Wall Street Journal article, written by former FBI Director Louis
Freeh, is a stinging indictment of the 9/11 commission and of Pentagon
authorities blocking the testimony of key military officers as to foreknowledge
of vital information on the 9/11 attacks. Though this article was published in
one of the world's most respected newspapers, virtually no other major media
reported this major story. Please help to inform others of this important
development by sending this message to your friends and colleagues. Together,
we can and will build a brighter future for us all.

With best wishes,
Fred Burks for the WantToKnow.info Team
Former language interpreter for Presidents Bush and Clinton


http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007559

An Incomplete Investigation
Why did the 9/11 Commission ignore "Able Danger"?


BY LOUIS FREEH
Thursday, November 17, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

It was interesting to hear from the 9/11 Commission again on Tuesday. This
self-perpetuating and privately funded group of lobbyists and lawyers has
recently opined on hurricanes, nuclear weapons, the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel and
even the New York subway system. Now it offers yet another "report card" on the
progress of the FBI and CIA in the war against terrorism, along with its
"back-seat" take and some further unsolicited narrative about how things ought
to be on the "front lines."

Yet this is also a good time for the country to make some assessments of the
9/11 Commission itself. Recent revelations from the military intelligence
operation code-named "Able Danger" have cast light on a missed opportunity that
could have potentially prevented 9/11. Specifically, Able Danger concluded in
February 2000 that military experts had identified Mohamed Atta by name (and
maybe photograph) as an al Qaeda agent operating in the U.S. Subsequently,
military officers assigned to Able Danger were prevented from sharing this
critical information with FBI agents, even though appointments had been made to
do so. Why?

There are other questions that need answers. Was Able Danger intelligence
provided to the 9/11 Commission prior to the finalization of its report, and,
if so, why was it not explored? In sum, what did the 9/11 commissioners and
their staff know about Able Danger and when did they know it?

The Able Danger intelligence, if confirmed, is undoubtedly the most relevant
fact of the entire post-9/11 inquiry. Even the most junior investigator would
immediately know that the name and photo ID of Atta in 2000 is precisely the
kind of tactical intelligence the FBI has many times employed to prevent
attacks and arrest terrorists. Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably concluded
that it "was not historically significant." This astounding conclusion--in
combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into
its findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if
the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically
insignificant itself.



The facts relating to Able Danger finally started to be reported in mid-August.
U.S. Army Col. Anthony Shaffer, a veteran intelligence officer, publicly
revealed that the Able Danger team had identified Atta and three other 9/11
hijackers by mid-2000 but were prevented by military lawyers from giving this
information to the FBI. One week later, Navy Capt. Scott J. Phillpott, a U.S.
Naval Academy graduate who managed the program for the Pentagon's Special
Operations Command, confirmed "Atta was identified by Able Danger by
January-February of 2000."

On Aug. 18, 2005, the Pentagon initially stated that "a probe" had found nothing
to back up Col. Shaffer's claims. Two weeks later, however, Defense Department
officials acknowledged that its "inquiry" had found "three more people who
recall seeing an intelligence briefing slide that identified the ringleader of
the 9/11 attacks a year before the hijackings and terrorist strikes." These
same officials also stated that "documents and electronic files created by . .
. Able Danger were destroyed under standing orders that limit the military's
use of intelligence gathered about people in the United States." Then in
September 2005, the Pentagon doubled back and blocked several military officers
from testifying at an open Congressional hearing about the Able Danger program.

Two members of Congress, Curt Weldon and Dan Burton, have also publicly stated
that shortly after the 9/11 attacks they provided then-Deputy National Security
Adviser Stephen Hadley with a "chart" containing preattack information collected
by Able Danger about al Qaeda. A spokesperson for the White House has confirmed
that Mr. Hadley "recalled seeing such a chart in that time period but . . . did
not recall whether he saw it during a meeting . . . and that a search of
National Security Council files had failed to produce such a chart."

Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 Commission, reacted to Able Danger with
the standard Washington PR approach. He lashed out at the Bush administration
and demanded that the Pentagon conduct an "investigation" to evaluate the
"credibility" of Col. Shaffer and Capt. Phillpott--rather than demand a
substantive investigation into what failed in the first place. This from a
former New Jersey governor who, along with other commissioners, routinely
appeared in public espousing his own conclusions about 9/11 long before the
commission's inquiry was completed and long before all the facts were in! This
while dismissing out of hand the major conflicts of interest on the commission
itself about obstructions to information-sharing within the intelligence
community!

Nevertheless, the final 9/11 Commission report, released on July 22, 2004,
concluded that "American intelligence agencies were unaware of Mr. Atta until
the day of the attacks." This now looks to be embarrassingly wrong. Yet
amazingly, commission leaders acknowledged on Aug. 12 that their staff in fact
met with a Navy officer 10 days before releasing the report, who "asserted that
a highly classified intelligence operation, Able Danger, had identified Mohammed
Atta to be a member of an al Qaeda cell located in Brooklyn." (Capt. Phillpott
says he briefed them in July 2004.) The commission's statement goes on to say
that the staff determined that "the officer's account was not sufficiently
reliable to warrant revision of the report or further investigation," and that
the intelligence operation "did not turn out to be historically significant,"
despite substantial corroboration from other seasoned intelligence officers.

This dismissive and apparently unsupported conclusion would have us believe that
a key piece of evidence was summarily rejected in less than 10 days without
serious investigation. The commission, at the very least, should have
interviewed the 80 members of Able Danger, as the Pentagon did, five of whom
say they saw "the chart." But this would have required admitting that the
late-breaking news was inconveniently raised. So it was grossly neglected and
branded as insignificant. Such a half-baked conclusion, drawn in only 10 days
without any real investigation, simply ignores what looks like substantial
direct evidence to the contrary coming from our own trained military
intelligence officers.

No wonder the 9/11 families were outraged by these revelations and called for a
"new" commission to investigate. "I'm angry that my son's death could have been
prevented," seethed Diane Horning, whose son Matthew was killed at the World
Trade Center. On Aug. 17, 2005, a coalition of family members known as the
September 11 Advocates rightly blasted 9/11 Commission leaders Mr. Kean and Lee
Hamilton for pooh-poohing Able Danger's findings as not "historically
significant." Advocate Mindy Kleinberg aptly notes, "They [the 9/11 Commission]
somehow made a determination that this was not important enough. To me, that
says somebody there is not using good judgment. And if I'm questioning the
judgment of this one case, what other things might they have missed?" This is a
stinging indictment of the commission by the 9/11 families.



The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, has led the way
in cleaning up the 9/11 Commission's unfinished business. Amid a very full
plate of responsibilities, he conducted a hearing after noting that Col.
Shaffer and Capt. Phillpott "appear to have credibility." Himself a former
prosecutor, Mr. Specter noted: "If Mr. Atta and other 9/11 terrorists were
identified before the attacks, it would be a very serious breach not to have
that information passed along . . . we ought to get to the bottom of it."
Indeed we should. The 9/11 Commission gets an "I" grade--incomplete--for its
dereliction regarding Able Danger. The Joint Intelligence Committees should
reconvene and, in addition to Able Danger team members, we should have the 9/11
commissioners appear as witnesses so the families can hear their explanation why
this doesn't matter.

Mr. Freeh, a former FBI director, is the author of "My FBI" (St. Martin's,
2005).


Note: For other reliable news from the mainstream media on Able Danger, click
here. For some deeply inspiring stories to provide balance this disturbing
information:
http://www.WantToKnow.info/coverupnews#inspiration


See our archive of cover-up news articles at
http://www.WantToKnow.info/coverupnews


Your donations, however large or small, help greatly to support this important
work.
To make a secure donation: http://order.kagi.com/cgi-bin/store.cgi?storeID=6CYJA

Explore these empowering websites coordinated by website founder Fred Burks:
http://www.momentoflove.org - Every person in the world has a heart
http://www.WantToKnow.info - Reliable, verifiable information on major cover-ups
http://www.gcforall.org - Building a Global Community for All
http://www.weboflove.org - Strengthening the Web of Love that interconnects us all
Together, we are building a better world based on love and cooperation

-- To subscribe to or unsubscribe from the WantToKnow.info email list (avg. one
every few days), send an email to wecare@wanttoknow.info with "subscribe deep"
or "unsubscribe deep" in the subject line.

 

---