Danger abled/disabled/abled etc

-----------------------
The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info
-----------------------

Last updated on July 23rd, 2017 at 01:59 pm

The Able Danger story is weaving around like Jimmy Carter’s stoner grandson. At first, it seemed a score against the 9/11 Commission (and Media Watch, believers in the Commission’s version of events). Then serious doubts emerged, partly due to the anonymous nature of primary Able Danger sources. Now we have a name for one source:

[Lt. Col. Anthony] Shaffer said in an interview that the small, highly classified intelligence program known as Able Danger had identified by name the terrorist ringleader, Mohammed Atta, as well three of the other future hijackers by mid-2000, and had tried to arrange a meeting that summer with agents of the F.B.I.‘s Washington field office to share the information.

John Podhoretz: “If he’s telling the truth, then the entire history of the last five years needs to be rewritten.”

Powerline: “At this point, we have absolutely no way to know who is right about Able Danger and Mohammed Atta.”

That’s about where we’re at; somewhere near level, possibly leaning a little towards the Commission. That’ll change, and probably change again, in coming days/weeks.

(Several links via Instapundit, where Glenn is back in the chair)

UPDATE. Captain’s Quarters has further views, specifically examining the Commission’s Clinton coverage.

Posted by Tim B. on 08/17/2005 at 10:11 AM
    1. It all seems pointless to me.  The rules were different before 9/11.  For instance, cooperating with airplane hijackers was the drill.

      Things are different now.  Now passengers will kill a hijacker without being asked.  It’s not as if this isn’t pretty obvious stuff.

      Nobody was looking at things wrong before 9/11.  Muddling through was working and would continue to work forever, was the thinking.  That’s why you cooperate with hijackers, or did.

      Posted by rhhardin on 2005 08 17 at 03:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. Would this qualify as an “known unknown”?

      Posted by Andjam on 2005 08 18 at 01:09 AM • permalink

 

    1. rhhardin,

      Nobody was looking at things wrong before 9/11.  Muddling through was working and would continue to work forever, was the thinking.  That’s why you cooperate with hijackers, or did.

      Terrorism was a matter for Law Enforcement, and not something to concern Foreign Policy or National Defense. Sadly, to the vast majority of the Left, it still is.

      Posted by Spiny Norman on 2005 08 18 at 03:00 AM • permalink

 

    1. Not even that, Spiny—to the vast majority of the Left, it’s a nuisance.  At least that’s what it is in their ideal world, where it’s mostly just suffered by Jews and various ‘brown people’ instead of exposing the leftistas as the craven spineless lickspittle hypocrites they are.

      Posted by Achillea on 2005 08 18 at 06:57 PM • permalink

 

Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the “pending” list and you won’t be able to log in. All accounts that are “pending” for more than one week will be deleted.