Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Text


NORRISTOWN - Senior Pentagon officials were warned not to let the USS Cole dock in Yemen two days before terrorists attacked the ship five years ago killing 17 sailors, according to Congressman Curt Weldon, who said the crucial intelligence was gleaned from the former secret defense operation, "Able Danger."


Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, revealed the information in a House speech last Wednesday evening that blasted the Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) attempts to discredit Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a DIA employee who worked as a liaison with the "Able Danger" team.
In June, Shaffer told The Times Herald during an interview on Capitol Hill that the now-defunct data mining operation had linked Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta to an al-Qaida cell in Brooklyn in 2000 - more than a year before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
The military's Special Operations Command ran the high-tech dragnet that searched for terrorist linkages. The terrorist associations were mapped out on large charts, according to Shaffer and other of "Able Danger" colleagues, during the program that operated between 1999 and 2001.
However, following Shaffer's attempts to broker an arrangement that would draw the FBI into the operation, the program was shut down.
Weldon and Shaffer believe "Able Danger" intelligence may have disrupted - or even prevented - the Sept. 11 attacks if it had continued.
In August, Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott and James D. Smith, a defense contractor, corroborated Shaffer's story.
On Wednesday, Weldon again criticized the Pentagon for dragging its feet in its probe of the defense program's history, and continued his criticism of the CIA, which he said tried to protect its own intelligence turf from other government intelligence agencies.
"What we have here, I am convinced of this now, is an aggressive attempt by CIA management to cover up their own shortcomings in not being able to do what the Able Danger team did," he said.
Besides claiming to identifying Atta from a grainy photograph prior to Sept. 11, the intelligence team also tried to warn the Pentagon not to allow the USS Cole to make a refueling stop in Yemen five years ago, Weldon said.
On Oct. 12, 2000, a small boat loaded with explosives rammed into the side of the USS Cole as the ship refueled in port at Aden, killing the 17 Navy personnel.
"(Able Danger members) also identified the threat to the USS Cole two weeks before the attack, and two days before the attack were screaming not to let the (ship) come into the harbor at Yemen, because they knew something was going to happen," he said.




What else did Clinton know about this disaster? The MSM who bashed condi rice for that memo seem to be ignoring the 8 years prior to the Bush administration.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: zendari
Topic Title: Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole
Topic Summary: Clinton seems to have ignored it

What else did Clinton know about this disaster? The MSM who bashed condi rice for that memo seem to be ignoring the 8 years prior to the Bush administration.

Good, at least he didn't start a false War over lies about non-existent WMD and the wrong man responsible for 9-11.
 

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
1
81
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: zendari
Topic Title: Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole
Topic Summary: Clinton seems to have ignored it

What else did Clinton know about this disaster? The MSM who bashed condi rice for that memo seem to be ignoring the 8 years prior to the Bush administration.

Good, at least he didn't start a false War over lies about non-existent WMD and the wrong man responsible for 9-11.

Dave, I didn't think you would stoop so low as to not mind the deaths of these 17 sailors and the injuries to the other 39. I guess the ends justify the means for you, right? :disgust:
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: zendari
What else did Clinton know about this disaster? The MSM who bashed condi rice for that memo seem to be ignoring the 8 years prior to the Bush administration.

Clinton's out of office. Attacking the current admin, Repubs of Democrats, is where the money's at.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
All Americans should read up and be informed on Able Danger. It's a fascinating group of undercovers who identified Mohammed Atta almost 2 years before 9/11. Evidence was ordered destroyed. Here is the Wiki entry

The project and the few (who were members of Able Danger) that have spoken out about it certainly lead one to believe that Clinton knew more than he claims.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Dave, I didn't think you would stoop so low as to not mind the deaths of these 17 sailors and the injuries to the other 39. I guess the ends justify the means for you, right? :disgust:

Don't be shocked. Dave's claimed that he only cares about Americans if they're Democrats.

Note that he didn't have anything to say about Able Danger itself. Just the usual Dean talking points.
 

aircooled

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
15,965
1
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
All Americans should read up and be informed on Able Danger. It's a fascinating group of undercovers who identified Mohammed Atta almost 2 years before 9/11. Evidence was ordered destroyed. Here is the Wiki entry

The project and the few (who were members of Able Danger) that have spoken out about it certainly lead one to believe that Clinton knew more than he claims.


Maybe they should read this one too:
Bin Ladin determined to Strike in US



 

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
1
81
Originally posted by: Pabster
Just the usual Dean talking points.

Funny that you mention Dean. I attended a Letterman taping a couple of weeks ago while I was on vacation in NYC, and Dean was the guest. Letterman called him out left and right when it quickly became apparent that his only purpose there was to antagonize and exagerate.

During the commerical break, he appeared *very* uncomfortable, and didn't say a thing to anybody.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: aircooled
Originally posted by: Pabster
All Americans should read up and be informed on Able Danger. It's a fascinating group of undercovers who identified Mohammed Atta almost 2 years before 9/11. Evidence was ordered destroyed. Here is the Wiki entry

The project and the few (who were members of Able Danger) that have spoken out about it certainly lead one to believe that Clinton knew more than he claims.


Maybe they should read this one too:
Bin Ladin determined to Strike in US

Clinton has set a precedent for ignoring these things.
 

aircooled

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
15,965
1
0
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: aircooled
Originally posted by: Pabster
All Americans should read up and be informed on Able Danger. It's a fascinating group of undercovers who identified Mohammed Atta almost 2 years before 9/11. Evidence was ordered destroyed. Here is the Wiki entry

The project and the few (who were members of Able Danger) that have spoken out about it certainly lead one to believe that Clinton knew more than he claims.


Maybe they should read this one too:
Bin Ladin determined to Strike in US

Clinton has set a precedent for ignoring these things.

Aug 6 2001 is Bush.



 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: zendari
Originally posted by: aircooled
Originally posted by: Pabster
All Americans should read up and be informed on Able Danger. It's a fascinating group of undercovers who identified Mohammed Atta almost 2 years before 9/11. Evidence was ordered destroyed. Here is the Wiki entry

The project and the few (who were members of Able Danger) that have spoken out about it certainly lead one to believe that Clinton knew more than he claims.


Maybe they should read this one too:
Bin Ladin determined to Strike in US

Clinton has set a precedent for ignoring these things.


LMAO. Hint, bashing Clinton will not resurrect Bush's numbers or make him any less responsible for 2000 deaths based on his agenda of lies that is Iraq. Keep playing.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: umbrella39
LMAO. Hint, bashing Clinton will not resurrect Bush's numbers or make him any less responsible for 2000 deaths based on his agenda of lies that is Iraq. Keep playing.

And bashing Bush won't make Americans forget the misdeeds of Clinton. Thanks for playing.

Do you have anything to add on Able Danger?

 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: zendari
Topic Title: Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole
Topic Summary: Clinton seems to have ignored it

What else did Clinton know about this disaster? The MSM who bashed condi rice for that memo seem to be ignoring the 8 years prior to the Bush administration.

Good, at least he didn't start a false War over lies about non-existent WMD and the wrong man responsible for 9-11.

stay on the topic please
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
I read that entire article, and nowhere did I see anything implicating Clinton. The first sentence alone seems to indicate it was the fault of senior pentagon officials. After all, they knew about the threat and had the power to move the ship, yet did nothing. How is that Clinton's fault?

Regarding the ongoing story of Able Danger and what is generally seen as an intelligence failure in preventing 9/11, I think two things are important here. First, as with any event, hindsight is 20/20. We can look back on the various pieces of intelligence before 9/11 and tie it all together using 9/11 as a starting point. Pre-9/11, that link simply didn't exist, the same kind of analysis would have been much more difficult. Secondly, this makes an excellent case against granting broader powers to any police or intelligence agency. As we're seeing, all the pieces were already there. We had all the information, except we didn't do anything effective with it. Was this for the above reason? Were turf wars the issue? Were there simply not enough resources to do the kind of analysis needed on all the available intelligence? Whatever the reason, this whole story speaks pretty plainly to the reason there was an intelligence failure before 9/11. It wasn't the information that was the problem, it was making good use of that information.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
I guess the topic would be people need to listen to Able Danger.


right?
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: umbrella39
LMAO. Hint, bashing Clinton will not resurrect Bush's numbers or make him any less responsible for 2000 deaths based on his agenda of lies that is Iraq. Keep playing.

And bashing Bush won't make Americans forget the misdeeds of Clinton. Thanks for playing.

Do you have anything to add on Able Danger?

Oh, now you are the post cop! LMAO. Get a life, you have made a job out of ignoring topics to play the circle reference line. Mods pm you again? :laugh:
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: umbrella39
Oh, now you are the post cop! LMAO. Get a life, you have made a job out of ignoring topics to play the circle reference line. Mods pm you again? :LMAO.

You've proven the point. That's two consecutive posts you've made with absolutely nothing to add on (or comment about) Able Danger. Who's the one ignoring topics?
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: zendari
Topic Title: Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole
Topic Summary: Clinton seems to have ignored it

What else did Clinton know about this disaster? The MSM who bashed condi rice for that memo seem to be ignoring the 8 years prior to the Bush administration.

Good, at least he didn't start a false War over lies about non-existent WMD and the wrong man responsible for 9-11.

Dave, I didn't think you would stoop so low as to not mind the deaths of these 17 sailors and the injuries to the other 39. I guess the ends justify the means for you, right? :disgust:

Sorry I don't see the justification of a false and phoney war and lies about WMD correlates revenge for an attack on a Military vessel in such a manner especially with the death of 2,000 ground troops.

Did the 2,000 soldier deaths avenge the death of the 17 sailors for you??? :confused:
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: umbrella39
Oh, now you are the post cop! LMAO. Get a life, you have made a job out of ignoring topics to play the circle reference line. Mods pm you again? :LMAO.

You've proven the point. That's two consecutive posts you've made with absolutely nothing to add on (or comment about) Able Danger. Who's the one ignoring topics?

I guess I just should have posted: and the circle begins. That would be on topic as far as your posting history goes. LMAO. You always have 3 fingers pointing back at your Pabster. That is the funny part. Everything you whine about you are guilty of 10 fold, classic self-loather. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
 

aircooled

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
15,965
1
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: umbrella39
Oh, now you are the post cop! LMAO. Get a life, you have made a job out of ignoring topics to play the circle reference line. Mods pm you again? :LMAO.

You've proven the point. That's two consecutive posts you've made with absolutely nothing to add on (or comment about) Able Danger. Who's the one ignoring topics?

Who's the one ignoring Osama?



 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: aircooled
Who's the one ignoring Osama?

Yeah, who is?

Assuming you're referring to that article you linked -- seen it and commented on it numerous times before. It's no "smoking gun" by any means. There's nothing there, and if there is, why don't you enlighten us?

I'd say you're pretty desperate to try and change the topic mid-course.

 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: aircooled
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: umbrella39
Oh, now you are the post cop! LMAO. Get a life, you have made a job out of ignoring topics to play the circle reference line. Mods pm you again? :LMAO.

You've proven the point. That's two consecutive posts you've made with absolutely nothing to add on (or comment about) Able Danger. Who's the one ignoring topics?

Who's the one ignoring Osama?

Hush now. This thread is about blaming George Washington for causing the attacks of 9/11. Anything to deflect the blame off the current administration.
 

aircooled

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
15,965
1
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: aircooled
Who's the one ignoring Osama?

Yeah, who is?

Assuming you're referring to that article you linked -- seen it and commented on it numerous times before. It's no "smoking gun" by any means. There's nothing there, and if there is, why don't you enlighten us?

I'd say you're pretty desperate to try and change the topic mid-course.

That's comical.. "There's nothing there", hmm 5 days later there sure was.

I'm not desperate to change the subject, I'm just comparing apples to apples, don't show me a report about the cole that clinton dismissed and then say the presidential daily briefing about Osama using airplanes as missles is nothing. that is retarded.



 

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
1
81
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: zendari
Topic Title: Able Danger warned of attack on USS Cole
Topic Summary: Clinton seems to have ignored it

What else did Clinton know about this disaster? The MSM who bashed condi rice for that memo seem to be ignoring the 8 years prior to the Bush administration.

Good, at least he didn't start a false War over lies about non-existent WMD and the wrong man responsible for 9-11.

Dave, I didn't think you would stoop so low as to not mind the deaths of these 17 sailors and the injuries to the other 39. I guess the ends justify the means for you, right? :disgust:

Sorry I don't see the justification of a false and phoney war and lies about WMD correlates revenge for an attack on a Military vessel in such a manner especially with the death of 2,000 ground troops.

Did the 2,000 soldier deaths avenge the death of the 17 sailors for you??? :confused:

Why are you trying to change the subject?

What's the first word in your original reply?

"Good"

'nuff said. Once again, I'm sorry you felt you had to stoop to such disgusting hackery.