For starters, he shouldn't be surprised. He had to know that the discussion would veer towards classified information that the Committee could obtain behind closed doors. If he didn't know that this would happen, then he isn't as smart as people think he is.
The country deserves to know what happened to the Able Danger data, both with respect to Atta, but also apparently with data collected on the eve of the USS Cole attack. Who called for the data to be destroyed, even if it was by the book. Surely, that piece of information isn't classified.
We need to get a handle on the process, not just the substance of Able Danger. How was information processed by Able Danger and passed on to others in the intelligence community. Are the deficiencies in that process still prevelant today? Are there new problems? Has the consolidation of homeland security improved or weakened the intel gathering capabilities?
Then, we can sink our teeth into the 9/11 Commission's failures to provide an honest accounting of pre 9/11 intel, which includes Able Danger and other data conveniently omitted from the report.
UPDATE:
FrontPageMag's WarBlogger provides some additional information about today's events. Lt. Col. Shaffer believes that word came down from Sec. Def. Rumsfeld himself to stop Pentagon employees from testifying. Further, there's the followinng information that needs followup:
However, Shaffer says that former Major Eric Kleinstadt, now a civilian contractor, will still testify at the panel. Kleinstadt received the orders to destroy the Able Danger database. Specter's insistence that the hearings go forward probably hinges on Kleinstadt's ability to testify to the information that got destroyed, who ordered its destruction, and why. From that point, the committee could unravel an entire command sequence that will uncover how Able Danger got missed by the 9/11 Commission.
Another interesting fact got mentioned in Shaffer's interview. He spoke about a Dr. Eileen Pricer. One of the more mysterious potential sources of the Able Danger story involved a female PhD that could corroborate Shaffer and Phillpott, the woman who actually developed the Atta identification in the first place. I Googled Eileen Pricer and got just one hit -- but it's a doozy.
It turns out that Dr. Pricer testified before a closed session of Congressional subcommittee on national security exactly one month after 9/11. That testimony isn't available, but Rep. Christopher Shays mentions her on the record in the next day's public testimony...
UPDATE:
Others blogging today's Able Danger information: Michelle Malkin (who provides a good roundup of the key AD bloggers), Dr. Sanity live blogged the hearing, AJStrata wonders why the groundrules couldn't be established to permit people to testify as to process without worrying about potential releases of classified information, and Andy McCarthy weighs in as well.
UPDATE:
Junkyardblog considers Able Danger to be the battle that the Pentagon doesn't want to fight:
If the Pentagon is reticent to confirm Lt Col Shaffer's story, you have two data points to consider as reasons why. One, the likely involvement of NSA, the most secretive and most effective (largely because it's so secretive) intel agency we have. They stay out of the limelight and generally because of that run rings around the CIA. Anything that puts a spotlight on NSA is bad, so that in and of itself could be a reason to pour cold water on Able Danger. The second data point is that it could boomerang around on the Army Chief of Staff if he was in any way involved in bottling up Able Danger in his old command. The Pentagon does not want this scandal, not now and not ever. So I'll be surprised if they say anything interesting anytime in the next hundred years about Able Danger.
Technorati: Able Danger, weldon, and 9/11
No comments:
Post a Comment