• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Able Danger

I believe Able Danger is authentic. It is arguably a classic but tragic example of governments ability to screw up.

Do you believe that no one here is aware of government agencies chronic tendencies towards screwing up?
 
Able Danger

I had forgoten about it.

Able Danger was a classified military intelligence program under the command of the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM). It was created as a result of a directive from the Joint Chiefs of Staff in early October 1999 by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Hugh Shelton, to develop an Information Operations Campaign Plan against transnational terrorism, "specifically al-Qaida." According to statements by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and confirmed by four others, Able Danger had identified the September 11, 2001 attack leader Mohamed Atta, and three of the 9/11 plot's 19 hijackers, as possible members of an al Qaeda cell linked to the '93 World Trade Center Attacks. Primarily consisting of classified information, all publicly obtained information was approved after a legal review of SOCOM lawyers. If true, the early identification of the four hijackers by Able Danger would contradict the official conclusion of the 9/11 Commission, that American intelligence agencies had not identified Atta as a terrorist prior to the attack.
Click to expand...
 
I'm inclined to believe Able Danger existed. From what I have read the period of Clinton's "reign" with its defence cuts and passive foreign policy was ripe for intelligence personnel to get a hint of "whispers in the corridor" and yet never be able to get a hold of anything tangible that they could act on (or were allowed to act on).

I feel immensly sorry for the military/intelligence/law enforcement personnel who got so close, suspected something was wrong, and yet were stopped because of budget restraints or fear of being criticised for racial profiling or fear of making an international incident or because proposed action was "too high profile".

I think it was policy that failed the US, not incompetent personnel at the coal face.

-Andrew
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom