It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Congressman: Classified Intelligence Unit Knew Of 9/11 Terrorists In 1999

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Republican congressman, Curt Weldon, who serves as vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, has claimed a classified military intelligence unit codenamed Able Danger knew of Mohammed Atta and the 9/11 terrorist cell on U.S soil in 1999. The unit recommended that the FBI be informed of the terrorist cell "so they could bring that cell in and take out the terrorists". The Pentagon denied the request to inform the FBI citing that they are forbidden to share intelligence on the men because they were legally in the country.
 



news.yahoo.com
Rep. Curt Weldon, a Pennsylvania Republican who serves as vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, said a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger" identified the men in 1999.

That's an earlier link to al-Qaida than any previously disclosed intelligence about Atta if the information, which Weldon said came from multiple intelligence sources, is true.

A group of 9/11 widows called the September 11th Advocates issued a statement Wednesday saying they were "horrified" to learn that further possible evidence exists, and they are disappointed the 9/11 Commission report is "incomplete and illusory."

"The revelation of this information demands answers that are forthcoming, clear and concise," the statement said. "The 9/11 attacks could have and should have been prevented."

With the 9/11 commission disbanded for a year under provisions of the legislation that created it, some of the panel's members have said congressional committees should investigate Weldon's assertions.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


This is a revelation. The source of this information is a congressman who is vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security commitees no less. He is a credible source with no reason to lie. The 9/11 commission was intentionally misled into believing the government knew absolutely nothing about the 9/11 terrorist attack before it occured. This proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that the government was well aware of terrorists plotting an attack on American soil as early as 1999.

The Pentagon's excuse for not sharing the information with the FBI is false. Mohammed Atta and his cronies were in American on visas so the Pentagon was legally allowed to share its intel with them.

This story broke yesterday, less than an hour before the ATS server change overs. I was in the process of submitting this story when ATSNN was changed to read-only. Now, this story is no where to be see in the main stream media. Please do not let this story die. This is proof positive of a cover-up.

[edit on 10/8/05 by subz]

[edit on 10-8-2005 by John bull 1]

[edit on 11-8-2005 by John bull 1]




posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   


The 9/11 commission was intentionally misled into believing the government knew absolutely nothing about the 9/11 terrorist attack before it occured. This proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that the government was well aware of terrorists plotting an attack on American soil as early as 1999.


As an honest question--I truly have no idea how plausible this is--what are the odds that this will cause a re-opening of the case or even an entirely new investigative commitee on the topic? While this information may not in itself make much of a difference, there's lots of other stuff that has come to the public's attention since the report was released, and hopefully this is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

As far as knowing there were terrorists plotting an attack, I didn't see that in the article, just that the FBI knew of these terrorists. I'm sure there would be very little reason for them to be here other than to "case" the nation, but at the same time there was no reason for anyone to truly think anything would come of it--not on US soil at least.

Hindsight's 20/20 though, so looking back on it we can put forth all the should've-would've-could've scenarios we want. Doesn't change the fact that
there was (as far as I can see from this article at least) very little evidence in 1999 that Atta et al. were going to do anything special.



The Pentagon's excuse for not sharing the information with the FBI is false. Mohammed Atta and his cronies were in American on visas so the Pentagon was legally allowed to share its intel with them.


Unless I'm mistaken, the Pentagon stated they couldn't share the information because the men were in the country legally. A visa is a method of legally entering the country. I'm sure I'm probably missing some other information regarding the legalities of this, and if I am then by all means correct me. But based just on this quote alone the Pentagon was in the right to not give the information out. I also see backing for that belief based on this quote from the article:



However, because of concerns about pursuing information on "U.S. persons" — a legal term that includes U.S. citizens as well as foreigners admitted to the country for permanent residence — Special Operations Command did not provide the Army information to the FBI.


While I agree it is a cover-up, and they should have released this information much, much sooner, I don't think the fact that the government knew about these men back in '99/2K means they knew or believed anything the magnitude of 9/11 would happen.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:54 PM
link   
They were in the country legally and under visas, but the restriction on the military sharing information with the FBI relates to American citizens, not foreigners with visas. The fact that they were in the country legally didnt make a difference. It was a lie.

Also hindsight is 20/20 but Able Danger knew these guys were terrorists and they should of been arrested. You dont need hindsight to accept that suspected terrorists on American soil should be arrested.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   



Rep. Curt Weldon, a Pennsylvania Republican who serves as vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, said a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger" identified the men in 1999.



Just another fine example of how the Democrats in the Whitehouse at the time had more (Monica) pressing issues than terrorists to deal with.

The February 26, 1993, bombing of the World Trade Center.
The 1996 Khobar Towers attack.
The August 7, 1998, bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
The 1999 identification of the 9/11 attackers.
The October 12, 2000 attack on the USS Cole.

Maybe Ole Billy-Bob should have done something other than Monica and we wouldnt be where we are at now!

(edited to add a word)

[edit on 10-8-2005 by SOCIAL_TAKEOVER]

[edit on 10-8-2005 by SOCIAL_TAKEOVER]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:34 PM
link   
The problem seems to lie within the Pentagon if you ask me. It was the Pentagon's lawyers that ruled any transfer of intelligence from the military to the FBI would be unlawful. But if you wish to partake in partisan time wasting, go ahead.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Well, maybe if Clinton didn't have to expend so much time and effort trying to defend his office against a slavering right-wing witch-hunt, maybe his head would have been in the game and these things would have been a higher priority?

Apparently, the Republican-controlled congress also felt that prosecuting Bill for a few ill-advised hummers was more important than dealing with terrorists in our back yard, as they also had the same level of information as the office of the president.

This is a perfect example of partisan politics run amok. There is enough blame to go around for all.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz
Also hindsight is 20/20 but Able Danger knew these guys were terrorists and they should of been arrested. You dont need hindsight to accept that suspected terrorists on American soil should be arrested.


I don't want to sound like I'm supporting terrorism in any way, but I don't agree with that unless there was proof that they were planning an operation or that they were directly linked with past attacks. I see nothing associated with this article that suggests either of those were the case. Maybe I'm wrong--I don't remember members of the gangs around the town I used to live in getting arrested just because they were gang members.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:46 PM
link   

This is a revelation.

Subz, you have a gift for understatement.
This is huge.

Regardless if the law applies only to US citizens, it is a stupid law, and hopefully it was changed with the PA. Of course, in 1999 we were still in a state of denial and bliss, never expecting that 9/11 was on the horizon.

Listening to the news, the anchor said that Atta's face was actually covered up with a Post-it so as to prevent his identification.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
I posted this some time ago on ATS in regards to a what if President Clinton had acted, the Towers might still be standing !

here is the link.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
The US military is prohibited from performing law enforcement activities on US soil by the POSSE COMITATUS ACT.

The Posse Comitatus Act (18 USC 1385) is a criminal law prohibiting the use of the military to "execute the laws" except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or by Congress. In 1981 this law was slightly modified to allow the US military to assist civilian law enforcement agencies (primarily the USCG) in the combat against drug smuggling into the United States.

However, as most military and ex-military personnel will tell you, there is almost a doctrine of "non-interference" with US law enforcement. The last thing the military wants to do is be perceived as a law enforcement entity. That is a slippery slope down the road to the militarization of our federal government, and almost all US servicemen understand that the military must remain an independent, non-political organization that cannot be a tool of internal political policy for issues internal to the United States.


Ther can never be a Praetorian Guard in the US............

[edit on 10-8-2005 by Pyros]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Not only was the transfer of intelligence a problem subz, but what could we have done? We would have had the who, but not the where or when of 9/11. And the ACLU would have had a field day if we were to preemptively arrest them.

There were a lot of people in America that were paying members of terrorist groups...There still are(Not all of them are Islamic). If an Arab guy back in 2000 who was associated with the groups wanted to take flying lessons well...let him, it was unthinkable what they really had planned. Also lets say we did arrest them or kill them in a gun fight, All the press would say is the men wanted to fly planes oh how horrible. Hell I might have been like wow GW is really overreacting. And then the ACLU comes along and would create an even bigger mess and probably get the guys released and 9/11 is back on.

Now if some guy who is associated with terrorists (Arab or American) today in 2005 wants train to fly planes I will shoot them in the face myself. Its called preventing terrorist attacks.
Text



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 04:10 PM
link   

The Posse Comitatus Act (18 USC 1385) is a criminal law prohibiting the use of the military to "execute the laws" except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or by Congress.

I don't see this as the miltary executing any laws. I see it as sharing intelligence.

It doesn't make sense that the military, who cannot act upon domestic terror plots, be prohibited from sharing that info with the FBI, whose job it is to investigate and protect us.


[edit on 10-8-2005 by jsobecky]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 04:16 PM
link   
if it wasn't atta, it would have been someone else.

Getting rid of john gotti didn't get rid of the mafia.
Does getting rid of UBL mean an end to terrorism ? no

this does not mean 9/11 would have been avoided if we arrested atta.


as long as there aren't enough resources to go around, and there are cretins with the means and the motive, we will be in danger.


sad but true


It doesn't matter what clinton did or the FBI. those animals over there with black hearts and gold wallets are willing to die to harm us.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
So why lie about it? Why withold this evidence from the 9/11 commission? Why wasnt this used to back up the case for the Patriot Act? Something isnt right here and this is more evidence of governmental cover-ups and lies

Also I think you have misunderstood the Posse Commitus Act:


Posse Comitatus clarifications emphasize supportive and technical assistance (e.g., use of facilities, vessels, aircraft, intelligence, tech aid, surveillance, etc.) while generally prohibiting direct participation of DoD personnel in law enforcement (e.g., search, seizure, and arrests)

U.S Coast Guard website

The military was well within its rights to share this information with the FBI. The FBI would of been the agency enforcing American law, not the Pentagon. This is where the ink is deliberately being thrown into the water. There was no legal barrier to Able Danger's intelligence being transfered to the FBI. The Pentagon deliberately obstructed the apprehension of Atta and his fellow terrorists.

They were also deemed terrorists with connections to Al-Qaeda. Otherwise Able Danger wouldnt of pushed for the information to be transfered to the FBI.

This is a cover-up. The Pentagon would not of misinterpreted such an easy law. The Pentagon would of known that the military is only forbidden to spy on U.S citizens, not foreign nationals with entry visas.

[edit on 10/8/05 by subz]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 06:46 PM
link   
You can blame it on Clinton, you can blame it on Bush, but the real blame lies with our ENTIRE Government. The FBI, the CIA, the Pentagon...everyone is to blame.

It seems that our government has forgotten what they were put in office for...to protect America and its people. They're more interested in pointing fingers and trying to get each other thrown out of office at the expense of America than protecting it.



[edit on 10-8-2005 by elderban]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 08:58 PM
link   
The US government had warning of terrorist in the USA back in 1997 by a reporter from Okla. and before by the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism.

Ya'll got to get the book " The Third Terrorist" By Jayna Davis.

Roper



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:00 PM
link   
I concur - Jayna Davis rocks.

Just a little snippet via a great review of her research:

www.laweekly.com...



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:35 PM
link   
I am interested to see how far this little slip up will lead... Because if the government failed to mention this for "some reason" - Imagine how much further the rabbit hole could lead... No Doubt it would be virtually impossible to dig that deep - but I beleive the truth will one day come out - either that or we will be all dead...



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Now, while I understand that this was certainly a screw-up / coverup by the federal government (and agree with the thoughts expressed previously), here's what I see this meaning on the whole to the general public.

Most people in this country won't understand (or even know of) Posse Comitatus, nor will they see through the blantant lie in this story about the sharing of information. Instead, the majority of American people will take this story at face value, and say to themselves, "So, our laws prevented this information from getting into the hands of the people that could have done something about this. Well, we need to change the laws!" Thus, Patriot Act II passes into law with the support of the vast majority of the American public.

It's unfortunate that the general public doesn't open their eyes often enough, and that the government has a surplus of wool to pull over.....



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Republican (Pennsylvania) Congressman Curt Weldon exposed the information concerning the Able Danger chart.

Able Danger team was created in 1999 under a directive signed by General Henry H. Sheldon, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to assemble information about Al Qaeda networks around the world. By the middle of 2000 the operation had identified Mr. Atta and 3 of the other future hijackers as a member of an American-based cell and that the information was presented that summer in a chart to the Pentagon's Special Operations Command headquarters in Tampa, Florida. The chart included the names and photographs of Mr. Atta and the others, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawar al-Hamzi. Able Danger members recommended that the information be shared with the Federal Bureau of Investigations (and the Central Intelligence Agency), an idea that was rejected.

The 9/11 Commission created by Congress on November 27, 2002 under Public Law 107-306, after months of investigation, never breathed word of Operation Able Danger. Who told the 9/11 Commission to not include this in the final 9/11 Commission Report?

Bush should be placed in an open field and with one swinging 180 degree swoosh, his head should roll into the gutter with the rest of the traitors: Henry Kissinger, Richard Nixon, Woodrow Wilson, Delano Roosevelt, William Clinton, Ronald Reagan, et al.

Again, the American people stand with mouths aghast, and Bush and his cohorts wait out another storm, shift the blame, play the shell game and/or kick the American people (again) in the groin.

Thanks Pissident Bush, I salute you and your staff with one finger.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join