Log in

View Full Version : 9/11 cover....at highest level?


Qdrop
10-06-2005, 09:49 AM
from back in september:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9342936/

Congressman: Atta papers destroyed on orders
Pentagon denies having any documents on lead hijacker prior to 9/11


WASHINGTON - A Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy documents that identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist two years before the 2001 attacks, a congressman said Thursday.

The employee is prepared to testify next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee and was expected to identify the person who ordered him to destroy the large volume of documents, said Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa.

Weldon declined to identify the employee, citing confidentiality matters. Weldon described the documents as “2.5 terabytes” — as much as one-fourth of all the printed materials in the Library of Congress, he added.


A Senate Judiciary Committee aide said the witnesses for Wednesday's hearing had not been finalized and could not confirm Weldon’s comments.

Pentagon: Nothing found
Army Maj. Paul Swiergosz, a Pentagon spokesman, said officials have been “fact-finding in earnest for quite some time.”

“We’ve interviewed 80 people involved with Able Danger, combed through hundreds of thousands of documents and millions of e-mails and have still found no documentation of Mohamed Atta,” Swiergosz said.

He added that certain data had to be destroyed in accordance with existing regulations regarding “intelligence data on U.S. persons.”

Did program exist?
Weldon has said that Atta, the mastermind of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and three other hijackers were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as “Able Danger,” which determined they could be members of an al-Qaida cell.

On Wednesday, former members of the Sept. 11 commission dismissed the “Able Danger” assertions. One commissioner, ex-Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., said, “Bluntly, it just didn’t happen and that’s the conclusion of all 10 of us.”

Weldon responded angrily to Gorton’s assertions.

“It’s absolutely unbelievable that a commission would say this program just didn’t exist,” Weldon said Thursday.

Pentagon officials said this month they had found three more people who recall an intelligence chart identifying Atta as a terrorist prior to the Sept. 11 attacks.

Two military officers, Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, have come forward to support Weldon’s claims.

----------

that's from last month...but i've yet to hear a follow up on this story.
anyone else?

YoungRemy
10-06-2005, 09:52 AM
but he was there on 9/11.
he was filmed going through security checkpoints at Newark airport.


does this report suggest he was an innocent victim, killed on 9/11?

Qdrop
10-06-2005, 10:01 AM
oh look:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9601246/

No disciplinary review for 9/11 failures of Tenet
CIA director bars accountability review for his predecessor, others

Updated: 4:44 p.m. ET Oct. 5, 2005

WASHINGTON - Contrary to recommendations, CIA Director Porter Goss will not order disciplinary reviews for the agency’s former director George Tenet and other officials who have come under fire for their performance before the attacks of Sept 11, 2001.

In a statement Wednesday, Goss said a report by the agency’s independent watchdog did not suggest “that any one person or group of people could have prevented 9/11.”

“After great consideration of this report and its conclusion, I will not convene an accountability board to judge the performances of any individual CIA officers,” he said.


Half of those named in the report have retired from the agency. “Those who are still with us are amongst the finest we have,” Goss added.

A joint congressional inquiry investigating 9/11 asked the CIA’s inspector general to review whether any agency officials should be held personally accountable and disciplined for failures before the suicide hijackings.

Spanning hundreds of pages, the report completed this summer recommended accountability reviews for former director Tenet and other current and former officials. Limited details have been provided by individuals familiar with report who spoke only on condition of anonymity because it remains classified.

Qdrop
10-06-2005, 10:04 AM
but he was there on 9/11.
he was filmed going through security checkpoints at Newark airport.


does this report suggest he was an innocent victim, killed on 9/11?

no, the claim is that the US gov't had no knowledge of him being a terrorist...thus could not have stopped him from engaging the 9/11 attacks.

Qdrop
10-06-2005, 10:42 AM
Qdrop having an epiphany about 9/11?

Why were alot of papers destroyed?

Where's the evidence?

Who is really to blame?

I'm sure Beth could elaborate on some of this...

slow down, killer.
i'm not alluding to a US led conspiracy on 9/11 (that the US planned it)...

just that our Gov't fucked up the intell in the worst way....failing to spot and stop it...
and is now covering it's ass....

Qdrop
10-06-2005, 11:10 AM
I didn't allude to the fact that you thought the U.S. did the act.,But unfortunately covering their asses for their failures is just as bad..

and you know it

no YOU know it....

so there.

Jasonik
10-06-2005, 12:09 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger

sam i am
10-10-2005, 11:12 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger


PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE STOP quoting Wikipedia!

IT is NOT reliable!

Ali
10-12-2005, 01:30 AM
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE STOP quoting Wikipedia!

IT is NOT reliable!It is the most peer-reviewed knowledge database available!

If you find anything you disagree with on there, you are at liberty to change it. Anything with any inaccuracies normally gets fixed in a very short time.

See the FAQ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Overview_FAQ)

Who is responsible for the articles on Wikipedia?
You are! As are more than a quarter million other Wikipedians. This is a collaborative endeavor. Thousands of people have contributed to different parts of this project, and anyone can do so, including you. All you need is to know how to edit a page, and have some encyclopedic knowledge you want to share. The encyclopedia provides users with a certain amount of freedom.
You can learn who is responsible for the most recent versions of any given page by clicking on the "Page history" link. Nevertheless, if you spot an error in the latest revision of an article, you are highly encouraged to be bold and correct it. This practice is one of the basic review mechanisms that maintains the reliability of the encyclopedia.
If you are uncertain or find the wording confusing, quote the material on the associated talk page and leave a question for the next person. This helps eliminate errors, inaccuracies, or misleading wording more quickly and is highly appreciated by the community How can this be a bad thing?

Please could you provide an example of an inaccuracy in Wikipedia, in order to back up your dismissal of it?

Please also explain why your correction of said inaccuracy was rejected.

Jasonik
10-12-2005, 12:43 PM
http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200509260809.asp