< -back part 1
Part 2
In 2004, Congressman Curt Weldon (R-PA) and his
staff contacted the Commission to call the Commission's attention
to the Congressman's critique of the U.S. intelligence community.
No mention was made in these conversations of a claim that Mohamed
Atta or any of the other future hijackers had been identified by
DOD employees before 9/11.
In early July 2004, the Commission's point of
contact at DOD called the Commission's attention to the existence
of a U.S. Navy officer employed at DOD who was seeking to be
interviewed by Commission staff in connection with a data mining
project on which he had worked. The DOD point of contact indicated
that the prospective witness was claiming that the project had
linked Atta to an al Qaeda cell located in New York in the
1999-2000 time frame. Shortly after receiving this information, the
Commission staff's front office assigned two staff members with
knowledge of the 9/11 plot and the ABLE DANGER operation to
interview the witness at one of the Commission's Washington, D.C.
offices.
On July 12, 2004, as the drafting and editing
process for the Report was coming to an end (the Report was
released on July 22, and editing continued to occur through July
17), a senior staff member, Dieter Snell, accompanied by another
staff member, met with the officer at one of the Commission's
Washington, D.C. offices. A representative of the DOD also attended
the interview.
According to the memorandum for the record on this
meeting, prepared the next day by Mr. Snell, the officer said that
ABLE DANGER included work on link analysis, ? mapping links among
various people involved in terrorist networks. According to this
record, the officer recalled seeing the name and photo of Mohamed
Atta on an 'analyst notebook chart' assembled by another officer
(who he said had retired and was now working as a DOD
contractor).
The officer being interviewed said he saw this
material only briefly, that the relevant material dated from
February through April 2000, and that it showed Mohamed Atta to be
a member of an al Qaeda cell located in Brooklyn. The officer
complained that this information and information about other
alleged members of a Brooklyn cell had been soon afterward deleted
from the document ("redacted") because DOD lawyers were concerned
about the propriety of DOD intelligence efforts that might be
focused inside the United States. The officer referred to these as
posse comitatus restrictions. Believing the law was being wrongly
interpreted, he said he had complained about these restrictions up
his chain of command in the U.S. Special Operations Command, to no
avail.
The officer then described the remainder of his
work on link analysis efforts, until he was eventually transferred
to other work. The officer complained about how these methods were
being used by the Defense Intelligence Agency, and mentioned other
concerns about U.S. officials and foreign
governments.
At the time of the officer's interview, the
Commission knew that, according to travel and immigration records,
Atta first obtained a U.S. visa on May 18, 2000, and first arrived
in the United States (at Newark) on June 3, 2000. Atta joined up
with Marwan al-Shehhi. They spent little time in the New York area,
traveling later in June to Oklahoma and then to Florida, where they
were enrolled in flight school by early July.
The interviewee had no documentary evidence and
said he had only seen the document briefly some years earlier. He
could not describe what information had led to this supposed Atta
identification. Nor could the interviewee recall, when questioned,
any details about how he thought a link to Atta could have been
made by this DOD program in 2000 or any time before 9/11. The
Department of Defense documents had mentioned nothing about Atta,
nor had anyone come forward between September 2001 and July 2004
with any similar information. Weighing this with the information
about Atta's actual activities, the negligible information
available about Atta to other U.S. government agencies and the
German government before 9/11, and the interviewer's assessment of
the interviewer's knowledge and credibility, the Commission staff
concluded that the officer's account was not sufficiently reliable
to warrant revision of the report or further
investigation.
We have seen press accounts alleging that a DOD
link analysis had tied Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi (who had arrived
in the U.S. shortly before Atta on May 29) to two other future
hijackers, Hazmi al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, in 1999-2000. No
such claim was made to the Commission by any witness. Moreover, all
evidence that was available to the Commission indicates that Hazmi
and Mihdhar were never on the East coast until 2001 and that these
two pairs of future hijackers had no direct contact with each other
until June 2001.
The Commission did not mention ABLE DANGER in its
report. The name and character of this classified operation had
not, at that time, been publicly disclosed. The operation itself
did not turn out to be historically significant, set against the
larger context of U.S. policy and intelligence efforts that
involved Bin Ladin and al Qaeda. The Reportâ's description of
military planning against al Qaeda prior to 9/11 encompassed this
and other military plans. The information we received about this
program also contributed to the Commission's depiction of
intelligence efforts against al Qaeda before 9/11.
[ Edited Sat Aug 13 2005, 05:07PM
]
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
ewing2001, Tue Aug 16 2005,
04:37PM
Rudy Dekkers (Huffman Aviation) speaks out about
Able Danger.
Take it with a grain of salt :)
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050816/NEWS/508160425
Former flight school owner says U.S. intelligence
failure ruined his life
August 16, 2005
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
freedomfiles, Tue Aug 16 2005,
07:44PM
Daniel Hopsicker also released an article related
to Able Danger :
Army Intel Unit Exposes Massive FBI 9.11
Cover-Up
August 12,2005-Venice, FL.
by Daniel Hopsicker
http://www.madcowprod.com/08122005.html
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
PerpetualYnquisitive, Tue Aug 23 2005,
03:31AM
Able Danger Intel Exposed
"Protected" Heroin Trafficking
August 17,2005-Venice, FL.
by Daniel Hopsicker
Mohamed Atta was protected from official scrutiny
as part of an officially-protected cocaine and heroin trafficking
network with ties to top political figures, including Republican
officials Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, and it was this
fact—and not the “terrible lapses” of “weak
on terror” Clinton Administration officials cited by
Republican Congressman Curt Weldon—which shielded him from
being apprehended before the 9.11 attack.
Weldon alleges that Pentagon lawyers rejected the
military intelligence unit’s recommendation to apprehend Atta
because he was in the country legally, and therefore information on
him could not be shared with law enforcement.
But the “terrible lapses” cited by
Weldon do not stem from the nonsensical assertion that Atta had a
green card (he did not) which rendered him immune from military
investigation but were the result of an officially-protected heroin
trafficking operation being conducted on planes like those of Wally
Hilliard, whose Lear jet flew "milk runs" down and back to
Venezuela every week for 39 weeks in a row before finally running
afoul of local DEA agents not been clued-in on the
'joke.'
Full article and
video:http://www.madcowprod.com/08172005.html
Thanks to Mr. Hopsicker for providing more
evidence that shows Atta was a drug trafficker and NOT a suicide
pilot.
Gotta love it when people provide information that
contradicts their very own assertation.
See this
thread:http://team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?7.114.10
Hopsicker knows it was Mohammed Atta piloting
Flight 11 because Atta was a psychopath (breakfornews interview
that I have).
With proof like that who needs
evidence?
Dan, you Da Man. o+o)
yvan eht nioj
[ Edited Tue Aug 23 2005, 03:33AM
]
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
ewing2001, Tue Aug 23 2005,
03:33PM
I respect Hopsicker for his research but
respectfully disagree with his conclusion :)
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
PerpetualYnquisitive, Tue Aug 23 2005,
04:16PM
ewing2001 said ...
I respect Hopsicker for his research but
respectfully disagree with his conclusion :)
Ditto, I would be happy to buy Hopsicker a beer
anytime that he makes it to the GTA area, on the other hand, for
his arch nemesis,
Mike Ruppert, I'd only buy him a Beer
NUT.
I love how he "proved" that Dick Cheney planned
and ran 9/11 in his great Opus Crossing The Rubes I've
Conned.
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
ewing2001, Tue Aug 23 2005,
06:56PM
Second Officer Says 9/11 Leader Was Named Before
Attacks
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/politics/23intel.html
By PHILIP SHENON
Published: August 23, 2005
WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 - An active-duty Navy captain
has become the second military officer to come forward publicly to
say that a secret intelligence program tagged the ringleader of the
Sept. 11 attacks as a possible terrorist more than a year before
the attacks.
The officer, Scott J. Phillpott, said in a
statement on Monday that he could not discuss details of the
military program, which was called Able Danger, but confirmed that
its analysts had identified the Sept. 11 ringleader, Mohamed Atta,
by name by early 2000. "My story is consistent," said Captain
Phillpott, who managed the program for the Pentagon's Special
Operations Command. "Atta was identified by Able Danger by
January-February of 2000."..."
NOTE:
Officer listed here:
http://www.npc.navy.mil/NR/rdonlyres/F4E99A94-CD0E-44F6-B5B9-382FBE4C74B2/0/FY05SurfaceMajorCommandEligibleList.doc
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
PerpetualYnquisitive, Tue Aug 23 2005,
10:14PM
Investigative Report
What They Knew; When They Knew It
Posted May 27, 2002
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
A fountainhead of new clues to the Sept. 11
attacks and the far-flung international network that spawned them
is becoming public, apparently fed by heavily partisan cries of a
massive intelligence failure on the part of the Bush
administration. Democrats on Capitol Hill, led by Senate Majority
Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), are demanding creation of a special
investigation to determine possible Bush-administration
misfeasance.
http://tinyurl.com/c72qr
Caption under the photo in the above
article.
Democrats Daschle and Gephardt complained about
Bush but not Clinton. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) revealed U.S.
Special Forces identified the al-Qaeda network and had a plan to
wipe out the cells two years ago. But DoD brass shied from
implementing the project. Weldon calls for investigating all early
warnings.
Was this the opening gambit to "out" Able
Danger?
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
ewing2001, Thu Aug 25 2005,
03:09PM
...here are some highlights from a new Village
Voice/James Ridgeway article, which of course also doesn't include
anything new for the plotline, however only Chicago Tribune and
many german mainstream papers wrote about this so far, years
ago.
The article ignores, that Atta's 'contact' Marmoun
Darkanzali was almost hired as an informant by CIA officer Thomas
Volz.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0534,mondo1,67096,6.html
Errors of Commission
by James Ridgeway, with Natalie
Wittlin
August 23rd, 2005
"...By 1998, Atta was living in a Hamburg
apartment (later found to be an Al Qaeda cell) and under
surveillance by German intelligence. The Germans were passing along
what they knew to the CIA. There are suggestions that Atta may have
been known to U.S. intelligence as far back as 1993 and, according
to the German press, the CIA itself had other people in the
apartment under surveillance...
...In 2004, the German prosecutor who was in
charge of the investigation was scheduled to testify about this
Hamburg cell to the 9-11 Commission. But his testimony was
unexpectedly canceled. The documents from the investigation are
reported to be missing..."
[ Edited Thu Aug 25 2005, 03:12PM
]
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
ewing2001, Sat Aug 27 2005,
04:38PM
Real Reason for Able Danger-"leaks": Scripting
9/11 ties with China?
In today's NY Post we're finally getting some
clues, what other reasons than to reinforce the official plotline
of 9/11, the story of Able Danger might have:
Scripting somehow 9/11 ties with China, to build
up a psyOP for the big endgame between Russia, China and
US.
Able Danger was a setup and trojan against China
from the beginning, distracting from other already confirmed 9/11
patsie-surveillance teams,
which had nothing to do with the military
operation of 9/11 anyway.
http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/52673.htm
August 27, 2005
"...The private contractors working for the
counter-terrorism unit Able Danger lost their jobs in May 2000. The
firings following a series of analyses that Pentagon lawyers feared
were dangerously close to violating laws banning the military from
spying on Americans, sources said.
The Pentagon canceled its contract with the
private firm shortly after the analysts — who were working on
identifying al Qaeda operatives —
produced a particularly controversial chart
on proliferation of sensitive technology to China, the sources
said...
...the program also spat out scores of names of
other former government officials with legitimate ties to
China,
as well as prominent American
businessmen...
...A Pentagon official said last night that, while
the canned contractors worked for Able Danger, the China project
was separate from the counter-terrorism
assignment.
The Able Danger work was transferred to another
Department of Defense contractor —
and the program quietly expired later that
year when it was completed, the official said.
The China chart was put together by James Smith,
who confirmed yesterday that his contract with the military was
canceled
and he was fired from his company because the
military brass became concerned about the focus on U.S.
citizens..."
NOTE:
Since 9/11, Bill Gertz ("The China Threat") ,
defense and national security reporter for The Washington Times,
tries to tie 9/11 with China
and also insisted to claim before the
invasion of Iraq, that China may still be helping Iraq upgrade its
air defenses.
Gertz has been a guest lecturer at the FBI
National Academy in Quantico, Va.; the Central Intelligence
Agency;
the National Defense University at Fort McNair,
Washington, DC; and the Brookings Institution, Washington,
DC.
Gertz was also supported by Maj. Gen. John K.
Singlaub, former CIA deputy chief in South Korea, by refering to
the book "Unrestricted Warfare”
by Senior Cols. Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, who
apparently wrote in 1999 that an attack by bin Laden on the World
Trade Center
would be just the type of "unrestricted
warfare” that could bring down America.
http://www.newsmaxstore.com/nms/showdetl.cfm?DID=6&Product_ID=889&CATID=13&GroupID=58&CFID=238447&CFTOKEN=40146912
1999 was also the same year, when an allegeged
accidentally attack on the Chinese Embassy was the official excuse
to postpone an assassination attempt
on Bin Laden on hold, which should have taken
place 2 weeks later. The team was organised by "anonymous" Michael
Scheurer,
as revealed last year by Vanity
Fair:
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=859
".....the missiles were on place, and everything
seemed like a go....
But earlier that month, outdated intelligence had
caused the United States to mistakenly bomb the Chinese Embassy in
Belgrade.
It appears that Tenet's assessment that the
intelligence had only a 50/50 chance of being accurate helped kill
the operation...
The US, Russia or China wants to win the endgame
of WW3/4, to rule the world.
That's also the reason, why all these nations
cover up the truth about 9/11 and use the bogus war on terrorism as
a cover,
to build up for the final phase.
This week, a wargame by China and Russia revealed,
that the timetable against US is set.
End of war game, China lays out spread for
Russia
Saturday, August 27, 2005
‘...Through the exercises, the two armed
forces... improved their capabilities to meet new challenges and
threats and to fight international terrorism,
extremism and separatism,’’ Xinhua
quoted Chinese Defence Minister Cao Gangchuan as
saying..."
[ Edited Sat Aug 27 2005, 05:04PM
]
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
PerpetualYnquisitive, Sat Aug 27 2005,
10:27PM
ewing2001 said ...
Real Reason for Able Danger-"leaks": Scripting
9/11 ties with China?
In today's NY Post we're finally getting some
clues, what other reasons than to reinforce the official plotline
of 9/11, the story of Able Danger might have:
Scripting somehow 9/11 ties with China, to build
up a psyOP for the big endgame between Russia, China and
US.
Able Danger was a setup and trojan against China
from the beginning, distracting from other already confirmed 9/11
patsie-surveillance teams, which had nothing to do with the
military operation of 9/11 anyway.
China has been targeted as having masterminded
9/11 as far back as late 2001, as shown by; Seeds Of
Fire:
China and the Story Behind the Attack on America
by Gordon Thomas. I just happen to have a copy and will be reading
through it again this week
(it's been 3 years since I first read it in
September 2002).
And now for another Able Danger
infobit.
Able Danger adds twist to 9/11
9/11 Ringleader connected to secret Pentagon
operation
by Dr. Daniele Ganser
August 27, 2005
ISN Security Watch
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
We bring to the attention of our readers this
important analysis of Dr. Daniele Ganser of the Zurich Polytechnic
published by the International Relations and Security Network
(ISN). Dr Ganser's study is based on official US documents and
reports. It identifies the role of 9/11 ringleader Mohammed
Atta
and 3 other hijackers in a secret Pentagon
operation. It largely refutes the official US government narrative
as presented by the 9/11 Commission.
Four years after the 11 September 2001 attacks on
the US, the revelation of a top secret Pentagon operation adds a
new twist to a story about which we still know very
little.
For the past four years, we have been told by the
administration of George Bush and by the official 9/11 Commission
report of Chairman Thomas Kean and Executive Director Philip
Zelikow that Egyptian extremist Mohammed Atta was the key player in
the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks.
Atta, according to the Kean report, was the
“tactical leader of the 9/11 plot”. He was the pilot
who on that dreadful morning flew the first plane,
American Airlines 11, into the North Tower of the
World Trade Center in New York. It was Atta’s face, on
television and in newspapers across the world,
that became the symbol of Islamic terrorism. And
it was Atta’s name - not the names of any of the 18 other
hijackers allegedly lead by Atta on that day
- that was cited by international security
researchers. Atta was, as the Kean report stresses, “the
tactical commander of the operation in the United States”.
According to both the Bush administration and the official 9/11
Commission report, he was working on the orders of Osama Bin Laden
who,
from remote Afghanistan, controlled the entire
operation.
Now, almost exactly four years after 9/11, the
facts appear to have been turned upside down. We now learn that
Atta was also connected to a top secret operation of the
Pentagon’s Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in the US.
According to Army reserve Lieutenant-Colonel Anthony
Shaffer,
a top secret Pentagon project code-named Able
Danger had identified Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers as
members of an al-Qaida cell
more than a year before the
attacks.
Able Danger was an 18-month highly classified
operation tasked, according to Shaffer, with “developing
targeting information for al-Qaida
on a global scale”, and used data-mining
techniques to look for “patterns, associations, and
linkages”.
He said he himself had first encountered the names
of the four hijackers in mid-2000.
Schaffer himself was fully aware of the delicacy
of his revelations. As such, he chose to first speak to US
lawmaker
and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
(Republican, Illinois) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman
Peter Hoekstra (Republican, Michigan).
Schaffer said the two had assured him that
exposing the secret “was the right thing to
do”.
“I was given assurances we would not
suffer any adverse consequences for bringing this to the attention
of the public,” he said.
The conversations with Hastert and Hoekstra took
place before Schaffer anonymously leaked the information to the
media on 8 August
in the offices of Republican Curt Weldon of
Pennsylvania, the vice chairman of the House Armed Services and
Homeland Security committees
who also supported the exposure of this
secret.
Schaffer’s decision to expose Operation Able
Danger has given rise to some difficult questions, not the least of
which concerns the role of Atta
in the top secret operation. It also raises
the question of whether anyone in the Pentagon knew in advance what
Atta was planning on 9/11.
For now, though, the questions are likely to go
unanswered, as the Pentagon claims there is no evidence to support
allegations
that it had had military intelligence on a
9/11 bomber a year before the attack. The Pentagon has acknowledged
the existence of Operation Able Danger,
but denies claims that it had identified Atta and
three others as early as 1999.
When the “official” facts are turned
upside down, we need to go back to the sources and ask: What do we
really know about 9/11?
Our most important source, Atta himself, is dead.
So for now, there is only Schaffer, a 42-year-old native of Kansas
City, who worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in
Washington at the time of the 9/11 attacks and had insights into
the Pentagon’s top secret operation. According to
Schaffer,
when he informed the FBI and urged them to arrest
Atta, the Pentagon’s lawyers intervened and protected Atta
for reasons that remain unclear.
The official 9/11 Commission report, which
according to its own declaration aimed “to provide the
fullest possible account of the events surrounding
9/11”
in its 567-page report, fails to mention Operation
Able Danger or any other US-based SOCOM operations. On the
contrary, in its recommendations
as to how the US could be better protected from
“terrorists” in the future, the Kean report on page 415
suggests that SOCOM be given larger powers
to carry out covert action operations, previously
a domain controlled by the CIA.
The Kean commission also recommended better
oversight in order “to combat the secrecy and
complexity”. Yet, at the same time,
we learn from Schaffer that the Kean commission
did not provide the full story on 9/11, and specifically on Able
Danger. Schaffer,
according to his own testimony, had personally
informed Zelikow about Able Danger. Yet Zelikow covered up this
piece of the puzzle and,
to Schaffer’s frustration and disbelief,
decided not to include this data on the pretext that it was
“not historically relevant”.
If it is true that Zelikow declined to include the
information on Able Danger in the Kean report, and if it is true,
as Zelikow wrote,
that Atta was the “tactical leader of the
9/11 plot”, and if it is furthermore true, as Schaffer
publicly explained, that SOCOM protected Atta
prior to his deadly attack on the US, which
claimed 3,000 lives, then the account as provided by the official
9/11 report is discredited,
and we are faced with a sea of lies and
cover-ups.
Four years after 9/11, we are presented with facts
that are diametrically opposed to the official
narrative.
While the biggest questions remain unanswered and
there is a possibility that they will never be
answered,
the media would do well by the public to be
diligent enough to keep the issue alive and not allow it to be
swept under the rug
in the face of confusion and
complexity.
Dr. Daniele Ganser specializes in secret warfare
and is a Senior Researcher at the Center for Security
Studies.
The opinions contained in this commentary do
not necessarily reflect those of the International Relations and
Security Network (ISN).
The opinions contained in this commentary do not
necessarily reflect those of the ISN.
http://tinyurl.com/ctmrx
More phony 'revelations' to reinforce the 'Evil
Terrorist' angle.
19 Hijackers.
The 'Cribs' of the DoD and the Financial Centre of
America destroyed.
In the game of cribbage, 19 is a dead hand &
is worth Nothing.
P.S. Don't know if you caught this ewing2001, but
I think that you are a Trailblazer 'fan';
Analysis: NSA Intel System Over
Budget
Washington (UPI) Apr 19, 2005
by Pamela Hess
UPI Pentagon Correspondent
Trailblazer - the National Security Agency's
premiere intelligence-modernization project - is several hundred
million dollars over budget and months behind schedule, the
director of the organization has told Congress.
"The cost was greater than anticipated in the
tune, I would say, in hundreds of millions," said Lt. Gen. Michael
Hayden at a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing last
week.
"I would say that we underestimated the costs by,
I would say, a couple to several hundred million, in terms of the
costs."
According to Hayden, the delays in developing the
technology were even "more dramatic" than the
costs.
"When we actually encountered doing this, it was
just far more difficult than anyone anticipated," Hayden
said.
A joint congressional intelligence inquiry into
the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks issued last year warned the
full implementation of Trailblazer
was as much as five years away and "confusion
still exists at NSA as to what will actually be provided by that
program."
The same inquiry highlighted the reason why
something like Trailblazer was so necessary. In June 2002 it was
leaked to the media
that the NSA had intercepted Arabic messages
on Sept. 10, 2001. They were not translated until Sept. 12. They
said:
"The match begins tomorrow," and "Tomorrow is
zero" day.
Trailblazer was conceived in 2000 as a program to
organize and manage the vast amounts of data collected every day by
the nation's signals intelligence system.
The NSA intercepts huge volumes of electronic
signals put out by satellites, radios, telephones, fax machines,
pagers, cell phones,
and electronic messages and Internet sites, among
other things.
"The more success you have with regard to
collection, the more you're swimming in an ocean of data," Hayden
explained last week.
"So what Trailblazer was essentially designed to
do was to help us deal with masses of information
and to turn it into usable thing for
American decision makers."
Ironically, Trailblazer was supposed to be a model
acquisition program that would transform the way the NSA did
business,
allowing it to ride the wave of technological
innovation in the private sector.
The Trailblazer approach rejected the
traditionally expensive government method of defining specific
requirements and
schedules in favor of allowing industry to be
flexible and innovative.
In a 2001 news release NSA lauded its own
"heightened level of acquisition discipline"
that would be used as it pursued the
development of the Trailblazer project.
It was an expensive lesson in how not to develop
sophisticated new technologies, Hayden said.
"We learned within Trailblazer that when we asked
industry for something they had or something close to what they
already had,
they were remarkable in providing us a
response, an outcome. When we asked them for something that no one
had yet invented,
they weren't any better at inventing it than we
were doing it ourselves," Hayden said.
The better approach is "far more cooperative,"
with the government customer closely involved in monitoring the
progress of the program.
"There's a middle ground between doing it
ourselves and just exporting the problem," he
said.
In 2002 NSA was heading in the opposite direction.
Hayden told a congressional committee he was
increasingly
relying on the private sector for technology
development.
"In terms of 'buy vs. make' (the term Congress has
used), we spent about a third of our SIGINT development money this
year making things ourselves.
Next year the number will be 17 percent," he
said.
Trailblazer's diffic ulties also taught the NSA
not to finance attempts to push technology too
far.
"We don't profit by trying to do moon shots, by
trying to take the great leap forward," he said. "We can do a lot
better with incremental improvement,
spiral development. And that's where we are
now with the program."
An NSA spokeswoman said, true to the spiral
development model, some intelligence products developed on the
Trailblazer dime were already in use.
"Although we can't discuss specifics, several
Trailblazer technologies and products have been used successfully
by the intelligence community,
as well as by the Department of Defense since
9/11," spokeswoman Mary Payne told United Press
International.
"Trailblazer has contributed to this agency's
success while the agency has been on a wartime
footing."
She said the Trailblazer contract is being
restructured to speed the development and deployment of its useful
components to NSA projects worldwide.
She would not say how much the restructuring would
add to Trailblazer's bottom line or whether it would further slow
the schedule.
Details of the highly classified Trailblazer
program are few. Neither NSA nor the Senate Intelligence
Committee
will reveal exactly how large the cost overrun is,
the total budget for the project or when it was supposed to be
completed.
However, according to public records Trailblazer
may already be costing the taxpayer twice what was originally
expected.
NSA awarded several small contracts in 2001 of $10
million and $50 million to government contractors who were hired to
help NSA define exactly what Trailblazer would do and how it would
do it.
In 2002 a team led by Science SAIC won the first
large contract of $280 million for 26 months to build a technology
demonstration platform.
Hayden indicated to the committee that the program
already costs $200 million to $300 million more than
that.
SAIC heads the "Digital Network Intelligence" team
comprised of Northrop Grumman, Booz Allen Hamilton, The Boeing
Company,
Computer Sciences Corporation and an SAIC wholly
owned subsidiary, Telcordia Technologies.
http://tinyurl.com/863nz
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
freedomfiles, Sun Aug 28 2005,
04:18PM
Able Danger: Are We Looking In The Right
Direction?
CQ reader Ginetta sent me a message earlier today
regarding some further Able Danger dots that she had
connected.
She read Countdown to Crisis by Kenneth Timmerman
(a book which I have but have not yet read), a book which focuses
on the nascent nuclear threat
from Iran. However, after reading about Able
Danger here at CQ and the numerous questions it raises about our
understanding of al-Qaeda,
Ginetta noticed that a passage at the beginning of
Chapter 24 might connect Able Danger not just to al-Qaeda but to
Iran as well.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005328.php
Archive for the 'Able Danger/9-11'
Category
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/category/uncategorized/able-danger9-11/
Able Danger Controversy
Cooperative Research Forums
http://cooperativeresearch.org/phorum5/read.php?3,423
'Able Danger' Specialist: I Briefed 9/11
Staff
Army officer involved in gleaning Atta intel in
2000 speaks out
Posted: August 17, 2005
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45811
Able Danger - Now They Tell Us
The 9/11 commission report, once much lauded, now
has an awfully big hole
Sunday, August 14, 2005
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05226/553271.stm
Congressional Record: June 27, 2005 (House): Curt
Weldon
http://cryptome.org/weldon-062705.txt
WikiPedia: Able Danger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger
Was Mohammed Atta Overlooked?
New questions about whether the U.S. had
information about the 9/11 mastermind years before the
attacks
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1093694,00.html
[ Edited Mon Aug 29 2005, 12:48AM
]
Re: "Able Danger" vs. Curt Weldon- Propaganda Hoax
or Truth?
freedomfiles, Mon Aug 29 2005,
12:57AM
NEXT PART 3
Able Danger part
1
Able Danger
part 2
Able Danger part
3
Able Danger part
4
Able Danger part
5
related
SAIC
Michael Hayden 9/11
connection NSA
Khashoggi, Part
35: Fear and Loathing at the NSA
Computer Sciences
Corporation CSC - SAIC NSA Digital Rights
Management...
Mantech,
BAE, CACI, NSA SAIC etc... - 9/11Review
Operation Able Danger
9/11 review
Cong. Curt
Weldon to probe top-secret 9-11 Cambone notes?
Rebuttal to the
IG's Able Danger Report
Articles
By Alex Constantine - NSA CIA links to terror
911review.org
Homepage