Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : XLA or SCF from Mass. to Burmuda -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D.Austin who wrote (1061)	9/20/2005 11:54:18 PM
From: D.Austin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1116

Pentagon Hides From Able Danger Hearings. By: AJStrata · Section: Diaries In what has to be one of the dumbest PR moves in recent memory, the Pentagon has barred its people from testifying in the Senate Able Danger hearings tomorrow. The move basically guts any chance Americans have of learning the truth about Able Danger, whether they did ID the 9-11 terrorists in the US, and who was responsible for not allowing the FBI to be alerted to the presence of terrorists in the US. Here are some snippets from my latest post here. The Pentagon pulled a really bad stunt today stopping all the military witnesses to Able Danger from testifying to the Senate: The Pentagon said today that it had blocked a group of military officers and intelligence analysts from testifying at an open Congressional hearing about a highly classified military intelligence program that, the officers have said, identified a ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks as a potential terrorist more than a year before the attacks. The announcement came a day before the officers and intelligence analysts had been scheduled to testify about the program, known as Able Danger, at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Bryan Whitman, a Defense Department spokesman, said in a statement that open testimony about the program "would not be appropriate - we have expressed our security concerns and believe it is simply not possible to discuss Able Danger in any great detail in an open public forum." He offered no other detail on the Pentagon's reasoning in blocking the testimony. There are ways to handle this without exposing classified information. This looks like some kind of cover up or something. I doubt it is - but it will be played that way. How come they couldn't work out rules for discussing the matter without compromising intel? The big questions are policy and responsibility - not intel. That would explain why the posted witness list is a bit sparse as well. From the NY Times article referrenced above Specter is planning to go ahead - but with what? Weldon? We know his story. Mr. Specter said in a telephone interview that he intended to go ahead with the hearing on Wednesday and hoped that it "may produce a change of heart by the Department of Defense in answering some very basic questions." Specter and his staff were evidently convinced there was something to the claims: Mr. Specter said his staff had talked to all five of the potential witnesses and found that "credibility has been established" for all of them. "There are quite a few credible people who are prepared to testify that Mohamed Atta was identified long before 9/11," he said. "Now maybe there's more than one Mohamed Atta. Or maybe there's some mistake. But that's what we're trying to find out." This is only going to feed the conspiracy theorists and cause a PR nightmare. Why can't we find out what happened? Sep 20th, 2005: 23:28:14 --------- judiciary.senate.gov The Chairman Committee Information Committee Rules Online Library Document Request HOME > HEARINGS > SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 "Able Danger and Intelligence Information Sharing " Senate Judiciary Committee Full Committee -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE: September 21, 2005 TIME: 09:30 AM ROOM: 226 Dirksen OFFICIAL HEARING NOTICE / WITNESS LIST: September 8, 2005 NOTICE OF COMMITTEE HEARING RESCHEDULED -- Wed., September 21, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. The hearing on “Able Danger and Intelligence Information Sharing” scheduled by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary for Wednesday, September 14, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 226 of the Senate Dirksen Office Building has been rescheduled to take place on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. By order of the Chairman ----------------------------------------------- Tentative Witness List Hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on “Able Danger and Intelligence Information Sharing” Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:30 a.m. Senate Dirksen Building, Room 226 PANEL I The Honorable Curt Weldon United States Representative [R-PA, 7th District] PANEL II Mark Zaid, Esq. Attorney at Law Washington, DC Erik Kleinsmith former Army Major and Chief of Intelligence of the Land Infomration Warfare Analysis LIWA Project Manager for Intelligence Analytical Training Lockheed Martin Newington, VA PANEL III Gary Bald Executive Assistant Director Counter Terrorism/Counter Intelligence Federal Bureau of Investigation United States Department of Justice Washington, DC William Dugan Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Oversight United States Department of Defense Washington, DC

To: D.Austin who wrote (1061)	10/8/2005 9:19:41 AM
From: D.Austin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1116

Decade of Deceit: The Oklahoma City Bombing During the 9/11 congressional hearings a year ago, there was a common question that the commissioners seemed to enjoy asking: Why was the U.S. not on “war footing” when the 9/11 attack occurred? If the government truly wanted to seek all information regarding intelligence failures leading up to 9/11, the Commission should have asked one of its own members about the Oklahoma City bombing that killed 171 lives (168 plus 3 unborn) a decade ago on April 19, 1995. In one of the biggest cover-ups in the history of the U.S., the federal government purposely avoided investigating incriminating evidence of a plot that pointed directly to Middle East terrorism. The evidence is so extensive and so captivating that I can only hope and suggest that you will read the whole story for yourself. Reno-Gorelick Justice Department Shortly after the Murrah Federal Building was bombed a decade ago on April 19, 1995, Jamie Gorelick, then number two at Janet Reno’s Justice Department, appointed Merrick Garland to be the head prosecutor to lead the government investigation. Soon after being named to lead the investigation, Garland notified Oklahoma County district attorney Robert Macy that the Justice Department did not want a local investigation occurring simultaneously. Once this happened, the federal government had complete control over the direction of the investigation. Despite Gorelick’s claims shortly after the bombing that "We have a lot of very fruitful leads that we're following" and Janet Reno’s promise that “no stone will be left unturned,” the federal prosecution team continually ignored, suppressed and discarded evidence that pointed to unambiguous foreign terrorist links to the bombing. This dereliction of duty helped to cover up Islamic militants’ terrorist war against the U.S., which our nation would not fully understand until September 11, 2001. On December 23, 1997, Janet Reno had the audacity to state the following: “Two and a half years ago, when the Murrah Building was bombed, FBI Director Louis Freeh and I promised to follow every lead and bring those responsible to justice. Today, that promise has been kept.” Background on Conspiracy Theories Just a brief aside: I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I don’t believe FDR allowed the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor or that JFK was killed by the CIA. I’m sure many people hear the term “conspiracy” and don’t want to hear any more. If the 9/11 Commission used the term “conspiracy,” some people still might question whether terrorists were involved in that attack on the U.S. Instead, the 9/11 Commission used the term “plot,” which is a term that implies greater factual evidence and less speculation. Because the evidence pointing to foreign terrorism is so unmistakable, I think it’s necessary to use the term “plot” to describe the Oklahoma City bombing. bizblogger.blogspot.com