In my last post on Able Danger I asked, "Is the lid about to be blown off of Able Danger?". We know that 200 members of congress on both sides have endorsed a letter by Rep. Weldon to Sec. Def. Donald Rumsfeld, so something is going to happen. We will most likely have hearings and more testimony, which could drag on for years, even so, just how "much" of that story get's told is the real question.
Since my last post I got razzed a little by other bloggers because of my previous posts in which I saw the story going "bye, bye". Now this wasn't a guess on my part, I got the information from a very high source that for all intents and purposes the story was dead. I was told in so many words, "It's not going anyway mac, people don't want to play the game anymore - time to move on."
Incidently that same source tells me even now, after the letter, the "status" hasn't changed, but that "the feeling" is that since the reporting on the story (though limited), that some type of hearings will be introduced. But there is a "But"
You must realize that hearings require witnesses and documents that have 'strings' attached. So be prepared to see for the most part 'closed meetings', so that testimony will be sealed or classified. Although I suspect that a few may try to get that lid taken off, these things are governed by rules and security. Also people will continually be told not to testify.
Today I read this post by blogger TopDog08, asking why the story of Able Danger was ignored:
"A conversation that keeps coming back to me the last few days is one I had with a friend of mine who is more involved in politics than me. Talking about Able Danger, he said it was not in the interest of either party to go back and dig into what happened before 9/11 any more. That's why they've been treating Able Danger like such a political hot potato."
He also links to Mark Tapscott who writes:
"I would dissent from Freeh's suggestion about the consequences of the commission's Able Danger failure. If the Able Danger scenario is confirmed, and I have little doubt that it will be, the only possible conclusions are that 9/11 represented one of this nation's most colossal intelligence failures and the inability or unwillingness of the 9/11 Commission to even consider the Able Danger facts is indicative of the Washington Establishment's deeply ingrained refusal to assess honestly its role in the 9/11 disaster."
In this post, I said:
" I am also keenly aware of the "Matrix" or the truth of what we think we know, and what really goes on behind closed doors. Back in '85-87 I was smack dab in the middle of one of these "Matrixes", most of us are familiar with. A great leader was caught right in the middle of a "hard squeeze play" and it was amazing to see how the MSM created one reality, the public theirs, but behind the scenes the truth was more "deep" than anyone "outside" could have dreamed of."
The possible scenarios that I outlined in that previous post as reasons for the "total truth" of Able Danger not getting out is 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.
While in my last post I front for all three, but primarily the third, think of the bombshell to the left if the link were irrevocably established? I believe it is, but many would disagree. The point is while the door is wide open it remains to be seen how much of the Able Danger Saga will actually come out.
iraq Politics News murtha Able Danger Curt Weldon judith miller valerie plame karl rove Valerie Plame PlameGate john hannahcheney libby joe wilson woodward bob woodward