Able Danger Blog


Click here to order Triple Cross in paperback now

Monday, October 09, 2006

Facts the DOD IG left out

Many of these points have been described previously here on Able Danger Blog, before the release of the IG report. However here is a summary of things the IG left out:

1-During unclassified testimony given at the closed session of the HASC hearing on Able Danger, the lead attorney at SOCOM responsible for Able Danger testified that certain individuals were "minimized" because there was a question as to whether they were "US persons" or not. As a result, those individuals were considered "off limits". Many of them were located within the US, not just associated with the US.

2-The same SOCOM lawyer confirmed they had found records of an appointment scheduled between Colonel Worthington and the FBI Washington Field Office for October 2000. The Inspector General was present at the closed hearing where all this unclassified information was presented. Yet, this information was not included in the IG report.

3-All of the specific targeting information, data mining techniques, or computer technology used were classified. By failing to declassify or even discuss any of the related information, the IG report did not even touch the surface of Able Danger.

4-Other DoD "black" programs were involved in Able Danger. This has been confirmed in Congressional testimony, however the IG report never even mentions it. In fact, some of this information is so tightly held that no members of Congress have been briefed. This is the information that members of the Able Danger team were stopped from testifying about by DOD lawyers at the closed HASC hearing session in February.

5-A study was done at LIWA in October 2000 specifically to determine the difference between the importance and Arabic characters for "Atta" and "Atef". Why would such a study have been needed if the name "Atta" have never come up before this date?

6-None of the investigators from the Inspetor General were trained in the areas they were supposed to be investigating. Not special operations, not signals or human intelligence, and not even computer science. What were they trained to investigate?

This lays out some of the basics, I will address specific claims made by Bill Arkin, in a separate post. Although, I may need to put on some boots first to wade through.