How "Able Danger" Will Be Played
This is the money quote from the New York Times Thursday article about the 9/11 Commission/"Able Danger" scandal [emphasis added]:
The "Able Danger" revelations open up several cans of worms that partisan Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media do not want examined.
"Able Danger" puts Mohammed Atta in Prague, meeting with Saddam Hussein's security agents. This contradicts the liberal article of faith that the Bush administration had no reason to fear Saddam's regime. "Able Danger" also brings up questions about the Clinton administration's handling of terrorism and lack of wisdom in compartmentalizing national security information in the name of libertarianism. Most immediately, "Able Danger" could lead to an independent investigation of the actions of some of the more highly partisan members of the 9/11 Commission. The name Jamie Gorelick comes quickly to mind.
That's why it's likely that an effort will be made to convince the public that the "Able Danger" documents are fakes, created by a conspiracy probably masterminded by Karl Rove (who else?). The mainstream media trumpeted the 9/11 Commission's findings as if they were delivered from Mount Olympus, propelling the report into best-seller status. Remember the stampede to implement each and every one of the Commission's recommendations without bothering to debate them? If the MSM can't bury this one they'll try to play it as a conspiracy. Weldon had better have his ducks in a row.
Mr. Felzenberg said the commission's staff remained convinced that the information provided by the military officer in the July 2004 briefing was inaccurate in a significant way.Felzenberg has, in effect, called the unidentified officer a liar or the dupe of a liar. In order for the information to be "inaccurate" it would have to have been faked in some way. The possibility of faked information being fed to the Commission should have, in and of itself, immediately raised alarm bells that a coverup or setup was taking place. Why would the commissioners simply dismiss, without investigation, an attempt to give them false information?
"He wasn't brushed off," Mr. Felzenberg said of the officer. "I'm not aware of anybody being brushed off. The information that he provided us did not mesh with other conclusions that we were drawing" from the commission's investigation.
The "Able Danger" revelations open up several cans of worms that partisan Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media do not want examined.
"Able Danger" puts Mohammed Atta in Prague, meeting with Saddam Hussein's security agents. This contradicts the liberal article of faith that the Bush administration had no reason to fear Saddam's regime. "Able Danger" also brings up questions about the Clinton administration's handling of terrorism and lack of wisdom in compartmentalizing national security information in the name of libertarianism. Most immediately, "Able Danger" could lead to an independent investigation of the actions of some of the more highly partisan members of the 9/11 Commission. The name Jamie Gorelick comes quickly to mind.
That's why it's likely that an effort will be made to convince the public that the "Able Danger" documents are fakes, created by a conspiracy probably masterminded by Karl Rove (who else?). The mainstream media trumpeted the 9/11 Commission's findings as if they were delivered from Mount Olympus, propelling the report into best-seller status. Remember the stampede to implement each and every one of the Commission's recommendations without bothering to debate them? If the MSM can't bury this one they'll try to play it as a conspiracy. Weldon had better have his ducks in a row.
posted by Bluto at 2:04 PM
<< Home