Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

by **seemslikeadream** » Thu May 18, 2006 8:22 am

Former NY Times reporter Judith Miller to assert she was warned of large scale attack before 9/11 <a href="http://alternet.org/story/36388/" target="top">alternet.org/story/36388/</a> By Rory O'Connor and William Scott Malone, AlterNet. Posted May 18, 2006. In 2001, an anonymous White House source leaked top-secret NSA intelligence to reporter Judith Miller that Al Qaida was planning a major attack on the United States. But the story never made it into the paper. On Oct. 12, 2000, the guided missile destroyer USS Cole pulled into harbor for refueling in Aden, Yemen. Less than two hours later, suicide bombers Ibrahim al-Thawr and Abdullah al-Misawa approached the ship's port side in a small inflatable craft laden with explosives and blew a 40-by-40-foot gash in it, killing 17 sailors and injuring 39 others. The attack on the Cole, organized and carried out by Osama bin Laden's Al Qaida terrorist group, was a seminal but still murky and largely misunderstood event in America's ongoing "Long War." Two weeks prior, military analysts associated with an experimental intelligence program known as ABLE DANGER had warned top officials of the existence of an active Al Qaida cell in Aden, Yemen. And two days before the attack, they had conveyed "actionable intelligence" of possible terrorist activity in and around the port of Aden to Gen. Pete Schoomaker, then commander in chief of the U.S. Special Operation Command (SOCOM). The same information was also conveyed to a top intelligence officer at the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), headed by the newly appointed Gen. Tommy Franks. As CENTCOM commander, Franks oversaw all U.S. armed forces operations in a 25-country region that included Yemen, as well as the Fifth Fleet, to which the Cole was tasked. It remains unclear what action, if any, top officials at SOCOM and CENTCOM took in response to the ABLE DANGER warnings about planned Al Qaida activities in Aden harbor. None of the officials involved has ever spoken about the pre-attack warnings, and a post-attack forensic analysis of the episode remains highly classified and off-limits within the bowels of the Pentagon. Subsequent investigations exonerated the Cole's commander, Kirk Lippold, but Lippold's career has been ruined nonetheless. He remains in legal and professional limbo, with a recommended promotion and new command held up for the past four years by political concerns and maneuvering. Meanwhile, no disciplinary action was ever taken against any SOCOM or CENTCOM officials. Schoomaker was later promoted out of retirement to chief of staff, U.S. Army, and Franks went on to lead the combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Enter Judith Miller, the Pulitzer Prize-winning ex-New York Times reporter at the center of the ongoing perjury and obstruction of justice case involving former top White House official I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby. Miller spent 85 days in jail before finally disclosing that Libby was the anonymous source who confirmed to her that Valerie Plame was a CIA official, although Miller never wrote a story about Plame. Now, in an exclusive interview, Miller reveals how the attack on the Cole spurred her reporting on Al Qaida and led her, in July 2001, to a still-anonymous top-level White House source, who shared top-secret NSA signals intelligence (SIGINT) concerning an even bigger impending Al Qaida attack, perhaps to be visited on the continental United States. Ultimately, Miller never wrote that story either. But two months later -- on Sept. 11 -- Miller and her editor at the Times, Stephen Engelberg, both remembered and regretted the story they "didn't do." Interview with Judith Miller: "I was working on a special project in 2000-2001 -- trying to do a series on where Al Qaida was, who Al Qaida was, and what kind of a threat it posed to the United States. In the beginning I thought it was going to be pretty straightforward, but it turned out to be anything but. And it took me a long, long time, and a lot of trips to the Middle East, and a lot of dead ends, before I finally understood how I could tell the story to the American people. It was a long-term investigative piece, which meant that for the most part, I didn't write articles on specific individual attacks -- I was working the story … "I was fairly persuaded that the attack on the Cole was an Al Qaida operation, based on the sources that I was talking to, because I had no independent information, obviously. The people that I was covering ardently believed that Al Qaida was behind a lot of these attacks on American forces and Americans throughout the Middle East that we were beginning to see. At the time there was still a fair amount of debate and a fair amount of resistance to that thesis within the intelligence community, as it's so-called. But from the get go, I think the instinctive reaction of the people I was covering was that this was an Al Qaoda operation. So I started looking at the attack on the Cole as an example of Al Qaida terrorism. "I learned that the Al Qaida Cole attack was not exactly a hugely efficient operation, and I learned later on that there had been an earlier attempt to take out the Cole or another American ship that had floundered badly because of poor Al Qaida training. Because of incidents like that -- you know, overloading a dinghy that was supposed to go have gone out to the ship and blow it up, so that the dinghy would sink -- people tended to discount Al Qaida. They said, 'Oh, they are just a bunch of amateurs." But I'd never thought that. I never believed that. And the people I was covering didn't think that … "I had begun to hear rumors about intensified intercepts and tapping of telephones. But that was just vaguest kind of rumors in the street, indicators … I remember the weekend before July 4, 2001, in particular, because for some reason the people who were worried about Al Qaida believed that was the weekend that there was going to be an attack on the United States or on a major American target somewhere. It was going to be a large, well-coordinated attack. Because of the July 4 holiday, this was an ideal opportunistic target and date for Al Qaida. My sources also told me at that time that there had been a lot of chatter overheard -- I didn't know specifically what that meant -- but a lot of talk about an impending attack at one time or another. And the intelligence community seemed to believe that at least a part of the attack was going to come on July 4. So I remember that, for a lot of my sources, this was going to be a 'lost' weekend. Everybody was going to be working; nobody was going to take time off. And that was bad news for me, because it meant I was also going to be on stand-by, and I would be working too. "I was in New York, but I remember coming down to D.C. one day that weekend, just to be around in case something happened … Misery loves company, is how I would put it. If it were going to be a stress-filled weekend, it was better to do it together. It also meant I wouldn't have trouble tracking people down -- or as much trouble -- because as you know, some of these people can be very elusive. "The people in the counter-terrorism (CT) office were very worried about attacks here in the United States, and that was, it struck me, another debate in the intelligence community. Because a lot of intelligence people did not believe that Al Qaida had the ability to strike within the United States. The CT people thought they were wrong. But I got the sense at that time that the counter-terrorism people in the White House were viewed as extremist on these views. "Everyone in Washington was very spun-up in the CT world at that time. I think everybody knew that an attack was coming -- everyone who followed this. But you know you can only 'cry wolf' within a newspaper or, I imagine, within an intelligence agency, so many times before people start saying there he goes -- or there she goes -- again! "Even that weekend, there was lot else going on. There was always a lot going on at the White House, so to a certain extent, there was that kind of 'cry wolf' problem. But I got the sense that part of the reason that I was being told of what was going on was that the people in counter-terrorism were trying to get the word to the president or the senior officials through the press, because they were not able to get listened to themselves. "Sometimes, you wonder about why people tell you things and why people … we always wonder why people leak things, but that's a very common motivation in Washington. I remember once when I was a reporter in Egypt, and someone from the agency gave me very good material on terrorism and local Islamic groups. "I said, 'Why are you doing this? Why are you giving this to me?' and he said, 'I just can't get my headquarters to pay attention to me, but I know that if it's from the New York Times, they're going to give it a good read and ask me questions about it.' And there's also this genuine concern about how, if only the president shared the sense of panic and concern that they did, more would be done to try and protect the country. "This was a case wherein some serious preparations were made in terms of getting the message out and responding, because at the end of that week, there was a sigh of relief. As somebody metaphorically put it: 'They uncorked the White House champagne' that weekend because nothing had happened. We got through the weekend … nothing had happened. "But I did manage to have a conversation with a source that weekend. The person told me that there was some concern about an intercept that had been picked up. The incident that had gotten everyone's attention was a conversation between two members of Al Qaida. And they had been talking to one another, supposedly expressing disappointment that the United States had not chosen to retaliate more seriously against what had happened to the Cole. And one Al Qaida operative was overheard saying to the other, 'Don't worry; we're planning something so big now that the U.S. will have to respond.' "And I was obviously floored by that information. I thought it was a very good story: (1) the source was impeccable; (2) the information was specific, tying Al Qaida operatives to, at least, knowledge of the attack on the Cole; and (3) they were warning that something big was coming, to which the United States would have to respond. This struck me as a major page one-potential story. "I remember going back to work in New York the next day and meeting with my editor Stephen Engelberg. I was rather excited, as I usually get about information of this kind, and I said, 'Steve, I think we have a great story. And the story is that two members of Al Qaida overheard on an intercept (and I assumed that it was the National Security Agency, because that's who does these things) were heard complaining about the lack of American response to the Cole, but also … contemplating what would happen the next time, when there was, as they said, the impending major attack that was being planned. They said this was such a big attack that the U.S. would have to respond.' Then I waited. "And Stephen said, 'That's great! Who were the guys overheard?' "I said, 'Well, I don't know. I just know that they were both Al Qaida operatives.' "'Where were they overheard?' Steve asked. "Well, I didn't know where the two individuals were. I didn't know what countries they were in; I didn't know whether they were having a local call or a long-distance call. "'What was the attack they were planning?' he said. 'Was it domestic, was it international, was it another military target, was it a civilian target?' I didn't know. 'Had they discussed it?' "I didn't know, and it was at that point that I realized that I didn't have the whole story. As Steve put it to me, 'You have a great first and second paragraph. What's your third?"' Anatomy of a scoop Stephen Engelberg confirms Miller's tale in all respects. Engelberg first mentioned the incident in an article by Douglas McCollam in the October 2005 edition of Columbia Journalism Review, which noted: "Miller was naturally excited about the scoop and wanted the Times to go with the story. Engelberg, himself a veteran intelligence reporter, wasn't so sure. There had been a lot of chatter about potential attacks; how did they know this was anything other than big talk? Who were these guys? What country were they in? How had we gotten the intercept? Miller didn't have any answers, and Engelberg didn't think they could publish without more context. Miller agreed to try and find out more, but in the end, the story never ran." In a recent interview, Engelberg expanded on his comments. "I recall thinking it made perfect sense at the time," Engelberg told us. "The Cole attack was out of character -- unlike the Africa embassy attacks, the Millennium plot, the earlier World Trade Center bombing. "That weekend, pre-4th of July, everybody was nervous," said Engelberg. "Judy went down to check with the White House and the NSC types at the Old Executive Office Building and CTC. And she came back in and had the story. And I knew the source. "Judy had two guys talking, but no names or details," Engelberg recalled. "One guy says, 'The U.S. didn't retaliate for the Cole.' And the other guy says the coming attack 'will be so big they're gonna have to retaliate.' But no details … Judy had the what but not the who and the where. "I said, 'Check with the CIA, NSA, DIA,'" Engelberg remembered. "But we couldn't get anything that week." Interview with Judith Miller: "I realized that this information was enormously sensitive, and that it was going to be difficult to get more information, but that my source undoubtedly knew more. So I promised to Steve that I would go back and try to get more. And I did … try. "He knew who my source was. He knew that the source was impeccable. I had also confirmed from a second source that such a conversation had taken place -- that there was such an intercept -- though my second source did not seem to know as much about the content of the intercept as the first source did. But that was enough for me to know that there was a good story there. "But whoever knew about the 'who' and the 'where' was not willing tell me at that time. After the fact I was told that, 'The bad guys were in Yemen on this conversation.' I didn't know that at that time. I remember knowing that the person who'd told me seemed to know who had been overheard, but he was not about to share that information with me … "And Washington being Washington, and the CT world being the CT world, I was soon off pursuing other things. I simply couldn't nail it down with more specificity. I argued at that time that it was worth going with just what we had, even if it was vague, that the fact that the Al Qaida was planning something that was so spectacular that we have to respond was worth getting into the paper in some way, shape or form. But I think Steve decided, and I ultimately agreed, that we needed more details. And I simply couldn't pry them loose. "At the time I also had had a book coming out. Steve, Bill Broad and I were co-authors of a book about biological terrorism. So we were working flat out on that book trying to meet our deadline. I was desperately trying to get my arms around this series that we were trying to do on Al Qaida. I was having a lot of trouble because the information was very hard to come by. There was a lot going on. I was also doing biological weapons stories and homeland security stories. And in Washington, if you don't have a sense of immediacy about something, and if you sense that there is bureaucratic resistance to a story, you tend to focus on areas of less resistance. "Our pub date was Sept. 10th. I remember I was very worried about whether or not the publisher was actually going to get copies of the books to the warehouses in time. Because of course, Steve, Bill and I had delivered the manuscript late -- everything was very late. "The morning of Sept. 11, I was downtown about 12 blocks from the World Trade Center. I remember walking to a school around the corner with a very clear view of the World Trade Center, because it was just a few blocks away. And all I can remember thinking was, 'Are they going to get those books to the warehouses on time?' I was also trying to make up my mind who I was going to vote for in the New York Democratic Primary. And -- everybody says this -- it was one of most beautiful days in New York I ever remember! "When I got to the Baxter School, there were people standing out in front of the school, pointing at the World Trade Center, which was on fire, and I looked up. I asked what had happened, and they said that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. There was an awfully big gash in the building and I didn't see the plane, but there was an awful lot of smoke and I thought, 'Gosh! That was a pretty big space for a Cessna or something to have gotten into that building.' "And here I had spent my whole summer, my whole past year thinking about an Al Qaida attack, and I yet wouldn't let myself believe that it was happening right then. I simply wouldn't believe. So I turned around without voting, without going into the building, and I started to call my CT sources in Washington, and I remember reaching the counter-terrorism office at the White House, and I was told that nobody was there, that all of the principals were out giving speeches or doing something else. And I said, 'OK, I'll try to call back in 15 minutes.' "By that time I walked to my house a couple of blocks away, and I heard a boom, and I turned around and once again I didn't see the plane, but I saw the fire shoot out from the building from the plane. "It was only then, after the second plane hit, that I allowed myself to believe that it really was a terrorist attack -- the attack that we had been so worried about for so long. And I think I was kind of amazed at myself, at the power of denial. When you don't want to believe something's happening, it does not, it's not happening! And I think that was what was going on in the intelligence community. The idea that Al Qaida would actually strike in the United States, not at the Cole or overseas, or in Jordan as part of a warning bombing plot, but here in the U.S., that was just kind of unthinkable! People were in the state of denial, as I was that morning. "I remember calling back the White House that morning, and at that point, I talked to the secretary in the counter-terrorism office and she said: 'Nobody's here, Judy, and we're evacuating this building. I gotta go. Bye.' At that point, I hadn't even heard about the Pentagon attack, but I knew. "It was very strange … it was a strange feeling to have written a series that virtually predicted this, and to have had not a single other reporter call, not a single other newspaper follow up on some of the information that we had broken in that series. At the time of the series, which was published in January 2001, we had information about chemical and biological experiments at Al Qaida camps. We had gotten the location of the camps, we had gotten satellite overhead of the camps. I had interviewed, in Afghanistan, Al Qaida-trained people who said that they were going to get out of the 'prison' in Afghanistan and go back and continue their jihad. They had talked about suicide bombings. We had Jordanian intelligence say that attempts to blow up hotels, roads and tourist targets in Jordan over the millennium was part of the Al Qaida planned attack. And yet I guess people just didn't believe it. But I believed it. I believed it absolutely, because I've covered these militants for so long. There was nothing they wouldn't do if they could do it." The one that got away Like Miller, Steve Engelberg, now managing editor of the Oregonian in Portland, still thinks about that story that got away. "More than once I've wondered what would have happened if we'd run the piece?" he told the CJR. "A case can be made that it would have been alarmist, and I just couldn't justify it, but you can't help but think maybe I made the wrong call." Engelberg told us the same thing. "On Sept. 11th, I was standing on the platform at the 125th Street station," he remembered ruefully more than four years later. "I was with a friend, and we both saw the World Trade Center burning and saw the second one hit. 'It's Al-Qaida!' I yelled. 'We had a heads-up!' So yes, I do still have regrets." So does Judy Miller. "I don't remember what I said to Steve on Sept. 11," she concluded in her interview with us. "I don't think we said anything at all to each other. He just knew what I was thinking, and I knew what he was thinking. We were so stunned by what was happening, and there was so much to do, and I think that was the day in which words just fail you. "So I sometimes think back, and Steve and I have talked a few times about the fact that that story wasn't fit, and that neither one of us pursued it at that time with the kind of vigor and determination that we would have had we known what was going to happen. And I always wondered how the person who sent that [intercept] warning must have felt. "You know, sometimes in journalism you regret the stories you do, but most of the time you regret the ones that you didn't do. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=seemslikeadream@rigorousintuition>seemslikeadream</A> at: 5/18/06 6:22 am

by **anotherdrew** » Thu May 18, 2006 2:14 pm

the mainstreaming of LIHOP has perhaps begun?

by **dugoboy** » Thu May 18, 2006 2:50 pm

sure is..

by **dbeach** » Thu May 18, 2006 3:05 pm

WOULD YOU BELIEVE ANYTHING FROM THIS overpaid mockingbird ??amazing how they try to clean up their corporat image. Let me see she had the interview and knew of 9/11 BUT Later regretted not publishing it Regretable that those people died in those buildings and worse is the POLICE STATE since . THANX but no Thanx ms. miller WHERE is her nazi photo??????? "Now, in an exclusive interview, Miller reveals how the attack on the Cole spurred her reporting on Al Qaida and led her, in July 2001, to a still-anonymous top-level White House source, who shared top-secret NSA signals intelligence (SIGINT) concerning an even bigger impending Al Qaida attack, perhaps to be visited on the continental United States. Ultimately, Miller never wrote that story either. But two months later -- on Sept. 11 -- Miller and her editor at the Times, Stephen Engelberg, both remembered and regretted the story they "didn't do.""

by **HMKGrey** » Thu May 18, 2006 3:12 pm

Curious timing for this story to break. In the same week as the Government releases a stream of ridiculous footage of an apparently vaporous blur attacking the Pentagon on 9/11..? What's all that about? As ever, it has to be connected.

by **FourthBase** » Thu May 18, 2006 3:15 pm

If there are any journalists to suspect as being CIA agents, it's probably the ones who cover the intelligence world and have lots of spook sources.

by **dbeach** » Thu May 18, 2006 3:45 pm

Hi 4th Base I am at the pt where ALL of the MM so called journalists{many of whom have no deree in journalism but do have lovely haidos} are suspect for govt propaganda and mockingbirds . Ms. Miller is but one of many NOW SLAD needs to show the judy water bearer nazi photo

by **seemslikeadream** » Thu May 18, 2006 3:59 pm

Obediah Obediah, Jah Jah sent us here to catch vampire… Obediah Obediah, Jah Jah sent us here to catch vampire… We have the chalice to light up Jah fire! When i and i catch them vampire i and i have to set them on fire <img src="http://www.bartcop.com/judith-miller-pail.jpg" style="border:0;"/> EVERYBODY'S GOTTA LEARN SOMETIME <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6757267008400743688" target="top">video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6757267008400743688</a> BUDDY BUDDY <img src="http://www.gsnmagazine.com.nyud.net:8090/images/aug_05/atta.jpg" style="border:0;"/> DO THE MATH 24 MINUTES THERE MUST HAVE BEEN A MILITARY ORDER EzCode Parsing Error: color=red size=3]WATCH THIS[/font] http://www.bushflash.com/buddy.html http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/24/124834/678 DIA Agents were ordered to put yellow Post-its over Atta's face and the face's of 3 other 9/11 terrorists "We were directed to take those 3M yellow stickers and place them over the faces of Atta and the other terrorists and pretend they didn't exist," the intelligence officer told GSN." Intel agents Michael Shaffer and Scott Philpott have confirmed Rep. Weldon's claims that a chart with Atta's face, soon the photos of 3 other members of the 9-11 terror team, were known to DIA team Able Danger by early 2000. This diary will show that Pete Schoomaker and Philip Zelikow are two of the main Perpetraitors in this scandal, that they deliberately withheld information from the President of the United States that would have prevented 9/11, that they and their neo-con rulers Let It Happen On Purpose. Of this there can no longer be any doubt. MUST READ - RE: ABLE DANGER INFO http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4447706 Hopsicker: Able Danger Intel Exposed "Protected" Heroin Trafficking http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x149481 Able Danger: Short Time-line http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4441903 Was Able Danger Shut Down After It Detected Condi-PRC Spy Ring? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4494524 Senate May Hold Hearings on Able Danger, Info Sharing Thursday, August 25, 2005 Able Danger (search) is the code name for a military-intelligence unit that apparently learned a year before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta (search) and other terrorists were already in the United States. One of the central Able Danger claims — that military lawyers blocked the sharing of the Atta information from the FBI in the late summer and early fall of 2000 — will be a focus of the committee's if a hearing takes place, FOX News has confirmed. Some analysts involved with Able Danger have recently gone public with their findings, saying they were discouraged from looking further into Atta, and their attempts to share their information with the FBI were thwarted, because Atta was a legal foreign visitor at the time. "This story needs to be told. The American people need to be told what could have been done to prevent 3,000 people from losing their lives," said Rep. Curt Weldon (search), R-Pa. Weldon drew attention to Able Danger by speaking about it on the House floor and publicly calling for the Sept. 11 commission to explain why the intelligence information wasn't detailed in its final report. Some Able Danger analysts, including Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer (search) and Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott (search), claim that in October 2003, they told commission staffers of the presence of Al Qaeda operatives in the United States in 2000. more http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166800,00.html Senate May Hold Hearings on Able Danger, Info Sharing http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1727804&mesg_id=1727804 Condi in Middle of Able Danger ‘Cover Up’" Weldon is now saying that the Pentagon cover up of able danger “will shake the country to its roots." ... If the claims made by the Able Danger participants and Rep. Weldon are confirmed, former National Security Adviser Rice and other Bush Administration officials will face a barrage of questions. First would likely be an inquiry into why the administration unceremoniously axed the Able Danger project in May of 2001. During an August 20th interview on C-Span’s Washington Journal, Able Danger member Lt. Col. Schaffer posed a question of his own: "The American public should ask themselves: Why would the leadership of DoD shut down, terminate, a project which was aimed at targeting al-Qaeda offensively? ... "Why would they shut that down, four months before 9/11? That’s the big question right now, we have to ask that. I don’t know the answer to that question because I know my side of the story, I know that when a 2 star general got in my face and said, “I’m a 2 star general and you are not. You are to stop your support of Able Danger.” That’s what I know personally. But the question has to be: Who told him to do that? ... "And why did the rest of the project, I’m talking about Special Operations Command and the Army portion of this, why was that terminated? "Those are the questions that need to be asked." more... http://www.theinternationalpost.com/z30082005.html Congressman Weldon -- Why now? Why ever? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4500623 Three more assert Pentagon knew of 9/11 ringleader By Will Dunham WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Three more people associated with a secret U.S. military intelligence team have asserted that the program identified September 11 ringleader Mohammed Atta as an Al Qaeda suspect inside the United States more than a year before the 2001 attacks, the Pentagon said on Thursday. The Pentagon said a three-week review had turned up no documents to back up the assertion, but did not rule out that such documents relating to the classified operation had been destroyed. Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott and Army Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer last month came forward with statements that a secret intelligence program code-named "Able Danger" had identified Atta, the lead hijacker in the attacks that killed 3,000 people, in early 2000. Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), vice chairman of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, also went public with the allegations. Pat Downs, a senior policy analyst in the office of the undersecretary of defense for intelligence, told reporters that as part of the review, the Pentagon interviewed 80 people. Downs said that three more people, as well as Phillpott and Shaffer, recalled the existence of an intelligence chart identifying Atta by name. Four of the five recalled a photo of Atta accompanying the chart, Downs said. Pentagon officials declined to identify the three by name, but said they were an analyst with the military's Special Operations Command, an analyst with the Land Information Warfare Assessment Center and a contractor who supported the center. Downs said all five were considered "credible people." But officials said an exhaustive search of tens of thousands of documents and electronic files related to Able Danger failed to find the chart or other documents corroborating the identification of Atta. Phillpott has said Atta was identified by Able Danger by January or February of 2000. "We have not discovered that chart," Downs said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050901/pl_nm/security_attacks_pentagon_dc Three more assert Pentagon knew of 9/11 ringleader http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1744982&mesg_id=1744982 Specter Wants Answers About 'Able Danger' http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1796658&mesg_id=1796658 NYT/Reuters: Pentagon Blocks Testimony at Senate Hearing on Terrorist http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1795221&mesg_id=1795221 NOW - ON CAPITOL HILL - Able Danger Inquiry CSPAN3 9:30am et http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4836496 Able Danger ties Condi Rice to Chinese espionage! (really!) http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4846388&mesg_id=4846388 VIDEO-the Senate Judicial Committee ABLE DANGER saga http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php? Official: (Curt Weldon) Attack on Cole foreseen (ABLE DANGER) http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1915365&mesg_id=1915365 New 9/11 Timeline update, with new Able Danger page http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php? Weldon seeks Defense testimony on al-Qaida http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1931300 Weldon rips 9/11 commission over intelligence failures http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1959226 General gave OK for Able Danger (confirms al-Qaida mission prior to 9/11) http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1973724

by **StarmanSkye** » Thu May 18, 2006 4:00 pm

Curious timing indeed -- This whole bizarre metaphorical mea-culpa 'if only we KNEW then what we now knew we knew!' 'confession' by leading-disinfo propagandist Frau Miller STINKS. Sounds like she actually knew as much if not more re: the impending 911 attacks than fall-guy Moussaoui did -- mayhaps SHE should have been tried for witholding critical attack information? (Of course it's ludicrous -- but no less than the whole Gummint scapegoating semi-anonymous guilty 'others', leading the Nation collectively down the Primrose Path -- and down the rabbit hole.) The Media's complicity in lies and ongoing cover-up abuse of power, censorship and disinfo-shilling makes me puke. Starman

by **dbeach** » Thu May 18, 2006 6:45 pm

THANK U SLAD U MADE THIS OLE BEACH BUM SMILE!!! Next weekend is Memorial Day PRAY FOR PEACE I would consider her actions to be TREASONOUS and her employer also for NOT reporting.. JOURNALISTS!! Fancy words for simply TREASON

by **HMKGrey** » Thu May 18, 2006 8:32 pm

Watching "Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime" last week I thought the Able Danger segment was incredibly powerful. Imagine taking that piece of the movie, editing it down to 60 or 90 seconds and running it as a TV commercial. Now THAT would shake a few windows. [My check for $100 is ready and waiting to go...]

by **seemslikeadream** » Thu May 18, 2006 11:20 pm

<a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2291959" target="top">www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2291959</a> paulthompson (1000+ posts) Thu May-18-06 05:31 AM Response to Original message 1. Here's my entry about the article the NYT "forgot" Edited on Thu May-18-06 05:48 AM by paulthompson September 9, 2001: New York Times Reports bin Laden ‘Promises More Attacks’; Article Will Be Removed Shortly After 9/11 Just two days before 9/11, the New York Times publishes an article on their website examining the threat of an al-Qaeda attack on US interests. The article focuses on a videotape made by bin Laden which was released in June 2001 (see June 19, 2001). The article notes that “When the two-hour videotape surfaced last June, it attracted little attention, partly because much of it was spliced from previous bin Laden interviews and tapes. But since then the tape has proliferated on Islamic Web sites and in mosques and bazaars across the Muslim world.” It further notes that in the video, bin Laden “promises more attacks.” Referring to the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen, he says, “The victory of Yemen will continue.” He promises to aid Palestinians fighting Israel, an important shift in emphasis from previous pronouncements. He also praises the Taliban, suggesting that previous reports of a split between bin Laden and the Taliban were a ruse. The article comments, “With his mockery of American power, Mr. bin Laden seems to be almost taunting the United States.” (New York Times, 9/9/01) Curiously, shortly after 9/11, the New York Times will remove the article from their website archive and redirect all links from the article’s web address, http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/09/inter ... /asia/09... to the address of another article written by the same author shortly after 9/11, http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/12/inter ... /12OSAM.... . (Note the dates contained within the addresses.) --- By the way, you can still try the top link and watch your browser get redirected to the story in the second link. Talk about a cowardly newspaper! I'd also point out that if Miller's latest account is true, what does that tell us about how hard the 9/11 Commission tried to find the truth? Why didn't they uncover this NSA warning after 9/11? Miller says "everyone" in power was talking about it. So that means pretty much "everyone" has been lying their asses off about just how much warning they'd been given before 9/11. But that shouldn't be a big surprise. Also, there was already a thread on a Raw Story article about this article coming up, but I'm starting a new thread so people can go directly to the new article instead of an article about the article. Kudos to Raw Story, though, for bringing this story to wider attention. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=seemslikeadream@rigorousintuition>seemslikeadream</A> at: 5/18/06 9:22 pm

by **dbeach** » Fri May 19, 2006 1:09 am

"So that means pretty much "everyone" has been lying their asses off " lying on their asses while lying its why they are called media whores ..presstitutes ect... and they ain't that pretty.. Ms Miller is just one... I figure about every one of the talkin heads is a mockingbird especially woodward russert katie couric paula zahn wills stephanoffhilis makes me ill the big bucks NANTUCKET CROWD

by **dugoboy** » Fri May 19, 2006 12:20 pm

ugh.. <a href="http://alternet.org/story/36388/" target="top">The 9/11 Story That Got Away</a> the incompetence line indeed.. ___________________________________________ "BUSHCO aren't incompetent...they are COMPLICIT."

Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

Re: Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

yea

Re: yea RIGHT!!

Re: Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

Re: yea RIGHT!!

Re: yea RIGHT!!

Re: i and i have to set them on fire dbeach

Re: Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

Re: Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

Re: Judy Miller warned of large scale attack before 9/11

Re: The article the NYT "forgot"

Re: The article the NYT "forgot"

Re: The article the NYT "forgot"

Who is online