Jump to content
The Education Forum

Abu Zubaydah: needed a serious revision required in the official account of 9/11


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

DEATHANDTAXES BLOG

There was a pre-9/11 military intelligence program called “Able Danger” in Afghanistan, which Shaffer served in as an intelligence agency officer. Shaffer and other witnesses involved allege that this program uncovered information about Atta as a potential security threat. But most importantly, it was a program which was left out of the 9/11 commission report in 2004.

Shaffer had reported Atta as a potential threat to Dr. Philip Zelikow, the then executive director of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, and Zelikow had expressed concern while they were still abroad. But back in the States and after the attacks, Zelikow told Shaffer “We don’t need you to come in. We have all the information on ‘Able Danger’ we need. Thank you anyway.”

The “Able Danger” information was left out of the 9/11 reports, and the evidence is has been bought (with nearly $50,000 in tax dollars) and torched.

+++++++++++++++++ Booklist

A nonfiction book that frequently reads like an adventure novel, this account of the author’s intelligence operations in post-9/11 Afghanistan should definitely strike a chord with readers. Shaffer was an intelligence operative from an early age, joining army counterintelligence in the early 1980s at the age of 19. By 1991, he was running HUMINT, the army’s clandestine human-intelligence program. Prior to 2001, he was working on an operation called Able Danger, which, according Shaffer, uncovered some of the 9/11 terrorists a full year before the attacks, although—again, according to Shaffer—the government blocked attempts to act upon the information. He saw the same sort of thing happen again in Afghanistan, when red tape and inept policies hindered efforts to fight the Taliban. This is almost two books in one: a rousing chronicle of the author’s experiences on foreign soil and an examination of a bloated bureaucracy that is in desperate need of retooling. Shaffer adopts a mostly objective tone, although there are moments when his personal views sneak through (the phrase “Bush administration lunacy,” for example). Although no coauthor is listed, the book reads like it was transcribed from taped interviews (see the occasional oddly constructed paragraph where it looks like someone stuck in parenthetical explanations of things the author was saying). All in all, a fascinating, eye-opening book. --David Pitt

Link to post
Share on other sites

You complain and deny it when I say you seem not to read the crap you cut and paste here but here’s another example. In response to my observation that “Shaffer's book wasn't even about Able Danger” you posted the claim of the obscure anonymous blogger that “There was a pre-9/11 military intelligence program called “Able Danger” in Afghanistan, which Shaffer served in as an intelligence agency officer…” as if to say the book really was about Able Danger but also posted the Booklist review of the book which described it as “this account of the author’s intelligence operations in post-9/11 Afghanistan…”, and referring to the bureaucratic barriers to Able Danger stated “He saw the same sort of thing happen again in Afghanistan” in other words the focus of the book refers to his post 9/11 service.

Your blogger seems not even to have bothered to look at the book, I gave it a quick skim on Amazon and Shaffer made it clear he was in Washington when he was part of Able Danger. This guy it totally confused and clueless. He babbled:

Shaffer had reported Atta as a potential threat to Dr. Philip Zelikow, the then executive director of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, and Zelikow had expressed concern while they were still abroad. But back in the States and after the attacks, Zelikow told Shaffer “We don’t need you to come in. We have all the information on ‘Able Danger’ we need. Thank you anyway.”

Huh? He thinks Shaffer spoke to Zelikow in Afghanistan BEFORE 9/11, and is so clueless that he thinks “the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States” existed BEFORE 9/11!! Holy crap, he’s even more confused than you are!

There have been several comparisons between the censored and uncensored versions of the book. Get back to us with evidence the focus of the censoring was on Able Danger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dark_Heart#Critical_publications_of_plain_text_versus_redacted_text

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...