Demand Able Danger whistleblowers testify

Demand Able Danger whistleblowers be allowed to testify before Congress

Dear Family and Friends,

Today an even split of 245 Republican and Democratic Senators/Representatives have signed US Rep. Curt Weldon's [R- PA] letter demanding that Able Danger whistleblowers be allowed to testify before Congress [see letter and signers herein below].

Able Danger, was the military intelligence unit that identified terrorists and tracked Mohammad Atta & Co. in 2000, but was quickly gagged that year. Why? US military officers in the Able Danger unit were told to forget they'd ever heard of Atta; and when whistleblower Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer went public this year, he was harassed and had his clearance revoked.

Sen. Arlen Spector [R-PA] and US Rep. Curt Weldon's [R- PA] are pleading for you to contact them [see link herein] and your Sen./Rep. [see links herein] and give them the groundswell of support they need to investigate Able Danger. At the time of year when we all pray for Peace on Earth, please consider doing this little bit to actually bring it about [isn't this is how our democracy works?].

Please email your Senator/Representative and support them for signing this letter or ask them to sign.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm, and http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.shtml
Also, please forward widely for the sake of our Republic and the security of our people.

Congressman Weldon is calling on all Members of Congress to sign a letter he is sending to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld requesting that
members of Able Danger be allowed to testify before Congress and the American people.

A FULL-TEXT VERSION OF THE LETTER & LIST OF SIGNATORIES:

The Honorable Donald Rumsfeld
Secretary Department of Defense
Pentagon

Washington, DC 20301

Dear Secretary Rumsfeld:
We the undersigned are formally requesting that you allow former participants in the intelligence program known as ABLE DANGER to
testify in an open hearing before the United States Congress. Until this point, congressional efforts to investigate ABLE DANGER have been
obstructed by Department of Defense insistence that certain individuals with knowledge of ABLE DANGER be prevented from freely and
frankly testifying in an open hearing. We realize that you do not question Congress’s authority to maintain effective oversight of
executive branch agencies, including your department. It is our understanding that your objection instead derives from concern that
classified information could be improperly exposed in an open hearing.  We of course would never support any activity that might compromise
sensitive information involving national security. However, we firmly believe that testimony from the appropriate individuals in an open
hearing on ABLE DANGER would not only fail to jeopardize national security, but would in fact enhance it over the long term. This is due
to our abiding belief that America can only better prepare itself against future attacks if it understands the full scope of its past
failures to do so.

On September 21, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary conducted a hearing on ABLE DANGER which Bill Dugan, Acting Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Oversight, certified did not reveal any classified information. Congressman Curt Weldon’s testimony
at that hearing was largely based on the information that has been  given to him by ABLE DANGER participants barred from open testimony by
DOD. Their testimony would therefore closely mirror that of  Congressman Weldon, who did not reveal classified information.
Therefore we are at a loss as to how the testimony of ABLE DANGER participants would jeopardize classified information. Much of what
they would present has already been revealed. Further refusal to allow ABLE DANGER participants to testify in an open congressional hearing
can only lead us to conclude that the Department of Defense is uncomfortable with the prospect of Members of Congress questioning
these individuals about the circumstances surrounding ABLE DANGER. This would suggest not a concern for national security, but rather an
attempt to prevent potentially embarrassing facts from coming to light. Such a consideration would of course be an unacceptable
justification for the refusal of a congressional request.
Sincerely,

Republican (144)
1. Curt Weldon (R-PA), 2. David L. Hobson, (R-OH), 3. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), 4. Joel Hefley (R-CO), 5. Todd Russell Platts (R-PA)
6. Tom Davis (R-VA), 7. Michael G. Fitzpatrick (R-PA), 8. Charles W. Dent (R-PA), 9. Jim Ramstad (R-MN), 10. Mark Souder (R-IN)
11. Phil English (R-PA), 12. Michael McCaul (R-TX), 13. Sam Johnson (R-TX), 14. Christopher Shays (R-CT), 15. Walter B. Jones (R-NC)
16. Charles H. Taylor (R-NC), 17. John L. Mica (R-FL), 18. John T. Doolittle (R-CA), 19. Jeff Miller (R-FL), 20. Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD)
21. Nathan Deal (R-GA), 22. Joe Wilson (R-SC), 23. Donald A. Manzullo (R-IL), 24. Charles W. Boustany, Jr. (R-LA), 25. Ralph M. Hall (R-TX)
26. John E. Peterson (R-PA), 27. Ron Paul (R-TX), 28. Jerry Weller (R-IL), 29. Michael N. Castle (R-DE), 30. Geoff Davis (R-KY),

31. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ), 32. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), 33. Fred Upton (R-MI), 34. Rob Simmons (R-CT), 35. Rodney P. Frelinghuysen (R-NJ)
36. Henry Bonilla (R-TX), 37. Virgil H. Goode, Jr. (R-VA), 38. Howard Coble (R-NC), 39. Jim Gibbons (R-NV), 40. Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY)
41. Dan Burton (R-IN), 42. Joseph R.Pitts (R-PA), 43. Jim Gerlach (R-PA), 44. Trent Franks (R-AZ), 45. Rodney Alexander (R-LA)
46. Ellen Gallegly (R-CA), 47. Don Sherwood (R-PA), 48. Zach Wamp (R-TN), 49. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), 50. Chris Smith (R-NJ)
51. Frank Wolf (R-VA), 52. Chris Chocola (R-IN), 53. Bobby Jindal (R-LA), 54. Rick Renzi (R-AZ), 55. Mark Kirk (R-IL)
56. Ron Lewis (R-KY), 57. Rob Aderholt (R-AL), 58. Randy J. Forbes (R-VA), 59. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-CA), 60. John Boozman (R-AR)
61. Frank A. LoBiondo (R-NJ), 62. John E. Sweeney (R-NY), 63. Michael R. Turner (R-OH), 64. Dennis R. Rehberg (R-MT-At Large)

65. Tom Osborne (R-NE), 66. Scott Garrett (R-NJ), 67. Pete Sessions (R-TX), 68. John Linder (R-GA), 69. Todd W. Akin (R-MO)
70. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), 71. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), 72. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), 73. Robin Hayes (R-NC), 74. John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-TN)
75. Bob Inglis (R-SC), 76. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), 77. Lee Terry (R-NE), 78. Dave Weldon (R-FL), 79. Nancy L. Johnson (R-CT),

80. Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL), 81. Melissa Hart (R-PA), 82. John Sullivan (R-OK), 83. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), 84. Adam H. Putnam (R-FL)
85. Don Young (R-AK-At Large), 86. Peter King (R-NY), 87. Daniel E. Lungren (R-CA), 88. Michael T. McCaul (R-TX), 89. Katherine Harris (R-FL)
90. John Hostettler (R-IN), 91. Paul E. Gillmor (R-OH), 92. Roy Blunt (R-MO), 93. Michael Simpson (R-ID), 94. Tom Price (R-GA),

95. Charlie Norwood (R-GA), 96. Michael Bilirakis (R-FL), 97. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), 98. Henry E. Brown, Jr. (R-SC), 99. Thomas G. Tancredo (R-CO)
100. Terry Everett (R-AL), 101. Robert Ney (R-OH), 102. Ed Whitfield (R-KY), 103. Wally Herger (R-CA), 104. Mark Foley (R-FL)
105. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), 106. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-CA), 107. Mike Rogers (R-MI), 108. John J. H. “Joe” Schwarz (R-MI)
109. Jon C. Porter (R-NV), 110. Kay Granger (R-TX), 111. Greg Walden (R-OR), 112. Mary Bono (R-CA), 113. Anne Northup (R-KY)
114. John Kline (R-MN), 115. Frank D. Lucas (R-OK), 116. Candice S. Miller (R-MI), 117. William Jenkins (R-TN), 118. Patrick McHenry (R-NC)
119. Sue W. Kelly (R-NY), 120. Mike Pence (R-IN), 121. Kenny Hulshof (R-MO), 122. Cathy McMorris (R-WA), 123. Ralph Regula (R-OH)
124. John Carter (R-TX), 125. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI), 126. James Leach (R-IA), 127. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ), 128. Bill Shuster (R-PA)

129. John McHugh (R-NY), 130. Tim Murphy (R-PA), 131. Barbara Cubin (R-WY-at large), 132. Michael Conaway (R-TX)

133. Chris Cannon (R-UT), 134. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL), 135. Jim Ryun (R-KS), 136. Jeb Bradley (R-NH), 137. Steven C. LaTourette (R-OH)
138. Ander Crenshaw (R-FL), 139. Bill Young (R-FL), 140. Melissa Bean (D-IL), 141. Jack Kingston (R-GA), 142. Ed Royce (R-CA),

143. Tom Cole (R-OK), 144. Patrick Tiberi (R-OH),

Democrats (101)
145. John Murtha, John P. (D-PA), 146. Ike Skelton (D-MO), 147. Jim Cooper (D-TN), 148. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), 149. Solomon Ortiz (D-TX)
150. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), 151. Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX), 152. Joe Baca (D-CA), 153. Bob Etheridge (D-NC), 154. James R. Langevin (D-RI)
155. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), 156. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), 157. Ed Pastor (D-AZ), 158. Eliot Engel (D-NY), 159. Loretta T. Sanchez (D-CA)
160. Linda T. Sanchez (D-CA), 161. Mike McIntyre (D-NC), 162. Louise McIntosh Slaughter (D-NY), 163. Corrine Brown (D-FL)

164. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), 165. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), 166. Sam Farr (D-CA), 167. Chet Edwards (D-TX), 168. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ)
169. Nita M. Lowey (D-NY), 170. Neil Abercrombie (D –HI), 171. Steny H. Hoyer (D-MD), 172. Gwen Moore (D-WI), 173. Madeline Z. Bordallo (D-GU)
174. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-NY), 175. Nick J. Rahall, II (D-WV), 176. Robert Brady (D-PA), 177. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), 178. Mike Doyle (D-PA)
179. Tim Holden (D-PA), 180. G.K. Butterfield (D-NC), 181. Dale E. Kildee (D-MI), 182. James E. Clyburn (D-SC), 183. Steve Israel (D-NY)
184. Harold Ford (D-TN), 185. John Larson (D-CT), 186. Eni Faleomavaega (D-AS), 187. Ken Meek (D-FL), 188. John Dingell (D-MI)

189. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), 190. Rush Holt (D-NJ), 191. Vernon J. Ehlers (D-MI), 192. Alcee L. Hastings (D-FL), 193. Martin Olav Sabo (D-MN)
194. Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA), 195. David Wu (D-OR), 196. Grace F. Napolitano (D-CA), 197. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), 198. Ruben HinoJosa (D-TX)
199. John M. Spratt, Jr. (D-SC), 200. Norman D. Dicks (D-WA), 201. Edward Markey (D-MA), 202. Jane Harman (D-CA), 203. Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
204. Bart Stupak (D-MI), 205. Susan A. Davis (D-CA), 206. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), 207. Hilda Solis (D-CA), 208. Gene Green (D-TX)

209. Martin T. Meehan (D-MA), 210. Marion Berry (D-AR), 211. Charles B. Rangel (D-NY), 212. James P. Moran (D-VA), 213. Elijah E. Cummings (D-MD)
214. Maxine Waters (D-CA), 215. John Lewis (D-GA), 216. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), 217. Chaka Fattah (D-PA), 218. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX)
219. Lane Evans (D-IL), 220. Shelley Berkley (D-NV), 221. Bill Delahunt (D-MA), 222. Rick Larsen (D-WA), 223. Robert E. (Bud) Cramer, Jr. (D-AL)
224. Gene Taylor (D-MS), 225. Allyson Y. Schwartz (D-PA), 226. Richard E. Neal (D-MA), 227. Al Green (D-TX), 228. Robert Wexler (D-FL)
229. John T. Salazar (D-CO), 230. Michael Capuano (D-MA), 231. Mike Thompson (D-CA), 232. Collin Peterson (D-MN), 233. Joseph Crowley (D-NY)
234. Robert Andrews (D-NJ), 235. Mark Udall (D-CO), 236. George Miller (D-CA), 237. Adam Smith (D-WA), 238. Michael Honda (D-CA)
239. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), 240. Steven R. Rothman (D-NJ), 241. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), 242. Jerry Costello (D-IL)

243. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), 244. Allen Boyd (D-FL)

The Pentagon has prevented members of the Able Danger effort from testifying in an open hearing. Able Danger dealt with open-sourced,
unclassified information, and their story should be told to the American people.

Write to Newspapers.
http://www.usnpl.com/ - U.S. Newspapers
http://www.usnpl.com/conews.html - Colorado newspapers

Call or write to Weldon and Spector, tell them you support them. Ask
for Russ Caso, the staffer for Weldon who is handling this issue. Ask
for Barr, the staffer for Spectors Judiciary Committee. (he wouldn't
give me his last name.)

Rep. Weldon's Address, Phone, Fax, Email
2466 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2011
Fax: (202) 225-8137
CurtPa07@Mail.House.Gov

Able Danger News on Weldons site:
http://curtweldon.house.gov/News/DocumentQuery.aspx?CatagoryID=1932

Sen. Arlen Spector:
Main Office:
711 Hart Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: 202-224-4254
http://specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInfo.Home

Talking Points:
1. If the 9-11 commissioners believe that Able Danger was so
insignificant, why won't they push for the Pentagon to cooperate in
the hearings?
2. Why is Rumsfeld obstructing these hearings? Is he afraid of what
will be exposed by these whistle blowers, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer,
Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, and civilian analyst James D. Smithn who
have been gagged? (Dr. Eileen Preisser has not come forward yet but
should be subpeoned.)
3. Why, if the Pentagon is interested in the truth of 9-11 and is not
concerned that Able Danger was significant, are they destroying
evidence? Isn't that illegal? Yes! They must file forms before
destroying classified info and so far haven't produced those forms to
Weldon.
4. How is it that Rumsfeld can tell the Armed Services Committee and
the Judiciary Committee that these people cannot testify? Can't these
committees subpoena these people, over-riding this inept Defense
Secretary? The Congress oversees the DOD!
5. This is a matter of huge significance for the public who were
counting on the 9-11 commission to report all the facts, now found to
be guilty of omitting important evidence that these hijackers were
known of years before!

The absolute best source to understand Able Danger and it's significance http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?

MORE THAN HALF OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WANTS OPEN
HEARINGS ON ABLE DANGER

WASHINGTON, Nov 18 - U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), vice chairman of
the House Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, has sent a
letter to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld signed by over half of
the House of Representatives requesting that he allow "former
participants in the intelligence program known as ABLE DANGER to
testify in an open hearing before the United States Congress." The
letter has 246 signatures (144 Republicans, 101 Democrats, and one
Independent), including senior members and leadership on both sides of
the isle.

"The full story of ABLE DANGER deserves to be heard by the American
people," said Weldon. "Secretary Rumsfeld must understand that the
will of Congress is behind allowing members of the ABLE DANGER effort
to testify in an open hearing about the work they were doing prior to
9-11 to track the linkages and relationships of al-Qaeda worldwide.

In the article below, the reference to the "firewall" that existed
between the intelligence agencies has been disproven as a
disinformation effort by the DOJ during the 9-11 hearings, to project
the intel. agencies as faultless. Nothing could be further from the
truth. FBI superiors obstructed field agents investigations of Bin
Ladens and hijackers before 9-11 and ultimately ordered them
curtailed. And as we see in Able Danger, the Pentagon had full
knowledge of the supposed hijackers, but are now shutting down
access. Also former FBI director Freeh has some skeletons in his
closet as he may have taken part in a cover up for Condi Rice and
Lewis Perry who were doing defense deals illegally with China between
99 and now. So Freehs calling for truth in Able Danger is suspect to
say the least. Maybe he's exorcising his demons, hoping for a better
afterlife.

Able Danger: Uncovering the 9/11 Cover-up
More Than Half of House Reps. Want Hearings on Able Danger
by Barbara Anderson [therant.us]

November 21, 2005 - Writing for the Wall Street Journal's opinion
page, former FBI Director Louis Freeh has become the most recent
critic of the 9/11 Commission's investigation into the terrorist
attacks that killed 3,000 Americans. He also leveled criticism at the
9/11 Commission Report, which he says is flawed because it is
incomplete.

Able Danger, a relatively small data-mining operation, claims it
identified several terrorist cells in this country and elsewhere
before the 9/11 attacks. It also claims that members identified
Mohammed Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers in mid-2000. They further
claim that they warned defense officials about activity in Aden,
Yemen. They advised against entering the Port of Aden two days before
the attack on the U.S.S. Cole on October 12, 2000, which left
seventeen American sailors dead.

According to Able Danger participants, this vital information about
terrorists in our midst was never allowed to get to those who may have
used it to thwart the 9/11 terrorist attacks. They claim they tried
three separate times to present it to the FBI and were barred three
separate times from doing so by attorneys for the Clinton
administration.

When LTC Anthony Shaffer of Able Danger went public with his
allegations, appearing on talk shows, retaliation was swift.
Representative Curt Weldon, who has gone to bat for Shaffer, relates:
"They have gagged the military officers. They have prevented them from
talking to any member of Congress. They have prevented them from
talking to the media. And the Defense Intelligence Agency has began a
process to destroy the career and the life of Lieutenant Colonel
Anthony Shaffer." In other action, according to Representative Weldon,
one day before the Lieutenant Colonel was to testify before the Senate
Committee on the Judiciary, in uniform, they permanently removed his
security clearance. The Defense Intelligence Agency told LTC Shaffer's
attorney they planned to seek a permanent removal of his pay and his
health care benefits for him and his two children. Reports are that
this punishment has been lightened somewhat, but we still may not hear
from LTC Shaffer. He has been effectively muzzled.

Why did this information never get to the FBI? Former Director Freeh
has remarked that the Able Danger information was the kind of
intelligence that could have prevented the hijackings. What the 9/11
Commission did show was the lack of communication between the
different agencies because of a "firewall" set up to hinder such
communication. It has been charged that the person responsible for
that wall was none other than Jamie Gorelick, who was part of the
Clinton administration, and who was the lead Democrat on the 9/11
Commission.

Congressman Weldon has called for a criminal investigation into what
he says is the most important story of our lifetime. He says he has
support from 202 fellow lawmakers from both parties, noting on
Thursday, November 17, that their goal was to force Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld to allow "former participants in the intelligence
program-known as Able Danger-to testify in an open hearing before the
United States Congress." However, Congressman Weldon has encountered
resistance for such a criminal investigation from some on the 9/11
Commission. Slade Gorton appeared on Lou Dobbs Tonight to say there is
nothing to the reports about Able Danger and they are not important
enough to consider further action. Tim Roemer has chimed in that Able
Danger presented no helpful information for the 9/11 Commission to
consider.

Former FBI Director Louis Freeh disagrees. He charged that the 9/11
Commission ignored or "summarily rejected" the most critical evidence
that could have prevented the horrible deaths of 3,000 of our fellow
citizens. Evidence collected by Able Danger, if true, is "undoubtedly
the most relevant fact of the entire post-9/11 inquiry." However, the
9/11 Commission concluded, and members have publicly stated, that it
was "not historically significant". Thus was valuable information
dismissed. Thus was Able Danger rendered irrelevant.

In righteous anger Congressman Weldon has noted that "in two weeks
with two staffers, I've uncovered more in this regard than they did
with 80 staffers and $15 million of taxpayers' money!" He also claimed
that "there's something very sinister that's going on here that really
troubles me."

Freeh says that new revelations point out that it is "a good time for
the country to make some assessments of the 9/11 Commission itself."
Freeh has commended the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee,
Republican Arlen Specter, for examining some of these matters. Able
Danger was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. Weldon has
claimed, "There's a cover-up here. It's clear and unequivocal". Freeh
makes a good case for an investigation, saying "The Joint Intelligence
Committees should reconvene and, in addition to Able Danger team
members, we should have the 9/11 commissioners appear as witnesses so
the families can hear their explanation why this doesn't matter." Many
other Americans would like to hear that explanation, also.

September 21, 2005: Senate Judiciary Committee Holds Public Hearing on
Able Danger Unit; Key Officers Barred From Testifying

Sen. Arlen Specter.

<image.tiffThe Senate Judiciary Committee, led by Sen. Arlen Specter
(R), holds a public hearing to investigate an intelligence program
called Able Danger, to explore allegations that it identified Mohamed
Atta and three other hijackers more than a year before 9/11, and to
learn why the Pentagon disbanded it and destroyed the information it
had gathered. [UPI, 9/21/05; Government Computer News, 9/21/05;New
York Times, 9/21/05] The committee is seeking testimony from several
former Able Danger members. Among these are Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer,
Navy Capt. Scott Phillpott, Dr. Eileen Preisser, and civilian analyst
James D. Smith; all but Preisser have recently come forward with
allegations about the unit (see August 17, 2005;August 22-September 1,
2005). However, the day before the hearing, Defense Department lawyers
ordered them and other former Able Danger members not to testify.
[UPI, 9/21/05; Jerry Doyle Show, 9/20/05] Shaffer says in an
interview, “I was told by two [Defense Department] officials today
directly that it is their understanding that [Defense Secretary
Rumsfeld] directed that we not testify...” [Jerry Doyle Show, 9/20/05]
The Defense Department's only reason for doing so, offered by a
spokesman, is that they have “expressed [their] security concerns and
believe it is simply not possible to discuss Able Danger in any great
detail in an open public forum open testimony of these witnesses.”
[New York Times, 9/21/05] Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen
Specter says, “That looks to me like it may be obstruction of the
committee's activities, something we will have to determine.” He
complains that the Pentagon only delivered hundreds of pages of
documents related to Able Danger late on the eve of the hearing,
leaving no time for committee staff to review the material. [Reuters,
9/21/05] Furthermore, the Pentagon's representative at the hearing,
William Dugan, admits that he has very limited knowledge of Able
Danger. Arlen Specter tells him, “You were sent over—perhaps with the
calculation you wouldn't have the information.” [Associated Press,
9/21/05; Government Computer News, 9/21/05]