Thread: Congressman Curt Weldon on ABLE DANGER

I am just starting a new thread for this topic because I can't find the one where we were discussing it PLUS I have found a copy of the letter that Weldon has written to Rumsfeld. This is from the transcript of Lou Dobbs' show on November 16th.

Weldon on Able Danger

Wednesday, November 16, 2005; Posted: 5:50 p.m. EST (22:50 GMT)

RELATED
Rep. Weldon's letter to Rumsfeld
(CNN) -- Congressman Curt Weldon, R-Pennsylvania, says a military intelligence unit called Able Danger identified four September 11 hijackers in 2000, more than a year before those attacks.

And he accuses the Defense Intelligence Agency of conducting a smear campaign against Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, the intelligence officer who said he tried to alert the FBI and, later, the commission investigating the attacks about the terrorists.

Weldon's faced criticism from 9/11 commission member Tim Roemer for his call for an investigation into the Able Danger claims.

"The way he talks about Able Danger these days, you'd think it would have prevented Pearl Harbor and maybe had Congress spend money responsibly or develop some kind of immigration policy," Roemer told CNN's Lou Dobbs on Monday.

Weldon joined Dobbs on Tuesday to discuss Roemer's remarks, as well as his call for an Able Danger investigation.

DOBBS: Congressman, what is your reaction to Tim Roemer's remarks?

WELDON: Outrageous. We're talking about the loss of 3,000 people [in the September 11, 2001 attacks]. The largest loss of American lives, including Pearl Harbor, in the history of our country, in one incident. And we brush it aside like it's nothing.

Talk to the families of these people as I have. I have a wife and two kids in my district whose husband was on one of the planes when he had his throat slit by the terrorists. The chief of all rescue in New York, Ray Downey, left five kids and grandkids. Talk to them. Talk to the 17 sailors' families on the USS Cole, a couple of whom have already written me e-mails that they really want to know what happened and what could have prevented the attack. I just can't believe the cavalier attitude of responding to this, Lou.

DOBBS: Cavalier, perhaps, certainly glib.

At the same time, Tim Roemer is asking, where is the chart? Where is the information? And why are you asking for a criminal investigation when the 9/11 Commission members say they never saw any evidence of this? Why is there that disconnect?

WELDON: Well, the chart is not the issue. The 9/11 Commission is using that because they're embarrassed. They've got egg all over their face. The reason they didn't report on it, is because for some reason, I think it was deliberate. They never interviewed the key participants in Able Danger.

The people that I've talked to had one meeting, and that was a debrief by [Commissioner] Jamie Gorelick's staffer. And it was in Jamie Gorelick's best interest not to have the story told.

Perhaps that's why she called my office the first week of August when the story broke in The New York Times and said to my chief of staff, "Please tell Congressman Weldon that I did nothing wrong."

She also made similar calls to Arlen Specter's staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Personal calls to tell us that she did nothing wrong. Lou, there's something here that the American people need to understand.

DOBBS: Well, there is so much that we need to understand, congressman. And your call for a criminal investigation, when we last talked had 100 signatures. How many, Congressman, do you now have, congressman and congresswomen, supporting your call for an investigation of the Defense Department and the controversy surrounding Able Danger?

WELDON: Lou, last week was the first day I circulated the letter. On the final day of the session I got, as you pointed out, 100 signatures. We're going back into session in five minutes. I'll guarantee you by the close of your hour here, I'll have at least 125 names on this letter, if not more. And these are senior members of both parties. These are conservatives and liberals who want these people to be able to testify in open, before the Congress and before the American people.

Below is the letter to Rumsfeld:

Below is Rep. Weldon's letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld:

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.