Nov 26 2005

Spring Time in Prague With Iraqis, Opportunities Lost

Published by at 1:19 pm under Able Danger/9-11,All General Discussions

In attempt to delay the massive leaf raking I must face every year after Thanksgiving, I have been researching diligently (over my morning coffee) some Able Danger and ‘Atta in Prague’ updates, something we posted recently on here. Fair warning – this sucker is one long post.

Or are they may be accurately called ‘predates’. A couple of folks have pointed to articles I had not seen before on the question of whether Atta did meet with Iraqi intelligence agent Al Ani in April of 2001 – a period when the US trail of Atta ‘disappears’ for a period of a few days. This lack of knowledge of Atta’s whereabouts persists to this day even though nearly all his moves in country have been traced. The first link comes from Mac Ranger and points to this June 03, 2004 article by Deroy Murdock at NRO:

Epstein and other Prague-Connection proponents believe Mohamed Atta met on April 8, 2001 with Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, Consul and Second Secretary at Iraq’s Czech embassy between March 1999 and April 22, 2001. Al-Ani, a suspected intelligence officer, allegedly handled several agents, possibly including Atta.

According to his May 26, 2000 Czech visa application â€” submitted in Bonn, Germany â€” Atta called himself a “Hamburg student.” He had studied urban planning for seven years at Hamburg-Harburg Technical University and launched an Islamic club there in 1999.

Atta apparently had pressing business in Prague. With his visa application pending until May 31, Atta nonetheless flew to Prague International Airport on May 30 and remained in its transit lounge for about six hours before flying back to Germany. Czech officials suspect he may have met someone there. Two days later, on June 2, he returned to Prague by bus on Czech visa number BONN200005260024. He stayed there for some 20 hours, and then flew to Newark, New Jersey, on June 3.

While skeptics dismiss this encounter, Czech intelligence found Al-Ani’s appointment calendar in Iraq’s Prague embassy, presumably after Saddam Hussein’s defeat. Al-Ani’s diary lists an April 8, 2001, meeting with “Hamburg student.” Maybe, in a massive coincidence, Al-Ani dined with a young scholar and traversed the nuances of Nietzsche. Or perhaps Al-Ani saw Mohamed Atta and discussed more practical matters.

Gimme a break. How is this evidence better than misinformation evidence provided by Khalid Sheikh Mohamed – master mind of 9-11? The 9-11 commission would leave you to believe there is evidence of Atta in Virginia Beach (my native beach hang out BTW). But in reality there isn’t:

On April 4, 2001, the FBI says, Atta departed Virginia Beach’s Diplomat Inn with Al-Shehhi and cashed a SunTrust check for $8,000. No American eyewitness saw Atta again until April 11.

Gone. Disappeared. After years of investigation and tracing purchase, hotels, etc all they have is someone using Atta’s cell phone ( a phone which is most likely useless in Europe due to the different mobile phone protocols). One last item:

As is well known, on June 18, 2002, CIA Director George Tenet told the Congressional Joint Inquiry on 9/11 that his agency could not “establish that Atta left the US or entered Europe in April 2001.” But Tenet also admitted: “It is possible that Atta traveled under an unknown alias.”

That means there are a number of international travelers that the CIA found during that time period that they cannot clearly identify with a person they could track down. They knew who flew in and out of the country on the days that could support Atta being in Prague. But obviously there is some name or names which have defied scrutiny and been eliminated as being Atta under an assumed name.

Again, are we to believe the mastermind of 9-11 over leaders from a western nation?

Hynek Kmonicek booted Al-Ani from Prague. He was then the Czech Republic’s deputy foreign minister, and today is its United Nations ambassador. As Kmonicek tersely insisted in the Prague Post in June 2002: “The meeting took place.”

You want to know possibly why Mohamed might do all he could to not implicate Iraq? Well, Saddam and his thugs were known to treat traitors and their families with a special kind of touch, if you know what I mean. However, if Mohamed believed deeply in the cause, and the cause still involved remnants of the Baathists as key elements, Mohamed would never lead the US towards those still fighting.

And what about the veracity of the 9-11 report? Well, their conclusions have been shot full of holes it seems. This one stunned me:

Epstein also disputes news accounts that Atta was in Virginia when he was supposed to be in Prague. The New York Times, quoting “federal law enforcement officials,” said Atta was in Virginia Beach on April 2, 2001 and “was back in Florida, renting a car” by April 11. According to Newsweek, “The bureau [FBI] had his rental car and hotel receipts.”

“There were no car rental records in Virginia, Florida, or anywhere else in April 2001 for Mohamed Atta,” Epstein responds, “since he had not yet obtained his Florida license. His international license was at his father’s home in Cairo, Egypt (where his roommate Marwan al-Shehhi picked it up in late April).”

Without a driver’s license, Atta could not have been “back in Florida, renting a car,” as the Times claims. Anyone who has rented an automobile knows the first words out of every car rental agent’s mouth: “Driver’s license and credit card.”

Especially foreign travelers! The article shows how Atta could get around, but the point is the evidence placing Atta in the US is incredibly shaky and requires assumptions no commission investigating 9-11 should have made and pretended were facts.

And this article adds, or repeats, another Iraq connection to 9-11 (emphasis mine):

Additional records further illuminate Iraqi complicity in the September 11 massacre. As a May 27 Wall Street Journal editorial reported, Ahmed Hikmat Shakir’s name appears on three different rosters of the late Uday Hussein’s prestigious paramilitary group, the Saddam Fedayeen.

On January 5, 2000, Shakir allegedly welcomed Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi to Kuala Lampur and escorted them through immigration and on to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel. That’s where these September 11 hijackers met with 9/11 conspirators Ramzi bin al Shibh and Tawfiz al Atash. Five days later, according to The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes (he is also author of the new book The Connection), Shakir vanished.

On January 15, al Midhar and al Hamzi quietly flew from Hong Kong to Los Angeles. Nearly eight months later, they very loudly smashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon.

Saddam Fedayeen Lieutenant Colonel Shakir resurfaced on September 17, 2001, in Qatari handcuffs. His pockets and apartment yielded, among other things, phone numbers for the contacts and safe houses of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers. Shakir also possessed information on “Operation Bojinka,” al Qaeda’s 1995 conspiracy to explode 12 passenger jets simultaneously over the Pacific. Shakir passed from Qatari to Jordanian custody before being released after three months of Iraqi pressure. He reportedly returned to Saddam Hussein’s Baghdad.

We have pointed out many times that connections between the 9-11 Al Qaeda members and the WTC bombing in 1993 was going to create a clear connection to Iraq.

OK, well that was ‘old news’ article number one. Big Dog, a commenter on our site, pointed us to this New American article by William Jasper and published October 31st, 2005. It focuses in on Atta’s time in Germany, and the interest he garnered in connection with Iraq intelligence activities also being monitored.


The Malaysia meeting was in 2000, so why did Ramzi bin al Shibh have to fly to Malaysia to meet with people when Hamburg was available? That is something that should be investigated. Was it to keep hidden a possible Iraq connection from German and/or Western intelligence?


Gee, I wonder why it caused so much attention. But notice the timeframe nicely overlaps the Able Danger timeframe and all that traffic is exactly the kind of signature a data mining analysis would pick up. And you know what, that kind of traffic is impossible to miss (given the US Embassy bombings in 1998 and the millennium scare in 2000).

Over the past several years, as more and more evidence has come out, it has grown more and more difficult for U.S. government officials to sustain the cover story that they had no way of anticipating the attacks. As it turns out, U.S. intelligence agencies and their foreign counterparts were almost tripping over each other as they shadowed the al-Qaeda network across the face of the planet. The FBI and CIA were tracking al-Qaeda operatives and their activities in the U.S. and overseas. The National Security Agency (NSA) was intercepting and recording the telephone calls of many al-Qaeda operatives, including Osama bin Laden himself. More recently, it has come to light that a super-secret Pentagon operation, known as “Able Danger,” was also tracking and monitoring al-Qaeda. Using advanced computer “data mining” capabilities, the Able Danger team reportedly identified Mohammed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Midhar, and Nawaf al-Hazmi as members of an al-Qaeda cell code-named “Brooklyn” because of its connections to New York City.

Notice the same names identified are the ones in the Malaysia meeting.

This story also makes a claim that had up until now not been made so clearly: Clinton appointees were the ones who destroyed the Able Danger data – in an effort to shut down and purge a study on ‘China’ infiltration of the US being done using the same technology and government/contractor resources:

This much we do know: first, the Clinton administration in 2000 and then the Bush administration in 2001 failed to heed the Able Danger warnings on al-Qaeda. Moreover, Clinton administration officials ordered the main Able Danger files destroyed in 2000; Bush administration officials ordered Lt. Col. Schaffer’s duplicate Able Danger files destroyed in 2004.

That last item is a bit of a stretch. There are indications the Deputy Director of DIA – a holdover from the Clinton period, possibly in a different position – is the one who ignored the Able Danger results and purged Shaffer’s duplicate data sets to cover up his actions pre 9-11, when he dismissed the warnings. That would not mean the ‘Bush Administraion’ was at fault.

What is becoming clear is there was lots of activity around Al Qaeda in Germany throughout the period of 1999 – 2001. Ed Morrissey reported on the round up of Iraqi intelligence agents in Germany in February 2001, which might have caused a meeting in Germany to move to Prague. But this article adds to that picture immensely:

Whatever useful data Able Danger might have been able to offer concerning Mohammed Atta and his associates would have been superfluous. The FBI and CIA had been tracking the al-Qaeda 9/11 conspirators very closely for years â€” both in the U.S. and overseas, using both technical means and human intelligence. Dedicated FBI and CIA field operatives had warned their superiors repeatedly and had urged them to authorize the arrest of the terrorists.

The following is a comprehensive list of ‘dots’ that should have been connected – but where not. The most disturbing ones are from supposed Clinton Allies like Germany. Why didn’t are vaulted relationship bear the fruit of preventing 9-11?

Hamburg Cell. Mohammed Atta, Ramzi bin al Shibh, and their roommates in Hamburg came under surveillance by German intelligence and the CIA in 1998 because of their association with al-Qaeda operatives in Hamburg who had been linked to the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. Those operatives included Mamoun Darkazanli, Mohammad Haidar Zammar, Said Bahaji, and Mounir al-Motassadek. The CIA station chief in Hamburg, Tom Volz, who posed as a U.S. embassy employee, actually tried to recruit Darkazanli as an informant in late 1999 and 2000.

San Diego Cell. Even the 9/11 Commission Report, which whitewashed federal government failures, acknowledged that the failure to identify hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar when they entered the U.S. was one of the biggest “lost opportunities.” The CIA had tracked both men to the “secret” al-Qaeda planning meeting for 9/11 in Malaysia, where they and other participants were photographed and videotaped by the CIA and Malaysian intelligence. The FBI claims that the CIA didn’t inform them about the two men, so they had no way of knowing about them.

That won’t wash. Available evidence shows the FBI had multiple tails on the duo in San Diego, where Hazmi and Midhar lived with former San Diego State professor Abdussattar Shaikh, an acknowledged longtime undercover asset of the FBI! What’s more, the two terrorists had regular contacts with several other area jihadists who had long been under FBI surveillance, including Omar al-Bayoumi, an agent of the Saudi government whom federal authorities acknowledge as a primary financial conduit for Hazmi and Midhar.

Stop here a second and contemplate this. Able Danger had Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Khalid al-Mihdar and Nawaf al-Hazmi in their sites in January 2000. That is the same time as the Malaysia meeting was being held. Atta and Shehhi could have been tracked back to Hamburg and to all the subsequent meetings with the other Al Qaeda key players like Khalid Sheikh Mohamed. But more importantly, had the Able Danger warnings been dispersed to law enforcement, then the names of Mihdar and Hazmi would never have been missed in the US.


The FBI and the 9/11 Commission report say that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar first entered the United States in 2000, but the Washington Post and the LA Times report that the two first came in 1999, and that al-Hazmi’s name was on their future apartment’s lease in November of 1999. Either way, the two definitely attended the 2000 Al Qaeda Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. It was there that the details of the 9/11 attacks were decided upon. He was secretly videotaped at this meeting by Malaysian authorities.


OK, I am not a temporally grounded person (which means I do not automatically place events into a timeline) so maybe I just missed this the whole time. But Able Danger had identified the four key highjackers at the most critical juncture of their planning! So I agree with former FBI Director Freeh: had Able Danger been paid attention to 9-11 could have probably been averted.

For some time I had chalked up ignoring Able Danger to the fact it was using cutting edge technology in a novel way which had not been validated yet. Therefore its results would rightfully be suspect, initially. But now I see that the FBI was tracking these folks and find it disturbing that even questionable information was not passed on when it pertained to terrorists. Unless it would impact a prosecution.. Its possible a meeting with SOCOM to pass terrorism information from Able Danger to the FBI could actually hit the Gorelick wall (as opposed to a credibility wall).

Once you see that Hamzi and Mihdar would have been red flagged by Able Danger getting the news out, the domino effect of this becomes clear. Again, back to the article from New American:

Phoenix Cell. FBI informant Aukai Collins, who monitored Middle East terrorist suspects for the FBI for four years in Phoenix, claims to have told the FBI about 9/11 hijacker Hani Hanjour while Hanjour was in flight training in Phoenix. Collins said the FBI knew Hanjour lived in Phoenix, knew his exact address, his phone number, and even what car he drove. “They knew everything about the guy,” Collins claims. In July 2001, Phoenix FBI agent Ken Williams sent an electronic memo to FBI headquarters in Washington outlining his investigation into area flight schools that led him to believe al-Qaeda may be using U.S. flight schools to train terrorists as pilots.

What does Hanjour have to do with all of this? Again, back to Wikipedia and Hamzi:

In June of 2000, al-Mihdhar returned to Yemen, his birthplace, leaving al-Hazmi to take care of himself. This move was not authorized by al-Qaida. Another al-Qaida operative and future 9/11 hijacker named Hani Hanjour moved in with him. In 2001, al-Hazmi and Hanjour moved to Falls Church, Virginia. Eventually two other hijackers, Ahmed al-Ghamdi and Majed Moqed, moved in with them.

Yep. The killer FBI memo that was ignored probably would not have been if Hamzi’s AQ connection from Able Danger had been distributed into the law enforcement community. Once the flight school link was seen the 9-11 plan would have crumbled into the open.

This could be more damning than I originally suspected. The Able Danger find was right on top of (and maybe due to) key planning meetings on the final stages of 9-11. The four people identified could have easily led to the unraveling of the plot members, and the warning signs that were missed would have been obvious with the four names associated with the events. Able Danger could have been the tipping point for detecting 9-11 in the early stages.

Now we must know, and in the open, why Able Danger was silenced and its data purged in 2000. There is no more important issue to our national security than getting to the root of this. And if the Gorelick Wall was the rationale used to keep SOCOM intel from reaching FBI resources that were at times in the next room with the 9-11 perpetrators, then we need to know that too.

14 responses so far

14 Responses to “Spring Time in Prague With Iraqis, Opportunities Lost”

  1. Snapple says:

    Gimme a break!

    Gorelick is not in power now. We may expose her, but we may also expose our secrets.

    I have read and reread all of this stuff you are posting from Mylroie and Epstein, and it sounds plausable to me; but the big question I have at the end of the day is, why doesn’t Bush come on TV and explain this.

    I am pretty sure that Clinton’s Pentagon lawyers have not chained him to the wall in Abu Graib and stuffed a gag in his mouth. I am pretty sure J. Gorelic is not sitting on his head or twisting his arm.

    If your scenario is true, why doesn’t Bush hold a press conference and explain to the American people that “Iraq did it”? He’s the President of the United States. I am sure it would really help his ratings.

    So either this information is not true, or there is a really good reason why Bush is not admitting it.

    Cheney looked like he wanted to implicate Iraq but he backed off.

    Assuming your (Mylroie’s) account is true, perhaps Bush hesitates to explain Iraq’s involvement because it would compromise sensitive ongoing criminal and intelligence investigations.

    Perhaps Bush would not be able to prove to his skeptics that Iraq was involved without going into sensitive sources and methods.
    Not wanting to reveal the existence of Able Danger would be one possibility, but I don’t work for the government or in a security-related field.

    This administration is often criticized for its extreme secrecy, but maybe there is a reason.

    I personally think that there are people–even Americans–who may have collaborated in 9-11. The government is trying to smoke them out, do sting operations on them, arrest them, without compromising sensitive sources and methods.

    It is difficult to take intelligence information into court. It exposes secrets that tip off other bad guys. I think it is better to keep that information secret, but use it to mount sting operations on the bad guys.

    It may not appear that some of these guys who are being taken down by stings are being locked up for much, but they may be getting locked up for something the FBI can take into court, and that’s what matters.

    But I am no expert. This is just what I would do.

    For example, look at those guys named Shah and Sabir. The FBI tricked them into swearing loyalty to Al Qaeda. They claim they were “framed.” But why did the FBI frame them?

    Sabir was a doctor who lived in Boca Raton where the first anthrax attack was planned.

    Shah was the son of a former lieutenant of Malcolm X who was arrested with a note in his car about Ward Churchill, the Colorado radical who called American killed on 9-11 “Little Eichmanns” and who suggests that soldiers should fragg their officers.

    Not only that, Churchill justified the 9-11 attacks in his screed called “Some People Push Back.” You know where that phrase comes from? It comes from Malcolm X. He said this when Kennedy was shot. Malcolm X attributed Kennedy’s death to his anti-Castro policies.

    Intelligence is not about getting the Democrats. It is about rounding up or neutralizing the terrorists and their support networks. And I think this is happening. We just don’t hear what these people really did that made the FBI decide to set them up.

    I think the terrorists want to know about Able Danger. They may want to know if we can place these terrorists in America well prior to 9-11 and if we have taken note of their American confederates. I’m against telling them. And if a few Democrats have their sins of omission covered up, so what.

    But, I am no expert at all. Just an ordinary citizen.

  2. LuckyBogey says:

    AJ â€“ Good work! Keep in mind that AD would have had access to BIS data. Foreign intel was being data-mined. Remember the San Diego apartment was being rented from a FBI informant. Donâ€™t forget about the terrorists that ran away from the London airport. I find it interesting that we have Pincus and Isikoff quoting anonymous â€œsenior administration officials. As stated at the end of the below referenced article:
    â€¦. the introduction of an anonymous â€œsenior administration sourceâ€ with an unknown agendaâ€¦..

    On May 1st, 2002, the status of the case changed radically when first Newsweek and then the Washington Post declared the meeting a fictoid. Walter Pincus in the Washington Post (based on a story a few days earlier by Michael Isikoff in Newsweek) stated â€œThere is no evidence that the alleged leader of the Sept. 11 hijackers, Mohamed Atta, met in April 2001 with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Pragueâ€¦ and Pincus writes â€œthe Czechs said they were no longer certain that Atta was the person who met al-Ani.â€

    This is total disinformation and falsehoods by the same writers involved with Joe Wilson! Also I find Azizâ€™s comments to be very curious:
    “Even if such an incident had taken place, it doesn’t mean anything. Any diplomat in any mission might meet people in a restaurant here or there and talk to them, which is meaningless. If that person turned out to be something else, that doesn’t mean he had a connection with what that person did later.”

    These same reporters are quoting â€œsenior admin officialsâ€ who do not want to connect AD, Iraq, Plame-Gate, and 911? Why?

  3. AJStrata says:

    Snapple, you need to take a chill pill – I think I am on your side!

    First off, realize everything I refer to is in the media! So don’t think I am exposing anything here.

    Second, there is very little that is secret in this. It just talks about how there is little evidence to back up the 9-11 commissions version of events and lots to think otherwise.

    Yes, we have to be careful about sources, methods and what we know. But we can discuss what went wrong in the process that allowed all this information not to come together and help stop 9-11.

    You ask why Bush doesn’t play gotcha with Clinton era mistakes. I have said many times Bush is not interested in that game because it doesn’t help us in the war on terrorism. He refuses to get sidetracked with the finger pointing.

    With that said, I think he left too much unanswered. But we will find out. Remember, I am just a simple citizen too. And I would like some answers on what happened to destroy intelligence data on terrorists.

  4. axiom says:

    This White House has gone out of its way to avoid the blame game in reference to actions by a previous administration.

    In fact, try and think of any times the Bush Administration specifically tried to pass the buck to a previous administration. I can only think of one occasion. Ashcroft, when testifying in public before the 9/11 Commission, made public the memo from Jamie Gorelick about “the wall”.

    The Bush Administration has actually done a lot of things specifically to cover for the Clinton Administration. The White House told congressional leaders to ease off on the Marc Rich pardon. The WH basically let Sandy Berger walk away with a slap on the wrist for comprimising national security.

    The Atta timeline is still open in my opinion. You cannot insist that Atta was in Hamburg meeting with al-Ani. And you cannot insist Atta was in the United States making phone calls. However, the Malaysia meeting, the Iraqis that facilitated travel for the Bojinka plot planners, and the Abdul Yasin issue is enough information to raise serious doubts about those that WANT to rule out Iraqi involvement in 9/11.

  5. axiom says:

    Snapple: Laurie Mylorie isn’t mentioned by AJ. What are you talking about?

  6. Snapple says:

    Everything AJ is writing was first written by Laurie Mylroie and by Epstein following on her lead. That’s no secret if you have followed this.

    Mylroie wrote a book on Saddam with Judith Miller, too, by the way.

    Her book about the two WTC attacks and about Atta in Prague is called The War Against America. You need a new edition because the old edition was about the first WTC attack. She updated it after 9-11.

    Her book that blames the CIA and State Department is called Bush Versus the Beltway, and her book with Miller is called Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf.

    In Bush Versus the Beltway, she blames bureaucratic obstruction for the fact that her theory wasn’t accepted. I said what I think above.

    But again, I have no special expertise. I am only speculating.

  7. Snapple says:

    Take a chill pill yourself. Gimme a break!

    Ward Churchill popped up at a conference Cynthia McKinney organized on Able Danger. (link)

    Why would he be snooping around on that? This guy is always really big trouble. And he doesn’t want us to have better intelligence analysis. He wants America “off the planet.”

    All these leftists who are so eager to find out about this Pentagon program–gives me the creeps.

    I think Churchill is going to try to make trouble about Able Danger.
    I even wonder if he is concerned that Able Danger may have picked up his activities. He was very opposed to the sanctions on Iraq, said how it was killing children, etc. Basically, he seems like he was a Saddam shill.

    And he was jubilant about 9-11. It made his day.

  8. Snapple says:

    If anyone wants to know more about Churchill, go to

    They only address Churchill’s dishonesty as a scholar, however.

    They have not speculated on the implications of Churchill’s interest in Able Danger.

    There is another site that sounds a lot like Churchill snarling, flipping-off America, and threatening mayhem; but the person writes under hats, so it is difficult to be positive. I think it probably is Churchill, but can be certain because the site’s owner posts under two pseudonyms.

    This is a very scary, spitefilled person. He hates the Rocky Mountain News for exposing his academic dishonesty. He is often threatening their writers.

  9. AJStrata says:

    OK Snapple,

    I’m chilled. Just thought you were coming on a bit strong and putting some words in my mouth. Keep posting!

  10. Snapple says:

    Lucky Bogey–

    I also had read this non-denial denial which you mention.
    If true, that quote is really telling.

    â€œEven if such an incident had taken place, it doesnâ€™t mean anything. Any diplomat in any mission might meet people in a restaurant here or there and talk to them, which is meaningless. If that person turned out to be something else, that doesnâ€™t mean he had a connection with what that person did later.â€

  11. Snapple says:


    I just saw something huge on the news. Probably I didn’t hear everything right, so listen yourself. This was just on FOX NEWS and my coffee is still percolating.

    These are going to expand the power of the Pentagon to to criminal investigations on American citizens in the US if it is related to terrorism. These are not intelligence investigations–these will lead to criminal prosecutions.

    I think this is Able Danger. I say go for it. Arrest their butts.
    Try them. Throw them in the penitentary. But make sure it is fair and just.

    The radicals are really going to flip out now.

    AJ–please find out about this and perhaps start a thread. Watch. Probably this is the Able Danger submarine surfacing. I don’t know. This is just speculation. I have nothing to do with government matters. I just read a lot.

    And I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last nite!

    If Able Danger was destroyed, it’s probably been reconstituted by now, but I am not too knowlegable about computers and databases.

    But if they did it before they can repeat it.

    This is so great! Makes my day!! Woo Hoo!

  12. Able Danger: Clear Thinking/Analysis

    AJ Strata has done excellent work dissecting the 9-11/Able Danger timeline:


  13. […] This is probably how 9-11 murders Midhar and Hazmi were missed when they were making all their calls overseas to what had to be targets of the CIA and German intelligence. The NSA would see the call, but due to short sighted and lazy policies that avoided arguing why these people should be monitored their information would never be transmitted to the FBI under Clinton’s watch. […]

  14. […] AJStrata and Macranger both wrote some excellent posts that illustrate the ties between the 9/11 hijackers, specifically Atta, and the Able Danger operation. AJ first points to this article printed in 2004: Epstein and other Prague-Connection proponents believe Mohamed Atta met on April 8, 2001 with Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, Consul and Second Secretary at Iraq?s Czech embassy between March 1999 and April 22, 2001. Al-Ani, a suspected intelligence officer, allegedly handled several agents, possibly including Atta. […]