Informed Speculation

Sometimes you can be right for the wrong reasons, and wrong for the right ones, and as regards Able Danger, I’m unsure which is which…William Arkin, writing in the Washington Post, has one of the more lucid MSM pieces on the often bewildering spy project I’ve yet to see. Certainly the regular followers of Able Danger, such as Captain Ed, AJStrata, and Tom Maguire, have mentioned Arkin’s main conclusion – that Able Danger is being avoided by the Pentagon because it gathered information on U.S. citizens, illegally, and not because it revealed Mohammed Atta’s prescence pre-9/11 – many times.

So we have little new here; yet the passage of time and the at-times-conflicting testimony of the ‘whistleblowers’, led by the quite unreliable Curt Weldon, have moved me firmly into the skeptic’s corner regarding the Atta connection. I find the scenario laid out by Arkin far more plausible:

The Pentagon is hiding something. But it’s not what Weldon thinks.

First, to debunk the myths:

* As best as I can determine, having spent tens of hours talking to military sources involved with the issue, intelligence analysts did not identify anyone prior to 9/11, Mohammed Atta included, as a suspect in any upcoming terrorist attack.
* It is not even clear that a “Mohammed Atta” was identified, let alone that it is the same Atta who died on 9/11.
* No military lawyers prevented intelligence sleuths from passing useful information to the FBI.
* Able Danger itself was not an intelligence program.

…Using the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and associated lists of suspect individuals as a starting point, LIWA [Land Information Warfare Activity (LIWA), a part of the Army Intelligence and Security Command] began to compile databases of “associated” individuals, and then they began to “data mine” their mountains of collected records to find links between them. What they ended up with—and what is still being hidden today—is the questionable (read: potentially illegal) collection and acquisition of information on American citizens before and after 9/11.

I’m a firm believer in Occam’s Razor, and Able Danger increasingly looks like a scenario where it seems to be quite applicable.

UPDATE 6:22 p.m. central: It will come as no surprise to his regular readers that AJ weighs in with a comprehensive post bringing to bear his excellent comprehension of the issues involved…highly recommended…

UPDATE 2 9:48 p.m. central: Baldilocks reminds me that she was on this beat 5 days ago (but better late than never, right, Juliette?). Meanwhile, Captain Ed shares AJ’s skepticism of Arkin’s skepticism, pointing out the unwarranted leaps made in the article, and enlightening us to a problem with Arkin’s credibility that dates back to those glorious days of 2003 when he first began blogging…