Saturday, August 20, 2005


Pilgrim is skeptical of partisans masquerading as skeptics. I'm with him. We don't know enough about ABLE DANGER or Lt. Col. Shaffer to offer up a bunch of grand theories or issues indictments. What we can do is gather information, sift through it, and weigh what we know.

Lt. Col. Shaffer could be an honorable man who is mistaken about how close ABLE DANGER came to Atta. The 9-11 Commission staff may have good reasons for not following up with him in January 2004. My mind is open on both questions.

OTOH, i see no reason why Shaffer would flat out lie about so important an issue. He is smart enough to know that he will be unmasked and repudiated.

In addition, the 9-11 Commission has not explained why they were so certain ABLE DANGER was of no importance. Did they speak to ABLE DANGER team members whose recollections differ from Shaffer's? Or did they rely on the FBI/INS timeline of Atta's movements? If it is the latter, then their work is incomplete and ABLE DANGER is a live issue.

No comments: