Another 9/11 Coverup in the Making?
By Rory O'Connor, AlterNet
Posted on August 23, 2006, Printed on August 23, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/40693/
Despite the best efforts of the Pentagon to keep the lid on, the
story of Able Danger -- the controversial secret military
intelligence program that purportedly identified five active
al-Qaeda cells and four of the 9/11 hijackers more than a year
before the worst terror attacks ever on American soil --
continues to make news.
The latest wrinkle is a nasty public spat between the National
Geographic Channel, which plans to broadcast "Triple Cross: Bin
Laden's Spy in America" on Aug. 28, and author Peter Lance,
whose new book forms the basis of the documentary.
Lance is an Emmy-winning former reporter-producer for ABC News.
His book, "Triple Cross," which will be released in September,
accuses law enforcement officials of negligence in tracking down
Ali Mohamed, an alleged al-Qaeda agent in the United States for
years before Sept. 11. The book says Mohamed was hired by the
CIA and worked for the FBI, all the while providing information
to the terrorists. The book also contains, according to Lance,
"a major new insight" into why the Pentagon killed the Able
Danger operation in April 2000.
It involves the discovery by Able Danger operatives that Ali
Mohamed was a member of Osama bin Laden's inner circle. Mohamed
turned up in FBI surveillance photos as early as 1989, training
radical Muslims who would go on to assassinate Jewish militant
Meir Kahane and detonate a truck bomb at the World Trade Center.
He not only avoided arrest, but managed to become an FBI
informant while smuggling bin Laden in and out of Afghanistan,
writing most of the al-Qaeda terrorist manual and helping plan
attacks on American troops in Somalia and U.S. embassies in
Africa. Finally arrested in 1998, Mohamed cut a deal with the
Justice Department, and his whereabouts remain shrouded,
unknown.
''The FBI allowed the chief spy for al-Qaeda to operate right
under their noses,'' Lance said. ''They let him plan the
bombings of the embassies in Africa right under their noses. Two
hundred twenty-four people were killed and more than 4,000
wounded because of their negligence."
Lance contends that when Pentagon officials realized how
embarrassing it would be if it were revealed that bin Laden's
spy had stolen top-secret intelligence (including the positions
of all Green Beret and SEAL units worldwide), they decided to
bury the entire Able Danger program. Lance further states that
his book also contains evidence that Patrick Fitzgerald (of
later Scooter Libby/Valerie Plame fame) covered up key al-Qaeda
intelligence in 1996, when he was then an assistant U.S.
attorney in New York. To Lance, Fitzgerald was "one of the
principal players in the government's negligence, who engaged in
an affirmative coverup of key al-Qaeda-related intelligence in
1996."
Lance believes "Fitzgerald was hopelessly outgunned by Mohamed,
a hardened al-Qaeda spy, who was bin Laden's personal security
advisor." Despite two face-to-face meetings with Mohamed, whom
Fitzgerald called "the most dangerous man I've ever met," he
left him on the street, which allowed Mohamed -- who actually
planned the surveillance for the African Embassy bombings -- to
help pull off that simultaneous act of terror in Kenya and
Tanzania on August 7, 1998, in which 224 died and more than
4,000 were injured.
There is also a chilling tie-in in the book to the
airliner-bombing plot revealed last week by the British
intelligence. Much of the key intelligence that Fitzgerald
helped to bury in 1996 was directly related to the Bojinka plot,
a scheme by original WTC bomber and 9/11 architect Ramzi Yousef
to smuggle small improvised explosive devices aboard up to a
dozen U.S. bound jumbo jets exiting Asia.
Fitzgerald went on become both U.S. attorney for the northern
district of Illinois and special prosecutor in the CIA leak
probe. After allowing Ali Mohamed to operate with virtual
impunity for years, Fitzgerald finally arrested him post-bombing
in 1998. But then he cut a deal with him that allowed Mohamed to
enter witness protection and avoid the death penalty.
Lance contends that this was to spare the government from
embarrassment, since Ali Mohamed had been an FBI informant since
1992. Yet despite three years in federal custody, Fitzgerald and
his elite FBI squad members were unable to extract the 9/11 plot
from Mohamed, who was so close to bin Laden that he lived in the
Saudi billionaire's house after moving him and his family from
Afghanistan to Khartoum in 1992.
The revelations, says Lance, proved "too hot to handle" for the
National Geographic Channel, which is two-thirds owned by Rupert
Murdoch's NewsCorp (which also owns Lance's publisher,
HarperCollins). "The Feds have gotten to them, there is no
doubt," Lance told me in an interview. "National Geographic has
abandoned the truth and acquiesced to pressure from the
government."
Television critic Glenn Garvin first reported the flap in a
Miami Herald piece that characterized Lance's reaction to the
program as a "watered-down whitewash" that was "like doing
'Schindler's List' from Hitler's perspective.''
Able Danger insiders had figured the documentary to be
controversial, but no one expected open warfare to break out
between Lance and his broadcasters prior to its airing. Lance,
who was originally slated to narrate the film, is so angry at
what he sees as the program's shift in direction and emphasis
that he now refuses to back it at all.
At least one source interviewed for the documentary -- House
Armed Services Committee vice chairman Curt Weldon, who has
spearheaded congressional efforts to get to the bottom of the
Able Danger affair -- has asked to be removed from the program.
"We didn't think National Geographic was doing a 100 percent
job," says Weldon's chief of staff, Russ Caso. "We felt we
weren't looking at an unbiased piece.'' And National
Geographic's producers now won't even let Lance see the final
cut unless he signs what they call a "nondisparagement
agreement.''
The public pissing match between Lance and his putative
broadcaster is virtually without precedent. ''It's probably
happened before,'' John Ford, executive vice president of
programming at National Geographic Channel, told the Herald.
"But I can't tell you when. I certainly don't know of a case."
Ford strongly denies the documentary is a whitewash and says the
network still stands behind it despite Lance's attack. But Lance
is having none of it: "They hijacked my work," he says, "The
documentary is now skewed so much in favor of the feds that it
actually distorts the facts of the story." National Geographic's
executive vice president of programming, John Ford, said the
film's producers never intended to base the documentary solely
on the book -- something Lance hotly disputes.
"Let me set the record straight on the allegations made by John
Ford," he says. "First, in the Miami Herald piece, Ford lied to
Glenn Garvin when he said that 'Peter wanted us to include
accusations and conclusions ... that we could not independently
verify, and we weren't willing to do that.'"
"The film is also based on our own independent research," says
Ford. He also told United Press International that Lance "wants
this show to reflect his own personal conclusions," and that he
is "using this controversy to promote his book."
"The second lie is that the documentary 'was never supposed to
be based solely' on my book," says Lance. "The truth is that
from the beginning Nat Geo hired me to do a documentary
exclusively based on my work. This was my show from start to
finish. But now we're at a point where a major cable network,
reporting on an issue of national importance, is backtracking on
proof of how the FBI folded on the road to 9/11. What's worse,
in a few days this documentary will air with my name on it!"
Lance concludes, "This is a ridiculous lie, since they've cut me
out of the process and rolled over in favor of the feds."
Despite Lance's vehement protestations, National Geographic
executives like Ford are undeterred and say that the show must
and will go on -- especially given the upcoming fifth
anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. ''It exposes how different
parts of the U.S. national security apparatus failed to connect
the dots on Ali Mohamed over a decade and a half,'' Ford said.
"It's like a Tom Clancy thriller, but true.''
What's also true is that many questions still remain unanswered
about the actual Able Danger program, what it found, and what
reaction higher-ups everywhere from Pentagon brass to FBI
officials to the 9/11 Commission had when Able Danger operatives
attempted to inform them of its findings.
Why, for example, were three planned meetings with the FBI
canceled at the last minute, thus preventing the bureau from
hearing evidence that may have helped them "connect the dots"
before the terror attacks? Why was the guided missile destroyer
USS Cole sent to refuel at the port of Aden, Yemen, in October
2000, despite the fact that Able Danger had identified Aden as
the location of an active al-Qaeda cell? Why did Special
Operation Command chief Peter Schoomaker (now Army chief of
staff) apparently do nothing after Able Danger analysts
personally briefed him about the danger in Yemen just two days
before a suicide bomb attack blew a 40-by-40-foot hole in the
side of the Cole, killing 17 crew members and injuring 39
others?
Further, why was veteran intelligence analyst-operative Lt. Col.
Tony Shaffer's career derailed and reputation besmirched after
he tried to alert an unwilling 9/11 Commission to Able Danger's
findings? What has happened to the Department of Defense's own
inspector general's investigation into the scapegoating of
Shaffer -- originally slated to be completed and made public in
May? Whatever happened to Arlen Specter's Senate Judiciary
Committee hearings on Able Danger, originally scheduled for last
September and then "postponed for the Jewish holidays?" And why
were the entire 2.5 terabytes of Able Danger data destroyed,
along with a pre-9/11 link chart that identified four eventual
hijackers and even had a photograph of Mohammed Atta?
And what about reports that the Able Danger program was
reconstituted after the data purge by a classified Raytheon
"skunk works" program in Garland, Texas? Or that the entire
data-mining effort was then taken "black," hidden deep inside
the intelligence bureaucracy and expanded into what later
morphed into Total Information Awareness, NSA warrantless
surveillance, and in fact the government's ongoing illegal and
unconstitutional spying on huge quantities of domestic telephone
calls and emails? Conspiracy ... or something more? The plot
ever thickens …
Filmmaker and journalist Rory O'Connor writes the Media Is A
Plural blog.
© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at:
http://www.alternet.org/story/40693/