Oct 03 2005

Able Danger, Shaffer Responds, 10/03/05

Published by at 12:49 pm under All General Discussions

Attorney Mark Zaid, who is representing Lt Col Shaffer and other Able Danger members ready to testify in Senate hearings, has come out to rebuff AP claims regarding Shaffer’s security clearances. Zaid posted his response to Ed Morrissey, who has the complete text here.

It is a very extensive response, and here are my comments on it:

The AP story that was issued Friday entitled “Pentagon revokes clearance of ‘Able Danger’ officer” was replete with many errors and unfortunate omissions that portrayed my client, who the reporter never interviewed, in a false light.

Unfortunately, the AP story was terrible. Despite having the documents in her possession the reporter made numerous errors and ignored crucial information.

I am not surprised. Journalists come it two flavors: uninformed or hopelessly biased towards the leftward fringes.

First, the AP failed to understand the distinction between DIA and the Army. DIA is LTC Shaffer’s civilian employer. The key allegations filed against him were while he served with the Army on active duty. LTC Shaffer is now a reserve Army officer. The Army took no punitive action against LTC Shaffer. Instead, with full knowledge of everything DIA was doing, the Army promoted him from Major to LTC in the midst of the security clearance revocation proceedings. This says everything. It was a slap right in DIA’s face. Thus, it is his civilian, not military, security clearance that was revoked.

Interesting. DIA has not issues regarding Shaffer’s work for them, and no ‘convictions’ from other parties. If all the transgressions happened during his Army stint – the DIA cannot become judge and jury and now, in essence, convict him for the Army.

Second, the initial article noted: “Shaffer says he received a Bronze Star medal for work on a classified operation in Afghanistan in 2003.

This was not the medal that DIA – again, not the military/Army – raised an issue about. LTC Shaffer was awarded the Bronze Star for his six month deployment in support of combat operations in Afghanistan during his July-Dec 2003 deployment for Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.

The award at issue was the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) – and it had to do with his work on classified operations such as ABLE DANGER.

This is a prime example of a ignorant reporter. The media is biased because it is unwilling to staff up with people who understand even the most basic aspect of the military. What a joke.

In the 1990 incident Shaffer merely had the credentials on him when he got a “drunk in pubic” charge. He did not use the credentials for any purpose. In 1996 he was on official business with a DIA Counterintelligence Special Agent in the car when he was pulled over. He was explicitly told by the DIA Special Agent to show the credentials. That is a very important fact that was omitted. Moreover, there was no alcohol involved with the 1996 incident though at first glance the article may give that impression.

Demonstrating without a doubt this AP reporter is both uninformed and biased. AP better get out with a correction ASAP. You do not make these kinds of errors in a ‘professional news organization’. Of course, AP does not meet my minimalistic definition of a professional news organization – so I doubt they will make a correction.

Fifth, yes, LTC Shaffer took pens and pads from the American Embassy to use at school. However, it was nearly 30, not 20, years ago, in the 1978-79 timeframe – when he was 15 and 16 years old. And, again, this previously investigated and favorably adjudicated.

Are there any ADULTS in DIA ar at the AP??? What in the world is this??? Somebody needs to be fired for simply trying to do such an inept smear job. This is so 3rd grade it is pathetic and for someone so stupid as to report this as a major issue.

3 responses so far

3 Responses to “Able Danger, Shaffer Responds, 10/03/05”

  1. Snapple says:

    AJSTRATA writes: “Are there any ADULTS in DIA ar at the AP??? What in the world is this??? Somebody needs to be fired for simply trying to do such an inept smear job. This is so 3rd grade it is pathetic and for someone so stupid as to report this as a major issue. ”

    The DIA may not have written this document. You have had no confirmation from them that they did. You are taking the word of
    Shaffer’s lawyer Mark Zaid.

    He has criticized the AP reporter for getting it wrong, but he has not made these apocryphal documents public.

    I wouldn’t buy a pig in a poke.

  2. […] Meanwhile, Strata reports the Mullahs are working on their mid-range missile capabilitites. […]

  3. […] The situation on the ground is improving rapidly, despite the MSM headlines and Democrat/Rino treachery. Is Iraq another Vietnam? Check this graph at Michael Totten. By comparison with Vietnam, US losses in Iraq have been minor. By comparison with the losses inflicted on US citizens by illegal immigrants (40,000+ dead since 9/11), US losses in Iraq have been minor. Two things have happened since the surge began: 1. Al Sadr fled and his death squads have been neutralized. 2. The Sunni tribes have, at long last, recognized that the enemy is Al Qaeda, not the US. Add in aggressive US military leadership and a realization that time is short to avert disaster, and we have a recipe for victory. The Democrat’s victory in 2006 and their determination to hand victory to Al Qaeda has told everyone that Iraq needs to be won now or lost later. The Stratasphere sees progress in Diyala, now that Anbar has started to turn around. Al Qaeda is now the main enemy in Iraq. It is fighting a last-ditch battle and losing everywhere but in the MSM. Soon, they will lose even there. Posted by: Pat on May 18, 07 | 12:04 am | [0] comments [0] Views | Permalink | [0] TrackBack | Go to Main Page Random Posts Stay the Course in Iraq The problem with Islam What the Left thinks about 2008 var site=”sm6blogger” Judicious Asininity >>www.asininity.com 2004PHP […]