Oct 21 2005

Able Danger, China and DIA 10/21/05

Published by at 11:25 am under Able Danger/9-11,All General Discussions

After Curt Weldon’s blistering attack on the DIA and tried to find out who was deputy director during those years. While I have not found that information (yet) I did find out a few things.

First off, the DIA Deputy Director position is a civilian position and possibly an appointee – and that would make him/her a Clinton appointee. Recall it was DoD General Counsel lawyers who were tipped to Able Danger and came down hard, causing the purge of data in ealry 2000.

I believe the current Deputy Director is Mark Ewing who I can trace back to March 2001 (do a find on ‘ewing’). Whether Ewing is a Clinton era holdover and the source of the problem is pertinent to the Weldon claims.

Before that I have determine Jeremy Clark was the DD for DIA – and I can trace him until 1999 (do a find on ‘jeremy’). Interestingly enough, Jeremy Clark was somewhat involved in the issue of technology transfer to China during this same period – though he appears to have been aligned against the Clinton administration’s efforts to relax the restrictions:

Leitner submitted statistics showing a decline under the Clinton administration of export cases referred by the DTSA for further review by the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency. In closed testimony last week, DIA Deputy Director Jeremy Clark told the House Intelligence Committee he was worried about the decreasing number of export cases being referred to his agency for review, according to a congressional aide who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Who was in this slot from 1999-2001 I still cannot determine (but I would wager Bill Gertz knows). This leads us to the mother of all coincidences. It turns out the DIA was also heavily involved in determining the risk and damage of technology transfers to China in this time period (here, here and here)

Around this time LIWA and Orion, the unclassified data acquisition and data minining processing stages producing data sets for Able Danger HQ at SOCOM, also began work on a China data mining activity which caused a major reaction by the Clinton appointees, and led to the purging of data and firing of Orion.

Is it possible what is being covered up is not classified intelligence methods and information, but the fact the Clinton folks thought they had another, resignation-level scandal brewing with technology and China? This was just after impeachment if you recall.

We need to find out who the DIA DD was from 1999-2001.

Geez, should have checked over at Captain’s Quarters first!


And of course the China connection links back to Michael Maloof, another person who came forward recently on Able Danger. More here.

2 responses so far

2 Responses to “Able Danger, China and DIA 10/21/05”

  1. […] …but just barely- AJ’s Strata-Sphere and Captain Ed shed some light on the DIA and a risk-averse, crony-rich culture- Captain Ed first: It sounds like a whole host of people want out of the DIA. Just as with the weird allegations used against Shaffer, this portrait — if accurate — begs the question of what the DIA dreads so much. Exposure and embarrassment? Or something worse? […]

  2. OleJim says:

    Exposure and/or embarrassment are very high on the list of fears of the career bureaucrat. So much so that they might lie, cheat and steal to avoid these. This is probably the crux of the Able Danger cover-ups. But this is an extremely important investigation that must not be allowed to finally sink beneath the waves. Keep at it AJ!
    I am worried about Tony Schaffer. He is now jobless and he is not in shape to do the things he knows best. I think he gets an “A” for courage and an “A” for zeal. Unfortunately, he would get a “D” for discretion. I am glad that he brought this to our attention with the great help of Curt Weldon. But in an interview that I heard weeks ago, Tony Schaffer blurted out a bit or two of methodologic information that made me do an immediate “Omygosh.” He is a neophyte in talking to the press and being allowed to ramble. I think he said too much and this will bite him.
    I would like to think the DIA will have some serious house-cleaning done. I don’t think he will get his security clearance back because of some breaches, but none of that stuff was said in things released by the DIA.
    We need to be thinking of getting that man a new job! I keep wondering about an information management job in some Washington, DC conservative think tank. He will need work ASAP.