Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
What's this Able Danger stuff about?
Here's the beginning of the Wikipedia entry.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
Able Danger was a small, highly classified U.S. Army intelligence program under the command of the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC). It was created as a result of a directive in early October 1999 by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Hugh Shelton, to USASOC to develop a campaign plan against transnational terrorism, "specifically al-Qaida." According to claims made by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and confirmed by four others, Able Danger had identified the 9/11 attack leader, Mohamed Atta, and three other 9/11 hijackers as possible members of an al Qaeda cell operating in the United States by mid-2000, more than a year before the attack. Data mining has been cited as the method by which this information was found. The claim appears to contradict the official conclusion of the 9/11 Commission that American intelligence agencies had not identified Atta as a terrorist prior to the attack. This has resulted in a political controversy that has begun to damage the credibility of the 9/11 Commission.
One thing that intrigues me is the mention of data mining. Isn't that what Adm Poindexter wanted to do? So follow the logic for a second.
The Special Operations Command commissions Able Danger to deal with international terrorism.
They use limited data mining and come-up with Muhammed Atta's name and threat as well as some others. (For whatever reason, it didn't get on anybody else's radar).
After 9/11 Poindexter's proposal catches the public eye, mainly because it is Poindexter running it but also because it sounds like a frightful invasion of privacy.
It looks to me like Able Danger was a proof of concept.
The 9/11 Commission was asked not to publicize the data mining aspect and the Able Danger connection.
Poindexter's plan was the real deal. I wonder if it went forward under a different mandate and under a different command.