Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « Next Stop Romenesko | Main | The Times, Playing Questionable Assertion As Fact »

    August 10, 2005

    Comments

    scott

    If the "100s or 1,000s of names" was the case, wouldn't the 9/11 Commission just say so? Why say, "It didn't mesh with our conclusions about Atta"?

    house

    It is likely the results did draw many false positives, but these were probably ranked.Atta and 3 others ended up on the chart.
    Consider the claim of the use of open source info only.If that is true, profiling variables would have been used that may have been questioned as violations of privacy, and perhaps unscientific.
    If classified info was also used,
    (i.e., CIA cables on Al Midhar and Alhazmi's travel to Malaysia/Bangkok/LA, )then we have another agency that didn't share with the FBI.

    michael reinhard


    Even if it is true that there were too many false positives on the Able Danger list it seems like this story is not getting the attention it deserves. We have reorganized our intelligence services to reduce the autonomy of the one agency in the government that appears to have had a clue, outlawed the technology that produced the clue and gave a pass to the people that decided the clue should be ignored. And yet the story seems to be going away already. After the breathless reception given to the CIA's quoting a 2 year old TV interview as an answer to HIS request for more information the speed with which this story is going away is truly perplexing.

    The comments to this entry are closed.