Pardon my cynicism, but isn’t there something unseemly about the members of the 9/11 Omission, who somehow missed the Able Danger story and allowed Jamie Gorelick, the author of the very regulations that prevented the CIA from talking to the

When we last head from Congressman Weldon he was on CSPAN kicking up the sand in the room and threatening to take the ABLE DANGER story to the Top!

Is it possible that some of the Chinese contacts discovered by LIWA-Orion somehow created links, whether intentional or not, between the Clinton Chinagate arms merchants and the Iraqi intelligence agents that were also meeting with Al Qaeda?

The Oil for Food investigation shows how massive and pervasive the Underground economy of the UN really was. When Johnny Chung and unmarked envelopes were floating around the Democratic party(including bribes to Kerry), whether they knew it or not, the Clinton Gang had waded into the same underground economy that was funding the weapons of our eventual demise.

When the Democrats asked for a closed session to get an in depth investigation into prewar intelligence, the only question is who in the Republican party has the guts to give it to them?

On Tuesday Republican Congressman Kurt Weldon of Pennsylvania held another press conference to try and keep the Able Danger scandal from drowning in the anonymity with which it has been relentlessly inundated by the to-be-expected Extreme Media black…

C-JCS was Gen. Hugh Shelton in January, 2001. He retired October, 2001. Coincidence?

Curt Weldon held a press conference today where he outlined some new information on the ongoing Able Danger investigation:
Dissatisfied with the response, Weldon today announced new revelations, which he says, “expose even more blunders prior to 9/…

You’re assuming that the LIWA-Orion portion was completely unclassified and this is probably based on information gathered from public statements made by JD Smith and Anthony Schaeffer. How certain are you that Orion (Now SRA) employees were restricted from accessing classified materials when they all had Top Secret level security clearances? If Orion had access to classified material, there is nothing that would prevent them from incorporating that information into their proprietary Link Analysis tool. My guess is that the data mining operation at Orion was not simply from open sources, but included classified material as well.

Still drinking coffee.

Even Ward Churchill came to her recent Able Danger conference.

Those VIPS come to McKinney’s conferences and speak. Do you know if they were at her most recent 9-11 conference on Able Danger?

According to Able Danger, the blind cleric who was involved in the first 9-11 had ties to four of the hijackers. Didn’t the Plamegate special prosecutor Pat Fitzgerald also prosecute this blind cleric?

It makes me wonder if some of these different investigations are somewhat connected.

It is very difficult to know the truth about any of this.

Looking at that data knowing that Atta and his fellow hijackers were members of Al Queda may have revealed more than the Administration was willing to make public about state support for the attack, i.e., connections to not only Iraqi intelligence, but also that of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Syria (or possibly some of our purported “allies”). Under such circumstances, the Administration would not have been in a position to selectively reveal such findings to justify the invasion of Iraq.

This would explain why there is no mentin of Able Danger or Dr. Eileen Preisser in the 9/11 Commission’s report even though we know from Congressman Shays’ characterization of her testimony before a closed session of the House Subcommittee on National Security one month after the attack that she spoke at least generally to the Subcommittee about the efficacy of those of her data mining efforts directed toward Al Queda. When she went before the Subcommittee, she knew (1) that Able Danger correctly predicted the Al Queda attack in the port of Aden that ultimately became the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in October 2000, (2) that Able Danger correctly identified Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers as potential Al Queda operatives in the spring of 2000, and (3) that efforts to share these findings with the FBI/DOJ were blocked by the legal bureaucracy within the Pentgon/DOD. As to the last of these, it would be reasonable to infer (although there is no evidence of this as yet) that once the attack on the U.S.S. Cole demonstrated rather conclusively that Able Danger was able to anticipate and identify potential Al Queda operatives and operations, Dr. Preisser and her analysts renewed their efforts to share their findings with the FBI/DOJ that had been rebuffed only the month before the Aden attack.

Does anybody really believe that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs would receive a briefing on Able Danger in January 2001 and not be told about the success of Dr. Preisser and her analysts in anticipating the attack on the U.S.S. Cole?

Does anybody really believe that Dr. Preisser would go before the Subcommittee responsible for funding her future data mining efforts and testify about the efficacy of her past data mining, addressed specifically toward thwarting Al Queda, and not tell the Subcommittee about both the U.S.S. Cole and the Atta revelation?

Does anybody really believe that Lt. Col. Shaffer would have failed to identify Dr. Preisser as the source of his own personal Atta revelation (recall that he did not recognize Atta after the attack, but was shown Atta on one of the Able Danger charts by Dr. Preisser) when questioned by the 9/11 Commission staff in Afghanistan?

Does anybody really believe that Dr. Preisser would have made her way so quickly up the Homeland Security chain of command if she had not revealed the success of Able Danger to both Congress and the Administration?

Recall, in an article in the May 2002 issue of SIGNAL Magazine (the International Journal for the Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association) [see http://www.afcea.org/signal/articles/anmviewer.asp?a=396&print=yes, Dr. Preisser is identified as a professor at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, as well as a “congressional fellow on science and technology applicable to national security” ... “appointed this year as “director of the Air Force [Research Laboratory’s] Homeland Defense Technology Center” in Albuquerque, N.M.

In a subsequent article for Federal Computer Week, dated June 12, 2002 [see http://www.fcw.com:8443/print.asp, Dr Preisser is referred to as “a congressional fellow who advises the Executive Office of the President on technology” and “the director of the Defense Department’s Homeland Defense Technology Center….”

In a later article in the August 2002 issue of SIGNAL Magazine [see http://www.afcea.org/signal/articles/anmviewer.asp?a=371&print=yes, Dr. Preisser is referred to as “chief of science and technology, Office of Homeland Security.”

Dr. Preisser is later identified in an announcement for the Second Annual Telecommunications/Information Technology Conference hosted by Murray State University on April 3-5, 2003 [see http://transcoder.usablenet.com/tt/http://www.murraystate.edu/tsm/conf/tsm2003_call.htm, as a “Congressional Fellow and Chief Scientist for Warfare and National Security”. In another announcement for the Conference, she is identified as the keynote speaker, and as a “Congressional Fellow and Special Assistant for Homeland Defense and National Security”.

Finally, in the Malouf op-ed in the WastTimes [see http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20051008-101924-8719r.htm, Dr. Preisser is identified as the head of the Information Dominance Center at the U.S. Army’s Land Information Warfare Activity (LIWA) at Fort Belvoir, Va. in the fall of 1999 when Congressman Weldon obtained her assistance in attempting to get the Clinton Adminstration to create the National Operations Analysis Hub (NOAH) within DOD to do the very thing that Able Danger was created only a month of two later to do.

In other words, there is virtually no chance that such a key member of the DOD intelligence community, both before and after the 9/11 attack, whose data mining program demonstrably identified Al Queda operations and operatives involved in the attack on the U.S.S. Cole and the 9/11 attack itself, would have managed to achieve Chief Scientist status after the attack having kept mum the entire time about the chief success of the program.

Dr. Preisser is the key to the whole thing. She has been known to Congressman Weldon since 1999, yet he has yet to mention her in any of his interviews or announcments about Able Danger. She was known to at least the House Subcommittee on National Security as an expert on data mining who had directed such efforts against Al Queda before the 9/11 attack, yet neither her name nor Able Danger merit any mention in the 9/11 Commission report, even in that portion of the report recommending the use of data mining to identify and avert terrorist threats. Indeed, though she was Chief Scientist for Warfare and National Security during the 9/11 Commission’s investigation, she was apparently not significant enough for the Commission to even interview.

Why doesn’t the Wall Street Journal do one of its famous “Who is ….?” editorials to see if we can spring Dr. Preisser free from her bureaucratic gag?