Able Danger

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

Hi, all,

Does anyone know the history of Able Danger, the corps of elite ninja data miners who supposedly fingered Atta a year before 9/11?  I did a couple of searches and found nothing about 'em dated before the story broke.

As you might suspect, I think there are things about this story that don't make sense. (Also, the CiC is, I'm sure, getting alarms constantly, and maybe AD wasn't able to prove the existence of a terror cell.)

Thanx,
- NF

[50 Shooter]

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19129  


Finally the missing pieces to the puzzle:
-Jamie Gorelick's "wall" policy smothered ongoing investigations into Chinese contributions to Bill Clintons presidential campaigns.
-proves the connection between Al Quaeda and Iraq.
-proves the 911 commission was solely a witchunt to cover up the Klinton responsibility.

The blood of the 3000 911 victims is squarely on Klinton's hands!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

9/11 Coverup Commission
By Ben Johnson and Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 15, 2005

For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.  St. Matthew 10:26

Recent revelations about covert Able Danger operations are forcing certain people to deal with subjects that they had thought swept under the rug. Despite apparent attempts to conceal the fact, the 9/11 Commission has had to admit it was informed that government agents knew of Mohammed Attas affiliation with al-Qaeda two years before 9/11, that Clinton-era policies prevented intelligence officials from sharing that information with the FBI, that the amended time frame would allow Mohammed Atta to have made contacts with Iraqi intelligence, and  most damningly  that it kept all this out of its final report.

Rep. Curt Weldon, R-PA, has done praiseworthy work in drawing attention to the recently released Able Danger report. Former CIA operative and terrorism expert Wayne Simmons has described the Able Danger operation as one of our best covert operations run by the intelligence community. The operation, he continues, was expert at using open source intelligence, including data mining techniques, to locate and identify Islamic terrorists, specifically al-Qaeda operatives in the United States. This operation identified 9/11 mastermind Mohammed Atta and three of his fellow hijackers as members of an al-Qaeda cell located in New York City (and codenamed Brooklyn) in 1999. We can only surmise that a gold mine of information lies yet unrevealed.

Weldon noted with exasperation that this information had been delivered to the 9/11 Commission in at least two separate briefings, possibly three, proving the incredible ineptitude of the commission. Weldon says staffers of the 9/11 Commission did not share  and Commissioners did not request  information about these Able Danger reports. This would have been indispensable to uncovering how 9/11 happened and what could be done to prevent a repeat performance, allegedly the commision's task..

Faced with these revelations, commissioners first claimed Rep. Weldon was not telling the truth, that the 9/11 Commission had never been presented with this vital information. Early last week, commission spokesman Al Felzenberg said, The name Atta or a terrorist cell would have gone to the top of the radar screen if it had been mentioned. Former Congressman and commissioner Lee Hamilton, D-IN, echoed Felzenberg, saying last Monday: The September 11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohammed Atta or of his cell. Had we learned of it obviously it wouldve been a major focus of our investigation. The New York Times notes that just a few days later, Mr. Felzenberg said the uniformed officer who briefed two staff members in July 2004 had indeed mentioned Mr. Atta. Hamilton, too, quickly readjusted his initial comments to admit that, indeed, the commissioners heard of Atta after all. Felzenberg acknowledged the commission had been briefed on this information but rejected the testimony of a uniformed officer on the grounds that his evidence did not match their preconceived timeline; it indicates Atta was active from February-April 2, whereas the commission believed Atta entered the United States for the first time that June.

There are several factors  none flattering to the Commission  that might explain this appalling lapse. John Podhoretz neatly summaries them: So was the [9/11 Commission] staff a) protecting the Atta timeline or b) Jamie Gorelick or c) the Clinton administration or d) itself, because it got hold of the information relatively late and the staff was lazy?

The really upsetting issue is contained in Podhoretz's first note. It requires a deeper reading because understanding it fully opens the entire mindset of the hard Left toward terrorism and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Podheretz notes that the Commission was protecting its interpretation of Mohammad Atta's international and domestic U.S. travels. Key in this interpretation in the minds of Clinton supporters and Bush haters of all stripes is the necessity to deny all ties between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and al-Qaeda. After all, in the endless cacophony of criticism against the Iraq War, the two steady drumbeats have been the failure to find WMDs, and the assertion that there were no links between Saddam Husseins Iraq and the September 11 attacks. Until now the Left has issued a series of deliberate misinterpretations of a series of reports  including that of the 9/11 Commission, and WMD reports by David Kay and Charles Dueffler. However the unimpeachable Able Danger report was at first denied by 9/11 spokesman Al Felzenberg, then was reluctantly confirmed to be correct. Felzenberg said that the information that [the Able Danger briefing officer] provided us did not mesh with other conclusions that we were drawing. (Emphasis added.)

And here we get to the crux of the matter. The movements of Atta prior to the terrorist attack as detailed by Able Danger, if acknowledged, would support statements by the Czech Republic that link Atta, and hence the al-Qaeda attack on America, irrefutably to Saddam's covert intelligence operatives. This is something that surfaced shortly after 9/11. A former Czech deputy foreign minister, later ambassador to the UN, gave statements that he personally expelled a high raking Iraqi embassy official in Prague for being a covert foreign intelligence agent after the latter was discovered to have met with Mohammed Atta in the international lounge at the Prague airport in August 2001. There the Iraqi transferred a large amount of cash to Atta, sufficient to fund the completion of the September 11 attack. Despite cruel pressure from mainstream media, the hard Left, the U.S. State Department, and the CIA, the Czechs insisted that their report was correct. Former Congressman John LeBoutellier was furious at the Bush administration for bowing to CIA pressure to discount the Czech report because it verified a vital deadly connection within the covert terrorist community. Now it appears as if the Czechs  and those who supported their account  were right.

This Atta-Iraqi meeting did not track well with some of the 9/11 Commission's pre-ordained agenda and had to be firmly discounted. They were able to accomplish this through a lame credit card receipt that could have been signed by any of Atta's cell. But a report with the weight of the Department of Defense and highly credible intelligence operatives behind it would expose the flimsy nature of the evidence that Atta was in the States. Hence, as Flzenberg said, with unflappable arrogance, if we missed anything we will say so, but we doubt that we did.

The possible motives of protecting Commissioner Jamie Gorelick and her former employer, President Bill Clinton, are also closely related. Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft testified at the 9/11 Commissions grandstanding hearings that one of its own commissioners, former high-ranking Clinton Justice Department appointee Jamie S. Gorelick, had been the prime architect of one of the problems for which the commissioners regularly denounced the Bush administration: the wall between intelligence agencies. Her infamous 1995 wall memo produced much of the harmful lack of intelligence coordination that the Commission then used to criticize the Bush administration. As FrontPage Magazines Jean Pearce wrote last May, the intelligence wall Deputy Attorney General Gorelick put in place smothered ongoing investigations into Chinese contributions to Bill Clintons presidential campaigns. Specifically the Department of Defense and the CIA were prohibited from exchanging relevant information with the FBI.

Not all were happy at the time with Gorelick's action. Gutsy New York City-based U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White was appalled by the Gorelick directive, sending two of her own memoranda back to Janet Reno and Gorelick protesting, The most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating. Her recommendations were ignored. According to the New York Post, White was so incensed by their actions that she wrote a second, scathing memorandum warning that the wall hindered law enforcement efforts to combat terrorism. It will cost lives, she reportedly warned. This second memo is still kept secret.

Her prophecy proved accurate; in 2, members of the Department of Defense knew of an al-Qaeda operative in the United States, but the DoD  hands tied by Gorelicks policy  declined to alert the FBI, a step that might have prevented the 9/11 attacks. At this time, al-Qaeda had already, either directly or through its affiliates, killed American soldiers in Somalia, detonated the Khobar Towers, and bombed U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In the summer of 2, they attacked the U.S.S. Cole.

This inaction seemed to fall into line with the Clinton administrations general disregard for terrorism. Although the discredited former National Security Council staffer Richard Clarke presented President Clinton as an anti-terrorism warrior, former intelligence officer Ralph Peters tells a much different story. Admitting that [terrorist] threats were real.threatened to destroy the belief system the Clintonites had carried into office, Peters detailed. In regards to the entire terrorist network, methodology, and ideology, the Clintons were a textbook case of denial. It was bad enough, as the Able Danger reports indicate, that the Clintons were willfully ignorant of the threat but their criminal negligence was compounded by a sleazy attempt to pass the buck on the Bush administration. Bill Clinton never made any serious retaliation for any of these provocations, nor the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, emboldening these terrorists, assuring through his intelligence wall that 9/11 terrorists could not be properly identified and apprehended, and passing the blame for the inevitable outcome of his policies to the nascent Bush administration.

If there was, in fact, covert direction from the top of the Commission to key members of its staff to cloak any link between Saddam and the September 11 attacks, to obfuscate evidence tying the Iraqi regime to al-Qaeda and Mohammed Atta, and to paint the most positive possible picture of the Clintons as implacable terror-warriors, then Able Danger had to be ignored and covered up. It fits the pattern of revisionist historical interpretations that seems to be the only authentic legacy from the Clinton years. Further, in Washington staffers tell their bosses what the latter want to hear. They are not rewarded for initiative. As Peters says, when told to think outside the box by a superior, a subordinate knows his job is to come back with fresh reasons why the in-house position was right all along.

By acknowledging the Iraq/al-Qaeda ties, not only to terrorism in general but to the September 11 attack, the war becomes completely justifiable as exactly what the Bush administration claimed it was: a defensive, if preemptive, war to protect the United States from a regime with cordial ties to anti-American terrorists. This outcome is so repugnant to the hard Left that it will justify even the most extraordinary suppression of evidence or promulgation of an outright lie in order to achieve its ends.

This is a critically important story that demands public attention. It will not be seriously investigated by many reporters, because the mainstream (read: leftist) media is not interested in exposing how its favorite president in decades enabled terrorists to pull off the worse act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Johnson is Managing Editor of FrontPage Magazine. Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu is author of Separated at Birth, an in-depth profile of North and South Korea.

[Paddy]

This rampant leftist extremism, powered by the arrogance of lawyers, will kill us all if left unchecked.  IF there was a crime committed, you can bet NOBODY will prosecute it.

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

Recent revelations about covert Able Danger operations are forcing certain people to deal with subjects that they had thought swept under the rug.

- NF

[50 Shooter]

You won't like this either.


Nearly from the moment Gorelick took office in the Clinton Justice Department, she... placed the gathering of intelligence... under near-direct control of the White House. In the process, more than a dozen CIA and FBI investigations underway at the time got caught beneath the heel of the presidential boot, investigations that would ultimately reveal massive Chinese espionage as millions in illegal Chinese donations filled Democratic Party campaign coffers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

How Chinagate Led to 9/11
By Jean Pearce
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 25, 2004

As the 9/11 Commission tries to uncover what kept intelligence agencies from preventing September 11, it has overlooked two vital factors: Jamie Gorelick and Bill Clinton. Gorelick, who has browbeaten the current administration, helped erect the walls between the FBI, CIA and local investigators that made 9/11 inevitable. However, she was merely expanding the policy Bill Clinton established with Presidential Decision Directive 24. What has been underreported is why the policy came about: to thwart investigations into the Chinese funding of Clintons re-election campaign, and the favors he bestowed on them in return.

In April, CNSNews.com staff writer Scott Wheeler reported that a senior U.S. government official and three other sources claimed that the 1995 memo written by Jamie Gorelick, who served as the Clinton Justice Departments deputy attorney general from 1994 to 1997, created "a roadblock" to the investigation of illegal Chinese donations to the Democratic National Committee. But the picture is much bigger than that. The Gorelick memo, which blocked intelligence agents from sharing information that could have halted the September 11 hijacking plot, was only the mortar in a much larger maze of bureaucratic walls whose creation Gorelick personally oversaw.

Its a story the 9/11 Commission may not want to hear, and one that Gorelick  now incredibly a member of that commission  has so far refused to tell. But it is perhaps the most crucial one to understanding the intentional breakdown of intelligence that led to the September 11 disaster.

Nearly from the moment Gorelick took office in the Clinton Justice Department, she began acting as the point woman for a large-scale bureaucratic reorganization of intelligence agencies that ultimately placed the gathering of intelligence, and decisions about what  if anything  would be done with it under near-direct control of the White House. In the process, more than a dozen CIA and FBI investigations underway at the time got caught beneath the heel of the presidential boot, investigations that would ultimately reveal massive Chinese espionage as millions in illegal Chinese donations filled Democratic Party campaign coffers.

When Gorelick took office in 1994, the CIA was reeling from the news that a Russian spy had been found in CIA ranks, and Congress was hungry for a quick fix. A month after Gorelick was sworn in, Bill Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 24. PDD 24 put intelligence gathering under the direct control of the presidents National Security Council, and ultimately the White House, through a four-level, top-down chain of command set up to govern (that is, stifle) intelligence sharing and cooperation between intelligence agencies. From the moment the directive was implemented, intelligence sharing became a bureaucratic nightmare that required negotiating a befuddling bureaucracy that stopped directly at the Presidents office.

First, the directive effectively neutered the CIA by creating a National Counterintelligence Center (NCI) to oversee the Agency. NCI was staffed by an FBI agent appointed by the Clinton administration. It also brought multiple international investigations underway at the time under direct administrative control. The job of the NCI was to implement counterintelligence activities, which meant that virtually everything the CIA did, from a foreign intelligence agents report to polygraph test results, now passed through the intelligence center that PDD 24 created.

NCI reported to an administration-appointed National Counterintelligence Operations Board (NCOB) charged with discussing counterintelligence matters. The NCOB in turn reported to a National Intelligence Policy Board, which coordinated activities between intelligence agencies attempting to work together. The policy board reported directly to the president through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.

The result was a massive bureaucratic roadblock for the CIA  which at the time had a vast lead on the FBI in foreign intelligence  and for the FBI itself, which was also forced to report to the NCOB. This hampered cooperation between the two entities. All this occurred at a time when both agencies were working separate ends of investigations that would eventually implicate China in technology transfers and the Democratic Party in a Chinese campaign cash grab.

And the woman charged with selling this plan to Congress, convincing the media and ultimately implementing much of it? Jamie Gorelick.

Many in Congress, including some Democrats, found the changes PDD 24 put in place baffling: they seemed to do nothing to insulate the CIA from infiltration while devastating the agencys ability to collect information. At the time, Democrat House Intelligence Chairman Dan Glickman referred to the plan as regulatory gobbledygook." Others questioned how FBI control of CIA intelligence would foster greater communication between the lower levels of the CIA and FBI, now that all information would have to be run through a multi-tier bureaucratic maze that only went upward.

Despite their doubts, Gorelick helped the administration sell the plan on Capitol Hill. The Directive stood.

But that wasnt good enough for the Clinton administration, which wanted control over every criminal and intelligence investigation, domestic and foreign, for reasons that would become apparent in a few years. For the first time in Justice Department history, a political appointee, Richard Scruggs  an old crony or Attorney General Janet Renos from Florida  was put in charge of the Office of Intelligence and Policy Review (OIPR). OIPR is the Justice Department agency in charge of requesting wiretap and surveillance authority for criminal and intelligence investigations on behalf of investigative agencies from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court. The courts activities are kept secret from the public.

A year after PDD 24, with the new bureaucratic structure loaded with administration appointees, Gorelick drafted the 1995 memo Attorney General John Ashcroft mentioned while testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The Gorelick memo, and other supporting memos released in recent weeks, not only created walls within the intelligence agencies that prevented information sharing among their own agents, but effectively walled these agencies off from each other and from outside contact with the U.S. prosecutors instrumental in helping them gather the evidence needed to make the case for criminal charges.

The only place left to go with intelligence information  particularly for efforts to share intelligence information or obtain search warrants  was straight up Clinton and Gorelicks multi-tiered chain of command. Instead, information lethal to the Democratic Party languished inside the Justice Department, trapped behind Gorelicks walls.

The implications were enormous. In her letter of protest to Attorney General Reno over Gorelicks memo, United States Attorney Mary Jo White spelled them out: These instructions leave entirely to OIPR and the (Justice Department) Criminal Division when, if ever, to contact affected U.S. attorneys on investigations including terrorism and espionage, White wrote. (Like OIPR, the Criminal Division is also part of the Justice Department.)

Without an enforcer, the walls Gorelicks memo put in place might not have held. But Scruggs acted as that enforcer, and he excelled at it. Scruggs maintained Gorelicks walls between the FBI and Justice's Criminal Division by threatening to automatically reject any FBI request for a wiretap or search warrant if the Bureau contacted the Justice Department's Criminal Division without permission. This deprived the FBI, and ultimately the CIA, of gathering advice and assistance from the Criminal Division that was critical in espionage and terrorist cases.

It is no coincidence that this occurred at the same time both the FBI and the CIA were churning up evidence damaging to the Democratic Party, its fundraisers, the Chinese and ultimately the Clinton administration itself. Between 1994 and the 1996 election, as Chinese dollars poured into Democratic coffers, Clinton struggled to reopen high-tech trade to China. Had agents confirmed Chinese theft of weapons technology or its transfer of weapons technology to nations like Pakistan, Iran and Syria, Clinton would have been forced by law and international treaty to react.

Gorelicks appointment to the job at Justice in 1994 occurred during a period in which the FBI had begun to systematically investigate technology theft by foreign powers. For the first time, these investigations singled out the U.S. chemical, telecommunications, aircraft and aerospace industries for intelligence collection.

By the time Gorelick wrote the March 1995 memo that sealed off American intelligence agencies from each other and the outside world, all of the most critical Chinagate investigations by American intelligence agencies were already underway. Some of their findings were damning:

In an investigation originally instigated by the CIA, the FBI was beginning its search for the source of the leak of W-88 nuclear warhead technology to China among the more than 1,000 people who had access to the secrets. Despite Justice Department stonewalling and the Departments refusal to seek wiretap authority in 1997, the investigation eventually led to Wen Ho Lee and the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
The FBI first collected extensive evidence in 1995 linking illegal Democratic Party donations to China, according to the Congressional Record. But Congress and the Director of the CIA didnt find out about the Justice Departments failure to act upon that evidence until 1997, safely after the 1996 election.
According to classified CIA documents leaked to the Washington Times, between 1994 and 1997, the CIA learned that China sold Iran missile technology, a nuclear fission reactor, advanced air-defense radar and chemical agents. The Chinese also provided 5,000 ring magnets to Pakistan, used in producing weapons-grade uranium. The Chinese also provided uranium fuel for India's reactors.

In many cases the CIA resorted to leaking classified information to the media, in an effort to bypass the administrations blackout.

Gorelick knew these facts well. While Clinton may have refused to meet with top CIA officials, Gorelick didnt. According to a 1996 report by the legal news service American Lawyer Media, Gorelick and then-Deputy Director of the CIA George Tenet met every other week to discuss intelligence and intelligence sharing.

But those in the Clinton administration werent the only ones to gain from the secrecy. In 1994, the McDonnell Douglas Corporation transferred military-use machine tools to the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation that ended up in the hands of the Chinese army. The sale occurred despite Defense Department objections. McDonnell Douglas was a client of the Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin, L.L.P. (now called Baker Botts), the Washington, D.C., law firm where Gorelick worked for 17 years and was a partner. Ray Larroca, another partner in the firm, represented McDonnell in the Justice Departments investigation of the technology transfer.

In 1995, General Electric, a former client of Gorelicks, also had much to lose if the damaging information the CIA and the FBI had reached Congress. At the time, GE was publicly lobbying for a lucrative permit to assist the Chinese in replacing coal-fired power stations with nuclear plants. A 1990 law required that the president certify to Congress that China was not aiding in nuclear proliferation before U.S. companies could execute the business agreement.

Moreover, in 1995, Michael Armstrong, then the CEO of Hughes Electronics  a division of General Electric and another client of Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin  was publicly lobbying Clinton to switch satellite export controls from the State Department to the Commerce Department. After the controls were lifted, Hughes and another company gave sensitive data to the Chinese, equipment a Pentagon study later concluded would allow China to develop intercontinental and submarine-launched ballistic missiles aimed at American targets. Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin partner Randall Turk represented Hughes in the Congressional, State Department, and Justice Department investigations that resulted.

The Cox Report, which detailed Chinese espionage for Congress during the period, revealed that FBI surveillance caught Chinese officials frantically trying to keep Democratic donor Johnny Chung from divulging any information that would be damaging to Hughes Electronics. Chung funneled $300,000 in illegal contributions from the Chinese military to the DNC between 1994 and 1996.

It was this web of investigations that led Gorelick and Bill Clinton to erect the wall between intelligence agencies that resulted in the toppling of the Twin Towers. The connections go on and on, but they all lead back to Gorelick, the one person who could best explain how the Clinton administration neutered the American intelligence agencies that could have stopped the September 11 plot. Yet another high crime will have been committed if the September 11 Commission doesnt demand testimony from her.

[toro]

I just could not believe that the United States was taken off guard.  I have always wondered about the Oklahoma bombing.  You know it is not right that all the ATF agents were not at work that day.  I believe that they were told to take the day off.  In the first reports about the bombing they were looking for men of Arab decent.  Then they pulled over Timothy McVey and the rest is history.

There are reports of other explosive devices in the building.  A second bomb was found in the east side of the building and was exploded.  The FBI found evidence that former Iraqi soldiers were involved in the 1995 Oklahoma bombing.  Timothy McVey was used as a front man to drive the truck.  He hated the government so he was more than willing to do this.

Remember John Doe No. 2?  They thought it might be Al-Hussaini.  After he left Oklahoma City, he went to work for Boston's Logan International Airport.  I saw this on the OKC Bombing Cover-up site.  But, I believe that Jose Padilla was John Doe No. 2.  He is also known as Abdullah Al muhajir... President Bush has designated Padilla an "enemy combatant."  Go to http://www.chargepadilla.org/  He has conspired with al-Queda, to scout for terrorist organization, using benefits of his U.S. Citizenship.  The first thing Hillary Clinton will do if she gets elected will be to pardon him. IMHO.  

To read about the Clinton's Allbright go to http://www.gamla.org.il/english/article/1998/may/win4.htm
I'd say she was on the side of Arafat.  It seems to be all connected somehow. IMHO.


                                              Mrs. Toro


======================================
Revelation 12:17
And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

[Guest]

Well... then there's this-
================

http://64.70.236.57/08172005.html

Able Danger Intel Exposed
"Protected" Heroin Trafficking
August 17,2005-Venice, FL.  
by Daniel Hopsicker

Mohamed Atta was protected from official scrutiny as part of an officially-protected cocaine and heroin trafficking network with ties to top political figures, including Republican officials Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, and it was this factand not the  terrible lapses of weak on terror Clinton Administration officials cited by Republican Congressman Curt Weldonwhich shielded him from being apprehended before the 9.11 attack.  /snip
==================

And if your tinfoil hat is better adjusted, this-

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/category/uncategorized/able-danger9-11/
==================

[Waitone]

I always thought the 911 commission was a gigantic CYA operation.  Able Danger does not disprove my thesis.  Right now Clintoon's adminstration is taking the heat.  Bush adminstration admits it heard about the intl AFTER 911.  I got a sneaking suspicion Bush knew about the intel before 911.  Time will tell if I'm correct.

Standing back from the story, it is clear to me once again the drones in the government had it right.  It was the political class that muffed it.  The problem caused by Able Danger is that it will indict the political class regardless of party.  And for that reason I expect high level attempts to suppress the information or shut up the whistleblowers.  If I were Col. Schaffer I would adopt a countersurveillance lifestyle.  No patterns, multiple plans, random decisions, no air travel, check car brakes, the usual.  If I am correct I fully expect to see people injured or die.

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

Anyone here know about the technology they used?  I've got some experience with data mining, and what they're claiming borders on the incredible (both senses of the word...)

- NF.