Powered by TypePad

« Does TIME Magazine Still Protect Their Sources? | Main | Is Andrea Mitchell The Next Bob Woodward? »

November 28, 2005



The unspoken aspect of able danger was that it traced money. It is the easiest thing to follow by monitoring electronics.

It was too good because it never filtered out certain types of transactions.

It scared the bejeebus out of everyone in the know-as it could follow every bribe, foreign and domestic, and every intell op that had a budget. No secrets.

What is really scary is that it did work, and proved its accuracy in successfully targeting terrorists, but the other strands of info that would be available would implicate every system it came across.

It would be my hope that the info would be completely destroyed,but the cynic in me tells me that someone still has it.


Ever see information destroyed? OK, yes. How about new knowledge?


Remember the scene at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark? Sometimes destruction isn't necessary...

cathy :-)


Were physicists left in charge of the decision to use atomic weapons?

Inventers of a technique commonly lose control of it's use. Potentially loose lips are no longer connected to ears hearing about Able Danger.

What have you heard about data-mining lately?

Let me put it this way. Is data-mining more effective if the objects are aware of it or not? Let's call on Heisenberg for a discussion of the effect.


Hey you, get that officionado outa' here. What do I have to do to get a little privacy.


Look, Officer, he was pointing it at me. How did I know he wasn't loaded? He wasn't even enabled. How did I know he wasn't dangerable. Up close that prod didn't look so pusillanissimo.

The comments to this entry are closed.