posted August 26, 2005 03:11 AM            

from: http://www.undercover.com.au/news/2004/oct04/20041001_jonstewart.html

Here is the data from Nielsen Media Research about the two shows:

* The median age of "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" 11:00 p.m. (premiere) airing is 35, while its median income is $67,000.

* The median age of "The O'Reilly Factor" 8:00 p.m. (premiere) airing is 63, while its median income is $54,000.

* Viewers of "The Daily Show" are 78% more likely than the average adult to have four or more years of college education.

* Viewers of "The O'Reilly Factor" are only 24% more likely than the average adult to have four or more years of college education.

* Viewers of "The Daily Show" are 42% more likely than the average adult to have a household income of $75,000+.

* Viewers of "The O'Reilly Factor" are only 6% more likely the average adult to have a household income of $75,000+.

* Viewers of "The Daily Show" are 26% more likely than the average adult to have a household income of $100,000+.

* Viewers of "The O'Reilly Factor" are only 11% more likely than the average adult to have a household income of $100,000+.

* Viewers of "The Daily Show" are 74% more likely than the average adult to have a household income of $75,000+ and an occupation of "professional, owner or manager."

* Viewers of "The O'Reilly Factor" are 15% less likely than the average adult to have a household income of $75,000+ and an occupation of "professional, owner or manager."

* Viewers of "The Daily Show" are 37% more likely than the average adult to be in a "white collar" profession.

posted August 27, 2005 09:10 AM            

Able Danger is the code name for a military-intelligence unit that reportedly learned a year before the 9/11 terror attacks that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta and other terrorists were already in the U.S.
Story Continues Below

One of the key Able Danger claims — that military lawyers blocked the sharing of the Atta information from the FBI in the late summer and early fall of 2000 — will be a priority of the committee's probe, according to FOX News.
"This story needs to be told. The American people need to be told what could have been done to prevent 3,000 people from losing their lives," said Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.).

Weldon spoke about Able Danger on the House floor and called for the Sept. 11 commission to explain why the FBI's intelligence wasn't detailed in its final report.

Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and several other Able Danger analysts claim that in October 2003, they told commission staffers of the presence of al-Qaida operatives in the U.S. in 2000.

Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita said on Monday that defense officials have not yet been able to verify the Able Danger claims.

"There appear to be more memories than there is information to substantiate those memories," the Pentagon said in a statement.

"We're reviewing the matter carefully, but thus far have not found what it is these handful of individuals seem to remember. At a certain point, we'll decide we have looked long enough and welcome anyone else coming forward with additional information."

But Weldon said he spoke to DiRita on Wednesday and that "he was backpedaling left and right," claiming he was misquoted about the status of the search.

"There's something very sinister going on here that really troubles me," Weldon told FOX News, attacking the Sept. 11 commission for not taking the claims more seriously. He said some panel members were trying to smear Shaffer and Able Danger.

"What's the Sept. 11 commission got to hide?" Weldon asked. "In two weeks with two staffers, I've uncovered more in this regard than they did with 80 staffers and $15 million of taxpayer money."

Weldon added that at least five people on the federal payroll will testify under oath about the validity of the Able Danger intelligence.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/8/25/134005.shtml

posted August 27, 2005 09:14 AM            

Rep. Curt Weldon predicted yesterday that members of the 9/11 Commission would have "egg all over their face[s]" when the truth comes out about briefings they received on an elite group of military intelligence analysts code named Able Danger.

"The 9/11 Commission is trying to spin this because they're embarrassed at what's coming out," Weldon told the Fox News Channel's "Fox & Friends" morning show.

In comments rebroadcast nationally by Rush Limbaugh, Weldon sounded livid over the attempted cover-up:
"In two weeks with two staffers, I've uncovered more in this regard than they did with 80 staffers and $15 million of taxpayers' money!"

The Pennsylvania Republican said the truth would come out in hearings planned for this fall:

"This information will ultimately end up in a hearing. Senator Specter is preparing a hearing in the judiciary committee. I talked to Speaker Hastert yesterday on the House side. We will bring people in under oath, and they will swear and they will answer the questions."

Weldon also blasted Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita for repeatedly claiming he can't find any evidence to back up claims from Able Danger team members that they had identified lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta two years before the attacks.

Weldon said he told Di Rita: "Larry, don't ever go on national TV again and say what you said, when I know that [Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence] Steve Cambone is right now going through four boxes of materials."

"There's something very sinister that's going on here that really troubles me," Weldon complained.

Limbaugh told his audience that Weldon was even more angry in an interview for next month's issue of the Limbaugh Letter, saying, "Multiply that by two and you'll get an idea how he sounded during his conversation with me."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/8/25/134005.shtml

posted August 27, 2005 09:19 AM            

Two military officers, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and Capt. Scott Philpott, contend that a unit code-named "Able Danger" used data mining - searching large amounts of data for patterns - to identify Atta in 2000. Shaffer has said three other Sept. 11 hijackers were also identified.

In a letter to FBI director Robert Mueller, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., asked the agency for "all information and documents it has" on Able Danger, Shaffer, Philpott and any other people linked to the operation. The letter, dated Wednesday and distributed Thursday to reporters, also seeks a meeting between Specter's staff and FBI agent Xanthig Mangum.
A handwritten note at the bottom says, "Bob, I'd like to move head on this ASAP."

Ed Cogswell, an FBI spokesman, said Thursday the FBI is reviewing the matter.

Shaffer claims to have contacted Mangum about setting up a meeting with the FBI to discuss Able Danger findings but was told by military attorneys he could not go because of concerns about the legality of gathering and sharing information on people in the United States, Specter wrote.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said Thursday that the stories told by Shaffer and Philpott match. But no evidence has been found that would support their claims that any Sept. 11 hijackers were identified by Able Danger, Whitman said.

Shaffer and Philpott have said they made comments to the Sept. 11 commission about Able Danger and its findings, but were not taken seriously. If proven correct, the intelligence would change the timeline for when government officials first learned of Atta's links to al-Qaida.

Their claims were first made public by Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees.

posted August 27, 2005 09:29 AM            

J.D. Smith, a defense contractor who claims he worked on the technical side of the unit, code-named "Able Danger" (search), told reporters Friday that he helped gather open-source information (search), reported on government spending and helped generate charts associated with the unit's work. Able Danger was set up in the 1990s to track Al Qaeda activity worldwide.

"I am absolutely positive that he [Atta] was on our chart among other pictures and ties that we were doing mainly based upon [terror] cells in New York City," Smith said.

Smith said data was gathered from a variety of sources, including about 30 or 40 individuals. He said they all had strong Middle Eastern connections and were paid for their information. Smith said Able Danger's photo of Atta was obtained from overseas.

Rep. Curt Weldon (search), R-Pa., arranged the media roundtable with Smith. Weldon drew attention to Able Danger by speaking about it on the House floor months ago and has publicly called for the Sept. 11 commission to explain why the intelligence information wasn't detailed in its final report.

Besides Smith, Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer (search) and Navy Captain Scott Philpott (search) have also gone on the record, saying they were discouraged from looking further into Atta, and their attempts to share their information with the FBI were thwarted because Atta was a legal foreign visitor at the time.

"This story needs to be told. The American people need to be told what could have been done to prevent 3,000 people from losing their lives," Weldon told FOX News this week.

Shaffer and Philpott claim that in October 2003, they told Sept. 11 commission staffers of the presence of Al Qaeda operatives in the United States in 2000 yet little was included in the panel's final report about those conversations.

During Friday's roundtable with Smith, he was asked by reporters about Atta, who was using another name during 1999-2000. Smith said the charts Able Danger was using had identified him through a number of name variations, one being "Atta."

Two sources familiar with Able Danger told FOX News that part of its investigative work focused on mosques and the religious ties between known terrorist operatives such as Omar Abdul Rahman (search), who was part of the first World Trade Center bombing plot in 1993.

An independent terrorism analyst pointed out to FOX News that German intelligence had no record of Atta before the Sept. 11 attack; that's significant because Atta headed up the Sept. 11 Al Qaeda cell in Hamburg. The analyst also questioned how Atta could be connected to Rahman, who was in prison by the mid-1990s.

Smith claims that one way the unit came to know Atta was through Rahman. Smith said Able Danger used data mining techniques — publicly available information — to look at mosques and religious ties and it was, in part, through the investigation of Rahman that Atta's name surfaced.

Aides to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (search), R-Pa., are actively discussing scheduling a hearing on Able Danger and the larger issue of information-sharing between the Pentagon and the FBI.

One of the central Able Danger claims — that military lawyers blocked the sharing of the Atta information from the FBI in the late summer and early fall of 2000 — will be a focus of the committee if a hearing takes place, FOX News has confirmed.

Specter sent a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday asking the agency to provide to the committee "all information and documents it has in connection with Able Danger, , Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer, Captain Scott Philpott or any other persons having any connections with Project Able Danger, including, but not limited to, e-mail communication, notes, phone message slips, memos or any other supporting documentation."

Specter also asked Mueller to make available FBI agent Xanthig Mangum to meet with his staff. Mangum is reported to have corresponded in 2000 with Shaffer, who helped run Able Danger's mission and has offered to testify on its findings, about scheduling a meeting between Able Danger and FBI staffs. No meeting ever took place.

The Pentagon has been looking into what it knew and when it knew it, but defense officials have not been able to verify the Able Danger claims so far. A Pentagon spokesman confirmed Thursday that the department has interviewed both Shaffer and Philpott.

"There's something very sinister going on here that really troubles me," Weldon told FOX News on Thursday, blasting the Sept. 11 commission (search) for not taking the claims more seriously. He said some panel members were trying to smear Shaffer and Able Danger.

"What's the Sept. 11 commission got to hide?" Weldon asked. "The commission is trying to spin this because they're embarrassed about what's coming out. In two weeks with two staffers, I've uncovered more in this regard than they did with 80 staffers and $15 million of taxpayer money."

Sept. 11 commission Chairman Thomas Kean recently told FOX News that the panel is waiting for a response from the Pentagon. Until then, the commission has stood by its work, maintaining that no documents they received from the military backed up the Atta claims.

Weldon added that at least five people on the federal payroll will testify under oath about the validity of the Able Danger intelligence.

"When this is over, the Sept. 11 commission is going to have egg all over their face," he said.
http://www.newsmax.com/r/?http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167130,00.html

posted August 30, 2005 05:29 PM            

Probability O'Reilly, has a larger audience than Jon Stewart: 100%

Probability George Bush is President: 100%

Probability John Kerry is not President: 100%

Probability George Bush is more intelligent than John Kerry: 100%

posted August 30, 2005 05:53 PM            

I think you're a whining leftist acoustic, one who can't formulate an argument of your own and must resort to attacking the credibility of the source. I don't give a damn from what source you post articles and I don't give a damn that the NY Times "says" they're going to clean up their act. They're only saying that now...after 50 years of outright lying, slanting and failure to report important stories at all because they've been dragged through a knothole and don't have a choice. This is a paper whose reporter make up stories and plagiarize other reporters work product.

Hopefully, next time you drop by, you'll have fallen out of your whine mode and have something of substance to say, not that I'm holding my breath on that.

posted August 30, 2005 06:52 PM            

Formulate an argument? No one p!sses you off more than I do. Therefore it's logical to conclude that my arguments are the most poignant to you. An example of a poor argument rebuttal would be your probability post above. Your feelings hurt that Jon Stewart's audience beats O'Reilly's on all those levels? Wah!

That's nice that you don't care that NY Times has a more realistic view of itself than NewsMax. How often does Pulitzer honor NewsMax? Oh, they don't. Why? Because, of course, they're yet another leftist organization. Strange thing is, this particular 'leftist' organization also awards journalism from the Christian Science Monitor and Wall Street Journal as well. I'm not sure whether or not the Orange County Register is considered conservative or not, but they're in there too. The NY Times wins these awards regularly, incidentally (and has for years). NewsMax? Now I'm not sure if it's because NewsMax isn't considered journalism, or if it's just that NewsMax is that poorly staffed. http://www.pulitzer.org/

quote:

---

This is a paper whose reporter make up stories and plagiarize other reporters work product.

---

That was one reporter. Whoopteedoo! How do you think your Republican brothers would feel if you judged the Sheehan family by such criteria?

quote:

---

Hopefully, next time you drop by, you'll have fallen out of your whine mode and have something of substance to say, not that I'm holding my breath on that.

---

If you're reading me as whining, then you're projecting that on me. Much like your other projections like, "Leftist," and, "Radical."

quote:

---

So, you don't want to debate.

---

posted August 30, 2005 07:22 PM            

On the other hand, it's you who are overly invested in replying in your whining way about what I choose to post so you're going to get more of the same. Maybe it will help straighten you out. Call it one of my good deeds!

posted August 30, 2005 07:26 PM            

The Senate Intelligence Committee has contacted the White House asking whether it has a copy of a pre-9/11 chart put together by the Able Danger military intelligence team that identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta as a terrorist threat.

Time magazine reports that the Committee "last week drafted a letter asking the White House for a copy" of the politically explosive chart, which Congressman Curt Weldon said he gave to then-Deputy National Security Advisor Hadley two weeks after the 9/11 attacks.

Earlier this month, Able Danger whistleblower Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer explained how the Atta chart was handed off to Hadley.
"Within two weeks of the attack, this colleague of mine ... she took that very poster [with Mohamed Atta] to Congressman [Curt] Weldon," Shaffer said in a radio interview. "And I have to say he took it right to [Steven] Hadley, I believe, over at the NSC."

"It's my understanding that he gave him that chart and Hadley had a great deal of interest in it," Shaffer added.

The one-time top aide to then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice has made no comment so far on the Able Danger controversy.

posted August 30, 2005 07:29 PM            

A copy of the Able Danger chart that identified lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta as a terrorist operating inside the U.S. a year before the 9/11 attacks is clearly visible in a video of a 2002 speech by delivered by Rep. Curt Weldon to the Heritage Foundation.

The Pentagon, the 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee are currently seeking evidence that the bombshell chart, featuring a photo Atta, ever existed - as claimed by three members of the Able Danger team, along with Rep. Weldon. But so far, no physical evidence of the controversial document has surfaced.

Until now.
A third of the way through his May 23, 2002 address on data fusion techniques, the video shows Rep. Weldon unfurling a copy of the now missing document and displaying it to the Heritage audience.

"This is the unclassified chart that was done by the Special Forces Command briefing center one year before 9/11," he explains. "It is the complete architecture of al Qaeda and pan-Islamic extremism. It gives all the linkages. It gives all the capabilities. . . ."

Though Weldon never mentions Able Danger or Atta by name - and the video never zooms in on the chart to the point where Atta's photo is identifiable - it's clear from Weldon comments that the chart is the same one currently being sought.

Since the Able Danger story broke three weeks ago, the Pennsylvania Republican has repeatedly insisted that he gave a copy of the chart shortly after the 9/11 attacks to then-Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley.

In the 2002 speech, Weldon told the same story in greater detail, standing beside a copy of what he said he gave Hadley.

"I went to the White House. I don't mean to embarrass this guy cause he's a good friend of mine. But I took a mini version of this chart in Nov. [2001] and I turned it over to him - Steve Hadley, who works directly for [then-National Security Advisor] Condi Rice."

Weldon said Hadley was stunned after viewing the Al Qaeda-Atta document.

"This is unbelievable - where'd you get this?" he wanted to know.

After being told that the chart was prepared by military intelligence a year before the 9/11 attacks, Hadley said, according to Weldon, "I've got to show this to the man" - apparently referring to President Bush.

In the same speech, Rep. Weldon also revealed that then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Hugh Shelton received a briefing on the Able Danger chart in the closing weeks of the Clinton administration.

posted August 30, 2005 07:31 PM              

quote:

---

one who can't formulate an argument of your own and must resort to attacking the credibility of the source.--jwhop

---

posted August 30, 2005 07:55 PM            

quote:

---

hahahahahahahahahahaha..Petron

---

posted August 30, 2005 08:31 PM            

quote:

---

I don't know how to break this to you acoustic but you don't even rise to a minor annoyance with me.

---

That's why you always reply to me, Jwhop? Are you in constant denial of reality or what?

quote:

---

I've heard all the leftist tripe before, heard every evasion to keep from dealing with facts, so I know the leftist play book inside out, from top to bottom and I must say, it's pathetic.

---

Pathetic like trying to pass NewsMax off as journalism? That IS what we were talking about wasn't it? Are you evading the debate between the award-winning journalism of the NY Times versus the higly biased, and un-noteworthy NewsMax?

If you were as clever as you think you are, you'd have made a fool of me by now, and put me in my place in some manner. Plainly, you haven't succeeded. The only person whose mind you influence with your faulty logic is your own.

quote:

---

On the other hand, it's you who are overly invested in replying in your whining way about what I choose to post so you're going to get more of the same.

---

Well, let me ask you this, Jwhop:

Which is worse, whining about a news source of no repute, or whining about a news source of consistent repute (whose articles are never posted here)?