Report cites warnings before September 11, 2001...

  • Thread starter Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
  • Start date
C

Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer

Guest
http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/18/intelligence.hearings/

Thursday, September 19, 2002 Posted: 10:48 AM EDT (1448 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional committees said in a report released Wednesday.

In 1998, U.S. intelligence had information that a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosives-laden airplane into the World Trade Center, according to a joint inquiry of the House and Senate intelligence committees.

However, the Federal Aviation Administration found the plot "highly unlikely given the state of that foreign country's aviation program," and believed a flight originating outside the United States would be detected before it reached its target inside the country, the report said.

"The FBI's New York office took no action on the information," it said.

Another alert came just a month before the attacks, the report said, when the CIA sent a message to the FAA warning of a possible hijacking "or an act of sabotage against a commercial airliner." The information was linked to a group of Pakistanis based in South America.

That warning did not mention using an airliner as a weapon and, the report said, "there was apparently little, if any, effort by intelligence community analysts to produce any strategic assessments of terrorists using aircraft as weapons."

Sen. Bob Graham, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the goal of Wednesday's hearing was "not to point a finger or pin blame" but to correct "systemic problems (that) might have prevented our government from detecting and disrupting al Qaeda's plot."

Nothing found is a "smoking gun," Graham said. "But collectively I think there was enough there that we should have done a better job of seeing what was coming and hopefully, with luck, stopping it."

Graham told CNN "It wouldn't have taken a lot of luck. It would have taken someone who could have asked and gotten answers to the right follow-up questions and then put it together."

The report, which looked at more than a dozen federal intelligence agencies, suggests the United States had more information that might have helped to prevent the terror attacks than the government has previously said.

As early as 1994 the government received information that international terrorists "had seriously considered the use of airplanes as a means of carrying out terrorist attacks," the report says.

In July 2001, the report says, a briefing prepared for senior government officials warned of "a significant terrorist attack against U.S. and/or Israeli interests in the coming weeks. The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties ... (it) will occur with little or no warning."

The joint committee's report discusses information federal intelligence agencies gathered about Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.

It said that in 1998, officials received reports concerning a "bin Laden plot involving aircraft in the New York and Washington, areas." Officials received reports that al Qaeda was trying to establish an operative cell in the United States and that bin Laden was attempting to recruit a group of five to seven young men from the United States to travel to the Middle East for training in conjunction with his plans to strike U.S. domestic targets.

The intelligence reports "generally did not contain specific information as to where, when, and how a terrorist attack might occur," the committee said, and they represented only "a small percentage of the threat information that the Intelligence Community obtained during this period, most of which pointed to the possibility of attacks against U.S. interests overseas."

Nonetheless, the report said, "the totality of the information in this body of reporting clearly reiterated a consistent and critically important theme: Osama bin Laden's intent to launch terrorist attacks inside the United States."

In fact in December 1998, the report says, the director of central intelligence, George Tenet, told his deputies, "We must now enter a new phase in our effort against bin Laden. ... We are at war."

"Relatively few of the FBI agents interviewed by the joint inquiry staff seem to have been aware of Tenet's declaration," the report said.

The report says that in July and August 2001, intelligence reporting "began to decrease" -- even though the al Qaeda threat was growing.

On September 10, 2001, some 35 to 40 personnel were assigned to a unit created by the director of central intelligence with the specific task of tracking bin Laden. Fewer than 20 people were part of a similar unit at the FBI. The report raises "questions about the adequacy of these resources with respect to the magnitude of the threat."

The report also suggests intelligence officials did not focus enough attention on a critical al Qaeda operative, unnamed in the report, whom officials had known about since 1995 "but did not recognize his growing importance" to the organization or to Osama bin Laden.

The report says the director of central intelligence has refused to declassify two pieces of information: precisely what the White House knew and information about a key al Qaeda operative involved in the attacks.

Government sources told CNN that operative is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, whom they describe as one of the masterminds of the September 11 attacks. He was indicted by the United States for plotting to bomb U.S. airliners in 1995. Officials believe he also plotted to have airplanes hijacked and flown into U.S. buildings.

Listed as one of the government's 22 most wanted terrorists, Mohammed is in hiding. U.S. officials believe he was in Pakistan when last heard from.

Stephen Push, who lost his wife in the World Trade Center, told lawmakers at the hearing, "Our loved ones paid the ultimate price for the worst American intelligence failure since Pearl Harbor."

Push said the U.S. intelligence bureaucracy must be thoroughly restructured. "If it isn't," he said, "the next attack may involve weapons of mass destruction -- and the death toll may be in the tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands."
 
On Jun 30, 6:20 am, anonym...@remailer.cyberiade.it (Cyberiade.it
Anonymous Remailer) wrote:
> http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/18/intelligence.hea...
>
> Thursday, September 19, 2002 Posted: 10:48 AM EDT (1448 GMT)
>
> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional committees said in a report released Wednesday.
>
> In 1998, U.S. intelligence had information that a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosives-laden airplane into the World Trade Center, according to a joint inquiry of the House and Senate intelligence committees.
>


Well of course the Jewish supremacists are going to pass along vague
general warnings about ARABS attacking the U.S...that was all part of
the plan.

"ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of these days using
airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of these days
using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of these
days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of
these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one
of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S.
one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the
U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack
the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to
attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going
to attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are
going to attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS
are going to attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..."

So that when someone actually does attack the U.S. with airplanes, we
already "know" it was ARABS.
 
On Jun 30, 6:08 am, jpsmith...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Jun 30, 6:20 am, anonym...@remailer.cyberiade.it (Cyberiade.it
>
> Anonymous Remailer) wrote:
> >http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/18/intelligence.hea...

>
> > Thursday, September 19, 2002 Posted: 10:48 AM EDT (1448 GMT)

>
> > WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional committees said in a report released Wednesday.

>
> > In 1998, U.S. intelligence had information that a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an explosives-laden airplane into the World Trade Center, according to a joint inquiry of the House and Senate intelligence committees.

>
> Well of course the Jewish supremacists are going to pass along vague
> general warnings about ARABS attacking the U.S...that was all part of
> the plan.
>
> "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of these days using
> airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of these days
> using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of these
> days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one of
> these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S. one
> of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the U.S.
> one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack the
> U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to attack
> the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going to
> attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are going
> to attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS are
> going to attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..." "ARABS
> are going to attack the U.S. one of these days using airplanes..."
>
> So that when someone actually does attack the U.S. with airplanes, we
> already "know" it was ARABS.


Bush lied, people died. Old story to most people with a brain.
 
"Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote in a a
message

> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
> committees said in a report released Wednesday.


During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents on
the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.

Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.
 
John P. wrote:
> "Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote in a a
> message
> > WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
> > several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
> > on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
> > before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
> > committees said in a report released Wednesday.

> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents on
> the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.



Why do lie and run false metaphors, sweet child, when the truth
is undeniable?

-zookumar-
 
"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in message
news:Y6mdne8_c4SqgxrbnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote in a a
> message
>
>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.

>
> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents on
> the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>
> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.
>

Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously could
they have prevented another 911?
 
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:06:06 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote:

>"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in message news:Y6mdne8_c4SqgxrbnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com...
>> "Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote
>>
>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.

>>
>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents on
>> the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>>
>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.
>>

>Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
>answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously could
>they have prevented another 911?


Bush could have prevented 9/11 easily. He'd already
been advised to secure civilian aviation.

Instead, he stopped the FBI from investigating the
bin Ladens (his family's business associates), and he
made sure the commercial pilots couldn't carry any
sidearms to defend themselves.

If he'd merely warned the potential victims, there's
no way the events could have unfolded in the ways
they did, which profited Bush so much.
 
"seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote in a message

>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.


>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents on
>> the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.


> Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
> answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously
> could they have prevented another 911?


An enemy dedicated to his mission,willing to die for it, with sufficient
resources and manpower, cannot likely be stopped. They tried in 1993 and
failed. They succeeded in getting the truck bomb into the building and
causing damage, but the impact was less than they had seemed to hope for.
Their next attempt, on September 11, 2001, was much more successful.

Had it failed. They would have tried again.

Even armed with very specific information, it is nearly impossible to stop
such an enemy.

In this case, the information was less than specific.
 
"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in
message news:RoadnUeGN7uNdRrbnZ2dnUVZ_h6vnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote in a message
>
>>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.

>
>>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car
>>> accidents on the interstate highways in and around the Chicago
>>> area.
>>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.

>
>> Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the
>> few un answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken
>> seriously could they have prevented another 911?

>
> An enemy dedicated to his mission,willing to die for it, with
> sufficient resources and manpower, cannot likely be stopped. They
> tried in 1993 and failed. They succeeded in getting the truck bomb
> into the building and causing damage, but the impact was less than
> they had seemed to hope for. Their next attempt, on September 11,
> 2001, was much more successful.


Their next attempt on U.S. soil was foiled on 12/14/1999 when Ahmed
Ressam, an Algerian living in Canada, was arrested at the United
States-Canada border in Port Angeles, Washington after crossing by
ferry. Ressam was planning to bomb L.A. International Airport.

>
> Had it failed. They would have tried again.
>
> Even armed with very specific information, it is nearly impossible
> to stop such an enemy.


Yet, the U.S. was able to do in in 1999. The reason was that somebody
was paying attention.

>
> In this case, the information was less than specific.


Yet, the U.S. was able to stop a planned attack in 1999. The reason
was that somebody was paying attention.
 
< US > wrote in message news:u12f835c2o87kflrhtaj2vba42g9a0j1bv@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:06:06 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>>"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in
>>message news:Y6mdne8_c4SqgxrbnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> "Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote
>>>
>>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.
>>>
>>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents
>>> on
>>> the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>>>
>>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.
>>>

>>Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
>>answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously
>>could
>>they have prevented another 911?

>
> Bush could have prevented 9/11 easily. He'd already
> been advised to secure civilian aviation.
>
> Instead, he stopped the FBI from investigating the
> bin Ladens (his family's business associates), and he
> made sure the commercial pilots couldn't carry any
> sidearms to defend themselves.
>
> If he'd merely warned the potential victims, there's
> no way the events could have unfolded in the ways
> they did, which profited Bush so much.
>

I wouldnt be the least bit suprised. Bush and co are a pack of crinimals who
deserve to be impeached and sent to prision.
 
"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in message
news:RoadnUeGN7uNdRrbnZ2dnUVZ_h6vnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote in a message
>
>>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.

>
>>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents
>>> on the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.

>
>> Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
>> answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously
>> could they have prevented another 911?

>
> An enemy dedicated to his mission,willing to die for it, with sufficient
> resources and manpower, cannot likely be stopped. They tried in 1993 and
> failed. They succeeded in getting the truck bomb into the building and
> causing damage, but the impact was less than they had seemed to hope for.
> Their next attempt, on September 11, 2001, was much more successful.
>
> Had it failed. They would have tried again.
>
> Even armed with very specific information, it is nearly impossible to stop
> such an enemy.
>
> In this case, the information was less than specific.
>

That part I agree with, if 911 was prevented something even worse might
happen. But I think "Binladen plans to attack lower Manhattan or use
aircraft as weapons" is pretty specific. The only thing it lacks is the date
and time.
 
On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 18:50:31 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote:

>< US > wrote in message news:u12f835c2o87kflrhtaj2vba42g9a0j1bv@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:06:06 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in message news:Y6mdne8_c4SqgxrbnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>> "Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.
>>>>
>>>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents
>>>> on the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>>>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.
>>>>
>>>Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
>>>answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously
>>>could they have prevented another 911?

>>
>> Bush could have prevented 9/11 easily. He'd already
>> been advised to secure civilian aviation.
>>
>> Instead, he stopped the FBI from investigating the
>> bin Ladens (his family's business associates), and he
>> made sure the commercial pilots couldn't carry any
>> sidearms to defend themselves.
>>
>> If he'd merely warned the potential victims, there's
>> no way the events could have unfolded in the ways
>> they did, which profited Bush so much.
>>

>I wouldnt be the least bit suprised. Bush and co are a pack of criminals who
>deserve to be impeached and sent to prison.


True.
 
< US > wrote in message news:k3ck83dm53o6dfk52g45f80qrobufbjpqb@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 18:50:31 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>>< US > wrote in message
>>news:u12f835c2o87kflrhtaj2vba42g9a0j1bv@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:06:06 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>>"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in
>>>>message news:Y6mdne8_c4SqgxrbnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>> "Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>>>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>>>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>>>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>>>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.
>>>>>
>>>>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents
>>>>> on the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>>>>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.
>>>>>
>>>>Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
>>>>answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously
>>>>could they have prevented another 911?
>>>
>>> Bush could have prevented 9/11 easily. He'd already
>>> been advised to secure civilian aviation.
>>>
>>> Instead, he stopped the FBI from investigating the
>>> bin Ladens (his family's business associates), and he
>>> made sure the commercial pilots couldn't carry any
>>> sidearms to defend themselves.
>>>
>>> If he'd merely warned the potential victims, there's
>>> no way the events could have unfolded in the ways
>>> they did, which profited Bush so much.
>>>

>>I wouldnt be the least bit suprised. Bush and co are a pack of criminals
>>who
>>deserve to be impeached and sent to prison.

>
> True.


If I lived in America i would help but its up to you guys to make the world
a better place. I'm just a bystander.
 
seon ferguson wrote:

> If I lived in America i would help but its up to you guys to make the world
> a better place. I'm just a bystander.


What do you imagine you would do?
I think there's really nothing left but to wait for the
soon-to-be-former administration to pass into "former administration."
There's been talk of everything from impeachment to oversight to
bringing the administration under the rule of law for the better part of
a decade now. It should be clear that nothing is going to stop these
leaders on their course.
 
"James McGill" <jmcgill@email.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:f6eplp$ldi$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
> seon ferguson wrote:
>
>> If I lived in America i would help but its up to you guys to make the
>> world a better place. I'm just a bystander.

>
> What do you imagine you would do?
> I think there's really nothing left but to wait for the soon-to-be-former
> administration to pass into "former administration."
> There's been talk of everything from impeachment to oversight to bringing
> the administration under the rule of law for the better part of a decade
> now. It should be clear that nothing is going to stop these leaders on
> their course.


They are some genuine patriots getting congress to sign a bill that would
impeach Bush. I'd probably join them or start my own impeachment process. I'm
afraid if we waited that long the criminals at the white house would lead
America into another unjust war and possible force our own children to die
for oil and the defense contract companies. The only way to save America is
impeach the bastards before it's to late.
 
"seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote in a message

> That part I agree with, if 911 was prevented something even worse might
> happen. But I think "Binladen plans to attack lower Manhattan or use
> aircraft as weapons" is pretty specific. The only thing it lacks is the
> date and time.


I don't recall any warning about Manhattan, but, the first WTC bombing in
1993 would have been a clue. There were warnings that planes might be used
as weapons. Oplan Bojinka was known to the intelligence community as well.

If they had just grounded all the planes and cancelled all air travel, they
could have stopped the whole thing.
 
"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in message
news:YpSdnZCEAtzamRbbnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote in a message
>
>> That part I agree with, if 911 was prevented something even worse might
>> happen. But I think "Binladen plans to attack lower Manhattan or use
>> aircraft as weapons" is pretty specific. The only thing it lacks is the
>> date and time.

>
> I don't recall any warning about Manhattan, but, the first WTC bombing in
> 1993 would have been a clue. There were warnings that planes might be used
> as weapons. Oplan Bojinka was known to the intelligence community as well.
>
> If they had just grounded all the planes and cancelled all air travel,
> they could have stopped the whole thing.
>

Or if they had allowed pilots to have guns on the planes then possibly the
pilots could fight back. I agree with you mistakes were made in both the
left and the right. You don't have to be a kook to figure that one out.

As for the lower Manhattan warning I know I read it somewhere but I'll have
to dig it up somewhere. It was certainly predicted though, like him or not
Alex Jones did predict the world trade center would be attacked.
 
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 13:01:36 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au>
wrote:

>
>"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in message
>news:YpSdnZCEAtzamRbbnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote in a message
>>
>>> That part I agree with, if 911 was prevented something even worse might
>>> happen. But I think "Binladen plans to attack lower Manhattan or use
>>> aircraft as weapons" is pretty specific. The only thing it lacks is the
>>> date and time.

>>
>> I don't recall any warning about Manhattan, but, the first WTC bombing in
>> 1993 would have been a clue. There were warnings that planes might be used
>> as weapons. Oplan Bojinka was known to the intelligence community as well.
>>
>> If they had just grounded all the planes and cancelled all air travel,
>> they could have stopped the whole thing.
>>

>Or if they had allowed pilots to have guns on the planes then possibly the
>pilots could fight back. I agree with you mistakes were made in both the
>left and the right. You don't have to be a kook to figure that one out.
>
>As for the lower Manhattan warning I know I read it somewhere but I'll have
>to dig it up somewhere. It was certainly predicted though, like him or not
>Alex Jones did predict the world trade center would be attacked.


<<SNIP>

Seon,

It is H A D E S. (I found that on google on my first try!)

>I can see why people think I'm that crazy whenever i say anything remotly
>anti Israel though.


I have been following your thoughts (to some extent). I respectfully
disagree with most of them.

In science it is customary to draw conclusions from facts, being
careful to not attempt to draw evidence to support pre-conceived
notions.

You seem to do that latter.

You seem to fight endlessly to find support for your pre-drawn
conclusions, and miss all the real evidence.

You might just be the penultimate conspiracist. That would be a bonus,
huh?

I think you might be the real contact person to do the summary that I
have waited so long for.

I am serious here. I see the endless arguments about 9-11 and
everything else in this group. What I want and need is a real
substantive dissertation that sums up en total the entire 9-11 event.

Can you and will you sum this entire thing up once and for all?

Motives?
Who benefited?
Why was the whole thing so clumsy? Who planted all the explosives so
clandestinely, and no one noticed the holes in the walls, the
explosives just sitting there in the offices, the rip cords, timers
and electronics to make it all go boom?

Why is the "official story" so wrong? 9-11 is quite possibly the most
studied event of all time, and are you quite sure that the "Popular
Mechanics" folks didn't do a pretty good job of explaining it all with
some real science and logic?

I think it is pretty good. My science background and teaching
credentials tells me that all is well. I rest at ease. I see you as
one who is obsessed with the minutia of a past event, and can't come
to terms with the reality of it.

Please tell me why I am wrong.

Alex Jones, by the way, is a complete idiot. And your citing him gets
you nothing.

-sj
>
 
"sj" <sj@essjay.com> wrote in message
news:i1hm8392cn02k7h40um02hkkk8gd32mmov@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 13:01:36 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in
>>message
>>news:YpSdnZCEAtzamRbbnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote in a message
>>>
>>>> That part I agree with, if 911 was prevented something even worse might
>>>> happen. But I think "Binladen plans to attack lower Manhattan or use
>>>> aircraft as weapons" is pretty specific. The only thing it lacks is the
>>>> date and time.
>>>
>>> I don't recall any warning about Manhattan, but, the first WTC bombing
>>> in
>>> 1993 would have been a clue. There were warnings that planes might be
>>> used
>>> as weapons. Oplan Bojinka was known to the intelligence community as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> If they had just grounded all the planes and cancelled all air travel,
>>> they could have stopped the whole thing.
>>>

>>Or if they had allowed pilots to have guns on the planes then possibly the
>>pilots could fight back. I agree with you mistakes were made in both the
>>left and the right. You don't have to be a kook to figure that one out.
>>
>>As for the lower Manhattan warning I know I read it somewhere but I'll
>>have
>>to dig it up somewhere. It was certainly predicted though, like him or not
>>Alex Jones did predict the world trade center would be attacked.

>
> <<SNIP>
>
> Seon,
>
> It is H A D E S. (I found that on google on my first try!)
>
>>I can see why people think I'm that crazy whenever i say anything remotly
>>anti Israel though.

>
> I have been following your thoughts (to some extent). I respectfully
> disagree with most of them.
>
> In science it is customary to draw conclusions from facts, being
> careful to not attempt to draw evidence to support pre-conceived
> notions.
>
> You seem to do that latter.
>
> You seem to fight endlessly to find support for your pre-drawn
> conclusions, and miss all the real evidence.
>
> You might just be the penultimate conspiracist. That would be a bonus,
> huh?
>
> I think you might be the real contact person to do the summary that I
> have waited so long for.
>
> I am serious here. I see the endless arguments about 9-11 and
> everything else in this group. What I want and need is a real
> substantive dissertation that sums up en total the entire 9-11 event.
>
> Can you and will you sum this entire thing up once and for all?
>
> Motives?
> Who benefited?
> Why was the whole thing so clumsy? Who planted all the explosives so
> clandestinely, and no one noticed the holes in the walls, the
> explosives just sitting there in the offices, the rip cords, timers
> and electronics to make it all go boom?
>
> Why is the "official story" so wrong? 9-11 is quite possibly the most
> studied event of all time, and are you quite sure that the "Popular
> Mechanics" folks didn't do a pretty good job of explaining it all with
> some real science and logic?
>
> I think it is pretty good. My science background and teaching
> credentials tells me that all is well. I rest at ease. I see you as
> one who is obsessed with the minutia of a past event, and can't come
> to terms with the reality of it.
>
> Please tell me why I am wrong.
>
> Alex Jones, by the way, is a complete idiot. And your citing him gets
> you nothing.
>


Ah now I see where your coming at. I too have a scientific mind a show me
the money type thing. But there are a few things, with science no one has to
blindly view one hypothesis as the one true truth. If its is proven wrong
then the majority of scientists will accept it. That's how I view 911
conspiracy theories and the "official version" of 911. No two theories are
the one true theory everyone must believe in however most of the evidence
points to the "official version". The debunkers (http://www.911myths.org,
http://www.debunking 911.com and others) have done a sound job debunking the
obvious bullshit. But they are still some aspects of the 911 theories that I
believe they did not do a good job on. Like the warnings, the briefings, the
way Bush tried to take FBI agents of the hijackers etc. I try not to have
pre conceived notions and draw my conclusions based on facts but I have only
just recently decided to base my political views on facts so it will take
some time (so please bear with me)

But to some hard core 911 conspiracy theorists I am not one of them, unless
I agree with every single theory they bring out I am a "shill" so to them I
am not a 911 conspiracy theorist.

As for motives and who benefited well that's easy, Bush got his patriot act
passed, he got his war on terror going so now he can invade any country he
wants just by linking it to 911 and of course all the war time powers he has
but one could also argue he would have passed the patriot act and invaded
Iraq without 911.

As for explosions in the WTC that seems highly doubtful as conspiracy
theorists use quotes taken out of context as "proof" for there conspiracy or
you have to read the full quote to disprove their theory. But the collapse
of WTC 1, 2 and 7 do look like a classic example of a controlled implosion
but then I'm not a demolition expert.

Most of the official version, I believe, is correct. 911 happened the way it
was seen on TV and reported. My questions are about what happened before and
after those terrorist attacks.

Alex Jones may be an idiot but I wish someone would explain how an idiot
could predict 911 like that. He's a billion times smarter then Bush and all
those hardcore Bush fan's.
 
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:23:26 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote:

>< US > wrote in message news:k3ck83dm53o6dfk52g45f80qrobufbjpqb@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 18:50:31 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>< US > wrote in message news:u12f835c2o87kflrhtaj2vba42g9a0j1bv@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:06:06 +1000, "seon ferguson" <seon@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote in message news:Y6mdne8_c4SqgxrbnZ2dnUVZ_ruknZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>>> "Anonymous Loser" <AnonymousLoser@remailer.cyberiade.it> wrote
>>>>>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had
>>>>>>> several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States
>>>>>>> on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well
>>>>>>> before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional
>>>>>>> committees said in a report released Wednesday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> During the week of July 4, 2007, four people will die in car accidents
>>>>>> on the interstate highways in and around the Chicago area.
>>>>>> Armed with this specific information, stop it from happening.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Unlike you I'm not a coincidence theorist. These warnings are the few un
>>>>>answered questions I have left about 911. If they were taken seriously
>>>>>could they have prevented another 911?
>>>>
>>>> Bush could have prevented 9/11 easily. He'd already
>>>> been advised to secure civilian aviation.
>>>>
>>>> Instead, he stopped the FBI from investigating the
>>>> bin Ladens (his family's business associates), and he
>>>> made sure the commercial pilots couldn't carry any
>>>> sidearms to defend themselves.
>>>>
>>>> If he'd merely warned the potential victims, there's
>>>> no way the events could have unfolded in the ways
>>>> they did, which profited Bush so much.
>>>>
>>>I wouldnt be the least bit suprised. Bush and co are a pack of criminals
>>>who deserve to be impeached and sent to prison.

>>
>> True.

>
>If I lived in America i would help but its up to you guys to make the world
>a better place. I'm just a bystander.


The world had to cooperate to rid itself of the Bush
crime family hero Hitler.

Bush and Cheney are the greatest threat to the USA,
but they pose a threat to the rest of the world, too.
 
Back
Top