War against terror

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]The only thing more stunning is the complete apathy considering 3000 people died in one event, and then tack on the wars in the name of 9/11. That's a big deal. To ignore the Al Queda threat because your families arch-nemisis is sticking his tongue out at you is a big deal. And if this new whistleblower is true, to actively ignore it for whatever reason to follow a private vendetta is a very big deal. And if the alleged 9/12 speech where Star Wars is highlighted as opposed to the true threats is right, that is a very big deal and more proof.

It does not require a brain that TCA, TBA, CIA, FBI, and etc. failed in dealing with Al Qaeda. It just pisses me off that people are trying to pin the blame only one group for 9/11. That is why blame game is stupid for this instant.

9/11 commission was created to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks. The Commission is also mandated to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks (taken from website). If was created to not point fingers but get the facts.

And upon the collection of these "facts", it has come out that TBA may have ignored the threat from Al Queda. The "circumstances" involved around 9/11 include Bush demanding for a reason to go take Saddam out and wanting his Star Wars program to go through, and ignoring the little problem of terrorists.

In the lightist sense that is criminal negligence.

I know one recommendation they will come out with...

Don't ignore the threat in the first place.

As the head of the administration, and the stearer of policy, Bush holds full culpability. Blame is not stupid. Blame must be assessed and punishment dealt out for the very reasons you say come from the website.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]And upon the collection of these "facts", it has come out that TBA may have ignored the threat from Al Queda. The "circumstances" involved around 9/11 include Bush demanding for a reason to go take Saddam out and wanting his Star Wars program to go through, and ignoring the little problem of terrorists.

In the lightist sense that is criminal negligence.

I know one recommendation they will come out with...

Don't ignore the threat in the first place.

As the head of the administration, and the stearer of policy, Bush holds full culpability. Blame is not stupid. Blame must be assessed and punishment dealt out for the very reasons you say come from the website.

Then everybody from TCA, CIA, FBI, and etc. should be charged with something because it was their job also to protect us....

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]And upon the collection of these "facts", it has come out that TBA may have ignored the threat from Al Queda. The "circumstances" involved around 9/11 include Bush demanding for a reason to go take Saddam out and wanting his Star Wars program to go through, and ignoring the little problem of terrorists.

In the lightist sense that is criminal negligence.

I know one recommendation they will come out with...

Don't ignore the threat in the first place.

As the head of the administration, and the stearer of policy, Bush holds full culpability. Blame is not stupid. Blame must be assessed and punishment dealt out for the very reasons you say come from the website.

Then everybody from TCA, CIA, FBI, and etc. should be charged with something because it was their job also to protect us....

If superiors ignored threats, (like the flight school memo), if Bush and TBA ignored threats to persue their own goals.

Then yes.

I don't care if it doubles the prison population. Least these lame-asses will be out of government and not screw the US over again.

[Chill 0]

Did any tell Bush that he is the terrorist?

[Pukko 0]

My current theory is he did so to have something to unite Americans against anyhting he may wish to pursue, like Iraq and Afghanistan etc.  Only he probably did not realize that 3000 people would die for it first, make that he surely was too stupid to imagine that kind of death toll.

The only thing more stunning is the complete apathy considering 3000 people died in one event, and then tack on the wars in the name of 9/11. That's a big deal. To ignore the Al Queda threat because your families arch-nemisis is sticking his tongue out at you is a big deal. And if this new whistleblower is true, to actively ignore it for whatever reason to follow a private vendetta is a very big deal.

Wake the fuck up people.

The "circumstances" involved around 9/11 include Bush demanding for a reason to go take Saddam out and wanting his Star Wars program to go through, and ignoring the little problem of terrorists.

I don't know if you have managed to miss the "Project for the New American Century" (most often refered to as "PNAC") website. Journalists and critics refer to it frequently when talking about TBA's agenda. I view it, sligtly exagerrated, as the 'Mein Kamph II' website.

Here you can read a short text on their agenda + agreeing members of the organisation like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz & Jeb Bush:

Statement of Principles

And I agree with what bn880 & Akira wrote. I think its very consistent and logical for TBA to have had wet dreams about a 'new Pearl Harbour' for their agenda. And if they ignored the warnings, one can only hope that they underestimated the amplitude of 9/11 - and not cynically reasoned 'one have to break some eggs to make an omelett' (moreover a frequent rational among Bush supprters in defence of the war in Afghanistan & Iraq).

I have thought about posting this link once again when reading your discussions about the latest 9/11 scandal during the last week. But felt it is probably well known to everyone already, but maybe it is'nt?

Here is the only 'official' statement connected to TBA that I know of that intimates that these neoconservatives had reason to welcome 9/11:

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."

The quote is taken from page 51 of PNAC's main document, published in September 2000:

Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century

Add to that statements from Condolezza Rice in March 2000, when she probably had a bad day and slipped her tounge:

"We need a common enemy to unite us."

"We need a new threat as a marker to where we will lead."

Source

[bn880 5]

Quote[/b] ]My current theory is he did so to have something to unite Americans against anyhting he may wish to pursue, like Iraq and Afghanistan etc. Only he probably did not realize that 3000 people would die for it first, make that he surely was to stupid to imagine that kind of death toll.

Here comes the conspiracy theories..

Of course it is, but it does not mean it is not ture. For example there is a lot of motive, and even before the attacks there were some signs that Bush wanted Iraq. First thing after the attacks of 2001 Bush fixated on his target: Iraq. He had an agenda.

[joltan 0]

The talk that it is meaningless is just plain ignorant.

Was it meaningless that Nixon ordered the Watergate break in? What was the big deal? It was already done so why play "the blame game"?

Because it shows a stunning abuse, or lack of competency in the White House, that is why. So obviously there are some people that are happy being lied to and manipulated, as long as they don't have to deal with "the blame game."

Give me a break.

What's the big deal since it already happened? Well for one...it didn't have to happen. And thats a pretty big deal if you ask me.

The only thing more stunning is the complete apathy considering 3000 people died in one event, and then tack on the wars in the name of 9/11. That's a big deal. To ignore the Al Queda threat because your families arch-nemisis is sticking his tongue out at you is a big deal. And if this new whistleblower is true, to actively ignore it for whatever reason to follow a private vendetta is a very big deal. And if the alleged 9/12 speech where Star Wars is highlighted as opposed to the true threats is right, that is a very big deal and more proof.

Wake the fuck up people.

No, that is not what I meant. There were reasons why the safeguards against such things failed (airport security, inter-agency cooperation, evaluation of possible threats), and those have to be looked into. But believing that Bush or any of his croonies actually WILLINGLY IGNORED a threat they themselves considered serious is just plain stupid. So blaming TBA for 9/11 (but for their changes in foreign policy) is just stupid.

People can make wrong judgements or not recognize a threat in time, and in afterthought it is always easy to point out the errors. The question is, did someone commit these errors intentionally (not likely), because of incompetence or gross negligence (time to act on it) or was it just an ill-fated combination of minor errors/misjudgements/structural problems.

The security agencies failed to act on information they had, the airport security was (and still is) a joke and the govenement was in general quite uninterested in international affairs (apart from imposing steel tariffs & generally pissing off allies). While it is important that the reasons are investigated pinning all that on TBA is just silly. What CAN be pinned on them is how they reacted to these failures, how they acted to prevent such a thing to happen again or to bring down the culprits.

They can be blamed for failing on all accounts for that - but certainly not for 9/11 happening at all. They may have done more in advance - but how that would have prevented terrorists from capturing the planes I really can't see. Just look at how lax security on domestic flights in the US still is... with badly paid security personal and carriers competing purely on costs you can't expect each passenger to be scanned thoroughly. And certainly you couldn't before 9/11.

Watergate on the other hand was actually a criminal action sanctioned by the White House - that's something quite different. Of course - some things TBA did AFTER 9/11 in my eyes can be regarded as (far worse) criminal acts, too.

[bn880 5]

The talk that it is meaningless is just plain ignorant.

Was it meaningless that Nixon ordered the Watergate break in? What was the big deal? It was already done so why play "the blame game"?

Because it shows a stunning abuse, or lack of competency in the White House, that is why. So obviously there are some people that are happy being lied to and manipulated, as long as they don't have to deal with "the blame game."

Give me a break.

What's the big deal since it already happened? Well for one...it didn't have to happen. And thats a pretty big deal if you ask me.

The only thing more stunning is the complete apathy considering 3000 people died in one event, and then tack on the wars in the name of 9/11. That's a big deal. To ignore the Al Queda threat because your families arch-nemisis is sticking his tongue out at you is a big deal. And if this new whistleblower is true, to actively ignore it for whatever reason to follow a private vendetta is a very big deal. And if the alleged 9/12 speech where Star Wars is highlighted as opposed to the true threats is right, that is a very big deal and more proof.

Wake the fuck up people.

No, that is not what I meant. There were reasons why the safeguards against such things failed (airport security, inter-agency cooperation, evaluation of possible threats), and those have to be looked into. But believing that Bush or any of his croonies actually WILLINGLY IGNORED a threat they themselves considered serious is just plain stupid. So blaming TBA for 9/11 (but for their changes in foreign policy) is just stupid.

Well I think your analysis is stupid then. Bush DID ignore the threats, unlike Clinton who did NOT as a direct example of my statements.

[joltan 0]

Bush is not the one who evaluates the seriousness of a threat. he's not the one getting the threat messages from foreign intelligence agencies - they are filtered first through a very long chain of analysts and officials. Of course they did not take the terrorist danger serious enough - but that can only be said in hindsight. Is this gross negligence or just a simple misjudgement? Who knows? That's what the hearings are for, and that's why I wrote it is important to look into the reasons. The 'blame game' some of you are trying to play here, on the other hand, has nothing to do with finding any shortcomings and resolving them, but simply with finding a scape goat.

Edit: I consider Bush and his croonies a quite incompetent bunch of cretins, don't get me wrong there - but as I explained, there's much better (and real) reasons for disliking them than simply blaming '9/11' on them.

Edit 2: some grammar & some formulations

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Bush is not the one who evaluates the seriousness of a threat. he's not the one getting the threat messages. Of course they did not take the terrorist danger serious enough - but that can only be said in hindsight. Is this gross negligence or just a simple misjudgement? Who knows? That's what the hearings are for, and that's why I wrote it is important to look into the reasons. The 'blame game' some of you are trying to play here, on the other hand, has nothing to do with finding any shortcomings and resolving them, but simply with finding a scape goat.

Totally agree.

[bn880 5]

Could be a simple misjudgement, could be intentional, however I think it is agreed Bush knew there were threats in the country from the FBI already. Either way, that's a major screwup and a deviation on what Clinton did in the past.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Here is some more intel on 9/11 gate.

Quote[/b] ]Washington, DC -- March 24, 2004 --12:15 EST -- FBI translator Sibel Edmonds was offered a substantial raise and a full time job to encourage her not to go public that she had been asked by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to retranslate and adjust the translations of [terrorist] subject intercepts that had been received before September 11, 2001 by the FBI and CIA.

Edmonds, a ten year U.S. citizen who has passed a polygraph examination, speaks fluent Farsi and Turkish and had been working part time with the FBI for six months--commencing in December, 2001.

In a 50 reporter frenzy in front of some 12 news cameras, Edmonds said "Attorney General John Ashcroft told me 'he was invoking State Secret Privilege and National Security' when I told the FBI I wanted to go public with what I had translated from the pre 9-11 intercepts."

"I appeared once on CBS 60 Minutes but I have been silenced by Mr. Ashcroft, the FBI follows me, and I was threatened with jail in 2002 if I went public," Edmonds told tomflocco.com.

When we asked her if it was really true that she had been bribed by the FBI and DOJ, Edmonds said "You can interpret it as that."

http://tomflocco.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=50

Unsure of the source though so treat with some sceptecism for now till we have a cross refernced second and third source

What I can not understand is why this is not all over the US media? Why are people in the US hearing about this primarily from UK sources?

Kind Regards Walker

[walker 0]

Hi all

In case you missed it Sibel Edmonds is suing the US government!

Quote[/b] ]Defendant U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is an agency of the United States government and maintains and is responsible for Privacy Act systems of records containing information about Plaintiff, and Defendant DOJ took illegal action against Plaintiff.

5. Defendant Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is an agency of the United States government and a component of Defendant DOJ, and maintains and is responsible for Privacy Act systems of records containing information about Plaintiff, and Defendant FBI took illegal action against Plaintiff.

6. Defendant John Ashcroft is the Attorney General of the United States, and he is sued in his official capacity.

7. Defendant Robert S. Mueller, III, is the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and he is sued in his official capacity.

8. Defendant Thomas Frields is a Supervisory Agent in Charge at the Washington Field Office of the Federal Bureau of investigation in Washington, D.C., and he is sued in his official

capacity.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv....814.pdf

Kaboom!

Astonished walker

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]In case you missed it Sibel Edmonds is suing the US government!

She just suing to get her job back and some money...

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]What I can not understand is why this is not all over the US media? Why are people in the US hearing about this primarily from UK sources?

It was just talked about on Fox News television. The report said she had handed over documents to 9/11 commission that stated they (Al-Q) might use airplanes as weapons (I saw the end of the brief report).

[shinRaiden 0]

Interesting. She claims that she followed the proper channels for reporting management concerns. The part about her sister being arrested as a result of information leaked by former co-workers is odd, as most of the translators would also have relatives in the region similarly at risk, unless the whole translation department is as corrupt as she says. That will have to wait to be determined in court.

She also argues that she was unreasonablely terminated. That too will need to be determined in court, as the employment contract was not attached to the complaint. My employer has a clause where any party can terminate the contract at any time with out warning, and I believe without having to give a reason. If as she says that her firing was retalitory, that would have to be proven as well in court, and her admission that review notes were not taken could well complicate her case.

She cites as a foremost cause for the complaint the discloure of 'private' personal background information to unauthorized third-parties. However, no hint is given as to the identity of the third-parties, or reason for suspicion. Her arguement is actually an allegation that her file was leaked, no other specific charges. That's going to take a lot more work to get.

The findings are pretty connect-the-dots obvious. If her story holds, the findings are logical. If they don't her reason for the same findings is bunk.

As to the commentary from tomflocco, the ten years part is the length of time evaluated by the background check per her complaint.

Quote[/b] ]"Attorney General John Ashcroft told me 'he was invoking State Secret Privilege and National Security' when I told the FBI I wanted to go public with what I had translated from the pre 9-11 intercepts."

Hello? Are you as nutty as you claim the rest of your co-workers are? If she were to go public with the intercepts, that would of course potentially expose Methods & Operations to unauthorized personel.

Quote[/b] ]"I appeared once on CBS 60 Minutes but I have been silenced by Mr. Ashcroft, the FBI follows me, and I was threatened with jail in 2002 if I went public," Edmonds told tomflocco.com.

What else would you like to get for divulging classified material on public TV? A book deal? Ice cream?

[shinRaiden 0]

I'm waiting to see how Condie's testimony will go. Considering the security clearances have lapsed on all the comission members, they're not authorized to recieve or digest the information that they really need. Lets see how that plays on TV. It'll be fun, lets get some popcorn and watch the party. Who care's about National Security stuff, that's so two days ago.

[SpecOp9 0]

Lol

I know exactly how the Iraqi war started..

Can we go to war Mr. Bush?

Can we

Can we

Can we?

[Necromancer- 0]

Quote[/b] ]It was TBA's watch. They were suposed to be on guard. They new civil aicraft were to be used as weapons against US cities in the spring and summer before 9/11 yet they did nothing.

Well it was the job of the CIA, FBI, and etc to go after the terrorists (on the ground) who want to do harm aganist USA. Also, TCA basically did do not anything to Al-Quida during their 8 years in office (but on paper, execpt for a few missiles).

Actually they did.

It was just not announced to the press, because it would have economical reprecussions.

[theavonlady 2]

Lol

Don't miss out on the details, like who's in the "Iraq" circle on the left hand side.

[m21man 0]

I hope this is the correct thread for discussing the Spain attacks:

Quote[/b] ]Madrid Bomb Ringleader Cornered, Blows Self Up

Email this story

Apr 4, 8:26 AM (ET)

By Estelle Shirbon

LEGANES, Spain (Reuters) - The Tunisian suspected ringleader of last month's Madrid train bombings blew himself up with three accomplices after police cornered them in a suburban Madrid apartment, officials said Sunday.

Serhane ben Abdelmajid Farkhet, 35, known as El Tunecino (The Tunisian), was one of several men who yelled defiant Arabic slogans before detonating a charge that also killed a policeman, Interior Minister Angel Acebes told a news conference.

Another of the dead, Moroccan Abdennabi Kounjaa, was also among six suspects being hunted in connection with the March 11 bombings of four commuter trains, which killed 191 people.

Fifteen police officers were wounded by the explosion during the Saturday night raid in Leganes, a Madrid suburb. One of the wounded officers was in serious condition.

"The core group of those who carried out the terrorist act (the train bombings) have been detained or died in the collective suicide," Acebes said. "We have to highlight the magnificent work done by the security forces."

Investigators have clearly tied together three events that have rocked Spain in recent weeks: the March 11 train bombings, the discovery of a bomb wedged beneath a high-speed rail south of Madrid Friday, and Saturday's suicide blast.

Spain is holding 15 people, most of them Moroccan, over the March 11 attacks.

Investigators are also searching further afield for a possible mastermind who may have ordered the attacks from abroad with all signs pointing to Islamist radicals sympathetic to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network.

Two days after the bombings and on the eve of Spanish general elections, a videotape surfaced in which a purported al Qaeda spokesman claimed responsibility for the attacks and called them revenge for Spanish support of the war in Iraq.

The following day Spanish voters threw out the strongly pro-American ruling party, electing Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero's Socialists who have pledged to pull Spain's 1,300 troops out of Iraq unless the United Nations takes charge there by June 30.

SUICIDE BELT

Acebes did not say what led police to swoop on the working-class Madrid suburb of Leganes Saturday evening in an attempt to round up several suspects.

The occupants of the first-floor flat spotted the police and began firing while shouting and chanting in Arabic, officials and local residents said.

The police were about to raid the flat when the suspects set off an explosion, demolishing the front of the five-storey apartment block. The blast sent a pall of smoke into the air, left a gaping hole in the front of the block, damaged nearby buildings and left a pile of rubble on the ground.

One body which had yet to be identified was wearing an explosives belt of the type favored by Palestinian militants, the minister added. It contained two kg (4.4 pounds) of explosives.

"They shouted 'God is great' or something like that" in Arabic just before the explosion, one of the police officers who took part in the assault told El Pais newspaper.

A further two or three people may have escaped before the explosion, Acebes said, adding that the group appeared to have been planning more attacks.

Police also found 200 detonators and 22 pounds of dynamite, of the same type used in the train bombings and Friday's thwarted rail bomb.

PREACHED JIHAD

In the six arrest warrants issued Thursday, 35-year-old Farkhet was identified as the "personal leader and coordinator" of the suspected Islamist group implicated in the train bombings.

He had been agitating for "jihad" (holy war) in Madrid in mid-2003 if not earlier, the warrant said.

Acebes has singled out the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group -- a shadowy organization believed to be tied to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network -- as prime suspect in the bombings.

Investigators believe Friday's defused bomb was intended to derail the high-speed train running from Madrid to Seville in an attack that might have killed hundreds.

High-speed trains began running again Saturday, taking thousands to the southern city of Seville for its renowned Holy Week Christian celebrations culminating in Easter next Sunday.

[Placebo 29]

If they're the ones who did it then good riddance to them.

[SpecOp9 0]

Lol

Don't miss out on the details, like who's in the "Iraq" circle on the left hand side.

lmao, now that you point it out.

That's clever

[Balschoiw 0]

Funny, the 9/11 panel comes to the same conclusions using the same facts I used some 10 pages ago.

Panel concludes Sept. 11 attacks could have been prevented

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON -- The leaders of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks agreed Sunday that evidence gathered by their panel showed the attacks could probably have been prevented.

Their remarks drew sharp disagreement from one of President Bush's closest political advisers, who insisted that the Bush and Clinton administrations had no opportunity to disrupt the Sept. 11 plot. They also offered a preview of the difficult questions likely to confront Condoleezza Rice when she testifies before the panel at a long-awaited public hearing this week.

In a joint television interview, the commission's chairman, Thomas H. Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey, and its vice chairman, Lee H. Hamilton, a former Democratic House member from Indiana, indicated that their final report this summer would find that the Sept. 11 attacks were preventable.

They also suggested that Rice, Bush's national security adviser, would be questioned aggressively on Thursday about why the administration had not taken more action against al-Qaida before Sept. 11, and about discrepancies between her public statements and those of Richard A. Clarke, the president's former counterterrorism chief, who has accused the administration of largely ignoring terrorist threats in 2001.

"The whole story might have been different," Kean said on the NBC News program "Meet the Press," outlining a series of intelligence and law enforcement blunders in the months and years before the attacks.

"There are so many threads and so many things, individual things, that happened," he said. "If we had been able to put those people on the watch list of the airlines, the two who were in the country; again, if we'd stopped some of these people at the borders; if we had acted earlier on al-Qaida when al-Qaida was smaller and just getting started."

Kean also cited the "lack of coordination within the FBI" and the bureau's failures to grapple with the implications of the August 2001 arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui, a French citizen who was arrested while in flight school and was later linked to the terrorist cell that carried out the attacks.

Commission officials say current and former officials of the FBI, especially the former director Louis J. Freeh, and Attorney General John Ashcroft are expected to be harshly questioned by the 10-member panel at a hearing later this month about the Moussaoui case and other law enforcement failures before Sept. 11.

Hamilton, a former chairman of the House Intelligence and International Relations committees, said, "There are a lot of ifs -- you can string together a whole bunch of ifs, and if things had broken right in all kinds of different ways, as the governor has identified, and frankly if you'd had a little luck, it probably could have been prevented." He said the panel would "make a final judgment on that, I believe, when the commission reports."

Kean has made similar remarks in the past, but commission officials said it appeared to be the first time Hamilton, the chief Democrat on the panel, had said publicly that he believed the attacks could have been prevented.

I could have been part of the panel, comparing the matching facts I posted and the facts they use/used.

Eat this !

[bn880 5]

Well, ok, I've said this also but why is NOTHING on TV about this? Or maybe I'm blind...

hmf