<strong>So I guess this means you're going to continue to post here about the subject at hand? Well, I guess I will also. But, if I disagree with something you or anyone else says or have something to add you'll hear about it.
Expecting me to stop adressing only you is rediculous. If that's what you mean. You weren't very clear on that point.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You already know that I disagree with you. I already know that you disagree with me. If you need to find new ways to say that over and over again, I wouldn't stop you even if I could. But I'm not going to argue with you about this thread's subject.
Age is not an issue here unless you question that I'm old enough to remember certain events. Besides it seem to me ( just following your lead ) that we haven't been talking about the subject at hand for some time now.
<strong>So that mp3 is that Alice Cooper? I use to like his earlier stuff.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Social Distortion. They were a L.A. punk band from the '80s. Actually, I guess they got their start in the late '70s but I didn't discover them until the '80s. Mike Ness was more or less their leader. Oddly enough one of his big influences was Johnny Cash.
<a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&578&e=20&u=/nm/20020525/ts_nm/attack_fbi_dc_5"; target="_blank">A Minneapolis FBI agent</a> is accusing the national office of preventing them from investigating Moussaoui like they wanted. They picked this guy up because of suspicions regarding a flight school. The Minneapolis agents wanted to investigate him, but the national FBI office prevented them from doing so, she claims.
This seems like a more direct screw-up than any of the others. If they had investigated this guy more thoroughly at the time, and he really was going to be part of 9/11 like they think, they could have blown this thing wide open and prevented it.
She's also claiming that they tried to cover it up after the fact.
<strong><a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&578&e=20&u=/nm/20020525/ts_nm/attack_fbi_dc_5"; target="_blank">A Minneapolis FBI agent</a> is accusing the national office of preventing them from investigating Moussaoui like they wanted. They picked this guy up because of suspicions regarding a flight school. The Minneapolis agents wanted to investigate him, but the national FBI office prevented them from doing so, she claims.
This seems like a more direct screw-up than any of the others. If they had investigated this guy more thoroughly at the time, and he really was going to be part of 9/11 like they think, they could have blown this thing wide open and prevented it.
She's also claiming that they tried to cover it up after the fact.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Even worse .... A very disturbing quote if it happens to be true:
But requests for a warrant were thwarted by FBI supervisors in Washington, who seemed so intent on ignoring the threat Moussaoui posed that some field agents speculated that key officials at FBI headquarters <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/05/28/1022243318700.html"; target="_blank">"had to be spies or moles ... working for Osama bin Laden".</a>
I just hope this is not true, for the implications that it might bring and how scary those implications are.
Even worse .... A very disturbing quote if it happens to be true:
But requests for a warrant were thwarted by FBI supervisors in Washington, who seemed so intent on ignoring the threat Moussaoui posed that some field agents speculated that key officials at FBI headquarters <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/05/28/1022243318700.html"; target="_blank">"had to be spies or moles ... working for Osama bin Laden".</a>
I just hope this is not true, for the implications that it might bring and how scary those implications are.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hope it's not true that you would actually call that linked story "a news item" or use it to gather information regarding events. So field agents "felt" that higher-ups might have been moles for Bin Laden? So what?
I hope it's not true that you would actually call that linked story "a news item" or use it to gather information regarding events. So field agents "felt" that higher-ups might have been moles for Bin Laden? So what?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not a news item, nor an information gathering with regard to the event.
The quote was put as a reference. My comments are the subject of my post.
This seems like a more direct screw-up than any of the others. If they had investigated this guy more thoroughly at the time, and he really was going to be part of 9/11 like they think, they could have blown this thing wide open and prevented it.</strong>
He probably wasn't part of the Sept 11 hijackings, but he was a link to Mohammad Atta's terrorist cell. All they need to do is break one link in the chain of events to have stopped the hijackings, like deporting Atta and his cell for terrorist connections.
I'm back from my vacation, and it finally looks like the CIA will get a turn through the grinder as well:
The CIA tracked two suspected terrorists to a Qaeda summit in Malaysia in January 2000, then looked on as they re-entered America and began preparations for September 11. Inside what may be the worst intelligence failure of all. A NEWSWEEK exclusive
By Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman
... What happened next, some U.S. counterterrorism officials say, may be the most puzzling, and devastating, intelligence failure in the critical months before September 11. A few days after the Kuala Lumpur meeting, NEWSWEEK has learned, the CIA tracked one of the terrorists, Nawaf Alhazmi, as he flew from the meeting to Los Angeles. Agents discovered that another of the men, Khalid Almihdhar, had already obtained a multiple-entry visa that allowed him to enter and leave the United States as he pleased. ...
Yet astonishingly, the CIA did nothing with this information. Agency officials didn?t tell the INS, which could have turned them away at the border, nor did they notify the FBI, which could have covertly tracked them to find out their mission. Instead, during the year and nine months after the CIA identified them as terrorists, Alhazmi and Almihdhar lived openly in the United States, using their real names, obtaining driver?s licenses, opening bank accounts and enrolling in flight schools?until the morning of September 11, when they walked aboard American Airlines Flight 77 and crashed it into the Pentagon. ...
The links would not have been difficult to make: Alhazmi met up with Hanjour, the Flight 77 pilot, in Phoenix in late 2000; six months later, in May 2001, the two men showed up in New Jersey and opened shared bank accounts with two other plotters, Ahmed Alghamdi and Majed Moqed. The next month, Alhazmi helped two other hijackers, Salem Alhazmi (his brother) and Abdulaziz Alomari, open their own bank accounts. Two months after that, in August 2001, the trail would have led to the plot?s ringleader, Mohamed Atta, who had bought plane tickets for Moqed and Alomari. What?s more, at least several of the hijackers had traveled to Las Vegas for a meeting in summer 2001, just weeks before the attacks. ?It?s like three degrees of separation,? insists an FBI official.
Yes, it's looking more and more like a major screw up on someone's part.</strong>
Major screwup on somebody's part? This is mostly institutional constipation. Probably every single government agency or office has it due to the morass of politics, money and ego involved. It gets so aggravating that everyone forgets what the charter of their organization is.
<strong>He probably wasn't part of the Sept 11 hijackings, but he was a link to Mohammad Atta's terrorist cell.</strong><hr></blockquote>According to the gov't, he was the 20th hijacker, and he's being prosecuted as such. Are you going to be a witness for the defense?
I'm sick of the whole FBI vs CIA crap and related bullshit. Just after 9-11 Bush gave all them a pat on the back and said "None of us saw it coming". Well now we know that's not true at all. The FBI did and ignored it and the CIA let it slip out of their fingers. Bush now needs to say "You ****ers ****ed up big time. You 100 people in the FBI that read these memos and did nothing, your fired. You chumps in the CIA that fell asleep at the switch, get lost. Oh and all you people in both branches that spent any time blaming the other, see ya." Then he needs to promote these people who did see it coming. Hire the Police Chief from NYC. Then get them all to work hard to find these terrorist ****ers and kill them.
For what it's worth, that was a much better way to put it. I just got tired of being jumped on for critisizing the government. So I went easy on them. I did say before ( and I didn't point fingers directly ) that " don't you think it's odd that they got that far. " That's what I ment , who ever is at fault it's strange that the terrorists were able to pull this off. Leading one to believe that there was a failure of the system somewhere.
Comments
<strong>So I guess this means you're going to continue to post here about the subject at hand? Well, I guess I will also. But, if I disagree with something you or anyone else says or have something to add you'll hear about it.
Expecting me to stop adressing only you is rediculous. If that's what you mean. You weren't very clear on that point.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You already know that I disagree with you. I already know that you disagree with me. If you need to find new ways to say that over and over again, I wouldn't stop you even if I could. But I'm not going to argue with you about this thread's subject.
<strong>Age is not an issue here unless you question that I'm old enough to remember certain events...</strong><hr></blockquote>
I just wanted to know. It was just a question. Most people here don't have actual memories of those events.
<strong>So that mp3 is that Alice Cooper? I use to like his earlier stuff.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Social Distortion. They were a L.A. punk band from the '80s. Actually, I guess they got their start in the late '70s but I didn't discover them until the '80s. Mike Ness was more or less their leader. Oddly enough one of his big influences was Johnny Cash.
Thanks for the info on the band.
[ 05-26-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
This seems like a more direct screw-up than any of the others. If they had investigated this guy more thoroughly at the time, and he really was going to be part of 9/11 like they think, they could have blown this thing wide open and prevented it.
She's also claiming that they tried to cover it up after the fact.
[ 05-26-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
<strong><a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&578&e=20&u=/nm/20020525/ts_nm/attack_fbi_dc_5"; target="_blank">A Minneapolis FBI agent</a> is accusing the national office of preventing them from investigating Moussaoui like they wanted. They picked this guy up because of suspicions regarding a flight school. The Minneapolis agents wanted to investigate him, but the national FBI office prevented them from doing so, she claims.
This seems like a more direct screw-up than any of the others. If they had investigated this guy more thoroughly at the time, and he really was going to be part of 9/11 like they think, they could have blown this thing wide open and prevented it.
She's also claiming that they tried to cover it up after the fact.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Even worse .... A very disturbing quote if it happens to be true:
But requests for a warrant were thwarted by FBI supervisors in Washington, who seemed so intent on ignoring the threat Moussaoui posed that some field agents speculated that key officials at FBI headquarters <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/05/28/1022243318700.html"; target="_blank">"had to be spies or moles ... working for Osama bin Laden".</a>
I just hope this is not true, for the implications that it might bring and how scary those implications are.
<strong>
Even worse .... A very disturbing quote if it happens to be true:
But requests for a warrant were thwarted by FBI supervisors in Washington, who seemed so intent on ignoring the threat Moussaoui posed that some field agents speculated that key officials at FBI headquarters <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/05/28/1022243318700.html"; target="_blank">"had to be spies or moles ... working for Osama bin Laden".</a>
I just hope this is not true, for the implications that it might bring and how scary those implications are.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I hope it's not true that you would actually call that linked story "a news item" or use it to gather information regarding events. So field agents "felt" that higher-ups might have been moles for Bin Laden? So what?
<strong>
I hope it's not true that you would actually call that linked story "a news item" or use it to gather information regarding events. So field agents "felt" that higher-ups might have been moles for Bin Laden? So what?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not a news item, nor an information gathering with regard to the event.
The quote was put as a reference. My comments are the subject of my post.
<a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&578&e=20&u=/nm/20020525/ts_nm/attack_fbi_dc_5"; target="_blank">A Minneapolis FBI agent</a> is accusing the national office of preventing them from investigating Moussaoui like they wanted. ...
This seems like a more direct screw-up than any of the others. If they had investigated this guy more thoroughly at the time, and he really was going to be part of 9/11 like they think, they could have blown this thing wide open and prevented it.</strong>
He probably wasn't part of the Sept 11 hijackings, but he was a link to Mohammad Atta's terrorist cell. All they need to do is break one link in the chain of events to have stopped the hijackings, like deporting Atta and his cell for terrorist connections.
I'm back from my vacation, and it finally looks like the CIA will get a turn through the grinder as well:
<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/news/760647.asp"; target="_blank">The Hijackers We Let Escape</a>
The CIA tracked two suspected terrorists to a Qaeda summit in Malaysia in January 2000, then looked on as they re-entered America and began preparations for September 11. Inside what may be the worst intelligence failure of all. A NEWSWEEK exclusive
By Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman
... What happened next, some U.S. counterterrorism officials say, may be the most puzzling, and devastating, intelligence failure in the critical months before September 11. A few days after the Kuala Lumpur meeting, NEWSWEEK has learned, the CIA tracked one of the terrorists, Nawaf Alhazmi, as he flew from the meeting to Los Angeles. Agents discovered that another of the men, Khalid Almihdhar, had already obtained a multiple-entry visa that allowed him to enter and leave the United States as he pleased. ...
Yet astonishingly, the CIA did nothing with this information. Agency officials didn?t tell the INS, which could have turned them away at the border, nor did they notify the FBI, which could have covertly tracked them to find out their mission. Instead, during the year and nine months after the CIA identified them as terrorists, Alhazmi and Almihdhar lived openly in the United States, using their real names, obtaining driver?s licenses, opening bank accounts and enrolling in flight schools?until the morning of September 11, when they walked aboard American Airlines Flight 77 and crashed it into the Pentagon. ...
The links would not have been difficult to make: Alhazmi met up with Hanjour, the Flight 77 pilot, in Phoenix in late 2000; six months later, in May 2001, the two men showed up in New Jersey and opened shared bank accounts with two other plotters, Ahmed Alghamdi and Majed Moqed. The next month, Alhazmi helped two other hijackers, Salem Alhazmi (his brother) and Abdulaziz Alomari, open their own bank accounts. Two months after that, in August 2001, the trail would have led to the plot?s ringleader, Mohamed Atta, who had bought plane tickets for Moqed and Alomari. What?s more, at least several of the hijackers had traveled to Las Vegas for a meeting in summer 2001, just weeks before the attacks. ?It?s like three degrees of separation,? insists an FBI official.
Yes, it's looking more and more like a major screw up on someone's part.</strong>
Major screwup on somebody's part? This is mostly institutional constipation. Probably every single government agency or office has it due to the morass of politics, money and ego involved. It gets so aggravating that everyone forgets what the charter of their organization is.
<strong>He probably wasn't part of the Sept 11 hijackings, but he was a link to Mohammad Atta's terrorist cell.</strong><hr></blockquote>According to the gov't, he was the 20th hijacker, and he's being prosecuted as such. Are you going to be a witness for the defense?
For what it's worth, that was a much better way to put it. I just got tired of being jumped on for critisizing the government. So I went easy on them. I did say before ( and I didn't point fingers directly ) that " don't you think it's odd that they got that far. " That's what I ment , who ever is at fault it's strange that the terrorists were able to pull this off. Leading one to believe that there was a failure of the system somewhere.
[ 06-03-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>