sig - The request for a search warrant was to look into the computer of a suspect that was (we are told) the twentieth hijaker. He was supposedly part of the group that did it. The search warrant request was modified by the head of the anti-terror division (I think his name was David Chavez, might be remembering that wrong) and Robert Muller. The modifications made it so the judge would not grant the search warrant. When that happened, Colleen Rawley went over the heads of her superiors to George Tenet. That only got her in deeper trouble. But her team arrested Moussaui on some minor charge which is why we are told he was not on one of the hijacked planes. Even though they were specificaly told to drop the investigation.

Her public letter to Robert Muller spells out numerous roadblocks to the investigation her office was conducting. The worst in my opinion was the fact that there was a simultaneous investigation by the FBI in Phoenix into another group that was doing exactly the same thing, taking flying lessons, etc. The two investigations were never known to each other. That was the job of Chavez and Muller, who had knowledge of both investigations but never allowed them to learn of each other's work which would have been a standard procedure, share notes and look for larger conspiracies, other groups and so on.

When Ms. Rawley made her public statements she was very clear that had they been allowed to conduct their investigations without the top-level interference they "could concievably have prevented the hijackings". She was being very careful in her wording but she said that much directly. She also said the investigation into these terrorist suspects was "sabotaged" by her superiors.

The British intelligence agency MI-6 had used a special information conduit directly to George Tenet about a week and a half before 9/11 to warn him of the hijackings. They spelled out the plans, which airports would probably be used, the buildings that would probably be attacked and gave the names of four of the hijackers. George Tenet did nothing with this information, he didn't even put out a bulletin to the airports to watch for these four names.

And yet, a week after the hijackings, Dick Cheney in an interview said "we couldn't be happier with the job he's (Tenet) doing". I could be happier... I think most Americans could have been happier.

We were fed crap like "before 9/11 no one could have imagined that hijacked planes would be used as missles" a quote that was used by almost everybody in the White House. And yet only nine weeks before the attack, George Bush was at a G-7 convention in Genoa, Italy. There had been a warning that terrorists would hijack airliners and fly them into the building to try to kill the world leaders there. This threat was taken so seriously they had anti-aircraft batteries installed all around the convention site and the hotel where the dignitaries stayed. That wasn't even enough for our president, he was taken by helicopter to a destroyer at night to sleep because the hotel was deemed to be too unsafe. But nine weeks later no one could have imagined?

The Bush administration gave us Osama and Afganistan as the culprits within hours of the event. They gave us Atta's passport and suicide notes (that were later proven to be fakes) within 24 hours.

But the war against Afganistan was already underway. The timing couldn't be better... Rumsfeld was trying to get Iraq thrown in on the deal back then, but he had to wait.

Rowley personally contacted George Tenet? That's not what she said as I recall. The agents on the case (she was Legal Counsel, not the agents' supervisor) contacted the CIA's Counter Terrorists center. That's not quite the same as Rowley putting in a call to Tenet and getting squashed. Her involvement in the case, she said, was peripheral. Also, Moussaoui was taken into custody before any search warrant was requested. It's not like they arrested him just to put him on ice because they couldn't get a search warrant, which may or may not have been what you were suggesting. Couldn't quite tell if that's what you meant.

MI-6 provided Tenet with the terrorists' game plan in advance including names and places and methods? Where's your source for this? That's even better than the French book's account that claims a plane never hit the Pentagon. But seriously, where's your source for the MI-6 thing? I don't recall hearing that one.

I don't unquestioningly trust the gov't. But I also am familiar with gov't bureacracy, intra and inter agency power trips that actually hinder the work at hand and how screwed up it can be. So I don't necessarily assume a vast conspiracy when just gov't doing its bureaucratic thing as usual and then trying to cover up its screw ups is also an option.

As for the "no one ever could imagine that airplanes could be used" line some members of the Administration came out with, that's clearly nonsense. Al Qaeda plans to hijack airplanes and also use them as missles on American targets were found in SE Asia in the early to mid 90's. The CIA in Langley was one target as I recall. It was reported in the press at the time.

Also, on a more mundane note, only weeks before Sept 11 I saw a rerun of a show that spun off from the X-Files with the Lone Gunmen characters. An airliner was hijacked in flight and its computer was set on a path to crash into the WTC. At the last minute of course the show's heroes thwarted the plot. Evidently Hollywood could imagine what our intelligence agencies could not even with evidence of such plans having been made in the past.

sig - I remember Rawley saying she sent a letter to George Tenet.

The MI-6 story was on the front page of the BBC, the London Telegraph and the Jerusalem Post on 9/12. It was still 9/11 when I read it, late at night here but morning in Europe. The headline was "(don't remember his name but the head of MI-6) Is Furious, Demands to Know Why CIA Ignored Warning" The story said MI-6 had used a special channel, only used when the information is verified and extremely urgent, that goes directly from the director of MI-6 to the director of the CIA, 11 days before the attack. It said they sent 4 names (they turned out to be the 4 pilots according to the FBI's list) and the basic plans, including that the planes would be hijacked from major airports on the Eastern Seaboard. The official response from the CIA (a second one since the first was summarily rejected by MI-6) was that they misinterpreted the data, thinking it was referring to the assassination of General Massood in Afghanistan.

The story disappeared after about 3 days and was replaced (on every newspaper site that ran it) with a story that had the headline "CIA Was Warned". This story revealed that a secret CIA white-paper had detailed the possibility of such an attack in '96. What was interesting about this story is that this classified internal CIA document had details like using boxcutters, 4 or 5 hijackers per plane, full fuel tanks, and even angling the plane when it hits the WTC to spread the fuel over a wider area which it said could possibly cause enough heat to bring down the building. Eerily accurate in every detail. That story was pulled about a week later but I had saved it before it went away after seeing the original story disappear.

There are lots of stories of warnings about two weeks before the attack. Putin supposedly contacted Bush with very specific warnings and pulled all Russian personnel out of the US, The White House ruled that cabinet members and their families were not to fly on commercial airliners about 3 weeks prior and private jets were chartered for them, the Israeli's warned us, the French and Germans warned us. What's interesting is that seems to be when Osama learned about it too and he made his fateful comment that something "big" was going to happen in the US in about two weeks. In the tape of him at the wedding which was the supposed "smoking gun" (Rumsfeld actually said in a press conference "hey, this tape is real, it's not one of ours") he says to the Saudi guy "we found out it was going to happen two weeks before so we were not surprised and when the first plane hit I told my friends, wait there's more to come". Doesn't sound to me like Osama planned it if he only found out about it two weeks before it happened.

One thing that we do know is later in October it was revealed that Mohamed Atta was given $100,000 by the head of Pakistan's ISI (secret police). Coincidently that same guy was at CIA headquarters for a week leading up to 9/11 and was flown home on the 12th. While in DC he also met with the Senate Intelligence Committee. We can't ask him what that was all about because when it was discovered he was funding the terrorists he disappeared.

You say beaurocratic bungling but to me it smelled more like an intelligence operation. The stolen identities for example, one of them was from a deal two years before in Saudi Arabia where an entire family's identitys were stolen in a very professional looking operation that took only the necessary bits and left the entire family dead. Of the 19 hijackers 6 are still alive and several more are known to be stolen identities. We don't know who these guys really were and we don't know who planned it or funded it. Even George Tenet said about six months ago that "to this day we don't have a shred of evidence linking any of the hijackers to anyone in Afghanistan".

But the war on terror must move on. Is Mullah Omar and Osama really no longer a priority as Rumsfeld said? Why not? If they did this, and Bush swore they would be "rooted out and hunted down" why are they no longer important? I'm angry and I still want to know what happened on 9/11 and who did it. Most Americans it seems are okay with just invading some country that had nothing to do with it, like that makes it all better.

Talal Hussein, the local Hamas representative (in Syria):

"Iraqis are losing the war because they don't have the real Islamic faith. If the situation requires it, the jihad against the Americans will continue," he said.

"If the Iraqis asked us to stop fighting, we wouldn't because their request would be a result of American pressure. No-one would ask a fighter to stop a jihad against an occupier"

hey IPlural's back!

Hey DavidK, I have been trying to find stuf about Afganistan to see what is going on over there. I noticed on some other message boards (do you believe it! I went to another message board) and most don't know what is going on either. Most stories I find are old or are about some capture (not good enough)

I was wondering if you have any links to where you get your info on Afganistan?



.... what was the other messageboard? SOAD: System of A Down.

Joe, here's some current articles that deal with Afghanistan.

From a Pakistani newspaper: Taliban regrouping in Afghanistan http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_15-4-2003_pg4_9

Sabawoon.com, an Afgan newspaper: "The last place we liberated" http://www.sabawoon.com/articles.asp?id=12995&view=detail

A list of stories from the New York Times: http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=geo&v1=AFGHANISTAN&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=AFGHANISTAN

Some good news from Afghanistan in the India Times: Free Afghans find their voice - in writing http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=43458217

An editorial (more about Iraq than Afghanistan) from Truthout.org: How America Lost the War http://truthout.org/docs_03/041503A.shtml

Hi Joe, had to go up to Maine to get some things together.

I have to catch up on the thread.

We need more evedience for impeachment.

Not that I liked Bush and piticularly his administration, but they sure do know how to handle a war.


I do think, though, the American puplic would go for the Seria angle pretty easily. Maybe not Iran. So we could find oursevles at war just in time for elections. Go figure. Seria has been a problem for a long time though, I wouldn't be surprised, piticularly if they are actually holding top Iraqi goverment officials. (I was wondering where excaclty would they run to? Not Iran, or Turkey, Seria is the best option, I guess.)

When the economy becomes the news story of the day, Iraq probaly will lost in the mix... at least on TV.


The Afganistan angle is getting my attention now. Although the pipeline thing isn't so unusual. That pipeline can be Afganistans money maker hopefully for the people of Afganistan.

I'm tired. I need sleep.

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030415-031243-2104r

Bakerstreet, are you hiding links from us? where did that one come from?

So is this where you get your news from?

sheesh people take offense... but really doesn't the media talk about this enough? .. besides I'm bored why not watch people complain/argue... jerry springer is just as much fun =P! heheh