IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 22nd July 2011, 11:14 AM   #1
thatsmystory
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 254
What wall?

From The Eleventh Day by Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan:

Quote:
The job of finding Mihdhar, nevertheless, went to an intelligence agent, Robert Fuller, working on his own. Corsi marked the assignment "Routine" because--she would later tell investigators--she "assigned no particular urgency to the matter." The designation "Routine" gave Fuller thirty days to get under way. It was August 29.

pg. 335
We are talking about Al Qaeda operatives (with links to the Embassy bombings and the Cole attack) inside the US during a period of high threat. This is not excusable.

Last edited by thatsmystory; 22nd July 2011 at 11:16 AM.
thatsmystory is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 11:20 AM   #2
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
working on his own

Think that might slow the process?
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 11:27 AM   #3
RKOwens4
Thinker
 
RKOwens4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 212
Which of the operatives were known by U.S. intelligence to be in the U.S. and were known by U.S. intelligence to have links to the Embassy and Cole bombings? I haven't spent as much time researching what the U.S. intelligence agencies knew about the 19 hijackers before 9/11 and when they knew it, but if what I remember is correct, the CIA or FBI only knew before 9/11 that two of the 19 hijackers had POSSIBLE links to al-Qaeda. However, in the U.S. someone can't be arrested just for being suspected of having possible links to a criminal organization. I dunno if you're a truther or not but the truthers, anyway, always talk about civil rights and liberties and the constitution and say how the U.S. is becoming a police state, but when it comes to this particular case, the attitude seems to be, "The U.S. should have ignored the constitution and civil liberties and arrested these men!"
__________________
"It's amazing, amazing, that with all the access to accurate information, that people could be so pathetically uninformed." -CNN's Jack Cafferty

Last edited by RKOwens4; 22nd July 2011 at 11:30 AM.
RKOwens4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 11:50 AM   #4
BCR
Master Poster
 
BCR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
Originally Posted by RKOwens4 View Post
Which of the operatives were known by U.S. intelligence to be in the U.S. and were known by U.S. intelligence to have links to the Embassy and Cole bombings? I haven't spent as much time researching what the U.S. intelligence agencies knew about the 19 hijackers before 9/11 and when they knew it, but if what I remember is correct, the CIA or FBI only knew before 9/11 that two of the 19 hijackers had POSSIBLE links to al-Qaeda. However, in the U.S. someone can't be arrested just for being suspected of having possible links to a criminal organization. I dunno if you're a truther or not but the truthers, anyway, always talk about civil rights and liberties and the constitution and say how the U.S. is becoming a police state, but when it comes to this particular case, the attitude seems to be, "The U.S. should have ignored the constitution and civil liberties and arrested these men!"
No sir, Al-Mihdhar's family ran the communications center for AQ in Yemen. It was under NSA surveillance since at least 1998 (Embassy bombings) and definitely to a limited degree by the CIA by late-1999. Al-Mihdhar called the center from San Diego on multiple occassions shortly after his arrival in San Diego. I think the assertion by Fenton in his Disconnecting the Dots, and in this new book (which I am still awaiting its arrival so have not read it yet) is that it strains credibility (based on multiple primary document sources) that the NSA and CIA did not know of Al-Mihdhar's presence in the US, his participation in an active plot (their excuse was that it was non-US so they did not alert the FBI) and had direct links to other AQ associates later implicated in the Cole bombing. So to pick him up on his later departure from the US, or later return would not have been a violation of anyone's constitutional rights because by then (his return in 2001) he was solidly connected to a terrorist act (the Cole).

Or at least that is my understanding of the thesis

Here is a link to Miles Kara's review.
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM

Last edited by BCR; 22nd July 2011 at 12:04 PM.
BCR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 12:08 PM   #5
JackDaniels
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 51
This out last week:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ob-graham.html
JackDaniels is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 12:33 PM   #6
BCR
Master Poster
 
BCR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
Originally Posted by JackDaniels View Post
All of this stuff is connected fer sure. The Saudi's (and Iran too by the way), ran our support for Bosnia with OBL acting as the money man from 92 - 95 (the Sudan base of operations). That relationship began to fall apart when Clinton started the renditions of Egyptian Islamists on behalf of Mubarak in 1995. By 1998, Clinton alledgedly had a change of heart and paid Zawahiri (who had been the operational commander in Bosnia for the Islamists) a significant amount of money and promised not to interfere in Zawahiri's efforts to overthrow Mubarak. On his part, he promised not to launch operations against US forces participating in UN operations in Bosnia. Whether the later is true or not, Mubarak certainly thought so and began undermining Clinton's efforts against Saddam's Iraq. We may never know the extent of all of the off-the-books operations, but definitely by 1998 our relationship with the Islamists soured significantly. OBL may never have had a direct relationship with the CIA, but he was definitely a Saudi GID asset until 1998. Whether he remained so after that is certainly anyone's guess.
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM
BCR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 06:52 PM   #7
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by BCR View Post
No sir, Al-Mihdhar's family ran the communications center for AQ in Yemen. It was under NSA surveillance since at least 1998 (Embassy bombings) and definitely to a limited degree by the CIA by late-1999. Al-Mihdhar called the center from San Diego on multiple occassions shortly after his arrival in San Diego. I think the assertion by Fenton in his Disconnecting the Dots, and in this new book (which I am still awaiting its arrival so have not read it yet) is that it strains credibility (based on multiple primary document sources) that the NSA and CIA did not know of Al-Mihdhar's presence in the US, his participation in an active plot (their excuse was that it was non-US so they did not alert the FBI) and had direct links to other AQ associates later implicated in the Cole bombing. So to pick him up on his later departure from the US, or later return would not have been a violation of anyone's constitutional rights because by then (his return in 2001) he was solidly connected to a terrorist act (the Cole).
Al-Mihdhar wasn't put on a CIA watchlist until 21 August, 2001, almost two months after he'd returned to the USA. As late as March 2001 the CIA still had no conclusive evidence that Al Qaeda had carried out the USS Cole bombing.

I think Lawrence Wright is mostly right in his conclusions as to why the CIA waited so long before notifying the FBI that he was in the USA:
1) Due to the different way in which the two agencies approach counter-terrorism.
2) Due to personal issues between Alec Station staff and John O'Neill at the FBI.

It's also worth pointing out that he was only on a watchlist. The Terrorist Exclusion List (which prevents listed individuals from entering or leaving the USA) was only introduced after 9/11 as part of the Patriot Act.
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 08:20 PM   #8
thatsmystory
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 254
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
working on his own

Think that might slow the process?
Corsi is the same person who falsely claimed the wall prevented the criminal side agents from being involved in the investigation. She has never had to defend this conduct to the public. The media has given her a pass. Evidently deference to government secrecy is more important than getting answers as to why al Qaeda operatives were able to freely wander around the US in preparation for 9/11.

Cole investigator Ali Soufan has a book coming out on 9/12. Maybe he will finally explain why the UBLU obstructed the Cole investigation.

Last edited by thatsmystory; 22nd July 2011 at 08:24 PM.
thatsmystory is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd July 2011, 08:41 PM   #9
Orphia Nay
Penguilicious Spodmaster.
Tagger
 
Orphia Nay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ponylandistan Presidential Palace (above the Spods' stables).
Posts: 45,218
Originally Posted by RKOwens4 View Post
the truthers, anyway, always talk about civil rights and liberties and the constitution and say how the U.S. is becoming a police state, but when it comes to this particular case, the attitude seems to be, "The U.S. should have ignored the constitution and civil liberties and arrested these men!"
Quoted for truth (no need for a capital 't').

Mind you, they do what you say at the same time as saying the US government did 9/11 themselves. Their BS is all over the place.
Orphia Nay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2011, 03:36 AM   #10
BCR
Master Poster
 
BCR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,278
Originally Posted by gumboot View Post
Al-Mihdhar wasn't put on a CIA watchlist until 21 August, 2001, almost two months after he'd returned to the USA. As late as March 2001 the CIA still had no conclusive evidence that Al Qaeda had carried out the USS Cole bombing.

I think Lawrence Wright is mostly right in his conclusions as to why the CIA waited so long before notifying the FBI that he was in the USA:
1) Due to the different way in which the two agencies approach counter-terrorism.
2) Due to personal issues between Alec Station staff and John O'Neill at the FBI.

It's also worth pointing out that he was only on a watchlist. The Terrorist Exclusion List (which prevents listed individuals from entering or leaving the USA) was only introduced after 9/11 as part of the Patriot Act.
Actually, Lawrence Wright got a lot of it wrong in his Looming Tower. I am glad you qualified it as 'I think', because the primary documents (emails, memo's, etc) point in another direction. I understand many people are bias towards the version of events disseminated to the public 'explain' away the failures, but the primary documents simply do not support those conclusions.
__________________
"Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM
BCR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2011, 06:51 AM   #11
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by thatsmystory View Post
Corsi is the same person who falsely claimed the wall prevented the criminal side agents from being involved in the investigation. She has never had to defend this conduct to the public. The media has given her a pass. Evidently deference to government secrecy is more important than getting answers as to why al Qaeda operatives were able to freely wander around the US in preparation for 9/11.

Cole investigator Ali Soufan has a book coming out on 9/12. Maybe he will finally explain why the UBLU obstructed the Cole investigation.
because it IS the U.S.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd July 2011, 06:03 PM   #12
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by BCR View Post
Actually, Lawrence Wright got a lot of it wrong in his Looming Tower. I am glad you qualified it as 'I think', because the primary documents (emails, memo's, etc) point in another direction. I understand many people are bias towards the version of events disseminated to the public 'explain' away the failures, but the primary documents simply do not support those conclusions.

What direction do these primary documents point, pray tell?
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th July 2011, 06:47 PM   #13
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 632
Originally Posted by BCR View Post
No sir, Al-Mihdhar's family ran the communications center for AQ in Yemen. It was under NSA surveillance since at least 1998 (Embassy bombings) and definitely to a limited degree by the CIA by late-1999. Al-Mihdhar called the center from San Diego on multiple occasions shortly after his arrival in San Diego. I think the assertion by Fenton in his Disconnecting the Dots, and in this new book (which I am still awaiting its arrival so have not read it yet) is that it strains credibility (based on multiple primary document sources) that the NSA and CIA did not know of Al-Mihdhar's presence in the US, his participation in an active plot (their excuse was that it was non-US so they did not alert the FBI) and had direct links to other AQ associates later implicated in the Cole bombing. So to pick him up on his later departure from the US, or later return would not have been a violation of anyone's constitutional rights because by then (his return in 2001) he was solidly connected to a terrorist act (the Cole).

Or at least that is my understanding of the thesis

Here is a link to Miles Kara's review.
This material is also in "Disconnecting the Dots", released in July 2011, and is also in "Prior Knowledge of 9/11", first released in January 2007, almost 4 1/2 years ago.

This same material has also been posted on this forum.
paloalto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:08 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.