ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events 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 August 2012, 06:09 AM   #121
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
 
aggle-rithm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Almost all documents at the CIA had a back up copy somewhere else at the CIA. It is not believable that they would actually high light with a black pen or marker, this was done to redact information in these documents which the CIA did on a regular basis.
Wh--what?!?

The Onion is WRONG?!?
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.

Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.
aggle-rithm 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 August 2012, 11:59 AM   #122
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by Robrob View Post
Not to interrupt the use of your super-hindsight powers to tell us what "should have been done" but do you have any idea how long it takes - ouside of TV and movies (which apparently is where you do most of your research) - for a credit card company to respond to a federal grand jury subpoena?
The FBI had their own credit card data base, called Choicepoint, that had most in not all of the credit card date available. They did not need to get a federal grand jury subpoena to use this data base as much as they needed.

Information on Hazmi's use of his credit card was actually in this data base. It is possible that the same information was there for Mihdhar's credit card also. In any case FBI Agent Robert Fuller requested from FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi on September 5, 2001 permission to call Saudi Arabian Airlines to get Mihdhar’s credit card number from them since the FBI knew that Mihdhar had flown back to the US on July 4, 2001 on this airline.

Corsi denied him permission to get this credit card number, an action that to today has largely been kept secret and has never been explained by the FBI HQ. This information is only found in DE #650, a FBI summary prepared for internal FBI use only.

Why would she deny him this permission when he had told her that he was getting nowhere in this data base in his search for the whereabouts of Mihdhar and Hazmi. She had also been told by FBI Agent Steve Bongardt just the week before that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US for no other reason than to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorists attack!

This makes absolutely no sense, no sense at all.

Why would she deny him permission to get this credited card number when she knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were about to take part in some horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US and knew by denying Fuller permission to get this number his search for Mihdhar and Hazmi would most likely fail?
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
Old 22nd August 2012, 12:05 PM   #123
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,684
That's nice. Now, what are you going to do about it?
carlitos 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 August 2012, 01:47 PM   #124
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The FBI had their own credit card data base, called Choicepoint, that had most in not all of the credit card date available. They did not need to get a federal grand jury subpoena to use this data base as much as they needed.
I am quite familiar with Choicepoint. Are you really claiming it has "real time" (or even close to) reporting of credit card purchases?

Wow, you really do base your POV on TV/movies.

Quote:
Information on Hazmi's use of his credit card was actually in this data base. It is possible that the same information was there for Mihdhar's credit card also. In any case FBI Agent Robert Fuller requested from FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi on September 5, 2001 permission to call Saudi Arabian Airlines to get Mihdhar’s credit card number from them since the FBI knew that Mihdhar had flown back to the US on July 4, 2001 on this airline.
1) Choicepoint does not give any purchase info, period.

2) It takes a federal grand jury subpoena (and months) to receive purchase info.

3) Do you watch a lot of X-Files?

Quote:
Corsi denied him permission to get this credit card number, an action that to today has largely been kept secret and has never been explained by the FBI HQ.
Since it doesn't provide the info you pretend it would, your point is fantasy.

Quote:
Why would she deny him this permission when he had told her that he was getting nowhere in this data base in his search for the whereabouts of Mihdhar and Hazmi.
Begging the question fallacy. Not to mention, it doesn't provide the data you imagine it would.

Quote:
She had also been told by FBI Agent Steve Bongardt just the week before that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US for no other reason than to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorists attack!
Lie. Please feel free to provide an accurate quote.

Quote:
This makes absolutely no sense, no sense at all.
Argument from incredulity.

Quote:
Why would she deny him permission to get this credited card number when she knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were about to take part in some horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US and knew by denying Fuller permission to get this number his search for Mihdhar and Hazmi would most likely fail?
Begging the question, again.
Robrob 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 August 2012, 12:52 PM   #125
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by Robrob View Post
I am quite familiar with Choicepoint. Are you really claiming it has "real time" (or even close to) reporting of credit card purchases?

Wow, you really do base your POV on TV/movies.


1) Choicepoint does not give any purchase info, period.

2) It takes a federal grand jury subpoena (and months) to receive purchase info.

3) Do you watch a lot of X-Files?


Since it doesn't provide the info you pretend it would, your point is fantasy.


Begging the question fallacy. Not to mention, it doesn't provide the data you imagine it would.


Lie. Please feel free to provide an accurate quote.


Argument from incredulity.


Begging the question, again.
Choicepoint combines personal data sourced from multiple public and private databases for sale to the government and the private sector. The firm maintained more than 17 billion records of individuals and businesses, which it sold to an estimated 100,000 clients, including 7,000 federal, state and local law enforcement agencies (30 March 2005 estimates). The data in this data base includes consumer initiated transactions (60% of business).

It is clear that the Choicepoint data base had information on Hazmi, and perhaps Mihdhar, including drivers license information, addresses, and credit information.

Choicepoint provides a wide array of information to the government, including:

•Credit headers, a list of identifying information that appears at the top of a credit report. This information includes name, spouse's name, address, previous address, phone number, Social Security number, and employer.
•"Workplace Solutions Pre-Employment Screening," which includes financial reports, education verification, reference verification, felony check, motor vehicle record, SSN verification, and professional credential verification.
•Asset Location Services.
•The ability to engage in "wildcard searches," which allows law enforcement to "obtain a comprehensive personal profile in a matter of minutes" with only a first name or partial address.
•The use of "Soundex" queries, which allow searches on personal information based on how names sound, rather than how they are spelled.
•Information on neighbors and family members of a suspect.

ChoicePoint's AutoTrackXP is one of the most favored CDB products. It provides an interface for additional data points, including:

•Linkage services, which draw graphical relationships between suspects and other addresses, neighbors, and Social Security Numbers.
•Public records, including Social Security Death Master Filings, bookings and arrests, liens, judgments, and bankruptcies.
•Licenses, including drivers, pilots, and professional credentials.
•Lists of residents of Georgia, New York, and Ohio.
•National real-time phone directories and reverse look up services.
•"SmartSeach," a tool that allows broad wildcard searches: "There may be thousands of Jane Does, but there's probably only one Jane Doe who's between 25 and 30 and lives on the upper west side of Manhattan. SmartSearch makes it possible to find that one."
The document, "The FBI's Public-Source Information Program Fact Versus Fiction" highlights the agency's access (via Choicepoint) to property records, professional licenses, news articles, driver and DMV records, census records, and credit headers.

This would have found the drivers license of Nawaf al-Hazmi his California address, and his telephone number in the San Diego White Pages.

"It takes a federal grand jury subpoena (and months) to receive purchase info."

A Judge can order a subpoena for credit card information, you do not need to get a grand jury to do the same thing.

"Since it (ChoicePoint) doesn't provide the info you pretend it would, your point is fantasy."

Since you have no idea on what information it would provide, that would depend on what was actually in the data base, and the ultimate use of this information your reply here is total nonsense.

"Begging the question fallacy. Not to mention, it doesn't provide the data you imagine it would."

I did not mention the data you claim I imagined it would, so your reply again is total nonsense.

“Lie. Please feel free to provide an accurate quote.”

To quote FBI Agent Steve Bongardt:

“Dina, Why do you think they (Mihdhar and Hazmi) are here (in the US)? Do you think they are going to *********** Disneyland?”

“Dina where is the wall defined? Isn't dealing with FISA information (at the NSA)? ......Whatever happened to this - someday someone will die- and wall or not - the (American) public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems.”

This refers to the fact that FBI Dina Corsi shut down Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi by claiming that NSLU Attorney Sherry Sabol had stated that he, Bongardt, could not take part in any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi, when in fact she had said the direct opposite and said that Bongardt could take part in any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi.

These lies and this withholding material of information, (the fact that she knew on August 22, 2001 that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing) from FBI Agent Steve Bongardt cost almost three thousand people their lives on 9/11.

So what really is your motivation for defending Corsi and her boss Rod Middleton who were working for former CIA officer Tom Wilshire, as they shut down Bongardt's investigation on Mihdhar and Hazmi almost two weeks prior to the attacks on 9/11, using a series of lies, and by withholding material information from Bongardt and his team.
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
Old 23rd August 2012, 06:18 PM   #126
TheRedWorm
I AM the Red Worm!
 
TheRedWorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,452
That's nice. Still planning to not do anything, I take it?
__________________
I'll be the best Congressman money can buy!

As usual, he doesn't understand the relevant sciences, can't Google for the right thing, and appears to rely on the notion that a word salad liberally sprinkled with Google Croutons will make his argument seem coherent. -JayUtah
TheRedWorm 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 August 2012, 06:11 PM   #127
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Choicepoint combines personal data sourced from multiple public and private databases for sale to the government and the private sector. The firm maintained more than 17 billion records of individuals and businesses, which it sold to an estimated 100,000 clients, including 7,000 federal, state and local law enforcement agencies (30 March 2005 estimates). The data in this data base includes consumer initiated transactions (60% of business).

(Snip lengthy C&P)
As I said before, I am well aware of what comes from a Choicepoint report. I use them every day. They do not include purchases nor are they "real time."

Honestly, if you continue to base your POV on TV and movies it will not be worth educating you any more.

Quote:
It is clear that the Choicepoint data base had information on Hazmi, and perhaps Mihdhar, including drivers license information, addresses, and credit information.
Absolutely, 100% true. OTOH, you are misrepresenting "credit information." It is not your purchases. It is not your financial situation. It is what you put on the application as name, address, telephone, etc...

Quote:
The document, "The FBI's Public-Source Information Program Fact Versus Fiction" highlights the agency's access (via Choicepoint) to property records, professional licenses, news articles, driver and DMV records, census records, and credit headers.
See?

Quote:
This would have found the drivers license of Nawaf al-Hazmi his California address, and his telephone number in the San Diego White Pages.
Your powers of hindsight are tremendous! Tell me more...

Quote:
"It takes a federal grand jury subpoena (and months) to receive purchase info."

A Judge can order a subpoena for credit card information, you do not need to get a grand jury to do the same thing.
Bwahahahahahahaha! Thanks for confirming you have no idea what you are talking about!

Really, is there a particular TV show you base your POV on or is it all of them?

Quote:
"Since it (ChoicePoint) doesn't provide the info you pretend it would, your point is fantasy."

Since you have no idea on what information it would provide, that would depend on what was actually in the data base, and the ultimate use of this information your reply here is total nonsense.
Once more for the slow learners; Choicepoint does not provide purchase information or real time information. No matter how many times you try and ignore reality, it won't change.

Quote:
"Begging the question fallacy. Not to mention, it doesn't provide the data you imagine it would."

I did not mention the data you claim I imagined it would, so your reply again is total nonsense.
You claimed Choicepoint would tell the FBI about their ticket purchases.

Quote:
“Lie. Please feel free to provide an accurate quote.”

To quote FBI Agent Steve Bongardt:

“Dina, Why do you think they (Mihdhar and Hazmi) are here (in the US)? Do you think they are going to *********** Disneyland?”
So you admit he didn't say what you claimed he said?

Quote:
“Dina where is the wall defined? Isn't dealing with FISA information (at the NSA)? ......Whatever happened to this - someday someone will die- and wall or not - the (American) public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems.”
So you admit he didn't say what you claimed he said, again?

Quote:
So what really is your motivation for defending Corsi and her boss Rod Middleton who were working for former CIA officer Tom Wilshire, as they shut down Bongardt's investigation on Mihdhar and Hazmi almost two weeks prior to the attacks on 9/11, using a series of lies, and by withholding material information from Bongardt and his team.
You do realize you are posting on JREF? A website that requires claims to be supported by facts and evidence? I ask because that seems to confuse you.
Robrob 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 26th August 2012, 05:22 PM   #128
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Almost all documents at the CIA had a back up copy somewhere else at the CIA. It is not believable that they would actually high light with a black pen or marker, this was done to redact information in these documents which the CIA did on a regular basis.

But the documents that were redacted, in my opinion, must have had a back up copy somewhere else in the CIA and the redactions were only done when the CIA did not want the original documents with secret information shown to someone outside of the CIA.

Whoever marks up an original copy of a source or otherwise original document?

No one would believe that the CIA would be this dumb. This is another one of those dog ate my home work excuses to show that information was lost. Like the tapes of torture that the CIA said were not available until it was found out after the court asked for them that they had been available but then had been secretly destroyed just after the court's request.

That was a parody, you know...
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 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 26th August 2012, 05:53 PM   #129
Robrob
Philosopher
 
Robrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,497
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
That was a parody, you know...
No, he doesn't...
Robrob 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 26th August 2012, 05:54 PM   #130
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by Robrob View Post
No, he doesn't...
Must suck not to recognize humor like that.
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 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 19th September 2012, 08:16 PM   #131
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Who neglected what? Specifically?

How much longer do you think so-called truthers will do nothing more than post on message boards instead of trying to bring their absolute knowledge of what really happened on 9/11 to light? How much longer will so-called truthers defend the terrorists that killed my fellow countrymen without a shred of evidence?

JAQing over here.
In reply to this question, “Who neglected What? Specifically? And “How much longer do you think so-called truthers will do nothing more than post on message boards instead of trying to bring their absolute knowledge of what really happened on 9/11 to light?”

The CIA and FBI HQ neglected to warn anyone who could stop the al Qaeda terrorists when Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were found to be inside of the US in August 22, 2001. These agencies even knew that these al Qaeda terrorists were inside of the US for no other reason than to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack that would kill many Americans. But then these agencies did something much worse.

They shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt’s criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi , on August 28, 2001 when these agencies knew that this was the one and perhaps only investigation that could have stopped the huge al Qaeda terrorist attack that both agencies knew was just about to take place inside of the US, and that would kill many Americans?

The CIA had known about Mihdhar and Hazmi since January 2000, and even knew that Mihdhar had a visa for the US. On March 5, 2000, the CIA found out that Hazmi had entered the US with another al Qaeda terrorist, who turned out to be Khalid al-Mihdhar, and yet never gave this information to the FBI. WHY? In fact they had secretly and deliberetly allowed these two al Qaeda terroriosts to enter the US unnoticed.

The CIA had the Malaysia intelligence photograph all of the people at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting that took place on January 5-8, 2000, had identified Mihdhar and Hazmi at that time attending this planning meeting, and had even identified Walid bin Attash on January 4, 2001 as also having been at this meeting. At that time Walid bin Attash had been identified by the FBI as the mastermind of the Cole bombing. This identification from a photo taken at Kuala Lumpur was the proof to the CIA that Mihdhar and Hazmi had also taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing. Yet even though this information was known by the CIA and later by FBI HQ and by FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi, her supervisor FBI HQ SSA Rod Middleton and by the Deputy Chief of the FBI ITOS unit and their supervisor Tom Wilshire, this information was not given to the FBI Cole bombing investigators until after the attacks on 9/11 had taken place. This information was given to FBI Agent Ali Soufan, Bongardt’s boss, by the CIA Yemen station on September 12, 2001, obviously too late to prevent the attacks on 9/11, even though many units at the CIA and 50-60 people at the CIA were aware of this information.

Even though Bongardt found out that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US on August 28, 2001, knew they were inside of the US in order to take part in a al Qaeda terrorist attack, and wanted to start an investigation for these terrorists before they had time to carry out this al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US, the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing was never give to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt. This was the very information that Bongardt and his team of Cole bombing investigators needed and had been looking for in order to have enough substantial evidence of a Federal crime to be able to start a criminal investigation for these two al Qaeda terrorists.

The big question is why did both the CIA and FBI HQ withhold this critical information from Bongardt and his team? And then why did they shut down his investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi when they knew that this was the one and perhaps only investigation that could have stopped that huge al Qaeda terrorist attack that both agencies knew was just about to take place inside of the US, and kill many Americans?

This goes way beyond negligence in my opinion!

When you saw the WTC towers collapse recently as this tragedy was replayed on September 11, 20012, and knew that thousands of Americans were being murdered right in front of your eyes, it makes you think back to these still unanswered questions, and ask why?

Why did almost 3000 people have to die, when this attack could have been so easily prevented if only the CIA and the FBI HQ had not engaged in criminal behavior to withhold this material evidence from an ongoing FBI criminal investigation in the murder of 17 US sailors, and then shut down the one investigation that could have prevented the attacks on 9/11?

This is about as clear as an answer to “Who neglected what? Specifically?” as you can get.

And to answer the post by TexasJack”

Originally Posted by TexasJack View Post
It's like pulling teeth trying to get these truthers to substantiate a claim, isn't it? Then again, there isn't any teeth to their argument to begin with.

As far as the OP is concerned, this is simply not looking at the whole picture. The Bush Administration could have done more, but without actionable intelligence, it's hard to say if anything Bush did would have prevented the attacks. I say they were inevitable, because the failings were mostly of systematic intelligence. The lack of sharing of intelligence wasn't the only problem. What needed to be pushed by the President was a total overhaul of the FBI and CIA.
Don't get me wrong, there were those like NY director John O'Neill who had the vision and saw the real dangers, there just weren't enough of them. If the emphasis was put in its proper place, the attacks would probably would have been avoided. Did anyone notice that it was a rookie agent that finally cracked the case, albeit too late? Unfortunately, it took a catastrophic event to bring up some necessary changes, but as Amy Zegart pointed out in her outstanding book Spying Blind, there are still problems in the system.
The CIA gave the information they had to the FBI HQ agents and managers in the FBI ITOS unit, in fact it had been Tom Wilshire, Deputy Chief of the FBI ITOS unit, who had been a CIA manager at the CIA bin Laden unit and who had been moved over to the FBI ITOS unit over FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi and FBI HQ SSA Rod Middleton her boss, who had used Corsi and Middleton illegally to shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi. And Wilshire perhaps had more information on Mihdhar and Hazmi and the Kuala Lumpur meeting than anyone else at either the FBI HQ or CIA. In fact on August 24, 2001 while he and Corsi were engaged in criminal actions to block FBI Agent Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, he was in email contact with FBI HQ SA Micheal Maltbie, also in the FBI ITOS unit, and found out that Maltbie with his boss FBI HQ SSA David Frasca at this very time was blocking the criminal FBI investigation of Moussaoui.

How does criminally withhold material information from the FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing become mere lack of sharing of information, between the CIA and FBI.

Last edited by paloalto; 19th September 2012 at 08:19 PM.
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
Old 19th September 2012, 08:37 PM   #132
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
In reply to this question, “...
Kind of off topic and repeating your same old junk.

Quote:
the CIA and the FBI HQ had not engaged in criminal behavior
You keep repeating this failed conclusion.

The article is about Bush, not the CIA failure, Bush's failure to take action on a non-specific major attack. The CIA never said they would storm cockpits and kill pilots in seconds. Or did they? It hard to imagine someone so depraved they would kill by cutting throats without warning; surprise.
beachnut 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 20th September 2012, 12:24 AM   #133
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Kind of off topic and repeating your same old junk.

You keep repeating this failed conclusion.

The article is about Bush, not the CIA failure, Bush's failure to take action on a non-specific major attack. The CIA never said they would storm cockpits and kill pilots in seconds. Or did they? It hard to imagine someone so depraved they would kill by cutting throats without warning; surprise.
This was in answer to a direct question raised in this forum, if you can read. And your posts are completely devoid of any facts on 9/11. Your posts are just more of your unsubstantiated uninformed snarky opinion, which never changes.

And as I said before, there is no reason for you to ever get confused with the facts, is there!

But why do you defend the very people in the US government who had deliberately allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to murder almost 3000 of your fellow countrymen on 9/11.


Furthermore this information ties directly to Bush, although from your reply, you clearly cannot see this.
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
Old 20th September 2012, 12:44 AM   #134
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
...
But why do you defend the very people in the US government who had deliberately allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to murder almost 3000 of your fellow countrymen on 9/11.

Furthermore this information ties directly to Bush, although from your reply, you clearly cannot see this.
We are the government of the United State, we the people. In your fantasy the FBI and CIA have psychic abilities.

You said...
Quote:
CIA and the FBI HQ had not engaged in criminal behavior
Total nonsense. You clearly cannot see this.

You have failed to prove the US government deliberately allowed 19 terrorists kill pilots and steal aircraft, and crash them. Big fail, lots of SPAM. Clearly you cannot see this. That is why you keep posting it.
beachnut 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 20th September 2012, 07:19 AM   #135
Animal
Master Poster
 
Animal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,094
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
We are the government of the United State, we the people. In your fantasy the FBI and CIA have psychic abilities.

You said...
Total nonsense. You clearly cannot see this.

You have failed to prove the US government deliberately allowed 19 terrorists kill pilots and steal aircraft, and crash them. Big fail, lots of SPAM. Clearly you cannot see this. That is why you keep posting it.
Not to mention that since the average police officer / department is not required to protect you from a crime being committed, it is obvious that same lack of obligation would extend to the FBI and CIA
Animal 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 19th May 2017, 05:44 AM   #136
Gamolon
Master Poster
 
Gamolon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,083
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The FBI had their own credit card data base, called Choicepoint, that had most in not all of the credit card date available. They did not need to get a federal grand jury subpoena to use this data base as much as they needed.

Information on Hazmi's use of his credit card was actually in this data base. It is possible that the same information was there for Mihdhar's credit card also. In any case FBI Agent Robert Fuller requested from FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi on September 5, 2001 permission to call Saudi Arabian Airlines to get Mihdhar’s credit card number from them since the FBI knew that Mihdhar had flown back to the US on July 4, 2001 on this airline.

Corsi denied him permission to get this credit card number, an action that to today has largely been kept secret and has never been explained by the FBI HQ. This information is only found in DE #650, a FBI summary prepared for internal FBI use only.

Why would she deny him this permission when he had told her that he was getting nowhere in this data base in his search for the whereabouts of Mihdhar and Hazmi. She had also been told by FBI Agent Steve Bongardt just the week before that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US for no other reason than to take part in a horrific al Qaeda terrorists attack!

This makes absolutely no sense, no sense at all.

Why would she deny him permission to get this credited card number when she knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were about to take part in some horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US and knew by denying Fuller permission to get this number his search for Mihdhar and Hazmi would most likely fail?

So basiacally what you did with your post above is regurgitate what is posted here by somone named "rschop":
http://911blogger.com/news/2014-07-2...acilitated-911
Quote:
On August 29, 2001, FBI Agent Robert Fuller, an inexperienced FBI agent, who had never done any intelligence investigation before, was given the intelligence investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. The EC to start this intelligence investigation was marked "Routine", the absolute lowest level of precedence in spite of the fact that Corsi had been told by FBI Agent Bongardt that it is obvious that these terrorists are inside of the US for no other reason than to carry out a horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack

On August 30, 2001, the CIA sends the photograph of Walid Bin Attash, aka Khallad, to the FBI HQ and requests that it be given to Rod Middleton, Corsi’s supervisor. In spite of the fact that Middleton had also been on the phone in a conference call with Corsi to Bongardt shutting down his investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, and had been at the meeting with Sherry Sabol, where Sabol told Corsi and Middleton that Bongardt could take part in any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. Even though Middleton now also had photographic proof that both Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing, he never calls Bongardt back to allow him to start any investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. This is two weeks before the attacks on 9/11.

On September 4, 2001, Robert Fuller finally starts on a “Routine” investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi.

September 5, 2001 - Robert Fuller calls FBI Agent Dina Corsi and tells her that he has gotten nowhere in his investigation to locate Mihdhar and Hazmi, and that he has failed to find any information in the FBI data base “Choicepoint” on these terrorists. He requests that she give him permission to contact Saudi Arabian Airlines to get Mihdhar’s credit card number so he will have more to go on in the FBI data base. Corsi refuses to give Fuller permission even though she knows this will likely make his investigation fail to locate Mihdhar and Hazmi. (See DE #650. )
As was already asked, where is the link to this "DE #650" so we can all read for ourselves?
Gamolon 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 19th May 2017, 02:48 PM   #137
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by Gamolon View Post
So basiacally what you did with your post above is regurgitate what is posted here by somone named "rschop":
http://911blogger.com/news/2014-07-2...acilitated-911


As was already asked, where is the link to this "DE #650" so we can all read for ourselves?

The link to the Moussaoui Defense Exhibits is shown below;.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...s/defense.html
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
Old 19th May 2017, 07:21 PM   #138
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The link to the Moussaoui Defense Exhibits is shown below;.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...s/defense.html
DE, is that the defense trying to say a possible terrorist is not guilty becuase the other terrorists were not stopped, because no one knew what they were doing...

Wow, why would they pick up two guys who they failed to pick up before? Where is the probable cause? Oh, you knew they were going to kill pilots and fake a hijacking. good for you, you can tell the future, but it is delayed until after the fact. You can predict what will happen, but only tell everyone after it happens. What a great tool used to make up fake conclusions.


It is kind of sad they were on watchlists, and not kill them immediately lists. Or the torture them until they tell you a secret plot list.

Wow, a watchlist... what are you guys doing, we are watching

Hey were are watching possible idiots for UBL, and they are meeting with guys who look like more idiots. Gee, they are not doing anything but living and talking to other people.

I find it amazing someone thinks you can stop an attack by taking out two of 19. Where is the logic. Watching terrorists who did nothing but buy tickets to fly - arrest those guys, they bought airline tickets.

How many were on the watchlist with M and H, and was that a no fly list... etc. etc.
You keep posting the same junk, and making BS conclusions.

Are you the internet guy who said you knew the what the attacks were going to be but no one listened to you

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...efense/950.pdf
what does a watchlist mean for this defense presentation for the 20th insane terrorist who the other 19 left out for good reason - what did being on a watch list in pre 9/11 mean? How many were on the "watchlist".

... what it could have looked like if the FBI got M and H detained. 9/11 without H and M... today two planes hit the WTC complex, and one plane crashed in PA. A third plane was an attempted takeover by three UBL idiots, but passengers, pilots and crew stopped the small knife carrying nuts and they were arrested. FBI says M and H were celebrating the murder of thousands at the WTC complex...
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 19th May 2017 at 07:31 PM.
beachnut 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 8th June 2017, 05:08 PM   #139
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
DE, is that the defense trying to say a possible terrorist is not guilty becuase the other terrorists were not stopped, because no one knew what they were doing...

Wow, why would they pick up two guys who they failed to pick up before? Where is the probable cause? Oh, you knew they were going to kill pilots and fake a hijacking. good for you, you can tell the future, but it is delayed until after the fact. You can predict what will happen, but only tell everyone after it happens. What a great tool used to make up fake conclusions.


It is kind of sad they were on watchlists, and not kill them immediately lists. Or the torture them until they tell you a secret plot list.

Wow, a watchlist... what are you guys doing, we are watching

Hey were are watching possible idiots for UBL, and they are meeting with guys who look like more idiots. Gee, they are not doing anything but living and talking to other people.

I find it amazing someone thinks you can stop an attack by taking out two of 19. Where is the logic. Watching terrorists who did nothing but buy tickets to fly - arrest those guys, they bought airline tickets.

How many were on the watchlist with M and H, and was that a no fly list... etc. etc.
You keep posting the same junk, and making BS conclusions.

Are you the internet guy who said you knew the what the attacks were going to be but no one listened to you

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...efense/950.pdf
what does a watchlist mean for this defense presentation for the 20th insane terrorist who the other 19 left out for good reason - what did being on a watch list in pre 9/11 mean? How many were on the "watchlist".

... what it could have looked like if the FBI got M and H detained. 9/11 without H and M... today two planes hit the WTC complex, and one plane crashed in PA. A third plane was an attempted takeover by three UBL idiots, but passengers, pilots and crew stopped the small knife carrying nuts and they were arrested. FBI says M and H were celebrating the murder of thousands at the WTC complex...
This is from testimony to the Joint Inquiry Committee:

"Senator WYDEN. With respect to al Mihdhar and al-Hazmi, did your agency have the names of those two hijackers prior to September 11, 2001?

Mr. MANNO. No, we did not.

Senator WYDEN. If you had, what steps would have been taken, had you had that information?

Mr. MANNO. Well, prior to 9/11, we had a process, we had a so called watch list which was disseminated to the industry via the security directive process. In fact, a number of the people that we suspected were involved in what we call the Manila plot, the Bojinka plot, as you referred to it, were on that list. Again, what we would—the purpose of that process was to highlight for the air carriers particular individuals, individuals that had ties to terrorist groups and that presented a threat to aviation who should either be denied boarding or should be, if they showed up for the boarding, called to the attention of law enforcement. Had we had information that those two individuals presented a threat to aviation or posed a great danger, we would have put them on that list, and they should have been picked up in the reservation process."

Further:

The FAA had a "no fly list before 9/11'. One of the people on that list was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the master mind of the 9/11 attacks. But by June 12, 2001, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the CIA knew that KSM was recruiting many al Qaeda terrorists for a terrorist attack inside of the US and knew that these new recruits were being sent to the US in the summer on 2001 in order to link up with then other al Qaeda terrorists already inside of the US to carry out an attack that the CIA already had been warned about.

The CIA already knew that Nawaf al-Hazmi was in the US on March 5, 2000 and that his travel companion, Khalid al-Mihdhar, had a multi-entry visa for the US in order to join Hazmi in a al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US.

On August 22, 2001, the news that Khalid al-Mihdhar was also inside of the US went through out the CIA.

So the CIA clearly knew that the terrorists that KSM was recruiting, were being sent into the US to link up with Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi.

So if KSM was already barred from any US flight these, and was to be arrested if he showed up at any US airport, these other al Qaeda terrorists, Khalid al-Mihdyar and Nawaf al-Hazmi who the CIA knew were going to take part in his plan, the Bojinka plot, should also have not only been barred from any flight but also arrested if they showed up at any airport.

Since the credit card numbers used by Mihdhar and Hazmi were also used to buy 10 other tickets for the terrorists on 9/11, the FBI and/or FFA could have given these credit card numbers to the airlines to pickup Mihdhar and Hazmi making reservations for the other terrorists on 9/11. The FBI clearly knew how to get Mihdar's credit card number, since they knew he had flown into the the US on Saudi Arabian Airlines on July 4, 2001, and even had the exact flight number, and Hazmi's credit card information was right in the data base used by the FBI, ChoicePoint.
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
Old 8th June 2017, 06:10 PM   #140
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,482
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
This is from testimony to the Joint Inquiry Committee:

"Senator WYDEN. With respect to al Mihdhar and al-Hazmi, did your agency have the names of those two hijackers prior to September 11, 2001?

Mr. MANNO. No, we did not.

Senator WYDEN. If you had, what steps would have been taken, had you had that information?

Mr. MANNO. Well, prior to 9/11, we had a process, we had a so called watch list which was disseminated to the industry via the security directive process. In fact, a number of the people that we suspected were involved in what we call the Manila plot, the Bojinka plot, as you referred to it, were on that list. Again, what we would—the purpose of that process was to highlight for the air carriers particular individuals, individuals that had ties to terrorist groups and that presented a threat to aviation who should either be denied boarding or should be, if they showed up for the boarding, called to the attention of law enforcement. Had we had information that those two individuals presented a threat to aviation or posed a great danger, we would have put them on that list, and they should have been picked up in the reservation process."

Further:

The FAA had a "no fly list before 9/11'. One of the people on that list was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the master mind of the 9/11 attacks. But by June 12, 2001, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the CIA knew that KSM was recruiting many al Qaeda terrorists for a terrorist attack inside of the US and knew that these new recruits were being sent to the US in the summer on 2001 in order to link up with then other al Qaeda terrorists already inside of the US to carry out an attack that the CIA already had been warned about.

The CIA already knew that Nawaf al-Hazmi was in the US on March 5, 2000 and that his travel companion, Khalid al-Mihdhar, had a multi-entry visa for the US in order to join Hazmi in a al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US.

On August 22, 2001, the news that Khalid al-Mihdhar was also inside of the US went through out the CIA.

So the CIA clearly knew that the terrorists that KSM was recruiting, were being sent into the US to link up with Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi.

So if KSM was already barred from any US flight these, and was to be arrested if he showed up at any US airport, these other al Qaeda terrorists, Khalid al-Mihdyar and Nawaf al-Hazmi who the CIA knew were going to take part in his plan, the Bojinka plot, should also have not only been barred from any flight but also arrested if they showed up at any airport.

Since the credit card numbers used by Mihdhar and Hazmi were also used to buy 10 other tickets for the terrorists on 9/11, the FBI and/or FFA could have given these credit card numbers to the airlines to pickup Mihdhar and Hazmi making reservations for the other terrorists on 9/11. The FBI clearly knew how to get Mihdar's credit card number, since they knew he had flown into the the US on Saudi Arabian Airlines on July 4, 2001, and even had the exact flight number, and Hazmi's credit card information was right in the data base used by the FBI, ChoicePoint.
I've read your posts on this subject, and completely aside from any discussion about your position on the pre-9/11 intelligence and the use of same.

From my pov as a retired LEO, your idea of what constitutes probable cause for arrest isn't based in reality, at least as it relates to pre-9/11 sop.

Basically, from federal LE agencies on down, unless there was an existing arrest warrant or a criminal offense was committed in an officer's presence you couldn't effect an arrest.

In cases where probable cause was questionable, including possible terrorist activity, you weren't going to get a warrant signed. Observation and intelligence gathering? even electronic surveillance warrants could be problematic without rock solid facts that someone felt strongly enough to take to a judge.

In my little corner of the universe (firearms forensics etc.) I can't tell you how many cases over the years I passed along to ATF involving violations of the National Firearms Act or the Gun Control Act of 1968.

They never took action in one single instance - cases where our agency had federal felony violation firearms in custody, they had no interest. If a local agency developed intell. of specific activities that agency honchos had an immediate interest in (Drugs, counterfeiting, certain activities by certain gangs) they might jump in if the planets were aligned, but like a DEA guy told me "You bring in a heroin trafficking case involving the Mexicans when the boss is looking at meth from the OMG's, (outlaw motorcycle gangs) you get in at the end of the line."

I'm not going to argue your talking points.

The only thing I'll say is that your perception of the ease of arresting individuals based on what your asserting isn't based in reality.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 8th June 2017, 09:57 PM   #141
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
I've read your posts on this subject, and completely aside from any discussion about your position on the pre-9/11 intelligence and the use of same.

From my pov as a retired LEO, your idea of what constitutes probable cause for arrest isn't based in reality, at least as it relates to pre-9/11 sop.

Basically, from federal LE agencies on down, unless there was an existing arrest warrant or a criminal offense was committed in an officer's presence you couldn't effect an arrest.

In cases where probable cause was questionable, including possible terrorist activity, you weren't going to get a warrant signed. Observation and intelligence gathering? even electronic surveillance warrants could be problematic without rock solid facts that someone felt strongly enough to take to a judge.

In my little corner of the universe (firearms forensics etc.) I can't tell you how many cases over the years I passed along to ATF involving violations of the National Firearms Act or the Gun Control Act of 1968.

They never took action in one single instance - cases where our agency had federal felony violation firearms in custody, they had no interest. If a local agency developed intell. of specific activities that agency honchos had an immediate interest in (Drugs, counterfeiting, certain activities by certain gangs) they might jump in if the planets were aligned, but like a DEA guy told me "You bring in a heroin trafficking case involving the Mexicans when the boss is looking at meth from the OMG's, (outlaw motorcycle gangs) you get in at the end of the line."

I'm not going to argue your talking points.

The only thing I'll say is that your perception of the ease of arresting individuals based on what your asserting isn't based in reality.
I posted what the head of the FAA stated in public testimony. And I have a hard time believing that if the FAA and the airlines thought certain individuals were a threat to commercial aircraft, that they would not have taken action to first block these people from getting on any commercial aircraft and then to have them arrested.

The horror story of all horror stories is that all of the FBI criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US were blocked or shut down by one single FBI unit, the FBI ITOS unit, after this unit and in fact many units and almost all of the managers at FBI HQ's had been given the EC by FBI Agent Dina Corsi detailing the many threats to the US that were coming in to the US in the spring and summer of 2001, from bin Laden and Kattahb.

After almost all of the mangers at FBI HQ's had been warned of a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack aimed at the US, they shut down all FBI criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US and even blocked the intelligence investigation of FBI Agent Robert Fuller.

These actions have never been explained in any way. We even now know that CIA officer Tom Wilshere, not only was directing FBI Agent Dina Corsi and her manager Rod Middleton as they shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt's criminal investigation of al Qaeda terrorists Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, but was keeping a close eye on the Moussaoui criminal investigation of FBI Agent Harry Samit, and even knew it was going no where due to FBI HQ's.

Why would people who clearly knew about this horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack that was just about to take place inside of the US that would cause mass US casualties, shut down the only criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US when they clearly knew that this would allow these attacks to take place?

The CIA and FBI have never answered this horrific question! Almost 3000 people paid with their lives for these actions at the FBI HQ's and the CIA!

Last edited by paloalto; 8th June 2017 at 10:20 PM.
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
Old 8th June 2017, 10:23 PM   #142
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,482
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
I posted what the head of the FAA stated in public testimony. And I have a hard time believing that if the FAA and the airlines thought certain individuals were a threat to commercial aircraft, that they would not have taken action to first block these people from getting on any commercial aircraft and then to have them arrested.

The horror story of all horror stories is that all of the FBI criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US were blocked or shut down by one single FBI unit, the FBI ITOS unit, after this unit and in fact many units and almost all of the managers at FBI HQ's had been given the EC by FBI Agent Dina Corsi detailing the many threats to the US that were coming in to the US in the spring and summer of 2001, from bin Laden and Kattahb.

After almost all of the mangers at FBI HQ's had been warned of a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack aimed at the US, they shut down all FBI criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US and even blocked the intelligence investigation of FBI Agent Robert Fuller.

These actions have never been explained in any way. We even now know that CIA officer Tom Wilshere, not only was directing FBI Agent Dina Corsi and her manager Rod Middleton as they shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt's criminal investigation of al Qaeda terrorists Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, but was keeping a close eye on the Moussaoui criminal investigation of FBI Agent Harry Samit, and even knew it was going no where due to FBI HQ's.

Why would people who clearly knew about this horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack that was just about to take place inside of the US that would cause mass US casualties, shut down the only criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US when they clearly knew that this would allow these attacks to take place?

The CIA and FBI have never answered this horrific question! Almost 3000 people paid with their lives for these actions at the FBI HQ's and the CIA!
Assuming facts not in evidence anywhere but in your imagination, but have at it.

Everybody needs a hobby.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 8th June 2017, 11:34 PM   #143
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
...

Why would people who clearly knew about this horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack that was just about to take place inside of the US that would cause mass US casualties, shut down the only criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US when they clearly knew that this would allow these attacks to take place? ...
No one knew what the attack was going to be; you make up BS.

They bought no explosives, they bought no guns, ... there was no way to know what 19 nuts for UBL would do, or when they would do it.

Which terrorists could you detain and put in jail before 9/11? Which ones? You NEVER told everyone the full story of how the BS you make up could stop 9/11. How will you stop your next car accident? Can you read minds? no
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232
beachnut 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 9th June 2017, 01:36 AM   #144
Cosmic Yak
Graduate Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 1,844
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post

Why would people who clearly knew about this horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack that was just about to take place inside of the US that would cause mass US casualties, shut down the only criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US when they clearly knew that this would allow these attacks to take place?

The CIA and FBI have never answered this horrific question! Almost 3000 people paid with their lives for these actions at the FBI HQ's and the CIA!
Well you're the fearless truthseeker. Why don't you tell us? What's your theory, and what evidence do you have to back it up?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak 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 9th June 2017, 11:22 AM   #145
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Well you're the fearless truthseeker. Why don't you tell us? What's your theory, and what evidence do you have to back it up?
I have already posted my evidence many times on this forum. Re-read my prior posts.


By the way, I am not a truthseeker, I have just posted the facts that have come out of the many investigations on 9/11.

Since I have already done this, I will ask you:

"Why don't you tell us? What's your theory, and what evidence do you have to back it up?"

And further explain the following:

Why did FBI Deputy Chief of the FBI ITOS unit, Tom Wilshere, know for over three weeks that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US, knew they were in the US only in order to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack that would kill many Americans, and then directed FBI Agent Dina Corsi and her boss Rod Middleton to shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt's criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi when he clearly knew this would allow this al Qaeda terrorist attack to take place, murdering many Americans.

The Director of the CIA, George Tenet, knew for three weeks prior to the attacks on 9/11, that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US, knew they were in the US only in order to take part in a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack that would kill many Americans, and yet he claimed at the April 14, 2004 , 9/11 public hearing that he told no one about this information, not the FBI, not the FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing, not even the President's cabinet members at the September 4, 2001, meeting, the only meeting in the White House on the al Qaeda terrorists at that point. Thousands of people were just about to be murdered on September 4, 2001, and Tenet keeps this all a great big secret. Explain that if you can!

Richard Clarke even said to Condoleezza Rice going into this very White House meeting on September 4, 2001:

I wounder if some day the American people will wonder why we did not do more to stop this (imminent) al Qaeda terrorist attack (inside of the US).

I really doubt if you can explain any of this!

Last edited by paloalto; 9th June 2017 at 11:42 AM.
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
Old 9th June 2017, 11:29 AM   #146
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Assuming facts not in evidence anywhere but in your imagination, but have at it.

Everybody needs a hobby.
The facts that I have quoted come from the Joint Inquiry Committee investigation, the statements by the head of the FAA, and from the other investigations on 9/11.

You wrote: "Assuming facts not in evidence anywhere but in your imagination".

I have already stated where my facts came from, where did your facts come from, assuming you have any. But that may be a assumption of facts not in evidence anywhere, but in your own imagination.
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
Old 9th June 2017, 12:18 PM   #147
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,309
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The facts that I have quoted come from the Joint Inquiry Committee investigation, the statements by the head of the FAA, and from the other investigations on 9/11.
Are you claiming everything you post is the facts from this source? There is no interpretation on your part?

Your interpretation has been questioned several times and you have never been able to substantiate your claims.

For instance:

Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Why would people who clearly knew about this horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack that was just about to take place inside of the US that would cause mass US casualties, shut down the only criminal investigations of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US when they clearly knew that this would allow these attacks to take place?
I've never seen factual evidence leading me to believe this question/claim is true.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 9th June 2017 at 12:26 PM.
DGM 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 9th June 2017, 12:23 PM   #148
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,482
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The facts that I have quoted come from the Joint Inquiry Committee investigation, the statements by the head of the FAA, and from the other investigations on 9/11.

You wrote: "Assuming facts not in evidence anywhere but in your imagination".

I have already stated where my facts came from, where did your facts come from, assuming you have any. But that may be a assumption of facts not in evidence anywhere, but in your own imagination.
Your "facts" assume perfect foreknowledge on the part of intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

It didn't happen that way.

Even when a law enforcement agency is directly informed of a lethal threat, they often fail to act, or don't respond until after the threat has been carried out:

http://madamenoire.com/265960/smh-wo...g-to-kill-her/


"On August 17th of 2012, 32-year-old Deanna Cook was murdered while on the phone with a 911 dispatcher, reports the NY Daily News. It took the operator 9 minutes to map Cook’s location and when they eventually arrived on the scene, they knocked on the door and called Cook’s phone. When Cook didn’t answer, responders left the scene. The victim’s teenage daughter found her body in a bathtub two days later.

To makes matters worse, Cook notified the police on several occasions that her ex-husband was trying to kill her during the months leading up to her death.


“My name is Deanna Cook and I have a stalker. He’s already tried to kill me three times. I’m really just fed up with this. I can’t keep moving and changing my life because of this,” Cook can be heard telling a 911 dispatcher on a previous call.

“I don’t even want him to know that I called, you know what I’m saying? That’s the thing. That triggers him when he knows that I called. He tears the stuff up in my house,” she continued.

On one occasion, she even notified the authorities that he was watching her house.

“I have been going through this for like 5 years with him. It’s still the same thing. I have complaints. If you can look up my name, you’ll see there are a hundred thousand complaints, but ain’t nobody doing nothing,” she can be heard frustratedly informing a 911 operator who suggested that she file for a restraining order against Patrik.

“All I can do is try to help you ma’am. It’s all up to you. You are going to have to. It will be up to you to actually try to do the things that we suggest to you. But if you don’t do that, you know that police hands are tied,” the dispatcher tells Cook.


Just google: woman murdered after reporting death threat

These are simple issues compared to 9/11.

The players involved on the intell. and enforcement end did not have any better knowledge of what was on the menu than the dispatchers/LEO's did in the case above, contrary to your understanding of the material.

Some intell. weenie wasn't going to turn the ship of F.B.I. enforcement and investigatory priorities based on what they, or the C.I.A. for that matter, had as evidence pre-9/11. Players that were known members or suspects were on the move. Pretty difficult pre-9/11 to detain and arrest suspects w/o hard evidence in hand, and we didn't have anything much better than speculation.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 9th June 2017, 01:28 PM   #149
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by DGM View Post
Are you claiming everything you post is the facts from this source? There is no interpretation on your part?

Your interpretation has been questioned several times and you have never been able to substantiate your claims.

For instance:



I've never seen factual evidence leading me to believe this question/claim is true.

The fact that the CIA clearly knew about this attack comes right from Bob Woodward's book, State of Denial, which describes this information given by the CIA to Rice, Hadley and Clarke on July 10, 2001 at the White House, and the 9/11 Public hearings on April 14, 2004 right from CIA Director George Tenet.

Director of the CIA, George Tenet, also admitted that he had this information at the April 14, 2004 , 9/11 public hearings.

The fact that Tom Wilshere, Deputy Chief of the FBI ITOS unit, the unit in charge of all FBI investigations of al Qaeda terrorists, knew this al Qaeda terrorist attack was going to take place inside of the US, and that he was told these al Qaeda terrorists were inside of the US comes from DE 939, (the fact that he knew Khalid al-Mihdhar was going to take part inn this attack, and that both Mihdhar and Hazmi were already inside of the US on August 21, 2001) and the DOJ IG report, (his July 5, 2001 email back to the CIA).

The information that Tom Pickard and the upper management of the FBI knew this al Qaeda terrorist attack was going to take place inside of the US comes from his own testimony to the 9/11 Commission in public hearings.
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
Old 9th June 2017, 01:31 PM   #150
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Your "facts" assume perfect foreknowledge on the part of intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

It didn't happen that way.

Even when a law enforcement agency is directly informed of a lethal threat, they often fail to act, or don't respond until after the threat has been carried out:

http://madamenoire.com/265960/smh-wo...g-to-kill-her/


"On August 17th of 2012, 32-year-old Deanna Cook was murdered while on the phone with a 911 dispatcher, reports the NY Daily News. It took the operator 9 minutes to map Cook’s location and when they eventually arrived on the scene, they knocked on the door and called Cook’s phone. When Cook didn’t answer, responders left the scene. The victim’s teenage daughter found her body in a bathtub two days later.

To makes matters worse, Cook notified the police on several occasions that her ex-husband was trying to kill her during the months leading up to her death.


“My name is Deanna Cook and I have a stalker. He’s already tried to kill me three times. I’m really just fed up with this. I can’t keep moving and changing my life because of this,” Cook can be heard telling a 911 dispatcher on a previous call.

“I don’t even want him to know that I called, you know what I’m saying? That’s the thing. That triggers him when he knows that I called. He tears the stuff up in my house,” she continued.

On one occasion, she even notified the authorities that he was watching her house.

“I have been going through this for like 5 years with him. It’s still the same thing. I have complaints. If you can look up my name, you’ll see there are a hundred thousand complaints, but ain’t nobody doing nothing,” she can be heard frustratedly informing a 911 operator who suggested that she file for a restraining order against Patrik.

“All I can do is try to help you ma’am. It’s all up to you. You are going to have to. It will be up to you to actually try to do the things that we suggest to you. But if you don’t do that, you know that police hands are tied,” the dispatcher tells Cook.


Just google: woman murdered after reporting death threat

These are simple issues compared to 9/11.

The players involved on the intell. and enforcement end did not have any better knowledge of what was on the menu than the dispatchers/LEO's did in the case above, contrary to your understanding of the material.

Some intell. weenie wasn't going to turn the ship of F.B.I. enforcement and investigatory priorities based on what they, or the C.I.A. for that matter, had as evidence pre-9/11. Players that were known members or suspects were on the move. Pretty difficult pre-9/11 to detain and arrest suspects w/o hard evidence in hand, and we didn't have anything much better than speculation.
As I stated before all they had to do was give this information about Mihdhar and Hazmi to the FAA. The FAA would have done the rest.
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
Old 9th June 2017, 01:51 PM   #151
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,482
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
As I stated before all they had to do was give this information about Mihdhar and Hazmi to the FAA. The FAA would have done the rest.
The FAA wasn't and isn't a law enforcement agency.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 9th June 2017, 03:06 PM   #152
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
The FAA wasn't and isn't a law enforcement agency.
To repeat what I posted earlier.

Mr. Manno was the head of the FAA.

This is from his testimony to the Joint Inquiry Committee:

"Senator WYDEN. With respect to al Mihdhar and al-Hazmi, did your agency have the names of those two hijackers prior to September 11, 2001?

Mr. MANNO. No, we did not.

Senator WYDEN. If you had, what steps would have been taken, had you had that information?

Mr. MANNO. Well, prior to 9/11, we had a process, we had a so called watch list which was disseminated to the industry via the security directive process. In fact, a number of the people that we suspected were involved in what we call the Manila plot, the Bojinka plot, as you referred to it, were on that list. Again, what we would—the purpose of that process was to highlight for the air carriers particular individuals, individuals that had ties to terrorist groups and that presented a threat to aviation who should either be denied boarding or should be, if they showed up for the boarding, called to the attention of law enforcement. Had we had information that those two individuals presented a threat to aviation or posed a great danger, we would have put them on that list, and they should have been picked up in the reservation process."

The FAA had issued a notice to all airlines that if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed showed up at any US airport he was to be bared from getting on any aircraft and arrested. Had the FAA known that Mihdhar and Hazmi were also a threat to aviation security they would have done the same thing with these two al Qaeda terrorists. How woudl anyone have known this.

The 9/11 Commission report states that the CIA was told on June 12, 2001, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was behind the attacks that the CIA and FBI had been warned about since April 2001, and that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was recruiting al Qaeda terrorists in the summer of 2001 to be sent into the US to link up with other al Qaeda terrorists who were already inside of the US who the CIA knew were Nawaf al-Hazmi who was already inside of the US and Khalid al-Mihdhar, who had a multi-entry visa for the US, to carry out this al Qaeda terrorist attack.

All the CIA had to do was give the FAA these names, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar. If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was to be arrested if/when he showed up at any US airport, then Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the two al Qaeda terrorist inside of the US who were to link up with the other al Qaeda terrorists being sent into the US that were being recruited by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, should have been on the FAA list also. This only seems logical.

How did the CIA know they might show up at a US airport?

Both the CIA and the FBI had copies of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's Bojinka plot, the very plot mentioned by FAA Director Manno. This plot called for the hijacking of multiple commercial aircraft inside of the US and flying these into the two World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and the US capital building.

Last edited by paloalto; 9th June 2017 at 03:09 PM.
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
Old 9th June 2017, 03:25 PM   #153
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,309
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
The fact that the CIA clearly knew about this attack comes right from Bob Woodward's book, State of Denial, which describes this information given by the CIA to Rice, Hadley and Clarke on July 10, 2001 at the White House, and the 9/11 Public hearings on April 14, 2004 right from CIA Director George Tenet.

Director of the CIA, George Tenet, also admitted that he had this information at the April 14, 2004 , 9/11 public hearings.

The fact that Tom Wilshere, Deputy Chief of the FBI ITOS unit, the unit in charge of all FBI investigations of al Qaeda terrorists, knew this al Qaeda terrorist attack was going to take place inside of the US, and that he was told these al Qaeda terrorists were inside of the US comes from DE 939, (the fact that he knew Khalid al-Mihdhar was going to take part inn this attack, and that both Mihdhar and Hazmi were already inside of the US on August 21, 2001) and the DOJ IG report, (his July 5, 2001 email back to the CIA).

The information that Tom Pickard and the upper management of the FBI knew this al Qaeda terrorist attack was going to take place inside of the US comes from his own testimony to the 9/11 Commission in public hearings.
So......Why has no one been prosecuted for these crimes?

Please give us your theory.

My theory is it's not as simple as you make it out to be. I also believe hindsight might have something to do with your clarity.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

Last edited by DGM; 9th June 2017 at 03:38 PM.
DGM 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 9th June 2017, 04:37 PM   #154
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,802
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
To repeat ...
Both the CIA and the FBI had copies of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's Bojinka plot, the very plot mentioned by FAA Director Manno. This plot called for the hijacking of multiple commercial aircraft inside of the US and flying these into the two World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and the US capital building.
Can you post the arrest warrants for those guys?

The Bojinka plot was not about the WTC, Pentagon and Capitol Building, not US capital, that is money, why would you fly an aircraft into money.

You have no clue what the Bojinka plot was...
Quote:
Bojinka plot.. see wiki - They planned to assassinate Pope John Paul II, blow up 11 airliners in flight from Asia to the United States[1] with the goal of killing approximately 4,000 passengers and shut down air travel around the world, and crash a plane into the headquarters of the CIA in Fairfax County, Virginia.[2]
The 9/11 nuts did not use explosives.

, was the Bojinka plot a ruse to have the CIA/FBI looking for explosives... not simple travel, but explosives. The 19 terrorists broke no laws by buying tickets and flying airlines, until they stood up and killed crew, pilots and crashed planes.
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 9th June 2017 at 04:39 PM.
beachnut 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 9th June 2017, 04:52 PM   #155
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,164
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
Both the CIA and the FBI had copies of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's Bojinka plot, the very plot mentioned by FAA Director Manno. This plot called for the hijacking of multiple commercial aircraft inside of the US and flying these into the two World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and the US capital building.
You misrepresent Bonjinka consistently.

Bojinka was the plot to blow up multiple airliners over the Pacific between January 15 through the 27, 1995. It was FOILED when a fire in Yousef's apartment.

As far as US intel and law enforcement were concerned, Bojinka was past tense.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/11/wo...a.2447764.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/11/wo...a.2447764.html


9/11 evolved out of Bojinka, as have other failed and successful attacks on passenger jets because it is considered a play-book today by terrorist forces.

Bojinka's Phase II listed the WTC, Pentagon, White House, Capital building, CIA HQ, nuke plants, and others, but since the masterminds behind Bojinka were in prison by 2001 Phase II was nothing more than an anecdotal concept to be war-gamed at Langely.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 9th June 2017, 06:38 PM   #156
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,482
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
To repeat what I posted earlier.

Mr. Manno was the head of the FAA.

This is from his testimony to the Joint Inquiry Committee:

"Senator WYDEN. With respect to al Mihdhar and al-Hazmi, did your agency have the names of those two hijackers prior to September 11, 2001?

Mr. MANNO. No, we did not.

Senator WYDEN. If you had, what steps would have been taken, had you had that information?

Mr. MANNO. Well, prior to 9/11, we had a process, we had a so called watch list which was disseminated to the industry via the security directive process. In fact, a number of the people that we suspected were involved in what we call the Manila plot, the Bojinka plot, as you referred to it, were on that list. Again, what we would—the purpose of that process was to highlight for the air carriers particular individuals, individuals that had ties to terrorist groups and that presented a threat to aviation who should either be denied boarding or should be, if they showed up for the boarding, called to the attention of law enforcement. Had we had information that those two individuals presented a threat to aviation or posed a great danger, we would have put them on that list, and they should have been picked up in the reservation process."

The FAA had issued a notice to all airlines that if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed showed up at any US airport he was to be bared from getting on any aircraft and arrested. Had the FAA known that Mihdhar and Hazmi were also a threat to aviation security they would have done the same thing with these two al Qaeda terrorists. How woudl anyone have known this.

The 9/11 Commission report states that the CIA was told on June 12, 2001, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was behind the attacks that the CIA and FBI had been warned about since April 2001, and that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was recruiting al Qaeda terrorists in the summer of 2001 to be sent into the US to link up with other al Qaeda terrorists who were already inside of the US who the CIA knew were Nawaf al-Hazmi who was already inside of the US and Khalid al-Mihdhar, who had a multi-entry visa for the US, to carry out this al Qaeda terrorist attack.

All the CIA had to do was give the FAA these names, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar. If Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was to be arrested if/when he showed up at any US airport, then Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the two al Qaeda terrorist inside of the US who were to link up with the other al Qaeda terrorists being sent into the US that were being recruited by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, should have been on the FAA list also. This only seems logical.

How did the CIA know they might show up at a US airport?

Both the CIA and the FBI had copies of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's Bojinka plot, the very plot mentioned by FAA Director Manno. This plot called for the hijacking of multiple commercial aircraft inside of the US and flying these into the two World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and the US capital building.
You're more than a little confused.

The FAA does not have the powers to arrest - even the Air Marshal program is not under their authority. TSA administers the AM program.

The FAA has authority over civilian air transport companies and the certification of their aircraft, licensing of both private and commercial pilots, A & P mechanic licensing, etc. They can pull licenses from previously certified pilots. mechanics and companies.

What they can't do and don't do is effect arrests on their own authority with their own personnel.

Can the federal government have individuals arrested? of course, but not without a valid warrant, or a criminal offense committed in an officers presence - and connecting names to names, even names of established terror suspects, doesn't constitute enough probable cause for the issuance of a warrant. Outside the U.S. with no involvement of the F.B.I., even before 9/11 the rest of the world was kind of like Vegas - formal arrest warrants might not be in hand until after an actual detention, and the later formal arrest would be within established standards...if an actual arrest was the original intention.

If your version of this reality was correct, the current F.B.I. counter terror ops wouldn't need to go to the extent of having the suspect carry out at least one affirmative act furthering a criminal conspiracy to make an arrest.

Your version? suspected bad guy talks to bad guy - bingo, arrest.

It's a no-go. Think back to the Ft. Hood shooter. It was known he was communicating with Anwar al-Awlaki prior to his carrying out his attack - and he was investigated - not arrested - by the F.B.I. - and unfortunately cleared.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nidal_...Awlaki_e-mails

Your version of events in the run up to 9/11 do not withstand examination wrt arresting the eventual players on 9/11, and I have no clue as to how you came to the conclusion that the FAA is a federal agency with general criminal law enforcement authority, they're not now, and they weren't then.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 9th June 2017, 07:30 PM   #157
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
You misrepresent Bonjinka consistently.

Bojinka was the plot to blow up multiple airliners over the Pacific between January 15 through the 27, 1995. It was FOILED when a fire in Yousef's apartment.

As far as US intel and law enforcement were concerned, Bojinka was past tense.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/11/wo...a.2447764.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/11/wo...a.2447764.html


9/11 evolved out of Bojinka, as have other failed and successful attacks on passenger jets because it is considered a play-book today by terrorist forces.

Bojinka's Phase II listed the WTC, Pentagon, White House, Capital building, CIA HQ, nuke plants, and others, but since the masterminds behind Bojinka were in prison by 2001 Phase II was nothing more than an anecdotal concept to be war-gamed at Langely.
It is clear that the al Qaeda terrorists scaled back their plans for 9/11 and only attacked the most visible and iconic targets.

But the very mastermind of the Bojinka plot, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was not only not in prison, but was in fact actually masterminding the very al Qaeda terrorist attack that the CIA and FBI were getting numerous warnings about since April 2001, the attack on 9/11. The CIA was even made aware of this on June 12, 2001, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was the mastermind behind the al Qaeda terrorist attack, that the CIA had been getting numerous warnings about.

But what is even more damming is that the CIA had actually photographed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, right at this planning meeting, staying right at the condominium, with Mihdhar and Hazmi, where the January 5-8 al Qaeda terrorist planning summit meeting was taking place, and in spite of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed having at that time, a 2 million dollar FBI reward on his head, the CIA just let him walk away to ultimately direct the attacks on 9/11. The CIA at that time was clearly aware of this FBI reward on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
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
Old 9th June 2017, 09:14 PM   #158
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,164
Originally Posted by paloalto View Post
But what is even more damming is that the CIA had actually photographed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, right at this planning meeting, staying right at the condominium, with Mihdhar and Hazmi, where the January 5-8 al Qaeda terrorist planning summit meeting was taking place, and in spite of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed having at that time, a 2 million dollar FBI reward on his head, the CIA just let him walk away to ultimately direct the attacks on 9/11. The CIA at that time was clearly aware of this FBI reward on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
1. The CIA doesn't arrest people.

2. All CIA operations are code-name sensitive, and so they're not going to pick up the phone to call the FBI, ISI, or anybody else about a fugitive.

3. The CIA was not in the assassination business until after 9/11/2001.

4. A surveillance is just that, sneak and peek. Had the CIA moved on KSM on the spot chances are there was a solid operational reason or two or three. Like giving away their presence in a foreign country (even Canada gets upset about this), jeopardizing CIA assets exposing them to arrest and torture (see the doctor who helped us nail UBL). Either way, blowing the whistle would have endangered multiple operations in that AO, and since NOBODY knew what the attacks would look like the assumption would have been another truck-bomb or two.

5. Even if they had called the FBI to come and fetch them the host country would ask how the FBI knew where KSM was, and their internal security forces would begin a search for the CIA OP. (See #4).

Then there is the long list of trust issues between the FBI and CIA, so there's no guarantee that the Bureau would have done anything even if they had the information. History shows this to be a likelihood.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 9th June 2017, 09:14 PM   #159
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
You're more than a little confused.

The FAA does not have the powers to arrest - even the Air Marshal program is not under their authority. TSA administers the AM program.

The FAA has authority over civilian air transport companies and the certification of their aircraft, licensing of both private and commercial pilots, A & P mechanic licensing, etc. They can pull licenses from previously certified pilots. mechanics and companies.

What they can't do and don't do is effect arrests on their own authority with their own personnel.

Can the federal government have individuals arrested? of course, but not without a valid warrant, or a criminal offense committed in an officers presence - and connecting names to names, even names of established terror suspects, doesn't constitute enough probable cause for the issuance of a warrant. Outside the U.S. with no involvement of the F.B.I., even before 9/11 the rest of the world was kind of like Vegas - formal arrest warrants might not be in hand until after an actual detention, and the later formal arrest would be within established standards...if an actual arrest was the original intention.

If your version of this reality was correct, the current F.B.I. counter terror ops wouldn't need to go to the extent of having the suspect carry out at least one affirmative act furthering a criminal conspiracy to make an arrest.

Your version? suspected bad guy talks to bad guy - bingo, arrest.

It's a no-go. Think back to the Ft. Hood shooter. It was known he was communicating with Anwar al-Awlaki prior to his carrying out his attack - and he was investigated - not arrested - by the F.B.I. - and unfortunately cleared.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nidal_...Awlaki_e-mails

Your version of events in the run up to 9/11 do not withstand examination wrt arresting the eventual players on 9/11, and I have no clue as to how you came to the conclusion that the FAA is a federal agency with general criminal law enforcement authority, they're not now, and they weren't then.
This is what I previously posted:

Mr. MANNO. Well, prior to 9/11, we had a process, we had a so called watch list which was disseminated to the industry via the security directive process. In fact, a number of the people that we suspected were involved in what we call the Manila plot, the Bojinka plot, as you referred to it, were on that list. Again, what we would—the purpose of that process was to highlight for the air carriers particular individuals, individuals that had ties to terrorist groups and that presented a threat to aviation who should either be denied boarding or should be, if they showed up for the boarding, called to the attention of law enforcement. Had we had information that those two individuals presented a threat to aviation or posed a great danger, we would have put them on that list, and they should have been picked up in the reservation process."

This clearly states that: "the purpose of that process, (the no fly list), was to highlight for the air carriers particular individuals, individuals that had ties to terrorist groups and that presented a threat to aviation who should either be denied boarding or should be, if they showed up for the boarding, called to the attention of law enforcement. Had we had information that those two individuals presented a threat to aviation or posed a great danger, we would have put them on that list, and they should have been picked up in the reservation process.

It was law enforcement that would have arrested these people, not the FAA.

Also note: this no fly list was to highlight for the air carriers particular individuals, individuals that had ties to terrorist groups and that presented a threat to aviation.

I don't know how I can make this any clearer than that. The role of the FAA would have been to "highlight for the air carriers (the names of) particular individuals", not to actually arrest these individuals. My posts never claimed that the FAA would arrest anybody.
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
Old 9th June 2017, 09:26 PM   #160
paloalto
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
1. The CIA doesn't arrest people.

2. All CIA operations are code-name sensitive, and so they're not going to pick up the phone to call the FBI, ISI, or anybody else about a fugitive.

3. The CIA was not in the assassination business until after 9/11/2001.

4. A surveillance is just that, sneak and peek. Had the CIA moved on KSM on the spot chances are there was a solid operational reason or two or three. Like giving away their presence in a foreign country (even Canada gets upset about this), jeopardizing CIA assets exposing them to arrest and torture (see the doctor who helped us nail UBL). Either way, blowing the whistle would have endangered multiple operations in that AO, and since NOBODY knew what the attacks would look like the assumption would have been another truck-bomb or two.

5. Even if they had called the FBI to come and fetch them the host country would ask how the FBI knew where KSM was, and their internal security forces would begin a search for the CIA OP. (See #4).

Then there is the long list of trust issues between the FBI and CIA, so there's no guarantee that the Bureau would have done anything even if they had the information. History shows this to be a likelihood.
It was the Malaysian Special Branch that was surveilling this meeting in Kuala Lumpur for the CIA, and taking photos of the people that had attended this meeting, not the CIA itself. The Malaysian Special Branch sent the pictures back to the CIA at the time of the meeting. It was the Malaysian Special Branch that was perplexed and stunned when the CIA let all of these dangerous al Qaeda terrorists, many of who were already wanted for murder, walk from this meeting with no further surveillance or arrest.
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

Bookmarks

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 03:04 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.