Can I ask a silly question?

[Dragonlipz]

~~~

It is seldom I find something to agree with you on, but the intelligence failure did not occur in a vacuum.

There was a previous attack in the basement of one of the Towers, by a known Islamic terrorist cell.

Under President Clinton, both the Military and the Intelligence Community had their funds cut by over twenty-five percent and the USS Cole terror attack was virtually ignored as a wider threat.

What troubles many Americans now is that the same funding cuts are being visited upon the same agencies and the threatened investigations of CIA operatives has had a 'chilling effect' on the entire intelligence community.

I want to commend many posters on this thread for an accurate assessment of the nature of the tragedy. We are not intending to live in walled off, armored castles, so prevention, as Graham said, is the only solution.

Amicus

Right on, Mon Ami, as usual........we should invade Pakistan, Syria, and Iran......and then hang those facist socialist commie bastards.......you rock dude

 

[ishtat]

9/11 did in a strange way occur in a vacuum - a vacuum in the American experience. To a significant extent America was built through the lives of people who left their original homelands to avoid the kind of catastrophic impact on their lives caused by extremists. For 230 years the American mainland had been a haven for such people and I suspect that the nation's confidence both as individuals and collectively was to some extent a product of levels of public security almost unparrallelled in history.

Most of the preventive effort should be directed to offshore intelligence and most definitely not to offshore military adventurism.

However, For America to retain the best of what it is it must not retreat into a cocoon of exaggerated security. Manage the risk by all means but not to the extent of destroying or undermining the nations fundamental character.

USA must not become a nation characterised by fear. That would be a terrible memorial to those who died and indeed hand ultimate victory to the terrorists.

 

[amicus]

Well said, Ishtat, well said indeed.



ami

 

[YoursSINSerely]

Why do we allow dirty, smelly, sick, and uneducated people into our country? They should have to take a test and take a bath before they can come into a building.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

Right on, Mon Ami, as usual........we should invade Pakistan, Syria, and Iran......and then hang those facist socialist commie bastards.......you rock dude

Well said, Ishtat, well said indeed.



ami

i hope that was irony, otherwise you're a fuckin' moron.

Why do we allow dirty, smelly, sick, and uneducated people into our country? They should have to take a test and take a bath before they can come into a building.

... and you are def a moron.

 

[sr71plt]

i hope that was irony, otherwise you're a fuckin' moron.



... and you are def a moron.

I think we should use more for sarcasm. I'd like to think that's what the two (not ami, of course) were

 

[geronimo_appleby]

I think we should use more for sarcasm. I'd like to think that's what the two (not ami, of course) were

ah ...

 

[YoursSINSerely]

i hope that was irony, otherwise you're a fuckin' moron.



... and you are def a moron.

That little line under your name befits you. You are an aggrevating bastard. I've been up close to these dirty, smelly, uneducated people trying to help them fill out an application because its my job. It makes me gag. Would you like to be working or living next to someone like that? I know everybody needs a chance and that's why I try to help them out, but for Christ's sake be a decent human being first.

 

[sr71plt]

Ah . . . this one wasn't then. Pity.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

That little line under your name befits you. You are an aggrevating bastard. I've been up close to these dirty, smelly, uneducated people trying to help them fill out an application because its my job. It makes me gag. Would you like to be working or living next to someone like that? I know everybody needs a chance and that's why I try to help them out, but for Christ's sake be a decent human being first.

yup, i am.

and, darling, i've worked with people like that.

where were you in march of 2003?

it's your job and you gag? wow, ain't you full of empathy. you know everbody needs a chance but they have to meet your criteria to be a decent human being?

go and fuck yourself.

there. aggravating enough? wanker.

 

[YoursSINSerely]

Ah . . . this one wasn't then. Pity.

It didn't deserve a , it's the truth.

 

[sr71plt]

It didn't deserve a , it's the truth.

To you, apparently. That was what my "pity" meant.

 

[YoursSINSerely]

yup, i am.

and, darling, i've worked with people like that.

where were you in march of 2003?

it's your job and you gag? wow, ain't you full of empathy. you know everbody needs a chance but they have to meet your criteria to be a decent human being?

go and fuck yourself.

there. aggravating enough? wanker.

Well, it's apparent that their dirty smelliness has rubbed off into your personality. You learn what you live, aggrevating bastard. Wank that!

 

[geronimo_appleby]

Well, it's apparent that their dirty smelliness has rubbed off into your personality. You learn what you live, aggrevating bastard. Wank that!

aggravating ... there's no e.

and, darling. i was in kuwait in 2003, shortly to cross the border. ergo, your peurile little rant affects me ... ooh, not at all.

love you. now enjoy mummy's tit won't you.

 

[YoursSINSerely]

aggravating ... there's no e.

and, darling. i was in kuwait in 2003, shortly to cross the border. ergo, your peurile little rant affects me ... ooh, not at all.

love you. now enjoy mummy's tit won't you.

Everybody knows that I can't spell.

Thank you for being in the military. I appreciate your contribution. I have a nephew in Iraq at the moment.

I was talking about people coming into this country being decent human beings in order to stay. There should be a checklist that they have to go through beforehand-bathing being one of the things on the list. You weren't in Kuwait applying for a job, you were doing your job. I'm sure you are decent human being, you already know how to spell.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Why do we allow dirty, smelly, sick, and uneducated people into our country? They should have to take a test and take a bath before they can come into a building.

Most of them were born here, and call themselves "Red Blooded American Patriots."

 

[geronimo_appleby]

Everybody knows that I can't spell.

Thank you for being in the military. I appreciate your contribution. I have a nephew in Iraq at the moment.

I was talking about people coming into this country being decent human beings in order to stay. There should be a checklist that they have to go through beforehand-bathing being one of the things on the list. You weren't in Kuwait applying for a job, you were doing your job. I'm sure you are decent human being, you already know how to spell.

the ability to spell doesn't make me any more worthy than anyone else. if you asked me to spell in farsi, i'd be fucked.

and are you talking about the USA? you did that. ellis island i think it was.

oh, yeah, before you start, i have seen it. bathing is prolly one of the things a migrant would want to do. i've never known a human being who relished being smelly - oh, hang on, there was one, but he came from manchester (which is a joke in case you're not too bright).

anyway, i'm curious, define a 'decent' human being.

 

[sr71plt]

Most of them were born here, and call themselves "Red Blooded American Patriots."

And had to go through hoops and learn background information on the country and memorize pledges and such that most Americans know only well enough to qualify to go on Jay Leno's Jaywalking quizes.

But, hey, who's counting?

 

[Stella_Omega]

But, hey, who's counting?

Not the patriot types, that's for sure!

 

[DeeZire]

In the interest if rebutting Ami's claim that 9/11 was allowed to happen because of funding cuts to U.S. intelligence agencies, here is an extensive article, with 137 footnotes identifying sources, documenting the fact that there was excellent intelligence available at the time of the attacks.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq36.html

quotes of interest:

“FBI and military intelligence officials in Washington say they were prevented for political reasons from carrying out full investigations into members of the bin Laden family in the U.S. before the terrorist attacks of September 11…

U.S. intelligence agencies… are complaining that their hands were tied… They said the restrictions became worse after the Bush administration took over this year. The intelligence agencies had been told to ‘back off’ from investigations involving other members of the Bin Laden family, the Saudi royals, and possible Saudi links to the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan. ‘There were particular investigations that were effectively killed.’”[74]

(near the end of the article)

If established procedures were followed, as they should have been, and top decision-makers were informed, then the blame lies not only at the highest levels of the DCI, CIA, FBI, the Justice Department, the National Security Agency, and the State Department, but also with the White House Cabinet. According to these procedures, the relevant members of the Cabinet would have received notification of the warnings and subsequent developments in accordance with the CIA’s ‘strategic level’ assessment of the Al-Qaeda threat, as well as related relays of intelligence warnings. This is a more reasonable hypothesis, simply because it is in accordance with the known rules of intelligence warning in relation to issues of U.S. national security.

In the opinion of this author, therefore, the data provided here weighs strongly in favour of the conclusion that significant elements of the Bush administration did indeed receive advance warning of the attacks, but refused to act in the interests of the general public by pursuing measures to prevent the attacks.

In the article, intelligence directly relating to the use of civilian planes for terrorism is documented starting in 1995. The intelligence all came to a head in the weeks prior to 9/11, and by 9/7, the 11th was known as the day of the impending attack. It's a long article (maybe 4 LIT pages?) but seems to be fairly well-documented.

 

[amicus]

Being somewhat meticulous, if the verb can sustain a modifier, in my search for truth, I was about to commend DeeZire for the documentary referral offered as rebuttal.

http://nafeez.mediamonitors.net/

Following the link, I branched out for a biography of the author of the quoted reference, and guess what? An apologist for Islam.

It is accurate that the diminished ability of the Intelligence community, over 20 agencies, still managed to uncover evidence of a planned attack on the United States.

Equitable to the inability of first responders in the 9/11 terror attack to communicate with each other, US Intelligence agencies, protecting their own turf and following procedures and protocol, did not exchange information and when they could the results could not be analyzed as no agency existed with the power to interconnect data.

It is not really rehashing the Clinton years or the cutback in funding that fueled my earlier commentary; it is the current situation where the Intelligence Community is under fire, military projects are being cancelled and foreign policy is geared towards amelioration of differences rather than principled policies in the interest of the United States, that is troubling.

With a global economy and instant communications world wide, it is no longer feasible to strive for an isolationist policy in foreign or economic policies. Yet this is the apparent direction of the Obama administration.

Information, knowledge, intellegence and analysis is vital to both the security and economy of the United States and this administration is failing on all fronts.

DeeZire's political leanings are common knowledge on this forum and the apologies and attempted refutations of pro American rhetoric should be taken with a measure of caution.

Amicus

 

[Dragonlipz]

Being somewhat meticulous, if the verb can sustain a modifier, in my search for truth, I was about to commend DeeZire for the documentary referral offered as rebuttal.

Mon Ami,
Since when did we let truth and veracity stand in the way of the American Dream? Or the American Version - as set forth from your fantasy land of 1950's TV shows?
Geez dude, I would have thought that you'd use this as an opportunity to quote ANN RAND - the noted 'conservative'..........
Maybe you ought to ask yourself 'What would Glenn Beck do?'
You are the self-styled Glenn Beck of the sixties, right?

 

[chris_brown]

The plane scenario was contemplated--but just imagine how many buildings and how many planes and how many different types of approaches had to be considered. The irony is that, having been targeted before--and having been singled out as a target--it happened at the WTC.

I'll note that the planners weren't all that brilliant. The Pentagon facade they hit wasn't high and had recently been reinforced, nor the office space highly populated. That plane could just as easily--and with as good if not better symbolic and "leader" bodycount return--gone into the Capitol dome.

And, although there was symbolism in hitting the WORLD Trade Center (in which far more than just Americans were killed) was there, al-Qaida would have been cleverer to isolate the target as Americans and thus let some of the other countries with assets in the international trade center off the hook.

As a note of how massive the prevention problem is, at the time I had neighbors declare how happy they were that we lived in remote Charlottesville, Virginia--and I had to point up the hill to Monticello and ask them if they'd looked on the back of a nickel recently (and, indeed, Monticello is high on the list of assumed targets of terrorism). The biggest impact to be had in these isolated attacks is to attack symbols (which both the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were) to debilitate those you are attacking. In this vein, there are symbols in the United States that would affect a far greater percentage of the folks than the ones picked. The Pentagon is high on the priority list of symbolic targets--but the World Trade Center only was because al-Qaida had declared it a target and had attacked there before (and had planned other attacks there that had failed).

lets not forget the speculation that Flight 93 was rumored to be headed to the White House when the passengers took the flight over and crashed it into that Pennsylvania field

 

[sr71plt]

lets not forget the speculation that Flight 93 was rumored to be headed to the White House when the passengers took the flight over and crashed it into that Pennsylvania field

True. That would have been a more "agreed" symbolic tragedy for Americans, I think, and more clever planners would have sent the first one there or the Capitol building (or an NFL football game in progress) before the reinforced, low-lying Pentagon (any of the other four sides would have gotten a bigger, more important death count--the one facing the Potomac the most). I don't think as many Americans associate the White House with the current occupant as they do the Pentagon with current U.S. military policy.