DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
I'm just going to drop this here:
Split Thread Foreknowledge of events on 9/11
- Thread starter paloalto
- Start date
Notconvinced
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- May 31, 2015
- Messages
- 344
CIA: Those jerks in Malaysia want to fly aircraft into our headquarters. Can we take them out?
President: No, I think we'd get in more trouble if we screw it up like Africa, let's not do that.
CIA: Can we just use these brand new drones we got?
President and Pentagon: Nope
..... wheels turning.......
Sent from our shared looking glass platform
Notconvinced
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- May 31, 2015
- Messages
- 344
Yes, the Red&White aren't armed and funded by NATO to destabilize their neighbors.
Sent from our shared looking glass platform
CIA Headquarters are, of course, not at the Pentagon nor in New York City.
https://www.google.com/maps/search/cia+langley/@38.9520445,-77.1540852,15z
Carry on.
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
NATO funded 911?
Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk
Cosmic Yak
Philosopher
You of course have evidence this conversation actually happened. You just forgot to post the link. I'm sure you will rectify this omission without delay.
If this was true- and I await your evidence with eagerness- would you then support the assassination of people before they have committed a crime?
}jimd3100
Thinker
That's not what the record shows
A short list of who disagrees with you...
FBI USS Cole Lead Investigator Ali Soufan
FBI ALEC station officer Mark Rossini
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzkd0C2t2s8
Your own link posted earlier:
The CIA admits that it did not inform the bureau that after the Malaysia meetings ended, it tracked Almidhar and Alhazmi to Los Angeles.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/could/
FBI OIG Report:
The FBI failed to receive from the CIA three critical pieces of intelligence about Mihdhar and Hazmi in a timely manner:
Mihdhar’s possession of a valid, multiple-entry U.S. visa;
Hazmi’s travel to the United States; and
[INFORMATION REDACTED]
The CIA became aware of these three pieces of intelligence in January 2000, March 2000, and January 2001. Despite claims to the contrary, we found that none of this information was passed from the CIA to the FBI until August 2001
https://oig.justice.gov/special/0506/chapter5.htm
The 9-11 Commission:
This information was not shared with FBI headquarters until August 2001. An FBI agent detailed to the Bin Ladin unit at CIA attempted to share this information with colleagues at FBI headquarters. A CIA desk officer instructed him not to send the cable with this information. Several hours later, this same desk officer drafted a cable distributed solely within CIA alleging that the visa documents had been shared with the FBI. She admitted she did not personally share the information and cannot identify who told her they had been shared. We were unable to locate anyone who claimed to have shared the information. Contemporaneous documents contradict the claim that they were shared.
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Notes.pdf
A CIA desk officer instructed him not to send the cable with this information.
Mark Rossini was there.......
“When I confronted this person...she told me that ‘this was not a matter for the FBI. The next al-Qaeda attack is going to happen in Southeast Asia and their visas for America are just a diversion. You are not to tell the FBI about it. When and if we want the FBI to know about it, we will.’”
Another FBI colleague, Doug Miller tried to inform the FBI.....
Rossini recalled going to Miller’s cubicle right after his conversation with Casey. “He looked at me like I was speaking a foreign language.… We were both stunned and could not understand why the FBI was not going to be told about this."
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/01/23/information-could-have-stopped-911-299148.html
Several hours later, this same desk officer drafted a cable distributed solely within CIA alleging that the visa documents had been shared with the FBI.
The CIA has lied quite a bit about this...
Several hours later, this same desk officer drafted a cable distributed solely within CIA alleging that the visa documents had been shared with the FBI.
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Notes.pdf
The CIA became aware of these three pieces of intelligence in January 2000, March 2000, and January 2001. Despite claims to the contrary, we found that none of this information was passed from the CIA to the FBI until August 2001
https://oig.justice.gov/special/0506/chapter5.htm
Head of CIA explaining to Joint Inquiry why the CIA couldn't have notified the FBI about Al Qaeda operatives coming to America because "he knows nobody read the cables".....
https://youtu.be/IF38P58-rdo?t=1m15s
CIA IOG report showed he lied about that......
"In the period January through March 2000, some 50 to 60 individuals read one or more of six Agency cables containing travel information related to these terrorists."
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/Executive Summary_OIG Report.pdf
Tenet then uses the OIG report that showed he lied to the Joint Inquiry, to try and claim that the FBI officers knew about the information and they didn't share this with their own agency. He leaves out the part that they were ordered by CIA not to......
It is unclear why the OIG has selectively focused accountability on a few CTC officers when the field has primary responsibility and the FBI officers had the information about both men as soon as CTC learned of it. As the OIG report points out, dozens of officers opened and/or read the cable. page 10/18
http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0001229684_0.pdf
"You are not to tell the FBI about it. When and if we want the FBI to know about it, we will.’”
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/01/23/information-could-have-stopped-911-299148.html
Do you think these Al Qaeda Operatives, the first of the 9-11 hijackers to arrive, who couldn't speak English, and had never set foot in America before, would have a contact here? Or do you think KSM/Bin Ladin/Al Qaeda, are so stupid they would send them here to fend for themselves and hope they don't blow the operation?
If they did have a contact already in America, do you think that would be important information?
Last edited:
Notconvinced
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- May 31, 2015
- Messages
- 344
I'm talking about the bojinka plot, which was the impetus to allow the 911 plot to carry on, and the reason the DOJ wasn't properly informed, so that a false flag could be enabled, thereby forever enhancing our ability to stop such crimes in the future.
Sent from our shared looking glass platform
Jango
Graduate Poster
Sceptic-PK
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2010
- Messages
- 3,831
And yet huge swathes of your brethren will tell us that AQ are made up, or weren't involved at all or are really US government assets.
Look at all these really dangerous people that hate the US who were ignored by authorities...oh, they weren't actually involved in the attacks but the government sure did ignore them!
It's similar to my other favourite where US intelligence/policing agencies ignored all this intel re an impending attack and did nothing to act on it. The US discovered that it was going to attack itself and decided to help itself by not stopping itself or outing itself. Luckily those that discovered the cat out of the bag promptly stuffed it back in and were co-opted into the impossibly vast and capable team that had let the cat escape in the first place.
(No need to respond, I wasn't really talking to you.)
Is this like the shoot down means a stand down stuff? lol
What is the point? There is no point. After the dumbed down inside job failed, this is all that is left. Making up BS stand down nonsense based on BS logic, and this pile of BS which means nothing.
You post a Gish Gallop of stuff and never tie it together with more than "do you think"... never getting to a point.
How did the stand down BS turn out over at woo world on fire, aka prison planet? Prison Planet? lol
Axxman300
Philosopher
That is the FBI's job, not the CIA.
The FBI, after Waco, was also on a tight leash for the Clinton Justice Department. AQ had a good network on contacts in the U.S. thanks to Saudi, Kuwaiti, and UEA sympathizers. The FBI leadership tended to handle anything Saudi-related with kid gloves, usually bringing in DoS, issuing flaccid warnings, and dropping the matter as quickly as possible.
This was all about putting careers ahead of National Security. Nobody wanted to take risks at the FBI or at CIA for fear of being hauled in front of a House or Senate Committee to explain that there are bad people in the world who don't play nice. The laws and procedural guidelines were vague enough to insulate both agencies from not doing more, and that's all thanks to the Congress and the White House. The CIA and FBI do not make the rules, the elected body of US Government does, and thanks to their tendency to overreact the intelligence agencies had been cowed into hoping nothing bad happened.
We are seeing this again today, right now, with the arguments over the torture allegations, and the NSA's almost impossible to understand data collection practices. Both of which were signed off on by the vary people now persecuting them. It must be hard to commit to a risky intelligence operation when you have no idea weather your superiors will back you up if things go bad...or if things go well.
I guarantee that in five years there will be an investigation into the Targeted Drone Strikes and "Kill List" we've been prosecuting in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen, even though - right now - everybody knows about them. The CT-loons on the Hill will start digging, and then claim that we've been lied to, and we get yet another circus that ends with good people losing their jobs and our intelligence agencies being less intelligent.
To be blunt: The 9-11 attacks happened because CTists had stripped the Intel Communities of valuable tools, and erected procedural barriers that confused or simply kept FBI and CIA middle management from taking those next steps.
Axxman300
Philosopher
Meanwhile, the NSA had collected and intercepted Al Qaeda communications, but due to the volume that agency collects daily they actually had no idea that they had it:
In fact, this PBS Frontline page not only has amazing damning information on how the NSA was so far out of the loop (not reading e-mail) pre-9-11, it underscores just how impossible it is to keep a secret:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/oral-history/united-states-of-secrets/
These interviews also show how committed those who work in the intelligence agencies are to following the law and the Constitution.
- Thomas Drake
In fact, this PBS Frontline page not only has amazing damning information on how the NSA was so far out of the loop (not reading e-mail) pre-9-11, it underscores just how impossible it is to keep a secret:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/oral-history/united-states-of-secrets/
These interviews also show how committed those who work in the intelligence agencies are to following the law and the Constitution.
jimd3100
Thinker
So, what is being classified here?
that the CIA learned in January 2001, and didn't pass on to the FBI?
The answer is in this NY Times article written by DAVID JOHNSTON and JAMES RISEN....
Published: November 23, 2002
"Mr. Midhar and Mr. Alhazmi, who were aboard the American Airlines plane that crashed into the Pentagon, were identified as Qaeda operatives by the C.I.A. in January 2001."
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/23/international/middleeast/23TERR.html
This is where the 28 pages come in.
The CIA seems to be working more with Saudi Intelligence, than they are with the FBI in this situation. According to Lawrence Wright, in the Pulitzer Prize winning book The Looming Tower, the CIA knew these two were Al Qaeda Operatives even before Jan 2001, because Saudi Arabia Intelligence told them they were.....
"The CIA already had the names of Mihdhar and Hazmi, however. Saeed Badeeb, Prince Turki's chief analyst in Saudi intelligence, had previously alerted his American colleagues that they were members of al-Qaeda in one of the monthly meetings in Riyadh." page 351
http://www.amazon.com/The-Looming-Tower-Al-Qaeda-Road/dp/1400030846#reader_1400030846
Saudi Intelligence Agents Bayoumi and Basnan were babysitters for these known Al Qaeda terrorists in San Diego, helping them enroll into flight schools, getting IDS, opening up bank accounts, and getting housing. Saudi Intelligence and the CIA, are helping known Al Qaeda operatives when they arrive in the United States. The CIA by keeping this information from the FBI, and not putting their names on watch-lists, and the Saudis with everything else. But these Al Qaeda operatives flew into Los Angeles and didn't go to San Diego until 2 weeks later. If they had a contact in America, it was at Los Angeles.
The FBI Penttbomb investigators know who the contact was....
FBI Los Angeles Investigative Results:
Los Angeles has determined that __________________ may be a potential contact of the hijackers and _________ in Los Angeles. _______________is an administrative officer at the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles and may have diplomatic status. ______________is also believed to be one of the Imams at the King Fahad mosque. ____________also fits the description, as provided__________ of the individual that _____________met at the Saudi consulate prior to _________________ "chance" meeting with the hijackers at the restaurant. page 4/8
https://web.archive.org/web/2014092...plex.com/2002-09-04-FBI-Fahad-Al-Thumairy.pdf
Filling in the blanks in order:
Fahad al-Thumairy
Bin Attash
Fahad al-Thumairy
Fahad al-Thumairy
Fahad al-Thumairy
Bin Don
Omar al-Bayoumi
Bayoumi's
Someone who knows what's being kept from the American people(and rest of the world)with these redactions, including 28 pages of their own Inquiry into the matter.......
"I further believe that al Bayoumi was acting at the direction of elements of the Saudi government and that an official from the Islamic and Cultural Affairs section of the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles, Fahad al Thumairy, likely played some role in the support network for the 9/11 Attacks. In May 2003, the United States revoked al Thumairy's diplomatic visa and banned him from the United States." -Former U.S. Senator Bob Graham who led a joint 2002 Congressional inquiry into the attacks
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...84215436&z=b65a925c+&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Since Fahad al-Thumairy isn't mentioned in the released version of the Joint Inquiry report, do you think he is mentioned in the 28 pages? Or do you think Graham forgot to mention him in their 858 page report?
The 9-11 Commission after interviewing Thumairy twice:
Our general impression of Thumairy is that he was deceptive during both interviews. Page 2
https://cryptome.org/2014/09/saudi-911-interviews.pdf
Last edited:
Notconvinced
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- May 31, 2015
- Messages
- 344
And a quote from your reminder...
"nothing Jamie Gorelick wrote had the slightest impact on the Department of Defense or its willingness or ability to share intelligence information with other intelligence agencies."
The CIA had lawfully acquired intelligence that it could have shared with the DOJ. The "wall" policy meant that the DOJ couldn't legally accept criminal information obtained by illegal means, and was a policy that existed to strengthen cases that might reach trial, while at the same time tacitly saying to the intelligence community "please continue protecting us and find ways to pass on legally obtained Intel".
The above was arguably a flawed system, so as I've said before, restructuring needed to happen. I DO believe that's why there was a deliberate failure to act, a tactical stand down.
An interesting consequence of the "fall of the wall" is that the DOJ cannot now run any sort of investigation on anything without the intelligence community knowing about it.
Not that it matters, but I remember meeting Gorelick (pronounced 'gor-relic') and Reno at my Dad's goodbye party before his assignment in Brussels. So there's some bias....
Sent from our shared looking glass platform
Axxman300
Philosopher
The problem is that he was wrong:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB108198447949083135
And more specifically:
This is why the management of both agencies was gun-shy about pushing the investigation beyond clear boundaries.
jimd3100
Thinker
LOL! Yes, the dastardly "wall".
There was no wall that prevented effective information sharing between the CIA and FBI. You link to a wiki page on Gorelick as proof of something. But didn't link to the most in depth study of the issue. How come?
In 2009 the definitive report on this so called "wall" was finally released. Nearly 8 years after 9-11, and 5 years after it was written. To release it earlier would have caused serious damage to National Security.........right? LOL!
And here is the Gorelick memo.....
https://web.archive.org/web/2011051...her.com/media/paper441/documents/5nkzph1t.pdf
Why don't you point out the part(s) that say the CIA is prevented from telling FBI that known Al Qaeda terrorists are coming to America, or the part that says the CIA can't tell the FBI about known Al Qaeda terrorists are in America. How about just pointing out that the CIA is mentioned at all?
SLADE GORTON wrote the following when that report was still being kept secret.....
She had nothing to do with any “wall” between law enforcement and our intelligence agencies. The 1995 Department of Justice guidelines at issue were internal to the Justice Department and were not even sent to any other agency. The guidelines had no effect on the Department of Defense and certainly did not prohibit it from communicating with the FBI, the CIA or anyone else.
Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft’s department reissued and reaffirmed those guidelines in 2001, before September 11.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/aug/17/20050817-101757-6420r/?page=all
Your link is to an opinion piece, written before that investigation and report had even started.
He isn't wrong. The 35 page report and the memo itself show that he wasn't wrong. Why are you still peddling this BS? Because you got duped by the political sideshow. This report was classified in 2004, and 2005, and 2006, and 2007, and 2008, and only after a new Administration came, in 2009, was it released. On May 20, 2009. Keeping this classified, kept us free and safe. LOL! It also allowed you to be duped, by political BS. How does it feel to be manipulated? What happened, to basic common sense? You've actually convinced yourself that The CIA can't tell the FBI that known Al Qaeda operatives, and co-horts of the mastermind of the USS Cole bombing, are in the United States?
Because you fell for Ashcrofts political dog and pony show.
If you have a better source than the following report, that has studied the issue more, and released it's report, lets see it? Gorelick Wiki page proves nothing.
Legal Barriers to Information Sharing:
The Erection of a Wall Between Intelligence and Law Enforcement Investigation
August 20, 2004
Declassified May 20 2009
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
It said:
The July 1995 procedures were intended to permit a reasonable degree of information sharing between FBI agents conducting intelligence investigations and Criminal Division prosecutors.
Neither the NSA nor the CIA information regarding Mihdhar and the Kuala Lumpur meeting had been generated as part of an FBI intelligence investigation. The 1995 procedures by their terms governed only information collected by the FBI in the course of its intelligence investigations. Thus, the procedures were not applicable to sharing information gathered by the NSA and CIA. Indeed, the photographs that were shared were from the CIA and there was no need to obtain special permission to share them with the criminal agents.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
Second, the issue at the June 11 meeting was whether the information could be shared with FBI agents, not criminal prosecutors. Again, the July 1995 procedures were silent on the issue of sharing among FBI agents and thus had no application to the information in question. Although there were internal FBI walls contained in some particular FISA orders, none of this information had been generated pursuant to such FISAs. Thus, even those internal walls did not apply.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
The CIA analyst could have shared all of the information he had about Mihdhar's visa and travels without consideration of the July 1995 procedures. He merely believed it was not his role to share such information. He did not go back and ask his superiors for permission to share the information. The lost opportunity for information sharing in June 2001 was due to the failures of the two respective analysts to seek ways to share the information, not the July 1995 procedures.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
One of the Cole case agents read the lead with interest and contacted the analyst to obtain more information. The analyst argued, however, that because the agent was a designated criminal FBI agent, not an FBI intelligence agent, the wall kept him from participating in any search for Mihdhar. In fact, she felt he had to destroy his copy of the lead because it contained NSA information from reports that bore the sharing caveats. The agent asked the analyst to get an opinion from the FBI's National Security Law Unit (NSLU) on whether he could open a criminal case on Mihdhar.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
Subsequently, the analyst sent an email to the Cole case agent explaining that according to the NSLU, the case could only be opened as an intelligence matter, and that if Mihdhar was found, only designated intelligence agents could conduct or even be present at any interview. The case agent angrily responded that there seems to be some confusion regarding the wall because in his view it only applied to FISA information. The analyst replied that she was not making up the rules;
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
But she was making up the rules--once again it appears to be deliberate deception
What she did not tell the agent was that she had sought and received permission to share the NSA information with criminal agents. Thus, there was no reason for her continued insistence that the New York agent could not keep a copy of the lead.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
Finally:
Conclusion
As the review of the facts demonstrates, whatever the merits of the March 1995 Gorelick memorandum and the Attorney General's July 1995 procedures on information sharing, they did not control the decisions that were made in the summer of 2001. The Gorelick memorandum applied to only two specific cases, neither of which was involved (or even still existed) in the summer of 2001.
It is clear, therefore, that the information sharing failures in the summer of 2001 were not the result of legal barriers but of the failure of individuals to understand that the barriers did not apply to the facts at hand. Simply put, there was no legal reason why the information could not have been shared.
https://fas.org/irp/eprint/wall.pdf
Have carlitos and Axxman300, considered contacting Zelikow? He doesn't know that "The Wall" is what
As for why the CIA not only failed to share pre-9/11 information on Al-Qaeda operatives but forbade the FBI agents in Alec Station from sharing it, Zelikow said, “We don’t know.”
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/01/23/information-could-have-stopped-911-299148.html
"The Wall" is awesome!
"The Wall"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKMJ6H9SSms
Last edited:
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
So do you agree as long as the FBI was not prosecuting (or trying to detain) these individuals mentioned in the shared intel it would be OK?
Last edited: