So derailing that you decided to make a whole new topic in order to continue it.
What!? Do you not understand the term 'derail'? The subject you chose to discuss, in the other thread, had no relevance to the topic of the thread, thus it was a derail.
Since YOU seemed so adamant to continue that subject, I created this thread which has, as its topic, the subject you wish to discuss and thus IN THIS thread it is not a derail.
Should I have waited on you to start a thread? Would that have been more to your liking?
If so then why the **** did you not do so after the many times you were informed that you were off topic in the other thread?
But it wasn't a time and money issue it was a rights issue. So you show you don't understand the correct reason in your arguments. If you reflected the accurate reason then we could see a pattern of deflection by FBI that is common to not wanting to investigate and preferring minimal charges in order not to attract attention. Rowley was involved and had her ear to the ground on this. You should see what she thinks. Your input is too general and doesn't grip what is really happening.
Yes, it was a personal rights issue that apparently convinced the FBI brass that an FISA application would be shot down. THAT then would would mean that time, and money, and man-hours are money in any organization, expended on such an application, would be wasted, inefficient use of resources. Get it? Inefficient and wasteful expenditure is a good way for a middle manager to get demoted or fired.
Like that's never happened before with FBI. Can I mention other cases or would that be off-topic?
No, that would be on topic in this thread. Are you beginning to see how that works yet?
In fact most of the time ,pre-9/11, the various intelligence organizations were well known to basically, not play well together. The CIA did not trust the FBI to keep secrets and FBI considered the CIA to be untrustworthy and having separate agendas.
You can't really answer the point can you? Since when is checking 11 other facilities "heavy handed"?
I have addressed the point several times now. First of all you assume, using post-911's great 20-20 hindsight, that all the FBI needed to do was skip merrily to contacting these 11 flight schools. BTW, have you ever listed them? I seem to recall you being asked to do so.
First of all just because we know Mossaoui was at a school with simulator training does not mean that other similar terrorists would not be at schools that did not have such training.
Second, he was being held on visa infractions. So what you are calling for is a fishing expedition based on a hunch by a flight school and an FBI agent , and I cannot stress this enough, in the personal rights environment that was in effect in 2000/2001.
If you check out Lance's 'Cover-Up' you'll see FBI had no reason to ignore signs of another Bojinka.
How about you tell me about it. You keep bringing up Bojinka so put some context, in your own words, as to why this is so important and, specifically, how it would have applied to what was known about Mossaoui? At the time of his arrest, was there any connection known between Ramzi or Khaled, and Mossaoui? Was the Minnesota FBI office fully aware of and concerned with the events that took place 10,000 + miles away?
A personal anecdote; in the early 1980s I worked for Transport Canada. I was sent to Resolute Bay , in the Canadian Arctic. Just previous to my arrival , Armenian rebels were making trouble. The Flight Services Station in Rez , where I was to work had received, as had all FSS in Canada, a warning about Armenian terrorists. I showed up wearing a black knit hat and a full beard and this caused the radio operators to joke that I was an Armenian terrorist. It was a joke because, after all, what would a terrorist be doing in a back water place like the Canadian arctic?
If you check the record the great Al Qaeda war on the US was not much more above the statistical average of terrorist events for the following decade.
I must have missed the other Al Qada attacks within the borders of the USA that killed thousands of people. Oooh, you mean to imply that the attack on the Cole, and the embassies in Africa are statistically equivalent to 9/11. Tell you what, stop 20 people on the street who look old enough to recall all three incidents and ask them if the earlier two are on a par with the third.
There's serious reason to believe the red-orange-yellow color code warnings were psy-ops done against the American public to keep them in fear mode.
Did the GWB administration take advantage of the heightened emotion caused by terrorist attack on American home soil that killed thousands to push their pet agenda? Yes, definately. That however will get you no where in proving they allowed it to happen and deliberately obfuscated intervention of the plot.
Do you recall that the American government admitted guilt with the Japanese concentration camps and even made reparations?
Yes I am. Do you recall when that happened? 1988 and 1980, but it is true that Carter and Reagan were alive in 1942.
I'm of the opinion that the "backlash" was a formulated and predicted one. One that was incurred by persons anticipating that response for their PNAC-planned purposes.
That and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee.
