I'm not exactly privy to the details, but as far as I'm aware there were only two of the 19 hijackers that were even being monitored by a US Intel agency, and that was the FBI,
For some reason, Tenet seems to think that they were being monitored by the CIA, on a surveillance operation, and that's why they didn't watch-list them.
We had at that point the level of detail needed to watchlist him—that is, to nominate him to State Department for refusal of entry into the US or to deny him another visa. Our officers remained focused on the surveillance operation, and did not do this. -CIA Director G Tenet
http://fas.org/irp/congress/2002_hr/101702tenet.html
Why don't you tell us when the FBI was monitoring them?
There aren't a lot of secrets behind 9-11.
LOL! I'd probably be safer if the Government wasn't so open and transparent.
There's 20 pages of redacted testimony in the Commission Report
Thanks for exposing this secret. I didn't think there was any redacted testimony in the Commission Report.
but in that case we still know those 20 pages exist
I didn't know about those. I was duped into thinking there were 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry that were redacted, but thanks to the education I have got from this forum I now know that this is just disinformation put out by Sen. Graham who probably thinks a plane flew over the pentagon like CIT.
Politics and money - Graham is both - selling books of woo to those who can't think for themselves. Don't waste your money, or time being fooled by Graham like some were fooled by CIT and their lies of the NoC.
I was wasting my time being fooled by Graham and others who have read the 28 pages, when I should have been on this forum getting the REAL story from those who have never seen those pages. This makes sense, because by not reading the 28 pages, forum members are less bias. And can therefor think for themselves.
and we have a pretty good idea what they say.
Darn tootin' we do. They can't keep secrets from you.
Besides, what's the rush?
Eh, just wait for another... twenty to thirty odd years and it'll probably be declassified then. I would imagine the information contained therein would not be earth-shattering by any stretch of the imagination.
This makes sense. The people surely can wait 30 odd years, or however long it takes, this person hasn't read the pages but they imagine that it's not interesting, so why embarrass Bush over shady deals, which is what this other person who hasn't read the pages either expects the pages show.....
At most, I expect it might show some kind of shady business deal Bush was involved in that had nothing to do with 9/11, but that he thought might get accidentally discovered/publicized anyway.
It's just to bad that the folks who
have read the pages, have decided to use them as a way to help Graham sell outrageous lies to line his pockets.
This is how they do it, make up some fake headlines which are not supported in fact, and get face time to sell their books. It is called publicity, and then idiot fake news source like RT, or some TV station with a slow day publish the nonsense without support to push their agenda, or sell soap; as they fool people into thinking there is substance in the woo.
Falling for lies from CIT, then falling for fake headlines to sell books is a sign of what?
See the difference between Beachnutcase and truthers? It's not plane parts and videos that are fake. It's Graham and the fake news that helps him sell his book of lies. Thank you for exposing the real 9-11 conspiracy.
Oh golly gee! I'm so close!
Like Beachnut said, the one thing missing
what's the one thing missing? I'll see if I can find it....
from all of the testimony, and all of the documents from the CIA and FBI
Cool! I've already quoted from and posted links to documents from both the CIA and FBI in this very thread, what documents are you looking for? The "one thing missing"?
the one that says they knew 4 jets would be hijacked on 9/11/2001 to be flown into the WTC and the Pentagon.
Holy Cow!! That would certainly be the Mother of all Smoking guns! However, I wouldn't be surprised if they classified that one. Probably right after they made sure to document it. They would have to document stuff like that, I'm sure, if it actually happened. Also, that kind of testimony, if made, would have certainly have been made in one of the closed-door sessions.
But after I hook up with DGMs contacts and file a FOIA, it wont be classified for long.
Like Beachnut said, the one thing missing from all of the testimony, and all of the documents from the CIA and FBI is the one that says they knew 4 jets would be hijacked on 9/11/2001 to be flown into the WTC and the Pentagon.
You never see reasonable requests like that from truthers. Gosh if that's all that's missing.........
Also missing is the documentation where someone at CIA said the attacks would be allowed to take place.
LOL! Whew! Thanks. I almost forgot about that one. Once they find my FOIA for the....
documentation where someone at CIA said the attacks would be allowed to take place.
they probably wont destroy it. The CIA only does that kind of stuff to the 9-11 Commission. They wouldn't dare try that with someone who posts on internet forums sometimes.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/20071222-INTEL-MEMO.pdf
So that shouldn't be a problem.
In the end the American people are culpable in the intel failures in our desire to protect our Constitutional rights...period..
If it weren't for my raging Islamophobia clouding my judgement, I would have known that. Thank you for opening my eyes and making me a better person. I was a bit harsh earlier on our Saudi friends, due to my racist disease.....
Frankly I'm more concerned by who the CIA was working with. The Saudis. And I accuse Fahad Al Thumairy, Omar al-Bayoumi, and Osama Basnan, of being terrorists who were involved in the 9-11 plot, and are supporters of Bin Ladin and who are protected by Saudi and U.S. Governments. As for the CIA/FBI, my assumption is they were following orders. I have no reason to believe that they wanted a terrorist attack to happen in America. I can't say the same for the Saudis- I do accuse them of being terrorists, and protecting them is not just disgusting, but treasonous.
Most embarrassing - my Islamophobia was distracting from the ones really culpable in the intel failures, which resulted in the attacks in America that murdered 3000 people, as you point out....
the American people are culpable in the intel failures in our desire to protect our Constitutional rights...period..
You think the 9-11 victims families suing certain Saudis for being culpable, is just a clever ploy to distract, or just plain ol' Islamaphobia? Perhaps both ya think?
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.
To be extra blunt: American CTists
And now it all makes sense. Surely, the CIA knows perfectly well, that there are people in the FBI who think they're working on behalf of the American people, so they do the smart thing, they instead work with America's true friends, that aren't culpable of anything, except maybe loving us to much........
The C.I.A. did not pass this intelligence to the F.B.I. However, the C.I.A. did share the information with Saudi authorities, who told the agency that Mihdhar and a man named Nawaf al-Hazmi were members of Al Qaeda. page 6/12
https://web.archive.org/web/20080306021921/http://www.lawrencewright.com/WrightSoufan.pdf
Although the C.I.A. was legally bound to share this kind of information with the bureau, it was protective of sensitive intelligence. The agency sometimes feared that F.B.I. prosecutions resulting from such intelligence might compromise its relationships with foreign services, although there were safe guards to protect confidential information. page 7/12
https://web.archive.org/web/20080306021921/http://www.lawrencewright.com/WrightSoufan.pdf
See? Now that's called teamwork. And pretty smart of the CIA to put
"its relationships with foreign services" above
"legally bound to share this kind of information with the bureau", as you point out-that's called avoiding risk...........
Nobody wanted to take risks at the FBI or at CIA for fear of being hauled in front of a House or Senate Committee
Nothing less risky than allowing known terrorists into the country, of course once the terrorists are in the country, the CIA has no choice but to do nothing......
the intelligence agencies had been cowed into hoping nothing bad happened.
Seems like a reasonable plan of action, along with crossing your fingers. Praying is always a good response as well, but those lefty atheist politicians probably prevented them from doing that to.
The CIA are so nice they are protecting FBI agents, from the wrath of Ashcroft....
The way your scenario plays out in July, 2001, ends with CIA agents who share intel with the FBI, and those FBI agents who act on that intel all being put on suspension.
Yea, that's about the only good thing about 9-11, thanks to the CIA not sharing intel, no one was put on suspension.
Thanks for the following story of how Intelligence is collected, very informative....
In the lead-up to the invasion of Afghanistan, the Army's SFOD-D contacted an Afghan national who was in prison, but had current knowledge of the country.
This sounds like an interesting guy. He is in a prison cell, yet has "current knowledge" of goings on in a country 5000 miles away, since this is in the lead-up to the invasion I assume this is an American prison. Since he's "an Afghan national", he probably knows about the latest movements and goings on of international terrorist groups. What was his name?
They asked him about Al Qaeda and how to find them, and they were told to talk to the local cab drivers because they seem to know everything.
Cab drivers huh? Yup. Makes sense....Wait a minute...Holy Cow! Alpo and Stinke risked their lives trying to tell us that! CIT was exposing these cabbies in America, and all I did was beret them as idiots to suggest ordinary cab drivers would be involved in this stuff.
That's not something you can get from Rand McNally.
No it's certainly not. Sounds like the FBI could learn a thing or two from those guys. Good story, it all makes sense now.....
Dilawar (born c. 1979 – December 10, 2002), also known as Dilawar of Yakubi, was an Afghan taxi driver who was tortured to death by US army soldiers at the Bagram Collection Point, a US military detention center in Afghanistan.
He arrived at the prison on December 5, 2002, and was declared dead 5 days later. His death was declared a homicide and investigated and prosecuted in the Bagram torture and prisoner abuse trials.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilawar_(torture_victim)
He's a cabbie, the Army already gathered intelligence.....
They asked him about Al Qaeda and how to find them, and they were told to talk to the local cab drivers because they seem to know everything.
Nice Intelligence story. Maybe CIT can share this with Lloyd to get him to talk.
Classically entertaining response, but on a serious note.... It might do America a lot of good to put together a thoughtful presentation of the evidence
The evidence is classified.
Bring the evidence that proves the interpretation you have made. You know, that they knew there would be an attack and let it happen anyway.
That is what you are claiming, right?
The evidence is classified.
Unlike you, I'd like to see the results of the investigation. Unlike most so -called truthers, I'm not calling for a new Investigation, I'd like to see the results of the ones I've already paid for, not just the parts the trust-worthy CIA thinks I should see.
