Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

THE SO-CALLED "INTELLIGENCE FAILURE" OF 9/11

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
WheresWaldo Donating Member (272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 12:24 AM
Original message
THE SO-CALLED "INTELLIGENCE FAILURE" OF 9/11
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 12:28 AM by WheresWaldo
THE SO-CALLED "INTELLIGENCE FAILURE" OF 9/11
Facts on Public Record Clearly Show FBI Had Three 9/11 Hijackers Under
Surveillance
____________________________________________________________________

by John A. McCurdy
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MCC309A.html

A transcript of McCurdy's panel presentation in Toronto at the Bloor Cinema
screening of Guerrilla News Network documentary, "Aftermath: Unanswered
Questions From 9/11."

I would like to focus on what 9/11 Skeptics call the official narrative, or
story, of what happened on September 11, 2001. In May 2002, a series of
government and media disclosures revealed that U.S. intelligence and
military communities had had a great deal of foreknowledge of the method of
attack, the targets, and at least some of the 9/11 hijackers. Nevertheless,
it was argued, there had been no decisive "smoking gun" evidence
pinpointing exact specifics about the attacks, which might otherwise have
rendered them preventable.

The range of dissenting official voices that spoke out against the handling
of Sept. 11 by the Bush administration, however, was noticeable. Internet
journalist and editor Russ Kick collected a number of these statements
together at his website, The Memory Hole, in July.

On June 1, 2002, Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff told the
press: "As of September 10th, each of us knew everything we needed to know
to tell us there was a possibility of what happened on September 11." Two
days later, Senator Richard Shelby said of 9/11: "They don't have any
excuse because the information was in their lap, and they didn't do
anything to prevent it." Three days after Shelby, on June 6th, Senator
Arlen Specter put the matter even more decisively: "I don't believe any
longer that it's a matter of connecting dots. I think they had a veritable
blueprint, and we want to know why they didn't act on it." <1>

The comments of these two Senators, moreover, cannot be dismissed as
politically partisan. Shelby, at the time, had been the ranking Republican
on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and member of the joint intelligence
committee investigating 9/11. Specter had also been a Republican member of
the joint intelligence committee investigating 9/11.

Building on the so-called "failure to connect the dots" official narrative,
and the disturbing comments of Chertoff, Shelby, and Specter, let's turn to
a small sampling of information available in the public domain pertinent to
"connecting the dots" of the 9/11 attacks. My three examples were published
by the corporate media - one by ABCNews.com, the other two by Newsweek. In
doing so, I want to challenge and disagree with two truisms of the
""intelligence failures": first, that the public has no right to think
about - let alone question - the intensely suspicious decisions made by the
CIA, supposedly with respect to "information hoarding" (the so-called
intelligence "turf wars"); and second, the claim that the FBI had not
collected full intelligence on 9/11 hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi, Khalid
Almihdhar, and Hani Hanjour.

(snip)
(edited for correct link)

the site has a lot of conspiracy stuff supporting the LIHOP hypothesis. I'm posting this because it references specific articles in the public domain from reputable news sources. any thoughts???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thoughts
"the site has a lot of conspiracy stuff supporting the LIHOP hypothesis. I'm posting this because it references specific articles in the public domain from reputable news sources. any thoughts???"

1.) Use of the word "conspiracy" in the context of 9-11 is not helpful to anyone. Regardless of whether you believe the Official Story Version of what happened or not; there was definitely a conspiracy. By using the term in the manner you (and many others) have used it, it comes across as though "conspiracy" only applies to something OTHER than the Official Story Version.

2.) There is no such thing as LIHOP, with regard to 9-11. Certain ACTIONS had to have occurred on that day. Thus, by definition, it cannot have been a LIHOP situation. The perpetrators WERE helped by elements of our own government, which may or may not be 100% responsible for 9-11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-29-03 06:46 AM
Response to Original message
2. At any given time
how many people would the FBI have "under surveillance"?

(intended as a serious question)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Nov 26th 2014, 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC