BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean

Subject: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 09:37 AM

I heard this on the BBC 10 mins ago, that Thomas Kean, the 9/11 Commission's chairman has spoken to a BBC journalist, and taking into account all the evidence at their disposal, this is what he is quoted as saying as being the opinion of the Commission.

I have no links to provide; it's not on the BBC website, yet.

But you never know..., the BBC got it wrong once before, right?

Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 09:53 AM

Forgive me for repeating my comments from other thread where you shared this.

Jim, I'll be interested in reading what the Commission says. Maybe it could have been prevented if Ben Laden had been killed or Al Qaeda had been hit harder earlier or if the intelligence services were more like they are in James Bond movies (sorry, trying to lighten the mood). Again, all I said is that Clarke admitted that all the things he recommended combined wouldn't have prevented 9/11.

That doesn't mean it couldn't have been prevented at all, though I suspect we'll discover that it could have been prevented in the same way that Pearl Harbor could have been prevented. If you knew the attack was possible and put up torpedo nets, if the handful of patrol planes had been sent in the right direction instead of ordered south by staff in Washington, if the people manning the new radar sets had properly interpreted their data, and so on. Before Pearl Harbor only a few people in the world believed you could sail aircraft carriers that far and use planes to attack with torpedoes in the shallow harbor. Unfortunately they were Japanese or Americans to low it the military pecking order to have much say. Top brass didn't believe it possible, and it wasn't by the old rules. The attack changed the world and made the new rules obvious in retrospect. In that case, the Top Brass were made scapegoats despite the fact that they were getting contradictory orders and information from all side, all the way up the chain of command. Being obvious in retrospect is very different from being obvious before the fact, of course, so eventually the Top Brass at Pearl were vindicated and the final responsibility shared.

Before 9/11 only a few people had considered using planes as missles...

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Amos
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:09 AM

Pearl Harbor could have been prevented readily enough, by simply following the age-old policy that during negoitiations with a hostile nation the place of the fleet is at sea, location unknown. Instead, our mighty Pacific Fleet was all racked up in neat rows in a known harbor. It was not exactly a secret that the Japanese were in desperate straits.

Unfortunately you can't apply that to skyscrapers and terrorist cells. The rules of inter-state war (Cold or hot) go all to hell with distributed networks of underground enemies. This is not news.

A

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:17 AM

What's this, Strick?
Damage limitation already?

Maybe 9/11 could have been prevented in the way that 9/11 could have been prevented, Strick. Has that ever occurred to you?

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:18 AM

"Pearl Harbor could have been prevented readily enough, by simply following the age-old policy that during negoitiations with a hostile nation the place of the fleet is at sea, location unknown. Instead, our mighty Pacific Fleet was all racked up in neat rows in a known harbor."

Fair enough, but putting fleets to sea for indefinite periods is ridiculously expensive and up to WWII, the US was notoriously cheap when it came to military spending. Remember the films of the first draftees training with wooden guns and shooting at "tanks" that were old cars with ply wood turrent attached? We'd been pushing Japan for over six months and no one expected them to attack Pearl, how long would they have had to stay out. Besides, all the dispatches were expecting trouble futher east closer to Japanese bases of operation, so no one in the chain of command even thought of that.

Amos, you don't think Al Qaeda changed the scale and nature of international terrorism? This isn't the Baader-Meinhof Gang we're talking about or even Libya.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:25 AM

"Maybe 9/11 could have been prevented in the way that 9/11 could have been prevented, Strick. Has that ever occurred to you?"

No, just someone who spent several years studing history being realistic. Maybe there is a silver bullet out there, I just don't think it's likely. It's all those conspiracy theories. Too often normal behavior and not anticipating a radical change at all levels is all you need for an explanation.

I'll be happy to read what they say, but any super human, they, should have known or they should have thought won't be sufficient to convince me. Hell, I don't "blame" Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity. I can imagine circumstances through which he could have worked it out and been more effective against them, but it's not surprising that he didn't. He did what seemed reasonable at the time based on experience up to that time.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Amos
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:26 AM

I think Al Qaeda changed the scale of terrorist acts. I have no idea how large their association is. I am certain they needed a nation's support somewhere to field the operation, whether Afghanistan or Pakistan.

A

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:28 AM

9-11 set new rules of engagement and levels of force internationally.
If terrorism will kill non combatants by turning them into weapons, you can be sure it will be stopped in advance now....The Final Option as it is known in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Amos
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:31 AM

What does that mean, Nameless One?

A

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:33 AM

Amos, the difference is that lobing a few crusie missles at them only made Al Qaeda mad. Our previous experience with state sponsored terrorism taught us that you could discourage them if you hit something they valued (in Kaddafi's case, by targeting him).

You do have to have a place to train and base operations, but all dem militia bases in da Southern US proves you don't have to have the nation's cooperation to keep them running.

GUEST, I'll bite, please explain The Final Option as it is meant in the UK. The implications are obvious, but...

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:38 AM

You don't blame Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity?
He was the one, who in 1996 said that Al Qaeda was the biggest significant threat of our generation.
And then when he did do anything, he was wagging the dog...

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:46 AM

Shooting suspected planes down, I think, Amos.

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Pied Piper
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 10:49 AM

Of cause 9/11 could have been prevented,
if
the US had not funded Al Qaeda
the US had not ignored all the UN resolutions against Israel
the US had not supported the economy of Israel
the US had tried to find a solution for the people who's land was stolen by Zionists.
The US made this bed and now we all have to lie in it.
Thank you Uncle Sam.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 11:11 AM

well, isn't hindsight a marvelous thing!

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 11:37 AM

Get real. Terrorism doesn't require massive organizations, and can't be fought effectively by attacking such organizations. WMDs are scary as hell, but not at all necessary for terrorism--9/11 was accomplished with box cutters; Oklahoma City with fertilizer.

I cartainly don't advocate a policy of International appeasement, but one might stop to consider that unilaterally interfering with other nations--no matter how foul their government is--is not apt to lead to friendly responses by the interfered-with citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 12:24 PM

The one thing that made September 11th possible was that the passengers and crews of the planes weren't thinking in terms of the planes being used as missiles.Hi-jacking for them, as for the rest of us, meant being diverted to some strange airport, and maybe the planes might get destroyed after the passengers had disembarked.

In those circumstances, sitting tight and keeping quiet was only the rational thing to do.

Since September 11th, it is impossible for the same scenario to be played out. There will be more atrocities, but never again quite that one.

If the authorities had any reason to think that this new twist on hi-jacking was on the cards, and they failed to let the rest of us know that, that would have been grossly irresponsible, and would have been a major factor in the disaster. And that is the question that needs to be settled.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:19 PM

"You don't blame Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity?
He was the one, who in 1996 said that Al Qaeda was the biggest significant threat of our generation.
And then when he did do anything, he was wagging the dog..."

Sorry my point hasn't been clear, Jim. The Clinton administration was confused as to how to deal with Al Qaeda. When treating them like a criminal organization like the Baader-Meinhof Gang didn't work, they tried treating them like terrorist nations. The attacks on Al Qaeda were meant to be retaliatory, not wipe them out. Pin pricks that accomplished very little anyway, particularly given Al Qaeda was warned by senior leaders in Pakistan prior to the attacks. All it did was motivate Ben Laden to order more direct attacks on the US. That wasn't the desired result was it? That's clearly not the way to handle them.

That's the reason the US moved from a policy of containment to one of desctruction in 2001. It just didn't get implemented in time and we were still effectively using the policy from the Clinton years.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:23 PM

In other words, 9/11 could have been avoided...

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:29 PM

During the period we're discussing, only if the Clinton administration made a fabulous leap of logic it's not fair to expect from them. Worse, if they really had taken after Al Qaeda before their true danger was fully realized, the world, US and Arab would probably seen it as an attack on Islam, not self defense. It would have been much, much harder for Clinton to make a case for the what he would have needed to do both domestically and abroad. Who would have supported invading Afghanistan in 1994? There's such as thing as being right too early.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:30 PM

"Wiping out" just wasn't an option then, and it isn't really an option now. Containment, prevention, and above al, avoiding actions thta make it easier to recruit people, those are the strategies that make sense.   The idea that somehow there is a simple solution "kill Bin Laden", or something like that, is a fantasy.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:34 PM

in 1994 Algerian terrorists hijacked a french airliner and threatened to crash it into the Eiffel tower. However they werent trained as pilots and could only try to force the pilot to do their bidding, which of course would not work as any pilot would do their best to avoid crashing into buildings.
(eventually french commandos stormed the plane on the ground and killed most of the terrorists)

There was a hijacking incident in Africa in the 90s where an insane man attempted to crash the airliner - the pilot and copilot eventually overcame him but it was close.

the suicide bombing concept came out of Lebanon in the early 80s devised by the Hizbollah as a tactic against Israeli and US targets.

so to put all of these elements together should not have been that difficult - the US has terror think tanks whose job it is to come up with scenarios and work through various responses.


a terror analyst in Vancouver very accurately predicted the idea of using hijacked airliners as missiles before 911, he was even investigated by the CIA afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:39 PM

"There's such as thing as being right too early"

No there's not, Strick. That's a cop out of the highest order. Clinton recognised the threat in '96... he said so almost verbatim to the way I have written it above.
This line... "You don't blame Clinton for not recognizing that Al Qaeda represented a quantium leap in terrorist activity" was me quoting you, remember.
I don't blame Clinton for not recognising the quantum leap.... for the simple reason that he did recognise the quantum leap.

What argument are you defending here? That 9/11 could have been prevented, but 'what the hell, people make mistakes'?

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Kim C
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:40 PM

It's easy to quarterback on Monday morning.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:46 PM

Yes Kim..., but this is about Friday evening.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 01:46 PM

"I don't blame Clinton for not recognising the quantum leap.... for the simple reason that he did recognise the quantum leap."

OK, have it your way. Why the hell didn't Clinton do something effective about it? All the cruise missle strikes did was cause Ben Laden to be more intent on attacking the US. In effect they prompted 9/11.

Of course you can be right too early -- if no one's ready to believe what you say and you have no proof, you might as well not be right at all. Any good cop knows that. Knowing that someone is a bad guy doesn't matter if you can't do anything about it. You can only tail them so long before their lawyer shout harrassment and then you're worse off than ever.

A good example is the alert Clarke had the US go into in July of 2001. By the time the terrorists attacked in September, the edge had been taken off the alert, parts of the system were showing signs of breaking down and they were looking for the wrong thing any way. What good did it do him to be right?

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 02:00 PM

Strick, it's about as possible to wipe out Al Qaeda as it is to wipe out all asthma. Both are symptoms of bigger problems. You can't kill the symptom in these cases. You can either try to limit them, or you can correct the problems that cause the symptoms.

In the case of Al Quaeda, the problem is caused by the way powerful countries like the US treat weaker countries like Afghanisan. Trying to "wipe out" the symptom in this case will only make it worse.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 03:03 PM

Possibly, Carol, particularly as we know it's organized now.   Assume for the moment that trying to fix the problems would only cause different ones later on. After all supporting the Mujahideen's attempts to drive the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan are part of what got us here as is the US's defense of Kuwait. Ben Laden's prime
motivation for starting all this was the presense of US troops in Saudi Arabia, sacred ground, duing the first Gulf War. By your rules, we can't use force to change their governments, anyway (I'm OK with that) Any non-military attempt at modernization or liberalizaton of governments in the region plays in to Al Qaeda's hands, too. One of their main arguments is that Westernization is diluting Islamic purity and the madrasas are turning out young men who agree with them every day.

Now what? Can't give into their demands. Remember what they want most was putting up Taliban-like states across the region, a situation worse than what we have now. As you said, you can't attack the countries that support them and UN sactions would have the same effect. What's left? Putting the West on alert permanently and violating the civil rights of everyone who is or looks Arab?

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 03:08 PM

"All the cruise missle strikes did was cause Ben Laden to be more intent on attacking the US. In effect they prompted 9/11"

And Afghanistan and Iraq has turned that table, has it?

As to what good it may have done Dick Clarke to be right, probably the satisfaction of knowing that in a way he may have played some part in preventing a catastrophe happening on American soil. Not that he might have known specifically what that catastrophe might have been, mind you; just to be resplendent in the knowledge that his President was on top of the issues in good time.

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 03:13 PM

"And Afghanistan and Iraq has turned that table, has it?"

You're the one intent on blaming various administrations when their strategies don't work, not me.

Dick Clarke was right, but he prevented nothing despite the fact that the advice he gave (not what he wished he had given) was followed by both administrations.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 03:42 PM

What we do, Strick, is to try to insert ourselves back into an international consensus. Even if it's no more effectual than the US government has been, it will at least have some degree of legitimacy with the international community. Then, we stop meddling in the affairs of other countries. In all of the cases where the US does intervene, it's always with some sort of expectation of profit (usually for the large corporate entities that helped get those in power in the US government where they are). The US doesn't ever do things for altruistic reasons.

I would suggest that the UN should be supported wholeheartedly by the US government, and that it be restructured so that all member nations have exactly the same rights within the organization as all the rest. No more special priveleges for the more powerful countries like the US. I think that would go a long way toward addressing the underlying problems. And I also think that the US should endorse, and become a member of the international court. We need to make this country accountable for what it does. Only then can we hope to really correct the problems that produce the symptom of "terrorism". (Including the state sponsored terrorism that the US has been engaging in for most of its existance.)

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 03:55 PM

I'd endorse part of that, Carol, but not all of it. I don't think you know what you're asking in those changes to the UN, but it's not going to happen. None of the permanent members of the Security Council would let it happen; they all have too much at stake. Interedsting question: what percentage of your standard of living are you willing to give up to achieve this?

It would be interesting to see what would happen if the US joined the international court. After there is no statute of limitations to the kind of war crimes Bob Kerrey confessed to a few years back.

Jim, I should have answered your first question in that last post. Afghanistan? Yeah, I feel safer. Al Qaeda lost a major base of operations and isn't nearly as effective as it would have been if we hadn't gone in. They were growing faster than they are now and don't were turning out much more dangerous recruits than they are today.   I don't think I can express my feeling toward the Taliban, either. If, as some people say, the Taliban were our fault (wrong, but if), then Afghanistan as partially corrected that mistake. I

raq? No, not particularly safer, not from terrorists anyway. Saddam was never a direct threat to the US, but he was a serious threat to other countries in a strategic region of the world and an indirect threat.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 04:06 PM

I'd endorse part of that, Carol, but not all of it. I don't think you know what you're asking in those changes to the UN, but it's not going to happen. None of the permanent members of the Security Council would let it happen; they all have too much at stake.

That's the fly in the ointment... at least for the time being. But terrorism will never go away until they do. Some day they will realize this, if everyone on earth doesn't get killed first.

Interedsting question: what percentage of your standard of living are you willing to give up to achieve this?

Interesting question indeed. What do you know about my standard of living, and on what basis do you assume I would have to give up any of it in order to achieve what I suggested?

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 04:18 PM

I know next to nothing of your standard of living, Carol. Well enough to make some guesses, but that's beside the point. I didn't mean to make the question of personal. I think the changes you suggest and their consequence would help reduce the standard of living the US substantially. How much would you or anyone else be willing to give up?

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 04:30 PM

You need to know something about my standard of living in order to understand any sort of answer I might give you. We're living in a small travel trailer in a mobile home court in rural Alabama. It costs us $100 per month to park our trailer here. Right now, I'm doing my internetting in a little metal shed that we've set up next to our trailer. We have one vehicle, which we don't use more than once or twice a week on average. All of the jobs that Rob is qualified to do seem to be bleeding over to India, and Rob is in the process of figuring out what he wants to do for a living now.

I'm working on some projects of my own, but they're not generating any income yet, so we're living on savings. There's no telling when we will have an income again. The projects I'm working on, if they do eventually generate an income, won't necessarily be dependent on the economic situation in the US. So I don't think I would agree with the idea that the changes I've suggested will necessarily have any significant impact on my standard of living.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 04:34 PM

Sorry, Carol, wasn't trying to go there.

I'm worried that a good percentage of the US population would join your life style if the changes you suggest were implemented. Many of them would not like it.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 04:38 PM

It's not all that bad, actually. We're sort of enjoying the simplicity of it. I think it would not necessarily be a bad thing for other people to adopt a simpler lifestyle. In fact, I think it woud probably be a very good thing. And just think how liberating it would be for us not to have to maintain our high standard of living using blood money as the basis for it.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 04:47 PM

Sure, and maybe people will give up their SUVs, too. But it's a nice thought and I respect it.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 04:54 PM

The SUV problem is already being addressed. There are hybrid SUVs that will be available on the market very soon. That's a very good start, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 07:38 PM

So, let me get this straight.

Clinton did recognize that Al Quaeda was a new type of, and significant, threat.

His response, as characterized by Rummie, and parroted by the Right, was to "lob a few cruise missles at them".

This only pissed-off Al Quaeda, he (Clinton) should have done more.

Now, please give me a reference to one (uno, ein, un, 1, I, e^-i*pi) Right winger who, at the time, said "that's good start, but we need to attack some more."

I'll give you a thousand references to those people screaming "wag the dog".

Oh Please, if Clinton had done what people are now saying he should have done, the outcry would have been even more shrill.

Don't assume I'm a Clinton fan. I just can't take the hypocrisy.

Interesting how the attack on Iraq has driven Enron, etc. off the front page. No one is screaming wag the dog about that are they?

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 08:01 PM

"Clinton did recognize that Al Quaeda was a new type of, and significant, threat."

Track down what Bob Kerrey said about that in the hearings today. It's fair to say Kerrey doesn't think the US understood what kind of threat Al Qaeda was during the Clinton administration.

At last count, 28 of the key players at Enron have indicted. Jeff Skilling, the lastest to be indicted, was in the news the other day when the police picked him up for acting erratically. Ken Lay's the only officer I know of that hasn't been touched yet, but it's only a matter of time. It is hard for something that happened in 2001 to remain a headline this many years later. Most of the actual crimes were committed in the late 90s after all.

Actually the other half dozen or so corporate scandals similar to Enron are more interesting than this case. Global Crossing, Worldcom, Rite Aid, Computer Associates, Dynergy, Healthsouth, Imclone, someone was asleep at the wheel when those guys were fixing their books from about 1996 on.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 08:29 PM

I'm not aware of any evidence that the Afghan war has had any adverse effect on the ability of the Al Qaida network to recruit and train recruits, and carry out attacks. And there is very strong reason to believe that it may have had the opposite effect.

The crucial weapon involved is not technological, it is human - once you have human beings who are willing to die in the course of carrying out the instructions, the rest is just detail. Pocket knives, fertiliser, backpacks - nothing high tech needed, no complicated training.

That is why the essential thing is to avoid providing that essential key weapon, the person who is motivated to give his or her life. Everything that has been done so far could have been designed to make it easier to recruit such people, by motivating increased numbers to feel that way.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 08:51 PM

An excerpt from
Inside Al Qaeda's Training Camps
What they're ready for.

By Bryan Preston

...But what kind of training are these potential killers receiving? According to a U.S. Army assessment of its training videos, al Qaeda operatives get high quality, professional preparation to carry out a number of combat operations.

According to the Army's assessment, which I have reviewed, al Qaeda troops are well trained and can pose a serious tactical threat to American and allied forces engaging them. In fact, their training in matters ranging from weapons handling to multi-layered force structure suggests a level of professionalism that is likely the result of contact with a state military structure. When they initiate an attack, they don't go in as cowboys. Carrying their handguns in the high ready position, or their assault rifles in a disciplined, military bearing, they never handle or fire their weapons in a haphazard manner. Their strike forces divide into teams, coordinated along lines of responsibility such as assault, security and support elements. These sub-elements maintain synchronicity via handheld radios.

Most chilling of all, the tactics seen on the al Qaeda training tape match nothing seen on the battlefields of Afghanistan. It's therefore reasonable to conclude that the videotaped tactics are for some future attack. The entire tape points to such a conclusion. The ambush scenario featured six-lane highways with cloverleaf exit and entry patterns similar to those in the United States and Europe. Some of the hostage scenarios featured raids of buildings with large numbers of occupants, suggesting schools or businesses. The golf-course scenario certainly doesn't look like anything likely to be pulled off in most Middle Eastern countries.

Al Qaeda troops train via a set of combat scenes that vary in scale and intent. Scenarios seen on the tape include those described above, as well as several others that involve hostages. All hostage scenarios began with extreme violence — anyone offering resistance was shot and killed on the spot. During the siege, the terrorists play-acted dictating commands to the hostages in English, and the play-acting hostages responded in English. For these scenarios, the terrorists are trained to determine whether any law enforcement, military, security, or even armed citizens, are among the hostages. If they find such people among the prisoners, the terrorists will segregate them from the others, and will control them by threatening to harm the unarmed hostages. The end fate for such prisoners is ritual execution in front of TV cameras. In fact, all of these scenarios ended with the terrorists murdering all hostages and preparing to die in place. None of the hostage scenarios deviated from this pattern...

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 04 - 09:27 PM

In fact, their training in matters ranging from weapons handling to multi-layered force structure suggests a level of professionalism that is likely the result of contact with a state military structure.

Hahahahaha... !!!!!!!!

No shit! That state structure would be the CIA (and whatever covert military stuff they used to train people like the Mujahideen).

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: dianavan
Date: 14 Apr 04 - 02:59 AM

Strick - Re your reply to Carol C: "I'm worried that a good percentage of the US population would join your life style if the changes you suggest were implemented. Many of them would not like it."

Thats the point, Strick - Many will have to make those changes so that others won't have to die just to satisfy their lifestyles or their perceived needs. Most people in this world are just trying to live (clean air, water and an adequate diet) Never mind the SUV. Whats fair is fair.

I think the U.S. is outnumbered and the world is calling for change.

Nader is the only one who seems to know this. Kerry and Bush will only maintain the status quo.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: GUEST,Jim McCallan
Date: 14 Apr 04 - 11:02 AM

Strick..., I don't know if you do this deliberately or not, but let's go through it once again, shall we?

""Clinton did recognize that Al Quaeda was a new type of, and significant, threat."
Track down what Bob Kerrey said about that in the hearings today. It's fair to say Kerrey doesn't think the US understood what kind of threat Al Qaeda was during the Clinton administration."

What Bob Kerrey thought the US understood, has nothing whatsoever got to do with what Clinton recognised.
Clinton couldn't fart sideways without someone accusing him of 'dog wagging'

9/11 could have been prevented, Strick.
Does that not piss you off wholesale?

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 14 Apr 04 - 11:07 AM

dianavan, I understand. As a WAG, I'd say we might expect to give up one third of our current level of goods and services, and that we won't get to decide which third. It will probably include some things we really want or even need. More importantly, I have no doubt that the people hurt most by this will be the ones who can afford it least. Imagine we don't like that, but I'm also sure it's obvious.

To top it off, the cynic in me would think that any resulting "progress" in the world wouldn't go to the peoples who need it, it would go to the next two or three most agressive national powers. Ever feed ducks stale bread in at a pond? If the largest male stops eating, it isn't the smallest, weakest ducks that get the next pieces of the bread.

If you think getting the US to agree to this would be difficult, imagine what it'll be like getting everyone else on board.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 14 Apr 04 - 11:36 AM

"9/11 could have been prevented, Strick.
Does that not piss you off wholesale?"

I was refering to what Bob Kerrey said Bob Kerrey should have done, not what the US understood. Turns out Kerrey was involved in part of Clinton's policy efforts on this. He said that we never realized that Al Qaeda was an army and should be attacked like an army, not a criminal group. If he had it to do over again, he would treat them completely differently. If he had it to do over again...

You know, Jim, it doesn't piss me off, because I understand the dynamic. Did you know that the Union could have ended the Civil War in 6-8 months? All they had to do was promote Grant instead of McClelland to lead the Army of the Potomac and buy 200-500 Gatlin guns after the Union tested them in 1862. It's perfectly true, honest. We'd have saved what, 300,000-400,000 lives? Shouldn't I be pissed off given that would have prevented the total destruction of the South (their army would have been defeated in the field not by burning their homeland) and Lincoln would have lead the instead of Reconstruction instead of Congress? Then again, do you have any idea what it would have taken for someone with sufficient authority to recognize that and overcome all the obstacles to keep these two things from happening?

The question is not whether 9/11 could have been prevented. Hell, I could have described senarios that would have prevented it without one word from this Commission. The question is whether the senarios are realistic given the obstacles that existed in the real world, not the healthy imagination of the people looking back on the situtation.

By and large the world doesn't work the way it's supposed to. That mutiple, somewhat competing organizations siloed information and didn't connect the dots the way they should have shouldn't be a surprise. That they couldn't respond effectively to something they had never encountered before shouldn't be a surprise. It's the real world, after all.

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Apr 04 - 11:47 AM

I think you're wrong about that, Strick. It's really only a very small percentage of people who are benefitting from a petroleum dependent economy. An economy that is based on sustainable and ethically responsible energy, goods, and services would benefit far more people. It's the people in the bottom 90 percent (the ones currently with the lowest standard of living) who will benefit. You're forgetting that these are the people who are paying all of the hidden costs of the petroleum based economy. Including the hidden cost of their sons and daughters getting killed in places like Iraq.

You're a Christian, right? Do you think you'll go to heaven if you make decisions that result in other people losing their lives just so you can have a higher standard of living? What was it somebody said about a camel passing through the eye of a needle?

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: GUEST,Jim McCallan
Date: 14 Apr 04 - 11:51 AM

Yes, but apparently a lot of other actions against the US were prevented during this time, presumably using the same intelligence gathering/sharing systems.

The question then is: Who took their eye off the ball?
Which of course, would then beg the question: Why?

I think in this eon of dot joining, we should be able to join those ones.

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: 9/11 Could Have Been Prevented: Kean
From: Strick
Date: 14 Apr 04 - 11:51 AM

"An economy that is based on sustainable and ethically responsible energy, goods, and services would benefit far more people."

The oil based economy's not the reason that isn't happening right, now, Carol. I just don't think the underlying reasons are going to change just because we reduce our standard of living while shifting to different energy sources.

"You're a Christian, right? Do you think you'll go to heaven if you make decisions that result in other people losing their lives just so you can have a higher standard of living? What was it somebody said about a camel passing through the eye of a needle?"

Don't worry about me. It doesn't work like that.