SKYDRIFTER
15th Sep 2001, 01:28
There is a clear answer to the "how" of the 11-9-01 disaster in the USA.
In the USA, the Federal Law governing the FAA was changed under the Clinton administration; relieving the FAA of most of it's responsibility for safety.
That was coupled with Clinton's Presidential Executive Order 12866. That Order essentially said, "...if it's going to cost the airlines any significant money, don't enforce it."
The Airlines were charged with providing their own security(?); starting the whole mess.
The horrific terrorist attack on America was a repeat event with a long history - make no mistake about it.
The terrorist attack on America has its roots in the Afghan war. Osama Bin Laden received his training, experience and his initial assets there. In the aftermath of the Afghan war, many Muslims, probably thousands, were assisted in gaining residence / citizenship for their support of the CIA efforts in Afghanistan. Beyond the Afghan refugees, an unknown number of Kurds were also flown into the U.S., as refugees from the Gulf War.
American prejudice, apathy and ignorance being what it is, few questioned the role of the CIA in the Afghan war. 'Intelligence' is one thing, war is another. Yet, in the shadowed tradition of the secret war in Laos & Cambodia, the U.S. intelligence agency was essentially conducting a war against the Russians.
Among other issues of that effort, comes the non-accountability of such assets as the supply of Stinger missiles from the Afghan conflict.
The first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993. The Muslim connection is well known. In the background of that effort was another Bin Laden terrorist effort, known as "Project Bojinka," targeting U.S. Airliners in the Pacific. By accident, it was discovered in the Philippines and thwarted. Note that there was no warning to Americans.
One of the key players in "Project Bojinka" was an individual known as Ramsi Yousef. He was also one of those convicted in the first WTC bombing. Yousef, among other things, told the FBI that his 'group' was responsible for the downing of TWA-800. That claim has more than sufficient credibility to be taken very seriously.
While 'official' sources denied any criminal activity in TWA-800, Yousef's claim has radically more merit and probability than the nonsensical 'short-circuit' claim of the NTSB. The discovery of the PETN traces indicate a U.S. military 2.75 inch solid rocket motor. The alleged bomb-dog test doesn't hold water - to keep it simple. The number of witnesses who claimed to have seen a missile numbered in the hundreds. There was too much evidence that TWA-800 was taken down by at least one missile. Other than nonsensical theory, there was no evidence of the center-wing fuel tank explosion as the initial event. The 'official' proving theories and tests don't hold up under elementary scrutiny.
In brief, there is no shortage of protests documenting government cover-up in the TWA-800 disaster.
In a strange twist, in the case of the Oklahoma City bombing, McVeigh's attorney turned up frightening evidence of a middle-eastern terrorist connection. His requests for further evidence were denied. The introduction of the middle-eastern connection in court was stifled. The forewarning by the BATF informant, Carol Howe was suppressed.
Now, with the facilitation of all agencies looking the other way, America faced down the recent tragedy and a terrible aftermath, which will forever change the freedoms of America. That didn't have to happen.
A relatively well-known Government Accounting Office report to Congress slams the FAA for the lax security standards. Part of the report was kept secret, as it damnably quantified the risk to Americans - still no change. Another recent report (Hart Rudman) warned that such an event was imminent. Why was there no significant warning? Why was there no stepped up security?
The Boston airport, in particular, has a prominent history of lax security standards; what happened?
Three weeks before the 9-11 attack, the overseas papers quoted Bin Laden as saying that a major strike against the USA was soon to come. That's a lot of warning, by any standard. Bin Laden almost always telegraphs a warning - he's not to be ignored. Sixty-minutes did a report on the Afghan sentiments against the U.S. which telegraphed a warning sixty days before the attack. Regardless of who actually did the attack, there were credible warnings of an attack.
Bear in mind that the FAA gave Bin Laden an engraved invitation with their selective ignorance of airport security, defying Congress with the GAO citing the FAA blatant failures. That issue has no shortage of government documentation.
Ramsi Yousef claimed his group was responsible for TWA-800. Yet the FBI's Kallstrom said there was no evidence. So, why did the FBI go fishing for Stinger remnants after the recovery effort?
Still, there was no appreciable increase to aircraft security. The FAA has a nifty set of "stall tactics;" there was no appreciable increase anywhere. Rhetoric will be heard to the effect of, "...changes were proposed." As usual, results are as evasive as ever.
One should note the New York Times catch of the FBI involvement in the first WTC bombing. There was warning in that event, also!
The FAA allowed a smuggler's paradise to be built in the new Guam airport terminal under Clinton. With "Project Bojinka" in the immediate background and the first Muslim attack on the World Trade Center, there was no excuse.
Among others, former FAA security agent, Steve Elson, has had a crusade against all of Washington D.C. on the lack of airport security. There was warning galore - as usual.
Again, Boston, in particular, has a terrible record for airport security.
It's early, but it appears that the hijackers slipped knives past security - no big trick by the FAA 'special' standards. In all likelihood the hijackings were done with teams of 2 - 3 per aircraft.
The news footage of the WTC / Pentagon strikes strongly suggest that the hijackers were skilled pilots, with a bias toward the 757 / 767. The WTC / Pentagon flying was that of a pilot who is current at the controls of a simulator, with practice at hitting the specific targets.
The flying exhibited exact planning, practice and recent proficiency. At the airspeed of the strike, the eye-hand coordination demands would be too high for casual flying skill - with, or without, an autopilot engaged. At 290 knots, the individual towers and the front door of the Pentagon are not that big a target.
Three precise hits are too much for coincidence, luck or adrenalin.
It's highly probable - and already, reasonably established - that proficiency was acquired / maintained in a Stateside flight simulator facility, offering airliner models with high-level graphics capability, with the WTC & the Pentagon in the visual data-base. It's unlikely that a program such as "Microsoft Flight Simulator" could account for the flying skills exhibited.
Relative to the FAA disregard for safety, evidenced by the GAO report on lax airport security, as well as other legitimate complaints - somebody needs to get the FAA honest. We're very likely to see this again.
The tragedy of Swiss Air 111 illuminated the FAA record for methodically overlooking the aircraft wiring issue. Backing the FAA was a Clinton's Presidential Executive Order 12866 - "If it costs the airline money - don't enforce it." Behind that was a change in U.S. Law, relieving the FAA of the responsibility for aviation safety. The setup was nothing less than methodical.
The FAA has also permitted a flimsy cockpit door design on aircraft which couldn't keep anybody out. The airline industry has had cockpit break-ins before by sky-ragers; this isn't anything new.
Returning to the terrorist issue, one should give notice, that in the history of bombings against the USA, there have been warnings galore in the newspapers, etc, but the security agencies always get surprised. Americans should notice that there have been no changes - until AFTER this disaster.
While the 9-11 terrorist operation was reasonably involved, the greatest probable sophistication was in keeping the pilot's skills up to the needed proficiency, and certainly the timing.
Complexity kills operations such as this, thus it is more probable that the 'gang' kept it as simple as possible, with a fair amount of money behind them. The FAA track record on airport security is a joke. The security penetration was probably quite easy. As yet, there is no significant indication of airport 'inside workers.'
Many people are ignorant as to the thousands of Muslims that the CIA brought into the U.S. as a reward for supporting operations overseas.
The Muslim devotion to Islam far exceeds any other loyalty. While Americans are pandered the idealism of the equality issue, tribalism will always rule the planet. Reverse prejudice illuminates that truth in the USA.
With some good propaganda, the terrorists prostitute Islam to produce the tribalism we saw on the eleventh of September, probably taking a lesson from the Crusades.
In a sentence, radical changes are long overdue. Persecuting the terrorist organizations only treats the symptoms.
Despite the undeniable horror of the 9-11 attacks, it knowingly began with the U.S. government agencies and the American Congress. The issue isn't about apportioning blame, it's in the implementation of the known and needed repair - in the American homeland. For starters, the U.S. Congress needs to reverse the law, again making the FAA responsible for safety; then ensuring that the FAA complies with that law.
Permitting airlines or airports to maintain their own security is paramount to a prison system based on the "honor" system. That statement is not an exaggeration.
The "60-Minutes" segment, aired on 9-16-01, detailed the methodical gaps in security as well. The actions were criminal, yet the FAA did nothing worth mentioning. Previous criminal charges against the security contractors didn't affect anything appreciable in the FAA system.
Before the first World Trade Center rescue teams were set up, the airlines were lobbying for multi-billion dollar grants and interest-free loans. Legislation was requested to exempt the responsible airlines from civil litigation. These were the companies who knowingly delivered the avenue and means for the murders - knowingly facilitated by the FAA.
This horror could have been prevented; with the Congressional changes to Federal Law, and the FAA history of maximizing corporate profits, it was all but guaranteed, in some fashion. History warned us, as did the media; this didn't need to happen.
Now, flight crews must be more vigilant than ever. It's necessary for all flight crews to do everything necessary to get American airports in the practice of practicing actual security.
The best recommendation is to learn / observe actual security breaches and report them through the union or company. The topic is a politically sensitive one; anonymous is probably best.
[ 18 September 2001: Message edited by: SKYDRIFTER ]
In the USA, the Federal Law governing the FAA was changed under the Clinton administration; relieving the FAA of most of it's responsibility for safety.
That was coupled with Clinton's Presidential Executive Order 12866. That Order essentially said, "...if it's going to cost the airlines any significant money, don't enforce it."
The Airlines were charged with providing their own security(?); starting the whole mess.
The horrific terrorist attack on America was a repeat event with a long history - make no mistake about it.
The terrorist attack on America has its roots in the Afghan war. Osama Bin Laden received his training, experience and his initial assets there. In the aftermath of the Afghan war, many Muslims, probably thousands, were assisted in gaining residence / citizenship for their support of the CIA efforts in Afghanistan. Beyond the Afghan refugees, an unknown number of Kurds were also flown into the U.S., as refugees from the Gulf War.
American prejudice, apathy and ignorance being what it is, few questioned the role of the CIA in the Afghan war. 'Intelligence' is one thing, war is another. Yet, in the shadowed tradition of the secret war in Laos & Cambodia, the U.S. intelligence agency was essentially conducting a war against the Russians.
Among other issues of that effort, comes the non-accountability of such assets as the supply of Stinger missiles from the Afghan conflict.
The first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993. The Muslim connection is well known. In the background of that effort was another Bin Laden terrorist effort, known as "Project Bojinka," targeting U.S. Airliners in the Pacific. By accident, it was discovered in the Philippines and thwarted. Note that there was no warning to Americans.
One of the key players in "Project Bojinka" was an individual known as Ramsi Yousef. He was also one of those convicted in the first WTC bombing. Yousef, among other things, told the FBI that his 'group' was responsible for the downing of TWA-800. That claim has more than sufficient credibility to be taken very seriously.
While 'official' sources denied any criminal activity in TWA-800, Yousef's claim has radically more merit and probability than the nonsensical 'short-circuit' claim of the NTSB. The discovery of the PETN traces indicate a U.S. military 2.75 inch solid rocket motor. The alleged bomb-dog test doesn't hold water - to keep it simple. The number of witnesses who claimed to have seen a missile numbered in the hundreds. There was too much evidence that TWA-800 was taken down by at least one missile. Other than nonsensical theory, there was no evidence of the center-wing fuel tank explosion as the initial event. The 'official' proving theories and tests don't hold up under elementary scrutiny.
In brief, there is no shortage of protests documenting government cover-up in the TWA-800 disaster.
In a strange twist, in the case of the Oklahoma City bombing, McVeigh's attorney turned up frightening evidence of a middle-eastern terrorist connection. His requests for further evidence were denied. The introduction of the middle-eastern connection in court was stifled. The forewarning by the BATF informant, Carol Howe was suppressed.
Now, with the facilitation of all agencies looking the other way, America faced down the recent tragedy and a terrible aftermath, which will forever change the freedoms of America. That didn't have to happen.
A relatively well-known Government Accounting Office report to Congress slams the FAA for the lax security standards. Part of the report was kept secret, as it damnably quantified the risk to Americans - still no change. Another recent report (Hart Rudman) warned that such an event was imminent. Why was there no significant warning? Why was there no stepped up security?
The Boston airport, in particular, has a prominent history of lax security standards; what happened?
Three weeks before the 9-11 attack, the overseas papers quoted Bin Laden as saying that a major strike against the USA was soon to come. That's a lot of warning, by any standard. Bin Laden almost always telegraphs a warning - he's not to be ignored. Sixty-minutes did a report on the Afghan sentiments against the U.S. which telegraphed a warning sixty days before the attack. Regardless of who actually did the attack, there were credible warnings of an attack.
Bear in mind that the FAA gave Bin Laden an engraved invitation with their selective ignorance of airport security, defying Congress with the GAO citing the FAA blatant failures. That issue has no shortage of government documentation.
Ramsi Yousef claimed his group was responsible for TWA-800. Yet the FBI's Kallstrom said there was no evidence. So, why did the FBI go fishing for Stinger remnants after the recovery effort?
Still, there was no appreciable increase to aircraft security. The FAA has a nifty set of "stall tactics;" there was no appreciable increase anywhere. Rhetoric will be heard to the effect of, "...changes were proposed." As usual, results are as evasive as ever.
One should note the New York Times catch of the FBI involvement in the first WTC bombing. There was warning in that event, also!
The FAA allowed a smuggler's paradise to be built in the new Guam airport terminal under Clinton. With "Project Bojinka" in the immediate background and the first Muslim attack on the World Trade Center, there was no excuse.
Among others, former FAA security agent, Steve Elson, has had a crusade against all of Washington D.C. on the lack of airport security. There was warning galore - as usual.
Again, Boston, in particular, has a terrible record for airport security.
It's early, but it appears that the hijackers slipped knives past security - no big trick by the FAA 'special' standards. In all likelihood the hijackings were done with teams of 2 - 3 per aircraft.
The news footage of the WTC / Pentagon strikes strongly suggest that the hijackers were skilled pilots, with a bias toward the 757 / 767. The WTC / Pentagon flying was that of a pilot who is current at the controls of a simulator, with practice at hitting the specific targets.
The flying exhibited exact planning, practice and recent proficiency. At the airspeed of the strike, the eye-hand coordination demands would be too high for casual flying skill - with, or without, an autopilot engaged. At 290 knots, the individual towers and the front door of the Pentagon are not that big a target.
Three precise hits are too much for coincidence, luck or adrenalin.
It's highly probable - and already, reasonably established - that proficiency was acquired / maintained in a Stateside flight simulator facility, offering airliner models with high-level graphics capability, with the WTC & the Pentagon in the visual data-base. It's unlikely that a program such as "Microsoft Flight Simulator" could account for the flying skills exhibited.
Relative to the FAA disregard for safety, evidenced by the GAO report on lax airport security, as well as other legitimate complaints - somebody needs to get the FAA honest. We're very likely to see this again.
The tragedy of Swiss Air 111 illuminated the FAA record for methodically overlooking the aircraft wiring issue. Backing the FAA was a Clinton's Presidential Executive Order 12866 - "If it costs the airline money - don't enforce it." Behind that was a change in U.S. Law, relieving the FAA of the responsibility for aviation safety. The setup was nothing less than methodical.
The FAA has also permitted a flimsy cockpit door design on aircraft which couldn't keep anybody out. The airline industry has had cockpit break-ins before by sky-ragers; this isn't anything new.
Returning to the terrorist issue, one should give notice, that in the history of bombings against the USA, there have been warnings galore in the newspapers, etc, but the security agencies always get surprised. Americans should notice that there have been no changes - until AFTER this disaster.
While the 9-11 terrorist operation was reasonably involved, the greatest probable sophistication was in keeping the pilot's skills up to the needed proficiency, and certainly the timing.
Complexity kills operations such as this, thus it is more probable that the 'gang' kept it as simple as possible, with a fair amount of money behind them. The FAA track record on airport security is a joke. The security penetration was probably quite easy. As yet, there is no significant indication of airport 'inside workers.'
Many people are ignorant as to the thousands of Muslims that the CIA brought into the U.S. as a reward for supporting operations overseas.
The Muslim devotion to Islam far exceeds any other loyalty. While Americans are pandered the idealism of the equality issue, tribalism will always rule the planet. Reverse prejudice illuminates that truth in the USA.
With some good propaganda, the terrorists prostitute Islam to produce the tribalism we saw on the eleventh of September, probably taking a lesson from the Crusades.
In a sentence, radical changes are long overdue. Persecuting the terrorist organizations only treats the symptoms.
Despite the undeniable horror of the 9-11 attacks, it knowingly began with the U.S. government agencies and the American Congress. The issue isn't about apportioning blame, it's in the implementation of the known and needed repair - in the American homeland. For starters, the U.S. Congress needs to reverse the law, again making the FAA responsible for safety; then ensuring that the FAA complies with that law.
Permitting airlines or airports to maintain their own security is paramount to a prison system based on the "honor" system. That statement is not an exaggeration.
The "60-Minutes" segment, aired on 9-16-01, detailed the methodical gaps in security as well. The actions were criminal, yet the FAA did nothing worth mentioning. Previous criminal charges against the security contractors didn't affect anything appreciable in the FAA system.
Before the first World Trade Center rescue teams were set up, the airlines were lobbying for multi-billion dollar grants and interest-free loans. Legislation was requested to exempt the responsible airlines from civil litigation. These were the companies who knowingly delivered the avenue and means for the murders - knowingly facilitated by the FAA.
This horror could have been prevented; with the Congressional changes to Federal Law, and the FAA history of maximizing corporate profits, it was all but guaranteed, in some fashion. History warned us, as did the media; this didn't need to happen.
Now, flight crews must be more vigilant than ever. It's necessary for all flight crews to do everything necessary to get American airports in the practice of practicing actual security.
The best recommendation is to learn / observe actual security breaches and report them through the union or company. The topic is a politically sensitive one; anonymous is probably best.
[ 18 September 2001: Message edited by: SKYDRIFTER ]