Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Eight years after Islamic terrorists flew four jetliners into The World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania, killing 3,000 innocent people, President Barack Hussein Obama allowed another one of them, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallabto, to board a U.S.-bound plane with high explosives strapped to his leg."
"If not for his bumbling incompetence, the failure of the detonator, and the heroism of Dutchman Jasper Schuringa, who subdued Abdulmutallabto before the device exploded, Northwest Airlines flight 253 and its passengers would have been blown out of the sky."
Obama today sent Attorney General Eric Holder to pledge a vigorous investigation of the "alleged attack" on the airliner.
"The terrorists are not intimidated, Mr. President, when you send a lawyer to do the work of the U.S. Marines."
"While Obama primps and preens for the international press, our friends in Europe, and his friends on the lunatic left, Islamic fascists are on the march. They will not relent in their pursuit of America's destruction, and their biggest ally in that goal is the President of The United States."
theFinancialSkinny-Financial and Political Headlines and Commentary (http://www.thefinancialskinny.com/obamasinexcusablefailure.html - broken link)
Good Evening,
I would say the above outstanding post most certainly put's this ridiculous matter in perspicuous perspective !
Most of the American Citizenry is well aware by now of the pathetic absurdity associated within the mindset of most of the current "Washington Political Circus" and it's ongoing ignominious and vindictive actions in blatant disregard for the will of the majoity of those ctizens.
May we be ever mindful of our awesome responsibliliy as the unique citizens of the greatest nation on earth to actively participate in ensuring the successful perpetuation of American Constitutional Democracy !
At this most critical juncture in America's history we the citizens must be absolutely vigilant in our efforts to "Keep America Strong and Secure in the face of it's considerable enemies around the globe !
The current "Goof Troop" of politicians in Washington D.C. must positively be strictly held accountable for their actions regarding the protection of America's citizens in the face of ominious"Terrorist" threats at home and abroad.
The majority of America's Political Leadership must not under any circumstances allow themselves to come under the sway of the current pitifully weak "Milk Sop" diplomacy mindset of the Administration !
And I Qoute : "A nation which can perfer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one. " Alexander Hamilton
Thank You / Lamar
Last edited by L.Funk; 12-27-2009 at 04:37 PM..
Reason: No Reason !!! ... LFunk
Once again the nearsighted politicians treat the symptom instead of the cause. The reason we have terrorists is because we occupy Holy Lands, we bomb innocent civilians, and our one-sided support of Israel.
We need to leave the Middle East and quit being the policemen of the world. It is not our fight and all we do is throw fuel on the fire. We need our troops home protecting our borders, not fighting and dying for Oil companies.
I'm really surprised nobody has mentioned all the "close calls" we had under the Bush Administration. One of the more famous ones was the shoe bomber. I just knew you'd have right wingers saying exactly what they didn't say when the same situation occurred under a Republican president.
Hello? How many terrorist attacks under Clinton?
Here's the thing: No one can have it BOTH WAYS. The be-all-end-all factor is how the sitting President DEALS with a full fledged attack or "close call".
Clinton: dealt with none in a way that prevented any more from happening under his "watch". Wasn't he the guy in office when the 9/11 idiots were in country and learning how to fly, hanging out at strip clubs and "merging" with the population?
Bush: dealt with what happened under his watch...to the horror of the liberals when they got their "rights" stripped off their hard working backs.
Obama: Where is he?
I always wonder WHERE people are from when they play off an "attempt" or even play off 9/11 , "like, so what, dude?" I also wonder how old people are when they live in NY or NJ or close to it when they toss what happened on 9/11 like it was no big deal? 14? 12?
If and when the next big one happens, I hope it's in your backyard this time and not mine. Then I can run around minimizing the concern over "failed attempts" and blame you for over-reacting.
Here's the thing: No one can have it BOTH WAYS. The be-all-end-all factor is how the sitting President DEALS with a full fledged attack or "close call".
Clinton: dealt with none in a way that prevented any more from happening under his "watch". Wasn't he the guy in office when the 9/11 idiots were in country and learning how to fly, hanging out at strip clubs and "merging" with the population?
Bush: dealt with what happened under his watch...to the horror of the liberals when they got their "rights" stripped off their hard working backs.
I'm getting awfully tired of having to repeat myself, but I will continue to do so until you people get it through your heads that you are utterly WRONG about who did what and when as it relates to the threats from Al Qaeda.
During President Clinton's two terms in office, we:
Captured Ramzi Yousef;
Arrested and convicted Wali Khan Amin Shah;
Initiated a grand jury investigation of bin Laden in New York;
Uncovered his network in 56 countries;
Pressured Sudan to expel him;
Garnered the cooperation of Jamal Ahmed al-Fadl regarding Al Qaeda's organization and how it operates;
Convicted Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, Abdul Hakim Murad, and Wali Khan Amin Shah;
Arrested Mohamed al-'Owhali and got him to confess to his role in the embassy bombing;
Fired Tomahawk missiles at a suspected Al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan and a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, which was suspected of producing chemical weapons for bin Laden (I don't think I have to tell you how the Right criticized that one);
Arrested Ali Mohamed and got his cooperation regarding bin Laden;
Thwarted an attack on Los Angeles International Airport by arresting Ahmed Ressam when he was caught entering the U.S. with 130 pounds of explosives;
And repeatedly warned the Bush administration, in urgent post-election intelligence briefings in December 2000 and January 2001, that "Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation".
Between January and August of 2001, the FAA issued 15 advisories to airlines and airports warning that terrorists could try to hijack or destroy American aircraft;
NSC counterterrorism chief, Richard Clark warned that Al Qaeda sleeper cells within the U.S. were “a major threat”;
In April, 2001, Washington received another "specific threat" that Al Qaeda may attack American targets;
Also in April, 2001, another FAA warning was issued, calling for "a high degree of alertness";
FBI Investigators were pulled out of Yemen due to security issues, and more FAA warnings went out in June, 2001;
U.S. embassies in Senegal and Bahrain were closed;
An attack against the embassy in Yemen was stopped by the Yemenis;
In June, Condoleezza Rice was warned during an intelligence briefing that an Al Qaeda attack is “highly likely.”
Throughout July and August, a bunch of terrorists got into the country, and the FBI warned the Administration about retaliatory terrorist attacks for the arrest and conviction of Ahmed Ressam;
Zacarias Moussaoui was picked up in Minneapolis, but no search warrant is issued;
The CIA alerted the FBI that Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi were inside the U.S.;
On August 6, Condoleeza Rice and President Bush were informed "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" and that "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings" were found;
On August 28, Moussaoui was linked to Al Qaeda;
On September 11, 2001, 4 planes were hijacked, two were slammed into the World Trade Center towers in New York, one was slammed into the Pentagon and one was overtaken by passengers and crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, likely on its way to the White House - 2,967 people lost their lives, and thousands more lost their loved-ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyG
Obama: Where is he?
You might try looking around this thing they call "The Internet".
I always wonder WHERE people are from when they play off an "attempt" or even play off 9/11 , "like, so what, dude?" I also wonder how old people are when they live in NY or NJ or close to it when they toss what happened on 9/11 like it was no big deal? 14? 12?
If and when the next big one happens, I hope it's in your backyard this time and not mine. Then I can run around minimizing the concern over "failed attempts" and blame you for over-reacting.
Wow. How despicable. You really should be ashamed of yourself.
There was a clear disparity in the levels of response to foreign versus domestic
threats. Numerous actions were taken overseas to disrupt possible attacks—
enlisting foreign partners to upset terrorist plans, closing embassies, moving
military assets out of the way of possible harm.Far less was done domestically—
in part, surely, because to the extent that specifics did exist, they pertained to
threats overseas.As noted earlier, a threat against the embassy inYemen quickly
resulted in its closing.Possible domestic threats were more vague.When reports
did not specify where the attacks were to take place, officials presumed that they
would again be overseas, though they did not rule out a target in the United
States. Each of the FBI threat advisories made this point.43
Clarke mentioned to National Security Advisor Rice at least twice that al
Qaeda sleeper cells were likely in the United States. In January 2001, Clarke
forwarded a strategy paper to Rice warning that al Qaeda had a presence in
the United States. He noted that two key al Qaeda members in the Jordanian
cell involved in the millennium plot were naturalized U.S. citizens and that one
jihadist suspected in the East Africa bombings had “informed the FBI that an
extensive network of al Qida ‘sleeper agents’ currently exists in the US.†He
added that Ressam’s abortive December 1999 attack revealed al Qaeda supporters
in the United States.44 His analysis, however, was based not on new
threat reporting but on past experience.
The September 11 attacks fell into the void between the foreign and domestic
threats.The foreign intelligence agencies were watching overseas, alert to
foreign threats to U.S. interests there.The domestic agencies were waiting for
evidence of a domestic threat from sleeper cells within the United States. No
one was looking for a foreign threat to domestic targets.The threat that was
coming was not from sleeper cells.
Although the FAA had authority to issue security directives mandating new
security procedures, none of the few that were released during the summer of
2001 increased security at checkpoints or on board aircraft.The information
circulars mostly urged air carriers to “exercise prudence†and be alert. Prior to
9/11, the FAA did present a CD-ROM to air carriers and airport authorities
describing the increased threat to civil aviation.The presentation mentioned
the possibility of suicide hijackings but said that “fortunately,we have no indi=
cation that any group is currently thinking in that direction.â€47 The FAA con=
ducted 27 special security briefings for specific air carriers between May 1,
2001, and September 11, 2001.Two of these briefings discussed the hijacking
threat overseas. None discussed the possibility of suicide hijackings or the use
of aircraft as weapons. No new security measures were instituted.48
Funny how you left off what led into the quoted sections, and what followed them:
On August 1, the FBI issued an advisory that in light of the increased volume of threat reporting and the upcoming anniversary of the East Africa embassy bombings, increased attention should be paid to security planning. It noted that although most of the reporting indicated a potential for attacks on
U.S.interests abroad, the possibility of an attack in the United States could not be discounted.33
On August 3, the intelligence community issued an advisory concluding that the threat of impending al Qaeda attacks would likely continue indefinitely. Citing threats in the Arabian Peninsula, Jordan, Israel, and Europe, the advisory suggested that al Qaeda was lying in wait and searching for gaps in security before moving forward with the planned attacks.34
During the spring and summer of 2001, President Bush had on several occasions asked his briefers whether any of the threats pointed to the United States. Reflecting on these questions,the CIA decided to write a briefing article summarizing its understanding of this danger. Two CIA analysts involved in preparing this briefing article believed it represented an opportunity to communicate their view that the threat of a Bin Ladin attack in the United States remained both current and serious.35 The result was an article in the August 6 Presidential Daily Brief titled “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US.†It was the 36th PDB item briefed so far that year that related to Bin Ladin or al Qaeda, and the first devoted to the possibility of an attack in the United States.
. . .
No CSG or other NSC meeting was held to discuss the possible threat of a strike in the United States as a result of this report. Late in the month, a foreign service reported that Abu Zubaydah was considering mounting terrorist attacks in the United States, after postponing possible operations in Europe. No targets, timing, or method of attack were provided.39
We have found no indication of any further discussion before September 11 among the President and his top advisers of the possibility of a threat of an al Qaeda attack in the United States. DCI Tenet visited President Bush in Crawford,Texas, on August 17 and participated in PDB briefings of the President between August 31 (after the President had returned toWashington) and September 10.But Tenet does not recall any discussions with the President of the domestic threat during this period.40
. . .
In sum, the domestic agencies never mobilized in response to the threat. They did not have direction, and did not have a plan to institute.The borders were not hardened.Transportation systems were not fortified.Electronic surveillance was not targeted against a domestic threat.54 State and local law enforcement were not marshaled to augment the FBI’s efforts.The public was not warned.
Funny how you left off what led into the quoted sections, and what followed them:
On August 1, the FBI issued an advisory that in light of the increased volume of threat reporting and the upcoming anniversary of the East Africa embassy bombings, increased attention should be paid to security planning. It noted that although most of the reporting indicated a potential for attacks on
U.S.interests abroad, the possibility of an attack in the United States could not be discounted.33
On August 3, the intelligence community issued an advisory concluding that the threat of impending al Qaeda attacks would likely continue indefinitely. Citing threats in the Arabian Peninsula, Jordan, Israel, and Europe, the advisory suggested that al Qaeda was lying in wait and searching for gaps in security before moving forward with the planned attacks.34
During the spring and summer of 2001, President Bush had on several occasions asked his briefers whether any of the threats pointed to the United States. Reflecting on these questions,the CIA decided to write a briefing article summarizing its understanding of this danger. Two CIA analysts involved in preparing this briefing article believed it represented an opportunity to communicate their view that the threat of a Bin Ladin attack in the United States remained both current and serious.35 The result was an article in the August 6 Presidential Daily Brief titled “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US.” It was the 36th PDB item briefed so far that year that related to Bin Ladin or al Qaeda, and the first devoted to the possibility of an attack in the United States.
. . .
No CSG or other NSC meeting was held to discuss the possible threat of a strike in the United States as a result of this report. Late in the month, a foreign service reported that Abu Zubaydah was considering mounting terrorist attacks in the United States, after postponing possible operations in Europe. No targets, timing, or method of attack were provided.39
We have found no indication of any further discussion before September 11 among the President and his top advisers of the possibility of a threat of an al Qaeda attack in the United States. DCI Tenet visited President Bush in Crawford,Texas, on August 17 and participated in PDB briefings of the President between August 31 (after the President had returned toWashington) and September 10.But Tenet does not recall any discussions with the President of the domestic threat during this period.40
. . .
In sum, the domestic agencies never mobilized in response to the threat. They did not have direction, and did not have a plan to institute.The borders were not hardened.Transportation systems were not fortified.Electronic surveillance was not targeted against a domestic threat.54 State and local law enforcement were not marshaled to augment the FBI’s efforts.The public was not warned.
Striking in the United States is like saying you should find the high yellow straw in that hay stack. There was no direct threats and no clear targets.
Quote:
Rice told us she understood that the FBI had tasked its 56 U.S. field offices
to increase surveillance of suspected terrorists and to reach out to informants
who might have information about terrorist plots.An NSC staff document at
the time describes such a tasking as having occurred in late June but does not
indicate whether it was generated by the NSC or the FBI.Other than the pre=
viously described April 13 communication sent to all FBI field offices, however,
the FBI could not find any record of having received such a directive.The
April 13 document asking field offices to gather information on Sunni
extremism did not mention any possible threat within the United States and
did not order surveillance of suspected operatives.The NSC did not specify
what the FBI’s directives should contain and did not review what had been
issued earlier.49
The Attorney General told us he asked *****rd whether there was intelli=
gence about attacks in the United States and that *****rd said no. *****rd said
he replied that he could not assure ******** that there would be no attacks in
the United States, although the reports of threats were related to overseas tar=
gets.******** said he therefore assumed the FBI was doing what it needed to
do. He acknowledged that in retrospect, this was a dangerous assumption.
The terrorists exploited deep institutional failings within our government.
The question is whether extra vigilance might have turned up an opportu=
nity to disrupt the plot. As seen in chapter 7, al Qaeda’s operatives made mis=
takes. At least two such mistakes created opportunities during 2001, especially
in late August.
I'm not saying it's all anyone's fault. However there were fundamental flaws, which were fixed with the DHS and various other acts, which played major roles in 9/11. This doesn't take away from Clinton thinking of this as a police problem or Bush failing to push the envelope on a problem never thought of before 9/11. As the commision said very clearly:
Quote:
We believe the 9/11 attacks revealed four kinds of failures: in imagination,
policy, capabilities, and management.
That's not something that just magically appears once a president takes office. In some cases it seems we still haven't learned our lesson.
Striking in the United States is like saying you should find the high yellow straw in that hay stack. There was no direct threats and no clear targets.
The clear targets were airplanes. We were warned on multiple occasions that airplanes were going to be used to fly into buildings. Did it really matter which buildings? Start beefing up airport security immediately. Start installing locks on the cockpit doors of all domestic airlines. Don't just sit around and wait for the terrorists to tell you where and when they're going to strike -- make it as close to impossible as you can, for them to do so in the manner in which you've been warned they're planning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon
I'm not saying it's all anyone's fault. However there were fundamental flaws, which were fixed with the DHS and various other acts, which played major roles in 9/11. This doesn't take away from Clinton thinking of this as a police problem or Bush failing to push the envelope on a problem never thought of before 9/11. As the commision said very clearly:
That's not something that just magically appears once a president takes office. In some cases it seems we still haven't learned our lesson.
Note that the person to whom I was replying said that Clinton did nothing, so therefore we had terrorist attacks against us, and Bush did something (vague but which pissed off liberals, so it must've been good), completely ignoring the largest terrorist attack on America in the history of ever that happened on his watch -- whatever the reason.
That person was wrong on all of her facts. Clinton didn't do nothing and Bush was no knight in shining armor.
Could the attacks on 9/11 have been averted? Who knows - maybe not even if we had beefed up security procedures in response to those warnings. As we saw from yesterday, stop them from kicking in the front door and they'll find a way to go around to the back door.
At this point I don't think it's a matter of lacking imagination, policy, capabilities, or management, but a matter of manpower and resources. If it were up to me, I'd have bomb-sniffing dogs at every security checkpoint, as well as having them patrol the aisles of every plane before takeoff. I'd have a marshal on every single flight, and I'd make them obvious to every passenger. I think they should make several passes up and down the aisles during the flights, as well.
But even if all my pie-in-the-sky ideas were implemented, the terrorists would find new "weapons" besides airplanes and we'd be back to square one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
