Tuesday, April 24, 2007

"This is not hearsay. These are things that are documented."

I'm doing some research, reading this diary about the french infiltration of Al Qaida pre-911 - and the subsequent warnings, and I read this:
"As Keith Olbermann has said:
"It appears now that the operative word in the phrase 'We could not have anticipated' was the word 'we.' "
Keith is wrong, of course. Not even "we" was operative.

From the April 2004 front page article about Sibel in The Independent:
But in an opinion piece in The Washington Post on 22 March, Ms Rice wrote: "Despite what some have suggested, we received no intelligence that terrorists were preparing to attack the homeland using airplanes as missiles, though some analysts speculated that terrorists might hijack planes to try and free US-held terrorists."

Mrs Edmonds said that by using the word "we", Ms Rice told an "outrageous lie". She said: "Rice says 'we' not 'I'. That would include all people from the FBI, the CIA and DIA [Defense Intelligence Agency]. I am saying that is impossible."

That aside, below is the relevant info from the article. This is the info that superscotthorton asked Michael Scheuer, head of the effing OBL unit at the CIA, about a few weeks ago, and Scheuer still says he'd never heard it - 6 effing years later - despite it being on the front page of the Indy, and in Sibel's August 04 letter to Kean and the commission, and of course, here at this blog, which he should read daily.
Sibel Edmonds said she spent more than three hours in a closed session with the commission's investigators providing information that was circulating within the FBI in the spring and summer of 2001 suggesting that an attack using aircraft was just months away and the terrorists were in place. The Bush administration, meanwhile, has sought to silence her and has obtained a gagging order from a court by citing the rarely used "state secrets privilege".

She told The Independent yesterday: "I gave [the commission] details of specific investigation files, the specific dates, specific target information, specific managers in charge of the investigation. I gave them everything so that they could go back and follow up. This is not hearsay. These are things that are documented. These things can be established very easily."

She added: "There was general information about the time-frame, about methods to be used but not specifically about how they would be used and about people being in place and who was ordering these sorts of terror attacks. There were other cities that were mentioned. Major cities with skyscrapers."
Here it is from Sibel's letter:
(We) received information that: 1) Osama bin Laden was planning a major terrorist attack in the United States targeting four or five major cities; 2) the attack was going to involve airplanes; 3) some of the individuals in charge of carrying out this attack were already in place in the United States; 4) the attack was going to be carried out soon, in a few months.


steven andresen said...

Wasn't it Cheney who refused to fly in commercial airplanes starting that summer of 2001?

profmarcus said...

thanks for keeping this visible... we can only hope and pray that the truth will out eventually, and, if we keep banging the drum, maybe it will sooner rather than later...

Kax said...

I think it was AG John Ashcroft who refused toi fly commercial planes. Darth always has AF 2 to use.

Anonymous said...

Something that pisses me off...and I lost the link too...and can't remember the exact title of the study...double damn.

Anyway a study was commissioned by congress back in the 90's on attacks to the US and terrorism...I found it on the Libary of Congress web site almost three years ago.

In that study it plainly said in black and white that terrorist could and probably would use aircraft as flying bombs to attack major US cities.

Now this was commissioned by congress and no one read it and they all claim the idea of a plane as a bomb NEVER EVER occured to them?

This has fustrated the hell out of me for a long time because IT IS THERE in plain english in a study commissioned by congress...And no one has seen fit to mention this study..once again, COMMISSIONED BY CONGRESS....???? HUH, Duh?

Anyone with some time on their hands can google way back or go to the Library of Congress and look for it.

Anonymous said...

BTW...if anyone want to take up the task of finding that study I seem to remember that the former Senator Gary Hart was one of the members involved in or requesitng the report.

Enlightenment said...

Here's something else to consider, though it doesn't [that I know of] specifically mention flying them into buildings, it's food for thought.


lukery said...

here's the thing - if nothing else. there was a specific warning that SIbel is aware of, she reported it to 911COmm, and it didn't appear in 911comm's "missed opportunities" section.

something is wrong there with that picture - nobody can disagree with it.

Enlightenment said...

Well, considering that nothing was actually hijacked on 9/11 and the "nineteen hijackers" were C.I.A. assets whose purpose was to leave a trail of phony "evidence" behind so that in the days after 9/11 the F.B.I. could flesh out the "nineteen hijackers" myth to make it somewhat more believable than it would have been otherwise (with the exception of the several of them who were completely uninvolved victims of passport theft, explaining how they "turned up alive" days later), we can be sure that if Sibel picked up on things that could be considered "missed opportunities" they would be related to this phony trail of "evidence".

Here's a related question: Why were the "hijacker pilots" so incompetent at flying Cessnas yet were supposedly able to fly the "hijacked airliners" like pros? Because they didn't have to fly anything on 9/11. Like I said, their purpose wasn't to get on any airplanes, it was just to leave a trail of phony "evidence". Taking rudimentary flying lessons, no matter how pisspoor they did, was enough. Being able to actually fly an airplane wasn't necessary.

lukery said...

E - regardless - the 'warning' should have made the 'missed opportunities' section - there's a crack in the matrix...

as yogi berra said, when ya tell the truth, ya dont have to remember anything...

Kax said...

As I recall the Millenium Celebration in Seattle was cancelled precisely because there had been threats of planes flying into their tall building, I forgot the name of it, but the point is, they knew then that it was a potential threat.

Further, with $30 billion a year for "Intelligence", it is simply not credible that they would have had no clue whatsoever before 9/11, yet they immediately knew the names of the "highjackers" and that the Bin Laden family needed to be protected and spirited out of the US before being questioned.

We really have no free press capable of connecting any dots.

Enlightenment said...

Lukery, you are right, the Matrix is coming unraveled.

Kax, it isn't that the press isn't CAPABLE of connecting any dots (though that would likely be true for some of the individual brainless blowdried "journalists"), it is that they are wholly owned by a handful of big conglomerates whose interests are served not by exposing the truth and following leads to where they end up, but by being accessories after the fact in the cover-up. It simply isn't in the media's interests to tell the truth about 9/11. Case in point being CNN's pentagon correspondent Jamie MacEntyre who was on the Pentagon's lawn a few minutes after the "airliner" crashed into the Pentagon and categorically stated that it was apparant that no airliner had crashed there. A day later CNN forced him to retract his statement (though apparantly he didn't HIMSELF retract it, but let CNN retract it for him). For being a good little slave he is now their SENIOR Pentagon Correspondent.