Why wasn't more done to protect airplanes from hijackings before 9/11

[spooked911]

when there were clear indications terrorists might try mass hijackings?

(Yes, this question is more for people who don't believe in government complicity)

This is something that has long bothered me. There were many warnings of hijackings in the summer of 2001. Why weren't pilots and airlines in general told over and over to be on guard for terrorist hijackings?

This didn't need to involve letting passengers know and scaring away air travelers. The warnings only had to be for airline pilots and crews. It seems like there should have been exetremely emphatic warnings given that should have kept the pilots and crews and ATC's on alert for hijackings.

If hijacking warnings WERE in fact given-- how did the hijackers then take over FOUR planes so easily with only knives and boxcutters (and wine bottles ;))?

[Florida_Geek]

1. The Gore - Hartman report

wanted a lot of changes. Gore would have done that as President, but Bush wanted STAR WARSSSSSS>

[Drifter]

4. Yep ...

If the AWOL chimp was not installed, there is a good chance that the RW would have asked for Gores resignation, because he put so many resources into aviation saftey as well as a number of other programs.

9/11 would not have happened (or would have been a dud).

Cheers
Drifter

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. Because it cost money and inconvenienced passengers.

[Career Prole]

3. Bingo!

Nothing wounds conservatives more than investing in a silly thing like protecting life...there's no return on that.

[MercutioATC]

5. Exactly. The cost to benefit ratio was very low.

...at least, that's the way it seemed before 9/11.

[tngledwebb]

6. Perhaps all reasonable precautions were long in place,

and, excepting on the day of 9/11 itself, have proved sufficient.

Of course, any system can be improved, but the existing security measures at the time were probably 80-90% safe, and well designed to catch or thwart any type of hijacking attempt. The question is why those measures failed so utterly and often on that one day only, and never before or since.

Read the New Pearl Harbor for a good summary of the other holes in the official story.

[LARED]

7. Interesting take on the question, but I

question your assumptions.

Of course, any system can be improved, but the existing security measures at the time were probably 80-90% safe, and well designed to catch or thwart any type of hijacking attempt.

Prior to 9/11 how many hijacking attempts were caught or thwarted in the US? Where does 80 to 90% come from?

Also over-looked is that pre 9/11 the use of a hijacked plane as a weapon was not considered a high risk. Hijackers were negotiated with after they landed. Of course everything changed on 9/11.

[tngledwebb]

9. Everything changed on 9/11, and then changed back, you mean?

Well, it is possible that we MAY have improved our security measures from 10 to 20% since 9/11, just maybe. That is if you include taking our shoes off, and giving cretins and thugs carte blanche to feel up women and other suspicious looking types...

Oh, and of course, its great that our radar is pointing IN more often, and that so many of the top brass are signing up for their free imagination implants...

And a DU'er is apparently keeping f/t hours watching the smoggy midwestern skies, if not the voting booths.

[LARED]

10. You skipped over any info to back your assumptions (nt)

[MercutioATC]

13. Actually, the full-time status is nothing new.

I've been doing it for nearly 14 years. Pay me $140k/year and I'll watch voting booths instead.

Things haven't "changed back". Yes, the system still relies on pilot cooperation, but communications have been streamlined and the military is much more involved (witness the restricted areas that pop up every time Bush goes anywhere or there's a major sporting event).

Again, it's all about awareness. Hijacked planes pre-9/11 were never used as weapons. With the change in situation came a change in procedure.

[LARED]

8. For one thing hijackings were

pretty rare in the US. In fact if you remove hijackings related to Cuba and bombs the numbers are very very low.

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Government_Role/security/POL18.htm

[spooked911]

11. I understand they were rare, but I stiIl can't understand NOT warning

pilots and flight attendents be on guard for hijackers. A warning is very cheap.

And it just seems as though the 9/11 hijackers succeeded much too easily-- unless as some have suggested there was a plan to let certain planes be hijacked.

[LARED]

12. Was there a specific reason to warn them?

If not, warning people about something that almost never happens (just in case it might) is pointless.

[AZCat]

14. There was a warning on July 31, 2001 from the FAA to the airlines

On July 31, 2001 the FAA warned airlines, but the warning had expired by September 11, 2001.

Here is a CNN Link that I got from the Center for Cooperative Research 9-11 Timeline.

Unfortunately the text of the warnings remain classified, so we cannot verify the conflicting claims about the nature of the warnings.

There is a dispute about a later warning concerning concealed weapons - the FAA claims they sent out a warning, Delta claims they recieved no such warning (in August).

[RoeBear]

15. It's no more difficult to get a weapon on board now...

...as it was prior to 9/11.

One would just have to use an all plastic knife (very real, very sharp)or make one of flint or glass.

What has changed is that the pilots, attendants and passengers will all fight for their lives now if anybody wants to get into the cockpit cabin.

Before 9/11 it was never considered that someone would use a plane as a weapon.

[spooked911]

16. The military knew damn well planes could be used as weapons before

9/11-- give me a break.


In fact, in the months before before 9/11, NORAD ran drills where hijacked planes were programmed to crash into buildings.

Don't give me that "nobody thought it could happen" crap.

[tngledwebb]

17. Reason for all the 'imagination' implants, I guess.

And your point is incorrect. You never heard of kamikaze pilots? Did you go not read about WWII in high school?

[John Doe II]

18. Sorry

But read Paul Thompson's Timeline on www.cooperativersearch.org or buy the book.
Or here: http://11september-paxamericana.chez.tiscali.fr//Scene4.htm
There were literally more than 50 warnings by the CIA and others. Let's talkl about Operation Bojinka. Let's talk about 1994 and the Eiffel Tower let's talk about 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta etc etc etc. Or if you prefer movies then watch the Lone Gunmen. It's even on the Internet now.

I think the only one really believing in this is Condy Rice telling this obvious BS under oath ....!