Odigo says workers were warned of attack

[wellst0nev0ter]

Odigo says workers were warned of attack

By Yuval Dror

Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744&contrassID=/has%5C

[wellst0nev0ter]

1. So Does That Partially Exonerate Amiri Baraka?

Still don't know why he went with the 4,000 Israelis, though.

[ewagner]

2. oh-oh...are these guys credible?

one edit: So the FBI and Israeli Intelligence forces have had this info since shortly after 9/11?

[qb]

3. Holy shit - a dozen countries were predicting it, but Bush ignored them.

Can you fault a couple of workers for paying attention?

[dofus]

4. Why has this taken two years

to come out? Why should I think it's credible?

[Abe Linkman]

5. First of all, it hasn't taken two years for this to come out

YOU are just now finding out about it. But, the reason why it is just now coming to the attention of a wider audience is only because of negligence and incompetence...some might even say "criminal" negligence. Clinton would have called it merely a "bureaucratic snafu". Some of the Official Story keepers of the faith might go a tad further than the negligence/incompetence defense, but I'd be surprised if they do so.

[greyl]

6. I heard of it last year

early to mid-last year maybe on tv. The same show also spoke about how some school kids told their teacher that the Twin Towers would "be gone next week". I'm not sure what the show was - maybe Donahue? Maybe Frontline or Pov?

[Dogmudgeon]

7. Old news

This story emerged within a week of the attacks.

It is one of the tantalizing bits of evidence that was left to moulder while Bush was being elevated to Saviourhood. Now that the light bulbs illuminating the halo have burned out, our courageous press is starting to look into these things.

It's gonna be ugly.

How ugly?

As ugly as yo' mama when she be cuttin' herself a switch!

--bkl
Phonics, Ebonics, Bushonomics ... let's call the whole thing off!

[reorg]

8. this was reported in Haaretz on 9/12/01

- just one day after the attacks, if I remember correctly. I've seen the original report on their website. Haaretz is a moderately left wing, obviously well established Israeli newspaper - no reason to doubt the veracity of this report.

[RH]

9. It did not take two years to come out.

It was in the Washington Post, September 2001.

see e.g.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.net/timeline/2001/wpost092801.html

N.B.

Diamandis today in a telephone interview also said the warning message did not identify the World Trade Center as the attack target. Diamandis declined to reveal any other information contained in the message, including whether the warning named the targets for the attack.

"Providing more details would only lead to more conjecture," he said.

[plaguepuppy]

10. Other indications of warnings

I was listening to an interview on Pacifica just before 9-11 with a guy who worked in the Windows on the World restaurant in the north tower, 106th and 107th floors. There was a big breakfast meeting scheduled on 9-11, some kind of water works group, that was scheduled to have 500 attendees. Because of that meeting extra workers were put on for the shift, adding to the number (72) who died. But oddly enough only 98 people showed up for the breakfast.

About the Odigo warning: specific or not it is interesting to note that only one Israeli was killed in the Trade Center. This is sometimes confounded with the unrelated question of how many "Jews" were killed, whith the intent of making the question go away by somehow making it seem antisemitic. But the fact remains that a documented total of one Israeli died, and as I understand it he was visiting the WTC to do business there, not someone regularly employed there. I'll go back and get his name to post later.

" Even though the company usually protects the privacy of users, Odigo recorded the Internet protocol address of the message's sender to facilitate his or her identification, he said."

"He did confirm that soon after the terrorist attacks on New York, the Odigo employees notified their management, who contacted Israeli security services. In turn, the FBI was informed of the instant-message warning."

And of course the FBI immediately ran this guy down and locked him up for questioning, right? Just like they did with all those short-sellers, no doubt.

[LARED]

11. it is interesting to note that only one Israeli was killed

Why is that interesting?

It must equally interesting that no one from France, Spain, Chile, Peru, the entire continent of Africa, plus a host of other counties where murdered that day. Also note that only one person was killed from Bermuda, Britain, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador.

This must be quite interesting to an astute investigator. < /sarcasm>

http://september11victims.com/september11victims/COUNTRY_CITIZENSHIP.htm

[Robb]

13. Your link

...Shows foreign citizenship held by victims; I'm seeing two Israeli citizens, one from France, a few from Africa (including Ivory Coast and Nigeria), and 5 Peruvian.

However, the lack of Spanish or Chilean victims leads me to the same conclusion: Spain and Chile have formed a bloc and are sending terrorists to the U.S.

/sarcasm similarly now off

[plaguepuppy]

14. Interesting? But then to you nothing is...

Because as I understand it there were a great many more Israelis who worked there on a regular basis. Since your only interest seems to be in supporting the official story at any and all cost I wouldn't expect you to find any evidence to the contrary "interesting," lame attempts at irony notwithstanding.

So you find the Odigo warning, and the lack of any investigation thereof utterly boring? Maybe you should try a "</stupidity>" command and see if things look any different.

[LARED]

16. Any chance you have credible evidence that

there were a great many more Israelis who worked there on a regular basis? How many should have been murdered if it was a normal day (whatever that means)? Me thinks you are spending to much time reading the revisionist tripe at AFP.

What does the fact that "only" one Israel was killed have to do with the official story and my interest or lack thereof in it.

As for the Odigo warning. It is interesting to a certain extent. It would be nice to know the outcome of any investigations. As to its indicating some sort of hole in the official story, I don't see it. It was non specific. There were supposedly no targets identified, no times, places or people identified. Do you expect the entire country to come to a screeching halt every time some weird threat is received? Especially pre 9/11.

[plaguepuppy]

18. Sorry, tripe's not my dish - tastes too much like red herring

"Me thinks you are spending to much time reading the revisionist tripe at AFP."

When in doubt, reach for the old "antisemitc/revisionist" slur.

As to how many Israelis were potentially at risk, the actual source for the canard about 4,000 Israelis not going to work was an inquiry just after the attacks made by the Israeli embassy concering the whereabouts of some 4,000 of their citizens in the WTC and the surrounding area. How many of those actually worked in the WTC is anyone's guess. After considerable searching I have yet to find any demographic breakdown of the WTC workforce.


"It was non specific. There were supposedly no targets identified, no times, places or people identified."

Actually all the Odigo guy said was this:
"Diamandis today in a telephone interview also said the warning message did not identify the World Trade Center as the attack target. Diamandis declined to reveal any other information contained in the message, including whether the warning named the targets for the attack.

"Providing more details would only lead to more conjecture," he said.

And God knows we wouldn't want any conjecture - but what exactly about the message might lead to "inappropriate" conjecture? Guess we'll never know.

But the issue of warnings is a much bigger question than just the Odido mystery message. As I mentioned before, some 400 out of 500 participants somehow got the idea that it was not a good morning to be at Windows on the World. Another one of those big unasked questions is how many people actually showed up for work that day, and how many were actually evacuated after the impacts.

For weeks afterward we were hearing estimates of casualties in the 7-10,000 range, which only slowly were revised down to the final number. It certainly looks like authorities with good information about how many people would normally be there, and some estimate of how many were evacuated, greatly overestimated how many people were actually there that day.

In a sane world where real investigations of massive crimes such as 9-11 were carried out it would be a matter of some interest if thousands of people had not showed up because of some kind of warning, specific or not. Instead we are given sentimental pap of the "saving Private Lynch" variety that turns everyone into a hero and deliberately blurs the line between "heroes" and "victims," and offers us blind killing rage against the entire Arab world as a legitimate form of emotional catharsis. It's "closure" at any cost, and the truth be damned.

[LARED]

19. Huh?????????

When in doubt, reach for the old "antisemitc/revisionist" slur.

Excuse me, but I did not call you antisemitic, so there was no slur against you. Regarding AFP being antisemitic and revisionist, it is no slur to speak the truth.

the actual source for the canard about 4,000 Israelis not going to work was an inquiry just after the attacks made by the Israeli embassy concerning the whereabouts of some 4,000 of their citizens in the WTC and the surrounding area.

Wait just a second here. You believe there is something suspicious about only two Israelis being killed based on the canard of 4000 Israelis not going to work that day. You admit and know it's a canard yet you use this as the basis for your suspicion? You'll need to explain that as some may get the impression you buy into the Zionist conspiracy theories that abound.

After considerable searching I have yet to find any demographic breakdown of the WTC workforce.

After 5 full minutes on Google I found this

>>>>Tsviya Shimon, minister of administrative affairs for the Israeli consulate and mission in New York, told The Washington File that there might have been up to 100 Israeli citizens working in the World Trade Center. To date, only two are known to be missing, she said. One of them, Shimon reported, managed to call his wife on his cell phone to tell her he was injured, but there has been no word from him since.

http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/01091417.htm

Not exactly fodder for the conspiracy menu.

[Abe Linkman]

20. Was it a Jewish holiday?

Why did the 4,000 NOT go to work that day at the WTC? You mean, out of all of those people, only TWO didn't get the message, or does it mean that more than two may not have gotten the message, but only two perished in the attacks?

[LARED]

21. 4000 Jews did not go to work that day...

in the WTC? Surely you have some evidence to back up such a remark.

[acerbic]

22. I think 4000 is way too low...

I'm pretty sure that several million Jews did not go to work that day in the WTC. How's that for suspicious? :silly:

[Abe Linkman]

23. They all used GPS to get to the secret party bush was hosting at Offut AFB

n/t

[LARED]

29. Can I assume your response

is a tacit acknowledgment that the 4000 Israelis that didn't show up on 9/11 is a figment of someones fevered imagination.

Or do you still believe that nonsense?

[Abe Linkman]

33. You tell me: how many were warned

What is the number that your crowd is willing to acknowledge?

[LARED]

35. As there is no evidence that anyone was warned,

I'll have to say none. If any evidence come to light that indicates any of the 4000 or so Israelis working in lower Manhattan were warned I'll revise my guess.

So what is your crowd willing to acknowledge?

[Abe Linkman]

37. The warning that is well-known, if little acknowledged by your crowd.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744&contrassID=/has%5C

[LARED]

40. So your crowd is willing to

acknowledge that two Odigo workers were warned?

That's it????????

[Abe Linkman]

41. YES, people were forewarned. Obviously not all by Odigo.

Plenty of people were forewarned about the coming self-attacks. Some people were so frightened by the warnings that they stopped flying commercial airlines (Ashcroft), others headed for the safety of Offut airforce base, some cancelled flights (Mayor Brown), and so on.

[LARED]

47. Is it forewarned or warned?

If your are talking about forewarning then you are absolutely correct. (except at the part about self attacks). The government had been forewarned for many years that terrorist were working on the means and ways to attack the USA. Remember the WTC bombing in 1993?

Do you have any evidence that the were specific warnings given to someone that would be able to take action? I think the answer is no. After two years I've yet to see any compelling and credible evidence that is true.

[Abe Linkman]

48. It's you're; not your - in the context you used it.

They were obviously specific enough that lots of people heeded them and avoided being killed, maimed, or otherwise hurt on 9-11.

As you know, Mayor Brown only said that his "airport security advisor" told him to cancel his scheduled flight for the next morning (9-11-01).

I'm sure you are aware of many others (like those I mentioned earlier) who made abrupt changes in their 9-11 schedules.

Oh, that group which just happened to end up at Offut AFB, rather than in their offices (some of which were in the WTC) - I'm sure that was mere coincidence - doesn't mean a thing. Really, it doesn't. Now, Ted's "wife's" delay of leaving on the 10th, and instead changing to the 11th: I'm not sure, after what I've read about Ted Olson.

[LARED]

50. Thanks for the grammar lesson

I'm aware of the difference between your and you're. It a fairly common mistake made in informal writing. Most over look things like that. I know I have overlooked misspellings on your part so lighten up.

lots of people heeded them and avoided being killed, maimed, or otherwise hurt on 9-11.

Outside of Mayor Browns security adviser (assuming that's (note the correct usage of ') not urban legend) who else was warned? People change plans all the time. Do you have any evidence that people made changes because they were warned?

[Abe Linkman]

53. You're welcome. See the Brown story raises ?s message.

Misspellings are usually just typos. But, I'd like to know which ones I've made that you've kindly overlooked. That's the only way I'd know if they were mere typos and not incorrect word choice or actual misspellings.

[LARED]

51. Abe, you should check your facts better

As you know, Mayor Brown only said that his "airport security advisor" told him to cancel his scheduled flight for the next morning (9-11-01).

Something about this your statement seemed wrong so I checked it out.

From http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtml

For Mayor Willie Brown, the first signs that something was amiss came late Monday when he got a call from what he described as his airport security -- a full eight hours before yesterday's string of terrorist attacks -- advising him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel.

He was advised to be cautious not to cancel his flight as you indicated.

"It was not an abnormal call. I'm always concerned if my flight is going to be on time, and they always alert me when I ought to be careful."

I guess if you're the Mayor, you get warnings on a regular basis.

Whatever the case, Brown didn't think about it again until he was up, dressed and waiting for his ride to the airport for an 8 a.m. flight to New York, where he was to attend a state retirement board meeting.

He never canceled his flight. It seems he did not change his plans either.

[Abe Linkman]

52. Brown's story raises even more questions.

Not sure what you're getting at. That he never canceled his flight?
That he failed to heed the warning? When you are warned to be cautious, and you are scheduled to fly somewhere, prudent people don't fly. Yet, we are to believe he paid no attention to the warning?

You can believe that, but I don't.

He was warned the night before. And the article is fuzzy about the events on the morning he was to travel.

Have you ever read any news stories about any other warnings to public officials not to take a trip, but they did anyhow?

I'm not surprised that Mayor Brown was vague in who called him, but it's very interesting that he was headed to NYC. That wasn't very vague at all. How'd they know to warn him about a trip to NY?

There's no way to confirm Brown's statements, but he was warned, and he didn't go to NY. Strange that he would receive a warning, claim not to be concerned about it, and it turns out to be 9-11 related. Another odd coincidence? I don't think so.

His statements about what he did the morning of 9-11 are curious. According to his story, NO ONE told him anything. He just saw a news story on TV. I'd bet he was watching TV to see the details of the warning he had received.

[LARED]

54. OK

For the heck of it lets make some speculations. I know you believe these are facts, but in reality it's only speculation at this point.

The warning the Mayor received was 9/11 related. The warning came from someone that had enough knowledge to know that 9/11 was the date the attacks would take place and wanted the Mayor to be protected.

Assuming this is correct.

Now what?

How does this point to some malfeasance from the Bush administration?

How does this strengthen your argument that the attacks were self inflected?

How does this point to LIHOP or MIHOP or any other fanciful HOP's?

[Abe Linkman]

55. You're trying to say that warnings were always a part of the plan

I agree. That explains why they were vague when they called Mayor Brown's staff. They had to keep it vague so they could maintain plausible deniability just in case smart sleuths such as yourself started putting two and two together.

Something else it makes you wonder is if they gave similar warnings to anyone else who didn't pay any attention to them...but ended up becoming a victim as a result of not heeding the warning?

[LARED]

56. You're trying to say that warnings were always a part of the plan

Huh. Where did I say that? Stop trying to put words in my mouth. I ignored it the last few times you did it.

How about answering my question instead.

[Abe Linkman]

59. You didn't use those actual words, and I didn't say you did.

But, the implication I got from your message is that you agree that giving warnings was an integral part of the 9-11 plans. I used what I thought was your agreement on that, to expound on Mayor Brown's situation, and how it raises questions about other people who may have been warned but ignored the warning. Some have speculated that the Olsons were warned, but either forgot the warning or ignored it. As you may know, Barbara Olson ( Olson is the name she was going by, so that is why I use it here ) was originally scheduled to go out to L.A. on the 10th.

We know that Mayor Brown was warned, and I've read about a group of Pentagon folks (or people coming there, or ?. I forget now.) who cancelled their flights scheduled for the 11th. Don't you wonder who all was warned about 9-11?

[LARED]

60. How did you figure that out?

That I thought and agreed that giving warnings was an integral part of the 9-11 plans. I am certain that those associated with the terrorist were warned. I am equally sure that there was no specific warning given to anyone that could have taken action to stop or mitigate the attacks on innocents have come to light either.

So how about getting back to my questions from above?

Assuming this speculation is true.

The warning the Mayor received was 9/11 related. The warning came from someone that had enough knowledge to know that 9/11 was the date the attacks would take place and wanted the Mayor to be protected.

Now what?

How does this point to some malfeasance from the Bush administration?

How does this strengthen your argument that the attacks were self- inflected?

How does this point to LIHOP or MIHOP or any other fanciful HOP's?

And given your last post;

How does giving warnings as an integral part of the 9-11 plans support your position that the attacks were self-inflected?

[plaguepuppy]

61. no specific warning

Why, because Bush and his fellow scum-suckers assure us that there were no such warnings, contrary to statements (not "speculation") from several foreign intelligence agencies of vehement and quite specific warnings? Is there some reason we should assume any of the self-serving drivel pumped out in enormous volume by this administration is actually true, especially now that their whole skein of deception has begun to unravel? Are you really claiming that this bunch wouldn't lie on their mothers' graves to save their pink little asses?

"I am equally sure that there was no specific warning given to anyone that could have taken action to stop or mitigate the attacks"

"Could have" if the individuals warned actually wanted to stop the actions in question...
As in "sorry, you've obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a fuck."

[LARED]

62. quite specific warnings?

Got any links to those?

[plaguepuppy]

65. Links

A few for starters:

http://www.activeopposition.com/911TruthOut.htm

The warnings from all those foreign intelligence services, after all, are quite real. Egypt, Germany, Russia and the Israelis were vociferous in their concerns. The German intelligence service BND told US and Israeli intelligence that Middle East terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." The BND's information came through Echelon, the American-controlled network of 120 satellites that monitors all worldwide electronic communications.

Egypt voiced similar warnings that same month regarding aircraft attacks. Delivered just before the G-8 summit in Genoa, Egypt's alert carried such weight that anti-aircraft batteries were placed around Columbus Airport in Italy. The Russians warned the US that same summer of 25 pilots who had been trained for suicide missions, and Putin himself delivered the warning "in the strongest possible terms" to the US government. The Israeli intelligence service Mossad delivered a warning to both the FBI and the CIA detailing "a major assault on the United States" against "a large-scale target" that was "very vulnerable."

The Washington Post has reported that the NSA intercepted two messages on September 10, 2001, warning that something was going to happen the next day. "Tomorrow is zero hour," was one of the messages. The NSA's charter is to intercept, translate and pass on to FBI and CIA operatives important electronic signals from all across the globe. The Echelon satellite network which provided the German BND with their 9/11 information last June is part of that system.





http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jan2002/sept-j16.shtml

Warnings from foreign governments

The governments of at least four countries Germany, Egypt, Russia and Israel gave specific warnings to the US of an impending terrorist attack in the months preceding September 11. These alerts, while fragmentary, not only combined to foretell the scale of the attack and its main target, but indicated that hijacked commercial aircraft would be the weapon of choice.

According to an article in one of the major daily newspapers in Germany, published just after the destruction of the World Trade Center, the German intelligence service BND told both US and Israeli intelligence agencies in June that Middle East terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture."

The newspaper cited unnamed German intelligence sources, who said that the information came through Echelon, the US- controlled system of 120 satellites which monitors all worldwide electronic communications. Echelon is operated jointly by the United States, Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand, although its existence is not officially admitted. (Source: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, September 14, 2001)

The government of Egypt sent an urgent warning to the US June 13, based on a video made by Osama bin Laden. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak told the French newspaper Le Figaro that the warning was originally delivered just before the G-8 summit in Genoa. It was taken seriously enough that antiaircraft batteries were stationed around Christopher Columbus Airport in the Italian city. According to Mubarak, bin Laden "spoke of assassinating President Bush and other heads of state in Genoa. It was a question of an airplane stuffed with explosives. These precautions then had been taken." (Source: New York Times, September 26, 2001, "2 Leaders Tell of Plot to Kill Bush in Genoa," by David Sanger)

According to Russian press reports, Russian intelligence notified the CIA during the summer that 25 terrorist pilots had been specifically training for suicide missions. In an interview September 15 with MSNBC, Russian President Vladimir Putin confirmed that he had ordered Russian intelligence in August to warn the US government "in the strongest possible terms" of imminent attacks on airports and government buildings. (Source: From The Wilderness web site; MSNBC).

The London-based Sunday Telegraph óan arch-conservative newspaper usually highly supportive of the Bush administrationó reported that the Israeli intelligence service Mossad had delivered a warning to the FBI and CIA in August that as many as 200 followers of Osama bin Laden were slipping into the country to prepare "a major assault on the United States." The advisory spoke of a "large-scale target" in which Americans would be "very vulnerable." The Los Angeles Times cited unnamed US officials confirming this Mossad warning had been received. (Source: Sunday Telegraph, September 16, 2001, "Israeli security issued urgent warning to CIA of large-scale terror attacks," by David Wastell and Philip Jacobson; Los Angeles Times, September 20, 2001, "Officials Told of 'Major Assault' Plans," by Richard A. Serrano and John-Thor Dahlburg)

The Independent, a liberal daily in Great Britain, published an article asserting the US government "was warned repeatedly that a devastating attack on the United States was on its way." The Independent cited an interview given by Osama bin Laden to a London-based Arabic-language newspaper, al-Quds al-Arabi, in late August. About the same time, tighter security measures were ordered at the World Trade Center, for unexplained reasons. (Source: Independent, September 17, 2001, "Bush did not heed several warnings of attack," by Andrew Gumbel)

Despite this series of alerts, no US intelligence agency issued any warning of a possible attack on a target on US territory in the months leading up to September 11. The CIA and FBI had issued warnings about likely attacks on American military bases or embassies in the Middle East, Europe and Asia. On September 7 the US Department of State issued a worldwide alert about an impending attack by bin Laden followers, although it was focused on US-related targets in east Asia, especially Japan, not within the US itself. As the ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Richard Shelby, admitted, "This obviously was a failure of great dimension. We had no specific warning of the US being attacked."

Moreover, the FBI's decision to take no action on Zacarias Moussaoui must be considered in the light of this continuous stream of warnings from overseas. The US government was being repeatedly alerted to the danger of devastating attacks using hijacked commercial aircraft, yet the FBI decided to conduct no serious investigation into a man, believed by French intelligence to be linked to Osama bin Laden, who wanted to learn how to steer a 747 jumbo jet, but not to take off or land. Moussaoui was not even turned over to the FBI by the Immigration and Naturalization Service until after September 11.


http://democrats.com/elandslide/petition.cfm?campaign=911

The Bush administration ignored numerous warnings from US and foreign agencies:

They ignored warnings as early as June from the National Security Agency's Echelon electronic spy network that Middle Eastern terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture
They ignored warnings from an FBI agent in Phoenix on July 10, 2001 about suspicious Arab pilots with ties to Al Qaeda who were training in a local flight school, urging a nationwide investigation of Arab students in flight schools
Bush personally ignored warnings from the CIA on August 6, 2001 that Al Qaeda planned to hijack US planes
They ignored warnings from Jordanian intelligence in the summer that a major attack was planned inside the US using airplanes
They ignored warnings from Israeli intelligence in August that large-scale terrorist attacks on highly visible targets on the American mainland were imminent, organized by a cell of as many of 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation
They ignored warnings from Russian intelligence in August that at least 25 terrorist were trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan to attack US targets, with future plans to attack financial, nuclear, and space facilities
They ignored warnings from Moroccan intelligence in August that Bin Laden was "very disappointed" by the failure of the 1993 WTC bombing, and planned "large-scale operations in New York in the summer or autumn of 2001"

[LARED]

68. Ok. You have successfully

convinced me of something I already knew. There was a serious intelligence failure. Now establish with some certainty that the dots were connected and the attacks were ignored by our government.

Below is the source of this information from your working links. The World Wide Socialist Web. (not exactly an unbiased journal of record) indicates it was fragmentary information received over months. Easy to connect the dots in hindsight. Perhaps not so easy pre 9/11. Should our intelligence organizations have figured it out? Yes. Should heads roll? Yes. Is there evidence that someone put it all together and then sat on it. No.

The governments of at least four countries—Germany, Egypt, Russia and Israel—gave specific warnings to the US of an impending terrorist attack in the months preceding September 11. These alerts, while fragmentary, not only combined to foretell the scale of the attack and its main target, but indicated that hijacked commercial aircraft would be the weapon of choice.

[Abe Linkman]

70. Lared

"convinced me of something I already knew. There was a serious intelligence failure."

Doing something isn't a failure to do something, Lared. How is giving a warning an intelligence failure, unless the warnings weren't supposed to have been given?

[RH]

66. but to save their pink little asses

is not quite the same thing as to needlessly put their pink little arses at risk, is it?

In that respect a very big problem with the more far fetched hoax theories is 'why do it like that to begin with?'.

:shrug:

Why not, for instance, simply crash a B757 into the Pentagon if the same impression is exactly your intended effect?

I have never yet seen any serious attempt to answer that from those who prefer to suppose that the incident was some kind of enormous conjuring trick.

[Abe Linkman]

64. Malfeasance? Or something sinister?

"How does this point to some malfeasance from the Bush administration?"

Who told you that giving warnings to certain individuals is malfeasance?
NOT giving warnings would be malfeasance. What is so unforgivable is the fact that only certain, pre-selected individuals were warned. It was malfeasance (your term) NOT to warn everyone else.

[RH]

67. Who told you

that giving warnings to certain individuals is malfeasance?

The notion would presumably have arisen from the talk of anti semitism.

Except for an implication of malfeasance why would it be "anti" anything?

[LARED]

69. Abe

Your premise is that the Bush administration MIHOP. You have been quite clear on that issue. Malfeasance is perhaps too light a word to describe such an act if true, but is suitable.

My question based on the above premise is this. Assuming you are correct and the BFEE planned and implemented 9/11, what purpose would it serve to warn Mayor Brown, warn the 4000 Israelis supposedly in downtown Manhattan, or warn any of the others you think were warned?

[Abe Linkman]

71. Lared

That's one of the reasons why a thorough, independent investigation is needed. To find out why only certain people were warned.

[plaguepuppy]

72. What purpose would it serve?

"Assuming you are correct and the BFEE planned and implemented 9/11, what purpose would it serve to warn Mayor Brown, warn the 4000 Israelis supposedly in downtown Manhattan, or warn any of the others you think were warned?"

That assumes that any leaks had to have been deliberate, i.e. that the conspirators were omniscent. The more sensible assumption would be that, while very powerful and ruthless, the plotters could not keep perfect secrecy among the dozens (hundreds?) who would have had to be in on it. Human nature being what it is it would be difficult to keep something that big from close friends and family, and from there the information could easily diffuse out to the thousands of whatever nationalities who seem to have been warned not to go to work that day.

It's not all that hard to make a reasonable estimate of how many people would normally have been in their offices at that hour, and combine it with the best estimates of number of people evacuated to get a reasonable estimate of casualties. That being the case why were the casualty estimates so high for so long? The sources used by the media should have been knowledgable enough about the WTC to have come up with reasonable guesses of both numbers. Even if nobody kept an exact count of people as they were leaving, the FDNY and other rescuers on the scene had lots of experience with evacuations and should have been able to give a decent estimate. Did 10,000 or 20,000 people just walk out the door while no one was looking?

[Abe Linkman]

73. What about Ashcroft?

Using lared's phrase, what purpose was served by warning Ashcroft not to fly via commercial airliners?

What purpose was served by warning Ashcroft, but not warning the entire flying public? What purpose was served by that, Lared?

[LARED]

77. I don't know

but not being overly skeptical of the cause of 9/11 I would assume Ashcroft had specific threats against him?

Just a guess of course. If the BFEE MIHOP why bother warning Ashcroft months earlier. Why not just warn others or just have him on the ground on 9/11?

[Abe Linkman]

74. "lared"

Assuming that there a fund-raiser took place on the morning of 9-11-01 at Offut AFB; what purpose was served by having so many corporate executives (who otherwise would have been in the WTC that morning) fly all the way out to Offut AFB to meet with bush?

And, what purpose was served by keeping bush inside an elementary school for 30 minutes after "America was under attack"? How did they know he would be safe there? Was the Secret Service warned not to leave the building? If so, what purpose would THAT serve?

One more for you in this message: What (lawful) purpose was served by bringing down WTC 7?

[plaguepuppy]

75. And my favorite WTF

And while we're in Florida, what purpose was served by whisking Bush away from the friendly realm of goat stories and kids at his reading level to the supposedly known target of Airforce One?

And despite supposed warnings that AF-I was a target, and with all kinds of military bases in the neighborhood, why did they fly around for so long with no fighter escort?

[Abe Linkman]

76. Great questions, plaguepuppy

Let me have a crack at them:

A.) Whisking him away from the kids: 1.) ANSWER: to avoid further embarassing him? 2.) What proof do you have that they did "whisk" him away? (your proof must be that he was "whisked", not an opinion that he was) 3.) I told you there was an intelligence failure, or bureaucratic snafu, or negligence --- what more do you need?

B.) Why did they fly around for so long? ANSWER: to burn up fuel so that if they were hit, no population centers beneath AF1 would be incinerated (after all, if jet fuel can take down the WTC, no telling what it might do to _____U.S.A.) 2.) They forgt which AFB the fund-raiser was scheduled for. 3.) Due to an unfortunate intelligence failure, no fighter escorts received a message to accompany the plane to the fund-raiser 4.) I already told you they messed up, and frankly, what happened is, they had to wait for the escort fighters to be fueled up because they forgot to do it the night before. 5.) Worse case scenario - LTFTJBWTO (Let Them Finish The Job Before We Take Off).

[LARED]

78. what purpose was served

by having so many corporate executives (who otherwise would have been in the WTC that morning) fly all the way out to Offut AFB to meet with bush?

How many WTC executives were at this meeting? I think the answer is 1. Did Bush meet with these people at the AFB? No?

[plaguepuppy]

79. Only one lucky ducky?

"Of all places, Mr. Buffett just happened to be at the U.S. Strategic Command headquarters located at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska. Offutt AFB is, coincidentally, where President G.W. Bush flew to on Air Force One later on in the day for "safety". What was Buffett doing there? Mr. Buffett was "hosting a charity event" super early in the morning which included a small group of business leaders in which one of them became a very lucky person.

This person who became very lucky was Ann Tatlock, the CEO of Fiduciary Trust Co. International. Now what made Mrs. Tatlock such a lucky person for being at this event that morning? Mrs. Tatlock works in the World Trade Center and not only that, but her offices were right where Flight 175 crashed into the WTC 2... "

http://news.globalfreepress.com/index.pl?section=911

[RH]

45. Do you honestly are no awareness

of the insider trading pattern about which that so much of a fuss was made at the end of September 2001?

According to contemporary news headlines it was e.g.
"The World's Largest Insider Trading Scam".
http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=386

This from Dylan Ratigan of the Bloomberg Business News was a typical comment:

“This could very well be insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you’ve ever seen in your entire life . . . this would be one of the most extraordinary coincidences in the history of mankind if it was a coincidence,”

http://www.americanfreepress.net/051302/Revealing_9-11_Stock_Trades_Co/revealing_9-11_stock_trades_co.html

[LARED]

46. I think some clarification is in order

I make a clear distinction between someone that was had inside information (ie warned) and profited by it and someone or a group given a SPECIFIC warning and not going to work that day.

The first example is an accomplice as far as I'm concerned. The latter one that got a specific warning and took some action to either move people into or out of harms way does not appear to exist. Of course it is possible that a few Jihadist type people that worked in the WTC knew about the events and stayed clear.

When asked about was anyone warned I am responding to that question in the sense that a specific warning was given to some one that had authority over over people.

[LARED]

36. How about

answering my question.

[RH]

25. Not exactly fodder

but nevertheless a remarkably low number.

To be serious, how many Israeli victims were to be expected?

G W Bush had cited 130.

While the situation would be confused by the possibility of dual nationality, given that approximately one in ten of the trade center workers were killed one would proportionally expect maybe ten of the 100 Israelis to have gone the same way.

Press stories immediately after 9/11 had it that the Moassad had travelled to the USA especially to warn of impending attacks.

So are we then to asssume that they went out of their way to warn American only then to continue to shrug their shoulders, with no attempt to alert their own own folk?

The moot question would then be 'How much did they know?' How much sense would it make to suppose that elements in the USA may have turned a blind eye while the Mossad had no such an eye to turn? I'd have thought it more likely they'd know a tad more than their benefactors from start to finish.

According to Der Spiegel, October 1, 2002, "Mossad Agents Were On Atta's Tail"

http://www.cooperativeresearch.net/timeline/2002/derspiegel100102.html

[acerbic]

26. As much sense as that makes, it still doesn't consider

...where in the buildings the Israelis worked.

While the situation would be confused by the possibility of dual nationality, given that approximately one in ten of the trade center workers were killed one would proportionally expect maybe ten of the 100 Israelis to have gone the same way.

Depends totally on whether their offices were close, above or well below the impact points. Oh well, maybe they chose their offices 30 years ago based on the attack plans... :tinfoilhat:

[RH]

30. Or maybe

they'd got wind of what was to come and already moved out of the buildings.

Any comment therefore with regard to Zim?

While not at all convinced that extra explosives were planted I'd hesitate to exclude the possibility of demolotion as a general intention in view of the large number of building fires routinely suspected or proved to be deliberately perpetrated.

It would then be remarkable if some of the occupants were not in some way tipped off; when all said and done the casualties were much lighter than had originally been expected.

I'd like at least to see a thorough statistical analysis (not just with regard to the Israelis) of the numbers definitely in the building on the day as compared to the usual.

[LARED]

27. I'm not so sure it's a low number

As I recall approx 50,000 people worked in the Trades Centers on a normal day plus visitors. Now if 3000 of that number died, the ratio is 3 to 50. Assuming the number of 100 Israelis is correct and 2 died then that ratio in 1 to 50.

Given that the people that were murdered were decided in large part by their location in the building rather than a random fashion, it seems to me the difference between the numbers is statistically insignificant.

[RH]

31. Not even low

as compared to the figure of 130 as given by G W Bush?

Or as compared with the 4000 concerned Israeli friends and relatives who had contacted the Israeli Foreign Ministry?

G W Bush quoted his figure to Congress, Sept 20th 2001.

How long should it have taken to confirm whether not those who had gone to work lived or died? The US government ought to have had access to the best information and I'd not have expected the mere complation of a comprehensive check list to be that much of chore, under the circumstances, and those who did live would presumably then have got home again or made contact within a day or two at the most.

At first I took the rumours with a pinch of salt, with no particular axe to grind over it, but then I looked around the web for versions from Israeli or Jewish sources. Yes, there are some convincing stories to the effect that Jewish people were caught up in the event but looking at the bigger picture I began to wonder since when were they so strangely restrained about their suffering? If an Al Qaeda extremist faction was really behind it all, would they not have gone out of their of their way to hit the Jews? Didn't make such a good job of that then, did they?

I do not feel at all comfortable with any of it.

:crazy:

[plaguepuppy]

34. No slur to speak the truth...

So is it a slur to claim that I read somthing that you consider antisemitic that I don't actually read? You really don't hold yourself to any standard of honesty in your insults, but at least you're consistent in your indifference to truth and decency.

And I believe "suspicious" was your term. Am I allowed to find it interesting that shortly after a documented warning on an Israeli instant messaging service that out of the "might have been up to 100 Israeli citizens" (great research there, is that like "lose up to 150 pounds?) only one is in fact killed. And somehow the content of this "non-specific" message is so sensitive that it must be kept secret to avoid "inappropriate speculation."

Suspicious? Well, I find it at least as interesting as the 400 people (of unspecified and irrelevant nationality) who chose at the last minute not to show for that breakfast meeting at Windows on the World. Conspiracies? Well, at some level, but certainly not involving those 400 people, or "up to 99" Israelies. But a hell of a lot of people seem to have known in fairly specific terms that something big and bad was going down that day.

Is it interesting that Ashcroft had avoided commercial flights since July, or that Willie Brown (and a lot of others) were warned not to fly that day?

And again, the 4000 figure is not a canard, and has nothing to do with some imaginary number of people who didn't go to work: it is the number of Israelis stipulated by their embassy as being in the area and potentially at risk. It doesn't look like a duck or walk like a duck, and repeating 'canard' over and over doesn't make it one.

[LARED]

39. OK

So is it a slur to claim that I read something that you consider antisemitic that I don't actually read?

Well I'm glad to hear you don't read AFP. BTW, whether I consider the AFP to be antisemitic/revisionist is immaterial. There is no question that it is.

And I believe "suspicious" was your term. Am I allowed to find it interesting that shortly after a documented warning on an Israeli instant messaging service that out of the "might have been up to 100 Israeli citizens"

That was my word. It is base on the my impression of your remarks. If I misinterpreted then you have my apologies.

Where does it say that Odigo is an Israel messaging service? It is an American based company.

And again, the 4000 figure is not a canard, and has nothing to do with some imaginary number of people who didn't go to work: it is the number of Israelis stipulated by their embassy as being in the area and potentially at risk. It doesn't look like a duck or walk like a duck, and repeating 'canard' over and over doesn't make it one.

Ahhhh, it was you that said it was a canard not me. I merely pointing out that believing it was a canard and finding that information 'interesting' is inconsistent.

[Abe Linkman]

42. Polite note to be very, very careful.

It's easy to allow them to taunt you, but you must purge the urge
to take the bait.

[RH]

24. How many should have been murdered if it was a normal day

The 4000 figure came from the Israeli authorities.

G W Bush cited 130 Israeli deaths.

[LARED]

28. Yes

the 4000 was the estimate of Israelis in the WTC and surrounding areas. In NYC that covers a lot of area.

[RH]

32. According to the Jerusalem Post

"The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem has so far received the names of 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon at the time of the attack."

The figure would therfore presumably have corresponded to the number thought to have been at risk.

It would then indeed be riduculous, with nothing more to go on, to transpose that to meaning that 4000 were not at work but not so unreasonable to relate it more generally to the number actually hurt.

[LARED]

38. IMO relating the 4000 to the number actually hurt

is not valid. The people killed or hurt in the WTC were not randomly picked. Those killed were just unfortunately in the wrong part of the building at the wrong time. Although it is possible, but unlikely IMO, that the attackers targeted parts of the building based on who was in particular office areas.

If there was a office full of 300 Israelis that got killed because there were located in the wrong part of the building, what would people be saying then? One can only imagine.

So at the end of the day the ratio of Israelis killed verse other countries is largely meaningless unless some one comes up with evidence that the 100 to 130 Israelis in the WTC were normally in a area where most others died. I've yet to see anything like that. Have you?

[RH]

44. It is also engaging

to compare the figure of given figure of 100 workers with the
4000 previously "believed to have been in the areas of the World Trade Center". Do these people not keep records? Can they count?

The G W Bush figure of 130 was supposed to have been Israelis killed, not just Israelis involved. One can but wonder where on Earth such a number came from to begin with. Was it possibly a fact that a week after the event 130 Israels reported as missing had not yet showed up? Hoew then do you explain the lower figure of 100 that was later given. Do these people not keep records? Can they count?

I don't buy it. It insults my intelligence. I am astounded that others are prepared to go along with it with so little to say.

Are we supposed to understand that the Israeli authorities honestly supposed that only as many as 100 or 130 worked there and that they were all killed? A comment to the effect that the people killed or hurt in the WTC were 'not randomly picked' would then be remarkably meanigful. On the other hand, as we stand, I have as yet seen no evidence whatsoever to prove beyond doubt that the Twin Towers were an especially intended objective, chosen in advance by the given suspects, let alone any pre conceived plan to target a particular part of the buildings.

As I said before, I did look around for pertinent information but found very little, which is of itself remarkable. I have not yet seen any convincingly definite statistic to indicate the actual numbers known to have been at work or visiting the buildings. I do not believe that the Israeli authorities would not have done some work on this for themselves. I believe it is reasonable to suppose that the Sayenim networks are more capable, not less capable than the FBI or the CIA with regard to the possibility of effectively stitching a grand conspiracy together. I do believe that there was an element of conscious exaggeration, and from many different quarters, with regard to the fatality figures. Two months after the event many loud mouths who should have known better were still quoting the inflated figures of 5 or 6 thousand deaths at the Twin Towers.

[RH]

15. only one person was killed from Britain?

Since when was England (with 11 deaths listed) not in Britain?

[LARED]

17. I didn't notice that when I posted

I don't know why it is listed that way.

[dofus]

12. Okay, I stand corrected.

I long ago heard the story about all the Jews who worked at WTC being informed ahead of time, but this is the first time I'd heard this specific messaging service one.

The mayor (or former mayor?) of San Francisco got a phone call the evening of the 10th of September telling him not to fly the next day, and he was supposed to fly to NYC for something or another. That was reported within several days of Sept 11, and I don't believe it was ever found out who made the phone call.

[paulthompson]

43. More info

The surprising thing to me about the Odigo warning is how it is just one piece of many showing people with some advanced knowledge of 9/11. It appears many with connections to the Middle East or Afghanistan/Pakistan knew, and that includes Israelis and Muslims.

I've compiled a lot of such cases here:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.net/timeline/main/AAexactday.html

But there's many more instances I'm missing, such as the recent declassified DIA documents showing that the Northern Alliance was aware of the attack, or the Gerald Posner book suggesting both the Saudi and Pakistani gvmts were aware as well.

Here are some more interesting tidbits about Israelis with foreknowledge:

September 11, 2001 (W): Five Israelis are arrested for "puzzling behavior" related to the WTC attacks. They are arrested around 4:30 P.M. after having filmed the burning WTC from the roof of their company's building near Liberty State Park, then shouting in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery. They were spotted by a neighbor who called the police and the FBI. The police tracked them down in a van with the words "Urban Moving Systems" written on the side. One man was found with $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock, another had two passports on him, and a box cutter was found in the van. Investigators say that "There are maps of the city in the car with certain places highlighted... It looked like they're hooked in with this. It looked like they knew what was going to happen." One of these Israelis later says, "Our purpose was to document the event." The FBI later concludes at least two are Mossad agents and that all were on a Mossad surveillance mission. The FBI interrogates them for weeks. They are held on immigration violation charges and released 71 days later. Their names are later identified as Sivan and Paul Kurzberg, Oded Ellner, Omer Marmari and Yaron Shmuel.

Note that this story has recently been attacked as "anti-Semetic" - but Forward, a Jewish audience publication, points out that the FBI concluded at least two of these people were Mossad agents. And more Mossad agents were caught with footage of hours of film of the Sears Tower, as if they expected an attack there, and were attempting to film it as well.


September 4, 2001 (D): Zim-American Israeli Shipping Co. moves their North American headquarters from the 16th floor of the WTC to Norfolk, Virginia, one week before the 9/11 attacks. The Israeli government owns 49 percent of the company. Zim announced the move and its date six months earlier. More than 200 workers had just been moved out; about 10 are still in the building making final moving arrangements on 9/11, but escape alive. The move leaves only one Israeli company, ClearForest, with 18 employees, in the WTC on 9/11. The four or five employees in the building at the time manage to escape. One year later, a Zim ship is impounded attempting to ship Israeli military equipment to Iran; it is speculated that this is done with the knowledge of Israel. Given the Israeli government ties, the Odigo warning (see September 11, 2001 (C)), and the Israeli art student spy ring (see December 2000-April 2001), some have speculated that the move was more than just lucky.


I should point out the Zim story could be pure coincidence, but I think it's worth noting nonetheless. Especially if Der Speigel and other media reports are correct that the Mossad was tracking the 9/11 hijackers from at least mid-2000.

Here's some from the Muslim community:

July 16, 2001 (B): A Village Voice reporter is told by a New York taxi driver, "You know, I am leaving the country and going home to Egypt sometime in late August or September. I have gotten e-mails from people I know saying that Osama bin Laden has planned big terrorist attacks for New York and Washington for that time. It will not be safe here then." He does in fact return to Egypt for that time period. The FBI isn't told about this lead until after 9/11. He is later interrogated by the FBI and released. He claims what he knew was known by many.

Early September 2001 (G): Shortly before 9/11, people attending a New York mosque are warned to stay out of lower Manhattan on 9/11. The FBI's Joint Terrorist Task Force interviews dozens of members of the mosque, who confirm the story. The mosque leadership denies any advanced knowledge and the case apparently remains unsolved.

Early September 2001 (H): A veteran detective with post-9/11 investigations later claims that rumors in New York City's Arab-American community about the 9/11 attacks are common in the days beforehand. The story "had been out on the street" and the number of leads turning up later is so "overwhelming" that it is difficult to tell who knows about the attacks from secondhand sources and who knows about it from someone who may have been a participant. After 9/11, tracking leads regarding Middle Eastern employees who didn't show up for work on 9/11 are "a serious and major priority."

September 6, 2001: Antoinette DiLorenzo, teaching English to a class of Pakistani immigrants, asks a student gazing out the window, "What are you looking at?" The student points towards the WTC, and says: "Do you see those two buildings? They won't be standing there next week." At the time, nothing was thought of it, but on September 13 the FBI interviews all the people in the classroom and confirms the event. The FBI later places the boy's family under surveillance but apparently are unable to find a connection to the 9/11 plot. An MSNBC reporter later sets out to disprove this "urban myth," but to his surprise finds all the details of the story are confirmed. The fact that the family are recent immigrants from Pakistan might mean the information came from Pakistan. One official at the school says many Arab-American students have come forward with their own stories about having prior knowledge before 9/11: "Kids are telling us that the attacks didn't surprise them. This was a nicely protected little secret that circulated in the community around here."

September 10, 2001 (G): A sixth-grade student of Middle Eastern descent in Jersey City, New Jersey, says something that alarms his teacher at Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School. "Essentially, he warned her to stay away from lower Manhattan because something bad was going to happen," says Sgt. Edgar Martinez, deputy director of police services for the Jersey City Police Department. Note that others with possible 9/11 foreknowledge also lived in Jersey City (see June 12, 2001).


I think the "4000 Israelis" number is next to meaningless, esp. since that includes people in DC, but clearly there were people who knew and warned people not to go to work that day. No doubt many who knew would not have come forward to tell their stories to the FBI after 9/11. We now know the FBI was literally looking up random Muslim names in the phone book to investigate - if one was from the Middle East especially one would be asking for a heap of trouble to come forward.

What's incredible is how US intelligence could supposedly not know about the attack when it seems everybody and their brother knew. The above is just a small sample of what you'll find on that webpage I linked to above, and that's only what's publically known from those who have stepped forward.

[Abe Linkman]

49. Do you know about Posner, Mr. Thompson?

I'm surprised that you would consider him a reliable source for anything except BS.

btw - It seems like some people are prepared to accept that lots of folks knew in advance about 9-11...as long as they are all from the MEast. Amazing how some ME boys, under the direction of a cave man with bad kidneys, could pull off something like 9-11 (even causing the destruction of WTC 7 - to the great relief of lots of folks who had reason to worry about some of the contents of offices in that particular building)...and the U.S. was unable (or, more likely, unwilling) to restrain itself from getting in on the action. Yet, when it comes to invading a relatively large country like EYE RACK; the U.S. can blow 'em all to kingdom come, and do it with aplomb. The MEeasterns THERE were seemingly totally defenseless to stop the U.S.

Enough to baffle the curious.

[paulthompson]

57. Posner

Yep,
I'm aware of him generally, like the ridiculous "Case Closed" book. With 9/11, his take is generally to blame Clinton for everything. But I've read his 9/11 book and actually I don't find it that bad. He doesn't just make stuff up, as some do, but works mainly through lies of omission. For instance, he emphasizes all the mistakes made during the Clinton administration, and neglects to mention most in the Bush 2 one.

So in my opinion that makes him no better or no worse than most other mainstream media and authors. For instance with the JFK thing, it's completely taboo in the mainstream to suggest that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK despite 80+ percent of the people now believing so, so all the papers and magazines fell over each other in praising his Case Closed book. The fact is, virtually all news coverage of 9/11 is bad and filled with lies and disinfo, so in comparison he's actually better than many cos he at least is more rigorous with fact checking, at least in this book. Read Youssef Boudansky's 9/11 books if you want an example of someone just making stuff up left and right.

The end chapter in Posner's book about Saudi and Pakistani involvement in 9/11 appears to jibe with what else I know about their role. That in now way of course lets the US gvmt off the hook. I've long suspected the 9/11 operation was "farmed out" to Pakistan's ISI for more plausible deniability. The ties between the ISI and the CIA over drug trafficking and much more go back a long ways, as you probably already know.

By the way, there's an interesting Asia Times article about Posner's revelations that suggest it could be a subtle spin on the truth - naming General Mir as the Pakistani "mastermind" of 9/11 because he's conveniently dead, and thus protecting those really involved who are inconviently still alive.

[Abe Linkman]

58. Posner is a shill for "deep politics" interests

"By the way, there's an interesting Asia Times article about Posner's revelations that suggest it could be a subtle spin on the truth - naming General Mir as the Pakistani "mastermind" of 9/11 because he's conveniently dead, and thus protecting those really involved who are inconviently still alive."

What's new about trying to frame someone from outside America? You wouldn't expect an article that suggests that the attacks could NOT have happened without ACTIVE support from the U.S. Government, would you?

btw- Posner does not have a good reputation for rigorous research. Only that which supports a false version of whatever event he is writing about. His (summer, 1993) "Case Closed" is a perfect example.

[plaguepuppy]

63. Case wide shut

Posner seems to have done well as a semi-official conspiracy debunker, though in the case of the JFK assasination he doesn't seem to have convinced many people. Last I heard about 80% of Americans disbelieve the official story, making it in a sense the mother of all conspiracy theories. And perhaps a Rosetta stone as well, tying together so many major threads of political intrigue in late-20th century America.

An illuminating story from one of Hopsicker's public talks:
Barry Seal, of Mena Arkansas fame, was once asked if the rumor was true that he had flown the "getaway" plane out of Dallas. His laconic reply was "that would have had to be a big damn plane."