In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Rules of Engagement: Who's Getting Greased Here?

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited May 2002 in General Discussion
Rules of Engagement: Who's Getting Greased Here?
(Government Prior Knowledge a Moot Point)
By J.J. Johnson
Published 05. 16. 02 at 20:44 Sierra Time

While many people may have seen the latest finger-pointing dance going on in Washington over the September 11 attacks, some Internet users will find it boring - since there were suspicions of the government having prior knowledge that some kind of attack was coming. But it's less of the way the media and the left are pounding the Bush administration over the matter, it's how the Bush folks are responding that's bothering me. Sure, they've been answering all the questions the best they could, and yes, there probably are some politics behind it all. But here is the most glaring observation:
We are making ourselves look like the biggest bunch of idiots on the planet.

Due to White house spin control Thursday, this is what hit the wires:

"The White House on Thursday defended its decision not to alert Americans before the Sept. 11 attacks that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack airplanes. White House officials said such a warning would have risked shutting down the country's airline system."

"The defense came after Democrats led angry calls for President Bush to hand over a top-secret CIA briefing he received in August about the threats. Lawmakers also called for the release of an FBI memo before Sept. 11 that warned headquarters that many Middle Eastern men were training in at least one U.S. flight school." - Associated Press.

Now here's the rub: while many are out there saying "See, we told you the government knew about this and didn't say anything!", a little digging shows that not only did the government have prior knowledge, but a warning DID go out to the airline industry.

It took me a while to find something, but as a frequent air traveler, I clearly remember the warning that was given to all airlines last summer.



Airline Industry Warning Of June 23, 2001 - Airline News Wire: http://AirlineBiz.com/wire U.S. Airlines may be a terror risk over next 3 days

WASHINGTON - With U.S. Gulf forces already on high alert, the U.S. State Department is expected to issue a travel advisory shortly warning Americans traveling overseas to be on their guard.

Videotapes allegedly show Osama bin Laden threatening to attack U.S. interests in the region. Indictments against 13 Saudi nationals and one Lebanese, charging them with killing 19 US servicemen at a military base in Saudi Arabia in 1996 appears to be the catalyst. With the announcement of the indictments, U.S. Attorney General Ashcroft noted how terrorists are targeting the United States. "Americans are a high-priority target for terrorists," he said. In recent years, U.S. citizens have found themselves the target of several attacks by the terror network of Osama bin Laden. One such attack involved a plot to destroy 12 U.S. airliners in Asia.

A jury found Ramzi Ahmed Yousef the alleged mastermind of the scheme, and two other defendants, guilty on all counts. Yousef is also the alleged mastermind of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and is also linked to schemes to assassinate President Clinton and the Pope. Just prior to the attack of the Saudi military base, officials uncovered the plot to blow up 12 U.S. airliners on January 6, 1995 when a fire broke out in a Manila apartment. During the trial a Secret Service agent testified that Yousef boasted during his extradition flight to New York that he would have blown up several jumbo jets within a few weeks if his plan had not been discovered. The government said the defendants even devised a name for their airline terror plot named, "Project Bojinka."

Tapes played in court showed the defendants talking about how much they enjoyed killing Americans. In a test run, a bomb was placed on a Philippine Air Lines 747 flight to Tokyo. It exploded, killing a Japanese passenger. The Arabic satellite television channel MBC has reported, "the next two weeks will witness a big surprise."

A reporter of MBC said, "A severe blow is expected against U.S. and Israeli interests worldwide." MBC said the reporter met with Osama bin Laden two days ago in Afghanistan. "There is a major state of mobilization among the Osama bin Laden forces. It seems that there is a race of who will strike first. Will it be the United States or Osama bin Laden?" the correspondent said.

June 25 is the fifth anniversary of the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers bombing which killed 19 U.S. servicemen. Bob Monetti, President of the Victims of Pan Am Flight 103 said, "I hope the airlines are watching this situation closely." Mr. Monetti, who lost his son Rick on Pan Am 103 is also a special advisor to the FAA on security related matters. Monetti is hopeful about the progress that has been made since the bombing of Pan Am 103.

However, Monetti expressed serious concern about the abilities of the airlines to stop a terrorist organization from carrying out their plans as promised. Monetti noted that Osama bin Laden has had several terrorist targets over the years and not all of them have been military. "The airlines are at risk -- They need to take all appropriate measures and counter-measures to ensure the safety of their passengers," Monetti said.



This alert was never rescinded, and in fact, continued throughout the July 4 holiday season. I remember this because I recall an announcement that extra security precautions were being taken in the several airports I was in during that time. In case that wasn't enough to get someone's attention. Here's another excerpt:

Israeli security issued urgent warning to CIA of large-scale terror attacks
By David Wastell in Washington and Philip Jacobson in Jerusalem
London Telegraph - 09.16.01

ISRAELI intelligence officials say that they warned their counterparts in the United States last month that large-scale terrorist attacks on highly visible targets on the American mainland were imminent.

The attacks on the World Trade Centre's twin towers and the Pentagon were humiliating blows to the intelligence services, which failed to foresee them, and to the defense forces of the most powerful nation in the world, which failed to deflect them.



There are plenty more stories that are not too hard to scare up - including even the Russians giving a direct warning to the United States.

So what gives, Washington? Why not just come out and tell folks there WAS a warning out there? Since we're out in the open about government officials having prior knowledge of 'something' about to take place, the question will soon lead to the President's office door and what did he know, and when did he know it.

Now, let's throw a match into this can of gasoline: Sierra Times ran an article back on September 28, 2001 about a mysterious and unexplained change in a Florida executive order that left a speculation to many that Gov. Jeb Bush (R-FL) must have suspected there was a problem somewhere. Back on September 7, 4 days before the attacks, Gov. Bush changed an executive order that focused on natural disasters and using just a few words, changed the focus to that of 'terrorism'.

We'll say it: Someone knew something wicked this way was coming. But before pointing the fingers only at the Bush clan, Congressional leaders got the same classified briefings. So Dashcle & Co. can quit blowing smoke.

So, we can all point fingers at the government, right?

According to the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), From 1961 to 2001, pilots were permitted to carry firearms. Many did so - and safely - during the Cuban hijackings of the 1970s. Ironically, the FAA revoked that regulation last July, shortly before the Sept. 11 attack. Get that? That's shortly AFTER the posted warnings of possible multiple highjack attempts - from intelligence services of several countries.

Why didn't anyone in the pilots union scream? Why didn't air travelers scream?

What we're doing here is playing 'armchair quarterback' over what happened 8 months ago. The media-government complex will of course continue to point fingers, play politics, and propose more legislation (and probably more taxes) to make Americans 'feel' safe. But whole episode should lead all Americans to one conclusion:

You can't trust this government to protect you.

What's worse, even if they sincerely wanted to protect us, I don't believe they collectively know how. I recall shortly after September 11, the local Las Vegas media reported that the local FBI field office would be 'closed indefinitely'. Indefinitely meant long enough to install the concrete barricades around the FBI office and hire a 24-hour guard at the door. Sure, they were protecting - themselves.

And so the warnings were clearly given, and the pilots were disarmed. Armed pilots could have thwarted these attacks, but this government is STILL hesitant about giving our pilots a last line of defense against the next attack. "Oh - someone could get hurt," they say. Yet this government seems to have no problem sending an F-15 over a major metropolitan area to give some large airframe an air-to-air enema if they happen to stray off course without explanation. We'd rather have armed air marshals than armed pilots. At least the pilot can still fly the plane if an incident occurs. The air marshal? Well, that's anyone's guess. You see, if someone's gotta have a gun on that plane, "they have to be a federal employee - else we just can't trust them", this government has implied.

Yes, I'll admit it. We're getting greased here. Hosed. Flim-Flammed. Hoodwinked. But we're just as guilty for expecting the government to take care of us. Heck, we don't even take warnings about missing cyanide trucks seriously until we see it on a major wire service. Folks in Washington may make political hay out of it, but no justice will be served until some of the families of those who were lost refuse the government 'hush money' and start pursuing legal action. Do I believe the government was behind the attacks of 911? No. But I do see a clear legal argument for criminal negligence by the government, and Constitutional negligence by the American Public.

Between Langley and K Street, either heads should roll quick, or Real Americans better start looking to form their own country - for their own safety

http://www.sierratimes.com/02/05/17/arjj051702.htm


"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878

Comments

  • joeaf1911a1joeaf1911a1 Member Posts: 2,962 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    With all the so called threats from everywhere, reactor plants,
    resivoirs, tunnels, buildings, bridges, and the likes, how many can one take seriously. It is like "condition yellow" we live under now.
    Does anyone understand condition yellow? I dont. As far as "Rules
    of Engagement" in war, in WW 2 we only had one. It was taught from
    Basic Trainng into combat. Kill or be killed...... A old dog face.
  • badboybobbadboybob Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The democraps have no ammunition, therefore they resort to horse pucky. Can you imagine what America's response would have been if Al Sore was elected president?

    PC=BS
  • IconoclastIconoclast Member Posts: 10,515 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    9-11 may or may not have been a failure of the intelligence establishment we had at the time. But whose intelligence community was it, pray tell? The intelligence agencies gutted by Democratic Senator Frank Church? The intelligence agencies told to rely on electronic intercepts rather than human agents under the Klintoon Kops? Excuse please, but it seems to me that Daschle & company ought to take a real hard look at the silicon slabs before they start heaving stones! What a bloody crock of horse manure - and their words are, as well!

    If there were an IQ test for voters - say lukewarm room temperature at a minimum, the Democraps would have fewer reps in Congress than the Libertarians.
Sign In or Register to comment.