FBI Agent: The CIA Could Have Stopped 9/11

By Jeff Stein


Mark Rossini, a former FBI special agent at the center of an enduring mystery related to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, says he is “appalled” by the newly declassified statements by former CIA Director George Tenet defending the spy agency’s efforts to detect and stop the plot.

Rossini, who was assigned to the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center (CTC) at the time of the attacks, has long maintained that the U.S. government has covered up secret relations between the spy agency and Saudi individuals who may have abetted the plot. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers who flew commercial airliners into the World Trade Center towers, the Pentagon, and a failed effort to crash into the U.S. Capitol, were Saudis.

FBI Agent: The CIA Could Have Stopped 9/11

Former FBI agent Mark Rossini seems to verify Richard Clark's theory that the CIA tried to turn Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar but failed to turn them.Rossini and another agent wrote a memo that disappeared quickly.As for Tenet's howls of outrage to the IG they and the FBI clearly allowed the attacks to happen.

To those who would like to see and hear Richard Clark's theory:

a reply to: mike dangerously

Alphabet v Alphabet agencies ...

This must be the beginning of the mass exodus and time to put all bugouts into " Go mode "...

Finger pointing - guilt trips - they are delaminating.

Main players are shoring up ... the plebs are left - just to confuse and obfuscate.

(love that word)

Eta: as if any of us "pawns" will ever be privvy to this type of crap ....,

a reply to: mike dangerously

It's well known and admitted by the FBI, national defense and CIA that information was given and either ignored, or wasn't communicated with other agencies.

The thing is tho, people still think it was 'allowed' to happen and one big conspiracy.
The only conspiracy that make sense is it was know to a handful of people that it would, all the people who knew the intelligence under them knew as well, but didn't now the plan. Those people fell into the trap.

things would have gone a whole lot different if the Phoenix FBI has followed the instructions I suggested in the April-May 1995 Tip letter I sent to them in the Phoenix FBI, ATTENTION: Counter Terrorism unit...

but my brother-in-law, now a retired FBI Agent, was never put into the loop or even questioned about his brother-in-law's credibility...
I requested that James K. be heading up an investigative unit which would screen all middle eastern, Arabs taking commercial flight training here in the nationwide network of Flight Schools operating in the USA... (some programs even sponsored by USA Government Agencies to train Middle Eastern, young men, to become commercial pilots, at no cost)
this was in 1995 mind you...right after the OK City bombing

the tip letter cited the exact date & time that a group of seven possible Middle eastern terrorists were witnessed on the campus of a flight school associated with the Scottsdale AZ airport.

only the possibility that eventually 3 high profile targets would be attacked by a team of pilots to commandeer the commercial jets was revealed... the targets themselves were to be revealed only to Agent James K. when we were in communication.

as far as the Capitol building being a target---- well, my 'channeled' info said the intended Target was the Washington Monument & not the Capitol as the Washington Monument being toppled and the WH lawn looking like a war zone would have been a nice day for the act of martyrdom success...


the other "time-window" the interview shared was the June-August 2001 activity period.... there was a lot of activity going on... I noticed this when after some 32 years... a picture of myself at the base of the Washington monument in oct 1969 was published on the cover of a magazine owned by Steve Forbes on the April-May 2001 issue...in that image, I was caught waving the 'Peace Sign' "V' as my good-by salute to the iconic monument as I knew back in '69 that a new Pearl-Harbor attack would take the monument out- along with the Pentagon and the WTC tower---
I immediately froze up... the thought-police or whatever manifestation of Psychic Cops were out there, and chumming the waters with bait, so I kept my mouth shut that the 9-11 event (either in September or in November was about to unfold) too bad about the newly placed head of security at the WTC -> John P O'Neil = en.wikipedia.org...
who seemed to have been a person that was channeled with the scheme of 911 like I and others was


my name is not Ripley...and the source of this along with the catholic pedophiles revelation stopped
when I became a 'now' person instead of a future-throwback, immigrant from 1950-2000...I served my 50 years of servitude and it's not about how many people listened... that was your choice

Clarke's explanation is speculation. WHY he thinks the CIA withed the info that top Al Qaeda operatives were in the US planning an attack is speculation. What's not speculation is the fact the CIA did intentionally withhold this information and that the information would have most likely stopped the 9/11 attacks.

Either way, yes, the CIA could have stopped the attacks. The only question left is why. I don't agree with Clarke's explanation. I do agree with Clarke in that the CIA needs to be investigated for malfeasance at the least.

A serious investigation should have taken place, it should happen still. The CIA lied to the 9/11 commission. The American people should demand to know why the CIA kept this information from being passed on to the proper people. I'm of the opinion they wanted the attacks to happen. Clarke is of the opinion they were "embarrassed" because the 9/11 hijackers double crossed them.

What also gives me concern is the Able Danger program and the weak Senate investigation into it. Pentagon lawyers allegedly stopped the DIA from telling FBI counter terrorism about the Al Qaeda cells in America. The FBI is the only agency allowed to operate/arrest within America. Keeping the crucial Al Qaeda information from them essentially keeps any arrests/interrogations from taking place on American soil.

So, we have two cases where top level Al Qaeda operatives were allowed to operate on American soil leading into the attacks, at a time when the CIA was warning everyone about the Al Qaeda threat. Does anyone here think the Senate investigation into Able Danger was thorough? Does anyone not think the investigation was intentionally obstructed? Obstructed by the destruction of evidence and not allowing the Able Danger participants to testify.

Anyway, Clarke's interview combined with the separate Able Danger situation really makes me question these so called (unintentional) intelligence failures. The CIA's long history with Saudi intelligence and the Pakistani ISI is also troubling. Another troubling fact(?) is that Israeli intelligence knew the attack was coming and did nothing to stop it. Then we have the NORAD failures on the morning of the attacks.

9/11 is dirty.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: mike dangerously

It's well known and admitted by the FBI, national defense and CIA that information was given and either ignored, or wasn't communicated with other agencies.

The thing is tho, people still think it was 'allowed' to happen and one big conspiracy.
The only conspiracy that make sense is it was know to a handful of people that it would, all the people who knew the intelligence under them knew as well, but didn't now the plan. Those people fell into the trap.

You didn't even watch the entire interview.

Funny how so many people try to downplay what Rossini and Clark and several others have said about the CIA's inaction when it came to this not to mention how the FBI also had several shots at stopping the attacks.

FBI Agent: The CIA Could Have Stopped 9/11

How, by arresting themselves?