It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

PBS: NSA could have prevented 9/11 hijackings

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:47 AM
link   

PBS: NSA could have prevented 9/11 hijackings


rawstory.com

Author James Bamford looked into the performance of the NSA in his 2008 book, The Shadow Factory, and found that it had been closely monitoring the 9/11 hijackers as they moved freely around the United States and communicated with Osama bin Laden's operations center in Yemen. The NSA had even tapped bin Laden's satellite phone, starting in 1996.

"The NSA never alerted any other agency that the terrorists were in the United States and moving across the country towards Washington,"
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Well I believe this would fall under the incompetence or LIHOP end of the spectrum of 9/11 conspiracies.

In any case no one (not even OBL) has been held accountable for the 9/11 attacks. In fact most American officials responsible for protecting the country received medals!

"Not only was then-Director Michael Hayden never held accountable for the NSA's alleged failure, but he went on to oversee the Bush administration's vast expansion of domestic surveillance. In 2006, he was appointed as director of the CIA."

It's those d*mned dots...we just couldn't connect them. You know like all the foreign intelligence warnings. The Presidential Daily Briefing saying "Bin Laden determined to strike!" using aircraft!

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I wonder how the chamomile sipping PBS viewers will react? "Hmm interesting ah well off to bed!






posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Thank you for sharing this Leo



The Spy Factory will be shown over most PBS stations on February 3, 2009 at 8 pm.


I will be watching this one.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Yea I will definitely be watching. Don't you find it a bit odd that none of this information was brought before the 9/11 commission and the man responsible was charged with domestic surveillance and then promoted to the Director of the CIA. Things like this could make a person suspicious or even paranoid!

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Leo Strauss]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
I thought I would bump this one more time. Thought the 911 crowd would be all over this. Maybe times are a changin.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
I thought I would bump this one more time. Thought the 911 crowd would be all over this. Maybe times are a changin.


I have found out that most of the times people would rather just speculate and perpetuate some theories, than to actually discuss concrete information.



Well I believe this would fall under the incompetence or LIHOP end of the spectrum of 9/11 conspiracies.


Yeah, I have a feeling this don't fall so much under incompetency but as something else more sinister. It's too much incompetence, even for the US Government. Too many agencies and people 'failed'.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Give me a break!
If they would have arrested them before they got on the planes, most of you here would be screaming profiling or racist.
You would be yelling that the fascist government is arresting people without any proof and that the people who did the arresting should be brought up on charges. I guess they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Sad, just sad.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Wait, I read that book. It was excellent. Indeed, they let it slip under their noses.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by Frankidealist35]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


Thats the dumbest thing ive read all year.

.... use your brain, IF the NSA was actively tracking these guys, and had tapped OBL's mobile they wouldnt wait until they are boarding the plane.

It would be a nighttime raid, with warrants and swat teams.

the concrete evidence obtained from such wiretaps would of been presented immediately, so no doubt remained as to the guilt of these men.

instead of looking at the question at hand '' WHY didnt they stop them ''
you immediately conclude that HAD they been stopped, people would of screamed fascism.

Where is your head at?



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Give me a break!
If they would have arrested them before they got on the planes, most of you here would be screaming profiling or racist.
You would be yelling that the fascist government is arresting people without any proof and that the people who did the arresting should be brought up on charges. I guess they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Sad, just sad.


Exactly right.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


Thats the dumbest thing ive read all year.

Except for your so called logic.



.... use your brain, IF the NSA was actively tracking these guys, and had tapped OBL's mobile they wouldnt wait until they are boarding the plane.

Huh? I did NOT say anything about waiting until they are boarding the plane. Comprehension is your friend.

"Before they got on the planes" means anytime before, like days or weeks.


Most here would say talking on the phone is not a crime. Did they say "we are going to crash planes today" on the phone. If not, then most of you here would be screaming that they invaded your privacy by listening in on cell phone calls. Pathetic.



[edit on 1/28/2009 by WhatTheory]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperViking
 


Exactly wrong. This is negligence if not outright criminal. What world do you exist in that such an ignorant comment would make sense to you?

People these days.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by SuperViking
 


Exactly wrong. This is negligence if not outright criminal. What world do you exist in that such an ignorant comment would make sense to you?

People these days.



Do you know how many people are tracked on a daily basis by the NSA? I work the CSS- I know. The same people who think that it was negligence think the Bush Administration was negligent because it didn't stop the 9/11 attacks after the "bin Laden wants to use planes" brief. Guess how many blurbs in the DIB there are regarding threats. No, really, guess.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Yes actually I do know how many people are tracked by the NSA. About 300,000,000 Americans with political and religious groups, as well as journalists critical of the government, specifically targeted. The NSA is nothing short of the Gestapo. Maybe if they followed their charter instead of spying on granma going to a mosque they would have caught these guys before the event took place.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by projectvxn]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
Yes actually I do know how many people are tracked by the NSA. About 300,000,000 Americans with political and religious groups, as well as journalists critical of the government, specifically targeted. The NSA is nothing short of the Gestapo. Maybe if they followed their charter instead of spying on granma going to a mosque they would have caught these guys before the event took place.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by projectvxn]


So now you're going back on it being negligent and just plain not good enough surveillance. We agree! That's why I'm a big fan of the Patriot Act. Yourself?

Oh I hate to be pesky about facts but there's not even 300 million Americans, and no, we don't watch EVERYONE.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   
We an argue back and forth about what went happened, what they did, what they didn't do, but in the truth of all things, when you get down to the nitty gritty.

9/11 was an EPIC FAIL. Even if it was a "terrorist" attack as they like to portray it, the government FAILED YOU. Doesn't matter what agency it was, or who was director or even who was President. THEY FAILED YOU ALL, and then tried to say they could do nothing BUT fail because they weren't informed.

Now i'm not a scientist and i make no claim to know any sort of advanced math, but i've seen the budget figures, and i know how much they spend on intelligence and defense.

Even if they weren't informed as they claim, it's still a FAIL, they're still accountable for what happened, because we gave them a job, and they DIDN"T do it, hell they DIDN"T do it and they even managed to mess they're inactions up.

Come on people, smells like a chicken, looks like a chicken, feels like a chicken...but it's a turkey apparently?

Wake it on up.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Actually the Patriot act isn't bad. I agree that we need to be watching these people for sure. What I don't agree with is provisions that could be interpreted to make dissidents into terrorists. That stifles freedom of assembly, and free speech. And I do not agree with some of the language in there that could be interpreted to allow search and seizure with out warrants. Some of these provisions are good. Like consolidating the Immigration Department in with the DHS. And making agencies talk to each other ans share intelligence. But all with DUE process. Which, as the article indicates, was apparently good enough before the Patriot Act.
The issue here isn't the surveillance it is the Inaction.
So what's your point here?

[edit on 28-1-2009 by projectvxn]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
Actually the Patriot act isn't bad. I agree that we need to be watching these people for sure. What I don't agree with is provisions that could be interpreted to make dissidents into terrorists. That stifles freedom of assembly, and free speech. And I do not agree with some of the language in there that could be interpreted to allow search and seizure with out warrants. Some of these provisions are good. Like consolidating the Immigration Department in with the DHS. And making agencies talk to each other ans share intelligence. But all with DUE process. Which, as the article indicates, was apparently good enough before the Patriot Act.
The issue here isn't the surveillance it is the Inaction.
So what's your point here?

[edit on 28-1-2009 by projectvxn]


My point was first you said it was negligent that they didn't act. I said not only are there hundreds of such threats processed a day, but they were also hogtied from doing so. Then you changed your tune to the NSA not having enough power, and I agreed, and here we are.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Could have, should have, would have, but didn't. We are where we are and no matter who we blame or what action we seek, it will not happen. The government has already made up its mind about how it played out and have moved on. The only thing that we can hope for is that they have learned from their failures of that tragic day. Maybe they use the experience and lessons learned from 9/11 to avoid the next 9/11.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join