New details in events leading to 9/11

Duty Honor Country

Duty Honor Country

Active member
Due to political spinning, its taken me almost a week to figure out what's going on with all this pre 9/11 news. Basically, there are 2 events unfolding here. It seems a military intelligence group has claimed it "identified the Sept. 11 ringleader more than a year before the 2001 attacks." There is now unclassified documents stating that the State Department was in negotiation with the Taliban after the US embassy bombings in Kenya to expel/assassinate Osama bin Laden.

READ UP ON NEW MILITARY INTELLIGENCE
READ UP ON US NEGOTIATION WITH TALIBAN

Anybody got any opinions on there 2 matters?
 
The Pentagon Vs Civil law enforcement separation was and still is alive and well. The so-called firewalls within investigation departments are simply CYA implements. The Pentagon can have all sorts of super secret operations and glean gigabytes of information but someone in command has to step up and pass on the information, even if it looks to the lawyers that it may be illegally gained. There is a gut fear, especially at the command levels of military and civil authorities such as the FBI that their handling of situations will be judged as not following protocol and wind up being scapegoated within the Presidential Whitehouse staff and, inevitably, in the press.

So, unless a smoking gun or bomb is available, the information tends to circulate within the various investigative agencies but is not shared and pieced together as to the intentions of the cells under investigation. So round and round she goes.

Then, when there is a leak or, Heaven forbid, an incident costing lives here or abroad, there are no trails leading to one certain agency. The blame game starts and carefully practiced denials are put into effect and the trails to who knew what when cannot be be followed through the maze of operation procedures in place to safeguard against just such "outside" attacks. Nothing will come from investigating the 911 commission because it's almost impossible to give someone in your own organization up. For every claim of evidence of failure pointed at anyone, there are two claims pointed back at the first guy.
 
Being suspicious of some one before 9/11 was one thing, but actually throwing some one out of the country was some thing else. Lets face it there was a lot more trust at one time, also people might just rally around the underdog not knowing the facts of the matter and insist that he should be allowed to stay in the country. To over come this they would want to know were the information that you were using came from which in turn could lead to the death of the informer. These snipits of information saying some one knew about this chap really should be left were they are, but newspapers are always looking for a story which then stirs up another load of trouble.
 
1878 Military Law Gets New Attention

Nov 24, 2001 - This bit of relative antiquity defines the role of the US Military in our lives and keeps us from becoming little more than a wealthy banana republic.

Currently, America's military is largely prohibited from acting as a domestic police force. And while the presence of military "advisors" during the siege, brutality and slaughter at WACO Texas set ominous trends in motion, few thought in terms of its implications. But that was before the terrorism of September 11, 2001, now glibly called "911."

"Our way of life has forever changed,'' wrote Sen. John Warner R-Va., in an October 2001 letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "Should this law [Posse Comitatus Act] now be changed to enable our active-duty military to more fully join other domestic assets in this war against terrorism?''

The law, was championed by far-sighted Southern lawmakers in 1878. They had experienced a fifteen year military occupation by the US Army in post-Civil War law enforcement. They understood the heel of a jackboot.

In a nutshell, this act bans the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines from participating in arrests, searches, seizure of evidence and other police-type activity on U.S. soil. The Coast Guard and National Guard troops under the control of state governors are excluded from the act.
 
"Should this law [Posse Comitatus Act] now be changed to enable our active-duty military to more fully join other domestic assets in this war against terrorism?''
Click to expand...

Simple answer: No.
 
RnderSafe said:
Simple answer: No.
Click to expand...

agreed. The great thing about the USA is our troops are almost never used to enforce the law. I believe Ben Franklin said it best. "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

As for the 9/11 news, I am not surprised the press is giving it the back burner. Both instances happened under President Clinton's watch. I bet if the news made Bush look bad, it would be front page news. The NY times is notorious for doing so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top