March 7th, 2004

well, it looks like This post took on a totally dif­fer­ent sub­ject than intended. i fig­ured i’d weigh in on my opin­ion regard­ing This file (the senate find­ings on 9/11).

my 2 cents are below.

first of all, it’s obvi­ous that what hap­pened was a great cat­a­stro­phe, and while the intel­li­gence com­mu­nity had infor­ma­tion about poten­tial ter­ror­ist threats (and spe­cific infor­ma­tion about what turned out to be the 9/11 attacks), hind­sight is always 20/20. to imply that ANYONE, espe­cially high rank­ing gov­ern­ment offi­cials, had a hand in what hap­pened, or even knew about such threats and let them occur unhin­dered, is absurd.

more­over, most of the find­ings regard events that occurred well before GWB and his admin­is­tra­tion had taken office - heck, he wasn’t even run­ning for office at the time of many of the events in ques­tion were taking place. to pin this on any one person or admin­is­tra­tion is par­ti­san, and hon­estly it cheap­ens what hap­pened in the first place.

to imply that Bush had a hand in 9/11 - or let it happen - also implies that Clin­ton also was part of the same scan­dal. the find­ings doc­u­ment we’re talk­ing about says the main cul­prit is a lack of fund­ing, a lack of use of modern intel­li­gence equip­ment and tech­niques, and an inabil­ity to infil­trate al-​queda with their field agents (and, what i think is even scarier, the fact that the intel­li­gence com­mu­nity did not take al-​queda very seri­ously). this is not, and SHOULD NOT be a par­ti­san issue. clin­ton and his guys fucked up, Bush and his guys did as well. the CIA fucked up, the FBI fucked up, as did the world intel­li­gence com­mu­nity. we couldn’t even handle the infor­ma­tion we were get­ting in the late 90s/early ’00s - because we were having trou­ble trans­lat­ing every­thing we inter­cepted. things are being fixed now. does this make every­thing all better? no. but, all you can do is find out what hap­pened, put the blame where it belongs, and fix it and move on.

to hit on a point that Cory made ear­lier, and i have said as well, the con­tra­dic­tory com­ments about GWB have always left me at a loss. on one hand, he’s this blun­der­ing idiot that has ruined the coun­try. BUT, he’s also a tyrant who has duped us all, and will stop at noth­ing to dom­i­nate the world. GWB and the rest of the cur­rent admin­is­tra­tion are just like any other - they do what they think is best for the Amer­i­can people, some­times with­out actu­ally asking us what we think about the subject.

deep down, Bush means well. he wants noth­ing but the best for us, for a number of rea­sons. 1, i think he’s gen­uinely a “good” person. 2, obvi­ously the polit­i­cal impli­ca­tions: a happy public = re-​election. and thirdly, Bush under­stands that he has to finish what he views some­one else started. the his­tory behind the cur­rent middle east­ern and islamic cul­ture is so deep and mutil-​faceted that it’s hard to pin­point the ONE reason (or rea­sons) that there is even a ‘war on terror’ to begin with. but, as far as Bush and his pals think, there is busi­ness that must be fin­ished by the US, and the rest of the free world.

we can agree or dis­agree with this think­ing, and hon­estly, i think we’re going about it in a manner that will only cause more hatred in the long run. for every ‘heart and mind’ we may win, we’re cre­at­ing another future ter­ror­ist as well. rather than attack­ing the root cause - why we’re in the middle east in the first place. long term, for this reason, and many others, there needs to be an effort to free our­selves from the chains of oil depen­dence. face it - the only reason we’re over there, and the only reason these coun­tries can FUND ter­ror­ists is because of their oil wealth.

anywho, i tried to stay fairly on one topic here. like i said above - we’re ALL out­raged that the sep­tem­ber 11 attacks took place. in ret­ro­spect, the fact that we let it happen in the first place is flat out dis­turb­ing. but, at the same time, things always make a lot more sense after the fact. of course all the intel points to the 9/11 inci­dent now … at the time it seemed incon­ceiv­able to all of us, even those “in the know”. the only thing we can do is focus on find­ing out how to pre­vent these things from hap­pen­ing again - short term (’war on terror’) and long term (try to repair islamic-​western rela­tions, become less depen­dent on the region for energy). making it a re-​election issue, turn­ing it into a par­ti­san attack on a pres­i­dent is a witch hunt that makes every­one involved look silly.

Wel­come! If you're new here, you may want to sub­scribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

20 Responses to “Findings.pdf”

1. amber says:
   March 7th, 2004 at 6:00 pm

   Hey I was actu­ally gonna ask if you could put up some­thing for us to talk about this. Thanks, Daniel. ;)
2. amber says:
   March 7th, 2004 at 6:05 pm

   This site is pretty inter­est­ing.

   http://​www.​wha​tre​al​ly​hap​pened.​com/​q​u​i​c​k​index/
3. Daniel says:
   March 7th, 2004 at 6:14 pm

   okay, but what are your thoughts on the matter?
4. fruity says:
   March 7th, 2004 at 6:34 pm

   holy shit!!! haha­haha that site is AWFUL!!! what next? 80’s television’s ALF was a KGB oper­a­tive planted on amer­i­can tele­vi­sion to brain­wash chil­dren into eating cats, which in turn stim­u­lates the sale of japan­ese black market cats, which george bush in turn prof­its from?!?! that evil genius!!

   p.s. great look­ing site as well, some guy must have spent many hours in his base­ment typing out all of that garbage
5. rick says:
   March 7th, 2004 at 11:04 pm

   yea that site is a winner, i can’t believe some people actu­ally believe that crap
6. Daniel says:
   March 10th, 2004 at 9:21 am

   yea, that site has some inter­est­ing con­spir­acy the­o­ries, but noth­ing i’d really take seri­ously. most of them are a bit too over the top to ever take place.
7. amber says:
   March 15th, 2004 at 9:32 pm

   Why do you guys always think every­thing is a damn con­spir­acy theory? Sounds like you’re just closed-​minded fools.

   9/11 was one of the most piv­otal events in world his­tory. Its impact will be felt for years to come. You owe it to your­self to go beyond the sound bites and the sim­pli­fied offi­cial story. This is an extremely com­pli­cated story with numer­ous play­ers and motives. Not every­thing makes sense or fits neatly together. It’s a story full of espi­onage, deceit, and lies. But if there are forces out there trick­ing us, they can only suc­ceed if we, the gen­eral public, remain igno­rant and pas­sive.

   I am lim­it­ing my sources to only those one might call “mainstream.” Why? It’s not because I believe one can only trust the main­stream media. In fact, I feel the oppo­site is true - much of the best report­ing today is coming from alter­na­tive media. But many people are ini­tially very skep­ti­cal. A lot of mate­r­ial I found look­ing around the web seemed very hard to believe when I first saw it. My goal is to use main­stream sources to gen­er­ally open eyes to new pos­si­bil­i­ties. After seeing the sever­ity of what’s being hidden from us, you will very likely want to join in work­ing together to create a brighter future.

   —-

   America’s top mil­i­tary lead­ers report­edly drafted plans to kill inno­cent people and commit acts of ter­ror­ism in US cities to trick the public into sup­port­ing a war against Cuba in the early 1960s. Approved in writ­ing by the Pen­ta­gon Joint Chiefs, Oper­a­tion North­woods even pro­posed blow­ing up a US ship and hijack­ing planes as a false pre­text for war. [ABC, 5/1/01]

   —-

   1980s: Osama bin Laden runs a front orga­ni­za­tion for the mujaheddin—Islamic free­dom fight­ers rebelling against the Soviet occu­pa­tion of Afghanistan. The CIA secretly backs the muja­hed­din. Pakistan’s Pres­i­dent Benazir Bhutto, under­stand­ing the feroc­ity of Islamic extrem­ism, tells then Pres­i­dent George Bush, “You are cre­at­ing a Frankenstein.” [MSNBC, 8/24/98, Newsweek, 10/1/01]

   1993: One of bin Laden’s men buys a jet from the US military—and it was the Pen­ta­gon which unwit­tingly gave per­mis­sion for the air­craft to leave the base. This air­craft is later used to trans­port mis­siles that kill US spe­cial forces in Soma­lia. Bin Laden also has some of his fol­low­ers begin train­ing as pilots in US flight schools. [Sunday Herald, 9/16/01]

   1993: An expert panel com­mis­sioned by the Pen­ta­gon raises the pos­si­bil­ity that an air­plane could be used to bomb national land­marks. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 10/2/01]

   1994: Two attacks take place which involve hijack­ing planes to crash them into build­ings, includ­ing one by an Islamic mil­i­tant group. In a third attack, a lone pilot crashes a plane at the White House. Yet after Sept. 11, over and over avi­a­tion and secu­rity offi­cials say they are shocked that ter­ror­ists could have hijacked air­lin­ers and crashed them into land­mark build­ings. [New York Times, 10/3/01]

   Oct 1995: The oil com­pany Unocal signs a con­tract for a “the per­fect pipeline” through Afghanistan. Unocal edges out a more expe­ri­enced Argen­tinean com­pany for the con­tract. Henry Kissinger, a Unocal con­sul­tant, calls it “the tri­umph of hope over experience.” But not long after­ward, the Tal­iban alien­ates the US and the con­tract falls through. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 10/5/98]

   1996: Ana­lysts start work­ing through the night in a cham­ber, deep in the bowels of CIA head­quar­ters, known as the Bin Laden Room. Approx­i­mately 10-15 indi­vid­u­als are assigned to the unit, which is part of the CIA’s Counter-​Terrorism Center. By Sep­tem­ber 10, 2001, there are approx­i­mately 35-40 per­son­nel assigned. Rec­og­niz­ing the danger posed by Bin Laden, the FBI also cre­ated a unit in 1999 at FBI head­quar­ters to focus on him. [Newsweek, 10/1/01, Senate Intel­li­gence (Wit­ness Hill), 9/18/02]

   1996: The Saudi Ara­bian gov­ern­ment is finan­cially sup­port­ing Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda and other extrem­ist groups. After 9/11, the Bush Admin­is­tra­tion chooses not to con­front the Saudi lead­er­ship over its sup­port of terror orga­ni­za­tions and its refusal to help in the inves­ti­ga­tion. [New Yorker, 10/22/01]

   1996-2001: Fed­eral author­i­ties have known for years that sus­pected ter­ror­ists with ties to bin Laden were receiv­ing flight train­ing at schools in the US and abroad. One con­victed ter­ror­ist con­fessed that his planned role in a terror attack was to crash a plane into CIA head­quar­ters. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 9/23/01]

   1996-Sep 2001: Tal­iban envoys repeat­edly dis­cuss turn­ing bin Laden over, but the US wants to be handed bin Laden directly, and the Tal­iban want to turn him over to some third coun­try. About 20 more meet­ings on giving up bin Laden take place up till 9/11, all fruit­less. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 10/29/01]

   1997: Former National Secu­rity Advi­sor Brzezin­ski pub­lishes a book por­tray­ing Eura­sia as the key to world power, and Cen­tral Asia with its vast oil reserves as the key to dom­i­na­tion of Eura­sia. He states that for the US to main­tain its global pri­macy, it must pre­vent any adver­sary from con­trol­ling that region. He notes that because of pop­u­lar resis­tance to US mil­i­tary expan­sion­ism, his ambi­tious strat­egy can’t be imple­mented “except in the cir­cum­stance of a truly mas­sive and widely per­ceived direct exter­nal threat.” [The Grand Chess­board: Amer­i­can Pri­macy and its Geostrate­gic Imper­a­tives]

   1998: An Okla­homa City FBI agent sends a memo warn­ing that “large num­bers of Middle East­ern males” are get­ting flight train­ing and could be plan­ning ter­ror­ist attacks. [CBS, 5/30/02] A sep­a­rate CIA intel­li­gence report asserts that Arab ter­ror­ists are plan­ning to fly a bomb-​laden air­craft into the WTC. [New York Times, 9/19/02, Senate Intel­li­gence Com­mit­tee (Wit­ness Hill), 9/18/02]

   Aug 1998: Within min­utes of each other, truck bombs blow up the US embassies in Tan­za­nia and Kenya, killing more than 220. For some of the time that bin Laden’s men were plot­ting to blow up the two embassies, US intel­li­gence was tap­ping their phones. [Newsweek, 10/1/01]

   Dec 1998: A Time mag­a­zine cover story enti­tled “The Hunt for Osama,” reports that bin Laden may be plan­ning his bold­est move yet - a strike on Wash­ing­ton or pos­si­bly New York City. [Time, 12/21/98]

   Late 1998-Early 2000: On at least three occa­sions, spies in Afghanistan report bin Laden’s loca­tion. Each time, the pres­i­dent approves an attack. Each time, the CIA Direc­tor says the infor­ma­tion is not reli­able enough and the attack cannot go for­ward. [New York Times, 12/30/01]

   1999: MI6, the British intel­li­gence agency, gives a secret report to the London US embassy. The report states that al-​Qaeda plans to use com­mer­cial air­craft “possibly as flying bombs.” [Sunday Times, 6/9/02]

   Sep 1999: A US intel­li­gence report states bin Laden and Al-​Qaeda ter­ror­ists could crash an air­craft into the Pen­ta­gon. The Bush admin­is­tra­tion claims not to have heard of this report until May 2002, though it was widely shared within the gov­ern­ment. [CNN, 5/18/02, AP, 5/18/02, Guardian, 5/19/02]

   Nov 1999: The head of Australia’s secu­rity ser­vices admits the Ech­e­lon global sur­veil­lance system exists. The US still denies it exists. BBC describes Echelon’s power as “astounding.” Every inter­na­tional tele­phone call, fax, e-mail, or radio trans­mis­sion can be lis­tened to by pow­er­ful com­put­ers capa­ble of voice recog­ni­tion. They home in on key words, or pat­terns of mes­sages. [BBC, 11/3/99]

   Jan 2000: George Bush Sr. meets with the bin Laden family on behalf of the Car­lyle Group. He also met with them in 1998. Bush’s chief of staff could not remem­ber that this meet­ing took place until shown a thank you note con­firm­ing the meet­ing. [Wall Street Jour­nal, 9/27/01, Guardian, 10/31/01]

   Sep 2000: The think-​tank Project for the New Amer­i­can Cen­tury (PNAC) writes a “blueprint” for the cre­ation of a “global Pax Americana.” Writ­ten for the Bush team before the 2000 elec­tion, the report Rebuild­ing America’s Defenses is a “blueprint for main­tain­ing global US pre­em­i­nence and shap­ing the inter­na­tional secu­rity order in line with Amer­i­can prin­ci­ples and interests.” The plan shows Bush intends to take con­trol of Per­sian Gulf oil whether or not Saddam Hus­sein is in power. It advo­cates “regime change” in China, North Korea, Libya, Syria, and Iran. [Sunday Herald, 9/7/02, click here for report]

   Oct 24-26, 2000: Pen­ta­gon offi­cials carry out a “detailed” emer­gency drill based upon the crash­ing of a hijacked air­liner into the Pen­ta­gon. [Mil­i­tary Dis­trict of Wash­ing­ton News Ser­vice, 11/3/00] The White House later asserts that no one in gov­ern­ment had envi­sioned a sui­cide hijack­ing. [AP, 5/18/02]

   Jan 2001: A flight school alerts the FAA. Hijacker Hani Han­jour lacks Eng­lish and flying skills needed for his com­mer­cial pilot’s license. An FAA offi­cial then sits next to him in class. The offi­cial offers a trans­la­tor to help him pass, but the flight school points out this is against the rules. [AP, 5/10/02]

   Jan 2001: After the elec­tions, US intel­li­gence agen­cies are told to “back off” inves­ti­gat­ing the bin Ladens and Saudi royals. There have always been con­straints on inves­ti­gat­ing Saudis. [BBC, 11/6/01]

   Spring 2001: Mil­i­tary and gov­ern­ment doc­u­ments are released that seek to legit­imize the use of mil­i­tary force in the pur­suit of oil. One arti­cle advo­cates pres­i­den­tial sub­terfuge in the pro­mo­tion of con­flict and “explicitly urge[s] paint­ing over the US’s actual rea­sons for war­fare as a neces­sity for mobi­liz­ing public sup­port for a conflict.” [Sydney Morn­ing Herald, 12/26/02] A report writ­ten for US Sec­re­tary of State James Baker argues the need for mil­i­tary inter­ven­tion to secure the US oil supply. It argues that Iraq needs to be over­thrown so that the US can con­trol its oil. [Sunday Herald, 10/5/02]

   May 2001: US secu­rity chiefs reject Sudan’s offer to turn over volu­mi­nous files about bin Laden and al-​Qaeda. Sudan has made this offer repeat­edly since 1995. [Guardian, 9/30/01]

   May 2001: Sec­re­tary of State Powell gives $43 mil­lion in aid to the Tal­iban gov­ern­ment. [Los Ange­les Times, 5/22/01] This fol­lows $113 mil­lion given by the US in 2000. [State Dept. Fact Sheet, 12/11/01]

   May 2001: The US intro­duces the “Visa Express” pro­gram allow­ing any Saudi Ara­bian to obtain visas through their travel agent instead of appear­ing at a con­sulate in person. [US News and World Report, 12/12/01] Five hijack­ers use Visa Express over the next month to enter the US. [Con­gres­sional Intel­li­gence Com­mit­tee, 9/20/02, (Wit­ness Hill)]

   May-​Aug 2001: A number of the 9/11 hijack­ers make at least six trips to Las Vegas. These “fundamentalist” Mus­lims drink alco­hol, fre­quent strip clubs, and smoke hashish. Some even have strip­pers per­form lap dances for them. [San Fran­cisco Chron­i­cle, 10/4/01, Newsweek, 10/15/01]

   June 2001: German intel­li­gence warns the CIA, Britain’s MI6, and Israel’s Mossad that Middle East­ern ter­ror­ists are train­ing for hijack­ings and tar­get­ing US and Israeli sym­bols. [Fox News, 5/17/02]

   June 13, 2001: Egypt­ian Pres­i­dent Mubarak through his intel­li­gence ser­vices warns the US that bin Laden’s Islamic ter­ror­ist net­work is threat­en­ing to kill Bush and other G8 lead­ers at their July eco­nomic summit meet­ing in Italy. The ter­ror­ists plan to use a plane stuffed with explo­sives. [NY Times, 9/26/01]

   July 4-14, 2001: Bin Laden report­edly receives kidney treat­ment from Canadian-​trained Dr. Call­away at the Amer­i­can Hos­pi­tal in Dubai. Dr. Call­away is unavail­able for com­ment. During his stay, bin Laden allegedly is vis­ited by one or two CIA offi­cers. [UPI, 11/1/01, London Times 11/1/01, Guardian, 11/1/01]

   July 10, 2001: A Phoenix FBI agent sends a mem­o­ran­dum warn­ing about Middle East­ern men taking flight lessons. He sus­pects bin Laden’s fol­low­ers and rec­om­mends a national pro­gram to check visas of sus­pi­cious flight-​school stu­dents. The memo is sent to two FBI counter-​terrorism offices, but no action is taken. [New York Times, 5/21/02] Vice Pres­i­dent Cheney says in May 2002 that he opposes releas­ing this memo to con­gres­sional lead­ers or to the media and public. [CNN, 5/20/02]

   July 24, 2001: Larry Silverstein’s $3.2 bil­lion pur­chase of the WTC is final­ized. It’s the only time the WTC has ever been in pri­vate hands. Sil­ver­stein hopes to win $7 bil­lion in insur­ance from the 9/11 destruc­tion of the WTC towers. [NY Times, 02/16/03, ICSC, 4/27/01, News­day, 09/25/02]

   July 26, 2001: Attor­ney Gen­eral Ashcroft stops flying com­mer­cial air­lines due to a threat assess­ment. [CBS, 7/26/01] He later walks out of his office rather than answer ques­tions about this. [AP, 5/16/02]

   Late July 2001: The US and UN ignore warn­ings from the Tal­iban for­eign min­is­ter that bin Laden is plan­ning an immi­nent huge attack on US soil. The FBI and CIA also fail to take seri­ously warn­ings that Islamic fun­da­men­tal­ists have enrolled in flight schools across the US. [Inde­pen­dent, 9/7/02]

   Summer 2001: Intel­li­gence offi­cials know that al Qaeda both hopes to use planes as weapons and seeks to strike a vio­lent blow within the US, despite gov­ern­ment claims fol­low­ing 9/11 that the World Trade Center and Pen­ta­gon attacks came “like bolts from the blue.” [Wall Street Jour­nal, 09/19/02]

   Summer 2001: Russ­ian Pres­i­dent Putin later says pub­licly that he ordered his intel­li­gence agen­cies to alert the US of sui­cide pilots train­ing for attacks on US tar­gets. [Fox, 5/17/02]

   Late summer 2001: Jor­dan­ian intel­li­gence agents go to Wash­ing­ton to warn that a major attack is planned inside the US and that air­craft will be used. Chris­t­ian Sci­ence Mon­i­tor calls the story “confidently authenticated” even though Jordan later backs away from it. [CS Mon­i­tor, 5/23/02]

   Aug 2001: Britain gives the US a second warn­ing about an attack. The pre­vi­ous warn­ing was vague. This one spec­i­fies immi­nent mul­ti­ple air­plane hijack­ings by al-​Qaeda. [Sunday Herald, 5/19/02]

   Aug 6, 2001: Bush is warned by US intel­li­gence that bin Laden might be plan­ning to hijack com­mer­cial air­lin­ers. The White House waits eight months after 9/11 to reveal this fact. [New York Times, 5/16/02]

   Aug 8-23, 2001: Two high rank­ing Israeli Mossad agents come to Wash­ing­ton to warn the FBI and CIA that up to 200 ter­ror­ists have slipped into the US and are plan­ning an immi­nent major assault in the US. Indi­ca­tions point to a highly vis­i­ble target. [Tele­graph, 9/16/01, LA Times, 9/20/01, Fox News, 5/17/02] The Mossad gives the CIA a list of ter­ror­ists. A major Israeli spy ring was hard on the heels of at least four mem­bers of the 9/11 hijack­ers, includ­ing lead hijacker Mohammed Atta. [BBC, 10/2/02]

   Aug 22, 2001: Top counter-​terrorism expert John O’Neill quits the FBI due to repeated obstruc­tion of his al-​Qaeda inves­ti­ga­tions and a power play against him. He was the government’s “most com­mit­ted tracker of bin Laden and al-Qaeda.” The next day he starts a new job as head of secu­rity at the WTC. He is killed weeks later in the World Trade Center during the 9/11 attack. [New Yorker, 1/14/02]

   Aug 24, 2001: Frus­trated with lack of response from FBI head­quar­ters about detained sus­pect Mous­saoui, the Min­nesota FBI begins work­ing with the CIA. The CIA sends alerts call­ing him a “suspect 747 air­line sui­cide hijacker.” Three days later an FBI Min­nesota super­vi­sor says he is trying keep Mous­saoui from “taking con­trol of a plane and fly it into the WTC.” [Senate Intel­li­gence Com­mit­tee (Hill #2), 10/17/02] FBI head­quar­ters chas­tises Min­nesota FBI for noti­fy­ing the CIA. [Time, 5/21/02] FBI Direc­tor Mueller will later say “there was noth­ing the agency could have done to antic­i­pate and pre­vent the [9/11] attacks.” [Senate Intel­li­gence Com­mit­tee (Wit­ness Bre­itweiser), 9/18/02]

   Sep 10, 2001: A par­tic­u­larly urgent warn­ing may have been received the night before the attacks, caus­ing some top Pen­ta­gon brass to cancel a trip. “Why that same infor­ma­tion was not avail­able to the 266 people who died aboard the four hijacked com­mer­cial air­craft may become a hot topic on the Hill.” [Newsweek, 9/13/01] “A group of top Pen­ta­gon offi­cials sud­denly can­celed travel plans for the next morn­ing, appar­ently because of secu­rity concerns.” [Newsweek, 9/24/01, fifth para­graph from end]

   Sep 10, 2001: Former pres­i­dent Bush is with a brother of Osama bin Laden at a Car­lyle busi­ness con­fer­ence. The con­fer­ence is inter­rupted the next day by the attacks. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 3/16/03]

   Sep 10, 2001: Defense Sec­re­tary Rums­feld announces that by some esti­mates the Depart­ment of Defense “cannot track $2.3 tril­lion in transactions.” CBS later cal­cu­lates that 25% of the yearly defense budget is unac­counted for. A defense ana­lyst says, “The books are cooked rou­tinely year after year.” [DOD, 9/10/01, CBS, 1/29/02] [This announce­ment was buried by the next day’s news of 9/11]

   Sep 11, 2001: Warren Buf­fett, the second rich­est man on Earth [BBC, 6/22/01], sched­ules a char­ity event inside Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska. A small group of busi­ness lead­ers attend, includ­ing at least one who would oth­er­wise have died in the WTC. [SF Busi­ness Times, 2/1/02] Bush flies to this same base that day, where there is an under­ground com­mand center. [CNN, 9/12/01, CBS, 9/11/02]

   Sep 11, 2001: Recov­ery experts extract data from 32 WTC com­puter drives reveal­ing a surge in finan­cial trans­ac­tions just before the attacks. Ille­gal trans­fers of over $100 mil­lion may have been made through some WTC com­puter sys­tems imme­di­ately before and during the dis­as­ter. [Reuters, 12/18/01]

   Sep 11, 2001: In what the gov­ern­ment describes as a bizarre coin­ci­dence, a US intel­li­gence agency (the National Recon­nais­sance Office or NRO) was all set for an exer­cise at 9 AM on Sep­tem­ber 11th in which an air­craft would crash into one of its build­ings near Wash­ing­ton, DC. [AP, 8/22/02]

   Sep 11, 2001: The entire US is defended by only seven air bases. [News­day, 9/23/01]

   Sep­tem­ber 11, 2001—Timeline for the Day of the Attacks
   Depart­ment of Defense (6/1/01) and FAA (7/12/01) pro­ce­dure: In the event of a hijack­ing, the FAA hijack coor­di­na­tor on duty at Wash­ing­ton head­quar­ters requests the mil­i­tary to pro­vide escort air­craft. Nor­mally, NORAD escort air­craft take the required action. The FAA noti­fies the National Mil­i­tary Com­mand Center by the most expe­di­tious means. [DOD/, 6/1/01, FAA, 7/12/01, FAA 7/12/01]

   If NORAD (North Amer­i­can Aero­space Defense Com­mand) hears of any dif­fi­cul­ties in the skies, they begin the work to scram­ble jet fight­ers [take off and inter­cept air­craft that are off course]. Between Sep 2000 and June 2001 fight­ers were scram­bled 67 times. [AP, 8/12/02] When the Lear jet of golfer Payne Stew­art didn’t respond in 1999, F-16 inter­cep­tors were quickly dis­patched. Accord­ing to an Air Force time­line, a series of mil­i­tary planes pro­vided an emer­gency escort to Payne’s stricken Lear about 20 min­utes after ground con­trollers lost con­tact with his plane.[Dallas Morn­ing News, 10/26/99]

   8:20 AM (approx.): Air traf­fic con­trollers sus­pect Flight 11 has been hijacked. [NY Times, 9/15/01]

   8:40 AM: NORAD is noti­fied of hijack­ing. [NY Times, 10/16/01, 8:38 AM Wash­ing­ton Post, 9/15/01]

   8:46 AM: Flight 11 crashes into the WTC (World Trade Center) north tower. [approx­i­mately 26 min­utes after con­trollers lost con­tact] [New York Times, 9/12/01]

   8:46 AM: Bush later states, “I was sit­ting out­side the class­room and I saw an air­plane hit the tower. The TV was on.” [CNN, 12/4/01] “When we walked into the class­room, I had seen this plane fly into the first building.” [White House, 1/5/02] [There was no live cov­er­age of the first crash on TV.]

   8:52 AM: Two F-15s take off from Otis Air Force Base. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 9/15/01] They go after Flight 175. Major Gen­eral Paul Weaver, direc­tor of the Air National Guard, states “the pilots flew like a scalded ape, top­ping 500 mph but were unable to catch up to the air­liner. We had a nine-​minute window, and in excess of 100 miles to inter­cept 175,” he said. ”There was just lit­er­ally no way.” [Dallas Morn­ing News, 9/15/01] F-15’s fly at up to 2.5 times the speed of sound [1875 mph or 30+ miles a minute or 270+ miles in nine min­utes] and are designed for low-​altitude, high-​speed, pre­ci­sion attacks. [BBC]

   8:56 AM: By this time, it is evi­dent that Flight 77 is lost. The FAA, already in con­tact with the Pen­ta­gon about the two hijack­ings out of Boston, report­edly doesn’t notify NORAD of this until 9:24, 28 min­utes later. [see 9:10 AM for com­par­i­son] [New York Times, 10/16/01]

   9:03 AM: Flight 175 crashes into the south WTC tower. [23 min­utes after NORAD noti­fied, 43 min­utes after air traf­fic con­trol lost con­tact with pilots] [New York Times, 9/12/01, CNN, 9/12/01]

   9:10 AM: Major Gen­eral Paul Weaver states Flight 77 came back on the (radar) scope at 9:10 in West Vir­ginia. [Dallas Morn­ing News, 9/15/01] Another report states the mil­i­tary was noti­fied of Flight 77 sev­eral min­utes after 9:03. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 9/15/01]

   9:24 AM [? – see above]: The FAA, who 28 min­utes ear­lier had dis­cov­ered Flight 77 off course and head­ing east over West Vir­ginia, report­edly noti­fies NORAD. A Pen­ta­gon spokesman says, “The Pen­ta­gon was simply not aware that this air­craft was coming our way.” [News­day, 9/23/01, NY Times, 10/16/01] Yet since the first crash, mil­i­tary offi­cials in a Pen­ta­gon com­mand center were urgently talk­ing to law enforce­ment and air traf­fic con­trol offi­cials about what to do. [NY Times, 9/15/01]

   9:28 AM: Air traf­fic con­trol learns that Flight 93 has been hijacked. [MSNBC, 7/30/02]

   9:38 AM: Flight 77 crashes into the Pen­ta­gon. [42 min­utes or more after con­tact was lost, one hour after NORAD noti­fi­ca­tion of first hijack­ing] [New York Times, 10/16/01, 9:43 CNN, 9/12/01]

   9:59 AM: The south tower of the World Trade Center col­lapses. [New York Times, 9/12/01]

   10:10 AM: Flight 93 crashes in Penn­syl­va­nia. [42 min­utes after con­tact was lost][CNN, 9/12/02]

   10:28 AM: The World Trade Center north tower col­lapses. [CNN, 9/12/01, NY Times, 9/12/01]

   5:20 PM: Build­ing 7 of the World Trade Center col­lapses. [CNN, 9/12/01]

   Sep 11, 2001: Did the Air Force send up planes after the hijacked air­craft? The Air Force won’t say. It says they keep about 20 F-15 and F-16 fight­ers on duty with Air National Guards along the nation’s coast­line, ready to inspect unknown air­craft enter­ing U.S. air­space. “We can scram­ble and be air­borne in a matter of minutes,” said an Air Force spokesper­son. Some air­line pilots are won­der­ing whether the FAA did enough to try to pre­vent the crashes. [Wall Street Jour­nal, 09/14/01]

   Sep 11, 2001: Hours after the attacks, a “shadow government” is formed. Key con­gres­sional lead­ers say they didn’t know Pres­i­dent Bush had estab­lished this government-in-waiting. Some Con­gress­men state the admin­is­tra­tion should have con­ferred about its plans. [CBS, 3/2/02, Wash­ing­ton Post, 3/2/02]

   Sep 11, 2001: A National Public Radio cor­re­spon­dent states: “I spoke with Con­gress­man Ike Skel­ton who said that just recently the direc­tor of the CIA warned that there could be an attack – an immi­nent attack – on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected.” [NPR, 9/11/01]

   Sep 12, 2001: Sen­a­tor Orrin Hatch says the US was mon­i­tor­ing bin Laden sup­port­ers and over­heard them dis­cussing the attack. [ABC, 9/12/01, AP, 9/12/01] [Why has the media not explored the fact that the US could mon­i­tor pri­vate com­mu­ni­ca­tions of al-​Qaeda on 9/11?]

   Sep 13-19, 2001: Mem­bers of bin Laden’s family are driven or flown under FBI super­vi­sion to a secret assem­bly point in Texas and then to Wash­ing­ton, where they leave the coun­try on a pri­vate char­ter plane when air­ports reopen three days after the attacks. [New York Times, 9/30/01]

   Sep 14, 2001: The two black boxes for Flight 77 are found. [PBS, 9/14/01] FBI Direc­tor Robert Mueller later says Flight 77’s data recorder pro­vides alti­tude, speed, head­ings and other infor­ma­tion, but the voice recorder con­tains “nothing useful.” [CBS, 2/23/02]

   Sep 15-16, 2001: Sev­eral 9/11 hijack­ers, includ­ing leader Mohamed Atta, may have had train­ing at secure US mil­i­tary instal­la­tions. [Newsweek, 9/15/01, NY Times, 9/15/01, Wash­ing­ton Post, 9/16/01]

   Sep 19, 2001: The FBI claims that there may have been six hijack­ing teams on the morn­ing of 9/11. [New York Times, 9/19/01, CBS, 9/14/01, Guardian, 10/13/01] Author­i­ties have iden­ti­fied teams that total as many as 50 infil­tra­tors who sup­ported or car­ried out the strikes. About 40 of the men have been accounted for. [Los Ange­les Times, 9/13/01] Yet only one person, Mous­saoui, is later charged.

   Oct 2, 2001: The Patriot Act is intro­duced in Con­gress. The next day, Senate Judi­ciary Com­mit­tee Chair­man Patrick Leahy (D) accuses the Bush admin­is­tra­tion of reneg­ing on an agree­ment on this anti-​terrorist bill. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 10/4/01] Anthrax let­ters are sent to Leahy and Senate Major­ity Leader Tom Daschle (D) on Octo­ber 9. [CNN, 11/18/01]

   Oct 10-11, 2001: After con­sult­ing with the FBI and CDC, Iowa State Uni­ver­sity in Ames destroys anthrax spores col­lected over seven decades. On Oct 25, the White House home­land secu­rity direc­tor con­firms pub­licly that the tainted let­ters con­tained the Ames strain. [New York Times, 11/9/01]

   Nov 12, 2001—Mar 25, 2002: 13 renowned micro­bi­ol­o­gists mys­te­ri­ously die over the span of less than five months. All but one or two are killed or mur­dered under unusual cir­cum­stances. Some are world lead­ers in devel­op­ing weapons-​grade bio­log­i­cal plagues. Others are the best in fig­ur­ing out how to stop mil­lions from dying because of bio­log­i­cal weapons. Still others are experts in the theory of bioter­ror­ism. [Globe and Mail, 5/4/02, NY Times 08/11/02] Nov 12: Benito Que, 52, an expert in infec­tious diseases—killed in car­jack­ing, later deemed pos­si­ble stroke. [Globe and Mail, 5/4/02] Nov. 16: Don Wiley, 57, one of the world’s lead­ing researchers of deadly viruses—body found in Mis­sis­sippi River. [CNN, 12/22/01] Nov 21: Dr. Vladimir Pasech­nik, 64, an expert in adapt­ing germs and viruses for mil­i­tary use—stroke. [NY Times, 11/23/01] Dec 10: Dr. Robert Schwartz, 57, a lead­ing researcher on DNA sequenc­ing analysis—slain at home. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 12/12/01] Dec 14: Nguyen Van Set, 44, his research orga­ni­za­tion had just come to fame for dis­cov­er­ing a virus which can be mod­i­fied to affect smallpox—dies in an air­lock in his lab. [Sydney Morn­ing Herald, 12/12/01] Jan 2002: Ivan Glebov (bandit attack) and Alexi Brush­lin­ski (killed in Moscow), both world-​renowned mem­bers of the Russ­ian Acad­emy of Sci­ence. [Pravda, 2/9/02] Feb 9: Victor Kor­shunov, 56, head of the micro­bi­ol­ogy sub-​faculty at the Russ­ian State Med­ical University—killed by cra­nial injury. [Pravda, 2/9/02] Feb 11: Ian Lang­ford, 40, one of Europe’s lead­ing experts on envi­ron­men­tal risk—murdered in home. [London Times, 2/13/02] Feb 28 (2): Tanya Holz­mayer, 46, helped create drugs that inter­fere with repli­ca­tion of the virus that causes AIDS, and Guyang Huang, 38, a bril­liant scholar highly regarded in genetics—murder/suicide. [San Jose Mer­cury News, 2/28/02] Mar 24: David Wynn-​Williams, 55, an astro­bi­ol­o­gist with NASA Ames Research Center—killed while jog­ging. [London Times, 3/27/02] Mar 25: Steven Mostow, 63, an expert on the threat of bioterrorism—private plane crash. [KUSA TV/NBC, 3/26/02]

   Dec 2001: The US engi­neers the rise to power of a former Unocal Oil employee, Hamid Karzai, as the interim pres­i­dent of Afghanistan. Look­ing at the map of the big US bases in Afghanistan, one is struck that they are com­pletely iden­ti­cal to the route of the pro­jected oil pipeline. [Chicago Tri­bune, 3/18/02]

   Dec 25, 2001: Lead­ing struc­tural engi­neers and fire-​safety experts believe the inves­ti­ga­tion into the col­lapse of the World Trade Center is “inadequate.” They note that the cur­rent team of 20 or so inves­ti­ga­tors has inad­e­quate finan­cial and staff sup­port, has been pre­vented from inter­view­ing wit­nesses and from exam­in­ing the dis­as­ter site. They couldn’t even get detailed blue­prints of the World Trade Center. The deci­sion to rapidly recy­cle the steel beams from the WTC means defin­i­tive answers may never be known. [New York Times, 12/25/01]

   Jan 1, 2002: Zalamy Khalilzad is appointed by Bush as spe­cial envoy to Afghanistan. [BBC, 1/1/02] Khalilzad once lob­bied for the Tal­iban and worked for an Amer­i­can oil com­pany that sought con­ces­sions for pipelines in Afghanistan. [Inde­pen­dent, 1/10/02]

   Jan 4, 2002: An edi­to­r­ial in the respected trade mag­a­zine Fire Engi­neer­ing states that there is good reason to believe that the “official investigation,” blessed by FEMA, into the WTC col­lapse is a half-​baked farce that may already have been com­man­deered by polit­i­cal forces whose pri­mary inter­ests are clearly not full dis­clo­sure. Respected mem­bers of the fire pro­tec­tion engi­neer­ing com­mu­nity are begin­ning to raise red flags, and a res­onat­ing theory has emerged: The struc­tural damage from the planes and the jet fuel in them­selves were not enough to bring down the towers. [Fire Engi­neer­ing, 1/02]

   Jan 24, 2002: Senate Major­ity Leader Tom Daschle claims that on this day Cheney calls him and urges that no 9/11 inquiry be made. He is repeat­edly pres­sured there­after. [Newsweek, 2/4/02]

   Feb 6, 2002: CIA Direc­tor Tenet tells a Senate hear­ing that there was no 9/11 intel­li­gence fail­ure. When asked about the CIA on 9/11, he states that the 9/11 plot was “in the heads of three or four people.” He rejects any sug­ges­tion that the CIA failed to do its job. [USA Today, 2/7/02]

   Feb 21, 2002: A ban on poppy grow­ing by the Tal­iban in July 2000 along with severe droughts reduced Afghanistan’s opium yield by 91% in 2001. Yet the UN expects its 2002 opium crop to be equiv­a­lent to the bumper one of three years ago. Afghanistan is the source of 75% of the world’s heroin. [Guardian, 2/21/02] [Why is the US unable to con­trol opium pro­duc­tion which had almost stopped?]

   Mar 2, 2002: The 9/11 col­lapse of WTC build­ing 7 was the first time a modern, steel-​reinforced high-​rise in the US has ever col­lapsed in a fire. [New York Times, 3/2/02] Build­ing 7 was where the SEC was stor­ing files related to numer­ous Wall Street inves­ti­ga­tions. The files for approx­i­mately 3,000 to 4,000 cases were destroyed. [National Law Jour­nal, 9/17/01] Lost files include doc­u­ments that could show the rela­tion­ship between Cit­i­group and the World­Com bank­ruptcy. [The Street, 8/9/02]

   Mar 13, 2002: Bush says of bin Laden: “I truly am not that con­cerned about him.” [White House, 3/13/02] Mil­i­tary chief Myers states: “the goal has never been to get bin Laden.” [CNN, 4/6/02]

   Apr 19, 2002: FBI Direc­tor Mueller: “We have not uncov­ered a single piece of paper that men­tioned any aspect of the 9/11 plot. The hijack­ers had no com­put­ers, no lap­tops, no stor­age media of any kind.” [FBI, 4/19/02, LA Times, 4/30/02] Yet inves­ti­ga­tors have amassed a ‘’substantial” amount of e-mail traf­fic among the hijack­ers. [USA Today, 10/1/01] The laptop com­puter of Mous­saoui, the alleged 20th hijacker, was con­fis­cated weeks before 9/11, yet FBI head­quar­ters sys­tem­at­i­cally dis­missed and under­mined requests by Min­neapo­lis FBI agents to search the com­puter. [Time, 5/21/02, CNN, 5/27/02]

   May 15, 2002: For the first time, the White House admits that Bush was warned about bin Laden hijack­ing air­craft and want­ing to attack the US in Aug 2001. It is unclear why they waited eight months to reveal this. The Press Sec­re­tary states that while Bush had been warned of pos­si­ble hijack­ings, “the pres­i­dent did not receive infor­ma­tion about the use of air­planes as mis­siles by sui­cide bombers.” Yet the August memo left little doubt that the hijacked air­lin­ers were intended for use as mis­siles and that US tar­gets were intended. [New York Times, 5/16/02, Wash­ing­ton Post, 5/16/02, Guardian, 5/19/02]

   May 16, 2002: Con­gres­sional com­mit­tee mem­bers inves­ti­gat­ing 9/11 say there is far more dam­ag­ing infor­ma­tion that has not yet been dis­closed. “We’ve just scratched the surface,” said Sen­a­tor Richard Shelby, rank­ing Repub­li­can member of the Senate intel­li­gence com­mit­tee. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 5/17/02]

   May 17, 2002: Dan Rather says that he and other jour­nal­ists haven’t been prop­erly inves­ti­gat­ing since 9/11. He graph­i­cally describes the pres­sures to con­form after the attacks. [Guardian, 5/17/02]

   May 21, 2002: A memo is released in which Min­nesota FBI agent Coleen Rowley writes to FBI Direc­tor Mueller, “I have deep con­cerns that a del­i­cate and subtle shading/skewing of facts by you and others at the high­est levels of FBI man­age­ment has occurred and is occurring.” [Time, 5/21/02] CNN calls the memo a “colossal indict­ment of our chief law-​enforcement agency.” [CNN, 5/27/02] Time mag­a­zine later names Rowley one of three “Persons of the Year” for 2002. [Time, 12/22/02]

   May 23, 2002: Pres­i­dent Bush says he is opposed to estab­lish­ing a spe­cial, inde­pen­dent com­mis­sion to probe how the gov­ern­ment dealt with terror warn­ings before 9/11. [CBS, 5/23/02]

   May 30, 2002: FBI Agent Robert Wright for­mally accuses the FBI of delib­er­ately cur­tail­ing inves­ti­ga­tions that might have pre­vented 9/11. He is under threat of ret­ri­bu­tion if he talks to mem­bers of Con­gress about what he knows. [Fox News, 5/30/02] He also accuses the agency of shut­ting down his 1998 crim­i­nal probe into alleged terrorist-​training camps in Chicago and Kansas City. Wright has writ­ten a book, but the agency won’t let him pub­lish it or even give it to anyone. [LA Weekly, 8/2/02]

   July 23, 2002: The New York City gov­ern­ment decides that many of the audio and writ­ten records of the Fire Department’s actions on 9/11 should never be released. The New York Times had filed a law­suit seek­ing numer­ous records con­cern­ing the ter­ror­ist attack on the World Trade Center, includ­ing first­hand accounts by scores of fire­fight­ers and chiefs. [New York Times, 7/23/02]

   Aug 11, 2002: The Observer has learned of three heroin refiner­ies in Afghanistan. There are believed to be sev­eral more, some of them oper­at­ing in broad day­light. [Observer, 8/11/02]

   Aug 30, 2002: German author­i­ties charge a Moroc­can man with com­plic­ity in the 9/11 attacks. He is only the second person ever to be charged for­mally in con­nec­tion with 9/11. [Tele­graph, 8/30/02]

   Sep 11, 2002: On the first anniver­sary of 9/11, New York Times writes, “One year later, the public knows less about the cir­cum­stances of 2,801 deaths at the foot of Man­hat­tan in broad day­light than people in 1912 knew within weeks about the Titanic.” The former police com­mis­sioner of Philadel­phia says: “You can hardly point to a cat­a­clysmic event in our his­tory when a blue-​ribbon panel did not set out to estab­lish the facts and sug­gest reforms. That has not hap­pened here.” [NY Times, 9/11/02]

   Oct 5, 2002: Con­gres­sional inves­ti­ga­tors say the FBI’s efforts to block their inquiry makes them skep­ti­cal of FBI asser­tions. They also say the Jus­tice Depart­ment has joined the FBI in fight­ing con­gres­sional requests for infor­ma­tion, while the CIA has been antag­o­nis­tic. [NY Times, 10/5/02]

   Oct 16, 2002: The CIA, FBI, and NSA all tes­tify that no indi­vid­ual at their agen­cies has been pun­ished or fired for any of the mis­steps sur­round­ing the Sept. 11 attacks. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 10/18/02]

   Oct 21, 2002: No more than six of the 19 hijack­ers were inter­viewed by US offi­cials before being granted visas. This con­tra­dicts the State Department’s claim that 12 had been inter­viewed. Of 15 hijack­ers, none filled in the visa doc­u­ments prop­erly. All 15 of them should have been denied entry to the coun­try. “The system was rigged in their favor from the get-go.” [Wash­ing­ton Post, 10/22/02, ABC News, 10/23/02] In Decem­ber 2002, two top Repub­li­can sen­a­tors report that if State Depart­ment per­son­nel had merely fol­lowed the law in Saudi Arabia, 9/11 would not have hap­pened. [AP, 12/18/02]

   Oct 27, 2002: A report from Defense Sec­re­tary Rumsfeld’s Defense Sci­ence Board rec­om­mends the cre­ation of a super-​intelligence body (P2OG) which would launch secret oper­a­tions to “stimulate reactions” among ter­ror­ists and states owning weapons of mass destruc­tion. It would prod ter­ror­ist cells into action, thus expos­ing them to quick-​response attacks by US forces. [Los Ange­les Times, 10/27/02]

   Oct 29, 2002: Of over 800 people rounded up since 9/11, only 10 have been linked to the hijack­ings and prob­a­bly will turn out to be inno­cent. [Newsweek, 10/29/02] Though many were held for months, the vast major­ity were never charged with any­thing other than over­stay­ing a visa. [NY Times, 7/11/02]

   Nov 27, 2002: Bush names Henry Kissinger to lead an inde­pen­dent inves­ti­ga­tion into the 9/11 ter­ror­ist attacks. [New York Times, 11/28/02] He is a highly con­tro­ver­sial figure. Doc­u­ments released by the CIA strengthen sus­pi­cions that Kissinger was actively involved in a covert plan to assas­si­nate thou­sands of polit­i­cal oppo­nents in six Latin Amer­i­can coun­tries. He is also famous for his obses­sion with secrecy. [BBC, 4/26/02] “Indeed, it is tempt­ing to wonder if the choice of Mr. Kissinger is not a clever maneu­ver by the White House to con­tain an inves­ti­ga­tion it long opposed.” [New York Times, 11/29/02]

   Dec 13, 2002: Kissinger resigns as chair­man of the new 9/11 inves­ti­ga­tion citing con­tro­versy over poten­tial con­flicts of inter­est with his busi­ness clients. [CNN, 12/13/02, BBC, 12/14/02]

   Dec 16, 2002: Bush names Thomas Kean chair­man after Henry Kissinger resigns. Kean promises a thor­ough inves­ti­ga­tion. [AP, 12/17/02] He plans to devote one day a week to the 9/11 com­mis­sion. [Wash­ing­ton Post, 12/17/02]
8. amber says:
   March 16th, 2004 at 12:25 pm

   Rick, get a girl­friend. Get some­thing to do. Get a pos­i­tive atti­tude. Get laid. Do some­thing. As I said ear­lier, it’s not nec­es­sary. You asked for an opin­ion .. those are the facts. Deal.

   I’m sure you twats don’t care but I don’t even want to post here any­more. You make me feel mis­er­able because I can’t even say any­thing right, and when I think I do, I am blasted.
9. fruity says:
   March 16th, 2004 at 1:42 pm

   haha­hah!!! i think that’s the first time i’ve ever been called a “twat” by a woman/girl/whatever…and once again, i’m not rick.
10. Daniel says:
    March 16th, 2004 at 3:09 pm

    fruity=erik
    rick=rick
    anonymous=dirocco
11. fruity says:
    March 16th, 2004 at 3:11 pm

    I’m a twat
12. fruity says:
    March 16th, 2004 at 3:22 pm

    that wasn’t me :)
13. anonymous says:
    March 16th, 2004 at 3:36 pm

    and how the fuck do you know who anony­mous is!??!? it’s an anony­mous name!!! it couldn’t be dirocco!!!
14. Daniel says:
    March 16th, 2004 at 3:37 pm

    how mys­te­ri­ous!
15. Daniel says:
    March 16th, 2004 at 3:39 pm

    amber - i see all of the events, and yes, a lot of them are trou­bling. in ret­ro­spect, it’s obvi­ous we had a lot of the clues to exactly what was going to happen right in front of us, and did noth­ing about it.

    i’d like to see your opin­ion on the topic i posted though, in your owns words. i’m curi­ous as to who you think is to blame, why they are to blame, and what can/should be done in the future to pre­vent such things from hap­pen­ing again?

    just curi­ous …
16. Anonymous says:
    March 16th, 2004 at 4:23 pm

    You guys have no clue!!!@!?@?!?!!!!
17. amber says:
    March 17th, 2004 at 9:31 am

    Oh this is Ryan. Yeah. The one who lived in a closet with a fake vagina mounted on the wall. Mmm. Cred­i­ble source. Keep on humpin, man. Just clean that shit out once in a while.
18. Cory says:
    March 17th, 2004 at 11:57 am

    Amber, I think every­one just gets a little frus­trated when you post a 10 page list of things that I guess rep­re­sent “your points” or maybe in your opin­ion “the facts”, but then you fail to add any com­men­tary to them. No one on this site is argu­ing with some­one from Con­gress or with intel­li­gence lead­ers, we are argu­ing with each other. We can and do have some good debates, but I think we’d all prefer if you, Amber, debated with us, rather than just the copy and paste or the “read this article” stuff. As should be clear to you by now, we don’t have quite the same alarmist point of view that you do, which is totally fine. You’ve just got to be a little more clear, and per­sonal maybe, about why we should all be as alarmed as you.
19. Anonymous says:
    March 17th, 2004 at 12:08 pm

    Uh amber…. You’ve met me all of once you have no idea who I am. I’ve never lived in a closet, I don’t have a wall pussy, nor will I ever.

    You seem to have me con­fused with Mike which hon­estly hurts. I think every­one on here can agree that Mike was a world­class tool­box.
20. Daniel says:
    June 30th, 2004 at 5:08 pm

    oh, the memories…