e-Claire

9-11 Commission Report - more

Point out the helpful bits for me? The "9-11 Commission" [aka: National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States ] report is in and there were some pretty screwy takes on it coming from my raaadio box as I motored about town searching for a mortar box this am. [this is becoming a building mecca, you should pardon the expression, who woulda thought it would be a hard to find item? To the masons mix the stuff in their pants pockets?!? aaaaany-whoo...] I heard that there is "absolutely no connection between Saddam and al Q. I heard that Atta was *not* in Prague that day, but in Flahriddah. oy. Lessee what I can find in the *real* world:

The conspiracy that eventually pulled off the deadliest attacks ever on US soil was far from a collection of evil geniuses .

The "9-11 Commission" has morphed into the X-Men Commission, I see.

"These are just people. It is important for us to reduce this to that," says a source close to the commission. "These are just people who have problems.

Sure. Just like my Aunt Harriett and her hay fever, and my neighbor with her monomaniacal aspirations of world dominance. Just folks.

They are not infallible."

I see. It is not the efforts of the USA or any members of the Coalition. It is not the fall of the Taliban [orchestrated by.... whom?] It is only due to the lack of infallibility of al-Q and its poor, just-human members that will prevent any further attacks.

The implication: ...It is not necessarily inevitable that a tragedy on the scale of Sept. 11 will soon happen again.

Let's look at this term, "not necessarily inevitable." It expresses just the barest doubt, about a 3 on a scale of 1-10, that another attack -- on the same scale -- is inevitable [1. impossible to avoid or prevent 2. certain] So the CSM is saying outright that they, at least, believed another attack -- on the same scale -- was/is inevitable. I wonder how many Americans would agree?

The terror training infrastructure that Mr. bin Laden established in Afghanistan and elsewhere was "quite good," judges a commission staff report. Trainees were encouraged to think creatively about ways to commit mass murder.

Why would this outfit call a mass murderer bent on the destruction of our country and our entire culture "Mister" ?!?

Iraq never responded to requests for help in providing training camps or weapons, the panel found in the first of two reports issued today.

What was that whole Salman Pak/NBC training camp area thing?

Mohamed Atta never met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague on April 9, 2001,

So, I guess Laurie Mylroie and Edward Jay Epstein are fulla shit? Though their information says it was April 8, 2001

"There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan [in 1996], but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship," the report says. "Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States." [emph mine -C]

"they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship" -- yeah, get back to me when you have some evidence, huh pal. "Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied" -- well, that's good enough for me, boys. These guys got no reason to lie. Pack it up! Lemme get this straight in my mind: "No credible evidence that [the two] cooperated on attacks on the US"] Not that they weren't working together on other projects. Not that Saddam wasn't giving pant-loads of Oil-for-Food $$$ to al-Q. Not that Saddam wasn't wetting himself trying to get some validation and attention from the big, bad Ossama, who was playing Saddam like a tuna. Not even that there *exists* evidence that the two did *not* cooperate: only that there is only evidence adjudged to be "not credible" that they did. Specifically on that *one* project. The whole of which presupposes that Saddam's overt and direct cooperation in the 9-11 attacks was the *only* justification or valid reason for our actions. I remain underwhelmed.

The conclusions provide the latest example of how the Sept. 11 commission has become a political irritant for the Bush administration.

Thank you, WaPo. Your take is duly noted. My take is as follows: "The conclusions provide the latest example of how the Sept. 11 commission has become a political irritant for football designed to take down the Bush administration. " Let's look at what the Commission describes as the original, evil genius version of the 9-11 Plan:

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind [X-Meeeeen!] of the plot, planned to have nine of the planes crash into the FBI and CIA headquarters, the Pentagon and the White House, as well as nuclear plants and the tallest buildings in California and Washington state.

Speculate on what might have happened differently if that had happened.

The hijackers of the 10th plane, which Mohammed planned to pilot, would contact the media, kill all of the adult men on board and then make a statement denouncing the United States before freeing the women and children.

Seems as if the leaders of the jihadists aren't anywhere near as eager to seek their 72 houris as they expect their pawns underlings to be.

The plot also called for hijacking and blowing up 12 airliners in Southeast Asia, but al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden scrapped that part of the plan because it was to difficult to coordinate operations on two continents.

Think that might have increased the number of members of the Coalition? Or not?

Bin Laden scaled back the plot in the United States to the four planes that were eventually used in the attack.

Himself, personally? I'd like to know how they discovered and verified that fact. Today's reports are not available on the official website. [3:00pm PDT] And I am out of time for the nonce.

<< Back to main