Posted on 02/10/2005 9:12:05 PM PST by trumandogz
Federal Aviation Administration received repeated warnings in the months prior to September 11, 2001, about al Qaeda and its desire to attack airlines, according to a previously undisclosed report by the commission that investigated the terror attacks. The report by the 9/11 commission detailed 52 such warnings given to FAA leaders from April to September 10, 2001, about the radical Islamic terrorist group and its leader, Osama bin Laden. The commission report, written last August, said five security warnings mentioned al Qaeda's training for hijackings and two reports concerned suicide operations not connected to aviation. However, none of the warnings pinpointed what would happen on September 11.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
So what were they supposed to do shut the airlines down?
JF'n Kerry was warned repeatedly that Logan Airport had atrocious security too, but failed to act on it.
So none of the post 9/11 security measures would have been possible berfore 9/11?
Even if they had done something they still wouldn't have stopped all the terrorists. That would have been racial profiling which some people insist is bad.
This was well known and widely discussed both before and during the Jersey Girl hearings. It doesn't sound like this "new" report says anything to contradict the emphasis on overseas as the locus for the threat.
Waxman's "inquiry" notwithstanding, if there was anything to this "delayed" report, the commission RATs would have leaked it prior to the election. That such a leak did not occur tells me two things ... a) there is nothing new nor damaging to the Bush administration in this report and b) one must wonder about the timing and purpose of this report.
But being the Sec. of Transpiration Mineta should have at least imposed some sort of tighter security process.
FAA plants story at CNN to CYA.
Aviation officials were "lulled into a false sense of security" and "intelligence that indicated a real and growing threat leading up to 9/11 did not stimulate significant increases in security procedures."Bolding and underlines are mine.Of the FAA's 105 daily intelligence summaries between April 1, 2001 and September 10, 2001, 52 mentioned bin Laden, al Qaeda, or both, "mostly in regard to overseas threats."
The FAA did not expand the use of in-flight air marshals or tighten airport screening for weapons. It said FAA officials were more concerned with reducing airline congestion, lessening delays and easing air carriers' financial problems than thwarting a terrorist attack.
A proposed rule to improve passenger screening and other security measures ordered by Congress in 1996 had been held up by the Office of Management and Budget and was still not in effect when the attacks occurred, according to the FAA.
So what? He's a US Senator. Security in his home state isn't his job. The Senate doesn't handle homeland security, at most it just approves money for Homeland Security or passes laws to give Homeland Security people more tools.
If people actually did their jobs, 9/11 would not have been allowed to happen.
Hell, John Kerry had warnings about Logan and did nothing.
Kerry should have said something about the warnings but Mineta should lose his job.
Bush should have never appointed him in the first place.
So what? He's a US Senator. Security in his home state isn't his job.
It sure as hell is when his constituents write him and tell him about major deficiencies of a Federal agency in his state.
They should write to the governor or the FBI.
He was most likely chasing skirts in Midtown but the Sec. of Transportation in 2001 should have taken steps when he received warnings.
They should write to the governor or the FBI.
Federal officeholders(of which a senator is) have direct contact and much more influence with other federal agencies(which FAA is). Kerry forwarded it on to the FAA months after. Defend Kerry all you like, but he screwed the pooch on this one.
No. The public wouldn't have stood for it. They barely tolerate it now.
Why are you defending the Democratic Sec. of Transportation?
What was not done that should have been done and who should have done it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.