Mohammed and Binalshibh are on the FBI's wanted list
Posted on 09/08/2002 10:18:13 AM PDT by Siobhan
Al-Qaeda initially planned to fly hijacked jets into nuclear installations - rather than the World Trade Center and the Pentagon - according to an Arab journalist who says he interviewed two of the group's masterminds.
The Arabic television station al-Jazeera says it will broadcast on Thursday the interview in which Osama Bin Laden's aides describe in detail how they planned the 11 September attacks.
Capitol Hill - the "third target"
In an article published in several European newspapers, documentary-maker Yosri Fouda said Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh told him they had decided against the attack on nuclear power plants "for the moment" because of fears it could "get out of control".
Both men are on the FBI's most wanted list and have a $25m bounty on their heads.
The FBI says Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is one of Bin Laden's key lieutenants, while Ramzi Binalshibh is said to have shared an apartment in Hamburg with Mohammed Atta, the alleged ringleader of the hijackers.
Department of Martyrs
Yosri Fouda said he was taken to a hideout in Pakistan. He was told by a man there that Bin Laden was alive and well, but was not shown any proof of this.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed told him he was head of the al-Qaeda military committee and Ramzi Binalshibh the co-ordinator of what they refer to as "Holy Tuesday".
Over the course of two days, Mr Fouda says, the men gave him an insight into how the terror group operates and how the 11 September attacks were planned.
Mohammed and Binalshibh alleged that:
* The decision to launch a "martyrdom operation inside America" was made by network's military committee in early 1999
* Atta was summoned to a meeting with key hijackers in Afghanistan that same year
* Hijackers were recruited from al-Qaeda's Department of Martyrs, which is still active
* Mr Binalshibh wanted to be one of the hijackers, but was refused a US visa
* A number of reconnaissance teams travelled to the US ahead of the hijackers
* Ramzi Binalshibh posed in e-mails as Atta's girlfriend in Germany when the two communicated through the internet
* The fourth hijacked plane was heading for Congress, not the White House, when passengers overpowered the attackers
* The codenames for the targets were university faculties: "town planning" for the WTC, "law" for Congress, "fine arts" for the Pentagon
* On 29 August, Atta gave the date for the attacks to Mr Binalshibh, who ordered active cells in Europe and the US to evacuate
* Bin Laden was told on 6 September
At the end of his two-day interview, Mr Fouda writes, he was instructed to leave the videotapes behind so the faces of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh could be blanked out.
Despite promises that they would be returned, the videos never turned up. But, the journalist says, he did eventually receive voice tapes of the interviews.
We can always hope that some of the liberal lunatic fringe are scared enough and resign ;-)
But there is a catch.
The catch is that it seems even when there is overwhelming public desire for something there will always be a cadre of elite politicians who are against the public will (at times it is a good thing by the way in their defence). And this 'cabal' would obviously be liberal, and against an all out US nuclear strike at all and sundry nations that are Islamic in any respect. And due to them the strike would never happen.
And at the same time (looking at the Republicans) there would be many calling for the 'football' and ICBM/SLBM hits against Islamic nations, but i really doubt there would be enough calls for a strike! The thing is that unlike the average guy asking for strikes at all Islamic nations these guys have to have a cause and rationale for a strike! Obviously the 'cause and rationale' for a nuclear strike would be the millions of American casualties from the terrorist nuclear strike .....but the problem would be against whom? If they had a real target (eg let us say Algerian terrorists had recieved nuclear material from Pakistan and had thus acted) what would happen is that both Pakistan and Algeria would be on the receiving end of several Trident SLBMs before you can say 'nuke strike!'
But the problem here is that if such an act happened you would be sure the host nation would do its best to get rid of any and all evidence since it knows the consequences of being painted by the US (immediate annihilation). Chances are they would do this through a proxy ....and this proxy would be a 'previously unknown' terrorist group that is based in a nation like Canada, Britain or even the US (in essence these Islamic terrorist kooks would camp for years in a nation that is one of our good friends to ensure that there are no links to a veritable islamic nation).
What would happen then? What we have is a terrorist nuclear strike against a major financial/political/population hub. However all we know is that the perps were terrorists, islamic, belonging to a 'new group' that sprouted from nowhere, and they have been (let's just say) British citizens for like 10 years. The politicians would want to strike ...they would seethe for a strike .....but against who? Britain? Obviously not! The original countries that these terrorists came from? That ould be a good start, but remember this is being viewed by politicians and hence it would be hard to pick a nation just because the terrorists were born there 3 decades ago!
Think of Saudi Arabia. 15 out of the 19 9-11 terrorists were Saudi. And a lot of the Al Queda financing was done by some rich echelon of Saudi social strata (either on purpose or as 'protection' to fend of zealots). Yet Saudi Arabia is seen as one of our greatest allies in the world (obviously the 'average' guy sees Saudi Arabia as a back-stabbing forked-tongue enemy; and the average politician also thinks the Sauds are evil; but due to certain 'reasons' officially the Saudis are among our 'greatest allies').
What if the jehadi terrorist strike is carried out by some asinine jehadi mules who have British passports (or Canadian or US) but were originally born in Saudi Arabia? That would be a major conundrum for Congress. Obviously for the quintessential Freeper the choice would be simple. Show the Saudis we do not let Americans get nuked and do nothing .....however Congress is comprised of politicians who have to serve a wide variety of interests, and sadly meeting the wishes of their constituents is not that high on their list. Chances are what would happen is two carrier groups would be sent to the Arabian Sea and some country like Iran would get bombed to the stone age while the Saudi Sheiks would be sipping their Jasmine tea and laughing their @$$#$ off in the desert watching our brave men bombing the Iranians.
By the way ...to those who say no such thing can happen (as in no terrorist could ahve a US passport) ....i am typing this post with MSNBC on and they are showing this documentary about a guy called Ali mohammed who was a member of Al Queda. Nothing special, apart from the fact that he was an instructor at Forth Bragg teaching our special forces tactics and stuff. Yet this guy was discovered to be a senior member of Bin Ladens organization and what happened to him? He was discharged with a rank of Sergeant ....possibly due to shame from the powers that be that they missed this! If that can happen i think Al Queda (ooops, soory, the terrorist groups will be 'unknown') can send several jehadi mules into the US(or Canada or Britain) years before the attack and have them become citizens!
Anyways the solution for me (and you) would be simple .....nuke the Islamic nations. However although Congress would hold memorials and say how they are going to 'crush' the perps i think the victims would not be the real crooks but some nation like North Korea that did nothing but be an efficient scapegoat.
While nations like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia would be laughing their @$$#$ off knwing that they supplied the money and logistics, but nothing is happening to them (apart from getting US tax payer money for use of their bases).
Ironic.
We have the deterrent force.
Sac
Likely, a connection will now be proven since we got rid of most of the Dem butt kissers. We'll realize that Clinton was the most irreponsible, immoral president in the history of the United States.
He played and we paid...some with their lives in Oklahoma City, at our embassies, aboard the Cole and on 9-11.
Some legacy!!
Sac
If true it was a mistake to give this information.
We know who comes and goes from outside the US and I would expect that the FBI has already pulled all of the travel info possible leading up to the attack.
Now they can narrow the search window...from August 29th up to September 11th.
I dont think that is a good point.
Nobody had owned up for 9/11 before we knew who did it.
Measured responses is a good method for training the enemy how to be successful.
This is so correct.If those 16 acres would be done in OKC memorial style, it would have the effect of an outdoor Holocaust museum. There would be no frisbee catching dogs, no outdoor latte drinkers, no hot dog stands. It would be an empty zone.
Could be a couple of reasons. If things got out of hand and they weren't ready yet! (still working on their nukes) The other thing, perhaps they were unsure of 'fallot'? How far it could/would travel?
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.