• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI[W:32]

Bob0627

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
4,523
Reaction score
1,345
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
By Jon Gold
8/9/2014

For a long time now, I've been trying to figure out just exactly what the NSA knew about the hijackers and 9/11.

The main reason for this was because the 9/11 Commission barely looked at them, and the information they did come across tried to tie Iran to Al-Qaeda and 9/11. "[For executive director Philip] Zelikow and other staff on the commission, it was just more interesting—sexier—to concentrate on the CIA."

In late 2003, the NSA will allow the 9/11 Commission access to its archives on Al-Qaeda. "[P]erversely, the more eager [NSA director] General Hayden was to cooperate, the less interested [9/11 Commission executive director Philip] Zelikow and others at the commission seemed to be in what was buried in the NSA files."

Towards the end of the 9/11 Commission, "Zelikow would later admit he too was worried that important classified information had never been reviewed at the NSA and elsewhere in the government before the 9/11 commission shut its doors, that critical evidence about bin Laden’s terrorist network sat buried in government files, unread to this day. By July 2004, it was just too late to keep digging."

Interesting, since he seems to be the main reason the 9/11 Commission stayed away from the NSA.

According to this entry from History Commons

"...both the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry and the 9/11 Commission examine the NSA’s intercepts of various calls made by the hijackers to an al-Qaeda communications hub in Sana’a, Yemen." The portion of the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry that touches on this "is heavily redacted so most details remain unknown. It states that, although the NSA intercepted the calls and disseminated dispatches about some of them, THE NSA DID NOT REALIZE THE HIJACKERS WERE IN THE U.S. AT THE TIME THE CALLS WERE MADE (emphasis mine)."

[…]

"The 9/11 Commission Report contains a briefer section on the intercepts and deals with those which led to the surveillance of the al-Qaeda summit in Malaysia. In addition, it mentions that Almihdhar called his wife from San Diego in the spring of 2000, but fails to mention that his wife lived at an al-Qaeda communications hub and that the calls were intercepted by the NSA."

On 12/17/2005, George W. Bush says, "as the 9/11 Commission pointed out, it was clear that terrorists inside the United States were communicating with terrorists abroad before the September the 11th attacks, and the commission criticized our nation’s inability to uncover links between terrorists here at home and terrorists abroad. Two of the terrorist hijackers who flew a jet into the Pentagon, Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar, communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al-Qaeda who were overseas. But we didn’t know they were here until it was too late."

In her book "Wake-Up Call: The Political Education of a 9/11 Widow," 9/11 Family Member Kristen Breitweiser states:

"Unfortunately, the NSA never checked to see where al Mihdhar’s calls were originating from— i.e., San Diego. The NSA’s oversight in not checking to see where the phone calls were being made from seems hard to believe. Nevertheless, the NSA’s negligence in this regard has been excused and overlooked. So for the nearly five months al Mihdhar was in this country and living with al Hazmi in San Diego, the NSA listened in to his phone calls back to Yemen. Notably, because NSA assumed that al Mihdhar was overseas, they passed all of their information regarding al Mihdhar solely to the CIA— not the FBI. If only the billions budgeted to NSA for intelligence had had room for caller ID. If they had just informed the FBI about the presence of al Mihdhar within our borders, the FBI would have been able to begin its investigation more than a full year before 9/ 11. " (pp. 181-182)

Author Lawrence Wright makes two statements on the issue:

"[h]ad a line been drawn from the [communications hub] in Yemen to Alhazmi and Almihdhar’s San Diego apartment, al-Qaeda’s presence in America would have been glaringly obvious."

[…]

"You know, this is the key. The NSA is all over this phone. And everybody, you know, that has any connection with it is drawing links from that phone. Now imagine eight lines from Yemen to San Diego. How obvious would it be that al-Qaeda is in America[?]"

So basically, we are led to believe that the NSA was monitoring calls from San Diego to Yemen from the hijackers, but the NSA could not identify that the calls were coming from within the U.S. Meaning they had no idea the hijackers were in the United States.

On 5/14/2012, an article entitled "NSA Analyst: We Could Have Prevented 9/11" was released on HuffPo. In that article, NSA Whistleblower Thomas Drake said:

"I can't say fully, because it's classified. But I showed that NSA knew a great deal about the 9/11 threats and Al Qaeda, electronically tracking various people and organizations for years -- since its role is to collect intelligence. The problem is, it wasn't sharing all of the data. If it had, other parts of government could have acted on it, and more than likely, NSA could have stopped, I say stopped 9/11. Later, it could have located Al Qaeda -- at the very time the U.S. was scouring Afghanistan."

Obviously, that tidbit of information further sparked my curiosity. I went to History Commons, and found every entry on the NSA that I could find, but could not see what Thomas Drake was talking about.

On 1/7/2014, in this article written by several NSA Whistleblowers, we get a clue about one of lies about 9/11.

"NSA knew the telephone number of the safe house in Yemen at least by 1996 and was, of course, keeping track of calls to it from the U.S. Would Mueller, Morell and Cheney have us believe NSA doesn’t know about caller ID? As William Binney has explained, automated systems take over when such calls are made and as long as you have one valid number you can obtain the other. Was it a case of gross ineptitude on NSA’s part; or was NSA deliberately withholding information linking al-Mihdhar to the known al-Qaeda base in Yemen?"

On 6/4/2014, Abby Martin has on two NSA Whistleblowers on her show "Breaking The Set." They are William Binney and Kirk Wiebe. During this interview, William Binney tells us:

"I know specifics… like six or seven phone calls from San Diego back to the Yemen facility. And by the way, BOTH ENDS WERE KNOWN. I MEAN BOTH NUMBERS WERE THERE. THAT'S HOW CALLER ID WORKS (emphasis mine)."

What do we learn from all of this? It seems the NSA lied, had BOTH numbers, and presumably knew the hijackers were in the United States and did not tell the FBI about it.

Is this what Thomas Drake was talking about? I don't know, but it is a pretty big lie. Personally, I would like access to all of the transcripts of the intercepts, and all other information the NSA had on Al-Qaeda before the 9/11 attacks.

Maybe someday.

NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI | 911Blogger.com
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Yeah that...obviously isn't true, anyone with any knowledge of SIGINT would know that.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Yeah that...obviously isn't true, anyone with any knowledge of SIGINT would know that.

Care to qualify that statement? Or quantify?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Do you know what SIGINT is? How it works?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Do you know what SIGINT is? How it works?

So, just your word against the blogger then?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

So, just your word against the blogger then?

Do you know what SIGINT is? How it works?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Do you know what SIGINT is? How it works?

In a general sense, yes... In specific, no.

So, are you going to quantify or qualify how the article is false?

It was the 1996 telecommunications act that legislated that telecom companies track user information, the justification being GPS data for the purpose of locating the origin of 911 call.

But, that may not be relevant, since you have not explained in what sense the article is false? It seems like last time, you are just grasping to make points with no basis, and then getting insulting when you are shown wrong,
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Whether or not the story is accurate is only half the equation.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Whether or not the story is accurate is only half the equation.

More vagueries....
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

In a general sense, yes... In specific, no.

So, are you going to quantify or qualify how the article is false?

It was the 1996 telecommunications act that legislated that telecom companies track user information, the justification being GPS data for the purpose of locating the origin of 911 call.

But, that may not be relevant, since you have not explained in what sense the article is false? It seems like last time, you are just grasping to make points with no basis, and then getting insulting when you are shown wrong,

Because anyone who knows even a ****ing day's worth of SIGINT knows that the ONLY thing you know for sure is the locational data.

Listen, dude, I'm not here to "discuss" things. Conspiracy theorists, by their very nature, aren't capable of rational thought, so why would you think I'd engage in an exchange with you. I just correct you guys as you go, and do a lot of laughing. No one has to prove anything to conspiracy theorists, don't you understand that. You're already marginalized, laughed at, and don't dictate policy. So what does it matter?

I'm just telling you flat out that there's a conspiracy theorist that made a blog purporting to say something that the NSA frankly would not say, because you could be a ****ing private in the Army and if you're a 35S, P, or Q, you know that what the blogger is trying to say the NSA said makes no sense. None. So maybe, just maybe- I know this is so alien to you, but you may want to consider it- the conspiracy theorist blogger doesn't know what they're talking about and are confusing what was reported. Is that possible? A dumbass conspiracy theorist didn't know what they were talking about and completely dicked up their story? It only happens virtually every day here, so there's a pretty good chance this is just yet another example of a retard being a retard. They're a conspiracy theorist, after all, aren't they?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Because anyone who knows even a ****ing day's worth of SIGINT knows that the ONLY thing you know for sure is the locational data.

Listen, dude, I'm not here to "discuss" things. Conspiracy theorists, by their very nature, aren't capable of rational thought, so why would you think I'd engage in an exchange with you. I just correct you guys as you go, and do a lot of laughing. No one has to prove anything to conspiracy theorists, don't you understand that. You're already marginalized, laughed at, and don't dictate policy. So what does it matter?

I'm just telling you flat out that there's a conspiracy theorist that made a blog purporting to say something that the NSA frankly would not say, because you could be a ****ing private in the Army and if you're a 35S, P, or Q, you know that what the blogger is trying to say the NSA said makes no sense. None. So maybe, just maybe- I know this is so alien to you, but you may want to consider it- the conspiracy theorist blogger doesn't know what they're talking about and are confusing what was reported. Is that possible? A dumbass conspiracy theorist didn't know what they were talking about and completely dicked up their story? It only happens virtually every day here, so there's a pretty good chance this is just yet another example of a retard being a retard. They're a conspiracy theorist, after all, aren't they?

Ok, so, your years of knowledge and the best you can do is attack the source?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Ok, so, your years of knowledge and the best you can do is attack the source?

hahahahahahahahahah

Keep on believing in that massive worldwide conspiracy looooool
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Because anyone who knows even a ****ing day's worth of SIGINT knows that the ONLY thing you know for sure is the locational data.

So, the NSA whistleblowers are lying?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

So, the NSA whistleblowers are lying?

No, the blogger is being a conspiracy theorist- ie, stupid. Read what was quoted by the whistleblowers. Try to use your noggin to figure out where the disconnect might be. Let's get that hamster wheel spinning and see what you can come up with. Or, if you don't know anything about SIGINT, maybe just realize that and try not to draw conclusions if you don't have the depth of knowledge to do so.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

hahahahahahahahahah

Keep on believing in that massive worldwide conspiracy looooool

So, let's get this right; you say the information is false... You are challenged to quantify or qualify your assertion of being false.

You attack the source, I point out that you only attack the source, and you start laughing.

Wow... I bet you were the master debater at your school.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

No, the blogger is being a conspiracy theorist- ie, stupid. Read what was quoted by the whistleblowers. Try to use your noggin to figure out where the disconnect might be. Let's get that hamster wheel spinning and see what you can come up with. Or, if you don't know anything about SIGINT, maybe just realize that and try not to draw conclusions if you don't have the depth of knowledge to do so.

I've not drawn any conclusions, I was asking you, a claimed expert in the subject WHY it's false... And the best you got so far is "the source are idiots" and "figure it out yourself"... Very convincing.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

So, let's get this right; you say the information is false... You are challenged to quantify or qualify your assertion of being false.

You attack the source, I point out that you only attack the source, and you start laughing.

Wow... I bet you were the master debater at your school.

I'm laughing because it's ridiculous. I already told you I'm not here to "debate" with some random joes that don't know anything about the topics. Why would I?

YOU CAN'T PICK UP ON SELECTORS WITHOUT KNOWING WHERE THEY ARE, that's like...the first day of SIGINT 101. The conspiracy theorist blogger doesn't understand that. Of course they don't. That's normal for them. How do you think SIGINT works? Where do you think you get the signals from? Is it just magic?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

More vagueries....

What are the two basic questions that need to be satisfied when considering any factor or piece of evidence? You should know this. It isn't rocket science. Comes up around here frequently enough.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

I'm laughing because it's ridiculous. I already told you I'm not here to "debate" with some random joes that don't know anything about the topics. Why would I?

YOU CAN'T PICK UP ON SELECTORS WITHOUT KNOWING WHERE THEY ARE, that's like...the first day of SIGINT 101. The conspiracy theorist blogger doesn't understand that. Of course they don't. That's normal for them. How do you think SIGINT works? Where do you think you get the signals from? Is it just magic?

Ok, so, how does this refute the article?
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Ok, so, how does this refute the article?

Wow. Just when I think, after the bin Laden stuff, after the Rockefeller stuff, after the multitudes of times you fail to understand completely simple points...I'm sorry Bman, I can't help you. I just can't. Sorry.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

It would be nice if OWO would actually say what is false in the article, rather than just saying it is false and then insulting people when they ask him to specify. Otherwise it would seem he is only positing here to start a fight.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Wow. Just when I think, after the bin Laden stuff, after the Rockefeller stuff, after the multitudes of times you fail to understand completely simple points...I'm sorry Bman, I can't help you. I just can't. Sorry.

Like I said, I don't really know much of anything on the topic, you are a claimed expert saying it's false, so, explain, to someone without the expertise how it's false...

You see, unlike those other times where I knew you were wrong, and showed you were wrong, I don't have any specific knowledge to say one way or the other.

So, coming up with fallacious nonsense in post 10, I point it out.

Eventually, post 17 you tell me that you can't "pick up on selectors without knowing where they are"... That tells me nothing, if I don't know what a selector means.

Where do I think they get signals from? I'd say that would depend on the signal, but specifically, I could make some guesses, but that's about it.

So, really, if you can't help there's three choices:
1- you aren't really experienced enough to say
2- you know the whistleblowers were accurate, and don't want to wind up admitting it by accident, or
3- you just don't want to because your ego is still damaged from previous topics showing you wrong.

Well, if it's 3, I don't really have enough knowledge of the subject to call you on much of anything beyond fallacious points you've tried so far.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

You see, unlike those other times where I knew you were wrong, and showed you were wrong,


hahahahahahahahaha wtf? Seriously delusional
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

It would be nice if OWO would actually say what is false in the article, rather than just saying it is false and then insulting people when they ask him to specify. Otherwise it would seem he is only positing here to start a fight.

Maybe the part where it says that NSA said or insinuated that it didn't have a capability that, technologically, it can't collect without having. Like I'm sorry folks like you and the writer of the blog don't know SIGINT- it's in and outs are highly classified. But that doesn't mean that people like blogger can just go around making dumb arguments without someone laughing at them and calling them dumb. So much time wasted in that blog talking about how NSA seemed to be trying to make other agencies believe that they didn't "have caller ID", like come on.

Why would the blog utilize that much time for something so rudimentary to the entire discipline? Either a- ignorance or b- purposely being misleading. Hmmmm.
 
Re: NSA Lied About Knowledge Of 2 Hijackers In U.S., Didn't Inform The FBI

Like I said, I don't really know much of anything on the topic, you are a claimed expert saying it's false, so, explain, to someone without the expertise how it's false...

You see, unlike those other times where I knew you were wrong, and showed you were wrong, I don't have any specific knowledge to say one way or the other.

So, coming up with fallacious nonsense in post 10, I point it out.

Eventually, post 17 you tell me that you can't "pick up on selectors without knowing where they are"... That tells me nothing, if I don't know what a selector means.

Where do I think they get signals from? I'd say that would depend on the signal, but specifically, I could make some guesses, but that's about it.

So, really, if you can't help there's three choices:
1- you aren't really experienced enough to say
2- you know the whistleblowers were accurate, and don't want to wind up admitting it by accident, or
3- you just don't want to because your ego is still damaged from previous topics showing you wrong.

Well, if it's 3, I don't really have enough knowledge of the subject to call you on much of anything beyond fallacious points you've tried so far.

He immediately attacks the source and in the process defends the NSA (did you expect otherwise from this government stooge?). Then he plays the let-me-be-as-vague-as-possible game and ridicules you for not knowing why in HIS OPINION Jon Gold is wrong despite that you don't know any details about his opinion and he refuses to state them. This is just one of many reasons why I usually don't bother responding to his insanity.
 
Back
Top Bottom