Foreign Affairs
Source: SOT and other sources
Published: 9/14/01 Author: SOT and other sources
Posted on 9/14/01 8:58 PM Pacific by Spirit Of Truth

1 posted on 9/14/01 8:58 PM Pacific by Spirit Of Truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

A very timely post. Thanks, summer

2 posted on 9/14/01 9:01 PM Pacific by summer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Attacks with weapons of mass destruction next?

I think considering the way in which they were used, the planes can safely be considered weapons of mass destruction.

3 posted on 9/14/01 9:03 PM Pacific by thatsnotnice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Good post. Have faith in the men and women working for the President. They are going to sort this puzzle out.

4 posted on 9/14/01 9:10 PM Pacific by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

hey, folks . . . don't you suppose our guys know all this? let's see who gets what from big blue this time round -- i think we'll be pleased.

while i'm here, bob toricelli on msnbc tonight said, "we're going to rain hell on the people who did this. living hell. it is going to be overwhelming, and it is going to be sustained. i think president bush needed to see this [the world trade center] so that he could have no doubt about carrying forth the plan that he has already decided upon."

dep

5 posted on 9/14/01 9:13 PM Pacific by dep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Question...does anyone recall Hannsen (sp?). What kind of info did he deal with while spying??

6 posted on 9/14/01 9:14 PM Pacific by unix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

One of your "sources" is "SOT"... apparently this is "Spirit Of Truth". Yourself, right?

In light of how shallow an accuracy rate you've had before, I'm going to recommend that only people who think state lottery tickets are a sound investment take heed of your warning.

Please knock it off... we don't need this kind of misinformation at a time like this.

7 posted on 9/14/01 9:23 PM Pacific by Darth Sidious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

"while i'm here, bob toricelli on msnbc tonight said, "Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah, Yada Yada Yada!"

Toricelli's amendment to a major national security law, passed just a few years ago, forbids our intelligence agencies from paying spy's who have any dirt on their hands, whatsoever!

Now does everybody understand why we have no good HUMINTEL and lower Manhattan is still in flames tonight, with nearly FIVE THOUSAND AMERICANS, literally chopped to pieces in unspeakable tragedy.

Now, tell me what he said, again. I can't hear either you or him. I'm too enraged!!!

8 posted on 9/14/01 9:25 PM Pacific by SierraWasp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Attacks with weapons of mass destruction next?

Possibly,hope these #@$#$#$^^!!! are trained in duck and cover!!! or not!!

9 posted on 9/14/01 9:28 PM Pacific by mdittmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Well according to Nostradamus after Saddam Hussein is killed, New York will get nuked. Then we will see the rise of the third anti-christ, if he is not somebody we already know of.

10 posted on 9/14/01 9:34 PM Pacific by Bruce Leroy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Baloney. Everyone knows Iraq had a role, possibly Iran, Syria, maybe even China, N. Korea, and Russia. Bush is going to do a thorough and COMPLETE job. Read between the lines. Look at Tony Blair's statements about how we need to take the time to be thorough, as the actions being prepared might CHANGE THE PRESENT WORLD ORDER.

But we may not have the resources to do this all at once, so he may be laying out a staged war, where our current and short-term allies may be turned into enemies is they don't "see the light" soon enough. My goodness, I hope we learn very, very little before it actually happens.

11 posted on 9/14/01 9:50 PM Pacific by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

This story sounds like propaganda from AIPAC and its amen corner in Congress.

12 posted on 9/14/01 9:58 PM Pacific by Buchanan4prez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Please knock it off...

Sshhh...
HuTex told him.

13 posted on 9/14/01 10:15 PM Pacific by PRND21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Well according to Nostradamus after Saddam Hussein is killed, New York will get nuked.

Nostradamus is bunk. His only "successful" predictions have been the ones that have been creatively "retranslated" after the events they allegedly describe.

You might as well quote Jeane Dixon, and that woman who "channels" the ancient warrior dude.

14 posted on 9/15/01 12:15 AM Pacific by Dan Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I think considering the way in which they were used, the planes can safely be considered weapons of mass destruction.

I wish I could do the following calculation to arrive at an equivalent explosive yield but a 100 Ton 767 hitting something at 300-350 knots must have a force in the multi kiloton range

15 posted on 9/15/01 1:40 AM Pacific by ninonitti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Maximum takeoff weight for a 767 is 186000 kilograms. 300 knots is about 160 metres/sec. Kinetic energy is 1/2 mv squared, or 0.5 x 186000 x 160 x 160 = 2.4 x 10**9 joules. 1 kiloton = 4 x 10**12 joules. Therefore, the kinetic energy dissipated in the impact is only the equivalent of about one ton of TNT, by my calculations. There was actually a lot more energy released from the fuel than from the impact, if I'm not mistaken.

16 posted on 9/15/01 2:08 AM Pacific by Clinton's a rapist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Just a thought... If Iraq is behind this and the government finds out then how would we assault them again? Airstrikes from the gulf and Turkey until we can get settled ashore in Saudi? Would the Marines get their shot at storming the beach this time? Airstrikes and an Airborne assault into Iraq? It occures to me that all this hubbub over Afghanistan would be a great cover for movement.

17 posted on 9/15/01 2:10 AM Pacific by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

SpiritOfTruth is wacky, but the content of this particular post isn't.

18 posted on 9/15/01 2:14 AM Pacific by Clinton's a rapist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Maximum takeoff weight for a 767 is 186000 kilograms. 300 knots is about 160 metres/sec. Kinetic energy is 1/2 mv squared, or 0.5 x 186000 x 160 x 160 = 2.4 x 10**9 joules. 1 kiloton = 4 x 10**12 joules. Therefore, the kinetic energy dissipated in the impact is only the equivalent of about one ton of TNT, by my calculations. There was actually a lot more energy released from the fuel than from the impact, if I'm not mistaken.

If you're serious about attempting the calculation here's some more information for you.

Factor in about 70,000 kg of jet fuel. About 3.5 kg fuel = 1 gallon. 1 gallon has a max yield of 14 sticks of dynamite, say 3 lbs. convert that to joules. Now add the impact energy of the weight of the building falling an average of 50 stories. Add it all up and you can see the energy release DIRECTLY caused by this act for EACH plane.

I'll bet good money that it's up in the Little Boy (15kt) range

19 posted on 9/15/01 2:19 AM Pacific by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I heard each floor of the building weighed 3,000 tons. Okay, potential energy is mgh, if I recall my high-school physics. Say 100 floors with an average height above the ground of about 200 meters. The potential energy released in the collapse is therefore approximately 100 x 3,000,000 kg x 200 metres x 10 m/s/s, or 6x10**11 joules. That's still only about the equivalent of a hundred tons of TNT. It's a huge amount of energy (which is why the rubble is still steaming hot in the rain), but even a small nuke would release many times more energy.

20 posted on 9/15/01 2:35 AM Pacific by Clinton's a rapist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

21 posted on 9/15/01 4:11 AM Pacific by Spirit Of Truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Whacky like this?

22 posted on 9/15/01 4:18 AM Pacific by Spirit Of Truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I agree with you. This has Saddam's fingerprints all over it. But even if he had nothing to do with it, now would be a good time to take him out.

23 posted on 9/15/01 4:20 AM Pacific by Clinton's a rapist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I don't think Saddam's fingerprints are directly on this attack in the U.S. He's too smart to pick a fight that would be traced back to him. My hunch is that Iraq paid for this operation and provided intelligence and logistics for terrorist personnel from a third country. And now that its happened the Iraqi regime can plausibly deny responsibility. But its still a terrorist state that should be dismantled altogether.

24 posted on 9/15/01 4:28 AM Pacific by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

Iraq is a poor candidate for state sponsorship of this operation and I will make my case for this position from a composite of information and analysis from the self described global intelligence service Stratfor.com:

U.S. Must Identify State Sponsors
0120 GMT, 010912

Analysis

The attacks on New York and Washington achieve a number of objectives for the perpetrators. On a strategic level, they demonstrate the vulnerability of the United States. In one fell swoop, the sophisticated and well-coordinated operation paralyzed New York City and the U.S. financial sector, sent the nation's government spiraling into chaos and struck terror in the hearts of the American public. Such a feat, accomplished with only four airline hijackings, is almost impossible to comprehend and will impact U.S. defense and foreign policy for decades to come....

Historically, international terrorist organizations tend to seek government support. State sponsorship is necessary for a variety of reasons. Most important, governments can provide access to the target country that would otherwise be difficult. By using a diplomatic passport, a suspected terrorist could enter a country unnoticed. States can also construct cover identities that may be fraudulent but are undetectable to other nations and can provide secure communications within a target country, since diplomatic pouches aren't normally open for inspection.

There are numerous nations that have ample motive for assisting in the recent attack but only a few that have the means and opportunity as well.

Topping the list of potential state sponsors are Afghanistan and Iraq. Ruled by the radical Islamic Taliban, Afghanistan has harbored Saudi-born dissident bin Laden for years. The Taliban is trapped in a seemingly endless conflict with the opposition Northern Alliance, which receives support from the United States, Russia and Iran and has several reasons to want to cause critical damage to the United States.

Washington launched missile strikes against the Afghan government following its implication in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. Perhaps even more importantly, U.S. opposition has kept Afghanistan a pariah state, limiting international support.

Afghanistan, however, has limited diplomatic access to the United States as long as it continues to provide bin Laden with safe haven. Support for such an extensive operation as seen today would seem far beyond the Taliban's capabilities.

Iraq, another strong suspect, also has reasons to want to strike a blow at U.S. hegemony. The country, which is still suffering from U.N. sanctions, would benefit significantly from a U.S. decision to redirect its focus on homeland defense and reduce its commitments abroad.

Iraq's involvement would be aimed at reducing U.S. air strikes against the country. But the fact that Washington probably long ago penetrated Iraqi operational capabilities in the United States, including any and all diplomatic traffic, makes the possibility that such an operation was carried out without any advance warning less than likely.

Other Islamic nations such as Libya, Pakistan, Sudan and Syria all have reasons to want to see the United States damaged, but none are likely suspects. Libya, a chief supporter of international terrorism in the past, has little to gain and everything to lose from such an act. Even though it suffered from U.S. air strikes in the late 1980s, Tripoli isn't likely to risk European investment at a moment when it is poised to regain international trust. Syria also has no desire to further U.S. reliance on and support for Israel, and that is just what this attack -- if it were indeed committed by Islamic terrorists -- has done.

Pakistan does not have any strong reason to risk U.S. retaliation or its position in the international system. There are several radical Islamic groups operating in the country, but few would have access to the diplomatic avenues necessary for facilitating such an attack.

Sudan, implicated in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings, has blatantly attempted rapprochement with the United States while curbing fundamentalist Islamic activity in the country. Moreover, given the historical relationship with bin Laden, who lived in Sudan as a guest of the government prior to fleeing to Afghanistan, the United States has likely also penetrated its diplomatic traffic as well.

Each of these nations may have a reason to see the United States suffer, but few are willing to actually go to war. And there is no doubt that if these attacks were even tacitly approved or facilitated by a national government, they are tantamount to a declaration of war.

The Sophistication of the Attackers
1640 GMT, 010912

Some questions have arisen as to the sophistication necessary to carry out the Sept. 11 attacks in New York and Washington. It is Stratfor's view that the attackers were extremely sophisticated and well organized....

According to emerging reports, each plane had at least two or three hijackers aboard. That means that there were, at minimum, between eight and 12 individuals involved. We would expect that others were involved as well on the ground -- providing safe houses, communications and other necessary elements. Our expectation would be that between 10 and 20 people were privy to the plot in detail, including targets and timing. We would expect the real number to tend toward the higher figure.

That is a large number to involve in a conspiracy. Clearly, they maintained excellent operational security through four difficult phases.

First, evidence suggests they were able to organize the operation outside the United States without detection by U.S. intelligence. This included gaining substantial knowledge about flying aircraft -- including turning off the transponder, preventing the hijack signal from being transmitted, navigating the aircraft and finally, flying it.

Second, they were able to move undetected into the United States. That means that they either obtained and traveled under false documents -- and had access to excellent ones -- or were "virgins" engaged in their first operation and not on any suspect list. We suspect the former is true.

Third, they re-formed in the United States, coordinating at least strike times, which undoubtedly could not be set too far ahead. After all, what if one of the selected flights was all booked up? Finally, they coordinated time on target superbly, with only one aircraft failing to carry out the mission.

Apart from the expertise needed, it is the ability to maintain security throughout the operation -- in spite of the number of people who were doubtless involved -- that is most striking. The attackers understood how to avoid detection by the National Security Agency and other technical intelligence agencies while organizing in the base camp. They knew how to avoid suspicion once in the United States. That meant that they had a sophisticated understanding of how U.S. intelligence works as well as the discipline to avoid triggering suspicion.

In an operation of this sort, the probability of detection is always high. There are too many people, too many actions required, too many possibilities for error. These operatives did not commit any detectable errors. They were very good. Simply consider that they were skilled enough with the use of cutting devices like box knives to intimidate plane-loads of people.

Many have said that anyone willing to die could have done what they did. But the willingness to die was only one of their attributes. We would urge anyone doubting this to try to imagine passing through the steps they undoubtedly passed through -- from flight training to the final action -- to realize the complexity of what this required.

Their support team has doubtless now dispersed, either in preparation for re-forming for new actions or withdrawing to fight another day. But the fact that a day after the action, little seems to be known about who the attackers were attests to their sophistication. This is not an enemy to be underestimated.

The Israeli Dimension
1800 GMT, 010911
By George Friedman

The big winner today, intended or not, is the state of Israel.

Israel has been under siege by suicide bombers for more than a year. It has responded by waging a systematic war against Palestinian command structures. The international community, particularly the United States, has pressured Israel heavily to stop its operations. The argument has been made that the threat of suicide bombings, though real, does not itself constitute a genuine threat to Israeli national security and should not trigger the kind of response Israel is making.

Today's events change all of this.

First, the United States no longer can argue that Israel should endure the bombings. Moving forward, the domestic American political mood simply won't tolerate such a stance.

Second, Israel now becomes, once again, an indispensable ally to the United States. The United States is obviously going to launch a massive covert and overt war against the international radical Islamic movement that is assumed to be behind this attack. Not only does this align U.S. and Israeli interests but it also makes the United States dependent on the Israelis -- whose intelligence capabilities in this area as well as covert operational capabilities are clearly going to be needed.

There is no question, therefore, that the Israeli leadership is feeling relief. Given that pressures for Israel to restrain operations against the Palestinian Authority and other Palestinian groups will decline dramatically, it might be expected that Yasser Arafat, anticipating this evolution, will rapidly change his position on suicide bombings and become more accommodating to Israel. In effect, today's events have wrecked Arafat's nearly successful drive to split the United States from Israel.

Given that the bombers are not fools, they undoubtedly understood that this would be a consequence....

The sophistication required means of communication and transport available only to states. Afghanistan does not have the international facilities needed. We assume that Sudanese and Iraqi diplomatic communications and transport are both too closely monitored to be useful. If that is true, what other nation provided support facilities for this operation? Answering that question speaks to the future of the region.

George Friedman is the founder and chairman of STRATFOR, the global intelligence company.

A couple of final points to keep in mind :

1) State support and control of a terrorist organization can be obtained through covert means such as through the careful planting of mole(s)in the organization or perhaps by recruiting a handful of high level members within the terrorist organization.

2) If Israeli intelligence were the ultimate brains behind this terrorist operation, it will not have been the first time that they have carried out a terrorist operation–a “black ops”-- against America with the intent to inflame American anger against the Arab peoples.

3) The attacks on USS Liberty, the Pollard case, and recent high technology transfers to China by Israel demonstrate the cynical and exploitative nature of the American-Israeli relationship.

4) Hamas was nurtured by Israeli intelligence during the 1980's as a way of undercutting Arafat’s moderate Fatah movement.

25 posted on 9/15/01 4:42 AM Pacific by peacenow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

BUMP!

26 posted on 9/15/01 4:44 AM Pacific by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I meant in the sense that it his MO. It's the MO of a sadist. Saddam, remember, got his start in government as a torturer for the secret police, stubbing lit cigarettes out in the eyes of his helpless victims. Even Hitler, for all his apocalyptic death wish, did not evidence the personal relish for cruelty that has marked Saddam throughout his career. Arafat is not in the same league as far as depravity is concerned. I guess those Islamic miltants in the Philipinnes who keep kidnapping random tourists and decapitating them are in the same ballpark psychologically, but they can't compete on scale. Saddam is almost sui generis.

27 posted on 9/15/01 4:46 AM Pacific by Clinton's a rapist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I surely hope Iraqi complicity is involved for this is a nation that has an asset that can be seized to provide compensation and minimize the effect of any 'oil boycott'. The oil fields of Iraq should be a prime target of any US response. Not their destruction but their seizure and operation.

The Shiite population around Basra and the Kurds to the north and west might offer little if any opposition to an American Expeditionary Force moving into Iraq for such an operation.

Taking and holding these relatively geographically compact oil fields avoids the mess of having to occupy population centers. The Arabs can shriek and wail, blow themselves up, do whatever they wish down in Baghdad it will have no effect on an American Army hunkered down many miles away out in the desert where the oil fields are.

28 posted on 9/15/01 5:11 AM Pacific by abwehr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

National Petition for a Congressional Declaration of War

Click the picture or the link above; it only takes a few seconds to sign the petition!

29 posted on 9/15/01 5:12 AM Pacific by Democrats are liars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I actually heard this week that it was suspected that Iraq was involved in this, possibly hiring or working with Bin Laden to carry this massive crime out. We know now that this was planned for at least a year. They just reported this morning that at least one of these guys has been in the U.S. since 1993...1993 was the year of the WTC bombing that pretty much failed in that there wasn't mass casualty and it didn't bring down the building. This was, no doubt, the objective of that bombing. So perhaps after that mission failed in '93, Iraq took action and began plotting this with Bin Laden...as long ago as 1993! I worry about a nuclear war, here...but I pray that we can bring down anyone who may use them before that happens...

30 posted on 9/15/01 6:00 AM Pacific by NCRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

SOT, We agree on one point - IRAQ IS BEHIND THIS!

31 posted on 9/15/01 6:22 AM Pacific by truth_eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I don't know about the kerosene fuel on these planes, but one gallon of gasoline=1700 pounds of tnt, if properly varorized, a fuel air explosive.

32 posted on 9/15/01 9:22 AM Pacific by Not now, Not ever!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

The disgusting part is that there was never a shortage of intelligence or warning.

Go to the documentation by the New York Times and the Washington Post of the FBI role facilitating the FIRST WTC bombing and the related intelligence provided by Ramsi Youseff.

Like it or not, the dots are well connected.

Go to the cover-up of the middle eastern connection by McVeigh's attorney, Stephan Jones.

Yet, we hear one government official, after another, claim there was no warning. That's a poorly crafted lie!

Horrifying or not, the U.S. Government can't claim a bit of surprise, with the possible exception of the magnitude.

The FAA, in particular has been on notice to the extreme, between GAO reports to congress, the very recent recent Hart-Rudman Report and years of complaints and reports to everybody from the White House on down with details of not only the failings but the methodical termination of FAA employees who address those failures.

There is no shortage of the citation and documents on FAA corruption. see -

Airline Safety ‘Net

The intent and potential impact of the first WTC bombing is enough. The threat has been long known and recently warned in such open forms as the overseas papers and the "60-Minutes" report on the Afghan terrorists.

There is no distinction between allowing something to knowingly happen; and making it happen.

If history is consistent, Texas will immediately start sucking up the defense tax dollars.

33 posted on 9/15/01 12:33 PM Pacific by SKYDRIFTER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

"Go to the documentation by the New York Times and the Washington Post..."

Who would believe anything from those two pro-communist rags?

34 posted on 9/15/01 3:48 PM Pacific by JimRed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

BMP

35 posted on 9/21/01 11:01 AM Pacific by agincourt1415
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

BMP

36 posted on 9/21/01 11:01 AM Pacific by agincourt1415
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

bmp

37 posted on 9/21/01 11:02 AM Pacific by agincourt1415
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

bmp

38 posted on 9/21/01 11:03 AM Pacific by agincourt1415
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

What specific weapons of "mass destruction" does Saddam have?

Also what is the range of any weapons here?

39 posted on 9/23/01 6:56 PM Pacific by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

What specific weapons of "mass destruction" does Saddam have?

Powedered Anthrax for one.

Also what is the range of any weapons here?

Guess I don't need to elaborate on this point now...

40 posted on 11/10/01 2:58 AM Pacific by Spirit Of Truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

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.

[ Latest Posts | Latest Articles | Self-Search | Bookmark | Abuse | Settings | Help! ]