Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Still another precedent for 9/11: Operation Bojinka

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
9215 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-19-04 10:34 PM
Original message
Still another precedent for 9/11: Operation Bojinka
When will the lies of this administration be seen for what they are??


Operation Bojinka--get this
http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/01/magazine_brzezinski010202.htm

Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2002; 1 p.m. EST
Six years before the Sept. 11 attacks, Philippine police took down an al Qaeda cell in Manila that, among other things, had been plotting to fly explosives-laden planes into the Pentagon -- and possibly some skyscrapers. The CIA knew about the plot, known as Operation Bojinka. So did the FBI. "We told the Americans about the plans to turn planes into flying bombs as far back as 1995," a Philippine inspector says. "Why didn't they pay attention?"

In 1996 -- as reported by the German paper Die Welt on Dec. 6, and by Agence France Presse on Dec. 7 -- Western intelligence services, including the CIA, learned after arrests in the Philippines that Al Qaeda operatives had planned to crash commercial airliners into the Twin Towers. Details of the plan, as reported by a number of American press outlets, were found on a computer seized during the arrests. The plan was called “Operation Bojinka.” Details of the plot were disclosed publicly in 1997 in the New York trial of Ramsi Youssef for his involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-19-04 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Right, and on CBS news tonight we learned that NORAD...
...ran simulations and fly by's of hijacked airliners that would be rammed into both the Pentagon and, you guessed it, the World Trade Center Towers. That took place before 9-11, I forget exactly when, perhaps two years before, not in the long forgotten past. Military Brass thought it not too plausible, but the various military branches including NORAD had contingency plans for how to deal with such events, including scrambling fighter jets to head off such efforts by hijackers. So, why were military aircraft ordered to stand-down on 9-11? The lies and cover ups go on.:wtf: :think: :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
9215 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-04 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. The NORAD topic is what sparked my memory of BOJINKA. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-19-04 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. Operation BOJINKA was 9-11 forerunner.
The only reason we know about is the Phillipino police woman checking out some "fireworks" within the city limits. It turned out to be an urban terrorist bomb-making factory. She's doing better than the BFEE turds Ashcan, Ridge and Smirk.

http://www.worldhistory.com/wiki/A/Aida-Fariscal.htm

Thanks, 9215! Way to keep focused on the Big Picture.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-04 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
4. 1997 NIE spelled it out for Dim Son & Sneer
Thanks to TRUTHOUT.org I discovered something new:

CIA Warned of Attack 6 Years Before 9/11

By JOHN SOLOMON
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Six years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the CIA warned in a classified report that Islamic extremists likely would strike on U.S. soil at landmarks in Washington or New York, or through the airline industry, according to intelligence officials.

Though hauntingly prescient, the CIA's 1995 National Intelligence Estimate did not yet name Osama bin Laden as a terrorist threat.

But within months the intelligence agency developed enough concern about the wealthy, Saudi-born militant to create a specific unit to track him and his followers, the officials told The Associated Press.

And in 1997, the CIA updated its intelligence estimate to ensure bin Laden appeared on its very first page as an emerging threat, cautioning that his growing movement might translate into attacks on U.S. soil, the officials said, divulging new details about the CIA's 1990s response to the terrorist threat.

CONTINUED...

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SEPT_11_CIA_WARNINGS?SITE=VARIT&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
9215 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-04 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Sometimes I think that the reason the Right went after Clinton
Edited on Tue Apr-20-04 09:26 AM by 9215
so rabidly was because he threatened to break up their terrorist network. I know this sounds extreme, but I think the public will be hearing about some very treasonous behaviour on the part of the Bushies in the near future.

There just isn't any excuse for turning down the pressure to get Bin Laden and Al Qaeda as Bush did.


Thanks for the input Octafish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-04 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Anytime, 9215! Yours is a most interesting idea.
The Reich Wing is what it is. What I don't understand is why people are so, seemingly, uninterested in their fate. Don't they notice the water is starting to boil? Don't they care? Can re-runs of "Friends" be that important?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
9215 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-21-04 02:18 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. No need to push it at this point, my friend. The truth is
impossible to refute once the public is made aware it. There is no need for anyone to risk your safety when the truth is coming out via many sources. All of the attempts at labeling us conspiracy theorists have failed so they now resort to coercion. I suggest that we all not take unneccessary risks. IMO we are seeing the public questioning, in a big way, what is going on and that process will continue. Let it ride and see what pans out. No need to press the hard facts unneccesarily. Don't take to many risks.

But I have had alot of my contacts in the mail and my e-mails cut off lately and there seems to be no technological explanation. The convergence of thought I have had recently parallels others who have been "suicided"--like Kangas and Casolaro. All of a sudden I have new friends who are less than "good friends" who want to know what I know about all of this shit and they have an uncanny knowledge of details that dont' jive with "current events" as portrayed by the newspapers.When I ask them questions they just walk away.

The bastards seem to be intent on shutting me down. If they go for the big hit they need to understand that every aspect will be investigated to the max at some future date. I have been in continuous contact with official and non-official sources who know what I know about these bastards. Most of my ideas have been disseminated to multiple sources, even out of the US, who will demand a proper investigation. My neighbors know what is up and back me up!! Anybody involved in an attempt on my life will be prosecuted to the fullest.

Anybody fucks with me and I will fight with all I've got! I know how to use a firearm, I practice regularly, and I give no quarter to fascists!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gandalf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-21-04 03:43 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. As long as you only post here
you have no big impact on the opinion of the public. Even then, you would be marginalized as a conspiracy nut. As as long as this is possible, I think there is no big danger -- that's what I hope, at least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gandalf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-21-04 03:35 AM
Response to Original message
8. Both 9/11 comissions documented facts about Bojinka
Edited on Wed Apr-21-04 03:36 AM by gandalf
The commission that focused on intelligence failures which published its report in July 2003 (if I remember correctly, the report mentions Bojinka), as well as the current 9/11 commission has it in the transcript of its hearing on May 23, 2003.

However, it might be that some major newspapers cannot remember all these things, so they once in a while forget to mention them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC