Hmm, I have to wonder what else has been 'undisclosed' by the commission.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... ept_11_faa

that's lovely, thank you faa

Well Willy Brown, Ashcroft and Rumsfeld were given specific information regarding commercial jets being dangerous on the 11th.

and put this together with Bin Laden Determinded to Attack Inside America


but of course we're in heindsight now...

9/11 Report Cites Many Warnings About Hijackings
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: February 10, 2005

ASHINGTON, Feb. 9 - In the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations, according to a previously undisclosed report from the 9/11 commission.

But 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," the commission report concluded.

The report discloses that the Federal Aviation Administration, despite being focused on risks of hijackings overseas, warned airports in the spring of 2001 that if "the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable."

The report takes the F.A.A. to task for failing to pursue domestic security measures that could conceivably have altered the events of Sept. 11, 2001, like toughening airport screening procedures for weapons or expanding the use of on-flight air marshals. The report, completed last August, said officials appeared more concerned with reducing airline congestion, lessening delays, and easing airlines' financial woes than deterring a terrorist attack.

The Bush administration has blocked the public release of the full, classified version of the report for more than five months, officials said, much to the frustration of former commission members who say it provides a critical understanding of the failures of the civil aviation system. The administration provided both the classified report and a declassified, 120-page version to the National Archives two weeks ago and, even with heavy redactions in some areas, the declassified version provides the firmest evidence to date about the warnings that aviation officials received concerning the threat of an attack on airliners and the failure to take steps to deter it.

Among other things, the report says that leaders of the F.A.A. received 52 intelligence reports from their security branch that mentioned Mr. bin Laden or Al Qaeda from April to Sept. 10, 2001. That represented half of all the intelligence summaries in that time.

Five of the intelligence reports specifically mentioned Al Qaeda's training or capability to conduct hijackings, the report said. Two mentioned suicide operations, although not connected to aviation, the report said.

A spokeswoman for the F.A.A., the agency that bears the brunt of the commission's criticism, said Wednesday that the agency was well aware of the threat posed by terrorists before Sept. 11 and took substantive steps to counter it, including the expanded use of explosives detection units.

"We had a lot of information about threats," said the spokeswoman, Laura J. Brown. "But we didn't have specific information about means or methods that would have enabled us to tailor any countermeasures."

She added: "After 9/11, the F.A..A. and the entire aviation community took bold steps to improve aviation security, such as fortifying cockpit doors on 6,000 airplanes, and those steps took hundreds of millions of dollars to implement."

The report, like previous commission documents, finds no evidence that the government had specific warning of a domestic attack and says that the aviation industry considered the hijacking threat to be more worrisome overseas.

"The fact that the civil aviation system seems to have been lulled into a false sense of security is striking not only because of what happened on 9/11 but also in light of the intelligence assessments, including those conducted by the F.A.A.'s own security branch, that raised alarms about the growing terrorist threat to civil aviation throughout the 1990's and into the new century," the report said.

In its previous findings, including a final report last July that became a best-selling book, the 9/11 commission detailed the harrowing events aboard the four hijacked flights that crashed on Sept. 11 and the communications problems between civil aviation and military officials that hampered the response. But the new report goes further in revealing the scope and depth of intelligence collected by federal aviation officials about the threat of a terrorist attack.

Previously Undisclosed 9/11 Commission Staff Report Posted
The National Security Archive has posted a redacted version of the 9/11 Commission's staff report on the FAA's failings. Written in August, its existence was previously undisclosed. [b]The uncensored version remains classified.[/b]

THE REPORT:

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NS ... ograph.pdf

NSA Archive about the Report: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NS ... /index.htm

http://www.thememoryblog.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But now we have the TSA, so this should never happen again!

Why? Why have they blocked the release of it? Why doesn't this bother anyone, that our government sees fit to spoon feed us what it wants us to hear? People should be up in arms over this stuff, but again, no one seems to really be bothered by it.

Sooooo, what are you guys saying? That the government orchestrated 9/11 and was behind it (the arguments that an airliner never hit the Pentagon) or that it covered it up? It seems to me that if the government orchestrated it, an outside source wouldn't have warned an adminstrative arm of aviation about it's own plot.

hahahahahaha fucking excellent point, now, either the FAA is fucked up and needs restructured, or noone can say jack shit about it

I think part of the reason for the classification of the documents and reports is because we didn't want to publicize the some aspects of the restructuring of the FAA which was implemented as a direct response to the 9/11 commission's findings. After all, the last thing you want is a road map how to circumvent the new procedures in place for airport screening.

You may be right, but I was under the impression that the 9/11 report dealt with issue before the attacks, and not with actions taken subsequently.

Who was it who said he read the whole thing? Was it G_V? I don't know, somebody here actually read the published version.

--PunkDavid

I didn't read the whole thing, but I know the panel gave recommendations based upon its findings which, to my knowledge, were incorporated into the top-to-bottom review of the FAA.

Yeah, I know about the recommendations, but it seemed you were implying that the report detailed changes that had already been implemented between 9/11 and the issuance of the report.

--PunkDavid (goes to read news and find some good thread starters)

Actually the "the government orchestrated 9/11" argument was made earlier:
http://www.theskyiscrape.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9133

That's what I was referring to . . . and what I'm trying to reconcile.

Right, but the reason for the classification was because of the report's findings (which incorporated recommendations) that were based upon the information that was just released. This information existed (obviously) before 9/11. The implementation of the FAA changes started immediately after 9/11, but continues to this day. Because it was a work in progress, and because the panel's findings nd recommendations incorporated classified information, it couldn't be released immediately.

Jesus, my head hurts . . .

First--I have never said or contended that the US Government was involved in the 9/11 attacks, and I honestly find that pretty ridiculous. It would be a cover-up of such a massive scale that it could not remain hidden for long.

Second--I don't care to read about what's been done since. I want to know why the Bush Administration feels that the populace doesn't need to know what happened prior to and leading up to 9/11, as well as some sketchy things on the day of (WTC 7, for starters). Obviously, I'm not calling for a jeapordization of national security, but if things have been changed like you say Chris, there's no need to hide aspects of what went wrong beforehand.

for the record tough office worker, i know i didnt mean you said the government was behind it, but there are some that do believe it

I never accused you specifically . . . but there's no denying that some people on this board are under the preposterous presumption that the government staged 9/11 and, in the process, killed 3,000+ people in order to create a pretext for invading Iraq.

Now, I'm all for an open and transparent government -- to an extent. Where things may compromise national security, operatives in the field or sources for information, though, I recognize that the need for classification exists and overrides any need for full disclosure. Even you have to recognize this.