It should now be clear to anyone that the horrific terrorist attack on America was a repeat event with a long history. Unfortunately, the fore-knowledge is known to be far too abundant for large-scale warnings NOT to have been issued, with associated intervention attempts. Most glaringly, there is still no significant 9-11 investigation under way. Time will kill many of the pertinent facts and separate people from their rage. There is method to that madness.

Consider this thought, for the moment - four nearly simultaneous and successful hijackings, with three precision hits, at 350 miles per hour, on three separate targets, all at the "least-risk" points.

History is abundantly clear; the 9-11 terrorists were far too confident, knowledgeable and skilled for the events of 9-11 to have been more luck than planning. The pilots of the three planes, which got through, all demonstrated too much skill for a 300-hour zealot. Four nearly simultaneous hijackings, with three precision strikes at 300 knots too strongly reek of advanced training.

The terrorist cover was too well-established and successful. Atta, alone had sufficient history that he should have been identified by the CIA - well in advance. While briefly addressed in the media, the subject of the attackers using addresses of U.S. Air Force training bases was never followed-up. Although there were "spelling errors" in the pilots names, the addresses were too suggestive of former fighter pilots - not amateurs. Mis-spelling is a standard government technique for hiding data, via computer searches. "...no data was responsive to your request." Just Ask Timothy Mc Veigh's original defense attorney - they nearly paid dearly for having missed the tactic.

Mohammed Atta had previously shut down a runway by abandoning a rented twin-engined aircraft on the runway. Yet, there was no investigation - far too atypical of the FAA, particularly after the Florida FAA got their nose busted for laxity in the Fine Air crash. Being a 'foreigner' was no license to violate FAA regulations or competency standards - something was badly wrong in that picture.

The training schools allegedly used, offered accelerated training programs. Yet, there was something not right about their training. Besides being able to get school-issued equivalents of student visas, the actual student visas were issued well after 9-11 - while the hijacker names were supposedly on the tips of every American.

While the Kamikaze attacks were known to be part of the ever-evolving 1995 "Project Bojinka," there were no new anti-hijacking procedures being developed. "Bojinka" was an unknown name among the very airline pilots who needed to know of its existence and the series of attacks, which suggested its continuation. In the mean time, the 'traditional' airline hijack counter-measure procedures were unchanged. Those procedures guaranteed the terrorist' access to the cockpits.

The name, "Bojnka" is Serb-Croate for "big bang," or "loud noise." Yes, the name derives from the "Ethnic Albanians" of the infamous Bosnian campaign - and bin Laden's cohorts in terror. From the Balkans to the Philipppines - no possibility of coincidence. The name should have rung loud warning bells in any intelligence agency.

"Project Bojinka" was an ambitious plan to blow up 12 U.S. airliners in the Pacific region, on a single day. An accidental apartment fire revealed the plan to the Manila police, when they raided Ramzi Yousef's apartment in January, 1995. Abdul Murad was captured by the Filipinos, but Yousef escaped to Pakistan, where he was later captured by police and extradited to the United states for the first WTC bombing trial.

Murad told the Philippine investigators of the Kamikaze plans, which were relayed to the U.S. authorities. To lend a high degree of credibility to the plot, Murad was an FAA licensed commercial pilot - originally licensed in the United Arab Emirates - suggesting the possibility that he was a former airline pilot - possibly trained in the military - at a U.S. training base.

The "Bojinka" linkage is incredible. Even in the McVeigh trial, the connection of the "Project Bojinka" players to the Oklahoma City bombing had been made. The first attacker of the World Trade Center, Ramzi Yousef, had claimed TWA-800. The continuity of the terrorist bombings gave him credibility, which the authorities cannot rationally deny.

Both Oklahoma City and TWA-800 are well-known as 'mysterious' under-investigated political embarrassments. Given the undeniable facts, both issues have been removed from the shadow of 'conspiracy theory.' Too many facts speak to the greater probability of truth and the undeniable cover-up. The connections continue -

The 2002 Bush Jr. administration identification of Iraqi involvement in the OKC bombing certifies the Middle Eastern evidence presented to the FBI, in the immediate aftermath of the bombing, by KFOR reporter, Jayna Davis. The evidence was REFUSED, when it was presented to the FBI. Despite the McVeigh trial politics, it was a felony to refuse the information. As a minimum, the FBI should have subpoenaed the information, instead.

The Bush Administration's sending of U.S. troops to break up the Philippine "Abu Sayef," in the spring of 2002, certifies the al Qaeda connection to the first WTC bombing, the OKC bombing and TWA-800. Muhammed Atta spent time in Manila as well; the continuity cannot be denied - except by the U.S. government; but WHY?

One would think that the American public has finally had enough. They haven't; the convenient denial mechanisms are provided for them.

It would seem that the monetary costs of the airliner diversions, due to sky-ragers, would have previously reached the point that flight attendants would have been trained to detect and monitor potential problem passengers; particularly trained in methods and resources to intervene. Scalding coffee and fire-extinguishers make great weapons for self-defense. Hat pins, hair spray, aerosol deodorants and perfume would have added to the list of personal weapons. Prior to 9-11, flight attendants were permitted the luxury of carrying these items.

In reality, a simple two-dollar heavy-duty bolt installed on the cockpit doors would have made the difference. Any stolen common cockpit keys would not be sufficient to guarantee cockpit access. Unique procedures, including depressurizing the cabin could have been established to thwart violent takeovers. However horrible the thought, losses among crew and passengers would have to be accepted, as the lesser of two evils, given the threat of airliners becoming Kamikaze aircraft.

The knowledge of the appropriate updated hijacking procedures would have leaked to the terrorists. Facing a long list of effective cabin counter-measures and threat, 9-11 may not have happened.

Pilots, in particular, will appreciate the following "checklist" as a cockpit counter-measure:


1. Cockpit Door - Bolt Latched
2. Transponder - 7500
3. Passenger Oxygen Deployment Circuit breakers - Pull
4. Oxygen Masks and Regulator - On-100%
5. Crew Interphone Communications - Establish
6. Air Conditioning - Full Cold
7. Pressurization - Manual
8. Outflow Valve - Full Open
9. Cabin Altitude Selector - 10,000 Feet (for post-event selection)
10. Aircraft Maneuvers - As Required
11. No. 2 radio - 121.5
12. ATC Communication - Establish
13. Intervention / Cabin Communication - As Required
14. Pressurization / Temperature - As Required
15. Land and Evacuate ASAP!

The success probability of extortionist-style hijackings was successfully thwarted with counter-measures, long prior to 9-11. With the measures cited above, the extreme of terrorist-style hijackings and suicide missions would have been reduced to the realm of 'infeasible.' Just the awareness of such an impending Kamikaze horror should have maximized the alertness and determination of law enforcement agencies. Similarly, the flight crews could have been better mentally prepared; even if training was ruled out, as an 'expense.' Under the regulations (FAR 108) - and federal law - the airlines were specified as being exclusively responsible. Yet, for the laxities which allowed 9-11, the airlines were rewarded with cash, loan guarantees and tax breaks; not to mention hundreds of millions in cost savings, once the government imposed the security 'head-charge.'

While inducing a depressurization, the passenger oxygen masks would not automatically deploy. The flight attendants would have portable oxygen bottles available to them, while the hijackers either desperately gasped for air, or fumbled, trying to grab the oxygen bottles. As a backup, the flight attendants would have the limited oxygen supply of the galley "smoke hoods."

Supplemental devices can be installed by the airlines, such as high-power strobe lights at strategic locations in the passenger cabin. Even during daylight, these are powerful enough to blind anyone, temporarily - and force passengers to put their heads down. High power and directional "personal injury" sonic-wailers could be installed in the vicinity of the cockpit door. Car thieves know their effectiveness, all-too-well - they work!

From the Israeli experience (no successful hijackings), it is too well-known that a simple add-on door can be installed in the first-class lavatory passageway, which leads to the cockpit door.

What might appear to be part of the wall would be a swing-out door, which the flight attendants could use to close off the passageway, allowing the pilots private access to the lavatory. Drinks and meals could then be delivered behind that locked door, also. Pushing past flight attendants and pilots into an exposed cockpit would no longer be possible.

In all, the 'fixes' are incredibly cheap, particularly over time.

As it stands, the pilots now have a bullet-proof door, locked from the inside, such that they are trapped, should an accident occur. The cockpit passageway second security door isn't being considered; another successful hijacking is guaranteed.

"Project Bojinka" has been known to have been compromised in its entirety, since 1995 - except to the people who desperately needed the information - the airline pilots and the public. The "Bojinka" files discussed airliners - not just small aircraft. The 1994 Islamic extremist hijacking of an Air France A-300 - Flight 8969 - with the intent to use it as a missile into Paris warned that the threat was quite real - complete with demands for maximum fuel and bin Laden ties. There can be no doubt that the Kamikaze aspect of "Bojinka" was indeed real and valid. The timing and failure of the Flight 8969 hijacking left the legacy, "...hijackers must be pilots."

Too many of the known terrorist plots had already become realities - prior to 9-11, such as the bombing of the various Western targets, including the embassies. The authorities obviously came to the realization that even though the "Bojinka" plans had been discovered, the terrorist attacks were still being carried out. However irrational, the authorities had to have known that the threat was obviously still there.

Ramzi Yousef had claimed responsibility for the TWA-800 attack. Normally, his claim might have been brushed aside as a self-aggrandized fantasy. However, Yousef was believed to have successfully used an experimental form of nitroglycerin in a test-bomb. The bomb was taped under a seat on Philippine Air flight, killing a Japanese tourist, while injuring 10 other passengers. Claims plus history, total credibility.

In books such as "Politics of Terror" and "Others Unknown," Yousef was connected to Cebu City, in the Philippines, as was Terry Nichols. In the FBI "302" reports and the investigations conducted by McVeigh's defense team, there are too many connections to ignore. The connection to Abu Sayyaf and Murad was apparently not enough. While the threat was clear, the FAA would not twist the arm of the airlines into upgrading either airport security, or crew readiness. Again, Flight 8969 could leave no doubt that the Kamikaze threat was quite real.

In the background, the airlines and government had adequate measures to deal with 'conventional' extortion-type hijackings - but "Bojinka" should have permanently changed the entire hijacking landscape. The government should have taken over airport passenger screening; with the screeners being legal residents - without a criminal history - and well-trained.

Somehow, the obvious politics continue unnoticed. Most glaringly, Congress had relieved the FAA of their mandate for safety; the 'big business' connection has not been identified in its "Connected Crime" context. Mysteriously, Congress won't change the law back, thereby making the FAA a responsible agency. The FAA needs to be as liable for safety as an airline company or a pilot.

Prior to 9-11, airport security had reached the point of being a joke. One would think that the industry could no longer tolerate the notoriety. In theory, the FAA should have been taking action against the carriers' operation certificates. Instead, the FAA methodically turned a blind eye to the issue.

Unknown to most is that the radical majority of security companies had been merged into a handful of companies - and then sold to overseas investors; not long before 9-11. The neo-feudalistic treatment of the security screeners produced enormous profit margins. Airport security deteriorated from being a joke, to being a bad joke. The public still hasn't reached the point of announcing that they've had enough. A prudent person might think that when it was discovered that neither Congress nor the FBI could effect security enforcement, the panic button would be pushed.

The FAA and airlines still maintain the traditional post-mortem mentality; prevention is still not appropriately at the forefront.

There are relatively inexpensive measures available. Tickets purchased by reservation only, would allow a background check on suspects or criminal names, complete with mandatory identification in the form of Social Security numbers, passport and visa numbers. Late ticket purchase could be allowed, with additional cost for the accelerated background check. Pre-registering for passengers could be set up with a PIN number for authentication. Computerized (biometric) facial identification is obviously under development; one day it will be reliable.

Passengers should be required to pass two security points before reaching the gate area, creating the time needed for any minor or delayed discoveries. A rational and responsible final security 'green light' needs to be accomplished at the gate.

At the screening point, two-axis x-rays should be made of the luggage. Density and unique physical profiling should be done, visually and even by computer imaging and screening.

Reliable chemical 'baggage sniffers' need to be developed, with prices at pragmatic levels. These need to be installed at security check points, and in the exhaust airstream of aircraft. Cargo aircraft alone, already need such detection on a daily basis.

Belly hold-baggage and freight need to be carefully scrutinized with greater sophistication. The FAA fines indicated that the FAA security agents were not doing their job, prior to 9-11. The unknown factor of the sky-marshals can also radically diminishes the chance of success.

At the expense of, perhaps $4,000 per airplane - on the outside - two video cameras with 'night-vision' capability could be installed specifically for monitoring aircraft cabins.

Beyond ticket price increases, a previous 10% tax on airline tickets has previously resulted in a large aviation fund buildup. Now, the fund should be a terrorist nightmare, by itself. Add the funding from the head-charge for security.

If terrorism is to succeed, it should be clear that the airlines,particularly, are now too high a risk for failure.

The world knows that the 9-11 attack on America has its roots in the Afghan war. Osama Bin Laden received his training, experience and his initial assets there. In the aftermath of the Afghan war, many Muslims, probably thousands, were assisted in gaining residence / citizenship for their support of the CIA efforts in Afghanistan. Beyond the Afghan refugees, an unknown number of Kurds were also flown into the U.S., as refugees from the Gulf War.

Prejudice being what it is, few questioned the role of the CIA in the Afghan war. 'Intelligence' is one thing, war is another. Yet, in the shadowed tradition of the secret war in Laos & Cambodia, the U.S. intelligence agency was essentially conducting a war against the Russians.

Among other issues of that effort, comes the non-accountability of such assets as the supply of Stinger missiles from the Afghan conflict.

In the background, the CIA has mysteriously evolved into a diplomacy agency, attempting to settle the Palestinian issue to the satisfaction of the Arab oil suppliers. Yes, something is terribly amiss in that picture.

The first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993. The Muslim-terrorist connection is well known. In the background of that effort was the bin Laden terrorist effort, "Project Bojinka," targeting U.S. Airliners in the Pacific. By accident, it was discovered in the Philippines in 1995, and thwarted. The pertinent U.S. authorities were notified; note that there was no significant warning to the American public - or pilots.

Again, one of the key players in "Project Bojinka" was Ramzi Yousef, also one of those convicted in the first WTC bombing. Yousef, among other things, told the FBI that his 'group' was responsible for the downing of TWA-800 ["American Spectator" Sept. 1997]. That claim has more than sufficient credibility to be taken very seriously.

While 'official' sources denied any criminal activity in TWA-800, Yousef's claim has radically more merit and probability than the nonsensical 'short-circuit' claim of the NTSB. The discovery of the PETN traces indicate a U.S. military 2.75 inch solid rocket motor. The alleged aircraft bomb-dog test doesn't hold water. The number of witnesses who claimed to have seen a missile numbered in the hundreds. There was too much evidence that TWA-800 was taken down by at least one missile. Other than nonsensical theory, there was no evidence of the center-wing fuel tank explosion as the initial event. The 'official' proving theories and tests don't hold up under elementary scrutiny.

With the 'official' denial of criminal activity, key evidence remained under unbreakable FBI lock-and-chains. To date, only strenuous legal efforts have been able to get a small portion of the evidence released. In brief, there is no shortage of protests documenting government cover-up in the TWA-800 disaster - among others.

In the case of the Oklahoma City bombing, McVeigh's attorney turned up frightening evidence of a middle-eastern connection - the "Bojinka" players. His requests for further evidence were denied. The introduction of the middle-eastern connection in court was stifled. The forewarning by the BATF informant, Carol Howe was suppressed.

Now, with the facilitation of all agencies looking the other way, America faces the aftermath of the 9-11 tragedy, which will forever change the freedoms of America. The pre-written "9-11 ready" Patriot Act converted American Constitutional rights to a 'situational' option, as opposed to its previous universal American reality. For all intents and purposes, the terrorists won.

The problem lies in the fact that the U.S. government did most of the dirty work.

A relatively well-known GAO report to Congress slams the FAA for the lax security standards. Part of the report was kept secret, as it damnably quantified the risk to Americans - still no change. A recent report, prior to 9-11, warned that such an event was imminent. Why was there no significant warning? Why was there no stepped up security?

While the 'convenient' change to the federal law removed the FAA's 'official' responsibility for aviation safety, President Clinton's "Presidential Decision Directive No. 39" made the FAA responsible for notification of potential terrorist issues. In turn, FAR 108 made each airline specifically responsible for security.

The Boston airport, in particular, has a prominent history of lax security standards; what happened? The Boston airport launched Jane Garvey's career as head of the FAA.

Three weeks before the 9-11 attack, the overseas papers quoted Bin Laden as saying that a major strike against the USA was soon to come. That's a lot of warning, by any standard. Bin Laden almost always telegraphs a warning - he's not to be ignored. Sixty-minutes did a report on the Afghan sentiments against the U.S., which telegraphed a warning sixty days before the attack. Regardless of who actually did the attack, there were timely and highly credible warnings of an attack.

As time goes on, more-and-more reports are surfacing which warned of this attack. However horrible the thought is, it must be asked, "Why were they ignored in the face of such historically clear, and even imminent threat???" The intelligence community has never relied on "specific" threats. Were that the case, there would be no intelligence agency; a rookie cop could figure out "specific" threats.

Bear in mind that the FAA gave Bin Laden an engraved invitation with their selective ignorance of airport security, defying Congress with the GAO report, which cited the FAA and airline blatant failures. That issue has no shortage of government and media documentation.

Following 9-11, the major airlines cited a phony bankruptcy likelihood. Beneath that veneer, wouldn't talk about the associated holding company which is sucking out all the real profit, while making it appear that the airline is anything but at programmed risk. If there's an associated airline holding company, it's prudent to look for a scam.

Terrorist, Ramzi Yousef, claimed his group was responsible for TWA-800. Yet the FBI's Kallstrom said there was no evidence. So, why did the FBI go fishing for Stinger remnants after the recovery effort? Why won't the FBI release the materials they seized on TWA-800?

Even with all the warnings, there was no appreciable increase to aircraft security. The FAA has a nifty set of "stall tactics;" there was no appreciable increase anywhere. Rhetoric will be heard to the effect of, "...changes were proposed." As usual, results were, and are, as evasive as ever.

Mary Schiavo cited the instant legislation proposed to exempt American & United from accounting for the deaths on the ground. It may have been introduced under the direct lobbying of the airlines, or the 'special' lobby which manipulates the FAA to spare the airlines such costs as the lax airport security which brought us to this thread.

The role of the U.S. government acting as an 'insurer' is particularly noteworthy. Anyone with a legitimate claim against the 9-11 airlines, who would sign a release in protection of the airlines, was eligible to receive approximately 1.6 million dollars - from the government! The offer was even extended to same-sex relationships. That precedent effected the U.S. government as endorsing same-sex relationships as a bone fide 'marriage.' In this issue alone, the question of "WHY" is huge. Added to the Government bailout of only the airline industry, the probability narrows to the protection of Texas interests.

With the pre-existing horror of the superficial airport security, versus the realistic threat, why would anyone hold the airlines harmless, against their mandated sole responsibility for airport and aircraft security? Except for corruption, it doesn't make sense. When one considers the possibility/probability of corruption, it makes perfect sense.

Each airline ticket contains a sizable tax, which is supposed to prevent such disasters. Instead, the fund is either allowed to accumulate (no doubt in favored banks) or is pillaged and/or spent on indirect benefits to the airlines. Little of it gets spent for safety - strange; or is it? The regulations / laws were there, millions were made due to the FAA permitting the airlines to ignore those; the airlines don't deserve a break.

Look for Norm Minetta to cover for the FAA.

Jane Garvey (FAA Administrator) knew the risk full well. Now, does she deserve to answer to a criminal court? Would anyone settle for just a U.S. Congress hearing?

One should note the New York Times catch of the FBI involvement in the first WTC bombing. There was warning!

Perhaps the most important of the "smoking guns" is the statement to Dan Rather - on 9-11 - that the FEMA team had arrived the night before. Given the date of the statement, there is no denial available. There should be no doubt that 9-11 was anything but a surprise.

The second most important "smoking gun" is the fact that bin Laden's American family segment was immediately whisked to Texas for a few days, then taken to either Boston or Washington D.C. to be put on a private jet bound, presumably for Europe - with their brand new (May 2001) Swiss citizenship. The dates in the media accounts suggest that their transport occurred prior to the lifting of the restriction on private aircraft flights. In 1999, a CIA report indicated family assistance in bin Laden's efforts, through a Cyprus bank.

In the background, the FAA allowed a smuggler's paradise to be built in the new Guam airport terminal under Clinton. With "Project Bojinka" in the immediate background; and the first terrorist attack on the World Trade Center - there is no excuse. While "Project Bojinka" has been known for 7 years, it was only recently illustrated that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were proposed targets of that plan - from the beginning.

In the book, "Bin Laden: the Man Who Declared War on America," Bodansky cites war-games conducted by Janet Reno, then head of the Department of Justice. The war-games entailed a terrorist strike on New York and Washington D.C. The scenario failed due to inter-agency rivalry. Such is off-scale for coincidence.

Among others, former FAA security agent, Steve Elson, has had a crusade against all of Washington D.C. on the lack of airport security. There was warning galore - even from private individuals. Elson ensured that there was no significant politician, nor office, who was not given detailed briefings on the superficial airport/aircraft security - with huge amounts of evidence illustrating the FAA criminal cover-up of the issue. Even the mass media illustrated the huge gaps in security.

Again, Boston, in particular, has a terrible record for airport security.

From what is presented, it appears that the hijackers slipped knives past security - no big trick by the FAA 'special' standards. The hijackings were done with teams of 4 or 5 per aircraft. Official reports identified one passenger as being shot with a pistol - then the reports disappeared.

Looking to what is known about the effort, the terrorists picked two airlines, "United" (States) and "American." No doubt the names were highly symbolic. The aircraft were just beginning their day's flying, ensuring that they would depart on time. The day (Tuesday) reasonably assured a low passenger count - least risk for passenger interference. The originating airports and their destination ensured the high fuel load.

The news footage of the WTC / Pentagon strikes strongly suggest that the hijackers were skilled pilots, with a bias toward the 757 / 767. Both aircraft had nearly identical cockpits and similar flying characteristics. The WTC / Pentagon flying was that of a pilot who is current at the controls of a simulator, with practice at hitting the specific targets.

The flying exhibited exact planning, practice and recent proficiency. At the airspeed of the strike, the eye-hand coordination demands would be too high for casual flying skill - with, or without, an autopilot engaged. At 290 knots, the individual towers and the front door of the Pentagon are not that big a target.

It's highly probable - and already reasonably established - that proficiency was acquired / maintained in a flight simulator facility, offering airliner models with high-level graphics capability, with the WTC & the Pentagon in the visual data-base. It's unlikely that a program such as "Microsoft Flight Simulator" could account for the flying skills exhibited. Three centered strikes are too much for the probability of adrenalin accounting for the accuracy of the strikes.

Relative to the FAA disregard for safety, evidenced by the GAO report on lax airport security, as well as other legitimate complaints - somebody needs to get the FAA honest. We're very likely to see this again.

The tragedy of Swiss Air 111 illuminated the FAA record for methodically overlooking the aircraft wiring issue. Backing the FAA was a Clinton's Presidential Executive Order 12866 - "If it costs the airline money - don't enforce it." Behind that was a change in U.S. Law, 'conveniently' relieving the FAA of the responsibility for aviation safety. The setup was nothing less than methodical.

The FAA has also knowingly permitted a flimsy cockpit door design on aircraft which couldn't keep anybody out. The airline industry has had cockpit break-ins before, by sky-ragers; this isn't anything new. In one instance, a deranged passenger was murdered by the passengers - yet no change was to come.

Historically, the threat to a flight attendant or a passenger's life was sufficient to open the cockpit door - that may have now changed forever. Although a bit drastic, alternate methods are available for dealing with a threatened flight attendant or passengers life.

Returning to the terrorist issue, one should give notice, that in the history of bombings against the USA, there have been warnings galore in the newspapers, etc, but the security agencies always get surprised. Americans should notice that there have been no changes - until AFTER this disaster.

While the 9-11 terrorist operation was reasonably involved, the greatest probable sophistication was in keeping the pilot's skills up to the needed proficiency, and certainly the timing.

Complexity kills operations such as this, thus it is more probable that the terrorists kept it as simple as possible, with a fair amount of money behind them. The FAA track record on airport security is a joke. The security penetration was probably quite easy.

The Muslim devotion to Islam far exceeds any other loyalty. While Americans are pandered the idealism of the equality issue, tribalism will always rule the planet. Reverse prejudice illuminates that truth in the USA.

With some good propaganda, the terrorists prostitute Islam to produce the tribalism we saw on the eleventh of September, probably taking a lesson from the Crusades. It is, however, important to separate true Muslims from the fanatics and terrorists.

In a sentence, radical changes are long overdue. It's time for America to demand their fundamental right to life, in addition to the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution. Persecuting the terrorist organizations only treats the symptoms.

Despite the undeniable horror of the 9-11 attacks, it knowingly began with our own government agencies and our own Congress. The issue isn't about apportioning blame, it's in the implementation of the known and needed repair - at home. For starters, Congress needs to reverse the law, making the FAA responsible for safety; then ensuring that the FAA complies with that law.

Permitting airlines or airports to maintain their own security is paramount to a prison system based on the "honor" system. That statement is not an exaggeration.

The "60-Minutes" segment, aired on 9-16-01, detailed the methodical gaps in security as well. The actions were criminal, yet the FAA did nothing worth mentioning. Nor, would any law enforcement agency get involved in the obvious criminal negligence, whether the airlines, security companies or the FAA. Previous criminal charges against the security contractors didn't affect anything appreciable in the FAA system. Even after 9-11, no significant charges were brought against the security companies. However, their contracts were allowed to be extended!

Before the first rescue centers were set up, the airlines were lobbying for multi-billion dollar grants and interest-free loans. Legislation was requested to exempt the responsible airlines from civil litigation. These were the companies who knowingly delivered the avenue and means for the mass murders - knowingly facilitated by the FAA.

America is now taught to feel sorry for the airlines who are in serious financial trouble. America has been conditioned to NOT question the financial history or interaction between the airlines and any associated holding / parent company, where ample money is quite likely to be found; or passed further down the line to dedicated recipients.

The threat was well-known; this horror could have been prevented. With the Congressional changes to Federal Law, Clinton's Presidential Executive Order 12866 and the FAA history of maximizing corporate profits over safety, it was all but guaranteed, in some fashion. History warned us, as did the media; this didn't need to happen.

So long as the security changes remain woefully inadequate, it will happen again!

| HOME |