Jump to content


9/11 panel: U.S. unprepared for attacks


DurableTear
 Share

Recommended Posts

Credit: CNN

 

 

 

9/11 REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

 

 

- U.S. military and civilian aviation officials were unprepared "in every respect" to stop the attacks.

 

- Protocols in place at the time did not call for intercepting hijacked planes.

 

- NORAD and the FAA "struggled, under difficult circumstances, to improvise a homeland defense."

 

- The NORAD commander said the Air Force could have stopped the planes if notified immediately.

 

- The military got first word of the American Airlines Flight 11 hijacking nine minutes before it hit the World Trade Center.

 

- Vice President Dick Cheney relayed President Bush's orders to shoot down hijacked jetliners, but the orders were apparently too late.

 

- The 9/11 attacks cost somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000 to execute, plus the cost of training the 19 hijackers in Afghanistan.

 

- Al Qaeda spent $30 million per year, according to the CIA.

 

- The largest expense went to the Taliban, at $10 million to $20 million per year.

 

- Most funds came from donations, with much money raised in Saudi Arabia.

 

- There's no evidence that any government gave money to al Qaeda.

 

- There's no "credible evidence" that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda.

 

 

 

9/11 panel: U.S. unprepared 'in every respect' for attacks

 

Testimony recounts chaos and confusion during unprecedented attacks

 

Thursday, June 17, 2004 Posted: 3:20 PM EDT (1920 GMT)

 

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The independent commission investigating the September 11 attacks completed its public hearings Thursday by concluding that U.S. officials were unprepared "in every respect" to stop the suicide hijackings that killed nearly 3,000 people.

 

The North American Aerospace Defense Command and the Federal Aviation Administration "struggled, under difficult circumstances, to improvise a homeland defense against an unprecedented challenge they had never encountered and had never trained to meet," the commission's staff concluded in a report read at the hearing's opening.

 

Gen. Richard Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the commission that the U.S. military was trained to "look outward." No one had used an aircraft as a guided missile since the Japanese kamikaze attacks of World War II, and the military had not drilled for the unprecedented multiple domestic hijackings, he said.

 

"There have been landings on the White House lawn. There was a landing in Red Square. There have been lots of stupid things," he said. "There was talk about crashing airplanes into the CIA. But in most of that threat reporting leading up to 9/11, it was hijacking an airplane and in the normal hijack mode, not in the mode of a weapon."

 

The commission is scheduled to issue a final report on its investigation in July, and its chairman, former New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean, promised a "full and complete accounting" of the circumstances surrounding the attacks.

 

Testimony at Thursday's hearing chronicled the confusion and delays by officials trying to confirm which planes had been hijacked and where they were headed.

 

"On the morning of 9/11, the existing protocol was unsuited in every respect for what was about to happen," the commission's staff report found. "What ensued was the hurried attempt to create an improvised defense by officials who had never encountered or trained against the situation they faced."

 

The staff reported Thursday that the military and the FAA failed to coordinate their responses to the attacks, in which suicide hijackers crashed jetliners into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field.

 

Vice President Dick Cheney relayed orders from President Bush authorizing the Air Force to shoot down hijacked jetliners that morning, but those orders appear to have been too late and were never relayed to fighter pilots.

 

Air Force officers "expressed considerable confusion over the nature and effect of the order," and did not pass it along to pilots scrambled to defend the East Coast after the World Trade Center was hit. Government protocols "did not contemplate an intercept" and presumed a hijacking "would take a traditional form, not a suicide hijacking designed to convert the aircraft into a guided missile," the commission staff found.

 

Myers, then the deputy chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said he was not advised of the August 2001 presidential briefing that warned that al Qaeda might use airplanes as weapons. Nor was he aware of the arrest that month of suspected Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, an al Qaeda member who had aroused suspicion at a U.S. flight school, he said.

 

Today, he said, Army radar and air defense systems are deployed to defend Washington and other places, and the Air Force has "lots of aircraft" on alert to respond to potential hijackings. And NORAD commander Gen. Ralph Eberhardt said the Air Force could stop a similar hijacking plot today -- by shooting down a hijacked jet, if necessary.

 

"Today, we believe we would have 17 minutes to make that decision," Eberhardt said. "On 9/11, we were 153 miles away; today we would be in position to fire for eight minutes to decide whether this is hostile act."

 

Cheney told the commission that Bush, who was aboard Air Force One after the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, had "signed off on the concept" of shooting down any more hijacked planes. But the report found that conversation did not occur until 10:10 a.m. -- by which time all four planes had crashed.

 

Cheney, at the White House, had communicated the authorization to intercept and engage inbound planes to defense officials, the report found, but the order did not reach Air Force commanders until 10:31 a.m. And NORAD commanders in Colorado and Florida never coordinated with the FAA to "organize a common response," the commission found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't want to start an entire liberal/conservative debate here, but I personally can't help but wonder the same thing everytime I hear this kind of news, telling us how our government/Bush administration could've done more to prevent the terrible attacks of 9-11.

 

Evidently, there was misscomunication among the appropriate government agencies to deal with this kind of emergency, we didn't follow leads regarding hijackings, and we didn't handle the terrorists we had in custody appropriately.

 

 

BUT,

 

has anyone of those that are criticizing the current administration's handling of the situation stopped for a second and asked himself/herself on how YOU would've reacted if the FBI or other pertinent agencies would've used excessive force against suspected terrorists, if certain citizen liberties would've been "infringed" in order to tighten security, or if the US would've decided to launch pre-emptive strikes against countries suspected of harboring terrorist networks, i.e. Afganisthan???

 

just a thought. I personally KNOW AS A FACT that the liberals would've bitched regardless, because that's what they always do...but in retrospect, it's very easy to criticize, isn't it??

 

:mischief2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO mistakes that have been made dating back to the creation of the israeli state all the way to Bush Jr. have been partially responsible for 9/11, you really cant focus all the blame on a president that has spent a year in office, because more can be pulled out that shows how clinton acted irresponsibly with al qaeda or how carter and reagan supported the mujadeen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO mistakes that have been made dating back to the creation of the israeli state all the way to Bush Jr. have been partially responsible for 9/11, you really cant focus all the blame on a president that has spent a year in office, because more can be pulled out that shows how clinton acted irresponsibly with al qaeda or how carter and reagan supported the mujadeen

While I agree that he shouldn't get all the blame, his administration was responsible at the time of the attacks for ensuring that all bases were touched. This is a major blunder by the entire government, the FBI, the CIA etc. But it was ultimately the administration's responsibility to "shake all the trees" and work around the bureaucratic laberynth in order to ensure that there were no loose ends.

 

What I do think is that instead of focusing so much on the problem, we should be focusing on the solution. What is being done to make sure this never ever happens again? That is what I care about. Really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I do think is that instead of focusing so much on the problem, we should be focusing on the solution. What is being done to make sure this never ever happens again? That is what I care about. Really.

I dont think its possible for me to agree more, stop wasting time and money on the why and focus on stopping anything like this from ever happening again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...