"Beyond Pearl Harbor" by Robert D. Novak Sept. 13, 2001 The New York Post

Thanks to Peter Duveen pduveen

"Beyond Pearl Harbor" by Robert D. Novak September 13, 2001 The New York Post

Security experts and airline officials agree privately that the simultaneous hijacking of four jetliners was an "inside job," probably indicating complicity beyond malfeasance. This makes all the more ominous Tuesday's national consequences.

Nobody was more vigorous Tuesday in demanding tough military reprisal against the terrorists than former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger. However, he was virtually alone in directing his rage not only at the assassins but also at security arrangements. "I thought we had solved that problem [of air skyjackings]," he said. He pointed out that effective air port security would have prevented the disaster that may exceed the 2,403 deaths in the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

The analogy with the Japanese surprise attack was drawn endlessly by political leaders and journalists. Former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, with a keen sense of history, disagreed: "This, after all, was not Pearl Harbor. We have not lost the Pacific fleet." Unlike Dec. 7, 1941, the second day of infamy was not perpetrated by an enemy that at that time was militarily superior and seemed to put this nation's very existence in question.

In the rage and mourning following Tuesday's disaster, few officials wanted to dwell on how a 10-year hiatus of airline hijackings in this country could be followed by four in one hour. At a minimum, the blame can be put on ill-trained, incompetent personnel performing the screening of passengers. At the worst, security experts fear collusion with the terrorists, possibly even extending to the cockpit. This is a subject that the airlines are loathe to discuss.

The immediate consequence, widely predicted by members of Congress, will be tighter security making life more difficult for airline travelers and other Americans. The instant security measures taken in Washington and around the country came after the greatest terrorist success in world history had run its course and would not have been effective in preventing disaster had it been put in place.

Of greater interest to members of congressional intelligence committees is the surprise element of the attacks. The CIA and FBI are internally at a low point of effectiveness. "Human intelligence" spying has been in decline for decades. No amount of security harassment of airline passengers will substitute for effective intellegnce. Like Pearl Harbor, the lack of warning Sept.11 will be investigated.

Unlike Pearl Harbor, however, there is no clear foe. While secret briefings of members of Congress point to Osama bin Laden as the source of the attacks, President Bush's Tuesday night address to the nation named no names. The government, at this writing, actually is not sure. Private sources indicate that the terrorists could be a splinter group of Osama, its identity and whereabouts as yet unknown.

An attack on Afghanistan for sheltering Osama's terrorists will put the United States in danger of being perceived, however incorrectly, as launching a holy war against Islam. There is strong sentiment in Congress for hitting somebody, somewhere who has unsavory terrorist credentials even if not connected with Tuesday's attack.

With a crippled CIA unable to target the assassins, the Bush administration seems headed to deliver the same kind of hammer blows that the Clinton administration used in the Kosovo war rather than surgical strikes aimed at the assassins.

Perhaps the biggest difference with Pearl Harbor is the cause of the conflict. Bush's eloquent call for unity talked of the need to " defend freedom." Unlike Nazi Germany's and Imperial Japan's drive for a new world order, however, the hatred toward the U.S. by the terrorists is an extension of its hatred of Israel rather than world domination. Secretary of State Colin Powell's laudable efforts at being an even-handed peacemaker makes no difference to terrorists.

Stratfor.com, the private intelligence company, reported Tuesday: "The big winner today, intentionally or not, is the state of Israel." Whatever distance Bush wanted between U.S. and Israeli policy, it was eliminated by terror.

The spectacle on television of Palestinian youths and mothers dancing in the streets of East Jerusalem over the slaughter of Americans will not be forgotten. The United States and Israel are brought ever closer in a way that cannot improve long-term U.S. policy objectives.

This is terribly significant in so many ways.

First, that a major article by a nationally famous columnist, in a big city tabloid, of the highest possible topical interest, filled with juicy and unique information, can be effectively squashed, suppressed from the prying eyes of researchers for over seven years now, by a media-intelligence-squashing complex of such vast power, we finally know their will to create reality by managing "truth" is real.

How about a scan of that other hard copy please, Peter Duveen, "AIMING' A JET IS 'VERY VERY EASY" It's my paranoia you understand. And how did he wind up as keeper of the gnostic articles?

The author, Robert Novak, must be aware of the special care and handling certain of his pieces receive. He'd have to get onboard even, wouldn't he? Like, not mentioning the discrepancies, or the smoking guns---even at the cost of sacrificing his reputation for prescient observations. And isn't it odd, that Novak also was the guy who outed career CIA agent Valerie Plame, by name,---under the direction of a corrupt White House cabal program.

Novak can be honest when he chooses to write forcefully: "There is strong sentiment in Congress for hitting somebody, somewhere who has unsavory terrorist credentials even if not connected with Tuesday's attack." Wow. Just wow.

"With a crippled CIA unable to target the assassins" is certainly new information, while " Unlike Nazi Germany's and Imperial Japan's drive for a new world order," constitutes a very high-level meme, much in needing of rehabilitating.

But look at the multiple layers of meaning hidden in his penultimate and final paragraphs. He reports on faked scenes of celebration, no less, which slander an already defeated people, who are dying under the gun this very day. He boosts this by his "Private sources" who indicate that the terrorists could be a splinter group of Osama, like Hamas, or the PLO, steering the retaliation to yet ANOTHER innocent country. What does that come to now Robert? Three innocent Muslim countries, or four? Oh yes! You stopped before Iran! Praise Jesus!

But all of that effort is then suppressed... One media, reporting on another media, who are themselves faking guilt by falsely manufacturing images, all of it squashed because of its tangential heavy burden of narrative anomalies.

Please Peter Duveen, could we have the full copy of the following article? You may be our last best chance.

OpEdNews » Columnist Robert Novak among first to link 9-11 and...
- 7:48am Dec 27, 2008 ... "AIMING' A JET IS 'VERY VERY EASY" (this was a banner headline over two pages) " 757s and 767's perfect picks for 'weapons" ...
www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=11361 - 68k - Cached - Similar pages -

"Taking control of a big airliner and flying it into as precise a target as the World Trade Center is easier than most people would imagine, aviation experts said today."

"It's very, very easy to aim the plane," said a senior captain with a U.S. carrier. "It's not very difficult to get the experience you need. In three months, you can get a pilot's license."

---

---

http://www.petersnewyork.com/hardcopyeasy.html

September 13, 2001, New York Post, 'Aiming' a Jet is 'Very, Very Easy', 757s and 767s perfect picks for 'weapons', page 35,

Taking control of a big airliner and flying it into as precise a target as the World Trade Center is easier than most people would imagine, aviation experts said today.

"It's very, very easy to aim the plane," said a senior captain with a U.S. carrier. "It's not very difficult to get the experience you need. In three months you can get a pilot's license."

The aircraft types chosen by the terrorists --- a Boeing 757 and 767 -- seemed to have been perfect for wreaking maximum damage. The planes are commonly found on domestic routes, but are also relatively heavy, long-range jets that would deliver great kinetic energy on impact, along with tons of fuel.

Moreover, they are designed so that a pilot can easily learn to fly both of them.

"The 767 and 757, though they look different, their cockpits are identical," said the senior captain, who has 25 years of experience in the industry.

On takeoff, 1 767 weighs up to 160 tons, including 45 tons of kerosene-based jet fuel, which on impact instantly becomes an atomized high explosive. The 757 weighs up to 100 tons, including 30 tons of fuel.

Gaining control of the aircraft also appears easy to achieve.

Decades since the first hijackings, and the huge increase in airport security that followed them, analysts said expert terrorists could still smuggle arms aboard airliners without much risk of detection.

Tests have revealed that staffers conducting airport security checks routinely fail to detect weapons, said Chris Yates, editor of Jane's Aviation Security.

"In tests, screeners have consistently missed explosives and weapons being taken through the checkpoints," he said.

The security staffers often did not stay long enough to become expert at their jobs, he said.

"There is a hugely high turnover of staff at some airports -- up to 400 percent a year," Yates said. "Pay at McDonald's [hamburger restaurants] can often be more than what they get.

"The whole thing [security] has been a really sick joke."

Once aboard with weapons, suicide hijackers with piloting experience would find fewer problems than terrorists who needed the cooperation of the cockpit crew for an extended flight to some haven, another analyst said.

"Once they've got control of the passengers and cabin crew, which isn't hard with any kind of weapons, they can get rid of the guys in the cockpit, who are sitting there with their backs to the door," said Peter Harbison, of the Center for Asia Pacific Aviation in Sydney, Australia.

Cockpit doors are normally locked, but the pilot said they would not be difficult to kick down.

Reuters

---