# Planes into the pentegon. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 3, 2004, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066 "2004-04-03T16:16:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/21 "2004-04-04T02:21:08Z")
> [@Reeder](#): > > All I’m saying is the government had an idea it might happen. > > Regardless of what Condi said. Um, dude. All large structures have emergency procedure for a plane strike, and the Pentagon certainly qualifies as a “large structure.” I don’t see where the surprise is. Would you be shocked if the WTC had emergency drills for a plane strike? Those buildings were _designed_ for a 707 to hit them. Conspiracy? Just saying. ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@Bob\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_1)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/22 "2004-04-04T02:24:41Z")
> [@Reeder](#): > > I am neither appalled or shocked. > > All I’m saying is the government had an idea it might happen. > > Regardless of what Condi said. ‘The government’ is a large, multi-faceted organism, in which one part (or many parts) frequently does not have a clue what the other part(s) is doing. A Pentagon report does not an actual plan make, you know. ---
**Author:** ![Roland\_Saul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/58f4c7/32.png) [@Roland\_Saul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roland_Saul)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/23 "2004-04-04T02:50:45Z")
Just a side note about the pentagon as an office building… I seem to remember from somewhere that it’s the largest single office building in the world in terms of square footage, so it would behoove the tenants to have the same contingency plans and drills that any important and vulnerable (ESPECIALLY from the air )command and control centre would have. I would have thought it strange if they had Attack of Mutated Troll preparedness exercises there, but a plane crash would be one of the first relevant disaster contingencies I would think of… ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/24 "2004-04-04T03:08:46Z")
> [@](#): > > I would have thought it strange if they had Attack of Mutated Troll preparedness exercises there, but a plane crash would be one of the first relevant disaster contingencies I would think of… Agreed… Yet Condi said they had no idea. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/25 "2004-04-04T03:26:47Z")
> [@Theios](#): > > Just take a look at a map of DC. Note the postion of Reagon Natl Airport and how close it is to the Pentagon. We’ve already seen one plane go down into the 14th St bridge due to bad weather (and pilot error). It would be smart for all building managers in DC to have plans in place should another plane go down in the city. Theois has the key. I work with a person who actually was involved in a major “disaster preparedness study” of a plane from National crashing into or near the Pentagon. He told me that it was a big concern, and that occasionally there were some “near misses” as planes came into approach too low, or when there was a “traffic emergency”. Did Ms. Rice actually say that they had no idea a plane would ever crash into the Pentagon? At all? Or no idea that a plane would be used as a terorist weapon against the Pentagon? I assume there will be a cite to keep this in GD. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/26 "2004-04-04T04:12:37Z")
> [@Una Persson](#): > > Did Ms. Rice actually say that they had no idea a plane would ever crash into the Pentagon? At all? Or no idea that a plane would be used as a terorist weapon against the Pentagon? I assume there will be a cite to keep this in GD. [National Security Advisor Holds Press Briefing](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/05/20020516-13.html) ([whitehouse.gov](http://whitehouse.gov) May16,2002) > [@](#): > > Q Why shouldn’t this be seen as an intelligence failure, that you were unable to predict something happening here? > > DR. RICE: Steve, I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would **take an airplane** and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one **and slam it into the Pentagon** ; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking. You take a plane – people were worried they might blow one up, but they were mostly worried that they might try to take a plane and use it for release of the blind Sheikh or some of their own people. Condi’s claim has been suspect for a couple of years now. See this Sept. 2002 article in the Washington Post: [9/11 Probers Say Agencies Failed to Heed Attack Signs](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36754-2002Sep18.html) > [@](#): > > The FAA and FBI were told in August 1998 that a group of unidentified Arabs planned to fly an airplane loaded with explosives into the World Trade Center from a foreign country. The FAA dismissed the report as unlikely, while the FBI’s New York field office tucked it away in its “bombing repository file.” > > •An FBI spokesman said yesterday that the 1998 report “was not ignored, it was thoroughly investigated by numerous agencies” and found to be unrelated to al Qaeda. > > • A September 1998 report said that al Qaeda might be planning to detonate an explosives-laden aircraft at a U.S. airport. > > • Later that same year, officials received another report indicating “a bin Laden plot involving aircraft in the New York and Washington, D.C., areas.” > > These specific reports came after authorities disrupted a series of other terrorist plots in the early- to mid-1990s involving airplanes, including a well-publicized 1995 plot in the Philippines to crash airplanes into CIA headquarters and other targets. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/27 "2004-04-04T05:41:41Z")
What are we really talking about here? I’m sure that some CIA or FBI operative somewhere can be cited to have predicted any event that anyone could ever dream up. Does that mean that it was given credence as a likely scenario? Ask yourself: prior to 9/11/01, how many people here would have thought it likely that terrorists would slam a comercial jetliner into the WTC? How many of you woke up that morining and said: Wow, I kind of expected this might happen? I think that is what Condi is getting at. If you want to get all worked up about whether her statement is technically correct or not, knock yourself out. We got caught with our collective pants down. There is nothing to be gained, other than partisan sniping points, by trying to blame someone for failing to prevent this. Richard Clarke himself is on record as saying that if everything he recommended had be implemented, that the attacks of 9/11/01 would in all likelihood still have happened. > [@](#): > > SEN. SLADE GORTON: ``Assuming that the recommendations that you made on January 25th of 2001 . . . had all been adopted say on January 26th, year 2001, is there the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11?’’ > > CLARKE: ``No.’’ ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/28 "2004-04-04T05:56:39Z")
**Squink** , every cite you have refers to them not knowing about a terrorist incident. However, what I’m talking about is accidental crashes, which the main cite in the OP is discussing. Where’s the connection between accidents and terrorists? The OP claims in effect that the military “practice(d) for such an event”. Yet the “event” linked is referring to an accident. Furthermore from the linked article: > [@](#): > > On Oct. 24, there was a mock terrorist incident at the Pentagon Metro stop and a construction accident to name just some of the scenarios that were practiced to better prepare local agencies for real incidents. Where’s the connection? I want to know how the linked article in the OP is a direct refutation of Rice’s claim re: terrorists using planes as missiles. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/29 "2004-04-04T06:00:19Z")
Rice seems to agree that the original quote was a bad deal, because she now says that she misspoke. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/30 "2004-04-04T06:07:40Z")
> [@Reeder](#): > > In the article I linked plane crash was put in parentheses…“Plane Crash” > > Why would they have done that? Because it wasn’t real? That’s a standard literary technique after all. Again, I repeat - how is an article discussing a simulated accident proof that the government knew planes would be used as missiles? ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/31 "2004-04-04T06:13:18Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > There is nothing to be gained, other than partisan sniping points, by trying to blame someone for failing to prevent this. Do you actually think that Condi’s claim that no one could have predicted a terrorist attack employing airplanes amounts to anything _more_ than partisan ass covering? If so, how? What other useful purpose did it serve? Determining what was known, and when, and how it failed to prevent 9/11 involves checking the veracity of everyone’s claims about what was known, and what they thought possible, and when they thought it, and what they did about what they thought. Rice’s claims seem at odds with what was known at the time. Finding out why that is has more utility than just its potential use in assigning blame. Was there a systemic communication breakdown about this sort of “unthinkable” threat? How and why? Is there anything we could do better to ensure that the same sort of thing does not happen again? These are _not_ partisan questions until someone either tries to assign blame, or hide information in order to avert the possibility of blame. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/32 "2004-04-04T06:50:41Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Richard Clarke himself is on record as saying that if everything he recommended had be implemented, that the attacks of 9/11/01 would in all likelihood still have happened. He isn’t on record as saying any such thing. The question he was answering was this: > [@](#): > > **GORTON:** Now, since my yellow light is on, at this point my final question will be this: Assuming that the recommendations that you made on January 25th of 2001, based on Delenda, based on Blue Sky, including aid to the Northern Alliance, which had been an agenda item at this point for two and a half years without any action, assuming that there had been more Predator reconnaissance missions, assuming that that had all been adopted say on January 26th, year 2001, is there the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11? > > **CLARKE:** No. These were actions directed at removing Bin Laden from Afghanistan. The things that Clark says _could_ have prevented 9/11 were the things liking daily meetings to address the actual hijacking threat. > [@](#): > > [Central Planning > Bush went for a 10-strike and missed 9/11. > By William Saletan > Thursday, March 25, 2004](http://slate.msn.com/id/2097800/) > > In fairness to Bush, it’s unlikely that by 2001, Clarke’s recommendations concerning Afghanistan could have prevented 9/11. The best shot at preventing 9/11 would have come not through a preconceived plan—Clarke’s, Hadley’s, or anyone else’s—but through a process designed to pull together bits of useful information from various parts of the government. That process, as Clarke explained on 60 Minutes, was what President Clinton had ordered when faced with similar warnings of impending terrorism: a regular schedule of Cabinet-level meetings at which the attorney general, the CIA director, the secretary of defense, and other top officers of the government would have to explain what their agencies were doing to address the threat. To prepare for those meetings, the Cabinet members would have had to press their subordinates for regular updates, and so on, down the chain of command. Clarke and others call it “shaking the tree.” > > In this case, the tree from which the useful information would have fallen was the CIA\*. The information was the known presence in the United States of two al-Qaida operatives who, it later turned out, were part of the 9/11 plot. But the trees were never shaken because the Cabinet officers didn’t meet to talk about al-Qaida until they approved the new Afghan-narcotics-Pakistani-democracy mega-plan a week before the attacks. And until then, Clarke wasn’t allowed to brief Bush on terrorism. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2004, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/33 "2004-04-04T14:50:11Z")
> [@Una Persson](#): > > Where’s the connection? I want to know how the linked article in the OP is a direct refutation of Rice’s claim re: terrorists using planes as missiles. I don’t see the connection either. The article from the OP seems to describe a normal disaster preparedness exercise; a little exciting, but not all that unusual even before 9/11. It doesn’t mention Ms. Rice, and there’s no reason to expect her to know about such a glorified fire drill. However, you did ask what Condoleezza had said about terrorists flying planes into the pentagon. As I wrote, she’s said enough to raise more than a few eyebrows across the country. It’d be a shame to ignore the _real_ heart of the issue just because of a poorly thought out OP. ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/34 "2004-04-05T10:03:41Z")
Wow! Here’s a BLOCKBUSTER story! Betcha this was something Bush doesn’t want to hear. And from both a Republican and a Democrat! One by one, the crew are abandoning the ship. 😃 > [@](#): > > NY Times > **Leaders of 9/11 Panel Say Attacks Were Probably Preventable** > By PHILIP SHENON > Published: April 5, 2004 > > WASHINGTON, April 4 — The leaders of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks agreed Sunday that evidence gathered by their panel showed the attacks could probably have been prevented. > > Their remarks drew sharp disagreement from one of President Bush’s closest political advisers, who insisted that the Bush and Clinton administrations had no opportunity to disrupt the Sept. 11 plot. They also offered a preview of the difficult questions likely to confront Condoleezza Rice when she testifies before the panel at a long-awaited public hearing this week. > > In a joint television interview, the commission’s chairman, Thomas H. Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey, and its vice chairman, Lee H. Hamilton, a former Democratic House member from Indiana, indicated that their final report this summer would find that the Sept. 11 attacks were preventable. > > They also suggested that Ms. Rice, Mr. Bush’s national security adviser, would be questioned aggressively on Thursday about why the administration had not taken more action against Al Qaeda before Sept. 11, and about discrepancies between her public statements and those of Richard A. Clarke, the president’s former counterterrorism chief, who has accused the administration of largely ignoring terrorist threats in 2001. > > “The whole story might have been different,” Mr. Kean said on the NBC News program “Meet the Press,” outlining a series of intelligence and law enforcement blunders in the months and years before the attacks. > > “There are so many threads and so many things, individual things, that happened,” he said. “If we had been able to put those people on the watch list of the airlines, the two who were in the country; again, if we’d stopped some of these people at the borders; if we had acted earlier on Al Qaeda when Al Qaeda was smaller and just getting started.” > > Mr. Kean also cited the “lack of coordination within the F.B.I.” and the bureau’s failures to grapple with the implications of the August 2001 arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui, a French citizen who was arrested while in flight school and was later linked to the terrorist cell that carried out the attacks. > > [Full article](http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/05/politics/05PANE.html) ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2004, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/35 "2004-04-06T11:31:40Z")
George Tenet’s written statement to the Commission begins by addressing the issue of prior knowledge of airplanes being used in various ways by terrorists. [http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0403/S00363.htm](http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0403/S00363.htm) President Bush is saying that he had no idea. Vice President Cheney says that Clarke was not a part of higher level meetings. Clarke is saying that he wasn’t allowed access to the higher level meetings. If terrorism were really a priority to the Bush Administration and if the CIA was warning the White House and the FAA that terrorists were devising new methods _and_ that the focus included “the homeland,” **maybe someone should have thought to include the terrorism advisor in higher level meetings.** Especially since he seemed so insistent at the time. Maybe the President should have appointed someone with expertise in the Middle East rather than in Russia, as was Condi Rice’s focus. I’m truly not blaming the President for failure to prevent 9/11. I _do_ hold him responsible for not paying attention and for passing the buck for his lack of knowledge. I do not understand how such a wonderful woman as Barbara Bush could be the mother of such an stubbornly stupid and dishonest man. Do any of you remember an interview with Presidential candidate George Bush in which his basic ignorance of international affairs was revealed? Did any of you wonder how someone could 1) be a President’s son and 2) be a candidate for the Presidency _and still not do his homework_? Further, _the man is still perpetuating mistakes that spring from his stubborn ignorance_. The latest example is the statement that June 30 is a firm date. How can he possibly say that at this stage? end hijack ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2004, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/36 "2004-04-07T05:41:20Z")
> [@iamme99](#): > > Wow! Here’s a BLOCKBUSTER story! Betcha this was something Bush doesn’t want to hear. And from both a Republican and a Democrat! One by one, the crew are abandoning the ship. 😃 This is a blockbuster? We all knew the attacks could have been prevented. We all knew our domestic and foreign intelligence gathering let us down, and that our approach to prosecuting Al-Quaida prior to September 11th was haphazard and sloppy. This, however, is a much more damning indictment of an administration that sat on its hands for eight years, rather than one that had only been in office eight months and was still filling key Administration positions due to Democratic stonewalling. I’m sure Clinton feels the sting of this more coming from Lee Hamilton, probably the last living Democrat with any kind of noteworthy foreign policy experience. Was the George W. Bush administration complacent? It was, as much as the rest of the country. We all paid a price for that. But at least they took swift action in Afghanistan when the attacks came, and didn’t just stop with a few cruise missiles, like certain other, impotent (where it counts) leaders did. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2004, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/37 "2004-04-07T06:09:19Z")
“Bush go-o-o-od! Clinton ba-a-a-a-ad!” I knew I shoulda sprung for the sheepdog instead of these darn cats… ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/38 "2004-04-08T04:09:35Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > This is a blockbuster? We all knew the attacks could have been prevented. > > We all knew our domestic and foreign intelligence gathering let us down, and that our approach to prosecuting Al-Quaida prior to September 11th was haphazard and sloppy. > > This, however, is a much more damning indictment of an administration that sat on its hands for eight years, rather than one that had only been in office eight months and was still filling key Administration positions due to Democratic stonewalling. I’m sure Clinton feels the sting of this more coming from Lee Hamilton, probably the last living Democrat with any kind of noteworthy foreign policy experience. > > Was the George W. Bush administration complacent? It was, as much as the rest of the country. We all paid a price for that. But at least they took swift action in Afghanistan when the attacks came, and didn’t just stop with a few cruise missiles, like certain other, impotent (where it counts) leaders did. You’re kidding, right? ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/39 "2004-04-08T04:45:43Z")
> [@nameless](#): > > assuming they had knowledge of potential attacks, _did not ignore it and saw it as being legitimate enough to practice for_, and then did nothing to stop the terrorist attack that would follow; doesn’t that imply a kind of conspiracy? Just because the administration had intelligence that terrorists might use jetliners as flying bombs does NOT mean they could stop everyone who tried to launch such an attack. Therefore no conspiracy is necessary. The point (to me) is: if the Bushies WERE aware of such a technique, why lie about it? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2004, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066/40 "2004-04-08T04:52:26Z")
> [@I Love Me](#): > > The point (to me) is: if the Bushies WERE aware of such a technique, why lie about it? Because this Administration is just whacko paranoid. Anything that isn’t said in public to a group of reporters is a national secret of Class 1 proportions and nobody, and I mean NOBODY, who isn’t already a member of this Administration is going to get that kind of security clearance. I wouldn’t be surprised if this White House classifies the President’s breakfast selections. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/planes-into-the-pentegon/238066.md?page=3)