Language
Country/Area
No result found
The Missing Warning: Why Did the FBI and CIA Fail to Interpret the Threat of Planes as Weapons?
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 shocked the world. As the incident unfolded, many conspiracy theories and doubts surfaced. People began to discuss whether U.S. intelligence agencies, such as the FBI and CIA, had been warned about the terrorist attacks and failed to take appropriate measures. These theories not only challenge the official narrative, but also raise questions about the U.S. national security system.
Even after the attack, many senior officials claimed they were surprised by the terrorists' actions.
In remarks after the attack, then-President George W. Bush said: "Our administration, at least I don't think, anticipated that aircraft would be used to attack buildings." National Security Adviser Condoleezza Condoleezza Rice also said: "No one could have predicted that they would try to use the aircraft as missiles." However, there were clear contradictions between these statements and subsequent intelligence reports.
"The FBI did not receive any warning signs that this type of operation would be feasible domestically." - Robert Mueller (FBI Director)
Some mass media reports contradict this view, pointing out that the FBI and CIA were aware of the threat that aircraft could become weapons as early as 1995, especially after the "Bojinka Conspiracy" was successfully intercepted. The ruse involved wanting to hijack multiple planes and destroy them. According to reports, a year before the attack, the FBI had actually obtained intelligence indicating that someone was interested in hijacking a U.S. airline. Across top officials, the seeming disregard for this possibility has fueled widespread skepticism.
Further investigation revealed that during the "Pentagon Mass Casualty Plan" exercise held in October 2000, a scenario in which a plane crashed into the Pentagon was simulated. The incident caused concern among a handful of officers, as they hinted at the hypothesis that such a scenario was not entirely impossible.
"This is something we've never seen before, we haven't even thought about it." - Air Force general
According to the 9/11 Commission report, although the attack was shocking, there were many warnings. Intelligence agencies in various countries, notably Britain and Jordan, had warned U.S. authorities about the terrorist attack months before the attack. The warnings varied in severity, but all pointed to al-Qaeda's intent to launch attacks in the United States.
For example, in July and August 2001, intelligence agencies in multiple countries received different reports of impending attacks, and these reports even specifically mentioned hijackings. The fears and safety warnings reflected in these reports seem to have failed to attract enough attention.
"We've heard the idea of aircraft as weapons, but I don't recall any specific threat intelligence being mentioned." - Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger
Clear loopholes between government agencies emerged in the processing and communication of information. After 9/11, in many cases information was not thoroughly communicated to all relevant departments. However, instead of being properly reviewed, this mistake became one of the perspectives of the government at that time.
In addition, further discussion also raised questions about the market trading behavior before the attack. It was reported that certain financial transactions showed unusual trading behavior shortly before the attack, particularly insurance business related to American Airlines. This cast doubt on the future of the interests, leading many to question whether anyone had access to inside information before the incident.
“We have never seen trading activity like this, and it all seems so coincidental.” - Medi Kleinberg, 9/11 Families Steering Committee
Every signal error, every transaction anomaly, and even every neglect of intelligence have triggered various subsequent conjectures and suspicions. As the investigation deepened, more doubts and questions surfaced: Why were these warnings and warnings ignored? Are there irreversible blind spots in our understanding of national security and access to information?
With various reports and inspections, deep reflection and review of this incident continue. Questions about the warning and safety systems of the past have never ceased. This lost warning is not only a trace of the event, but also a reflection on the future security system: Can we learn lessons from this history in the future and avoid similar tragedies?
