Re: Terrorist attack on the USA

["Roger Stenning" <roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Folks -

> The hijackers would not need detailed knowledge/experience
> with the 757/67.  They would need knowledge of how to fly a
> large jet, use of navigational systems, etc.  Just fly stable
> enough to not be noticed, navigate to target, aim for target.

Don;t forget: The 767/757 family of commercial aircraft are amongst
the most popular with airlines the world over, so access to training
facilities using them would be fairly simple to arrange. Also, as has
been mentioned, Bin Laden has access to a large amount of funding
(How, I don't know, so don't ask. I was a T.A. Military Policeman, not
a spook!), so actually sending his kamikazis through flight school
wouldn't be that hard to believe. They'd be paying customers, wouldn't
they?

> So just about any military trained pilot could pull this off.

Multi-engine ratings only, unless they just waited until the a/c was
in the air, which appears to be the most likely situation.

> Or someone trained by a military/civilian pilot.

See my comments above on this.

Assessment:
==========

Looking at it from a purely law enforcement angle, we will most likely
find the following:

Given the short list of capable nations and organisations with (1)
motive, (2) opportunity, (3) capability, and (4) willingness, to
perform such an act, it's increasingly likely that Bin Laden was
responsible for funding, arranging, and supplying the manpower for
this set of atrocities.

Actual planning would, I imagine, have been left to a hard core of
terrorist intel/planner types in-country, after assessing the weak
link in US air travel to that point in time - the regional airports.

Once assesed and planned, the 'trained'  terrorists, the kamizakis,
would, if not already in-country (they could have given themselves
away by mistake if held in-country for too long), have been brought
in, probably right before they were required, whereupon they boarded
the aircraft that were hijacked, and used knives to gain control of
the aircraft (according to the news services, they apparently used
knives in the hijacking).

Now, onto President Bush's recent broadcast to the US population...

It is interesting to note that he stated that no distinction as to
responsible parties, either perpetrators, or sheltering nations, in
brining those responsible to justice. This implies that he inteds to
order the countries he believes responsible for supporting the most
likely suspect - Bin Ladin - to surrender him. This implies
Afghanistan, and the Taliban Government there, which, frankly, tacitly
supports him. It also sugests that he's decided, for the time being,
not to exercise a military option, but to pursue a legal remedy, to
effect closure publicly by a trial for terrorist-related activities.
However, if the states he nominates fail to supply the prime
suspect(s), he may well order not-so-surgical strikes by the US
military against those states (which he calls 'Rogue States').

Summary of assessment:
===================

Most likely suspect:   Bin Ladin.

Most likely state to
support prime
suspect:                      Afghanistan.

Initial (desired)
solution:                      Public trial in the USA.

Most likely solution:   Military action against aforementioned
                                    state(s).

Comments, please.

Best regards,

Roger Stenning
Organiser, The Impossible Scenarios Group
www.the-isg.co.uk
ICQ: 74721632
UK Amateur Radio call sign: G1LIW
(PGP public key available on request)
________________________________________________________
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this message
may not be those of the ISG. The information in this email and
in any attachments may be confidential and/or privileged. If you
are not the intended recipient, you should not retain, copy or
use this email for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of
its content to any other person - you should also destroy this
message, delete any copies held on your systems and notify
the sender immediately.