I'm curious--why aren't pundits/politicos making more hay out of the fact that before the Genoa G-8 summit in 2001, anti-aircraft batteries were installed around the meeting site precisely because intelligence agancies were concerned that a terrorist group might hijack a passenger plane and dive-bomb it into the building? I mean, if ever there were an incident that puts the lie to the claim that "we couldn't have imagined that someone would fly a plane into the WTC," that's it. Or is there something to the Genoa story that I'm missing?
I might also add as an aside that the idea of driving a plane into a building in order to cause massive political chaos was offered up by none other than Tom Clancy in, I believe, The Sum of All Fears. (I could be wrong on the title--it has been years since I read Clancy. Please feel free to correct me.)
So what's the deal here--why aren't we calling bullshit on this lie, openly and loudly? What are we waiting for?