> 911 was some internal actors, sponsored by some CIA trained warlord who they forgot from 20 years before, but they could only see attacks coming from big nati

> 911 was some internal actors, sponsored by some CIA trained warlord who they forgot from 20 years before, but they could only see attacks coming from big nation states. Despite popular opinion, Bin Laden wasn't trained by the CIA or a hero of the Afghan jihad. He hid out in caves Pakistan for the most of that war and made occasional forays in to Afghanistan with a rag tag group of "fighters" whose exploits were comical more than anything else. Bin Laden's family very much wanted him to "stop dicking around", as did the Saudi govt and secret service. If I'm not mistaken he was persona-non-grata in Saudi Arabia and the only country that would have him was Sudan, where he lived in squalor, even before 911 happened (source: The Looming Tower). > cyber 911 can be something like a random operative who was given some covert training and now focus it on the coutry who trained them Most of those tools are for espionage, not warfare. Stuxnet was sabotage, highly specialised and took huge amounts of effort to develop and deploy. Afaik Middle Eastern hackers are mainly defacing websites and N-Korea is hacking entertainment companies and robbing banks. The cyber realm is different from the physical world in the sense that it has much more eyes on it than 911 had during the planning phase. Stuxnet was discovered by a tiny E-European IT shop and examined by a handful of people working in the private sector. To really start a war using software (say by launching missiles) you'd need highly specialised, precisely targeted tools that aren't lying around to be sold by rogue agents.