In early December, the 9/11 Public Discourse Project—a private group formed by 9/11 Commission members after their official term expired in 2004—chided the government for ignoring the lessons learned from the Commission’s probe of the terrorist attack. But the group’s patrician members failed to answer many questions. For example, how, precisely, did the Twin Towers fall? Why did Seven World Trade… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (891)Natalie is a funny one sometimes.
BTW Natalie, talking of Slander, your favorite fare, how about you don’t go calling the Rabbit a Holocaust denier behind his back, ,and then scuttling away like a dirty little crab when the rabbit popped up and called you on it.This was on the Democrats It’s the War thread I believe.
This rabbit has never denied anything about WW2 except that the Holocaust, involving Jews was not the central or even the biggest mass killings carried out by not only Nazi germany but also by Russia, predominantly by JEWISH extremists, Bolsheviks who murdered about ten times as many Christians. That is just recognising history Natalie and doesn’t costitute denial in any mans book.
It is important to note that you would stoop to slinging Holocaust Denial accusations around, it should be compared with your sly references to others involving drugs or religion or sexual or political or whatever mud you think you can stick. All the various innuendos you try and caste when you you have nothing but truth to face otherwise.
Like Dave once said, your armour is not so shiny my Girly.
Talk of Holocausts, and strocities generally would not seem to be very safe territory for someone who shamelessly shills for Depleted Uranium.
Someone who also Shills for an illegal war of aggression and what is fast looking to become the greatest war criminal junta in history.
Hasn’t it occurred to Natalie yet that we know where you would have been during world war two?
Natalie you would without a shadow of a doubt have been shilling for der Fuerer, and we know even if you don’t.
BTW have you had your Special Vaccination yet? Did they promise you you would get one? If you don’t have it yet, then the word is you are S.O.L. Like so many other minor underlings you’ll be left to contend with the bada bada bug, just like the rest of us you had sold out.
Coming Up with Rabbit’s entry Wiley.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 5, 2006 at 2:01 PM The Towers Were Designed to Survive Large Jet Collisions.
Each tower was designed to survive the impact and fire from a collision by a 707-340 carrying 23,000 gallons of fuel. The similar- sized 767-200s that hit the towers were each carrying about 10,000 gallons of fuel.Each tower was supported by both a palisade of columns forming its outer wall and a bundle of 47 massive steel columns in its core structure. Like all large engineered structures, the towers were over-engineered to support many times anticipated loads, to survive severe and improbable events, including bombings and fires. The plane crashes severed about 33 of the North Tower’s and 24 of the South Tower’s 240 perimeter columns. The South Tower impact trajectory suggests its core structure was barely damaged. Absent severe winds and earthquakes, each tower should have easily survived damage to even a majority of its columns. Each tower’s crash and fire damage was limited to an asymmetrical minority of columns and a few floors. yet each tower collapsed symmetrically, and into small pieces.
The Fires Were Not Unusually Severe.
Since jet fuel (kerosene) boils easily and its vapors ignite easily, it burns off rapidly. FEMA admits the fuel must have been used up within “a few minutes”. Thereafter the fires burned fuels similar to those in ordinary office fires. The impact holes became dard shortly after each collision, and the smoke darkened over time—a sign of oxygen-starved fires. After the South Tower had been hit, at least 18 people evacuated from above the impact zone down stairwells passing through it.There is no evidence that, even at their hottest immediately after the impacts, the fires approached the 700 degrees C required to significantly soften steel. Such temperatures would have caused regions of the building to glow red hot in broad daylight. The oxygen-starved fires likely remained below 400 degrees C, and would be harmless to the steel frame even in the absence of insulation. There is no evidence that the fires ever damaged the core structures. Note that softening of steel by high temperatures is reversible, and that steel is a good conductor of heat. If any structural steel had lost strength in the first minutes of the fires, it would have regained most of it as the fires cooled after consuming the jet fuel.
Fires Don’t Cause Skyscrapers to Collapse.
If WTC towers 1 and 2 and WTC 7 collapsed because of the fires it would be the first time in history that a steel-frame skyscraper totally collapsed because of fires or any other cause or combination of causes other than controlled demolition.
47-story WTC 7 sustained no impacts from aircraft or large falling objects, and only small fires were observed within it prior to its precisely vertical “collapse” into a small tidy rubble pile, 7 hours after the North Tower fell.What are the odds that three buildings would for the first time in history collapse in precisely the same, never before seen fashion despite one being substantially different from the other two and with nothing like the same damage, and that of all the buildings damaged that day, these three all belonged to one man….........and he had just overinsured them all a few weeks earlier…...............?
What are the odds dears? ..................^^.....................
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 5, 2006 at 2:17 PM Oh and what are the odds that it would all happen within a single work day, with time for a long and lazy lunch. ?
7 hours from start to finish. Not even any overtime needed for the controllers. Home for dinner. What are the odds?
“When do you think you’ll be home Dick?”
“Oh hopefully not too late, we’ve got a few skyscrapers to knock over and a few thousand people to kill, and a lunch with some of the gang, but I expect to get it all over within working hours.”
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 5, 2006 at 2:24 PM “What’s George doing?”
“They’ve got him stuck away with a bunch of schoolkids somewhere he can’t fuck anything up, he can read them a story”
“Are you sure that’s wise? “
“The kids are only seven or eight, it can be a simple story”
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 5, 2006 at 2:29 PM ASTRONOMICAL!, Rabbit.
Marvin Bush
If the Towers were brought down with explosives how could anyone get them in. Step in Marvin Bush whose company installed the security system…
Vol. 9, No. 2021 - The American Reporter - January 20, 2003
SECRECY SURROUNDS A BUSH BROTHER’S ROLE IN 9/11 SECURITY
by Margie Burns
Washington, D.C. WASHINGTON, Jan 19, 2003—A company that provided security at New York City’s World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., and to United Airlines between 1995 and 2001, was backed by a private Kuwaiti-American investment firm with ties to a brother of President Bush and the Bush family, according to records obtained by the American Reporter.And so on.
Feeling a little crabby, Natalie? You can be more direct with me. No need to use cumbersome qualifiers like moving in the direction of….
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 5, 2006 at 7:17 PM Brill’ Wiley. That Marvie Bush article is simply astounding. I chatted with Joe Shea who runs the American Reporter and he’s a straight up guy, careful and meticulous.
You and GR seem to be really hitting yer strides, rhythm and rhyme. Wish i had more time to watch and toss a few odd factoids in…
Cheers y’all!
Andi
Posted by AD Marshall on Jan 5, 2006 at 10:30 PM Btw, re Joe Shea, that’s not to say Margie Burns went unnoticed—he hardcore detail and analytical progress of her report speaks for itself—just that Shea’s publishing it adds even further to its credibility, and ominousness. Talk about family values! The Bushes have it down, deadly so.
Posted by AD Marshall on Jan 5, 2006 at 10:37 PM Gad am i incoherent now. I also have to add that i chatted with Joe Shea once, ages ago. But i’ve watched his work since then.
Posted by AD Marshall on Jan 5, 2006 at 10:39 PM O.K., I’ll be direct with you, wileywitch.
I’m just curious whether you’ve figured out your position regarding ATC/NORAD.
You characterized them as bumbling mediocre unimaginative clods, and chastised me for making excuses for them, calling them victims and understanding their dilemma in light of the mindset before 9/11.
But then you post items that make it clear that you believe there was manipulation from above. By this are you not making the grand-daddy of all excuses for them, and are they not the grand-daddy of all victims?
Don’t you agree that in order for one to believe that bombs were deliberately detonated by agents of our own government, it simply must follow that the jets had to be part of the plot? Wouldn’t it be be silly to think that those same agents, who were so clever to hide their scheme from all except Alex and Steven Jones, wouldn’t indeed do whatever was necessary to insure that the planes could successfully reach their targets? After all, you seem adamant in your contention that we should have otherwise been easily able to down the jets, although thankfully you have at least finally admitted that the first was unstoppable, by all practical measures.
Are you not constrained to conclude that indeed there was manipulation of the ATC/NORAD systems and that the vast majority of the good people operating them are therefore innocent of all you inferred about them?
Therefore am I not correct to have assumed that these good people did all one could have reasonably expected of them that morning?
Posted by Natalie on Jan 5, 2006 at 10:46 PM Natalie;
Are you not constrained to conclude that indeed there was manipulation of the ATC/NORAD systems?
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 5, 2006 at 11:51 PM When you’re responsible for air space, Natalie, you’re responsible for airspace. What part don’t you get?
Clearly there has been no investigation to determine exactly how we missed four hijacked aircraft.
Let me repeat this for the cheap seats—- FOUR HIJACKED AIRCRAFT!!
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 6, 2006 at 3:03 AM Oh Wiley…..... that Marvin Bush was going to be Rabbit’s next one…...not fair, now the rabbit will have to think of another.
Natty is good isn’t she guys?
Hi Lume. Happy New Year.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Jan 6, 2006 at 6:18 AM A nice round perspective piece.
Rabbit likes to read Douglas Hermann, and this one caught his rabbit eye recently. Still looking for the astronomical thing. Must it be astronomicalll impossible only? Are any other types of Astronomical allowed?
Yes i know I have given up the ghost again, it has to do with computers being changed again and all that. All up and running again after the big power surge.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 6, 2006 at 6:31 AM Natty that thing where you put Alex and Steven Jones together like that, maybe they are brothers? Do you think they are related Natty? Maybe all these pesky people who are pointing out flaws in your lovely fairy story are related, maybe rabbit to is called Jones? Have you thought about it? You have such a lovely story too, about how nineteen Mad Muslims (half of whom are immortal), managed to bring down four planes and three skyscrapers, and kill 3000 people, with a box cutter each…Or was it nail clippers?
Rabbit can’t remember, what did the bada bada terrorists use to commandeer the planes Natty?
Has anyone else ever thought about John Cleese demonstarting to the self defence class about how to defend oneself againt an attacker armed with a banana?
Open the cabin door, we have bananas, and we know how to use them.
Obviously that is silly. But does open the cabin door, we have nailclippers and we know how to use them, sound any more terrifying?.........................^^.........................WILEY wabbit has got it. It is Astronomical isn’t it?
Rabbit has waffled his way to an That’s Astronomical hasn’t he?
Who would have thought that a dozen or so mostly bozos who couldn’t fly a kite, would have been able to simultaneously take over four Passenger aircraft, armed only with Nail Clippers, and use them to collapse three skscrapers and damage the Pentagon, as well as kill about 3000 people, all in the space of one working day.
That’s Astronomical…............
Hell some of them were even out partying hard the night before. That must have been the ones who knew they couldn’t die, you wouldn’t want to be drinking firewater and mucking around with infidel whores the night before meeting the big Allah and supposedly in line for a truckload of Virgins. Now would you?
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 6, 2006 at 6:52 AM The majority of the attackers, 15, were from Saudi Arabia while two came from the United Arab Emirates, one was an Egyptian and another was Lebanese.
This makes it pretty clear that we had to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. The Saudis had boxcutters.
These are the world’s most idiotic evil geniuses. They can hijack four planes, defy the laws of physics, but the best weapons they could come up with were boxcutters? Did they throw them in the bowl before going through the metal detectors or what? Boxcutters???
I believe that toenail clippers were used in a money laundering scheme.
You waffle good. We really have no idea if the passengers were alive during the whole ordeal, or if they were dead beforehand, or any other possible scenario. How do we know that someone didn’t have gas masks and poison gas stashed on the airplane? We don’t know.
Warning—-my next post (I’ve been researching and getting some links pinned down) is about our bestess worstess friends on the whole planet.
Not Saudi Arabia.
Not Pakistan.
Thank you so much for introducing me to Nat, Rabbit. Maybe later I can hitch a ride with you to other haunts.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 6, 2006 at 7:25 AM Rabbitanovichz, I give you astronomical for thought experiment, da? I go back—-read more Rabbitanovichz and see if can go to Murphey’s Law link you give.
You good, Rabbitanovichz. Good Rabbitanovichz.
Bye. Bye. Tomorrow, me post make here.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 6, 2006 at 7:39 AM Rabbit reckons gas…...............There are precedents.
Have a look at KAL 007
I have a bad feeling I know what happened/is happening yet to some, of the passengers, if it is so, and the Russians may have been relatively kind in the case of KAL 007.
Rabbit cannot tell for it would open up various cans of worms, and it is purely speculation and is unlikely to be found out in our lifetime if it is so. Unlike the KAL 007, which shows once again that big secrets are hard to keep.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 6, 2006 at 8:01 AM By the way, that wasn’t meant as a precedent for gas in the plane, but there are a couple of stories which do go there.
Meant that there were precedents for people supposedly dying in a plane crash but being spirited away by a government instead.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 6, 2006 at 8:03 AM Wiley….......
On an impulse and just before logging off for the day, Rabbit popped Rabbitanovichz into Google, and voila….......nothing. Why does not at least this one mention of such term not rate a mention.
I mention this because similar exercises a few months ago would invariably have led back to the present if only ref to such a word.
Things which make rabbits go hmmmm…..............^^..................
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 6, 2006 at 1:47 PM Funny you mentioned that Rabbitarnia. Felonius Grammar was thinking about a new game called “Thomas Anyonymous”. When anyone has a quote and doesn’t know the source, it could be credited to Thomas Anonymous, and over time, we could see how often it pops up. I put “Thomas Anonymous” in Alltheweb.com just like that. Over 850 hits.
Maybe another name. The idea is to see it spread into many various topics.
I understand the hmmmm. It used to be that you could put unrelated words like “sandwich” and “dancing” and find a manic rant or two. Haven’t seen a manic rant in years.
About the conjecture, I can think of some examples I read a couple of years ago, but feel that some examples may be too much conjecture or impossible to substantiate.
Tonight I post.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 6, 2006 at 8:33 PM I don’t know much about key words and how that works.
Tonight I post “astronomical”, I hope.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 6, 2006 at 8:35 PM No one here? Good, I’ll wait til tomorrow. Oy, my aching back. Gonna watch a movie.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 7, 2006 at 4:29 AM Rabbit was here but now is not. By god it’s hot….....36 C and half past three. (6.30 actually but it didn’t rhyme.)
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 7, 2006 at 11:18 AM
<i>Next to address reporters was former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia James Akins, who for years has spoken up for Liberty survivors. Akins noted that his friend Ambassador Dwight Porter, U.S. ambassador to Lebanon in 1967, had told syndicated columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak, Akins, and other friends (including the Washington Report’s publisher, executive editor and this reporter), that he had seen transcripts of Israeli radio discussions during the attack. The U.S. monitors heard an Israeli pilot identify the Liberty’s American flag. His superiors ordered him to attack the ship anyway.</i>
and government officials like thisThree years ago, Condoleeza Rice, now President George W. Bush’s secretary of state and then his national security adviser, unwittingly explained in a remarkable burst of candor: “We have an Israel-centric foreign policy.”
The sad and simple truth is that most Americans, especially those in public office and even those in the presidency, have a deadly fear of being labeled anti-Semitic. No matter how well documented the charges, they will neither utter nor write anything critical of Israel, for fear it will draw that unwarranted and unwelcome charge. Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. George W. Ball once stated that the most powerful instrument of intimidation employed by Israel’s U.S. lobby is the “reckless charge of anti-Semitism.”Former Congressman Paul Findley (R-IL) is the author of They Dare to Speak Out, Deliberate Deceptions and Silent No More.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 7, 2006 at 9:16 PM Natalie;
Are you not constrained to conclude that indeed there was manipulation of the ATC/NORAD systems?.....Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 5, 2006 at 5:51 PM
No, of course not. Please explain why I would be constrained to believe this when my contention (and nearly everyone else’s in the country for that matter) is that our air defense/control systems performed well within, and in many respects exceeded, reasonable expectations that morning, given the fact that 19 “people” set out to do great deliberate harm to us via four separate attacks that were launched for all practical purposes, simultaneously.
Do you think it would be reasonable to expect law enforcement to stop four suicide bombers in four separate locations, even within a single large shopping mall, even several minutes apart? Even today given that nearly everyone is acutely aware of the possibility?
Was it reasonable to expect that we could have stopped Timothy McVeigh from blowing up that federal building, given the fact that we live in an open free society that values personal privacy, and depends on trusting people for the most part not to deliberately set off bombs that destroy buildings that kill hundreds of people?
No, people that imagine that these crimes should be easily prevented and also believe in bombs in buildings are the ones who are constrained, even if they won’t admit it. Of course the reason they won’t admit it is because they want to keep all their options open, a common trait of purveyors of the belief that nefarious deep dark schemes are at the root of every facet of every major event in history with the ultimate goal, of course, to benefit those evil corporations that provide us with everything we eat, live in, drive to work in, and argue on the Internet with.
Which leads to the inevitable question:
Have you made up your mind yet, luminous?
David has.
Your “conspiracy compass” test.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 7, 2006 at 9:44 PM Natalie, when you make up your mind have you ever changed your mind ??
Since we all enjoy tests so much I would like to share this as an aside :
The Gullibility Factor Test
Posted by David in Canada on Jan 7, 2006 at 10:07 PM I have made up my mind .... 9/11 stinks.
Smelliest event ever.
Posted by David in Canada on Jan 7, 2006 at 10:11 PM ... and doesn’t Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing have an odour too ?
Posted by David in Canada on Jan 7, 2006 at 10:18 PM Natalie, Natalie, Natilie. Who loves you, baby?
Once again—-all the air traffic controllers needed to know was that the planes’ transponders were off, and that the aircraft that showed up on the screen was not identified and was off course. And then they needed to call NORAD—-if the 9/11 investigation is correct, in that, they failed to contact NORAD.
Air Traffic controllers are trained to deal with planes that don’t have their transponders on, unresponsive pilots, and hijackings. Any air traffic controller expressing befuddlement over dealing with a possible hijacking is sorely lacking in imagination and must have missed that class.
Air traffic controllers and NORAD are designed to monitor all airspace under their jurisdiction.
No one said that it was going to be easy. That would be like saying that war is easy.
What exactly is it about responsibility that has you baffled and so ridiculously comparing a responsibility to monitor all air traffic (in the air) with all human traffic on the ground. I’m beginning to suspect that you have no idea why your analogy is not applicable and that you aren’t as clever as I thought you were.
Just a gentle reminder, the air traffic controllers and NORAD weren’t required to “stop” the attacks of 9/11, per se; but were required to respond appropriately. By the commission’s own record, an appropriate response was not made.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 7, 2006 at 10:43 PM David, it’s been a couple of years, now; but I did see several mentions of the Oklahoma Bombing site and the 9/11 site having the same contractor for clean-up. Guess they’re one of those on-the-go-federal-yet private-clean-up crews.
Got a 91 percentile on that test. The 9% of me that is gullible is terribly good at it sometimes. Have to work to keep myself on my toes.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 7, 2006 at 10:50 PM As for the disingenuous assertion that no one had ever contemplated that Islamic Terrorists would use airliners for Kamikaze attacks:
“On December 29, 1994, four terrorists alleged to have ties to Osama bin Laden hijacked Air France Flight 8969, a flight from Algiers to Paris. They loaded the plane with explosives and filled it with extra fuel, with the intent of ramming it into the Eiffel Tower. Commandos stormed the plane and killed the hijackers. (Source: NBC News. September 30, 2001. Chris Hansen, “The Lesson of Air France Flight 8969”)
A full seven years before September 11, an al-Qaeda suicide hijacking is partially executed and barely stopped by French intelligence. The Bush administration would have us believe that no one in the CIA had ever heard of such a thing.”
(Source “Center for Research on Globilisation University of Toronto”.)
“In July 2001, during the G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy, Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini revealed that Italian intelligence had uncovered a plot to crash a hijacked commercial airliner into either Air Force One or one of the buildings used for the summit. (Source: New York Newsday, Sept. 19, 2001) This jetliner kamikaze plot was directed at Bush himself. Taking the Bush denial to its logical extension, the White House would have us believe that Bush and the CIA were not only unaware of this plot, but also not warned by the Italian government.”
(Source “Center for Research on Globilisation”)
I remember hearing news reports of this at the time of the summit.The following was taken from a story written by Larry Chin at the University of Toronto:
[On May 15, Press Secretary and official White House liar Ari Fleischer nervously stuttered, ‘The president did not receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers. This was a new type of attack that was not foreseen’.”
This was followed by Condaleeza Rice, who repeated the spin: ‘I don’t think that anyone could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center.”
Bush himself issued a statement that he had no indication beforehand that “terrorists would hijack jets and deliberately crash them.”]
(Source for all 3 of the above quotes “Center for Research on Globilisation” - Larry Chin.)
In 1995 Philippine intelligence busted an Al-Qaeda cell tied to the Mastermind of the first WTC bombing. Part of the captured booty was a computer with a hard drive containing data regarding plans for an “Operation Bojinka”. The basic plan was to hijack airliners and crash them into targets. The data was shared with the American CIA.
That the President has spoken less than honestly is pretty obvious. That his mouthpieces have been disingenuous is proven. The full extent of his foreknowledge remains in question but there is no doubt that when he got up in front of the American People and asserted that this was a cowardly sneak attack of which we had no forewarning that was a damnable lie. It was not the true state of affairs and he well knew it when he spoke it. Upon this point there is no doubt. What did the President know, when did he know it, and when did he know he knew it? When press reports began surfacing?
Useful here is an intelligence agency term: “Limited Hang Out”. When discovery is inevitable, or a fait accompli, the tactic is to admit to a limited less damaging “version” of the “truth” so as to diffuse the situation and divert attention - “that’s old news now”. The Clinton Administration was masterful in it’s use. When you have a press willing to further the disinformation campaign it becomes very effective.
Hmmm. Maybe the “liberal media” just made this stuff up, huh? The French and Philipinos are in on it too. Everybody is out to get us in unimaginable ways. Poor U.S. Poor, poor U.S.—-more money than all the rest of the worlds’ combined spending on the military and we still have no imagination!
Guess we’ll need to spend more money, then.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 12:02 AM That’s right ... the Ministry of Lies ... needs more money ... and blind faith.
Posted by David in Canada on Jan 8, 2006 at 12:39 AM “Natalie, when you make up your mind have you ever changed your mind ??
Sure, David. But I like to think I base that change on some kind of credible evidence, not a bunch of out of context quotes and analysis by a bunch of hate or profit-motivated websites and authors, non of whom so far, to the best of my knowledge, are experts in structual engineering or even deliberate imposion. They do seem to be very good at surfing the web, though.
Since we all enjoy tests so much I would like to share this as an aside :
The Gullibility Factor TestI noticed the test doesn’t contain that question that some would have you believe is on everyone’s mind:
Were the WTC towers deliberately blown up by agents of the U.S. Government?
I scored an 85 on the test, however, several of the questions pertained to things that are far from settled fact. It seems to me that a valid gullibility test is one that asks about subjects that have been decided true or false beyond a reasonable doubt, not just the author’s pet areas of concern.
Interesting, though, and perhaps some good information contained in the links provided.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 8, 2006 at 12:48 AM ”... and doesn’t Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing have an odour too ?”
Yeah, it stunk too. It stunk because some nut thought he had the authority to kill innocent people to advance a twisted agenda. But my point is could we have stopped it? Even after surely knowing of the contempt certain folks have for anything government, were we expecting an imminent attack by these folks? Shouldn’t we have and done something prevent it? How could we have been so lax?
Are you saying that we let that happen too? The only reason I can imagine is that Clinton engineered it because he wanted to use it as an excuse to discredit right-wing talk radio, trying to imply that their belief in limited government equates with blowing it up.
Sounds at least as credible as believing that we would deliberately murder thousands of people and cripple our economy for the sake of…...what again?
Oh yeah….corporations.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 8, 2006 at 1:06 AM Natalie;
You know that I believe that the official story of the collapse of the WTC has a null probability of being true on 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and 3rd Law of Motion grounds alone. The controlled demolition theory explains the physical evidence without contradiction. What is it that I’m supposed to believe? That nefarious deep dark schemes are at the root of every facet of every major event in history? Sorry, I don’t believe that. Just the ones that have nefarious schemes at the root. Don’t you believe in nefarious schemes, Natalie?
I would find your arguments more compelling if they actually answered some of these outstanding questions in a forthright and logical manner. Conspicuously misconstruing your opponents arguments and then ascribing nefarious motives to your audience has an even less than null likelihood of winning you any converts to your point of view.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 8, 2006 at 1:41 AM It stunk because some nut thought he had the authority to kill innocent people to advance a twisted agenda.
This does not ring any bells for you, I take it.
Lumens has made the point well enough, but I must chime in and challenge you to form a reply (under 300 words) that doesn’t rest on reality being this or that based on emotion or what you would prefer to believe, or what you would prefer to proffer whether you believe it or not.
Sounds at least as credible as believing that we would deliberately murder thousands of people and cripple our economy for the sake of…...what again?
Halliburton, Bechtel, Kellogg, Brown & Root, the Carlisle Group, General Dynamics…
Oh but they would never put their profits above the emotions of U.S. citizens, right? They make weapons to enhance the quality of life and to instill democracy to thousands of people who aren’t strong enought to kill themselves for it.
If, by your logic, 9/11 destroyed our economy, then how do we have billions to wage war against Afghanistan and Iraq—-countries that have nothing to do with the alleged terrorists who were primarily Saudis—- and how can we justify levelling Iraqi cities for their own good.
Again—-under 300 words—-and here’s a fun challenge—-take out the adjectives and qualifiers. Someone might mistake them for weasel words.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 2:39 AM So luminous, I think that’s a yes, you DO believe in bombs in buildings. I knew ya did, just took a little coaxing. Last time I remember, you said “I don’t necessarily buy into these theories”, or something very close to that.
Sorry if I missed something you said after that.
Aside from a strange stance taken by a BYU physics professor who is reluctant to have his interpretations of the 2nd law of thermodynamics and 3rd law of motion scrutinized by anyone except a pro-Marxist economics publication, there is very little that has been offered to contradict the theory put forth by dozens and dozens of folks, who also know something of these laws, stating that indeed the collapses were caused by a combination of huge impacts and their resulting damage and fires.
Yes I do believe in nefarious schemes. I believe (I know) there are schemes to direct unsuspecting people to websites to click on banner ads to make people money. I don’t believe anyone would be silly enough to think they could pull something like what has been suggested here off without being caught. If you’re a discerning person, as you say, when it comes to nefarious schemes, I suggest you look elsewhere. At least quit clicking on those ads. ;-)
I have tried many times to forthrightly, and usually without insults, to answer in some detail questions that have been raised. It does absolutely no good. But to accuse me of ascribing nefarious motives to people is most certainly the height of hypocrisy, given all the same that has been directed at me, unprovoked except by I suspect valid points I’ve raised, mostly on other threads, that conflict with one’s comfort zones. (not necessarily talking about you personally here, although you have been pretty free with the accusations as well, albeit more subtle)
I don’t expect to win any converts here among those who comment. I would hope to keep some bombs-in-buildings novice lurker from falsely thinking the view presented here is unanimous or even sensible. I join with the authors of the subject article in that endeavor, in a rare coincidence of opinion. What are the odds? ASTRONOMICAL
Posted by Natalie on Jan 8, 2006 at 3:22 AM Natalie;
Professor Jones published his hypothesis, it is out there to read and criticize by anybody. Show me an analytical rebuttal to his hypothesis and then maybe we can discuss it.
By the way, the laws of physics are not particularly open to interpretation.
I don’t apologize for saying you are ignorant. You are ignorant.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 8, 2006 at 3:35 AM wileywitch wrote earlier:
“Air Traffic controllers are trained to deal with planes that don’t have their transponders on, unresponsive pilots, and hijackings. Any air traffic controller expressing befuddlement over dealing with a possible hijacking is sorely lacking in imagination and must have missed that class. Air traffic controllers and NORAD are designed to monitor all airspace under their jurisdiction. No one said that it was going to be easy.”
Now we’re swinging back into the incompetence zone. You’re giving me motion sickness.
“Just a gentle reminder, the air traffic controllers and NORAD weren’t required to “stop” the attacks of 9/11, per se; but were required to respond appropriately. By the commission’s own record, an appropriate response was not made.”
They weren’t required to “stop” the attacks? A startling admission on your part, much to my relief. I guess by appropriately you mean observing the airliners crashing into their targets. Those people really should be held accountable for missing that spectacle and not getting pictures.
Actually, the commission didn’t find much fault with the controllers or NORAD in it’s final report:
Clarifying the Record
The defense of U.S.airspace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with preexisting training and protocols. It was improvised by civilians who had never handled a hijacked aircraft that attempted to disappear, and by a military unprepared for the transformation of commercial aircraft into weapons of mass destruction. As it turned out, the NEADS air defenders had nine minutes’ notice on the first hijacked plane, no advance notice on the second, no advance notice on the third, and no advance notice on the fourth. We do not believe that the true picture of that morning reflects discredit on the operational personnel at NEADS or FAA facilities. NEADS commanders and officers actively sought out information, and made the best judgments they could on the basis of what they knew. Individual FAA controllers, facility managers, and Command Center managers thought outside the box in recommending a nationwide alert, in ground-stopping local traffic, and, ultimately, in deciding to land all aircraft and executing that unprecedented order flawlessly.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 8, 2006 at 4:04 AM So, what I hear you saying is that we failed to prevent the attack for emotional reasons, and because of a lack of imagination, and/or from an inability to believe that aircraft were being hijacked.
Glad we’re on the same page.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 4:24 AM I just did a google search on Jones, thinking there must be an avalanche of contrarian kerfuffle. Haven’t found anything yet. On the fifth page, though I did find this site though; Physics 911 Public Site . Interesting….
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 8, 2006 at 4:29 AM Natalie;
Professor Jones published his hypothesis, it is out there to read and criticize by anybody. Show me an analytical rebuttal to his hypothesis and then maybe we can discuss it.They are preparing to rebut as soon as they quit laughing. Jones’s paper is a political statement, not a scientific one. I was already familiar with most of it before reading it, just by surfing the web, which is what he appears to have mainly done. That is why it won’t be accepted by any genuine scientific or engineering journal or publication. (I predict, hoping I am right!)
By the way, the laws of physics are not particularly open to interpretation.
My mistake, I should have said “the method in which he chooses to apply those laws”.
I don’t apologize for saying you are ignorant. You are ignorant.
Thank you, that’s quite charitable, considering some of the things I’ve been called on these forums. You’re a gentleman and a scholar.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 8, 2006 at 4:37 AM “So, what I hear you saying is that we failed to prevent the attack for emotional reasons, and because of a lack of imagination, and/or from an inability to believe that aircraft were being hijacked. Glad we’re on the same page.”
Maybe in the same book, but certainly not on the same page. Emotion played a part as always in everything, but it’s not the “reason” for anything. If anything, there was imagination above and beyond protocol as stated in the report. There was no “dis-belief” that aircraft were being hijacked, only lack of knowledge of the intent of the hijackers.
And you accuse me of using weasel words? LOL
What’s this talk about “preventing the attacks”? Just a few posts up you stated: the air traffic controllers and NORAD weren’t required to “stop†the attacks of 9/11
Please…...my motion sickness.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 8, 2006 at 4:48 AM They are laughing, are they? Hardy-Har-Har.
The physical conditions of the phenomenon under observation determine the application of the laws of physics, not the person applying them. You are ignorant squared.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 8, 2006 at 4:51 AM There was a very good reason why the Federal government would have wanted the Murrah building event.
It is always amusing when Natty tries to ask a question she thinks is rhetoric and yet which has an answer totally out of order with what she tries to imply.
Here is some questions about Oklahoma.
Yes it stinks and always did. Especially the usual sign of a False flag op, NOBODY CLAIMED RESPONSIBILITY.
Rabbit is still looking for a reference which refers to the Oklahoma State government having been prepared to declare itself free of the federal government as the Federal government was no longer acting legally. Something like that, OKlahoma was supposedly all set to break out of the union or something. One hell of a reason as it happens.
Perhaps later.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 5:30 AM Natty Rabbit is tired of your constant harping on about alternative news sites as if that diuscounts anything. As a governmnet shill you probably use a computer which doesn’t allow direct access to many sites, you probably just get an officicial shill summary in place of the actual site on many of our sources. If you actually had read any of these sources you might notice how stupid you seem everytime you refer to them as conspiracy or innacurate. You see, as you have been told before, they may speculate on the news, but they don’t make it up. The claim that facts are invented by alternative media sites is laughable to anybody who reads them. These sites print and link to stories from the MSM. The difference being only that they are not hidden away on page ten or printed without context.
You are a shill as we know, and your job is to stop debate about such issues and limit the damage done by honest and factual reporting. It is therefore understandable that you hate the sites. Problem for you deary.
All these sites rely on pretty much the same facts, because these are well established. They have obtained the facts, in many cases from the MSM. The conclusions drawn upon these facts are what bothers you, and that the facts lead only to such conclusions when presented in context is enough for you to claim the facts are false. Trouble is they are not, and everytime you try to claim they are, you have been crushed like a cockroach for your attempted disinformation.
Here is a collection of facts, from the MSM. They are listed without links to sources here, if you want go to the original you can check them.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 5:45 AM OK read the link. It is too big to post here. It is all Mainstream Media reports, and not a bit of it supports the official Lies.
By the way Natalie, Rabbit has before forbidden you to claim a majority of people in even the USA believe the official lies. He has posted polls which show that the majority don’t believe at all. Forgetting are we?
Now just accept you are the minority and your side is losing day by day. Or don’t. I guess ignoring defeat is an American speciality.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 5:49 AM Nat;
Jones’s paper is a political statement, not a scientific one.
Really? No science at all? Fooled me. But you are the great scientific expert. Explain to me the politics of the Laws of Conservation of Momentum, please.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 8, 2006 at 5:54 AM Oh more of your forgetfullness Natty.
There have been numerous engineers and demolition experts qutoed among the refutation oif the official lie. Do you think nobody here knows you have been through all this before and have lost already?
As for basing your opinions on facts….that is hilarious.
The facts are complete anathema to the official conspiracy theory. They discount much of it from being possible. You base you opinion upon the government line and have never strayed from it by one millimeter, just like a shill would. YET the government lie is almost all speculation, since they withhold the crucial evidence which would prove the truth.
The official lie was arrived at by ignoring almost all the evidence and masses of witness testimony and by never allowing much of the evidence like recordings and video footage to be seen by anybody. That stinks a bit sweety.
There are NO facts which support the official lie, four years later there are NO facts which support the official lie, without also being able to be even better accou8nted for with alternative theries.
As Luminous Beauty says
“The controlled demolition theory explains the physical evidence without contradiction.”
That is what is does love. It is a valid working theory. You have not and cannot disprove it.
Virtually the whole world has made clear that they don’t accept the official lies, and honestly how can they? The facts as they are render the official fantasy story a complete impossibility.
Tell us again how we are all crazy, go on funny Shill.
Do you ever get any reward for your loyalty Shill? Have they given you the special vaccination yet? You are going to need it babe. Something as unhealthy as you is sure to be a sucker for a nasty new virus.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:03 AM O.K., Natalie, we’ll clear this up, one thing at a time.
1. Radar signals are beamed into the sky.
Let me know when this sinks in. In fact, why don’ t you rephrase it so that I can see that you truly understand it before we go to the next step.
I’m rooting for you.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:09 AM The Gullibility Test is cool. The clever Rabbit got 100%
As for Natty claiming the answers were questuionable in some cases, she obviously hasn’t read the answers and why. They were all easily proven contentions. You are just struggling with your gullibity Natty and proving how you can’t change your opinions about anything. Just like with other tests you’ve taken which showed things which you didn’t like, you automatically write something off if it disagrees with your delusions.
Hi Wiley, you caught a rabbit…................^^....................
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:15 AM Trying to get Natty to learn anything scientific is hopeless. Rabbit tried to teach her about gravity and Newtons laws styep by step, with helpful experimenst she could try at home, but she flat refused to entertain the idea learning about such “complex” science.
Still you’d think Natty had a headstart on understanding Radar, being a Bat and all.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:19 AM Well, she did keep her last post to me under 300 words, so maybe she’s trying.
Unlike air traffic control, trying counts in cyberspace and failure is of little consequence.
Catching rabbits is fun, yes?
Heidi Ho, Lumens! It makes more sense to ask someone to prove that the fall was not a demolition, does it not? Who are you going to believe——the 9/11 commission, or your lying eyes?
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:35 AM Oh, Rabbit and Lumens, what thinks yuens about the Israeli mossad angle?
(Don’t want to stanch the flow of thought, here.)
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:46 AM Yes Wiley, Natty is very trying.
She is quite fun though isn’t she? If she would just stop the broken record lines. She has been through it all, and as you can see she still pretends she is living in the real world and dealing with those of us she claims are in la la land.
Delightful the irony when the only people who have ever taken her seriously, and complimented her on her achievements, is Jay Bird. Once or twice a moron like Jay will say how right and clever she is, and she probably feels quite encouraged by that. She doesn’t realise that morons don’t count.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:51 AM Until Sept. 11, 2001, NORAD conducted four major exercises a year. Most included a hijack scenario, but not all of those involved planes as weapons. Since the attacks, NORAD has conducted more than 100 exercises, all with mock hijackings.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:55 AM Israeli Mossad angle is THE angle I reckon. First they are the first contenders just from the old “WHO GAINS?” query.
FBI evidence of Mossad involvement in September 11 attacks on the U.S.?!
source: Al Jazeera Jan 6/2006On the day of the September 11, 2001 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked how they could affect Israeli-U.S. relations. His quick reply was: “It’s very good…….Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)”.
An article by reporter Jim Galloway, published on The Austin American-Statesman on Nov. 25, 2001, stated that the FBI had evidence suggesting that the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence, along with some rogue American and foreign spy agencies, may be deeply involved in or even entirely responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks as well as other acts of terrorism against the United States.
According to Galloway, 100 of the 1,100 foreigners arrested by the FBI for suspicion of involvement in the 9/11 attacks were Israeli Jews. In fact, a Mossad surveillance team made quite a public spectacle of themselves on the day of the attacks. Five of the Israelis were arrested after “angry witnesses had seen the five at a waterfront park in New Jersey apparently laughing and clowning, and photographing themselves in front of the burning towers.” One witness told police at the time that the men “were like happy, you know … They didn’t look shocked to me.”
According to ABC’s 20/20, when police stopped the cheering Israelis, one of them told the officers: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem”.
One of the five Israelis had a German passport in addition to his Israeli passport. Another had an international flight booked to Thailand on September 13, two days after the attacks. The FBI also found out that one of them was a former paratrooper, assigned to an elite Israeli defense forces unit.
Two more Israelis were caught in a truck on Interstate 80 in Pennsylvania, near the site of the crash of American Airlines flight 93. Police became very suspicious when they found maps of the city with certain locations highlighted, box cutters (like the ones used by the hijackers), along with other incriminating evidence. Police also said that bomb sniffing dogs reacted as if they smelled explosives when they were brought to the Israelis’ truck.
The FBI believes that most of the arrested Israelis belong to an Israeli intelligence unit operating outside New Jersey, near where the Anthrax letters were mailed. They all worked for a U.S.-based company known as Urban Moving Systems.
An editorial on whatreallyhappened.com states that an FBI SWAT team raided the New Jersey warehouse of the Urban Moving Systems and confiscated a number of computer hard drives and files. It further adds that the Israeli owner of the company, Dominick Suter, closed his business days after the Sept. attacks and returned to Israel. He was in such a hurry that some of Urban Moving System’s customers were left with their furniture stranded in storage facilities.
more….
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 6:56 AM Behind closed doors, Israeli authorities were doing all what they can to get the men released and the FBI probe closed. Israeli lawmakers contacted their “friends” in the U.S. Congress, and the Mayor of Jerusalem, Ehud Ohmert personally called the New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and asked him to intervene.
An article on Power of Prophecy reported that a war brewed inside the FBI between the agents conducting the probe and their superiors, who warned that involving the Israelis in the attacks could be an “explosive political volcano.” But the lower-level agents didn’t buy it. They believed that the arrested Israeli Jews might just hold the key to the whole 9/11 debacle. “These Israeli guys knew what was coming down,” one FBI veteran was quoted as saying. “We would be fools if we let them just fade away into the sunset and pretend they weren’t involved.”
It was later confirmed that the five detained Israelis were in fact Mossad agents. However, FBI and Justice Department superiors succeeded in pushing aside the local FBI agents and the Israelis were released after spending just 71 days in U.S. custody. “Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information,” a U.S. official told Fox News at the time.
The compliant mainstream media completely ignored the Israeli connection. Rather it immediately blamed OSAMA BIN LADEN even though he had no record of doing anything on this scale. On the day of the attacks, CIA Director George Tenet said “You know, this has bin Laden’s fingerprints all over it.”But a number of intelligence officials have raised questions about BIN LADEN’s capabilities. “This guy sits in a cave in Afghanistan and he’s running this operation?” one CIA official said at the time. “It’s so huge. He couldn’t have done it alone.”
BIN LADEN himself denied any involvement in the attacks. The BBC published his denial in which he clearly stated: “I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself…” (Most of us never heard that quote on our nightly newscast).
To date, the only shred of “evidence” against bin Laden is a barely audible fuzzy amateur video that the Pentagon just happened to find “lying around” in Afghanistan.
U.S. intelligence analysts believe that Israel benefited most from the September 11 attacks. Israel has been widely criticized by the West for its aggression against the Palestinians. Israeli occupation soldiers were, and still are, shown on international TV news in heated exchanges with Palestinian youths armed with nothing more than stones. Israeli tanks bulldoze Palestinian farms and homes, and human rights groups complain that Palestinian detainees are tortured and abused in Israeli jails.
But after 9/11, things changed dramatically. Sympathy for the Palestinians vanished. The Arabs were universally portrayed as the “bad guys.” Israeli Prime Minister ARIEL SHARON reportedly said: “Now we and the Americans are in the same fight.”
.........
Blaming the horrible attacks on the Arabs was the best thing that has even happened to Israel. Now Washington, once again, solidly stands in the pro-Israeli camp, and “Palestinians be damned!”
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:05 AM Now Rabbit guesses the first thing the Bat will say, is that it is from al-jazeera. Rabbit hopes she does, because he will enjoy showing the same story in the US MSM, where it is.
This will be useful to show that al-Jazeera is reliable what’s more. Killing two bats with one stone. Three if one considers the further hit to her credibility the Natty will thus earn.
Come on Natty, never mind it is a trap, jump into it like you always do.
OOOH they are using al-Jazeera as a source…...........ooh you can get them now….......
(Seriously guys, you can even warn the Natty what is coming and she still walks right in, still a little flavouring goes a long way, watch this.)
Al-Jazeera seems to be a very reliable and honest source of news thinks Rabbit, who scored 100% on the Gullibility test. Come on miss 85% show us your stuff.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:05 AM Damn! Well, there is the address, though it comes not with the tiny url thrill.
Don’t jump in Nat. You’re still on 1.
I can see how someone might be confused by such reports that ever so conveniently fail to mention that not only a mere hijacking, but a yet more mere plane accidentally flying off course is enough cause to scramble jet fighters.
What a plane does after being hijacked probably matters to NORAD about as much as a nuclear warhead detonating—-they’d draw a little box around clusters of data to keep it from burning “ghosts” into the screen. Once a hijacked aircraft reaches its target, NORAD is pretty useless.
Of course, I don’t have to tell you two shiny ones that all the “imagining” stuff is a red herring. The question is not whether or not the air traffic controllers and folks at NORAD could “imagine” jets used as aircrafts.
The question is why were games conflated with real-time imagery causing confusion about whether blips were real-time or part of the exercise and delaying reports?
And why were the nearest fighter jets not scrambled as soon as the air traffic controllers reported?
And what are the odds? Huh? ASTRONOMICAL!
Jay complimented Tina1, too. He’s apparently as indiscriminate with his praise as he is petrified in his own thought. She’s one creepy little piece of work. Her little lol’s are weird. I think she’s drunk.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:12 AM Sep 1999: A US intelligence report states bin Laden and Al-Qaeda terrorists could crash an aircraft into the Pentagon. The Bush administration claims not to have heard of this report until May 2002, though it was widely shared within the government. [CNN, 5/18/02, AP, 5/18/02, Guardian, 5/19/02]
Nov 1999: The head of Australia’s security services admits the Echelon global surveillance system exists. The US still denies it exists. BBC describes Echelon’s power as “astounding.” Every international telephone call, fax, e-mail, or radio transmission can be listened to by powerful computers capable of voice recognition. They home in on key words, or patterns of messages. [BBC, 11/3/99]
Jan 2000: George Bush Sr. meets with the bin Laden family on behalf of the Carlyle Group. He also met with them in 1998. Bush’s chief of staff could not remember that this meeting took place until shown a thank you note confirming the meeting. [Wall Street Journal, 9/27/01, Guardian, 10/31/01]
Summer 2000: A secret military operation named Able Danger identifies four future 9/11 hijackers, including lead hijacker Mohamed Atta, as a potential threat and members of Al Qaeda. Yet none of this is mentioned later in the 9/11 Commissions’ final report. When questioned, the 9/11 commission’s chief spokesman initially says that staff members briefed about Able Danger did not remember hearing anything about Atta. Days later, however, after provided detailed information, he says the uniformed officer who briefed two staff members had indeed mentioned Atta. [New York Times, 8/11/05]
Sep 2000: The think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC) writes a blueprint for the creation of a global “Pax Americana.” Written for the Bush team before the 2000 election, the report Rebuilding America’s Defenses is a plan for maintaining global US preeminence and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests. The plan shows Bush intends to take control of the Persian Gulf whether or not Saddam Hussein is in power. [Sunday Herald, 9/7/02 , read report]
2000 – 2001: The military conducts exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One imagined target is the WTC. [USA Today, 4/19/04] Another is the Pentagon. [Military District of Washington (Army website), 11/3/00]
Jan 2001: A flight school alerts the FAA. Hijacker Hani Hanjour lacks English and flying skills needed for his commercial pilot’s license. An FAA official then sits next to him in class. The official offers a translator to help him pass, but the flight school points out this is against the rules. [AP, 5/10/02]
Jan 2001: After the elections, US intelligence agencies are told to “back off” investigating the bin Ladens and Saudi royals. There have always been constraints on investigating Saudis. [BBC, 11/6/01]
Spring 2001: Military and government documents are released that seek to legitimize the use of US military force in the pursuit of oil. One article advocates presidential subterfuge in the promotion of conflict and “explicitly urge[s] painting over the US’s actual reasons for warfare as a necessity for mobilizing public support for a conflict.” [Sydney Morning Herald, 12/26/02]
May 2001: US security chiefs reject Sudan’s offer to turn over voluminous files about bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Sudan has made this offer repeatedly since 1995. [Guardian, 9/30/01]
May 2001: Secretary of State Powell gives $43 million in aid to the Taliban government. [Los Angeles Times, 5/22/01] This follows $113 million given by the US in 2000. [State Dept. Fact Sheet, 12/11/01]
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:12 AM May 2001: The US introduces the “Visa Express” program allowing any Saudi Arabian to obtain visas through their travel agent instead of appearing at a consulate in person. [US News and World Report, 12/12/01] Five hijackers use Visa Express over the next month to enter the US. [Congressional Intelligence Committee, 9/20/02, (Witness Hill)]
May-Aug 2001: A number of the 911 hijackers make at least six trips to Las Vegas. These “fundamentalist” Muslims drink alcohol, frequent strip clubs, and smoke hashish. Some even have strippers perform lap dances for them. [San Francisco Chronicle, 10/4/01, Newsweek, 10/15/01]
June 2001: German intelligence warns the CIA, Britain’s MI6, and Israel’s Mossad that Middle Eastern terrorists are training for hijackings and targeting US and Israeli symbols. [Fox News, 5/17/02]
July 4-14, 2001: Bin Laden reportedly receives kidney treatment from Canadian-trained Dr. Callaway at the American Hospital in Dubai. Telephoned several times, the doctor declines to answer questions. During his stay, bin Laden allegedly is visited by one or two CIA officers. [Guardian, 11/1/01, Sydney Morning Herald, 10/31/01, London Times 11/1/01, UPI, 11/1/01]
July 10, 2001: A Phoenix FBI agent sends a memorandum warning about Middle Eastern men taking flight lessons. He suspects bin Laden’s followers and recommends a national program to check visas of suspicious flight-school students. The memo is sent to two FBI counter-terrorism offices, but no action is taken. [New York Times, 5/21/02] Vice President Cheney says in May 2002 that he opposes releasing this memo to congressional leaders or to the media and public. [CNN, 5/20/02]
July 24, 2001: Larry Silverstein’s $3.2 billion 99-year lease of the WTC is finalized. Silverstein hopes to win $7 billion in insurance from the 911 destruction of the WTC towers. [New York Times, 02/16/03, Newsday, 09/25/02]
July 26, 2001: Attorney General Ashcroft stops flying commercial airlines due to a threat assessment. [CBS, 7/26/01] He later walks out of his office rather than answer questions about this. [AP, 5/16/02]
Late July 2001: The US and UN ignore warnings from the Taliban foreign minister that bin Laden is planning an imminent huge attack on US soil. The FBI and CIA also fail to take seriously warnings that Islamic fundamentalists have enrolled in flight schools across the US. [Independent, 9/7/02]
Summer 2001: Intelligence officials know that al Qaeda both hopes to use planes as weapons and seeks to strike a violent blow within the US, despite government claims following 911 that the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks came “like bolts from the blue.” [Wall Street Journal, 09/19/02]
Summer 2001: Russian President Putin later says publicly that he ordered his intelligence agencies to alert the US of suicide pilots training for attacks on US targets. [Fox, 5/17/02]
Aug 5-11, 2001: Israel warns US of an imminent Al Qaeda attack. [Fox News, 5/17/02]
Aug 6, 2001: President Bush is warned by US intelligence that bin Laden might be planning to hijack commercial airliners. The White House waits eight months after 911 to reveal this fact. [New York Times, 5/16/02] Titled “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US,” the intelligence briefing specifically mentions the World Trade Center. Yet Bush later states the briefing “said nothing about an attack on America.” [Washington Post, 4/12/04, White House, 4/11/04, Intelligence Briefing, 8/6/01]
Aug 22, 2001: Top counter-terrorism expert John O’Neill quits the FBI due to repeated obstruction of his al-Qaeda investigations and a power play against him. He was the government’s “most committed tracker of bin Laden and al-Qaeda.” The next day he starts a new job as head of security at the WTC. He is killed weeks later in the World Trade Center during the 911 attack. [New Yorker, 1/14/02]
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:18 AM Aug 24, 2001: Frustrated with lack of response from FBI headquarters about detained suspect Moussaoui, the Minnesota FBI begins working with the CIA. The CIA sends alerts calling him a “suspect 747 airline suicide hijacker.” Three days later an FBI Minnesota supervisor says he is trying keep Moussaoui from “taking control of a plane and fly it into the WTC.” [Senate Intelligence Committee (Hill #2), 10/17/02] FBI headquarters chastises Minnesota FBI for notifying the CIA. [Time, 5/21/02] FBI Director Mueller will later say “there was nothing the agency could have done to anticipate and prevent the [911] attacks.” [Senate Intelligence Committee (Witness Breitweiser), 9/18/02]
Sep 10, 2001: A particularly urgent warning may have been received the night before the attacks, causing some top Pentagon brass to cancel a trip. “Why that same information was not available to the 266 people who died aboard the four hijacked commercial aircraft may become a hot topic on the Hill.” [Newsweek, 9/13/01] “A group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.” [Newsweek, 9/24/01, fifth paragraph from end]
Sep 10, 2001: Former president Bush is with a brother of Osama bin Laden at a Carlyle business conference. The conference is interrupted the next day by the attacks. [Washington Post, 3/16/03]
Sep 10, 2001: Defense Secretary Rumsfeld announces that by some estimates the Department of Defense “cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions.” CBS later calculates that 25% of the yearly defense budget is unaccounted for. A defense analyst says, “The books are cooked routinely year after year.” [DOD, 9/10/01, CBS, 1/29/02] This announcement was buried by the next day’s news of 911.
Sep 11, 2001: Warren Buffett, the second richest man on Earth [BBC, 6/22/01], schedules a charity event inside Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska. A small group of business leaders attend, including at least one who would otherwise have died in the WTC. [SF Business Times, 2/1/02] Bush flies to this same base that day, where there is an underground command center. [CNN, 9/12/01, CBS, 911/02]
Sep 11, 2001: Recovery experts extract data from 32 WTC computer drives revealing a surge in financial transactions just before the attacks. Illegal transfers of over $100 million may have been made through some WTC computer systems immediately before and during the disaster. [Reuters, 12/18/01, CNN, 12/20/01]
Sep 11, 2001: In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence, a US intelligence agency (the National Reconnaissance Office or NRO) was all set for an exercise at 9 AM on September 11th in which an aircraft would crash into one of its buildings near Washington, DC. [AP, 8/22/02]
Sept 11, 2001: The entire continental United States is defended by only seven air bases and 14 military jets. [CNN, 9/9/03, Newsday, 9/23/01]
These are all Facts reported in the Mainstream Media. They are among the sorts of facts taken into account by real people trying to get to the truth of what happened. The government is consistent at every level in trying to hamper any truth getting out as can be seen clearly by the number of outright lies about what had gone on or what was known.
Every claim made by this admin has proven to be false, and the 911 details are certainly no exception.
Of course it couldn’t happen without a complicit media. they are not exonerated because they have individually from time to time printed stories which show the government lies, because in each case they avoided looking at the obvious fact that they lied, happy just to quietly let the truth pass without comment or wider dissemination.
Luckily, the Internet has given people a chance to look at news and form their own opinions through research rather than relying on the self appointed gatekeeper media from feeding them their opinions directly.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:26 AM The pancaking of the Twin Towers was not inexpicable….airplanes filled with fuel for a transcontinental flight were smashed into the brittle outter shell of the towers, and ignited every flammable thing on 2 or 3 floors of the tower. The explosion, and cascading of fuel and consequent fire that occured in the center of the building overwhelmed the internal suspension steel girder system, weakening its strength ...the weight of the upper floors falling resulted in the absolute demolition of the building.
The tower hit second fell first, simply because it was compromised at a lower level, and could not support the weight of the upper floors.
You only have to check an engineers analysis of the destruction of these buildings to understand how the toppling happened…
what scares me is the idea that Bin Laden and his highly educated crew anticipated this destruction…how well it was planned, how the outcome, probably, exceeded their own expectations.
Which brings me to the question of ‘could these flights have been intercepted before contact’?
Possibly…if we had air crews flyiing over the Eastern seaboard when the flights took off, and then, oddly, deviated from the flight path.
Maybe there could have been a better reaction time if that were the case.
I think this operation was very well planned. I think they realized that there was a window of opportunity, and it was choreographed well, and despite any attempt there might have been at interception the die was cast when the terrorists took over the flights and turned the craft around.
I find it implausible to suggest that the ‘military-industrial complex’ ( remember those guys?) allowed or created this scenario to create a world of suspicion, ignorant patriotism, and aggression to accomplish the Manifest Destiny schemes of the Bush/Cheney Texas Oil Man Cartel.
I think Bin Laden was smart enough, had the resources, and hated us enough to hit us where it hurt…...
and that we’re a bunch of Beetle Bailey’s .
How about we talk about the forces that make us so fucking ignorant, trusting, and oblivious?
There’s the conspiracy, eh?
Posted by minerva on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:30 AM Sorry it’s long folks, but Rabbit feels the wealth of information, credited to the MSM like this, is too good not to be included in a thread started on the back of a pathetic hit piece based on innuendos of lack of backing for alternative opinions about 911.
Some more now.
Come on Muwakkil, how about you have a shot at knocking some of the massive amount of evidence of government complicity and knowledge? You made the initial spurious attack on supposedly deluded fools, maybe you can explain how the official lie can exist next to the facts which are printed in the MSM alone? The FACT is that the government has been lying, about everything for which the facts have become known. The only things we can’t PROVE they are lying about, can be proven one way or another just by releasing all the evidence they have withheld even from the 911 commission.
Now why won’t they do that do you suppose?
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:33 AM September 11, 2001—Timeline for the Day of the Attacks
Department of Defense (6/1/01) and FAA (7/12/01) procedure: In the event of a hijacking, the FAA hijack coordinator on duty at Washington headquarters requests the military to provide escort aircraft. Normally, NORAD escort aircraft take the required action. The FAA notifies the National Military Command Center by the most expeditious means. [DOD/, 6/1/01, FAA, 7/12/01, FAA 7/12/01]
If NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) hears of any difficulties in the skies, they begin the work to scramble jet fighters [take off and intercept aircraft that are off course]. Between Sep 2000 and June 2001 fighters were scrambled 67 times. [AP, 8/12/02] When the Lear jet of golfer Payne Stewart didn’t respond in 1999, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched. According to an Air Force timeline, a series of military planes provided an emergency escort to Payne’s stricken Lear about 20 minutes after ground controllers lost contact with his plane.[Dallas Morning News, 10/26/99]
8:20 AM (approx.): Air traffic controllers suspect Flight 11 has been hijacked. [NY Times, 9/15/01]
8:40 AM: NORAD is notified of hijacking. [NY Times, 10/16/01, 8:38 AM Washington Post, 9/15/01]
8:46 AM: Flight 11 crashes into the WTC (World Trade Center) north tower. [approximately 26 minutes after controllers lost contact][New York Times, 9/12/01]
8:46 AM: Bush later states, “I was sitting outside the classroom and I saw an airplane hit the tower. The TV was on.” [CNN, 12/4/01] “When we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building.” [White House, 1/5/02] There was no live coverage of the first crash on TV.
8:52 AM: Two F-15s take off from Otis Air Force Base. [Washington Post, 9/15/01] They go after Flight 175. Major General Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, states “the pilots flew like a scalded ape, topping 500 mph but were unable to catch up to the airliner. We had a nine-minute window, and in excess of 100 miles to intercept 175,’’ he said. ‘‘There was just literally no way.’’ [Dallas Morning News, 9/15/01] F-15’s fly at up to 2.5 times the speed of sound [1875 mph or 30+ miles a minute or 270+ miles in nine minutes] and are designed for low-altitude, high-speed, precision attacks. [BBC]
8:56 AM: By this time, it is evident that Flight 77 is lost. The FAA, already in contact with the Pentagon about the two hijackings out of Boston, reportedly doesn’t notify NORAD of this until 9:24, 28 minutes later. [see 9:10 AM for comparison, New York Times, 10/16/01]
9:03 AM: Flight 175 crashes into the south WTC tower. [23 minutes after NORAD notified, 43 minutes after air traffic control lost contact with pilots][New York Times, 9/12/01, CNN, 9/12/01]
9:10 AM: Major General Paul Weaver states Flight 77 came back on the (radar) scope at 9:10 in West Virginia. [Dallas Morning News, 9/15/01] Another report states the military was notified of Flight 77 several minutes after 9:03. [Washington Post, 9/15/01]
9:24 AM [? – see above]: The FAA, who 28 minutes earlier had discovered Flight 77 off course and heading east over West Virginia, reportedly notifies NORAD. A Pentagon spokesman says, “The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way.” [Newsday, 9/23/01, New York Times, 10/16/01] Yet since the first crash, military officials in a Pentagon command center were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do. [New York Times, 9/15/01]
9:28 AM: Air traffic control learns that Flight 93 has been hijacked. [MSNBC, 7/30/02]
9:38 AM: Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. [42 minutes or more after contact was lost, one hour after NORAD notification of first hijacking][New York Times, 10/16/01, 9:43 CNN, 9/12/01]
9:59 AM: The south tower of the World Trade Center collapses. [New York Times, 9/12/01]
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:34 AM 10:10 AM: Flight 93 crashes in Pennsylvania. [42 minutes after contact was lost][CNN, 9/12/02]
10:28 AM: The World Trade Center north tower collapses. [CNN, 9/12/01, NY Times, 9/12/01]
5:20 PM: Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapses. [CNN, 9/12/01]
Sep 11, 2001: Did the Air Force send up planes after the hijacked aircraft? The Air Force won’t say. It says they keep about 20 F-15 and F-16 fighters on duty with Air National Guards along the nation’s coastline, ready to inspect unknown aircraft entering U.S. airspace. “We can scramble and be airborne in a matter of minutes,” said an Air Force spokesperson. Some airline pilots are wondering whether the FAA did enough to try to prevent the crashes. [Wall Street Journal, 09/14/01]
Sep 11, 2001: Six air traffic controllers who dealt with two of the hijacked airliners make a tape recording describing the events, but the tape is later destroyed by a supervisor without anyone making a transcript or even listening to it. [Washington Post, 5/6/04, New York Times, 5/6/04]
Sep 11, 2001: Hours after the attacks, a “shadow government” is formed. Key congressional leaders say they didn’t know President Bush had established this government-in-waiting. Some Congressmen state the administration should have conferred about its plans. [CBS, 3/2/02, Washington Post, 3/2/02]
Sep 11, 2001: A National Public Radio correspondent states: “I spoke with Congressman Ike Skelton who said that just recently the director of the CIA warned that there could be an attack – an imminent attack – on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected.” [NPR, 911/01]
Sep 12, 2001: Senator Orrin Hatch says the US was monitoring bin Laden supporters and overheard them discussing the attack. [AP, 9/12/01] Why has the media not explored the fact that the US could monitor private communications of al-Qaeda on 911?
Sep 13-19, 2001: Members of bin Laden’s family are driven or flown under FBI supervision to a secret assembly point in Texas and then to Washington, where they leave the country on a private plane when airports reopen three days after the attacks. [New York Times, 9/30/01][Boston Globe, 9/20/01]
Sep 14, 2001: The two black boxes for Flight 77 are found. [PBS, 9/14/01] FBI Director Robert Mueller later says Flight 77’s data recorder provides altitude, speed, headings and other information, but the voice recorder contains “nothing useful.” [CBS, 2/23/02]
Sep 15-16, 2001: Several 911 hijackers, including leader Mohamed Atta, may have trained at secure US military installations. [Newsweek, 9/15/01, New York Times, 9/15/01, Washington Post, 9/16/01]
Sep 19, 2001: The FBI claims that there may have been six hijacking teams on the morning of 911. [New York Times, 9/19/01, CBS, 9/14/01] Authorities have identified teams that total as many as 50 infiltrators who supported or carried out the strikes. About 40 of the men have been accounted for. [Los Angeles Times, 9/13/01] Yet only one person, Moussaoui, is later charged.
Sept 23, 2001: Several of the alleged 9/11 hijackers are still alive. Pilot Waleed Al Shehri is one of the men the FBI said deliberately crashed a plane into the WTC. He is protesting his innocence from Morocco. His photograph was released, and he acknowledges that he is indeed the Waleed Al Shehri whom FBI has named. But, he says, he left the US last year, and became a pilot with Saudi Arabian airlines. [BBC, 9/23/01]
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:37 AM Oct 2, 2001: The Patriot Act is introduced in Congress. The next day, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D) accuses the Bush administration of reneging on an agreement on this anti-terrorist bill. [Washington Post, 10/4/01] Anthrax letters are sent to Leahy and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D) on October 9. [CNN, 11/18/01]
Oct 10-11, 2001: After consulting with the FBI and CDC, Iowa State University in Ames destroys anthrax spores collected over seven decades. On Oct 25, the White House homeland security director confirms publicly that the tainted letters contained the Ames strain. [New York Times, 11/9/01]
Nov 12, 2001—Mar 25, 2002: 13 renowned microbiologists mysteriously die over the span of less than five months. All but one or two are killed or murdered under unusual circumstances. Some are world leaders in developing weapons-grade biological plagues. Others are the best in figuring out how to stop millions from dying because of biological weapons. Still others are experts in the theory of bioterrorism. [Globe and Mail, 5/4/02, New York Times 08/11/02] Nov 12: Benito Que, 52, an expert in infectious diseases—killed in carjacking, later deemed possible stroke. [Globe and Mail, 5/4/02] Nov. 16: Don Wiley, 57, one of the world’s leading researchers of deadly viruses—body found in Mississippi River. [CNN, 12/22/01] Nov 21: Dr. Vladimir Pasechnik, 64, an expert in adapting germs and viruses for military use—stroke. [New York Times, 11/23/01] Dec 10: Dr. Robert Schwartz, 57, a leading researcher on DNA sequencing analysis—slain at home. [Washington Post, 12/12/01] Dec 14: Nguyen Van Set, 44, his research organization had just come to fame for discovering a virus which can be modified to affect smallpox—dies in an airlock in his lab. [Sydney Morning Herald, 12/12/01] Jan 2002: Ivan Glebov (bandit attack) and Alexi Brushlinski (killed in Moscow), both world-renowned members of the Russian Academy of Science. [Pravda, 2/9/02] Feb 9: Victor Korshunov, 56, head of the microbiology sub-faculty at the Russian State Medical University—killed by cranial injury. [Pravda, 2/9/02] Feb 11: Ian Langford, 40, one of Europe’s leading experts on environmental risk—murdered in home. [London Times, 2/13/02] Feb 28 (2): Tanya Holzmayer, 46, helped create drugs that interfere with replication of the virus that causes AIDS, and Guyang Huang, 38, a brilliant scholar highly regarded in genetics—murder/suicide. [San Jose Mercury News, 2/28/02] Mar 24: David Wynn-Williams, 55, an astrobiologist with NASA Ames Research Center—killed while jogging. [London Times, 3/27/02] Mar 25: Steven Mostow, 63, an expert on the threat of bioterrorism—private plane crash. [KUSA TV/NBC, 3/26/02]
Dec 2001: The US engineers the rise to power of a former Unocal Oil employee, Hamid Karzai, as the interim president of Afghanistan. Looking at the map of the big US bases in Afghanistan, one is struck that they are identical to the route of the projected oil pipeline. [Chicago Tribune, 3/18/02]
Dec 25, 2001: Leading structural engineers and fire-safety experts believe the investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center is “inadequate.” They note that the current team of 20 or so investigators has inadequate financial and staff support, has been prevented from interviewing witnesses and from examining the disaster site. They couldn’t even get detailed blueprints of the World Trade Center. The decision to rapidly recycle the steel beams from the WTC means definitive answers may never be known. [New York Times, 12/25/01]
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:39 AM Minerva, you’re speaking with full sentences and paragraphs all of a sudden.
The first physicist that reported that the collapse was consistent with demolition was silenced.
Unfortunately, your argument doesn’t really have legs, darlink.
I think this operation was very well planned. I think they realized that there was a window of opportunity, and it was choreographed well, and despite any attempt there might have been at interception the die was cast when the terrorists took over the flights and turned the craft around.
I find it implausible to suggest that the ‘military-industrial complex’ ( remember those guys?) allowed or created this scenario to create a world of suspicion, ignorant patriotism, and aggression to accomplish the Manifest Destiny schemes of the Bush/Cheney Texas Oil Man Cartel.
I think Bin Laden was smart enough, had the resources, and hated us enough to hit us where it hurt…...
So much for thinking, huh? Do you believe that someone can win the lottery without buying a ticket if they feel strongly enough about winning?
Nobody is that “lucky”.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:40 AM Jan 4, 2002: An editorial in the respected trade magazine Fire Engineering states that there is good reason to believe that the “official investigation,” blessed by FEMA, into the WTC collapse is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests are clearly not full disclosure. Respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers. [Fire Engineering, 1/02]
Jan 24, 2002: Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle claims that on this day Cheney calls him and urges that no 911 inquiry be made. He is repeatedly pressured thereafter. [Newsweek, 2/4/02]
Feb 6, 2002: CIA Director Tenet tells a Senate hearing that there was no 911 intelligence failure. When asked about the CIA on 911, he states that the 911 plot was “in the heads of three or four people.” He rejects any suggestion that the CIA failed to do its job. [USA Today, 2/7/02]
Feb 21, 2002: A ban on poppy growing by the Taliban in July 2000 along with severe droughts reduced Afghanistan’s opium yield by 91% in 2001. Yet the UN expects its 2002 opium crop to be equivalent to the bumper one of three years ago. Afghanistan is the source of 75% of the world’s heroin. [Guardian, 2/21/02] Why is the US unable to control opium production which had almost stopped?
Mar 2, 2002: The 911 collapse of WTC building 7 was the first time a modern, steel-reinforced high-rise in the US has ever collapsed in a fire. [New York Times, 3/2/02] Building 7 was where the SEC was storing files related to numerous Wall Street investigations. The files for approximately 3,000 to 4,000 cases were destroyed. [New York Law Journal, 9/17/01] Lost files include documents that could show the relationship between Citigroup and the WorldCom bankruptcy. [The Street, 8/9/02]
Mar 13, 2002: Bush says of bin Laden: “I truly am not that concerned about him.” [White House, 3/13/02] Military chief Myers states: “the goal has never been to get bin Laden.” [CNN/DOD, 4/6/02]
Apr 19, 2002: FBI Director Mueller: “We have not uncovered a single piece of paper that mentioned any aspect of the 911 plot. The hijackers had no computers, no laptops, no storage media of any kind.” [FBI, 4/19/02, Los Angeles Times, 4/30/02] Yet investigators have amassed a ‘‘substantial’’ amount of e-mail traffic among the hijackers. [USA Today, 10/1/01] The laptop computer of Moussaoui, the alleged 20th hijacker, was confiscated weeks before 911, yet FBI headquarters systematically dismissed and undermined requests by Minneapolis FBI agents to search the computer. [Time, 5/21/02, CNN, 5/27/02]
May 15, 2002: For the first time, the White House admits that Bush was warned about bin Laden hijacking aircraft and wanting to attack the US in Aug 2001. It is unclear why they waited eight months to reveal this. The Press Secretary states that while Bush had been warned of possible hijackings, “the president did not receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers.” Yet the August memo left little doubt that the hijacked airliners were intended for use as missiles and that US targets were intended. [New York Times, 5/16/02, Washington Post, 5/16/02, Guardian, 5/19/02]
May 16, 2002: Congressional committee members investigating 911 say there is far more damaging information that has not yet been disclosed. “We’ve just scratched the surface,” said Senator Richard Shelby, ranking Republican member of the Senate intelligence committee. [Washington Post, 5/17/02]
May 17, 2002: Dan Rather says that he and other journalists haven’t been properly investigating since 911. He graphically describes the pressures to conform after the attacks. [Guardian, 5/17/02]
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:40 AM That’s about half of it, so far.
I the 100% NOT GULLIBLE Rabbit, consider the list of stories above to give a very clear, an absolutely undeniable picture of a government which was not only complicit to some degree in 911, but which has quite obviously been going to the most extreme lengths in order to cover up the fact ever since.
You Natalie, are apparently just one tiny cog in the coverup machine, of course with a media form like the internet, Shills are certainly important in the task of coverup. See for example how much you have managed to cover-up.
(Big rabbit smile….....^^........ :)
May 30, 2002: FBI Agent Robert Wright formally accuses the FBI of deliberately curtailing investigations that might have prevented 911. He is under threat of retribution if he talks to members of Congress about what he knows. [Fox News, 5/30/02] He also accuses the agency of shutting down his 1998 criminal probe into alleged terrorist-training camps in Chicago and Kansas City. Wright has written a book, but the agency won’t let him publish it or even give it to anyone. [LA Weekly, 8/2/02]
July 23, 2002: The New York City government decides that many of the audio and written records of the Fire Department’s actions on 911 should never be released. The New York Times had filed a lawsuit seeking numerous records concerning the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, including firsthand accounts by scores of firefighters and chiefs. [New York Times, 7/23/02]
Aug 11, 2002: The Observer has learned of three heroin refineries in Afghanistan. There are believed to be several more, some of them operating in broad daylight. [Observer, 8/11/02]
Aug 30, 2002: German authorities charge a Moroccan man with complicity in the 911 attacks. He is only the second person ever to be charged formally in connection with 911. [Telegraph, 8/30/02]
Sep 11, 2002: On the first anniversary of 911, New York Times writes, “One year later, the public knows less about the circumstances of 2,801 deaths at the foot of Manhattan in broad daylight than people in 1912 knew within weeks about the Titanic.” The former police commissioner of Philadelphia says: “You can hardly point to a cataclysmic event in our history when a blue-ribbon panel did not set out to establish the facts and suggest reforms. That has not happened here.” [New York Times, 911/02]
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:48 AM Rabbit is off for now.
Don’t worry that Natty will be distracted by any of this Wiley. It will be in the too hard basket, she’ll prefer to spar with you using her smoke and mirror tricks and by trying to squirm herself into knots like an eels in the hopes that she will twist your words enought o have built herself a strawman. I’ve told you before what a terror she is in demolishing Strawmen.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:51 AM No one on earth defies gravity.
No terrorists could have been aware of this scenario and plotted their attack accordingly without inside information and assistance. Only stunning ignorance, and willful disbelief can think otherwise.
Why is the WTC where we hurt? Who is this “we”? Wouldn’t it hurt more if they had crashed into busy airports? Or into malls? Or into schools and churches—-making a big sloppy mess?
Who does this clinical, laws-of-physics-denying, surgical strike benefit? Why would the terrorist even attempt such a complicated attack in which U.S. forces should have had time to scramble?
And why would the terrorists expect something as truly “unimagineable” as causing the buildings to collapse vertically into their foot prints, instead of expecting the top part of the building to topple over in the direction of the planes’ trajectories leaving variously sized hunks of concrete on the street below? In which case, someone might easily think of inquiring about who might have been on and above the floors that were struck and where they were when the planes did strike?
What if, instead of focusing on the WTC (over and over and over again) there was talk in the media of all the people shopping, lazing about at home, sleeping, skating in parks, standing around waiting for buses, etc. who were killed that fateful day? Wouldn’t that hit us where we live more than the WTC?
Who the fuck lives in the WTC?
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:57 AM The lies promulgated about 9/11 are so legion that the deceivers are starting to trip over their own twisted tongues. Larry Silverstein claims his “pull it” comment meant to evacuate firefighters from WTC Building 7 and yet Popular Mechanics’ own 9/11 debunking special stated that there were no firefighters in the building whatsoever.
Just wanted to get in before the Nat.
Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet whopping the ninnies again.
A direct answer to a typical Natty criticism of one of the better Internet News Sites. Bit right wing attitudes for the rabbit, but they are the good guys.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 8:05 AM Wiley..the World Trade Center WAS a trade center.
That’s why they didn’t go for the outlet centers in Freeport, Maine, or any other bogus sale venue for people with “almost enough money to not be poor”
Many Western countries had holdings there, and I was happy when the province of Nova Scotia recovered their cache of silver ( my family had to emigrate from Nova Scotia to the rest of North America to make a living…but we’d rather be there)
As for the flight plan of the scrambling, intercepter type jets?
As a kid who grew up on air force bases, I could tell you when a military jet flies overhead. You don’t have to be some sort of genius to figure out the habits of the military response in this area…you don’t need expensive technology, or some inside source.
Ears, eyes, and a working knowledge of math could inform you about the response time of fighter jets in New York.
PS..I’ve been talking in full sentences for years…my parents are, understandably, proud.
lol
Posted by minerva on Jan 8, 2006 at 8:14 AM Interesting point Wiley. It is noticeable from outside that the maudlin preoccupation with 911 is not natural. Not meaning the majority who are interested because of the LIES and wanting the truth to come out. That so many Americans seem to take it so personally still and call it up as the Great Justifier of all which they now do.
Like the Holocaust mindset. the Jews sufferred the Holocaust and now they can do anything they want. they can murder and torture and dominate, as well as rob anyone they feel like, but because of the holocaust, nobody must criticise.
Now it’s like the USA has bought the Wal-Mart version. For the bargain price of only 2899 the USA now has a justifying holocaust. 911 is the reason you are exempt from international treaties and all forms of morality. You have been so wronged, so brutally abused, by that price. The holocaust…of 3000… is certainly justification for a million or more Muslims, or so you would think to listen to those of your countrymen and women who are so preoccupied with what was done to THEM on 911.
That is the key. The big issue which is what it’s all about. The 911 sympathy crowd are whining about
What was done to US
and completely ignoring the issues about
Who did it or Why.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 8:17 AM I seem to remember a 35 million dollar silver recovery for Nova Scotia…in one of the lower safe holds of the World Trade Center.
And that’s just the security holding of one small province in one relatively minor country…
instead of attacking our families, do you think ,maybe, the terrorists were going for the lucky pot of gold that lies at the end of all our rainbows?
Were they rainbow rapists?
Arggghhh!
Jihad on the dream destructing cash castrating sons a bitches!
lol
Posted by minerva on Jan 8, 2006 at 8:29 AM Gad, this thread’s become a whole 9/11 THROBs[01] site unto itself. Can’t keep up. Had to save it all to disk for later viewing…
Footies:
01. THROBs: Theories, Humor, Rants, Obfuscations and Best-guesses
Posted by AD Marshall on Jan 8, 2006 at 9:28 AM AD….
can you dig it?
I knew that you could, lol.
From the bastard child of soul,
Minerva Jones
Posted by minerva on Jan 8, 2006 at 9:30 AM [You got your post in before i could even complete my thought. :D]
Posted by AD Marshall on Jan 8, 2006 at 9:45 AM Actually Andi
It helps that most of it is familiar enough that I can grab the sources and post without having to go through it all again.
I think that ITT might have set us up on this one. they didn’t dare say all this themselves so Muwakkil comes on and gives Professor Jones and griffin a spray, knowing there would be plenty of regulars about to set the record straight and post all the info they didn’t dare get into.
This is rabbit giving ITT the benefit of the doubt.
Either way, the information is here.
Even better when someone can wriggle like a stuck fish and show the government up by being unable to do more than dissemble and make ad-hominem attacks in laughable attempts to try and make the fairy story stay up.
Around here (Perth-Western Australia) it is getting hard to find anybody who doesn’t already know that the official story about 911 is a lie. The jump in awareness has been noticieable lately. We may finally be reaching critical mass. The time when enough people know the truth, for the weight of information to flow unchecked through society.
This can only happen with truth, lies need to be propped up all the way. Truth eventually has a weight of its own. Thankfully.
Sadly I fear that the realisation of what is wrong and how badly, among the population, will just hasten the arrival of martial law. If you keep ignorant and keep inline, you will be allowed a semblance of freedom, just keep pretending all is well and question nothing.
If the majority of US citizens today stood up and said get out of that White House, you black souled bastards, the majority of citizens will be facing armed police and military. The concentration camps await you but only if you question the authority. Keep your eyes shut tight, and bleat when you are told to bleat, and you can keep calling yourselves a democracy for another day.
You think the loss of freedom and privacy and rights are for your protection from some mythical “Snowball” in a cave, and his even more mythical followers, when in reality they are for the protection of the usurpers in the white house, to protect them from you, when the penny finally drops.
Rabbit thinks he is hearing the clink as the penny drops for many even now.
Welcome to the depressing truth new chums. Unfortunately since it took you so long to get here, the gate is already locked and there is no way out.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 8, 2006 at 12:22 PM As for the flight plan of the scrambling, intercepter type jets?
As a kid who grew up on air force bases, I could tell you when a military jet flies overhead. You don’t have to be some sort of genius to figure out the habits of the military response in this area…you don’t need expensive technology, or some inside source.
Ears, eyes, and a working knowledge of math could inform you about the response time of fighter jets in New York.
Minerva, as someone who grew up serving in the Air Force and working for SAC/NORAD and a tactical mobile radar unit, I must ask—-what are you talking about?
Why in the world do you think that growing up on a military base gives you insight into the relationships between air traffic controllers, NORAD, and jet fighters on 9/11? Did you hear a lot of sonic booms over the bases?
To think that so many sherrifs and highway patrolmen could have saved the expense of clocking speed with radar when they could have used their eyes and a little math.
Come to think of it, why do air traffic controllers need radar? All they need is a little perch, right?
Guffaw.
lol not.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 8, 2006 at 7:54 PM Something else on this topic Rabbit posted to Minerva yesterday on the Your Guess Is As Good thread.
Minerva
Rabbit just happened by this thread again, and something you mention also on the right 911 thread. This one BTW
“..when you’re flying at 500 miles per hour…it takes an hour to travel five hundred miles.”
But why are you flying at 500 miles an hour, when the planes are capable of 1800 mph?
That my dear is the question.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 9, 2006 at 3:49 AM I am SO TIRED of people confusing REASONABLE SUSPICION with CONSPIRACY THEORIES. The fact is that NO ONE KNOWS what happened on 9/11 because there has never been an investigation into the events of that day!
The Kean Commission, organized almost a full year AFTER the attacks, and given minimal funds and information, was charged with investigating only the Intelligence failures. Period. They had to rely on the official version of the attacks as supplied by the Bush administration.
As a result, anyone who has pointed out the anomalies and the discrepancies in the official version is accused of being some kind of nutjob.
Please, please read the article below. Then go to the TVNL web site and read the series of editorials….that offer clear evidence that the conspiracy exists on the part of those who want to silence any questions and any independent investigation of the attacks. Wake up sheeple.
TvNewsLIES Challenges Believers of the Official Version of 9/11:
Posted by skipper7 on Jan 9, 2006 at 5:16 AM
I knew this happened. Got to remember to check out Wikipedia first. This is Pappy Bush’s refusal to apologize for the military shootdown of a civilian airliner.He would never apologize for the United States of America. What a pathological load of shit. I had almost forgotten how much worse having a former CIA agent was than having a bad actor in the Executive mansion.
Hi skipper7.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 9, 2006 at 5:32 AM Oh, skipper7. I’m pretty new here and don’t think I’ve seen ya round before. I’ll check out your link. Thank you. But in the future you might want to think twice before you throw the word “sheeple” around so loosely. Unless of course, you’re a strictly hit-and-run offensive poster that won’t be hanging around long enough to get the verbal ass whooping that this loose use of the word “sheeple” deserves.
You’re not afraid of having allies are you?
Hmmm?
Who are you talking to?
Or were you asking us to “wake up sheeple” as a verby sort of thing?
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 9, 2006 at 5:52 AM Skipper’s link brings up the point that seems so obvious it’s easy to forget—-there has been no evidence from the administration backing their claims and their contradictory actions.
Shortly after 9/11, I asked a 24/7 reference librarian if she had a list of all the “evidence” supporting the accusation against bin Laden, and al Queda. She sent me a list of hearsay and things that had already been debunked by other world police sources that dealt with terrorism and its threat. I asked her, after I received it if that was IT? She said, “yes”. I said, “this is the evidence? She said, “yes”. It sent shivers down my spine—- a librarian, for crying out loud!
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 9, 2006 at 6:38 AM Relax lovely Witch, Skipper is an occasional poster and well regarded by Rabbit as I recall.
He was throwing stones at the same Morons we are. There is a lot for him to read to catch up on all that has been posted, and he has done what we all do, look for the morons first. We have a had a steady stream of them, but even Natty has dried up at the moment, she does when she feels out numbered or cornered. I’m sure Skipper was referring the TVNewsLies piece to them.
Unfortunately the morons have had that reference before and ignored it outright, because it is all conspiracy theory sites or Bush hating sites. You know their reasoning, or lack of.
Wiley thanks for the Iran Air 655 reference. I too have had that in the back of my mind but couldn’t remember enough details to look it up.
When Bush Senior became pres, and then when he used the words New World Order, Rabbit heard these words from this man, and some alarm bell went off inside Rabbit’s heart, and he committed himself to watching what these bastards were up to and resisting them in any way possible. I heard the words of the Anti-Christ, and I’m not even a Christian but there is no other way to explain in our shared social context. I knew then we were definately in for TROUBLE.
He is still the most evil president of the two Shrubs. Pure Child Porn Snuff Film, Drug Baron suck on the devils dick kind of evil. Bush Junior is just a damned clown, a wicked, damned by god kind of clown.
(Remember that clowns are Rabbit’s pet hate, they are never good. Nasty unfunny, scary and ridiculous living fart joke type creatures, bad clowns.)
yes Reagan was a hoot when seen retrospectively. Not a clown either. Not an actor either really, but definately not a clown.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 9, 2006 at 7:27 AM Oh by the way,...Wiley…. it is possible that some people just post comments, based purely on the article and are thus often not reading other comments. Which of course is not only fair but essentially what the editors usually aim for with these threads. It is we undisciplined rabble who tend to take the threads on long journeys. Once in a while someone mentions the article again or we remind ourselves what started it all, or someone drops in just commenting the article and thus reminds us.
Obviously this time the topic is easy to stick to, I suspect sometimes this article was planted as a honey pot for us all. We have been bashing the 911 topic all over other threads.
or
Maybe they never take any notice of us at all, and we are just like a sort of lifeform living on the periphery of a wider picture. Like bacteria. We are electronic bacteria.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 9, 2006 at 7:36 AM I’m bitchy. Won’t pretend otherwise, though I’ll put a little cork in it (not too tight). Am starting to swing a bit wide.
It’s so odd to have to talk to people from other countries in order to get feedback on reality, and not just for fun stuff like how do you celebrate birthdays, what was grade school like, how many shots of liquers do you toss back before you start drinking, and other pleasant banter.
The only time I’ve been able to strike up a bit of friendly conversation with anyone around this town is when I meet another gardener.
Discussing politics is taboo here.
The mass trance that followed 9/11 was bizarre. I’d seen mass trances before, but that was a whole new grade of weird. At first I was worried about what the general population was going to be like when it woke up—-would they come up swinging? Haven’t worried about that in a long time.
We all do what we can (and other useless homilies).
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 9, 2006 at 8:02 AM Guess you know now, they didn’t wake up. The problem in this regard was there all along Wiley. Speaking from the point of view of an outsider to America but nonetheless part of the American Empire, a VERY large portion of the population was already entranced by the spell of modern media. I’m serious when I suggest it is actually an evolutionary thing. There is such a thing as a “primitiv” mentality which was never ready for true communion and oneness with the rest of the Galaxy, whilst paradoxically many more were being born, hatching so to speak, who could and are meat for inclusion in a future shared with other sentience.
911 was just the opening round of the endgame, it no longer matters if we, the minority have finally seen past all the decpetion, in fact they get their rocks off on letting us in on so much by being apparently careless.
How the hell do we know SO much about the Illuminati and who they are and what they are up to if they really wanted to keep the lid on it all?. No way, they know that enough dittoheads will stick to the program that they can get away with taunting the opposition, us, by letting their actions be no more opaque than that the complicit media can do it’s job effectively….enough..
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07 AM Hells bells, the rabbit has an uncomfortable knack of automatic writing if the Witch knows what he means, and that last spelling error scared the poop out of the hopper.
Meat? Jesus I hope not, that is rabbit’s worst fear.
He meant meant…..........
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 10, 2006 at 11:09 AM Yes—-the television trance. I was forced to watch television as a child. My mind would wander off—-the only programs I liked were Jaques Cousteau and Warner Brothers cartoons (but only if I couldn’t go outside.)
Around 8 years ago, I bought a television and watched it for several months, because I needed to have a cultural exchange. Talk about being on the outside—-a U.S. citizen who doesn’t drive or watch television! I had no idea what people were talking about half the time.
Yes, television is mesmerizing and ubiquitous. When Clouds was in the hospital last, I stayed in the lobby of the wing he was staying in. Every time I went back to the lobby, the television was on. Nobody was in there at the time, people just automatically turned on the T.V. and left it on even when they left the room.
People were dying with their family around them and the television on!
The last time I went to Walmart, there were televisions suspended from the ceilings, on Fox news, banging the war drums. Horrible.
I have to wonder why terrorists targeted the WTC instead of television networks. That’s where America lives.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 10, 2006 at 8:11 PM Rabbit maybe sees two or three hours of Television a week, on average. Our kids grew up for the first ten years without TV, which was easy living as far out as we had lousy reception anyway. Since moving to the city they have had TV and the drop in their behaviour, there attention levels, is astounding.
It is still possible to keep tabs on the Televison culture just from absorbing the talk around and the refs in the news etc. Rabbit can carry on a conversation about just about any TV show and people would never know Rabbit never saw an episode.
The terrorists, in the whitehouse, who carried out the attacks needed the Televison to broadcast it the way they did. That was the real masterstroke, the whole multimedia presentation. It may have been the moment they cast the spell, through the TV, through the images of the falling towers.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 11, 2006 at 5:19 AM Wiley, a tip, keep an occassional eye on this thread. The Nat Bat usually returns to the scene of her last crap, to try and hijack the tail of the thread. She will sit like a spider, quiet now, until someone new posts on the thread, then she’ll pounce and begin the whole shebang again, as if everyone just hatched new out of the egg with never a word said before..
.......... Or she’ll wait a while and then post a whole heap of stuff, reams and reams, much more than she does when actually arguing directly. (I could not denigrate the term debate by using it for what she does.)
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 12, 2006 at 4:01 AM Thanks for the heads up, Rabbitoid. That’s not a bad tactic on her part. I wonder who taught her that?
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 13, 2006 at 8:26 AM Hey Wiley..if you were actually an air traffic controller, keeping the world safer for Democracy and Capitalism through Norad in the past 25 years, perhaps my father either taught you your trade, or ran the school that educated you.
That’s who HE is.
And I trust him. You are less reliable in my books, lol.
But we know each other so little.
So when all hell broke lose one morning in September, I did have an excdellent source for my information….
aside from my unimpaired senses,my childhood history, and my basic knowledge of math, lol
Posted by minerva on Jan 16, 2006 at 7:06 AM And you think that the planes were 767’s and you think that the buildings, all three of them just feel down like decks of cards, because of a plane hit and short duration cool fires or a fire only in one case?
Do you believe in the farcical and fast drowning official lie Minerva or are you just having some sort of pissing contest with Wiley?
Don’t forget what the POTUS was doing while “All hell broke loose one morning in september” either will you?
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 11:44 AM Quotes you’ll never find on 9/11 conspiracy websites:
Minutes after the south tower collapsed at the World Trade Center, police helicopters hovered near the remaining tower to check its condition. “About 15 floors down from the top, it looks like it’s glowing red,” the pilot of one helicopter, Aviation 14, radioed at 10:07 a.m. “It’s inevitable.”
Seconds later, another pilot reported: “I don’t think this has too much longer to go. I would evacuate all people within the area of that second building.”
Those clear warnings, captured on police radio tapes, were transmitted 21 minutes before the building fell, and officials say they were relayed to police officers, most of whom managed to escape. Yet most firefighters never heard those warnings, or earlier orders to get out. Their radio system failed frequently that morning. Even if the radio network had been reliable, it was not linked to the police system. And the police and fire commanders guiding the rescue efforts did not talk to one another during the crisis.
Cut off from critical information, at least 121 firefighters, most in striking distance of safety, died when the north tower fell, an analysis by The New York Times has found.
http://www.firehouse.com/news/2002/7/7_P911.html
There’s lots more folks. Stay tuned.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 16, 2006 at 6:17 PM That’s it.
Hooray for Nat….!!
She has proven the whole government story, just like that, demolished the assembled references above and on three other threads, all the arguments and without further ado prove us all crazy with whatever she just waffled on about.
Glad you’re still around Nat, Rabbit has been spreading little baits, especially around the new incoming shills any one or all of which could be Natty the raging mad Batty.
Who knows, but it seems “de fun ain’t done, mon”.
Rabbit shall be content to watch.
“There’s lot’s more folks, stay tuned.”
Read this Natty.
Wiley, a tip, keep an occassional eye on this thread. The Nat Bat usually returns to the scene of her last crap, to try and hijack the tail of the thread. She will sit like a spider, quiet now, until someone new posts on the thread, then she’ll pounce and begin the whole shebang again, as if everyone just hatched new out of the egg with never a word said before..
.......... Or she’ll wait a while and then post a whole heap of stuff, reams and reams, much more than she does when actually arguing directly. (I could not denigrate the term debate by using it for what she does.)
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 11, 2006 at 10:01 PM
Does the rabbit know the ITT sopecial vampire shill queen or what eh?
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 6:55 PM Yes Nat, There sure is lots more, and since you raise the matter, here is some of it.
Always ready for you slimy Vampire shill of the Depleted Uranium Evil. For every one of your paltry shills hop specials Rabbit shall produce two new and interesting articles of facts to make your puny conspiracy theory of cobbled together exagerations, misinformation and witheld information, look like the shill swill they are.
Eat your heart out Bat. Rabbit has saved the best till later, we’ve only been playing mousy games with you, trying to discuss rational things like probability, history and gravity.
Now you have once again in the course of the thread, bared your Vampire Shill fangs and shown you are nought but a deciever, with not an honest breath in you.
Rabbit unmasks you once again and says lo and behold people, see the ugly thing, what a monster it is become, lie and decieve the ones who once it called it’s own kind. Lost to us, now sold to a lower bidder.
Offered only shared humanity, a place in the race, she chooses evil and death, for what….............. do they pay you thirty pieces of silver…...................Shill?
Death to your cause Nat and forward with the revolution, Charge…..............verily saith the rabbit, charge
And the rabbit charged, teeth bared in fury at this insolent she-devil, dark and evil one, she has been seen and beaten, wacked and bitten, yet she persists in annoying the rabbit. Caring nothing for truth or what is right, she cares only about being right. Which she is not and will never be again. Her soul was sold for an ounce of gold, and was found wanting.Charge….......................................................^^....... ...................
...
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 7:11 PM [url=“http://www.rense.com/general68/911jh.htm
“]German Intel Agent Von Bulow Solves 9/11, [/url]
USS George Washington anchored off Long Island on 9/11. That ship is believed to be the base of operations for the white jet seen in all 9/11 locations and the South Tower helicopter which remote controlled a Boeing 737, not a 767 claimed by government conspiracy theorists, into the South Tower. For more evidence of the US Navy connection to 9/11 read the Rense article, PM Missed NASA 911-type Airliner Crash 20 Years Ago:
The Navy’s bloody hands are all over the Plan for 9/11, Operation Northwoods:
Scoop carried the story that ‘hijackers’ lived at the Pensacola, Florida,Naval Air Station:
[url=“http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm
“]A JT8D engine, not from Flight 77, was identified in the Pentagon debris:[/url]This is for all those who want anything more to read about 911, since Natty seems to think there might be someone. rabbit is helping the Natty. Lot’s mor to come. Hooray for Natty, here to play again.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 7:17 PM Oh, all the silly little electrons stuffed up. They had their orders and they lost it, so people will have to cut and paste the urls, but they are all intact thinks the rabbit.
So How Were Those
911 Cell Calls Made?QUALCOMM Press Release
12-23-5
“Today, American Airlines and QUALCOMM showcased their strength as technology pioneers and market leaders in their respective industries,” said Dan Garton, executive vice president of marketing for American Airlines. “American is committed to researching and providing innovative, cutting-edge products and services that enhance our passengers’ traveling experience and give our customers what they value. Even though commercial availability of cell phone use in flight is approximately 24 months away, American Airlines knows that our customers want to stay connected and this proof-of-concept event is an important step in bringing in-cabin wireless services to our customers.”
American Airlines and QUALCOMM Complete
Test Flight to Evaluate In-Cabin Mobile Phone Use
FORT WORTH, Texas and SAN DIEGO - July 15, 2004 - QUALCOMM Incorporated
The Strange Case Of The 911 Cell Phone Calls
September 2004
Last month, Qualcomm Corporation issued a press release stating that they had developed a new technology that would finally make it possible to make cellular phone calls from commercial airliners. Using a technology called “Pico Cells”, the system will work as a link between the airliner and ground towers. According to the press release, it is currently impossible to connect by cell phone in a plane that is above 4,000 feet.
During the Republican National Convention in New York City last month, Deena Burnett, widow of Flight 93 victim Tom Burnett, spoke of the four telephone calls she received from her husband aboard the doomed airliner on September 11th, all of which were received from his cell phone, one of which lasted 13 minutes.
With the FAA statement that Flight 93 never went below 29,000 feet until its’ sudden fatal plunge, these two stories seem to be mutually exclusive. Either it is possible to make cell phone calls from a commercial jetliner in flight at cruising altitude - or it isn’t.
If it is already possible to use a cell phone on a plane, why is Qualcomm so excited about their Pico chip? If it is not possible to do so, there’s an even bigger problem.
Because there are no survivors of any of the 911 planes, the only “eyewitness” testimony we have is the paraphrased transcripts of phone calls made to family members. This is where we get the descriptions of “Arab looking men” with knives and box cutters, talking about “Allah”. It is from these calls we hear the immortal and heroic “Let’s roll!”.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 7:23 PM Oh and by the way.
The Movie In Plane Site was shown on channel 10 here the other day, Rabbit heard about it from a customer. That’s a commercial TV station too as it happens.
Getting mainstream enough for you cockroaches scuttling about in the shadows?
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 8:19 PM A little one which eats all of Natty’s ratty little offerings for a snack.
Had it before I think but you can’t have too much of a good thing, or bad thing as the case may be eh, Natty?
Are you happy Rabbit is helping you Natty?
There certainly was lots more, wasn’t there Natty?
Your turn now, you throw a stick onto the fire, Natty.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 8:25 PM Those quotes you think so highly of, prove nothing and don’t scratch the surface even at this point, but more interestingly a google for them reveals the grand total of 17 hits. A whole 17. They are all government or peripheral to it, and they all recycle the same story among themselves but there is no real point at which it gets pinned down to a credible source, uynles the NYT is such.
It would seem those quotes are not only likely to be missing from “9/11 conspiracy websites”, they are for the most part missing everywhere.
Now why might that be Natty? The machinery has such good tools like you to get it out there why are you not doing your job?
Naughty Shill you’ve got work to do and you are clearly not doing it well enough. Come here and spread some lies about 911 for us and prove you are worth keeping on the payroll. No Special Flu shots for you, you’ll just get the Salt water placebo. But if you believe it might work or so they say.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 8:36 PM AND you believe, don’t you Nat? Yes Natty believes.
Keep drinking the Koolaid, don’t forget the koolaid Nat.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 16, 2006 at 8:38 PM Hey Wiley..if you were actually an air traffic controller, keeping the world safer for Democracy and Capitalism through Norad in the past 25 years, perhaps my father either taught you your trade, or ran the school that educated you.
I was in NORAD 28 years ago. All that’s declassified now, but I don’t remember hearing public testimony from NORAD concerning 9/11. Why don’t you be a sport and ask your father to give us some information?
I was in a tactical, mobile radar unit after that. The guardedness of air space is what I know.
That’s who HE is.Good for him, honey, but that doesn’t change my experience. You can also believe whatever you want. What you believe or don’t isn’t my problem.
Perhaps what your father is up to at this time is classified? Have you thought about that? If your father gave you classified information, then perhaps you’ve just told on him. Just before I was assigned to missile warning, my unit was giving families tours of the site, and there were pictures of Mickey Mouse on the scopes. A woman asked “Where’s the missiles” and then her husband was reassigned to Iceland or Greenland, I forgot which—-it was a cold and desolate place where the USAF had radar sites..
So when all hell broke lose one morning in September, I did have an excdellent source for my information….
If your father really does work for NORAD and he really did give you information on September 11, 2001, then maybe you ought to shut up about it. FAA air traffic controllers have been told not to talk about it.
Unless of course, he’s told you all about the exercises NORAD was involved with that morning, then go ahead—-rat out your father.
Have you ever posted a link, Minerva? Have you ever referred anyone to an actual source of information? Besides your father? How about having your father post here? If he’ll tell you all the 9/11 NORAD scuttlebutt, then why not have him tell us? We have just as much of a need to know as you do?
And I trust him. You are less reliable in my books, lol.<i>
So? What’s with the “lol’s” Minerva? Are you tina1 too? I bet you are tina1, and that’s why you rarely ever really say anything more than a few glib comments and some oblique joke that you laugh it, I suppose, because it’s doubtful that anyone else is.
<i>But we know each other so little.
Oh, we know who your father is, don’t we?
aside from my unimpaired senses,my childhood history, and my basic knowledge of math, lol.
Oh, there you again—-titter, titter.
How fast do the fighter jets fly these days? And how far are military bases with fighter jets from the most protected air space in the world? Show us your math.
OH, and you haven’t told me yet if you heard a lot of sonic booms over the airbases you lived on.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 16, 2006 at 8:46 PM Welcome back, Nat! I’m so thrilled! I was actually starting to think that Rabbit might have given you too much credit.
But here you are, beautful! I haven’t forgotten—-you’re still on lesson ONE.
O.K., Natalie, we’ll clear this up, one thing at a time.
1. Radar signals are beamed into the sky.
Let me know when this sinks in. In fact, why don’ t you rephrase it so that I can see that you truly understand it before we go to the next step.
I’m rooting for you.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 16, 2006 at 9:25 PM I haven’t had time to do more than skim this. Looks like more pieces to the puzzle.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 17, 2006 at 6:09 AM More quotes you won’t see on 9/11 conspiracy websites:
“They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn’t really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down.” - Richard Banaciski
“The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn’t] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely” - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department
“Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area—(Q. A collapse zone?)—Yeah—be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn’t have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed.” - Chief Cruthers
“Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o’clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we’ve] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy…. The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn’t] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that’s] when 7 collapsed…. Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess.” - Lieutenant William Ryan
The question you should be asking yourself now, is why don’t I ever see these quotes on 9/11 conspiracy websites? Additionally, you should be asking yourself why doesn’t Steven E. Jones see fit to mention any of them in his paper, given his purported stance of “just wanting to find out the truth”?
The answer seems pretty obvious to me. What explanation do you folks offer?
Posted by Natalie on Jan 17, 2006 at 6:41 AM Natalie, you’re jumping ahead. But while you’re here, why don’t you explain to us how 9/11 was not a conspiracy. That’s the one I’m really looking forward to. How did this caper spontaneoulsy happen?
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 17, 2006 at 7:12 AM Lumens, you might also be interested in this article about Enron and Aghanistan.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 17, 2006 at 7:15 AM You know, Nat, these little vignettes don’t even make sense. Not only do they not explain anything, they don’t even really describe much of anything. At most, they say that some people expected the building to collapse, a corner was nicked off the building, there were fires in the building, and the building collapsed.
That doesn’t make any sense. Nobody expected the skyscrapers to collapse, but all of a sudden all concerned parties expect building 7 to collapse? Like the collapsing skyscrapers caused some kind of conversion among the firefighters so that they suddenly expected all burning buildings to collapse?
We all know the building collapsed. Fires and missing corners don’t make buildings fall straight down. And didn’t they have sprinklers in the building? Why don’t you go get some quotes about these things, then we’ll have something with which to work.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 17, 2006 at 8:06 AM 1. Radar signals are beamed into the sky.
Let me know when this sinks in, Nat. In fact, why don’ t you rephrase it so that I can see that you truly understand it before we go to the next step.
The next step is step 2. but it doesn’t come along until after step 1 is assimilated.
Are you getting warm, Nat?
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 17, 2006 at 9:46 AM And like the arlier ones they appear only on a handful of government or closely linked contractors and they are not in historical context and they cannot even be verified. For all the volumes of verifiable, solid factual and fully referenced stuff she has gliblt ignored, Rabbit would not even bother reading anything of Nat’s. You’ve never posted anything which stood up to even the most minimal standards of internet protocol, Nat, forget it. rabbit now owes you some more, he promised didn’t he.
Lucky Nat to have such a helpful Rabbit.
Now how about you answer Wiley, is she asking questions which are too hard for you again? Rabbit was always confusing you with questionbs which needed answers, which you could not or would not give. What have you got to hide that you can’t engage like a real person? Oh of course, your job, Shill. Have you not seen Mr Rendon lately? rabbit has asked before and it’s another you ignore, so since you could have made waffle out of it otherwise, Rabbit guesses you do know Mr Rendon.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 9:54 AM Wiley’s point is also quite obvious Nat, why would anyone have been expecting the buildings to collapse? We’ve already dealt with the probability that such a collapse would occur once as being astronomical, twice many times more and three times in one day, for the first time in history as being nearly infinate.
What incredible precognisance had these alleged witnesses to be able to have anticipated such miraculous results.?
Very simply put, the quotes change nothing and probably if examined closely will open more cans of worms than they close, it is usually so when the Official lies are looked more closely at.
More simply and I mean it. Since you posted it Natalie, I don’t believe a word of it.
Here is what it has come to. If you told me it was raining outside I’d certainly not take a raincoat.
When you started protesting about the plane/missile pentagon stuff, you attracted Rabbit’s interest to this event more for he knew straight away you were obviously hiding something. If you said the theories were crazy then there must be something in them. You are so dirty you’ve becomne a beacon allowing us to see what the government is trying most to hide.
Good onya mate.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 10:03 AM Hi Wiley
Rabbit comes back with some links in honour of Nat in a moment.
See how Rabbit was only just behind the Nat when she flapped by Wiley, she probably think Rabbit gets notification of followup, but he never does. rabbit is just karmically linked to Natty such that everytime she appears, so does Rabbit. Sometimes she has waited weeks and then crept in only to have the rabbit reply in 2 minutes. Rabbit magic.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 10:38 AM From November 10th 2005.
Congressman challenges Department of Defense
Representative Curt Weldon, Republican from Pennsylvania, has just fired another salvo in his ongoing battle against the Defense Department over the Able Danger “information warfare” program. According to at least five DOD employees, the controversial data-mining project, which ended in 2000, identified Mohamed Atta and other 9/11 hijackers a year before the worst terror attacks ever on US soil.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 10:53 AM [url=“http://rense.com/general69/175.htm”]High-Ranking Military
Officers And Airline Pilots
Agree Flt 175 Did Not
Hit WTC South Tower
[/url]Startling new revelations about the 9/11 attacks were recently released on The Power Hour radio program. Col. George Nelson USAF (ret.), who has 30 years of experience identifying aircraft and aircraft parts stated, “The plane that hit the south tower on 9/11 was not United Airlines (UA) flight 175”. After reviewing numerous video clips and photographs of the 9/11 attacks, he concluded, “That was not a commercial airliner. The planes were substituted.”
More on this.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 10:55 AM In the RENSE article ‘FBI Hides 85 Pentagon Videos & 911 Truth’, the cat was let out of the bag that a substituted Boeing 737 airliner, not the Flight 77 Boeing 757, guided by remote control from a hovering military helicopter crashed into the massive Pentagon masonry wall and came out second best. The 9/11 fairy tale claims Flight 77 went through the outer 3 rings of the Pentagon structure.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 10:59 AM [url=“http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/911smokingguns.html”] 180+ 9/11 ‘Smoking Guns’
Found in the Mainstream Media
[/url]
oooh! Hooray for the fairy.
Like that Nat the fairy gives you 180 mainstream references. How many articles had picked up your imagined quotes back there? Was it 18? Was it that many Nat?
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 11:04 AM Here is a good resource to see the various videos and see some of the latest news.
911 IN PLANE SIGHT was shown on OZ TV recently.
That should keep a fire burning under Nat’s ass for a bit.
Isn’t it nice to know that for every one of your efforts Rabbit will post two even better bits of information. Rabbit’s is even directly relevant. How happy Nat must be for the Rabbit.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 11:12 AM Plot to drive the world insane
“... I’m starting to think that S11 was an even more audacious psy-op than any of us imagined. That the ultimate purpose was not so much to get people to believe the official story as such but , but to plunge them into intellectual senility in the process of dealing with it. Of couse, the middle ranking perps like Bush desperately need to people to believe the official story and he’ll fight tooth an nail for that, but he’s just a pawn in the game too. The people pulling his strings have just let him loose in the lions cage and they don’t really care whether he wins or not. It’s the trauma of the fight that’s important.
I think it works this way. When I first got into S11 activism, I had a theory that there would be about 10 % of the population who would automatically assume that the govt did it, even if they didn’t have any evidence and about 10 % who would never believe it, no matter how much evidence they got. That leaves 80% which are open to persuasion. About half of these would be easy to convince if they got good evidence. The other half would range from difficult to extremely stubborn, but not hopeless.
So I figured that if the 40% of the population who would be easy to convince got targeted with good info, that would give you 50% and from there, the weight of majority pressure would start wearing down the other 40 % who were difficult but not completely closed.
I was dead wrong. It may have seemed like a sensible analysis in the pre-S11 world, but the event itself changed that. It gave people stark choices. The official story required either that one descended into total intellectual senility in order to still believe it – perhaps deliberately made ridiculous for that very purpose – or else that one keep ones intellect alive but destroy almost everything that one had previously believed about how society works.
If the real story had just been a kind of hover between LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) and criminal negligence as promoted by Ruppert, then people probably would have been able to fit that into their existing social models. So it wouldn’t have had the destructive effect.
But the cartoon like nature of the script left no middle ground. Destroy all your social paradigms or destroy your intellect in defending them.
I naively expected that most people would choose to keep their intellect alive and shift their social paradigm in accordance with what the evidence told them. But the perps knew better. They were so confident that most people would rather trash their intellect in order to hang on to the basics of their political beliefs, that they deliberately gave them a story which required lunacy in the true sense of the word to believe.
It was a plot to drive the entire world insane, and completely destroy intellectual standards. Once this crack has been opened in the collective intellect, once people have openly and brazenly endorsed complete intellectual insanity for the purpose of hanging on to old paradigms, then the gate is open is to promote total insanity across the board.
So the official story challenges everyone. Those who can come to terms with LIHOP, then face the challenge of believing that no plane hit the Pentagon and that the towers were demolished. Those who get past that face the challenge of remote controlled planes and non existent flights and faked passenger lists. . .
Once the insanity has been embraced, then the world can be flooded with any insanity they want and people have no intellectual capacity intact to deal with it.
So S11 itself is just a social and intellectual primer to set people up for whatever is next. . .
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 17, 2006 at 12:17 PM wileywitch wrote:
Natalie, you’re jumping ahead. But while you’re here, why don’t you explain to us how 9/11 was not a conspiracy. That’s the one I’m really looking forward to. How did this caper spontaneoulsy happen?
I certainly don’t believe that 9/11 was not a conspiracy. Dozens of members of al Qaeda had been working together (conspiring) in order to carry out the attacks since I believe about 1998. Hardly spontaneous.
What’s really impossible to believe is that the kind of conspiracy you’re suggesting could spontaneously be kept secret by the dozens or even hundreds of people that would have had to have been involved. We’ve got members of numerous govt. agencies eagerly leaking information in order to damage Bush, but for some reason, non of those involved in the bombs in the buildings plot have seen fit to sing. Why not?
Reality…..what a concept.
Denial…..the inability to accept reality, a condition eagerly comforted by operators of rumor and profit generating websites.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 17, 2006 at 5:33 PM It is telling that Nat just blows by this quote from Richard Banaciski:
“We were there, I don’t know, maybe 10, 15
minutes and then I just remember there was just an
explosion. It seemed like on television when they blow
up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the
way around like a belt, all these explosions.”Why would Dr. Jones quote a bunch of meaningless crap that neither negates nor supports his hypothesis, Nat? You seem to have a very tentative grasp on the rules of logic and reason as well as being aggressively ignorant.
Or are you just pulling our legs?
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 17, 2006 at 6:02 PM Are you saying, Nat, that it’s impossible for 9/11 to have been carried out with assistance by anyone in the U.S. government?
Are you really asking why any American involved in the attack or that was aware of Americans being involved in the attack, didn’t sing?
Talk about denial.
And are you really suggesting that because people have been singing about Bush in regards to other matters that there should have been singing about Bush’s involvement in 9/11?
Now that you’ve defined reality for yourself, how about spending some time in it.
Oh, who said anything about Bush being involved in 9/11? Clearly, he was busy reading My Pet Goat. He wasn’t even pretending to be the Commander in Chief.
Nevertheless, you must admit that our air defense was inadequate—-it failed the big test—-an attack took place. Shoot, three attacks took place.
Next you can carry on about how the attack that didn’t take place makes up for the three that did, right? Do I have your number, Nat?
I’m glad that people like yourself, who make excuses for failure are not responisible for doing whatever is necessary to fortify our air defense networks.
How’s it coming with Step one?
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 17, 2006 at 9:40 PM Oh, MINEEEERRRVUUUUUUHHH!!! How about those sonic booms? Heard any yet? Know what I’m talking about? HUH,HUH,HUH???
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 17, 2006 at 9:45 PM Also ignoring a lot of whistleblowers aren’t we Natty? Many people have come forward, and references have been given to their stories. Since you ignored them like nearly everything else (and that’s a lot), you probably think that means they don’t exist well since we know of them and discuss them, they exist.
Any comment about the Mossad Agents caught with Video of the whole attack sequence, and dancing in celebration over it and who were arrested and finally spirited out of the country? Obviously not.
So much ignored and so little has been said with so many words by this Shill pig, that she has dug herself into a position where her mere support for an idea is enough to make it a lie, even if it wasn’t before.
Minerva you’re a joke by the way.I don’t know about you Wiley but Rabbit finds wacking Trolls to be much better than Shills. They always make you feel a bit sick, they are foul and stink in a way that Trolls don’t manage to. Trolls are somehow funny, often tragic, but a Shill is a loathesome thing, disgusting, gross and vile.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 18, 2006 at 11:20 AM Natalie
Being able to parrot a definition of Denial is only more incredible when you are in the midst of denial of such basic facts as the many who have come forward with information which points squarely at some level of government involvement.
It happened, you ignore it and say it didn’t happen. You say we are in denial for saying that it happened. What?
If you were not a Shill, you would be certifiably insane on the basis of the argument you present. You can only help the cause of truth in the end, because you are too incredible even for many morons to relate to.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 18, 2006 at 11:25 AM Forget Radar Wiley, Natty lacks even comprehenmsion of Gravity and despite Rabbit trying his best to explain it she was still denying it could be understood by laymen, but needed engineers and professors to understand. Then when we gave her engineers and professors to explain it, she says that they are lying because they hate George Bush.
If she is going to dismiss any testimony because they hate George Dubya, then it does narrow the field a bit.
It also escapes her notice that the mere fact of understanding the truth is enough to make anyone hate George Bush if they didn’t already.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 18, 2006 at 11:29 AM It is telling that Nat just blows by this quote from Richard Banaciski:
What does that tell you, luminous? Thank you for helping to illustrate my point so beautifully.
“We were there, I don’t know, maybe 10, 15
minutes and then I just remember there was just an
explosion. It seemed like on television when they blow
up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the
way around like a belt, all these explosions.”
Of course, there could be any number of reasons for explosions. Deliberate, nefarious placement is probably the least likely explanation. You’ve probably heard of echoes sometime in your life. Maybe even the fact that electrical transformers explode. Or that steel breaking just before collapse in this case can make a sound that could easily be confused with a conventional “bomb”.However, there is little question from the quotes I highlighted that indeed there was huge damage to WTC7, and that there were furious fires raging inside. There can be little question that men trained to recognize when a building is about to collapse suspected as much before it happened, and were preparing for it.
Why would Dr. Jones quote a bunch of meaningless crap that neither negates nor supports his hypothesis, Nat? You seem to have a very tentative grasp on the rules of logic and reason as well as being aggressively ignorant.
Or are you just pulling our legs?
You’re pulling your own leg if you’re under the impression that the observations of those firefighters and rescuers is meaningless crap that doesn’t really say much of anything either way. In fact, if Jones had included them in his paper, it would have made his whole hypothesis on the collapse of 7 look ridiculous.However, a serious scientific paper, in order to be taken seriously, must deal with facts that contradict its hypothesis. Faced with the fact that men who are among the most knowledgeable about whether a building is going to collpase expected 7 to collapse, Jones is required to address that, and provide some kind of explanation as to why that doesn’t matter to his hypothesis.
But of course he can’t. Nobody could. That’s why he ignores it. That’s why everybody does.
Posted by Natalie on Jan 18, 2006 at 5:52 PM The problem here Nat is there has never been a spontaneous collapse of a skyscraper like this before or since. To assert that firemen are trained to recognize such an imminent collapse is an unsupported, disingenuous and irrational assumption. It is more likely that having just seen two buildings collapse in a completely unforeseen fashion they were thinking in an ad hoc fashion that maybe any burning building might collapse. You are going to have to do better than that. If you carefully read the testimony, the firemen are repeating things (conjectures) they heard about building 7 at best third-hand in a chaotic situation with poor communications; little more than gossip, certainly nothing even resembling expert testimony. Banaciski’s testimony of the collapse of the north tower, however, is the account of a first hand eye witness. It is corroborated with other first hand eye witnesses, many of whose testimony is not so easily dismissed by your coulda beens, and photographic evidence.
It seems you are only capable of arguing ad hominem, that is, on the basis of the embrace of your personal belief in the legitimacy and expertise (or not) of the opinions of others. If you wish to make any headway with me, you should restrain yourself to argumentum ad res. Just the facts, ma’am. Show me you can distinguish between a fact and an opinion.
Posted by luminous beauty on Jan 18, 2006 at 7:02 PM Yes, Natalie, we all know what it’s like to shout “hello!” into a canyon and listen to it exploding off of the walls.
You really are slippery with issues that three year olds are able to test scientifically. Are you seriously trying to tell us that there are adults who don’t recognize the difference between an echo and an explosion?
Echos, get increasingly feint—-with each bounce, sound is absorbed—-that’s why echos stop instead of echoing infinitely. That’s why we’re not all deaf from echoes through the ages.
Some expert testimony by air traffic controllers was cut to ribbons and scattered among many waste paper baskets. Hmmm. Why would their boss do that? Why didn’t they sing after watching the boss cut the voice recording they made into ribbons?
I’ll be back after work to get that link for you Natalie. That gives you plenty of time to find it and plot out your weaselly response.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 18, 2006 at 8:10 PM Jude would probably not mind if Rabbit posted the whole of her very succinct article.
This ties the whole lot up very neatly and though a review for most of us, is nonethless answering what small arguments are being raised by the resident dittoheads. Natty and Minerva. Neither has anything but foolishness to their credit. Upon considering the above article they have lost the day.
Webster Tarpley took a survey of the people in the room, to ascertain how many people were seasoned 911 truth seekers. Many of the people were new to the information. In order to help put things into perspective, he summarized some of the anomalies inherent in the official story of the events of September 11th, 2001.
“There was no proof that the 19 supposed highjackers had any connection to 911.” Tarpley asserted. He talked about the impossibility of “patsies” flying the planes and suggested that it was accomplished by Global Hawk, a remote control system which took over the crafts and flew them into the targets.
Tarpley even referred to the bulge on the bottom of one of the planes. There has been a great deal of controversy around this bulge, which was introduced in Dave Von Kleist’s film “911 In Plane Site.” Mr. Von Kleist has taken a lot of heat from debunkers.
“Such bulges should be taken seriously.” Tarpley insisted.
“That was not a commercial aircraft”, one woman called out. “I saw it….I was across the street from WTC at the time” She reported how much trouble she had had trying to get people to listen to her story..
Tarpley questioned why there had been no air defense for one hour and 45 minutes. His answer was “Moles work in the USAF and NORAD”.
..............................
Another fascinating presentation was Tarpley’s detailed account of the 15 drills which were conveniently occurring on the day of September 11th.
“It was the highest concentration of military drills in United States history, ” he stated.
People traditionally view drills as a protective strategy when, in reality, they are quite the opposite. The purpose of the drills is to deceive; often there comes a day when the drills morph into the real deal. Such a day was September 11, 2001.
Tarpley surprised a great many of the attendees by declaring that he believes George Bush and Dick Cheney were told very little prior to September 11, 2001. He said that the President and Vice President have merely been puppets since FDR’s administration. People who feel that all the problems will be solved when this duo is no longer in power are missing the larger picture; they are unaware of the rogue government puppeteers. The President has merely become the salesman of the myth of September 11th.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 19, 2006 at 2:39 AM Oops Rabbit meant Judy may not mind, but he didn’t post it all anyway, you must go and read the rest at the link provided.
Posted by Rabbit on Jan 19, 2006 at 2:40 AM Hi…
I won’t be having my father uttering testimonials at this site, because he’s been retired for 25 years, and only gets on the internet to check the news from his hometown and to check stock quotations ( let’s hope this form of gambling works out for his generation, and ours too…)
So I’m guessing my father probably DID train you, since his apitude was recognized pretty early, and he was one of the first non commissioned officers in the RCAF/CAD…Canada WAS the former buffer zone and flight path for suspected attacks, eh? Guess that zone has changed now that the enemies and the rules have changed.BUt I trust him, and his judgement, and for more than his skill at air weapon controlling.
This is where I would typically insert a self deprecating and ironic, lol, simply because
it’s friendlier.
And if we want peace, and compromise through negotiation, it’s something people of our generation need to become better at.It’s not pompous, or even proud. It’s a clumsy humility, and an acknowledgement of our constrained relations, and our limited knowledge. It’s a hopeful display of buffoonery
Because (and I hope you’ll excuse this statement as the ravings of a woman with little diplomacy) I do not find the ‘facts’, url’s, and conspiracy theories being presented at this website particularly telling.
I understand they are an important part of your world view, but to me, they look like the ravings of a few people who have an over inflated view of the West’s capability and the Middle East’s dependence on ‘inside sources’ to accomplish the mission of crippling the financial, military, and governmental centers of this country .
I only wish the that were the truth, because that sounds like something we might be able to bring under control, under the auspices of Colonel Half Track and his side kick Sarge.
I don’t think that was the case, however…. I believe there’s more Beetle Baileys in the world than Terminators. That’s probably my own coping skill, because the alternative is a fucking nightmare of violence and waste.
But back to the ‘411’
Evidently, this was the work of handful of engineers and urban planners, trained in navigating commercial aircraft and using the almost unlimited funds of a billionaire , who undertsood that even steel will become weaker when heat is applied . They dedicated themselves to a suicidal action, using aircraft as missiles ( like you rightly mentioned Wiley) to achieve an objective, understanding that they had a slight chance of success.
They succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, possibly because they changed the playing field and the rules, and were operating on a wing and a prayer at all times. But they were only a quarter successful, eh? They didn’t destroy the financial center, because the US has no center to it’s financial strength, but they did strike one of it’s most important hubs. They didn’t take down the military, because the heart of it is not found in the Pentagon, is it? A bunch of sinecured sociopaths and flunkies occupy those offices. And they didn’t hurt the government ..in fact, they strengthened the zeal and public support for an evil crew of despoilers.
That’s just my subjective response to the situation.
But if it makes you feel better to think there was a conspiracy, and that the US is manned by insane geniusnesses and a Chuck Norris clan’s worth of brilliant and feral miltary savants, have at it.
We’ll never know the truth anyway
Posted by minerva on Jan 19, 2006 at 5:10 AM Now, I’m not suggesting that everyone be fired. And I’m certainly not going to blame the union.
I suspect that the reason the tape was destroyed is because it was too realistic. I surmise that it would have begged questions like, Did they actually see the planes crashing into the tower? Did they see the crash outside of their windows? Or, Did the image of a jet crash into an icon of the WTC on their screens? <i>Or, <i>How many towers were involved from the time the four planes took off until the time they crashed? Or, Why didn’t the system automatically flag the aircraft when the transponders went off? Or, You mean all they saw was a paint without transponder information? And then it disappeared?
I surmise that the tape would have revealed that professional air traffic controllers in NYC who were on duty on 9/11—-air traffic controllers who were quite accustomed to nerve racking flight schedules—-spoke professionally about handling flight incidents in a manner that might seem dry to the public. I doubt the tape recorded a set of gripping narratives or any knowledge of the intentions of whoever was controlling those jets.
I’ve been strolling down memory lane.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 19, 2006 at 5:13 AM Yes, Minerva, Canada is part of NORAD. Our president stamped his feet not to long ago because Canada’s prime minister wanted us to ask before shooting down missiles over your territories. Does that sound familiar?
Unless your father worked in Biloxi, Mississippi or Colorado Springs, he didn’t train me. I don’t remember being trained by anyone who wasn’t U.S.A.F. Canada was rarely mentioned among my crews, except for the phased array radar system on the border, and perhaps on written tests.
Since you are so close to NORAD, perhaps you should ask yourself why you feel so much more comfortable with this
and “Beetle Baily” than you feel with the possibility that 9/11 was carried out with inside help.Whatever you think about “conspiracy theories” all you have offered is your father and your hopes that no one in the military or government would be willing to hurt us.
Oh yeah—-simple math. You’ve yet to show us your work, Minerva.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 19, 2006 at 5:32 AM And, Minerva, as someone who worked in nuclear forces, I can say in all honesty that reality is a fucking nightmare.
It would be wonderful if incompetence were the problem. That would be so easily rectified.
Posted by wileywitch on Jan 19, 2006 at 5:46 AM -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Salim Muwakkil
- Assassinated by the State
The federally sanctioned murder of a Black Panther. - The ‘Post-Racial’ President
Barack Obama navigates a world where color still matters. - Government-Assisted Terrorists
- The Irony of Obama’s Boycott
America's first black president refused to attend a U.N. conference on racism. - African-Americans Back Burris
- Will Holder Hold Cops Accountable?
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2005 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
