9/11's unanswered questions

[Sublimaze]

originally a post from xymphora (http://xymphora.blogspot.com), i thought it might stir up some tasty discussion. bon appetite.

It's getting on to almost two years since the events of September 11, and it is striking how little we know about what happened:

We don't know the real names of any of the hijackers.

We don't know what countries they came from.

We don't know who planned and organized the terrorism.

We don't know who financed it.

We have no idea what actually happened at the Pentagon (but I know a Boeing 757 didn't go through this hole). Normal video tapes of and from the Pentagon building, which should have shown what happened, have never been released (except for one, which poses more questions than it answers). Eyewitnesses have never been properly interviewed. The remarkable lack of debris, both within and outside the building, has never been explained. The fact that the authorities claimed to identify all but one of the passengers using DNA samples found at the scene has never been reconciled with the fact that they maintain that the plane was vaporized in the extreme heat in order to explain the lack of debris.

We really don't know anything about the timing of notification of the FAA and NORAD that something was seriously wrong. The official version of the timeline seems to be altered in order to make NORAD's inaction less suspicious. We don't have a firm answer on how the pilots managed to signal the control towers. Were all four transponders turned off? If so, how was that done, and why? Why did all the planes take such long routes in heading to their targets, when the more time spent in the air increased the chances of being intercepted?

We have no explanation for how the FBI came up with the names of all 19 (initially 18, but they added Hani Hanjour to Flight 77 so there would be a half-plausible pilot on board) hijackers within two days. Were they tracking the hijackers prior to September 11? We've never seen a full set of passenger manifests.

How could American officials be so certain so quickly that this was the work of bin Laden? What was the exact content of the briefing materials given to Bush and the Administration in the summer of 2001? Was American intelligence behind the decision of Ashcroft in July to no longer take commercial flights? Was it behind the decision of some Pentagon officials not to fly on the morning of September 11? Who told Willie Brown and Salman Rushdie not to fly?

We don't know what weapons the hijackers actually used, how they got them on the planes, and how they actually took control of the planes.

We have no idea what happened to Flight 93. Was it shot down? Did it crash as a result of a struggle in the cockpit? As a result of a bomb on the plane?

We have no idea what NORAD was doing on September 11. Why were planes not sent up for such a long time? If they were sent up, where did they go? Why were they not sent at top speed?

We don't know why Atta and Alomari went to Portland, Maine the day before the hijackings. We're so lacking in information that we don't actually know if any or all of the 19 identified hijackers were actually on the planes that crashed. We've never seen security video from any of the airports except Portland (authorities claim that Logan had no such video - can this be true, especially since the Logan parking lot was recorded?).

There were a number of flights on the morning of September 11 where passengers acted oddly in trying to get off the planes. Were these also flights which were to be hijacked?

Why were the bin Laden family members in the United States allowed to leave with essentially no interviews by American authorities?

We really have no good explanation for why no timely investigation was done of Moussaoui, and why he was just allowed to sit in jail until the terrorist attacks occurred. In fact, we have no good explanation for many, many things that the FBI didn't do.

We don't know how the hijackers had such remarkable success in dealing with such authorities as the FAA, the INS, the FBI, and local police. Did they have the equivalent of the privateer's 'letters of marque', which allowed them to roam freely through the bureaucracy? We've never heard the results of the investigation on how incompetent Hani Hanjour managed to obtain an American commercial pilot's license, perhaps because the explanation would make it clear how ridiculous it is to think he could have piloted Flight 77 into the Pentagon.

We have no idea of the deep background of the mysterious flying schools in Florida that Daniel Hopsicker has been writing about so well, and no idea of the nature of the Florida companions of Atta. We still have no idea of what the Israeli 'art students' were up to, and how they had such detailed knowledge of where to be.

A detailed investigation of the stock trading on and before September 11 would answer a lot of questions about who had foreknowledge of the attacks, and would probably break the case wide open. Why has this investigation not been done (or released?)? A similar investigation about the morning of November 22, 1963 was also not done, and it is quite clear why - investigating the deep power structure is never done.

What is Senator Graham referring to when he prattles on about mysterious foreign involvement in September 11?

We have no idea what was going on at the school in Florida, where George Bush acted so oddly. We don't know when he knew, and what he knew. We don't know why he continued to stay in a vulnerable spot after it was clear that the country was under attack. We have never been given an explanation for his repeated claim that he saw the first crash on television, when it wasn't televised until after the second crash. We have no sensible explanation for why he decided to spend the morning flying around the southeastern and midwestern United States (the excuse that his plane was in danger has since been denied). We have no explanation for why his plane was initially given no airforce protection.


Within this many months of all the major American conspiracies of the last forty years we were still confused, but we had some idea as to what was going on. This case is remarkable for the fact that we know almost nothing about what happened. The United States has embarked on two dreadful and unsuccessful wars based on the excuse of these attacks, and turned the country into a fascist security state. You would think there might be the slightest effort to answer some of these questions. The Bush Administration is stonewalling on even the most basic documents, and appears to have gotten away with one of the greatest cover-ups yet devised. The most striking thing is that most if not all of these issues could easily be resolved if the right people were forced to answer some rather simple questions.

[Lopeover]

What about the stock market? Some people knew that the stock market would take a big hit in this attack and based their market decisions on this information.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:
originally a post from xymphora (http://xymphora.blogspot.com), i thought it might stir up some tasty discussion. bon appetite.

It's getting on to almost two years since the events of September 11, and it is striking how little we know about what happened:

[/ QUOTE ]

According to who?

[ QUOTE ]
We don't know the real names of any of the hijackers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes we do, we have nabbed 3000 alqueda operatives since 9/11



[ QUOTE ]
We don't know what countries they came from.

[/ QUOTE ]

Saudi arabia....

[ QUOTE ]
We don't know who planned and organized the terrorism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Osama bin laden

[ QUOTE ]
We don't know who financed it.

[/ QUOTE ]

OSAMA BIN LADEN, incase you didn't hear...

[ QUOTE ]
We have no idea what actually happened at the Pentagon (but I know a Boeing 757 didn't go through this hole).

[/ QUOTE ]

So you interviewed the survivors???


[ QUOTE ]
Why did all the planes take such long routes in heading to their targets, when the more time spent in the air increased the chances of being intercepted?

[/ QUOTE ]


Because most hijackings wind up with the plane landing on the ground.


[ QUOTE ]
How could American officials be so certain so quickly that this was the work of bin Laden?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he praised the attacks, and tried earlier, WTC bombing 1993, REMEMBER???

[ QUOTE ]
We don't know what weapons the hijackers actually used, how they got them on the planes, and how they actually took control of the planes.

[/ QUOTE ]


Boxcutters, do you read?

[ QUOTE ]
We have no idea what happened to Flight 93. Was it shot down? Did it crash as a result of a struggle in the cockpit? As a result of a bomb on the plane?

[/ QUOTE ]

Um..it crashed into the ground due to a struggle from one of the passengers who phoned in whatr was happening...Let me guess, he was in on the conspiracy too?

[ QUOTE ]
We have no idea what NORAD was doing on September 11. Why were planes not sent up for such a long time? If they were sent up, where did they go? Why were they not sent at top speed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because we were basically caught with our pants down from being so dumb and naive for 8 years.

[ QUOTE ]
o such video - can this be true, especially since the Logan parking lot was recorded?).

[/ QUOTE ]

He is seen on an ATM camera, the night before.


[ QUOTE ]
We don't know how the hijackers had such remarkable success in dealing with such authorities as the FAA, the INS, the FBI, and local police.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clinton's mess..and legacy on his war on terrorism


[ QUOTE ]
What is Senator Graham referring to when he prattles on about mysterious foreign involvement in September 11?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe he should question why Klinton let Bin Laden go FOUR times!


[ QUOTE ]
Within this many months of all the major American conspiracies

[/ QUOTE ]


Started by idiots like you.


Keep quoting Michael Moore and see how far it gets you. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

[Keith J]

"I don't need a truth detector, I AM THE TRUTH DETECTOR"
I shall strike all the innuendo, outright lies and fabrications. Then I will answer the questions that remain.
[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:


It's getting on to almost two years since the events of September 11,



[/ QUOTE ]

That's it, no real questions. The original poster needs to check his herbal drug use. They have a habit of making one very paranoid.

[tacitus]

this is what the third time this has floated to the top of the cesspool of BS from the left? http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smack.gif

[Sublimaze]

i guess i should of known that Q & A post set up like a high school pop quiz would get the kind of non-answers you give on a high-school pop quiz. so lets narrow this down a bit shall we? we'll just look at the pentagon for now and later we'll move on to something else.

i'm curious as to what happened. i don't think there was a plane that hit the place. for one, if the heat was enough to incinerate the plane then how did the DNA that was supposedly used to identify the passengers (and by process of elimination, the hijackers) not also incinerate? reading through stories concerning this issue give the impression that the remains of the passengers did not come near incineration at all and they actually faced the dilemma of where to put the 'hijackers' remains. it should be of some concern to people as to how a boeing 757 would incinerate and people trapped inside would not. i mean if it's true that people were really that flame retardent then irony would dictate that we make planes out of terrorists.

on top of that, rumsfeld apparently had a slip of lips and reffered to a missile hitting the pentagon on 9/11 once. could he have been referring to the plane used as a missile or missile? i'm sure someone has the follow up to that.

[CaliGirl]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/offtopic1.gif

My question is: Why do you choose to post without your name being shown on "Who's Online"?

[DoctorDoom]

You aren't by any chances buying the conspiracy theories of the frog asshole about 9/11, are you?

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
My question is: Why do you choose to post without your name being shown on "Who's Online"?

[/ QUOTE ]
I can't fault him for that. I do it as well.

[CaliGirl]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:

we'll just look at the pentagon for now and later we'll move on to something else.

i'm curious as to what happened. i don't think there was a plane that hit the place. for one, if the heat was enough to incinerate the plane then how did the DNA that was supposedly used to identify the passengers (and by process of elimination, the hijackers) not also incinerate? reading through stories concerning this issue give the impression that the remains of the passengers did not come near incineration at all and they actually faced the dilemma of where to put the 'hijackers' remains. it should be of some concern to people as to how a boeing 757 would incinerate and people trapped inside would not. i mean if it's true that people were really that flame retardent then irony would dictate that we make planes out of terrorists.

on top of that, rumsfeld apparently had a slip of lips and reffered to a missile hitting the pentagon on 9/11 once. could he have been referring to the plane used as a missile or missile? i'm sure someone has the follow up to that.

[/ QUOTE ]


[b]Just to let you know the pilot of the Pentagon plane was a classmate of mine! Yes, Chic Burlingame is dead because of the terrorist! His wife and daughter have mourned their lost. At my high school and at Angel Stadium here in CA, there have been memorializes for him. [b] You need to read the facts and let it go!

[Sublimaze]

a conspiracy theory is a little more complete than an unanswered question. as for the frog i don't know what you refer to there.

[CaliGirl]

[ QUOTE ]
DoctorDoom said:
[ QUOTE ]
My question is: Why do you choose to post without your name being shown on "Who's Online"?

[/ QUOTE ]
I can't fault him for that. I do it as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://freeconservatives.com/uploads/doggie.gif

Yeah, but YOU are SOMEONE, he isn't! http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rotflmbo.gif

[Sublimaze]

that an interesting story but i'm afraid that doesn't address the questions posed.

[CaliGirl]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:
that an interesting story but i'm afraid that doesn't address the questions posed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't remember your asinine question because I think you are a troll who is uneducated with life!

What I posted was NOT a story, but the FACTS!

You are not worth my time anymore. There are more important topics to posts to than your pathetic, non-educational questions! Comprende?

[Sublimaze]

hell, your friend could pose even more questions if rumsfeld really meant to say that a missile hit the pentagon. i don't mean to be morbid or insensitive but what if you intend to say that because you knew the pilot of the flight that supposedly hit the pentagon that a plane had to have hit the pentagon then i still must stand behind what i said earlier. it doesn't answer why the people withstood the blaze while the plane was incinerated, or why there is no account for this miracle.

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
as for the frog i don't know what you refer to there.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
PARIS, France (CNN) -- Throughout the spring, and into this summer, a leading bestseller in France has not been some great work of French literature but a $17-dollar paperback called the "Horrifying Fraud."

The book casts doubt on the official version of the events of September 11, substituting an elaborate conspiracy concocted by America's military-industrial complex in order to increase U.S. military budgets.

It has sold more than 200,000 copies here -- a huge success in French terms -- attracting interest from readers like Eduard Chabanon and Naoufal Lahlou who are sceptical about much of what they are learn from the news.

Lahlou said: "There is always doubt. I haven't seen any proof that shows that man walked on the moon."

Thierry Meyssan, author of "The Horrifying Fraud," does believe man walked on the moon, but insists, among other things, that it was not a hijacked American Airlines 757 that crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 but a missile fired by the military itself.

[/ QUOTE ]
French buy into 9/11 conspiracy (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/06/26/france.book/)

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:
hell, your friend could pose even more questions if rumsfeld really meant to say that a missile hit the pentagon. i don't mean to be morbid or insensitive but what if you intend to say that because you knew the pilot of the flight that supposedly hit the pentagon that a plane had to have hit the pentagon then i still must stand behind what i said earlier. it doesn't answer why the people withstood the blaze while the plane was incinerated, or why there is no account for this miracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone was mentioning that the planes were used like missles. This is no big mystery, and neither is DNA being found. With an impact like that, did you expect every little bit of the plane and it's contents would all be in one spot?

As for the rest of your drivel, time for an extra layer of foil Sparky. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tinhat.gif

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

[CaliGirl]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:
hell, your friend could pose even more questions if rumsfeld really meant to say that a missile hit the pentagon. i don't mean to be morbid or insensitive but what if you intend to say that because you knew the pilot of the flight that supposedly hit the pentagon that a plane had to have hit the pentagon then i still must stand behind what i said earlier. it doesn't answer why the people withstood the blaze while the plane was incinerated, or why there is no account for this miracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, my friend is DEAD, from the terroist. Didn't you read that? I didn't intend anything! Why are YOU reading into FACTS?

Read the bold: My reply is: Huh?

Case closed for me. Too much ignoramus for me!

http://www.saratogamuseum.org/burlingame/images/burl.jpg
RIP Chic!

[Sublimaze]

aah i don't go so far as to pose any answers. truth be told i have no clue what the hell happened that day at the pentagon but there has to some people who do or there is some sort of explaination of things that makes sense. many of us believe it's a case closed situation all around but things like this are still here to say it isn't.

[Sublimaze]

i get it. your friends dead. i was trying to be nice and not accidentally make this any more personal to you than it already is by treating my question and your answer separately. my apologies, as it seems i have failed.

[Sublimaze]

almost missed you chris thanks for contributing. i'd think that what you present would be the most plausible but it also goes both ways because do you think that everyone in a crash like that would be thrown out of the plane? i'd say that's worth mentioning wouldn't you?

"hello press, the craziest thing happened with the plane. when it hit, the roof of the plane tore open like a sardine can and everyone was thrown out thus enabling us to identify everyone on board"

certainly worth mentioning. maybe no one was using thier seat-belts too. i know if i were on that plane i wouldn't see the point in it; i'd be fully reclined too, and smoking. so if that were the case then how would such a rather miraculous event not warrant the slightest mention? i'm not really trying to earn a tin foil hat here but there's still some remarkable blanks left to fill in for this story.

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
hell, your friend could pose even more questions if rumsfeld really meant to say that a missile hit the pentagon. i don't mean to be morbid or insensitive but what if you intend to say that because you knew the pilot of the flight that supposedly hit the pentagon that a plane had to have hit the pentagon then i still must stand behind what i said earlier. it doesn't answer why the people withstood the blaze while the plane was incinerated, or why there is no account for this miracle.

[/ QUOTE ]
One must ask a far more relevant question if he buys the missile BS: where the hell is the actual plane that allegedly did NOT hit the Pentagon? And where are all of its crew and passengers?


<center>http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/jcurry/gallery/g-wjanw.jpg</center>

This beast isn't your typical Cessna-172-sized aircraft. It's a BIG sumbitch, and you don't just land at some little jerkwater air strip and hide it under the trees. If you subscribe to the idiocy about the missile, you have to account for a missing airliner and all its occupants. The amount of conspiracy required would be mind-boggling.


<center>http://emperors-clothes.com/images/timemap.gif (http://emperors-clothes.com/images/maptime.htm)

<font size="1" color="grey">Click the pic for the source page.</font></center>

It is known that American Flight 77 left Dulles at about 8:10 AM on 9/11/2001 with 64 people on board. It is known that it travelled west about 300 miles, did a 180 over Ohio, and came back toward DC. You can't do that with a 757 without being tracked.

So, if the plane did NOT Hit the Pentagon, where the hell is it? It didn't land at any airport in the US. It didn't crash, or there would be wreckage. It wasn't deep-sixed into the ocean, again because there would have been wreckage. It was not flown overseas, because it would have been tracked by radar exiting US airspace and all foreign governments would have been alerted that a hijacked plane was heading somewhere over there.

In short, to believe that Flight 77 did NOT hit the Pentagon, you have to believe that it vanished from the face of the planet, and even the frogs aren't ready to accept that aliens spirited it away.

[Sublimaze]

thanks doctor, i actually do agree with you on the implausibility of the missile scenario. it leaves even more unaccounted for. maybe i should look in the frog's book to see how passengers and plane are accounted for. anyways i'll try and summarize what's been addressed so far and maybe we'll manage to keep this thread focused if it coninues much further.

in the plane scenario we are left with rather simple questions really.

1. how could a plane of that size almost entirely incinerate, leaving nearly no identifiable wreckage behind?

2. how did everyone on board avoid incineration?

a. every last person on board was thrown out of the plane far enough away from the wreckage to avoid being ashes.

3. how did such a stroke of luck as the above happen?

4. how did it come to be without mention?

as for the missile scenario, the questions are quite obvious, but i doubt we'll be spending much time in this rabbit hole.

1. where in the hell are the passengers and the plane?

2. how could a missile be launched without witnesses?

3. how/when could plane bits be planted without witnesses?

4. how would witness testimony be forged concerning plane wreckage?

i'm probably leaving out some stuff here but i'm not concerned about the missile scenario right now. with any luck we may come to a reasonable conclusion with the pentagon but even if no conclusion is forthcoming we have still ascertained that there are issues that remain unresolved.

[Keith J]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:
1. how could a plane of that size almost entirely incinerate, leaving nearly no identifiable wreckage behind?

2. how did everyone on board avoid incineration?

a. every last person on board was thrown out of the plane far enough away from the wreckage to avoid being ashes.



[/ QUOTE ]

You have to be kidding us. Or a very dull-witted moron. The planes were traveling over 400 MPH when they hit the buildings. Security video actually captured the Pentagon plane hitting and the fireball. Time to do your homework. How many race cars (F1, Indy, CART, NASCAR) survive a hit to a barraicade at 200 MPH? Not one and they are built much tougher than any airplane. Double the speed and you get 4 times the energy. Its simple freshman physics. Time to dust the books.

Incineration? Surely you have the most rudimentary knowledge of fire, that being its hot. This heat gives rise to convection which gives fire its shape and feeds it air. In the Pentagon, there was very little convection as the basement trapped the jet fuel but in the Twin Towers, the elevator shafts became huge convection chimmenys, forcably feeding the burning fuel. The smoke plumes billowing out of the upper stories is an indication to the speed of this burn. And again, fire burns hot. Fast fires burn very hot. And fires on ground floors just smolder and are easily extinguished with foam and spray, which was EASILY applied as the fire was on GROUND LEVEL.!

Some people around here do not need to even open their mouths to appear stupid. Others open their mouths and remove all doubt.

[Estragon]

I am personally acquainted with two people who SAW the plane crash into the Pentagon. One saw it going down in the general direction of the Pentagon, and moments later, heard the crash and saw smoke rising. The other saw the whole thing from his office window {he is employed by a conservative "think-tank" in DC}, including the actual crash.

This is just more kahanscheiss.

It is hard to believe that people keep posting the same old crap, no matter how many times it has been debunked.

[TheRealLobo]

Sublimaze asked:

"2. how did everyone on board avoid incineration?

a. every last person on board was thrown out of the plane far enough away from the wreckage to avoid being ashes."

Ummm...DNA evidence does NOT require an entire body to be gathered.

FTR, have you ever visited the site of an aircraft crash?

(The following may be too graphic for the sensitive)

I have...two of them.

At Ramstein AB in Germany during an airshow, two Italian pilots doing aerobatics slammed into each other. Body parts were everywhere. Two days after the crash, we found a hand in a tree. At the time, DNA identification was in it's infancy, but certainly DNA could have been used to identify the hand.

Also at Ramstein, a C-5 went in on takeoff. Not many parts of the plane were identifiable except for a large part of the wing root at the fuselage. The plane was barely moving, and went in at a very shallow angle. Wreckage was strewn over a VERY large field. We went and retrieved body parts that were ALSO strewn all over the field (nightmarish that was). The plane has a MAXIMUM speed of about 540 mph, and had gone in right after takeoff. I don't know what a C-5s takeoff speed is, but I suspect is significantly slower than the 400 mph cited by Keith above. Still, there was very little to identify that it was, in fact, an aircraft.

That's likely why very little wreckage was identifiable AS wreckage at the Pentagon.

Besides, are you aware of how large a missile would have had to have been fired to cause that much damage to the Pentagon? Some little shoulder fired thing wouldn't have been able to do it, and I don't remember reading about any ground launch systems having fired a missile inside the confines of the Beltway. I could have missed it, but I was really paying attention to the news around 11 Sep 2001.

[wolfplus3]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:
truth be told i have no clue what the hell happened that day at the pentagon

[/ QUOTE ]

and on this, we agree.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Sublimaze said:
almost missed you chris thanks for contributing. i'd think that what you present would be the most plausible but it also goes both ways because do you think that everyone in a crash like that would be thrown out of the plane?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not whole.


[ QUOTE ]
i'm not really trying to earn a tin foil hat here .....

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you're way beyond that. Why don't you ask your little gray men buddies to explain it to you next time they abduct you.

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

[Rhino]

[ QUOTE ]
Funny how people I know said they SAW the damn thing, and it was BEFORE the press claimed what exactly happened (it was before we were out of the burning halls). From their burns, I would say they probably saw exactly what they claimed to have seen and were unfortunate enough to remember it.

The crew of a military cargo plane watched helplessly on Sept. 11 as a
hijacked airliner plunged into the Pentagon, a defense official confirmed
Tuesday.

The report confirms the eyewitness account of two Hampton Roads residents
who were near the Pentagon that day and said they saw a second plane flying
near the doomed passenger jet.

A C-130 cargo plane had departed Andrews Air Force Base en route to
Minnesota that morning and reported seeing an airliner heading into
Washington "at an unusual angle," said Lt. Col. Kenneth McClellan, a
Pentagon spokesman.

The C-130 pilot "followed the aircraft and reported it was heading into
the Pentagon," he said.

"He saw it crash into the building. He saw the fireball."

Keith Wheelhouse, of Virginia Beach, still has a vivid image of that
fireball etched in his mind.

He and several family members, including his sister, Pam Young, of Surry
County, were leaving a funeral at Arlington National Cemetery when they
watched the hijacked American Airlines jet nose-dive into the nation's
military headquarters.

This makes the: "9:36 National Airport instructs a military C130
(Golfer06) that had just departed Andrews Air Force base to intercept
and identify it. Golfer06 reports it is a B767, moving low and very
fast." interresting... (I would like to find another source for this,
an "official" one would be best.)

"Where the plane came in was really at the construction entrance," says Jack Singleton, president of Singleton Electric Co. Inc., Gaithersburg MD, the Wedge One electrical subcontractor. "The plane's left wing actually came in near the ground and the right wing was tilted up in the air. That right wing went directly over our trailer, so if that wing had not tilted up, it would have hit the trailer. My foreman, Mickey Bell, had just walked out of the trailer and was walking toward the construction entrance."

For one employee with Wedge One's mechanical subcontractor John J. Kirlin Inc., Rockville MD, "lucky" is an understatement. "We had one guy who was standing, looking out the window and saw the plane when it was coming in. He was in front of one of the blast-resistant windows," says Kirlin President Wayne T. Day, who believes the window structure saved the man's life.

According to Matt Hahr, Kirlin's senior project manager at the Pentagon, the employee "was thrown about 80 ft down the hall through the air. As he was traveling through the air, he says the ceiling was coming down from the concussion. He got thrown into a closet, the door slammed shut and the fireball went past him," recounts Hahr. "Jet fuel was on him and it irritated his eyes, but he didn't get burned. Then the fireball blew over and the sprinklers came on, and he was able to crawl out of the closet and get out of the building through the courtyard."

"YES...I most definitely DID see it. And, although I didn't see it hit the building, one of my closest friends here did. Joe doesn't swear...ever...but on 9/11 --when I saw him at the entrance to Macy's (this was maybe five minutes after the hit) I asked him if he was SURE it was an airliner. His answer was, "Hell yes! It was a F**king American Airlines 757." Joe's more of an airplane freak than I am...and I don't think he was making it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

SOURCE (http://www.humanunderground.com/11september/comments-general.html)

Wanna know where the pieces went? They went to the grassy knoll of course. Why don't you go there and stop bothering us with this crap. Or you could just post it in the proper place; HERE (http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/postlist.php?Cat=&amp;Board=UBB35).

[Rhino]

Link 1 (http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/pentagon.htm)

Link 2 (http://www.csicop.org/hoaxwatch/)

Link 3 (http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen.pentagon.pictures/index.html)
Time lapse photos of the actual impact(click "Gallery" in EXTRA INFORMATION)

Could this be a piece?
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/images/debris.jpg

Link 4 (http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901020520-237165,00.html)

Link 5 - Eyewitness accounts. (http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77w.htm)

Link 6 (http://paulboutin.weblogger.com/2002/03/14)

So, please post your drivel elsewhere Sub.

[Estragon]

Nice job, Rhino.

I suppose next we'll have to again disprove the allegation that "4000 Jews were told to stay home from work at the WTC on 9/11" . . . or maybe one of the other recurring whoppers?

[Rhino]

Or the picture of that guy standing on top as the plane approached. If you dig a bit, you'll find some interesting info on the guy in France that started all this, and his brother who purely coincidentally happens to own the web site it was posted on. They are well known conspiracy theorists, they apparently fall for some of the most ridiculous stuff you've ever heard of, and they're widely regarded as complete idiots in France.

[RocketScience]

[ QUOTE ]
TheRealLobo said:
Besides, are you aware of how large a missile would have had to have been fired to cause that much damage to the Pentagon? Some little shoulder fired thing wouldn't have been able to do it, and I don't remember reading about any ground launch systems having fired a missile inside the confines of the Beltway. I could have missed it, but I was really paying attention to the news around 11 Sep 2001.



[/ QUOTE ]

A conventional TLAM - Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missile could cause that amount of damage, and it could have been fired by a submarine or an airborne platform. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/idea1.gif

I've heard some of this conspiracy stuff from an acquaintance of mine. When you intercept and beat down their initial points - such as defeating the missile "option" then they transition to the point that our Global Hawk technology could have been used to pilot the planes (drones) full of fuel into the buildings. When you corner them on well, then where are the original planes and the people?, they respond that the people were taken off the planes and have been kept in a "remote location" or simply executed. If you knock that one down, they then say that the people and pilots could have been on the planes, but that they were taken over by a remote control system that flew the planes and destroyed all the communication equipment.

When you listen to these "suggestions" it starts to make you queasy. First I thought, what if even a kernal of this stuff was true; if so it was clearly a world I did not want to live in. Next I thought what kind of mind believes such heinous thoughts about the government of the United States. I am a patriotic American extremely proud of my career in the Navy and would go back in a heartbeat if I was needed. But according to these conspiracy types, myopic drones like me who don't believe this stuff are the biggest part of the problem. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/deadsheep.gif

I always shake my head from lack of understanding of how one could come to believe this stuff, http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif but I also worry about exactly what the passionate believers of this stuff might have in store for us drones when their passion turns to helter-skelter action. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

I would not be surprised to learn that some regular members of this board actually ascribe to many of these conspiracy theories. Heck, I even think that Flight 800 was downed by a manpad (Stinger missile or enhanced export variety) attack of some sort, not necessarily fired by us, but that the whole incident was a cover-up to protect Bill Clinton's re-election -- wouldn't want al Qaeda to be seen kicking Uncle Sam's butt just before an election while Nero (Clinton) continued to burn the country down. http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tinhat.gif

Rocket

[pja]

For me, nothing has been unaccounted for other than why people insist on trying to change what happened by repeating lies and distortions. 3000 people were murdered on 9/11. There have been volumes of proof all along as to the source of this terrorism and other terrorism. Your author seems to suggest that the terrorists were just innocent passengers of a flight that some mysterious force crashed. This equates to saying no one has landed on the moon and Hitler didn’t murder any Jews.

I am tired of this kind of javelina excrement. I am tired of these dogs, foreign and domestic, who take their entertainment in trashing on America, trashing on people like me, in the name of leftist socialism and tyranny. The French, Germans and Russians were making big bucks off the suffering of the people of Iraq by skimming the top from the UN oil for aid program. You can pretend 9/11 didn’t happen or pretend that George Bush did it all, or pretend it was Martians. It doesn’t’ change the fact that this was written in pure hatred for the American people and our desired way of life. That is how I read it and this is my opinion of the tripe presented as the topic of this thread.

One of the reasons I don't come around too much any more is that this kind of garbage has become too personal for me. Life is too short to forever have to read this and know it is a lie. I consider people who promote these kinds of threads and theories to be evil and promoters of evil. I admire the patience of folks here who day after day after day refute the lies. You are better people than I am for sure.

Pat (aka pja)

[paleo]

" suppose next we'll have to again disprove the allegation that "4000 Jews were told to stay home from work at the WTC on 9/11" . .

I've seen this issue come up on many boards but if it was here it must have been before I arrived.
There was a recurring pattern elsewhere.
The topic would come up of the advanced warnings, who got them and who didn't, etc.
Someone would point out that the famous 4,000 ***ISRAELIS** did not go to work at the WTC on 9/11.
Then some loud, obnoxious bozo would substitute the word "Jews" for the word "Israelis" provoking loud confrontations between manic antisemites and manic prosemites.
Lost in the rhetorical bombardment was the simple fact that the 4,000 Israelis did not go to work in the WTC on 9/11.
This fact is easy to check as mainstream news services have kept victims lists sorted by nationality.

As for 'conspiracy theory', that is quite a different thing from simply
asking questions. Some of the questions regarding the official conspiracy theory of 19 Arab hijackers with boxcutters are begging for answers, most obviously: How did the hijackers get the air force defences to stand down?

The refusal of the authorities to answer even the simplest questions
is what breeds other conspiracy theories--alternative explanations
that 'fit the known facts' despite being scary and, sometimes, loopy.

I don't know what to make of this 'no plane' Pentagon theory. I've looked at the pictures and indeed the hole in the building looks too small for the plane to have passed through. And if the fire was caused by jet fuel burning, then the fire department was bonkers to be spraying water on it.

Well, I don't know, and I have a strong suspicion that I'm not meant to know. I wonder why WTC 7 collapsed. No plane hit it. No investigation, the evidence quickly melted down for export..the authorities certainly behaved as if they had something they were trying to hide..

Just don't tell me that pretending to believe whatever shit the government shovels your way is traditional conservative.
It isn't.
For a real conservative, government is already suspect to start.
Cover-ups and whitewashes are normal government behaviour.

So it goes..

[Estragon]

Dear All Conspiracy Nuts: Provide evidence of your stupid assertions, or STFU.

[2nd_Amendment]

I have no doubt there is a great deal we do not know about 9/11 and never will. I feel sufficiently secure in the knowledge that bin Laden was behind it, though. That said I also feel secure in the idea that our intelligence services did a whole helluva lot of ass-covering. it's government, folks, you'll never get the whole truth from them on anything unless it serves their purposes. Such is life.

[paleo]

"Dear All Conspiracy Nuts: Provide evidence of your stupid assertions, or STFU."

Likewise?

[TheRealLobo]

[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:
"Dear All Conspiracy Nuts: Provide evidence of your stupid assertions, or STFU."

Likewise?


[/ QUOTE ]

Those disputing what is held as the truth are those that need to provide proof.

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
Lost in the rhetorical bombardment was the simple fact that the 4,000 Israelis did not go to work in the WTC on 9/11.
This fact is easy to check as mainstream news services have kept victims lists sorted by nationality.

[/ QUOTE ]
And this proves what?

• If the lists of victims were by nationality, what nationality are Jews?
• If the 4000 were Israelis, why did the Israeli Embassy issue a statement expressing concern about 4000 Israeli nationals in New York City?

[ QUOTE ]
On September 17, Al-Manar posted to its Web site a story which has since been widely re-posted, including by white supremacists such as August Kreis, claiming that 4,000 Israelis were absent from their jobs at the World Trade Center on September 11, thus implying that Israel was in some way behind the attack. The story apparently has its roots in a statement by the Israeli embassy shortly after the attacks that it was trying to learn the status of some 4,000 Israeli citizens in the New York City area.

[/ QUOTE ]
Terrorism Strikes America: What They are Saying (http://www.adl.org/terrorism_america/saying_092001.asp)

• How did they arrive at the conclusion that 4000 Israelis (every Israeli in the city) did not go to work at the WTC on 9/11 when only about 130 actually worked at the WTC, and some DID show up for work?
• How do they explain why, of the 4000 alleged Israeli stay-at-homes, not one of them has to this day reported being warned not to go to work?

Further info:

4,000 Jews, 1 Lie - Tracking an Internet hoax. (http://slate.msn.com/id/116813/)

The case of the missing 4000 Israelis (http://www.nocturne.org/~terry/wtc_4000_Israeli.html) (An extensive analysis)

The tinfoil-hat crowd never bothers to look at the ramifications of their outlandish conspiracies, and the problems created by their nutcase theories.

[RocketScience]

Pja, I was just relating what I have heard that seems to correspond to the assertions of this post's author. I wasn't trying to promote the theories, just to relate what I have heard from the conspiracy grapevine.

There are a lot more people out there who consider this stuff in a very serious vein. I know you know that, and that probably accounts for the tone of your reply. That is why I indicated that discussion of 9/11 or the proposal that some sort of "death ray" was the reason for the shuttle disaster genuinely make me feel queasy.

In listening to like theories, no matter how preposterous, I will invariably have the thought pass through my mind that if, by some horrible quirk any of this is true, this is not a place I wish to inhabit.

It makes me greatful that I am a Christian and will, someday, leave all this "garbage" and the minds that think it, far, far behind.

Rocket

[Estragon]

Thank you, Doctor Doom, for your once again swift rebuttal of another crackpot lie. This is what? the 10th time for this one, or is it more?

All these crazy conspiracy theories have several things in common: <ul type="square"> There is ZERO actual evidence to back them up. They all seek to place blame on the US or Israel - and absolve or excuse the actual perpetrators. Even after being completely refuted, they keep coming back, posted by a different member {or the same ones with different nicknames}. [/list]

Again, it is not up to anyone to disprove a ridiculous assertion; it is the sole obligation of the person who makes it. Of course, they never do, they can't, because all are false.

[nosferatuscoffin]

This is just another example of the predictable behaivor of the Left. They are using Page 4 of their four page playbook. Make up outrageous lies, spread them around the news networks, the papers, the internet and subscribe to Hitler's theory that if a lie is told often enough, it will become accepted as the truth.

On the 9/11 theory, all of these crackpot accusations hold as much water as the Dems bedwetting about 'thoudands' of black voters being 'denied' the right to vote and being 'intimidated' in the 2000 Florida elections. To date, not one black voter has ever come forward and said so.

Do not worry too much about it folks. These are just the last, dying gasps of a party and a movement that is on the verge of the ash heap of history.

[Rhino]

[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:
"Dear All Conspiracy Nuts: Provide evidence of your stupid assertions, or STFU."

Likewise?


[/ QUOTE ]
Read my last post.

[paleo]

"Those disputing what is held as the truth are those that need to provide proof."

Oh, so there is an official truth as to why the air defences stood down?
I haven't heard it.
It is just one more of those 'unanswered questions' referred to in the topic header.

The only way to get rid of the conspiracy theories is by answering the unanswered questions.

A good theory needs to account for all the *FACTS*.

When a government refuses to reveal the facts
then "what is held as truth" may be no more
than ordinary propaganda and brainwashing.

2c
--paleo

[paleo]

I didn't suggest any theory at all.
From what few facts are available it seems at least two Israelis received pm'd warnings from the Israeli company Odigo,
and one Israeli citizen, a tourist, did die in the tower's collapse.

Of course maniac 'Aryans' and 'Arabs' predisposed to blaming Israel for everything will take these facts as supporting their (silly) platform.
That is hardly the only possible explanation. For example, and much simpler, Israel monitors Arab communications with bilingual listeners in real time, thereby much faster than US intel outsourcing their translations. Warnings were given and ignored with a 'just let them try' bravado. "Let one happen, stop the rest!" is from Lt. Vreeland's warning.
Foreign countries gave warnings~~Russia, Egypt, Germany, Morocco, Israel etc etc. FBI field agents gave warnings. The Phillipine secret service knew all about 'Project Bojinka': flying passenger jets into buildings.
A fact proving foreknowledge: the short-selling stock options.
There's a thread dead-ended by the coverup bulldozer.

typical american SNAFU!

[Estragon]

There was no "warning" to Israelis; as Doc pointed out, there were NOT even 4000 Israelis who worked in WTC, that is the total number in NYC, and none got any such "warning." If you claim they DID, it is up to you to prove it.

Neither was there any unusual amount of "short-selling" in the markets. The markets were already in a bear market, and the airline stocks were already in trouble. There are always more short sales in bear markets and in troubled industries. The SEC keeps a close watch on such things. It's just another false assertion from the conspiracy wackos.

There is no reason to keep answering such made-up "facts" and "unanswered questions" as these over and over again, as we have for the last year and a half or so.

[paleo]

Uh, Doctor Doom.
well like eh
yer last link there
was megaunavailable

2c
-p
.

[2nd_Amendment]

One note on the number of Conspiracy Theories out there: Had not the OKC bombing been so obviously misrepresented by the government, and had the Waco fiasco not been so obviously misrepresented as well(and we could throw in Ruby Ridge to a lesser degree) the willingness to believe this stuff might not be so common. Our former Commander-in-Thief went a long way towards establishing the idea that government lies in the minds of people who would have never thought of it before him in these situations.

[DoctorDoom]

[ QUOTE ]
Uh, Doctor Doom.
well like eh
yer last link there
was megaunavailable

[/ QUOTE ]
Which one? Every link in my previous post is as of this writing mega-available.

It is possible that for several hours after I posted the links, they were unavailable. Whenever I post, half the country visits whatever links I provide. It's a burden being an icon.

[Chris]

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rotflmbo.gif

[paleo]

"Again, it is not up to anyone to disprove a ridiculous assertion; it is the sole obligation of the person who makes it. Of course, they never do, they can't, because all are false."

OK, so you don't understand the difference between making an assertion and asking a question.
Someone asks innocently "Who profited from 'put' options on companies affected by 9/11?" and you reply that assertions cannot be proven because they are false.
Let me present a much simpler option: Assertions cannot be proved
because *the government* refuses to provide the relevent *facts*.

It's all so so secret
and only adults can deal with it
so go to bed
and let the adults take care of it.

You think your attitude is *conservative*?
It looks juvenile to me.

[paleo]

"This is just another example of the predictable behaivor of the Left."

Your rationality and your spelling seem to correlate.
The self-proclaimed left--The Nation, David Corn; Norman Soloman; Noam Chomsky--they are all saying **NO** conspiracy.
Dissident conservatives like Ruppert, Fitts, Flocco etc are sniffing
conspiracy. You can't tell them apart.
Perhaps you are slow?

[Estragon]

[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:
"Again, it is not up to anyone to disprove a ridiculous assertion; it is the sole obligation of the person who makes it. Of course, they never do, they can't, because all are false."

OK, so you don't understand the difference between making an assertion and asking a question.
Someone asks innocently "Who profited from 'put' options on companies affected by 9/11?" and you reply that assertions cannot be proven because they are false.
Let me present a much simpler option: Assertions cannot be proved
because *the government* refuses to provide the relevent *facts*.



[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, I get it . . .the complete lack of evidence for your crackpot theories proves there is a conspiracy.

Moron.

[paleo]

Estragon wrote: "Oh, I get it . . .the complete lack of evidence for your crackpot theories proves there is a conspiracy."

Excuse me? What theories, 'crackpot' or otherwise, did I suggest?

You seem to be operating under a fundamental delusion that groups
like unansweredquestions.org are creating theories.

This belief is totally wrong as you might verify for yourself by visiting their website.

All they want is information. Perhaps with true facts they might
create a theory; perhaps not. But it is glaringly obvious that the government does not want to reveal even elementary facts
that they must know by now, like, for example, who profitted by the short selling.

You just say "No! There wasn't any!". A comfortable defence, but
apparently from multiple sources, there was a great deal of 'insider trading' just before 9/11.

from: http://www.unansweredquestions.org/top_11.html
(...)
:: Insider trading ::

After 9/11, investigations were launched around the world into suspicious pre-9/11 trading that clearly indicated detailed foreknowledge of the attacks. Bloomberg News documented massive spikes in put options (a bet the stock will fall) in specific companies whose stock did in fact fall precipitously once trading opened. Put option expert Phil Erlanger estimated that profits would have been in the billions of dollars. Amr 'Tony' Elgindy exercised trades that suggested prior knowledge of 9-11 as Assistant U.S. Attorney Ken Breen pointed out to the court in a recent federal trial.

So, where does this money trail lead? Why have we learned nothing from the SEC about who placed these trades? Do we not have a right to know ?

"Massive pre-attack 'insider trading' offer authorities hottest trail to accomplices";

Kyle F. Hence; www.globalresearch.ca (http://www.globalresearch.ca); posted April 23, 2002

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/HEN204B.html

Index of stories on insider trading posted at From the Wilderness

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/index.html#inside

"Stock Advisor Knew About Attack", US Suggests; Alex Berenson, May 25, 2002

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/25/business/25FRAU.html

Complete indictment of FBI linked insider trading circle (33pp)

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/fbi/uselgindy502ind.pdf

============

[DoctorDoom]

The entire concept is tinfoil-beanie stuff. Do you realize what these looney-toon conspiracy theorists are saying here? There are people who knew beforehand that an attack was coming that would kill thousands of American citizens, and rather than take that knowledge to those who could have prevented the attack, they used it to make a profit.

This bespeaks soulless barbarians of the worst kind, and a cabal that went right to the highest levels of government. I'd believe that the attacks were launched by secret agents from Mars before I accepted that sort of scurrilous conspiracy bullshit.

[DesertFox]

What the good doctor said.

[paleo]

Dr.D: "...The entire concept is tinfoil-beanie stuff. Do you realize what these looney-toon conspiracy theorists are saying here?.."

It is not as if there were a situation with rational, common sense people on one side and a few berzerko 'conspiracy theorists' on the other.
The *official story* is *also* a conspiracy theory.

Except, as conspiracy theories go, it isn't very elegant.
It leaves dangling this obvious question of *how* the 19-Arabs-with-boxcutters managed to get the US Air Force to stand down.

Dr. D: "..This bespeaks soulless barbarians of the worst kind, and a cabal that went right to the highest levels of government."

Well, let us hope that is incorrect. In fact a rogue element of self-interested gangsters may have come in the night
and pirated the ship of state. Similar conspiracy theories arise
in the JFK assassination with its official story about the socalled 'magic bullet' that Mr. Stone ridiculed in his movie. Eventually (1998?) Gerald Ford ex-Pres. and Warren Commision member admitted that it was all made up. Whether you like it or not, the grassy knoll is simply where it's at. American history is practically entirely composed of conspiracy in action.

adjusting me tinfoil sombrero,
--paleo

[Estragon]

100% hooey.

[nosferatuscoffin]

[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:

Except, as conspiracy theories go, it isn't very elegant.
It leaves dangling this obvious question of *how* the 19-Arabs-with-boxcutters managed to get the US Air Force to stand down.

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing that you are forgetting is the fact that carrying box cutters onto an airplane was perfectly legal on 9/11. All of the screeners in the world could not have done a damn thing to stop them since there was no law being broken.

Now, onto the next conspiracy theory, whether the Zeebleworks are going to invade Earth within the next 25 bleems.

[DesertFox]

Nos, they can't possibly make it before at least 30 bleems. It's too far, and the technological hurdles are too imposing for a race no more advanced at this point that the Zeebleworks, despite the fact that they make us look like beginners.

As of the beginning of the 31st bleem from now, however, I think there's no question of an invasion. They need petroleum for their plastics industries, and their bioponic farms need infusions of fresh bacteria.

[nosferatuscoffin]

Well, Lord knows they will find an AMPLE supply of bacteria in Hill's pant suit. It is an envirnmental hazard as it is.

[DoctorDoom]

There are actually two distinct groups.

The Zeebleworks from Antares 7 are neophytes in the area of subspace jump drives, in addition to which their computers are still inadequate to compute a wormhole projection in less than 50 bleems, by which time the parameters will have changed enough to require recalculation. They don't pose an immediate threat, but they do have their eyes (all eight of them) on our petroleum and certain species of bacteria, and should be watched.

However, the Zeeblewôrks from Sirius 9 (distantly related due to a common bio-seeding of their respective planets by the Xerxexxians 578,450,000 bleems ago) are far more advanced technologically and could mount a ferocious attack in a matter of centibleems if so disposed. Fortunately, they are comprised largely of polymerized liquid nitrogen, and couldn't survive our climate for more than a few seconds without cumbersome refrigeration suits that would render them susceptible to a wide range of armor-piercing rounds.

And, we really don't have anything they want other than Dixie Chicks CDs, which they are using in an extensive psyops campaigns in their interminable war against the Gluurgans of Arcturus 5, all of whom are named Earl.

[Timberwolf]

[ QUOTE ]
nosferatuscoffin said:
[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:

Except, as conspiracy theories go, it isn't very elegant.
It leaves dangling this obvious question of *how* the 19-Arabs-with-boxcutters managed to get the US Air Force to stand down.

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing that you are forgetting is the fact that carrying box cutters onto an airplane was perfectly legal on 9/11. All of the screeners in the world could not have done a damn thing to stop them since there was no law being broken.

Now, onto the next conspiracy theory, whether the Zeebleworks are going to invade Earth within the next 25 bleems.

[/ QUOTE ]
I always thought the boxcutters were already onboard...thus, all the pissing and moaning about checking those of us that fly. They weren't taken through the terminal, but through the "backdoor" by someone who had access to the planes.

Not that this gives any credence to the rantings of the CTs, just making sure I'm not misunderstanding how things happened.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:
Except, as conspiracy theories go, it isn't very elegant.
It leaves dangling this obvious question of *how* the 19-Arabs-with-boxcutters managed to get the US Air Force to stand down.

[/ QUOTE ]

When did that happen? http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon127.gif

[Timberwolf]

[ QUOTE ]
Chris said:
[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:
Except, as conspiracy theories go, it isn't very elegant.
It leaves dangling this obvious question of *how* the 19-Arabs-with-boxcutters managed to get the US Air Force to stand down.

[/ QUOTE ]

When did that happen? http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon127.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
It didn't...except in the delusional fantasyland that is the mindset of the left.

[Chris]

[ QUOTE ]
Timberwolf said:
It didn't...except in the delusional fantasyland that is the mindset of the left.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah yes, the vacuum, the void, the liberal mind. Nuff said! http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[paleo]

Under normal conditions hijacked airplanes quickly get a visit from military jets. Even after the towers were hit there was no successful interception of the third plane. The Air Defence of Washington was very slow and obviously ineffectual. Normal procedures weren't followed.

I'm sure getting box-cutters on an airplane is a lot easier than getting the Air Force to ignor hijacked planes until after they had done their damage. This is why the 'official' conspiracy theory does not account for all the facts. Were these brilliant but suicidal conspirators also telepathic? Just lucky?

There are way more questions than answers.

[Rhino]

[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:
Under normal conditions hijacked airplanes quickly get a visit from military jets.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not true, at least not back then. The military had no mission to intercept hijacked aircraft, though I'm certain they would have if necessary, and if time permitted.

[ QUOTE ]
Even after the towers were hit there was no successful interception of the third plane.

[/ QUOTE ]
You should check your facts. Prior to 9/11 there was no airborne intercept force in this country. There were also very few "strip alert" forces, and none in the DC area. It's kind of hard to intercept a plane when there is no interceptor. The only military aircraft in the DC area was a C-130, and it became involved almost coincidentally when it identified the hijacked aircraft headed toward the Pentagon.

[ QUOTE ]
The Air Defence of Washington was very slow and obviously ineffectual.

[/ QUOTE ]
Once again you are clueless to actual facts, and therefore you are obviously ineffectual. There was no airborne "Air Defence of Washington" in existence, so you can't logically claim they were slow.

[ QUOTE ]
Normal procedures weren't followed.

[/ QUOTE ]
And what normal procedures would those be? Don't worry. I won't hold my breath expecting a credible answer.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure getting box-cutters on an airplane is a lot easier than getting the Air Force to ignor hijacked planes until after they had done their damage.

[/ QUOTE ]
You don't need to get anyone to ignore something when they were never tasked to pay attention to it in the first place. Even if the military had been tasked with such intercepts, there was nowhere near enough time to accomplish an intercept anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
This is why the 'official' conspiracy theory does not account for all the facts.

[/ QUOTE ]
What 'official' conspiracy theory? So far, your theories don't seem capable of recoginizing facts, much less drawing intelligent conclusions from them.

[ QUOTE ]
Were these brilliant but suicidal conspirators also telepathic? Just lucky?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, and from Mars, and they were coached by Elvis before boarding the planes, cuz the king was supposedly miffed when Gore lost.

[ QUOTE ]
There are way more questions than answers.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, that's pretty much a given when facts take a back seat to supposition, speculation, and paranoia.

[Estragon]

Since there had not been a successful airline hijacking in the US for 20 years prior to 9/11, air defenses were not standing by for that eventuality. Hindsight is always 20-20, but the cost of keeping fighters and pilots on standby for 20 years would have necessarily meant reductions in other military expenditures, which were deemed of a higher priority. Remember also that hijacked airplanes had not been used as missiles previously; hijackers of domestic aircraft either wanted cash, a free trip to Cuba, or were just irrational individuals who ended up surrendering.

Jets were scrambled after the WTC crash, but it was too late to prevent the Pentagon attack. There were fighters approaching Flight 93 when it was crashed by the passengers, who had heard of the WTC by then.

The key factor in the attack was the element of surprise. It worked. No one anticipated either the use of planes as bombs, or the possibility of simultaneous hijackings. Security breakdown? In hindsight, of course. Conspiracy? A wild speculation that requires substantiation beyond the imaginings of the paranoid.

[paleo]

Rhino: "Not true, at least not back then. The military had no mission to intercept hijacked aircraft"..."You should check your facts..."

Golly Rhino,
it's not like I heard this down at the corner bar.

America's grandmasters of investigative journalism and
historical research/current events have compiled the 'known' facts
with exceptional diligence and determination.

It is all sourced and referenced for academic or legal 'proofing'.
Feel free to examine the unansweredquestions.org and make
up your own mind.

But you can't just swat your tail and smack away some annoying fly.

Anyway, here is a bit from that site from a much much longer
investigative file titled "Airforce Response'::::

"A summary, according to mainstream media/military reports.
For more in-depth analysis, see sources below.

1) At 8:13am, Flight 11 from Boston stops responding (by radio) with Air Traffic Control.

2) By 8:20am, transponder contact is lost and the plane begins to go, (or is already) dramatically off-course.

3) Each of these instances, taken separately, constitutes an emergency according to FAA Order 7110.65M 10-2-5.

4) According to Bob Arnott of MSNBC, "Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button.... It's considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour." "Routine" response to such emergencies is to order "fighter-intercepts" into the air, to regain contact with the pilot, (NORAD spokesman, Boston Globe, 9/15/2000). Between Sept. 2000 and June 2001, fighters were scrambled 67 times.

5) By 8:24, the hijacking of Flight 11 is confirmed, as a controller hears someone say, "''We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you will be OK. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane."

6) The Nashua (ATC) controllers say they "didn't know when the military was contacted, but that it was routine to do so immediately when a hijacking is under way."

7) Yet NORAD claims that they were not informed for another 14 minutes!! -at 8:38.

8) When NORAD finally responds, they notify OTIS AFB, (about two hundred miles east of Flight 11's position). This decision is made just after they are informed, (at 8:43) that a second plane in the same area has been hijacked, (Flight 175) heading west, (away from Otis).

9) Top military spokesmen say cutbacks caused a reduction in the number of bases "on alert," (from 100 to 7 since 1990) meaning that intercepts had to come from a greater distance, (General Richard Myers, Senate confirmation hearing).

10) This story is repeated without question by the mainstream media.

11) Seven bases on the coastal borders for the entire United States! Yet there is a dozen or more Air Force bases in the general vicinity that have "battle-ready" fighter squadrons, (Syracuse, Philadelphia, Atlantic City, amongst others). Training missions are routine. Are they saying there was not a single plane on the tarmac, fuelled up, or already in the air, from ANY of those bases? Nor is this what occurred during the Payne Stewart crises, where four different bases were called in as the plane flew across the continent. (25 October 1999).

12) Military spokesmen describe the planes from Otis as flying "like a scalded ape." "Over 500 mph." Yet according to the American Federation of Scientists, the top speed of the F-15's (from Otis) is 1800+ mph. Though this top speed is rarely achieved with the full weight of fuel and weapons, the Otis planes actually fly at less than half their achievable speed.

13) The fighter-planes arrive in New York City at approximately 9:20 -after the two hijacked planes had crashed into the World Trade Centers- an HOUR and THIRTEEN MINUTES AFTER THE ORIGINAL LOST CONTACT WITH FLIGHT 11.

-----------------------------------------------------------
14) Flight 77 goes well off-course, (temporarily) at approximately 8:40 am.

15) At approximately 9:00am, transponder signal and radio contact is lost. The plane reverses course, and heads directly back toward Washington, at the same time that a second, hijack-confirmed plane has struck the World Trade Center. At 9:06, the FAA informs all air traffic control centers that Flight 77 has been hijacked.

16) NORAD claims it is not until 9:24 that the FAA informs them of the hijacking -TWENTY FIVE MINUTES AFTER CONTACT WITH THE PLANE HAD BEEN LOST -and all this, a full forty minutes after a known hijacked airliner had crashed into the WTC.

17) NORAD later claims that fighters were dispatched from Langley AFB, 130 miles away; when, in fact, four separate newspaper reports show fighters scrambling from Andrews AFB, (ten miles outside Washington) -AFTER the attack on the Pentagon. (San Diego Union-Tribune, 9/12/2001; NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 9/11/2001; Denver Post, 9/11/2001; Sunday Telegraph, (London), 9/14/2001).

18) The reports about Andrews were soon quashed -the military website quickly changed to show that no fighters were stationed there; and the reports about Langley did not surface until Sept. 14, contradicting both, General Myers on the 13th, and Dick Cheney on the 16th (Meet the Press, interview, 9/16/2001.)

19) Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and top Pentagon officials claim they were "unaware" that flight 77 was heading towards Washington; when, in fact, BY LAW, the FAA is obligated to inform the National Military Commnd Center in the Pentagon, (and the Secretary of Defense in particular) as soon as a hijacking is confirmed; that is, at 8:24, (FAA Order 7610.4J 7-1-2; CJCSI 3610.01A, 6/1/2001).

(...)
Well, this summary goes on and on and then has several links
for people who want more concrete data before they make
up their minds.

http://www.unansweredquestions.org/background_45.php

http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tinhat.gif

--paleo

[paleo]

Est: " Remember also that hijacked airplanes had not been used as missiles previously;.."

However al-qaeda plans for exactly that were previously discovered
in the Phillipines (google Bojinka) and France.

E: "The key factor in the attack was the element of surprise. It worked. No one anticipated either the use of planes as bombs, or the possibility of simultaneous hijackings. Security breakdown? In hindsight, of course. Conspiracy? A wild speculation that requires substantiation beyond the imaginings of the paranoid..."

You may well be right. If it was a simple security breakdown then
the 'ass-covering' coverups might make sense. Yet I have a lingering
suspicion that there is way more to the story
than us peasants are privy to.

btw, 'simultaneous operations' were an al-qaeda signature.
Delmart Vreeland's cryptic warning suggested 'letting one happen'
but 'stopping the rest' and may refer to that foreknowledge.

If all passenger planes had not been grounded
who knows what other targets might have been hit.
And the closed stock exchange prevented the insiders
from cashing in on whatever foreknowledge existed.

It certainly is very complicated.

--paleo

[Rhino]

[ QUOTE ]
paleo said:
Golly Rhino,
it's not like I heard this down at the corner bar.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay. Maybe you should check your sources.

[ QUOTE ]
America's grandmasters of investigative journalism and historical research/current events have compiled the 'known' facts with exceptional diligence and determination.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, "grandmasters of investigative journalism" probably only guarantees an IQ above 70, if that much. The media almost always gets facts wrong and that goes doubly for military subjects. Despite what you may think of their "exceptional diligence and determination", they are more often wrong about military subjects than they are right. Besides, some of the links you posted hardly qualify as having "exceptional diligence and determination", or even being journalistic for that matter.

[ QUOTE ]
It is all sourced and referenced for academic or legal 'proofing'.

[/ QUOTE ]
And it has all been thoroughly debunked for the baseless sensationalism that it is.

[ QUOTE ]
Feel free to examine the unansweredquestions.org and make up your own mind.

[/ QUOTE ]
Already did, before I ever responded.

[ QUOTE ]
But you can't just swat your tail and smack away some annoying fly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sure I can, if that's all it is. They know not of what they speak and they have been soundly refuted by those that do. That hardly qualifies as a mere 'swat' at something irritating.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, here is a bit from that site from a much much longer investigative file titled "Airforce Response'::::

"A summary, according to mainstream media/military reports.
For more in-depth analysis, see sources below.

1) At 8:13am, Flight 11 from Boston stops responding (by radio) with Air Traffic Control.

2) By 8:20am, transponder contact is lost and the plane begins to go, (or is already) dramatically off-course.

3) Each of these instances, taken separately, constitutes an emergency according to FAA Order 7110.65M 10-2-5.

[/ QUOTE ]
And each of them does occasionally happen, which is why nobody knee-jerks and screams "the sky is falling!" You need to find more knowledgeable sources.

[ QUOTE ]
4) According to Bob Arnott of MSNBC, "Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button.... It's considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour." "Routine" response to such emergencies is to order "fighter-intercepts" into the air, to regain contact with the pilot, (NORAD spokesman, Boston Globe, 9/15/2000). Between Sept. 2000 and June 2001, fighters were scrambled 67 times.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, the quintessential expert Bob Arnott (sp?)! Once again, if you choose media folks as military experts, you will get ridiculed a lot. They don't know jack, and they usually screw up what they do know. The NORAD spokesman was correct. Now see if you can find where those planes were scrambled from. I'll give you a hint. It was a LOOOOOOONG way from Washington DC. Ever heard of the ADIZ? That's the North American Air Defense Zone, where fighters actually stand alert and scramble, and it is nowhere near Washington. It was not a normal response to scramble fighters in the lower 48 states because there were none on alert here to be scrambled. They were in Alaska and Iceland, though you might occasionally see some from Maine on odd occasions such as exercises or Air National Guard training sorties. They didn't scramble south though. They scrambled northeast. They didn't have the range to respond to Washington, even if any had coincidentally been on alert. So, as you can see, fighter intercepts were not only not routine, they were non-existent. BTW, there was no such thing as a "panic button" between ATC and the military.

[ QUOTE ]
6) The Nashua (ATC) controllers say they "didn't know when the military was contacted, but that it was routine to do so immediately when a hijacking is under way."

[/ QUOTE ]
True, but not for intercepts. Whenever there is a hijacking, all aircraft in the vicinity, or potentially in the vicinity, are supposed to be notified, including military aircraft. Since ATC does not always have contact with all military aircraft, they quite naturally pass the info along to military officials so they can contact military aircraft as necessary.

[ QUOTE ]
7) Yet NORAD claims that they were not informed for another 14 minutes!! -at 8:38.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, 1. They weren't sure what was going on still, and 2. NORAD is not required to be notified in any certain timeframe. In other words, so what?

[ QUOTE ]
8) When NORAD finally responds, they notify OTIS AFB, (about two hundred miles east of Flight 11's position). This decision is made just after they are informed, (at 8:43) that a second plane in the same area has been hijacked, (Flight 175) heading west, (away from Otis).

[/ QUOTE ]
Otis AFB ceased to exist in the late 80s as part of the base closures. There is now an Air National Guard Unit there, but they did not have an ongoing scramble capability. In fact, they usually aren't even there, other than a few Command Post and 'caretaker' personnel.

[ QUOTE ]
9) Top military spokesmen say cutbacks caused a reduction in the number of bases "on alert," (from 100 to 7 since 1990) meaning that intercepts had to come from a greater distance, (General Richard Myers, Senate confirmation hearing).

[/ QUOTE ]
Gee, now why does that sound familiar?????????????

[ QUOTE ]
10) This story is repeated without question by the mainstream media.

[/ QUOTE ]
And hence the neverending stream of ignorant people who actually fall for this malarkey.

[ QUOTE ]
11) Seven bases on the coastal borders for the entire United States! Yet there is a dozen or more Air Force bases in the general vicinity that have "battle-ready" fighter squadrons, (Syracuse, Philadelphia, Atlantic City, amongst others).

[/ QUOTE ]
There are no Air Force bases in Syracuse, Atlantic City or Philadelphia. There is one not far from Atlantic City, but I doubt those transport aircraft there would have been able to scramble, much less intercept.

[ QUOTE ]
Training missions are routine. Are they saying there was not a single plane on the tarmac, fuelled up, or already in the air, from ANY of those bases?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. Live ordnance is rarely carried on training missions, these units do not stand alert, and a few aircraft already airborne were sent to investigate.

[ QUOTE ]
Nor is this what occurred during the Payne Stewart crises, where four different bases were called in as the plane flew across the continent. (25 October 1999).

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely, with hours of notice and no live ammunition.

[ QUOTE ]
13) The fighter-planes arrive in New York City at approximately 9:20 -after the two hijacked planes had crashed into the World Trade Centers- an HOUR and THIRTEEN MINUTES AFTER THE ORIGINAL LOST CONTACT WITH FLIGHT 11.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, it takes time to fuel, arm and generate a fighter, especially when you weren't prepared to.

[ QUOTE ]
15) At approximately 9:00am, transponder signal and radio contact is lost. The plane reverses course, and heads directly back toward Washington, at the same time that a second, hijack-confirmed plane has struck the World Trade Center.

[/ QUOTE ]
Which was not known until well afterwards. Once these aircraft cease transponder activity, they disappear from ATC scopes as known targets. The controllers did not know if the unknown target was Flight 77 or not, nor were they certain it had been hijacked simply due to a course change.

[ QUOTE ]
16) NORAD claims it is not until 9:24 that the FAA informs them of the hijacking -TWENTY FIVE MINUTES AFTER CONTACT WITH THE PLANE HAD BEEN LOST -and all this, a full forty minutes after a known hijacked airliner had crashed into the WTC.

[/ QUOTE ]
At the risk of repeating myself, so what?

[ QUOTE ]
17) NORAD later claims that fighters were dispatched from Langley AFB, 130 miles away; when, in fact, four separate newspaper reports show fighters scrambling from Andrews AFB, (ten miles outside Washington) -AFTER the attack on the Pentagon. (San Diego Union-Tribune, 9/12/2001; NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 9/11/2001; Denver Post, 9/11/2001; Sunday Telegraph, (London), 9/14/2001).

[/ QUOTE ]
And of course NORAD is correct because Andrews is not a fighter base, so it couldn't 'scramble' fighters. Once again, you will continue to look dumb if you think the press are military experts.

[ QUOTE ]
18) The reports about Andrews were soon quashed -the military website quickly changed to show that no fighters were stationed there;...........

[/ QUOTE ]
Gee! This sounds familiar too!

[ QUOTE ]
..........and the reports about Langley did not surface until Sept. 14, contradicting both, General Myers on the 13th, and Dick Cheney on the 16th (Meet the Press, interview, 9/16/2001.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Contradicting reports? From the media? No way!!!!! Say it ain't so!

[ QUOTE ]
19) Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and top Pentagon officials claim they were "unaware" that flight 77 was heading towards Washington; when, in fact, BY LAW, the FAA is obligated to inform the National Military Commnd Center in the Pentagon, (and the Secretary of Defense in particular) as soon as a hijacking is confirmed; that is, at 8:24, (FAA Order 7610.4J 7-1-2; CJCSI 3610.01A, 6/1/2001).

[/ QUOTE ]
They did inform them, and that does not mean the aircraft was headed toward Washington. It did in fact make several course changes along the way, so they had no way to be sure where it was headed.

[ QUOTE ]
(...)
Well, this summary goes on and on and then has several links for people who want more concrete data before they make up their minds.

[/ QUOTE ]
I saw it go on and on. I saw the links too. I saw no concrete data though. Just supposition and sensationalism. But, having spent twenty years in the Air Force, I am quite accustomed to ignorant people believing false information from an ignorant media and a host of crackpot conspiracy theorists. You always hope that people will get smarter, but it never really happens.

[DesertFox]

Thanks for that, Rhino. I know the press NEVER gets technical stuff right about the Army, and the more technical the issue the less likely the press is even near the ballpark.

I think journalists as a breed read too many spy novels, especially the John LeCarre ones where some wayward genius sits atop an enormous, hidden spy network within the intel apparatus and cunningly manipulates the psychological states of people on other continents with a superfine touch.

In this sort of thinking, all service people are manikins, all generals are out to rule the world, all Air Force pilots are supermen and everybody on the inside knows everything about everything -- meaning nothing ever happens by accident or coincidence. No, everything is plotted out in excruciating detail years in advance and always comes out exactly as planned. Evil people with evil motives in key places, etc. Only skilled, determined heroes in journalistic mufti have the brilliance to spot the plan from afar, the dogged determination to trace it down in all its ugly details and the courage to print the horrifying story for all the world to stand aghast at.

Paleo, Rhino just shot you outta the sky. If you want to be taken seriously on matters military, you had better find sources who know what they're talking about. All these idiots do is embarrass you-the-clueless.

[Wyatt_Junker]

[ QUOTE ]
DoctorDoom said:
There are actually two distinct groups.

The Zeebleworks from Antares 7 are neophytes in the area of subspace jump drives, in addition to which their computers are still inadequate to compute a wormhole projection in less than 50 bleems, by which time the parameters will have changed enough to require recalculation. They don't pose an immediate threat, but they do have their eyes (all eight of them) on our petroleum and certain species of bacteria, and should be watched.

However, the Zeeblewôrks from Sirius 9 (distantly related due to a common bio-seeding of their respective planets by the Xerxexxians 578,450,000 bleems ago) are far more advanced technologically and could mount a ferocious attack in a matter of centibleems if so disposed. Fortunately, they are comprised largely of polymerized liquid nitrogen, and couldn't survive our climate for more than a few seconds without cumbersome refrigeration suits that would render them susceptible to a wide range of armor-piercing rounds.

And, we really don't have anything they want other than Dixie Chicks CDs, which they are using in an extensive psyops campaigns in their interminable war against the Gluurgans of Arcturus 5, all of whom are named Earl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Classic!

Off-topic/ Wasn't the holocaust just a bar-b-que that got out of hand due to excessive kosher restrictions on the Ball Park franks? Eh Paleo?

[Timberwolf]

Good wood.......good distance......Good-bye!!! Touch 'em all, Rhino!!!

That was DEFINITELY a tape-measure long ball! http://freeconservatives.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon16.gif

[TheRealLobo]

Bravo Rhino.

I started posting a "similar" reply...particularly Otis, Philadelphia, Atlantic City, and Andrews points, but decided to finish reading the thread first.

Thanks for saving me the time.