An Even Newer 9/11 Thread
September 2, 2010 - 2:52pm
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: Become a Podcaster | Find a Show
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2012 the authors
Syndicate
CNN. All amateur hijackers and part-time Muslims know to turn off the transponder unit to prevent transmission of the four digit hijack code. Or at least the regular pilots of KAL 85 knew to do it during NORAD's 'practice Armageddon' exercise on 9/11/01. And apparently, so did 19 amateur hijackers know to switch off flight transponders on the very same day as if by coordinated planning.
Well I've only ever seen or read about circumstantial evidence linking the CIA's antcommunist jihadi leader to the 9/11 attacks. The Pentagon says they have the real goods on OBL but can't reveal it to the public for public to scrutinize. And it's for reasons of US national security, or at least, this is what they tell the public. But jrootham says he's satisfied with the evidence which he described as 'adequate', so that means jrootham isn't concerned that 9/11 may have been a false flag military or intelligence or even a joint military-intelligence operation between the US and Canadian militaries on 9/11 that sounds anything like 'operation Armageddon', or something like that, and which may have gone awry for them. In which case, they'd have to cover it up. Maybe even cover it up by blaming some group of convenient patsies, like the US Military and CIA's Afghan-Arab terrorists who they were somewhat familiar with from their days as proxy partners fighting communism in 1980s and 90s Central Asia.
I think the characterisation of the conspiracists as global masterminds who make stupid errors like this is somewhat inconsistent.
I think NORAD staging 'Practice Armageddon', an international military exercise on 9/11 may have not have went according to plan, no. And I have no real reason to believe there were any 'Al-Qaeda Muslims' on board any of those hijacked planes. I don't believe that stewardess Amy Sweeney made any cell phone calls to ATC from American flight 11, nor did Brian Sweeney make a cell phone call to his wife Julie from UA flight 175 and alleged to last several minutes. Or at least, not without a lot of technical difficulties when the plane was anywhere above 2000 feet altitude.
But I think the official narrative that claims a few amateur Cessna pilots dominated NORAD air space for nearly 2 hours on 9/11. and proceeded to demolish four buildings with only three planes, is fiction. There were dozens and maybe hundreds of incidents every year before 9/11/01 where passenger planes flew off course, and NORAD made sure to respond with fighter plane escorts in a matter of minutes. It didn't happen on 9/11 though. Why not? Does US "national security", and whatever that means, take priority over the truth? Is it good enough reasoon for you and Canada's leaders in Ottawa to send troops to occupy another country militarily and murder their citizens to protect a corrupt US-backed narco administration in Kabul from their own people striving for democracy?
CNN. All amateur hijackers and part-time Muslims know to turn off the transponder unit to prevent transmission of the four digit hijack code. Or at least the regular pilots of KAL 85 knew to do it during NORAD's 'practice Armageddon' exercise on 9/11/01.
Did CNN claim that none of the hijacked planes were able to transmit the hijack code?
Well I've only ever seen or read about circumstantial evidence linking the CIA's anticommunist jihadi leader to the 9/11 attacks. The Pentagon says they have the real goods on OBL but can't reveal it to the public for public to scrutinize. And it's for reasons of US national security, or at least, this is what they tell the public. But jrootham says he's satisfied with the evidence which he described as 'adequate', so that means jrootham isn't concerned that 9/11 was a false flag military or intelligence or even a joint military-intelligence operation between the US and Canadian militaries on 9/11 that sounds anything like 'operation Armageddon', or something like that.
So, your evidence that this is a fale flag operation consists of ignorance of the evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to the attack.
You do realise that just because you are unaware of something does not mean that it does not exist, right?
I think NORAD staging 'Practice Armageddon', an international military exercise on 9/11 may have not have went according to plan, no. And I have no real reason to believe there were any 'Al-Qaeda Muslims' on board any of those hijacked planes. I don't believe that stewardess Amy Sweeney made any cell phone calls to ATC from UAL flight 175 either. Or at least not when the plane was above 25000 or 30,000 feet altitude.
I have no idea what you are trying to claim about this "Practice Armageddon" that you keep bringing up.
They have footage from the airport cameras of these men getting on the planes. They may not be "Al-Qaeda Msulims" according to you, but there is little doubt those 19 men were on those planes.
I do not believe that Ms. Sweeney used a cell phone either. She used an Airfone instead.
.....
But I think the official narrative that claims a few amateur Cessna pilots dominated NORAD air space for nearly 2 hours on 9/11. and proceeded to demolish four buildings with only three planes, is fiction. There were dozens and maybe hundreds of incidents every year before 9/11/01 where passenger planes flew off course, and NORAD made sure to respond with fighter plane escorts in a matter of minutes. It didn't happen on 9/11 though. Why not? Does US "national security", and whatever that means, take priority over the truth? Is it good enough reasoon for you and Canada's leaders in Ottawa to send troops to occupy another country militarily and murder their citizens to protect a corrupt US-backed narco administration in Kabul from their own people striving for democracy?[/size]
Then it should be easy for you to find evidence of the US military providing an escort within minutes.
I don't know for sure. You'd have to do some leg work yourself. But the 9/11 Commish's report makes no mention of the universal code , "7500" for hijack in progress, having been received by any civilian ATC tower.
You do realise that just because you are unaware of something does not mean that it does not exist, right?
I have many significant other reasons to believe it was a false flag in addition to the lack of real evidence implicating Elvis bin Laden, who in all likelihood is deader than a door nail today while the US Military and CIA continue to play along with the charade that he is as alive and plotting the most sinister terror attacks against America. It's like reds under their beds and only slightly different.
Vigilant Guardian
Perhaps you can dig up some info on this for us? You may need to pursue a long and dragged-out FOI request through our stoogeaucracy in Ottawa. I don't think they will be very accommodating though. Just my guess. Our CA's in Ottawa are busy planning to seize dictatorial power by phony majority election and prolly can't be bothered with truth of any kind these days.
And many people are highly receptive of and easily persuaded by US Government propaganda. But that's okay, because they've fooled millions into believing in the invisible enemy that does not exist. As one of Rosie O'Donnell's guests said about it, an entire population has been mind-fucked by an invisible enemy. We will be known in future as the hypnotized generation.
Their names werent even on passenger lists on 9/11, so how could they know who the hijackers were? I don't think you understand what you're saying.
Sure, but only after the truth movement pointed out the technical flaws in their made up stories about cellular phone calls.
"Mom? This is Mark Bingham." Enough to make any mother suspicious if you ask me. And then they were "cut off."
It's SOP for NORAD 24/7/365.25. Everybody knows that. DId US reconnaissance know that KAL flight 007 had "wandered" off course over Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island in the 1980s and carrying a woman from my hometown who died in the tragedy? Sure they did. They know where every plane is in the sky at all times.
It's SOP for NORAD 24/7/365.25. Everybody knows that. DId US reconnaissance know that KAL flight 007 had "wandered" off course over Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island in the 1980s and carrying a woman from my hometown who died in the tragedy? Sure they did. They know where every plane is in the sky at all times.
There's also Payne Stewart who 2 years earlier had an F-16 on him within seconds when he failed to respond to a request to change radio frequencies.
Then there's Iran Air Flight 665. The yanquis aren't all-knowing, all-seeing.
No Yards, your link says it took 1 hour and 20 minutes for a fighter to get to Payne Stewart's plane. Not seconds.
Then there's Iran Air Flight 665. The yanquis aren't all-knowing, all-seeing.
What that proves is that ordinary lives are expendable as far as the US Government and US hawks are concerned.
Twenty four hours a day, 365 days a year, NORAD tracks airplanes, missiles, space launches and anything else that flies in or around the North American continent. While the tradition of tracking Santa began purely by accident, NORAD continues to track Santa. We’re the only organization that has the technology, the qualifications, and the people to do it. And we love it! NORAD is honored to be Santa’s official tracker on Christmas Eve!
They even track Santa fcs. Was Elvis bin Laden's pre-planned "new Pearl Harbor" a complete surprise to
FDRBush, Cheney and Rice in modern times? It's not likely according to experts. In fact, there are experts and whistleblowers who've stated that they were warned well ahead of time. As in, NeoCons had advanced warning of Santa from intelligence agencies around the world who had been tracking Santa bin Laden's army of darkness.Everybody's indoctrinated to some extent - religious fanatics are not born believing in god, children are not born believing in santa claus, Canadians are not born believing they live in a 'democracy', the many racists of all stripes who make life miserable for millions around the world are not born that way. The only question is whether the indoctrination is benign and helpful, and more in the line of educating the young to be strong and free and intelligent citizens, or more sinister - most people would, I expect, agree that the well-indoctrinated Hitler Youth were not a 'benign' manifestation of indoctrination, nor were/are the many southern US whites who seem to truly believe dark-skinned people are inferior to them.
Fewer people understand that educating / indoctrinating people to believe that Canada is a great democracy with a free media etc etc is not a lot better in principle than the indoctrinated Hitler youth, just a lot better done, by powerful and wealthy people who still want to rule the world, but have decided that a more subtle operation may work better than Hitler's (at least in Canada - some 'shock 'n' awe' operations still serve a purpose, and well-trained cops with tasers and pepper spray are always available for the few who have a slightly better appreciation of what they're up to ..). Few people understand the difference between a well-treated subject whose masters decide everything for them, and a collection of free humans making decisions about their country together.
To scoff at indoctrination is simply to prove how very successful they have been.
I have a longer essay here - http://www.rudemacedon.ca/lgi/can-managed-dem.html - for anyone ready to get a bit deeper into the rabbit hole. And the book, of course - They're Building a Box - and You're In It http://www.rudemacedon.ca/dlp/box/box-intro.html .
Hey siamdave; do you have the elasticity of thought to acknowledge that there are people who loathe Bush/Cheney/Rice/Obama and the empire they're inflicting on the planet yet who look at the destruction of the World Trade Centre and the damage to the Pentagon as something caused by big aircraft flying into them?
And besides, US taxpayers can't afford anymore money for expensive investigations as a result of frivolous inquiries into the worst building collapses in history. There's even less money to investigate the worst financial disaster in history. It's been one controlled demolition after another.
Hey siamdave; do you have the elasticity of thought to acknowledge that there are people who loathe Bush/Cheney/Rice/Obama and the empire they're inflicting on the planet yet who look at the destruction of the World Trade Centre and the damage to the Pentagon as something caused by big aircraft flying into them?
- I don't quite get your point - I very obviously acknowledge such people - I spend a fair amount of time trying to explain to them why they're wrong.
Let me try one on you - do you have the clarity of vision and thought to stand up in public and confirm that you really believe that these buildings -
- have been so badly damaged by airplane crashes and the fires we see burning that total, global virtually instantaneous collapse is imminent?
- I've been challenging you OCT people for years like this, and have yet to get a clear response. Anyone else feel free to join in - I believe that! Yea, me too! Sure - it's obvious those buildings are on the verge of collapse!
- and etc
As George Herbert Walker Bush once said, I will never demand a second investigation into 9/11. "I don't care what the facts are." And besides, false flags are unAmerican.
-serendipity seems to be with those who are open to it - just came across this -
".. Edward Bernays, the American nephew of Sigmund Freud, is said to have invented modern propaganda. During the First World War, he was one of a group of influential liberals who mounted a secret government campaign to persuade reluctant Americans to send an army to the bloodbath in Europe. In his book Propaganda , published in 1928, Bernays wrote that the "intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society", and that the manipulators "constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power in our country". Instead of propaganda, he coined the euphemism "public relations"..." ( http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26286.html)
- by a writer named John Pilger - whom, as I noted on the last thread, is rarely if ever acknowledged in the Canadian MSM, although he is certainly one of the world's leading 'non-establishment' journalists and documentarians ....
I don't know for sure. You'd have to do some leg work yourself. But the 9/11 Commish's report makes no mention of the universal code , "7500" for hijack in progress, having been received by any civilian ATC tower.
It seems that the hijackers simply turned the transponders off immediately. So, how is this evidence for a false flag operation?
I have many significant other reasons to believe it was a false flag in addition to the lack of real evidence implicating Elvis bin Laden, who in all likelihood is deader than a door nail today while the US Military and CIA continue to play along with the charade that he is as alive and plotting the most sinister terror attacks against America. It's like reds under their beds and only slightly different.
The issue of whether or not he is alive today is completely irrelevant to whether or not he is connected to the 9/11 attacks.
Vigilant Guardian
Perhaps you can dig up some info on this for us? You may need to pursue a long and dragged-out FOI request through our stoogeaucracy in Ottawa. I don't think they will be very accommodating though. Just my guess. Our CA's in Ottawa are busy planning to seize dictatorial power by phony majority election and prolly can't be bothered with truth of any kind these days.
And many people are highly receptive of and easily persuaded by US Government propaganda. But that's okay, because they've fooled millions into believing in the invisible enemy that does not exist. As one of Rosie O'Donnell's guests said about it, an entire population has been mind-fucked by an invisible enemy. We will be known in future as the hypnotized generation.
Oh, it is some completely irrelevant red herrring. I hope you don't mind if I simply ignore it then.
This is simply incorrect.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/14/national/main311268.shtml
Sure, but only after the truth movement pointed out the technical flaws in their made up stories about cellular phone calls.
"Mom? This is Mark Bingham." Enough to make any mother suspicious if you ask me. And then they were "cut off."
The way I see it, cell phone use would have been spotty and difficult, but possible, while Airfone use would have been no problem at all.
It's SOP for NORAD 24/7/365.25. Everybody knows that. DId US reconnaissance know that KAL flight 007 had "wandered" off course over Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island in the 1980s and carrying a woman from my hometown who died in the tragedy? Sure they did. They know where every plane is in the sky at all times.
That is not evidence for your claim. It is some completely irrelevant issue that doesn't even involve US air space.
Let me try one on you - do you have the clarity of vision and thought to stand up in public and confirm that you really believe that these buildings have been so badly damaged by airplane crashes and the fires we see burning that total, global virtually instantaneous collapse is imminent?
Yes.
By the way, how is your recent discovery of Bernays germane to any of this? Then again, the buildings in that photo you posted look a little like "torches of freedom."
Let me try one on you - do you have the clarity of vision and thought to stand up in public and confirm that you really believe that these buildings have been so badly damaged by airplane crashes and the fires we see burning that total, global virtually instantaneous collapse is imminent?
Yes.
By the way, how is your recent discovery of Bernays germane to any of this? Then again, the buildings in that photo you posted look a little like "torches of freedom."
- well, glad we got that on the record - I think you're the first one. It won't be long, I predict, where the family picnic, or whatever y'all do in a comparable way, is going to be having a good chuckle over that.
As for Bernays, well, your original question, to which I responded but you seem to have forgotten about (sort of a typical OCT behaviour when you're shown to have gotten yourself into something you can't handle) seemed to indicate you thought that OCTers were 'indoctrinated' according to my previous post, and I was just adding a bit of info for those who might be interested in looking into this deeper. Which is probably about 3 levels too deep for a bonger already, so bob's yer uncle, as the saying goes. If you want to try to engage in some serious discussion, I'd be happy to oblige - but your thinly veiled, completely misplaced sarcasm is, like, just too boring.
From the mouths of sophomores...
It's SOP for NORAD 24/7/365.25. Everybody knows that. DId US reconnaissance know that KAL flight 007 had "wandered" off course over Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island in the 1980s and carrying a woman from my hometown who died in the tragedy? Sure they did. They know where every plane is in the sky at all times.
That is not evidence for your claim. It is some completely irrelevant issue that doesn't even involve US air space.
- hmmm - '..every plane in the sky' would seem to include US air space - and in the context, especially US air space - keep at em, Fidel, they're on the ropes and reeling, I think - I've noticed with my last couple of small forays into the ring that it's like dealing with some desperate punchdrunk foe who is down and mostly out, lashing back with nonsencsical desperate gambits that an amateur could easily parry - c'mon, guys, get with it - on Rabble Babble summer 2010 - as in every other forum where there has been any kind of open debate - the OCT has been tried - and found wanting - very, very, very wanting.
From the mouths of sophomores...
- well I guess that answers my invitation for 'serious discussion'. Can't say that I'm surprised, as the only really serious thing that can be said about the OCT is some form of 'crap'.
Geez, gramp, you didn't *really* believe that stuff, did ya?!?!?!?! whooooeeeee!!!!
- hmmm - '..every plane in the sky' would seem to include US air space - and in the context, especially US air space - keep at em, Fidel, they're on the ropes and reeling, I think - I've noticed with my last couple of small forays into the ring that it's like dealing with some desperate punchdrunk foe who is down and mostly out, lashing back with nonsencsical desperate gambits that an amateur could easily parry - c'mon, guys, get with it - on Rabble Babble summer 2010 - as in every other forum where there has been any kind of open debate - the OCT has been tried - and found wanting - very, very, very wanting.
Fidel's claim was that US military fighter planes often were able to escort hijacked (or simply off course) passenger planes within minutes of receiving the signal.
The Korean airliner that was shot down by Soviet fighter planes is simply not evidence of Fidel's claims. This is because the planes that did intercept the plane were not US fighter planes, the plane was not in US airspace, and there is no indication as to how long the military planes took to arrive.
To put it simply, it is not relevant to Fidel's claims at all.
One of the problems that the USAF had on 9/11 is what they described as "the whole in the doughnut". USAF radars are positioned along the periphery of the US and look outwards. Internal airspace control is the air traffic control responsibility, which depend on transponders. At least all this was the case at the time. The upshot was they didn't know what was going on. Which is why they shut down everything.
NORAD spokesman, Maj. Douglas Martin, said that jets were scrambled 67 times to intercept suspicious planes in one-ten month period before 9/11. Did you think they played cards and ate cheeze doodles all day?
Yes it is. Renowned investigative news journalist wrote a book about flight 007. In the book Hersh points out that there was a massive US military exercise in the Pacific at the time of the KAL shootdown. KAL 007 was cold war baloney.
9/11 is colder war baloney. 9/11 was just another gladio operation. NATO countries have bombed and killed innocent civilians before in order that the public demand increased security, and even when conjuring false pretexts for war.
No Yards, your link says it took 1 hour and 20 minutes for a fighter to get to Payne Stewart's plane. Not seconds.
Sorry, read that wrong, I though they were saying they followed the plan from 9:33EDT till 9:52CDT .. my bad.
More than 60% of the world's oil and natural gas lie in Muslim lands.
This was the reason for false flag on 9/11.
This is the fascist scapegoat style of reasoning that causes hundreds of millions of people to be demonized by a western world inquisition against hundreds of millions of peaceful Islamists, and against all anti-capitalist heresy in general. It's an ongoing blood-for-oil sword operation. The war on democracy continues.
More than 60% of the world's oil and natural gas lie in Muslim lands.
This was the reason for false flag on 9/11.
This is the fascist scapegoat style of reasoning that causes hundreds of millions of people to be demonized by a western world inquisition against hundreds of millions of peaceful Islamists, and against all anti-capitalist heresy in general. It's an ongoing blood-for-oil sword operation. The war on democracy continues.
That's ridiculous! How could Spiderman steal all that oil?!
More than 60% of the world's oil and natural gas lie in Muslim lands.
This was the reason for false flag on 9/11.
This is the fascist scapegoat style of reasoning that causes hundreds of millions of people to be demonized by a western world inquisition against hundreds of millions of peaceful Islamists, and against all anti-capitalist heresy in general. It's an ongoing blood-for-oil sword operation. The war on democracy continues.
That's ridiculous! How could Spiderman steal all that oil?!
Yes, it's no secret that the USA's is the most oil dependent, most wasteful economy in the world today. Their thirst for cheap oil and energy in general is unsustainable. It's true that transporting oil and gas to North America from so far away is not economically feasible. But oil and gas represent power and influence for politicians, and oil and gas represent valuable commodities for western energy companies operating globally.
The answer would have to include: Afghanistan, pipeline geopolitics, colder war baloney etc. The name of the game is to provide alternative oil and gas supplies to Europe in order to lessen dependency on Russian and Iranian gas and oil, as well as projecting US power and influence in the region. But that's deserving of a thread all by itself.
More than 60% of the world's oil and natural gas lie in Muslim lands.
This was the reason for false flag on 9/11.
This is the fascist scapegoat style of reasoning that causes hundreds of millions of people to be demonized by a western world inquisition against hundreds of millions of peaceful Islamists, and against all anti-capitalist heresy in general. It's an ongoing blood-for-oil sword operation. The war on democracy continues.
That's ridiculous! How could Spiderman steal all that oil?!
- try listening to those who quite obviously are considerably more educated about such things - you might learn something. Of course the tradeoff might be too severe to bear - less tv time ....
Fake al-Qaeda in Gaza 2002
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed fought for the CIA in Afghanistan
Zacarias Moussaoui fought for the CIA in Chechnya
CIA-ISI Created “Al Qaeda Network”, Blamed for Pakistan Troubles 2007
"I am a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign policy with war on my mind." - Honest George, War President of America
NORAD spokesman, Maj. Douglas Martin, said that jets were scrambled 67 times to intercept suspicious planes in one-ten month period before 9/11. Did you think they played cards and ate cheeze doodles all day?
From your link:
So, NORAD seems to have significantly stepped up interceptions after Sept.11th. This suggests that NORAD felt that they were not doing it often enough beforehand. This is inconsistent with your claim that they were doing it all the time.
Yes it is. Renowned investigative news journalist wrote a book about flight 007. In the book Hersh points out that there was a massive US military exercise in the Pacific at the time of the KAL shootdown. KAL 007 was cold war baloney.
9/11 is colder war baloney. 9/11 was just another gladio operation. NATO countries have bombed and killed innocent civilians before in order that the public demand increased security, and even when conjuring false pretexts for war.
So, your evidence that the planes were not intercepted as part of a fals flag operation is your unsupported assertion that some other unrelated airline tragedy is also a false flag operation.
Fidel, evidence usually consists of those things that are independently verifiable by another person.
More than 60% of the world's oil and natural gas lie in Muslim lands.
This was the reason for false flag on 9/11.
This is the fascist scapegoat style of reasoning that causes hundreds of millions of people to be demonized by a western world inquisition against hundreds of millions of peaceful Islamists, and against all anti-capitalist heresy in general. It's an ongoing blood-for-oil sword operation. The war on democracy continues.
This could just as easily (and much more plausibly) have been the reason for manipulating the media to turn an intelligence failure into a cause for war. You can get the exact same effect without the complicated and risky false flag operation.
67 times in ten months. That's 6.7 times per month on average before 9/11.
On 9/11 we are led to belive that amtaeur Cessna pilots dominated NORAD air space for nearly two hours while dubya continued reading stories to children.
Fidel, evidence usually consists of those things that are independently verifiable by another person.
You still haven't proven to us or yourself that "al-Qaeda" is a real terrorist organization. Do realize how silly it is to believe in an invisible enemy that doesn't exist?
And, there is more evidence for people who are interested.
In 2004 before a senate hearing committee of the joint chiefs of staff of the US military, Senator Mark Dayton asked, “Did NORAD”– the military organization responsible for defending U.S. airspace–”conduct exercises or develop scenarios, prior to September 11, 2001, to test a military reaction to an aircraft hijacking which appeared destined to result in a suicide crash into a high-value target?”
General Richard Myers outlined “five exercise hijack events” that NORAD had practiced for between November 1999 and October 2000, which all “included a suicide crash into a high-value target.”
There were warnings from intelligence agencies all over the world leading up to 9/11. The Neocons did nothing in response. That's treason and dereliction of duty at the highest levels.
This makes no sense at all. The Neocons at least tried to justify breaking US and international laws to Congress before there was a vote on the matter. Without the prior false flag, it's open aggression Nazi Germany style. In fact, even the Nazis pulled a false flag with the Gleiwitz incident before invading Poland. And that was before there was even a UN.
According to international law as written in the UN Charter, disputes are to be brought to the UN Security Council, which alone may authorize the use of force. Without this authorization, any military activity against another country is illegal.
The US didn't want to wrangle with the UN, so they looked to the next clause in the UN Charter, which was to choose to attack a country they believed to be an imminent threat to America based on the 9/11 false flag attack which they themselves are either indirectly or directly responsible for it happening. And then they proceeded to break international laws as as well as US law when they attacked Afghanistan, a desperately poor country US hawks claimed to be harboring "al-Qaeda" terrorists who were all actually trained in terrorism on US and European soil.
9/11 Cameraman Faces Extradition to United States grtv
Sonnenfeld, who lives in Buenos Aires with his Argentine family, says the footage proves that 9/11 was a lie. He still has the 22-hour footage that US authorities want.
"I have promised to give my footage to the big investigators that are credible and widely known - investigators who will be able to detect anomalies that I or other people without scientific education might miss. With that in mind, I hope that there are many things they can discover that disprove the current official story of what happened," Sonnenfeld told a Press TV correspondent.
9/11 film footage from ground zero not viewed yet by the public? For a bunch of fascists who are supposedly trying to ignore the issue, they sure are excited about Sonnenfeld's video footage.
67 times in ten months. That's 6.7 times per month on average before 9/11.
On 9/11 we are led to belive that amtaeur Cessna pilots dominated NORAD air space for nearly two hours while dubya continued reading stories to children.
And far more often in the ten months after 9/11.
Fidel, they did not dominate NORAD air space. They simply eluded detection for about twenty minutes.
None of that is evidence that US military planes routinely intercepted hijacked and off course planes in minutes.
This makes no sense at all. ...And then they proceeded to break international laws as as well as US law when they attacked Afghanistan, a desperately poor country US hawks claimed to be harboring "al-Qaeda" terrorists who were all actually trained in terrorism on US and European soil.
None of that contradicts what I said.
67 times in ten months. That's 6.7 times per month on average before 9/11.
On 9/11 we are led to belive that amtaeur Cessna pilots dominated NORAD air space for nearly two hours while dubya continued reading stories to children.
And far more often in the ten months after 9/11.
And? What does this have to do with the fact that military jets were scrambled an average of nearly 7 times a month before 9/11 as opposed to NORAD's perfect record of zero times for nearly two hours while school children baby sat Presinit dubya on 9/11?
NORAD Stand-Down on 9/11
The air defense network had, on September 11th, predictable and effective procedures for dealing with just such an attack. Yet it failed to respond in a timely manner until after the attack was over, more than an hour and a half after it had started. The official timeline describes a series of events and mode of response in which the delays are spread out into a number of areas. There are failures upon failures, in what might be described as a strategy of layered failures, or failure in depth. The failures can be divided into four types:
None of that is evidence that US military planes routinely intercepted hijacked and off course planes in minutes.
And there is no evidence that there was a single Muslim person belonging to an invisible enemy sometimes referred to as "al-Qaeda" on any of the hijacked planes on 9/11. So that must mean that only those who want to believe in the bogey man will do so. I, on the other hand, refuse to believe in such nonsense. There is no law that says you have to believe in the bogeyman either. And I highly recommend that you don't for lack of proof on the part of Murder Inc. as well as their bought and paid-for stooges in Ottawa. I just think it's time that we outgrew the bogeyman. Just say to yourself, I can't do it anymore.
The Last Believer: From Omar's Mistake to Obama's Atrocities
http://www.chris-floyd.com/articles/1=latest-news/2018-the-last-believer...
"...the Terror War is a win-win situation for America's militarists, among whom Obama now stand's foremost..."
Sorry, kids, but the bogeyman is not real. We will refuse to be scared by trick or treaters donning Elvis bin Laden Halloween masks next month. The gig is up. EbL and his army of darkness are "blown"! You read right here on babble.
Fidel, who are you arguing with and why? As far as I can tell everyone here believes that al-Qaeda was more than a hundred guys who had each others cell phone numbers. Now it's a brand.
There is also large evidence of major blunders by various parts of the US government and military. There is lot's of CYA coverup going on. It is clear that the 9/11 attack was exploited to launch illegal wars.
All of the this is generally accepted here (I sit to be corrected if that is not true).
So why do you go on accusing people here that they are complicit in crimes when they are just applying Occam's Razor? Incompetence is FAR more likely an explanation than false flag.
BTW, the assertion that there were flight delays because of slow flying speeds is false. Fighter aircraft can reach maximum speeds only at very high altitudes. The flight envelopes followed by the fighters included afterburners and were designed to reach the target areas as soon as possible.
Not me. I don't believe in bogeymen. They had no problems tracking Pablo Escobar and his gangsters around the world by cellular phone signals. They were tracking their own bogeymen with Able Danger etc. "Al-Qaeda"s hijacking specialist. Sargent Ali Mohammed, was and probably still is on the US Army and CIA/US taxpayer payroll.
Exploited yes. The whistleblowers are saying there was exploitation in this way for many years leading up to 9/11. And they exploitated their own security leaks and holes in the years and months leading up to 9/11. They were quite familiar with the superstars of 9/11 terror before 9/11, and their partnerships with some of them dated back to the 1980s. If you did business with the people who murder your wife and neglect to mention that in a phony investigation followed by a mock trial with no one held accountable, I suppose it's not an indictable or impeachable offense. Not until there is a real investigation and war crimes trial in a World Court of law, because that's where this 9/11 business needs to be dealt with.
I have done nothing of sort. And if people were to apply Occam's philosophy on the matter, then like Taliban leaders in 2001, Occam's flock would have to assume that there is no real evidence of bin Laden's or "al-Qaeda" guilt in 9/11. And I suggest that until someone shows you the goods, you don't have to believe in the bogeyman either. Just say no to al-CIA'da conspiracy theories is what I recommend.
It would depend on how far away war planes were situated that day. And as Marge Gunderson of Fargo movie fame might have said about 9/11, it was a beautiful day.
Fidel, who are you arguing with and why? As far as I can tell everyone here believes that al-Qaeda was more than a hundred guys who had each others cell phone numbers. Now it's a brand.
- easy, podnuh - outside of the MSM, there are a LOT of questions about the so-called al Quaeda - I can't give you a figure on what a Babble 911 vote might show, but I can assure you it would not be 'everyone here' falling in line with your belief ....
There is also large evidence of major blunders by various parts of the US government and military. There is lot's of CYA coverup going on.
- there is indeed a lot of coverup going on - but when you consider that the destruction of the WTC buildings cannot be explained by the OCT, and thus the involvement of some very high people in the US gov't was necessary, the case is quite strong that it is not to cover up 'blunders' - it is to avoid spending the rest of a lot of lives in jail somewhere - this was a major, major crime, and there surely is a lot at stake for a goodly number of very powerful people to see that it is never opened up to public scrutiny
....
So why do you go on accusing people here that they are complicit in crimes when they are just applying Occam's Razor?
-- actually, Occam's Razor would say that something that looks exactly like many controlled demolitions we all have seen should be first considered as another controlled demolition - it is the OCT people who are jumping through all kinds of hoops, and making up all kinds of fantastical stories, and twisting all kinds of things to try to make a case that a relatively small plane crash and a short-lived, small fire caused huge steel buildings to collapse as they never have before, and could not have on that day without some kind of serious assistance beyond those little fires and relatively insignificant plane crashes. You ought to not be talking about Mr Occam - he's not really your bud here. One could write books about the OCT and Occam - the whole thing is a fantasy that requires an endless number of things to happen that would have ol Occie rolling in his grave to see his name and theory abused in this way - try reading one of Griffin's books, and you might see things a bit more clearly.
...And? What does this have to do with the fact that military jets were scrambled an average of nearly 7 times a month before 9/11 as opposed to NORAD's perfect record of zero times for nearly two hours while school children baby sat Presinit dubya on 9/11? ...Just say to yourself, I can't do it anymore.
None of that is evidence that US military planes routinely intercepted hijacked and off-course planes in minutes.
You also seem to be ignoring the evidence that I already quoted, and linked to, showing that there were Muslim terrorists on those planes.
So, you seem to believe one idea, even though there is no evidence for it. At the same time, you are deliberately ignoring evidence for somehing you do not wish to believe.
Profile: Prince Turki al-Faisal
In December 2004, Prince Turki accepted substantial libel damages and an apology from the magazine Paris Match over claims he himself was linked to the 11 September attacks.[..]
The ambassador weighed into the controversy surrounding US filmmaker Michael Moore's documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, when he condemned it as "grossly unfair" to Saudis.
He accused Moore of failing to carry out proper research and dismissed his claims the Bush administration helped high-ranking Saudis to leave the US immediately after the 11 September attacks.
Did Michael Moore defame the bin Laden family concerning 9/11?
But what's this?:
Judicial Watch Investigation Uncovers FBI Documents Concerning Bin Laden Family and Post-9/11 Flights
Unclassified document on Saudi Flight 207 (pdf)
And yet The 9/11 Commission Report(pdf) says this:
But immediately after the 9/11 attacks, they couldn't get bin Laden's closest associates(members of his own family) out of the country fast enough? Why is there no mention of this by the 9/11 Commission Cover-up?
.....
So, you seem to believe one idea, even though there is no evidence for it. At the same time, you are deliberately ignoring evidence for somehing you do not wish to believe.
- now if that isn't about as good of a description of the average OCT believer as you could find, I don't know what is - and is, of course, a perfect precis of one of the OCT bibles, the 911 Commission Report .... as very thoroughly explained by DR Griffin - often.
"Mom? This is Mark Bingham." Enough to make any mother suspicious if you ask me. And then they were "cut off."
The way I see it, cell phone use would have been spotty and difficult, but possible, while Airfone use would have been no problem at all.
The FBI originally said there were about a dozen cell phone calls which originated from UA flight 93 when that plane was at 40,000 feet altitude. Then in 2006 during the Zacarius Moussaoui trial, the alleged 20th hijacker, the FBI changed their story and said there were only two cell phone calls and the rest were by airfone. So if we go by the FBI's newest and latest lies stated in 2006 about the two cell phone calls, why did so many UA93 passengers' relatives specifically report receiving cell phone calls from UA flight 93?
Why does Deena Burnett still maintain that she received 3-5 cell phone calls from her husband Tom Burnett with Tom Burnett's cell phone ID showing up on her home telephone's caller ID display? Deena Burnett stated this about Tom's caller ID several times publicly as well as in a book she wrote.
Caller ID spoofing/voice changer equipment
Can anyone sound like General Colin Powell over a phone these days?
Quote:
The Boston Globe reported on its web site Thursday that it had obtained a copy of the complete manifest list of the planes hijacked from Boston.
The Globe said according to the manifest, Mohamed Atta, one of the suspected terrorists, was assigned seat 8D in business class on American Airlines Flight 11, directly across the...(snip)
Well I just don't understand it. Because The Washington Post published a "partial list" the next day. There are no Muslim names on the lists provided to them.
I don't see Mohammed Atta's name on any of USA Today's 9/11 passenger lists published in September of 2001.
And Gerard Holmgren reported that CNN's 9/11 passenger lists didn't have one single Muslim sounding name listed anywhere the day after 9/11. I checked, and CNN's 9/11 passenger/victims page now says, "page not found"
Don't you find it strange? Were only some news agencies provided fake passenger lists? Was Boston Globe's passenger list faked, too? I don't think they could use any of those lists in a real court of law with real lawyers and jury scrutinizing the evidence. In fact, they didn't. If they did, then the alleged hijackers would probably get off. The 19 alleged hijackers/patsies probably were killed, but there is no evidence they died on any of the 9/11 flights. Not really. What they did was a mock investigation, and they produced a whitewash report for public consumption.
The FBI originally said there were about a dozen cell phone calls which originated from UA flight 93 when that plane was at 40,000 feet altitude. Then in 2006 during the Zacarius Moussaoui trial, the alleged 20th hijacker, the FBI changed their story and said there were only two cell phone calls and the rest were by airfone. So if we go by the FBI's newest and latest lies stated in 2006 about the two cell phone calls, why did so many UA93 passengers' relatives specifically report receiving cell phone calls from UA flight 93?
Why does Deena Burnett still maintain that she received 3-5 cell phone calls from her husband Tom Burnett with Tom Burnett's cell phone ID showing up on her home telephone's caller ID display? Deena Burnett stated this about Tom's caller ID several times publicly as well as in a book she wrote.
I do not understand why you believe that people changing their story is an admission of deception.
People often change their stories as new information comes to light. That is how science (and critical thinking in general) works.
Besides, I would like to see some evidence of your claims, so that we can discuss this from an informed perspective.
Well I just don't understand it. Because The Washington Post published a "partial list" the next day. There are no Muslim names on the lists provided to them.
I don't see Mohammed Atta's name on any of USA Today's 9/11 passenger lists published in September of 2001.
And Gerard Holmgren reported that CNN's 9/11 passenger lists didn't have one single Muslim sounding name listed anywhere the day after 9/11. I checked, and CNN's 9/11 passenger/victims page now says, "page not found"
Don't you find it strange? Were only some news agencies provided fake passenger lists? Was Boston Globe's passenger list faked, too? I don't think they could use any of those lists in a real court of law with real lawyers and jury scrutinizing the evidence. In fact, they didn't. If they did, then the alleged hijackers would probably get off. The 19 alleged hijackers/patsies probably were killed, but there is no evidence they died on any of the 9/11 flights. Not really. What they did was a mock investigation, and they produced a whitewash report for public consumption.
The news articles to which you have linked are lists of the victims. Thus, they do not include the names of the hijackers.
People often change their stories as new information comes to light. That is how science (and critical thinking in general) works.
That's true, it is evidence of nothing. But the FBI changing their story about the 'cell phone flight' UA 95 doesn't exactly instill confidence in all of us enough to justify bombing and invading Afghanistan and occupying it militarily for nine years, does it?
As we were saying before, there is no hard proof that there were any Muslim hijackers boarding any of the 9/11 flights. Apparently the alleged hijackers themselves were not even proficient single engine pilots. Hani Hanjour was failing his flight training courses in Arizona. And yet we're supposed to believe he guided a commercial airline jet through combat maneuvers into the Pentagon. Rick Garza, a flight instructor at Sorbi's Flying Club, had this to say about the two alleged hijackers originally thought to have piloted Flight 77, Khalid al-Mihdar and Nawaq al-Hamzi: "It was like Dumb and Dumber, I mean, they were clueless. It was clear they were never going to make it as pilots."
Here is the official info about these "hijackers". Many of the real identities are still alive. The FBI ignored these facts during 2001-2002 and never updated their suspect list.Moussaoui trial exhibits 2006
The problem here is that the government side has a whole lot of circumstantial evidence. They are asking you to have a leap of faith and believe their version of events. There is just as much circumstantial evidence pointing right back at them and linking themselves to what was, and in all likelihood, an inside job on 9/11. There is more evidence for the US Government side having committed mass murder and perpetrating international terrorism over the years than there is for any of the alleged 9/11 hijackers. There is no way to look at 9/11 except through a very critical and a very jaundiced eye at who the accusers are in this case.
...there is no hard proof that there were any Muslim hijackers boarding any of the 9/11 flights.
Yes, there is. I even linked to it and quoted the relevant text.
I then pointed out that you were ignoring the evidence. Ane here you are doing it again.
Apparently the alleged hijackers themselves were not even proficient single engine pilots. Hani Hanjour was failing his flight training courses in Arizona. And yet we're supposed to believe he guided a commercial airline jet through combat maneuvers into the Pentagon. Rick Garza, a flight instructor at Sorbi's Flying Club, had this to say about the two alleged hijackers originally thought to have piloted Flight 77, Khalid al-Mihdar and Nawaq al-Hamzi: "It was like Dumb and Dumber, I mean, they were clueless. It was clear they were never going to make it as pilots."
Combat maneuvers? I do not think crashing a plane into a building requires good piloting skills, nor does it count as combat maneuvering.
Here is the official info about these "hijackers".
Many of the real identities are still alive. The FBI ignored these facts during 2001-2002 and never updated their suspect list.Moussaoui trial exhibits 2006
That's not official information. Those are just 9/11 conspiracy sites that confuse the victim lists with comprehensive passenger lists.
The problem here is that the government side has a whole lot of circumstantial evidence. They are asking you to have a leap of faith and believe their version of events. There is just as much circumstantial evidence pointing right back at them and linking themselves to what was, and in all likelihood, an inside job on 9/11. There is more evidence for the US Government side having committed mass murder and perpetrating international terrorism over the years than there is for any of the alleged 9/11 hijackers. There is no way to look at 9/11 except through a very critical and a very jaundiced eye at who the accusers are in this case.
If there is so much evidence, then why is it so difficult to provide examples of this evidence?
...there is no hard proof that there were any Muslim hijackers boarding any of the 9/11 flights.
Yes, there is. I even linked to it and quoted the relevant text.
I then pointed out that you were ignoring the evidence. Ane here you are doing it again.
I'm sorry but your one passenger list is proof of nothing. It certainly does not look good for Mohammed Atta who was arrested by the FBI before 9/11 and released on orders of DoD lawyers. But it still proves nothing.
These people would disagree with you.
You've shown us a list, and I've shown you several more from three other US news agencies produced that same week of 9/1 that don't jive with Boston Globe's. Why is it that? Apparently you are willing to have a leap of faith concerning this bit of circumstantial evidence whereas I am not willing. I don't believe in your 9/11 deities, sorry. Some of us require real proof.
If there is so much evidence, then why is it so difficult to provide examples of this evidence?
Cart before horse. It's a general rule of law that any invisible army of darkness which does not exist should be considered innocent of all charges until proven guilty. And the emphasis is on hard proof here. You don't have any, and neither does cosmetic US Government have any. Sorry, it's just the way it is.
I'm sorry but your one passenger list is proof of nothing. It certainly does not look good for Mohammed Atta who was arrested by the FBI before 9/11 and released on orders of DoD lawyers. But it still proves nothing.
CNN itself states quite clearly that those lists are not the official ones.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/index.html
Click on the link above, then click on "About this site" and you will get this text:
Legacy.com is not part of the US government, so the CNN lists can not be considered official.
The official lists can be downloaded here:
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution...
Screenshots of the manifests:
http://www.911myths.com/images/2/25/Flight_11_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif
http://www.911myths.com/images/b/bf/Flight_77_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif
http://www.911myths.com/images/9/91/Flight_93_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif
http://www.911myths.com/images/3/3c/Flight_175_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif
These people would disagree with you.
Well, until they produce a solid argument supported by verifiable evidence, it does not matter what they think.
You've shown us a list, and I've shown you several more from three other US news agencies produced that same week of 9/1 that don't jive with Boston Globe's. Why is it that? Apparently you are willing to have a leap of faith concerning this bit of circumstantial evidence whereas I am not willing. I don't believe in your 9/11 deities, sorry. Some of us require real proof.
It has nothing to do with faith. The Boston Globe published the official manifests while CNN did not. This is obvious as soon as you do some research into where they got their lists.
Cart before horse. It's a general rule of law that any invisible army of darkness which does not exist should be considered innocent of all charges until proven guilty. And the emphasis is on hard proof here. You don't have any, and neither does cosmetic US Government have any. Sorry, it's just the way it is.
I'm sorry, but that does not explain why you seem to be unable to provide evidence that 9/11 was a false flag operation.
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?
Were the Names of the "Hijackers" on the Passenger Manifests?
On the morning of 9/11, through an evaluation of data related to the passenger manifest for the four terrorist hijacked aircraft, Customs Office of Intelligence was able to identify the likely terrorist hijackers. Within 45 minutes of the attacks, Customs forwarded the passenger lists with the names of the victims and 19 probable hijackers to the FBI and the intelligence community.78
Under questioning, Bonner added:
We were able to pull from the airlines the passenger manifest for each of the four flights. We ran the manifest through [our lookout] system. . . . [B]y 11:00 AM, I'd seen a sheet that essentially identified the 19 probable hijackers. And in fact, they turned out to be, based upon further follow-up in detailed investigation, to be the 19.79
Bonner's statement, however, is doubly problematic. In the first place, the initial FBI list, as reported by CNN on September 13 and 14, contained only 18 names.80 Why would that be if 19 men had already been identified on 9/11?
Second, several of the names on the FBI's first list, having quickly become problematic, were replaced by other names. For example, the previously discussed men named Bukhari, thought to be brothers, were replaced on American 11's list of hijackers by brothers named Waleed and Wail al-Shehri. Two other replacements for this flight were Satam al-Suqami, whose passport was allegedly found at Ground Zero, and Abdul al-Omari, who allegedly went to Portland with Atta the day before 9/11. Also, the initial list for American 77 did not include the name of Hani Hanjour, who would later be called the pilot of this flight. Rather, it contained a name that, after being read aloud by a CNN correspondent, was transcribed "Mosear Caned."81 All in all, the final list of 19 hijackers contained six names that were not on the original list of 18---a fact that contradicts Bonner's claim that by 11:00 AM on 9/11 his agency had identified 19 probable hijackers who, in fact, "turned out to be. . . the 19."
These replacements to the initial list also undermine the claim that Amy Sweeney, by giving the seat numbers of three of the hijackers to Michael Woodward of American Airlines, allowed him to identify Atta and two others. This second claim is impossible because the two others were Abdul al-Omari and Satam al-Suqami,82 and they were replacements for two men on the original list---who, like Adnan Bukhari, turned up alive after 9/11.83 Woodward could not possibly have identified men who were not added to the list until several days later.84
For all these reasons, the claim that the names of the 19 alleged hijackers were on the airlines' passenger manifests must be considered false.
This conclusion is supported by the fact that the passenger manifests that were released to the public included no names of any of the 19 alleged hijackers and, in fact, no Middle Eastern names whatsoever.85 These manifests, therefore, support the suspicion that there were no al-Qaeda hijackers on the planes.
Even their circumstantial evidence is wonky. There is no such thing as "al-Qaeda"
One of the problems that the USAF had on 9/11 is what they described as "the whole in the doughnut". USAF radars are positioned along the periphery of the US and look outwards. Internal airspace control is the air traffic control responsibility, which depend on transponders. At least all this was the case at the time. The upshot was they didn't know what was going on. Which is why they shut down everything.
Sigh... into the 9-11 maelstrom again... LOL
That and the USAF was not set up to intercept internal fights... its "ready jets" (and there were only a few) were in the wrong places to do so. Modern jet fights and their pilots have to be prepped before they can take off on a mission. This isn't the RAF in the battle of Britain. It looks like Fidel here must think you can just hop into the cockpit of a F-15 fighter jet in you underwear and flip flops, turn a key and just fly off into the wild blue yonder... LOL
That is so synonymous of a person who doesn't know jack about the military (aside from its bad).
September 11, 2001, to test a military reaction to an aircraft
hijacking which appeared destined to result in a suicide crash into a
high-value target?
Yes, there were five US Military exercises to anticipate possible hijacking-suicide missions carried out against high value targets.
The White House had (at least ) 28 Advanced Intelligence Warnings Prior to 9/11
Apparently two F-16s over 100 miles away were in the air within 7 minutes on 9/11. They were sent to Long Island though and put in a holding pattern.
Actually British Spitfire and Hurricane pilots were often outnumbered by German Messerschmitts and Heinkels. Brits relied a lot on radar and coastal spotters and lookouts to warn them of the vaunted "surprise attack." They couldn't get up in the air all that quickly then, and sometimes they had to scramble so not to get caught on the ground or leave a town or city without air cover. The G forces were enough to wear them out in a matter of minutes during steep climbs to rise up to where the Adolfs would be. They came back soaking wet from sweating. It was a lot harder than they make it look in movies.
Speak for yourself. I don't know flying or tactics. But my deceased relative was was an RAF pilot, Halifax bombers - all shot down over the Channel, over Germany, or on the way home. I have some RAF memorabilia.
That and the USAF was not set up to intercept internal fights... its "ready jets" (and there were only a few) were in the wrong places to do so. Modern jet fights and their pilots have to be prepped before they can take off on a mission. This isn't the RAF in the battle of Britain. It looks like Fidel here must think you can just hop into the cockpit of a F-15 fighter jet in you underwear and flip flops, turn a key and just fly off into the wild blue yonder... LOL
That is so synonymous of a person who doesn't know jack about the military (aside from its bad).
- a reference would be useful - you know, the page of the American Defence Manual (public release version) or whatever they call it that says something along the lines of - My Fellow Americans - if our great country is the object of a surprise attack, I guess we're f***ed. It is simply impossible to get jet fighters into the air to protect y'all in less than 20-30 minutes. Our pilots and their commanders need some prep time, quick shower and coffee, time to get them bulky uniforms on, get the aircraft crews out of bed if it's a night and get their asses in gear - you know, stuff like that. Nobody hops out of bed and gets to work first thing these days - pretty unamerican, that kind of thing. We know y'all have been under the illusion that Mer'ca was the best protected country in the world, and we could have fighters in the air in seconds, but that's just (ahem) conspiracy theory crap. You're all not a lot better off than if we had no planes at all, in the event of a surprise attack"
- and etc - I am sure you can point us to some approriate reference to confirm this (actually I think probably not, I think you are somewhat less knowledgeable of air defence procedures than you pretend. )
Oh - did you know that there is a place called Andrews Air Force base about 10 miles from the White House? I'd be quite interested in hearing why and how a known-to-be-hijaced plane was allowed to crash into the pentagon, which they surely to god have some protection for, as the defence H!Q of the most militaristic nation the world has ever seen, with the highest budget - the plane that (supposedly) hit the Pentagon was known to be hijacked for at least an hour prior to the crash, and was known to be on path for Washington for at least the same amount of time - and not a single fighter over Washington to protect the city? Talk about LOL.
- I've always thought that required some kind of explanation, but the OCT seems to have not much to say about this. I am sure you, with your apparently great knowledge, could enlighten me on that point.
- oh - there is a bit more on 911 fighter response etc here, for those interested - http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/ .
- and a recent article on the whole al Quaeda thing, origin and so on, from a POV not sanctioned by the OCT folk - http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20907 .
- gosh, ol Winston and the Ministry of Truth would have had a rough time if they'd had the internet back then - all the BS spread through the MSM, all the truth floating around in cyberspace for anyone with the brains to go looking ...
Was America Attacked by Muslims on 9/11?...
We were able to pull from the airlines the passenger manifest for each of the four flights. We ran the manifest through [our lookout] system. . . . [B]y 11:00 AM, I'd seen a sheet that essentially identified the 19 probable hijackers. And in fact, they turned out to be, based upon further follow-up in detailed investigation, to be the 19.79
Bonner's statement, however, is doubly problematic. In the first place, the initial FBI list, as reported by CNN on September 13 and 14, contained only 18 names.80 Why would that be if 19 men had already been identified on 9/11?....
Please read Bonner's statement carefully. He says the sheet essentially identified the probable hijackers. I assume you are aware of what probable means. Between this time and the final official list, the number of suspected hijackers would have varied. After more investigation, the FBI became more certain and released a list of 19 hijackers on September 14th. CNN erred when it claimed that the FBI list only contained 18 names.
There is no contradiction.
Second, several of the names on the FBI's first list, having quickly become problematic, were replaced by other names. For example, the previously discussed men named Bukhari, thought to be brothers, were replaced on American 11's list of hijackers by brothers named Waleed and Wail al-Shehri.
The Bukhari brothers were removed from the list of suspects because they did not appear on the passenger lists. This makes sense, as not everyone suspected in a crime will actually be guilty, so investigators will stop investigating people once it becomes obvious the suspects are, in fact, innocent.
Two other replacements for this flight were Satam al-Suqami, whose passport was allegedly found at Ground Zero, and Abdul al-Omari, who allegedly went to Portland with Atta the day before 9/11. Also, the initial list for American 77 did not include the name of Hani Hanjour, who would later be called the pilot of this flight. Rather, it contained a name that, after being read aloud by a CNN correspondent, was transcribed "Mosear Caned."81 All in all, the final list of 19 hijackers contained six names that were not on the original list of 18---a fact that contradicts Bonner's claim that by 11:00 AM on 9/11 his agency had identified 19 probable hijackers who, in fact, "turned out to be. . . the 19."
Can you provide a link to the list of the original 18 hijackers that Mr. Griffin is talking about? Because al-Suqami and al-Omari appear on the Boston Globe manifest (which actually came from an official source) and on the FBI list, so I suspect that mr. Griffin is simply wrong about them.
Also, CNN flubbing up Hanjour's name is not evidence of a government conspiracy.
....
Apparently two F-16s over 100 miles away were in the air within 7 minutes on 9/11. They were sent to Long Island though and put in a holding pattern.
....
Please provide evidence for this claim.
From America's Air Force:
You guys seem to forget that before 9-11 airline hijackings here and worldwide were viewed as hostage situations and not potential bombing attacks. That influenced the US fighter response posture as well.
On 9/11 NORAD attempted to protect Washington by scrambling fighters from Langley Air Force Base. This was ineffective, though, and questions were raised almost immediately about the decision. Why, it was asked, didn't they launch fighters from the much closer Andrews Air Force Base, instead? The answer is rather simple: Andrews is not a NORAD controlled base and was outside NORAD's command structure. They had to use the jets at Langley for a quick response (they did not get Andrews and other bases involved until after they realized the hijacked planes were being used as bombs).
Like I said before post 9-11 airline hijackings here and worldwide were viewed as hostage situations and not potential bombing attacks and I think that's a bigger factor in this whole 9-11 NORAD response thing than most realize. Before this crashing a jet into a building was just crazy...
And consider this for discussion here: Even if interceptors caught up with the hijacked planes what could they do? They probably would have ended up watching the planes fly into their targets; seriously. Given the situation before 9-11 I really doubt NORAD would have ordered fighters to shoot down huge airliners full of US passengers over the USA; especially after they got over the cities and other populated areas. Nobody knew what was coming till pretty much after it happened.
That' it for me... You guys enjoy filling up the rest of the thread.
And so Bonner originally stated that they knew who all 19 hijackers were by 11 am on 9/11. Apparently he lied. The fact that Bonner lied doesn't support the Government's case against the alleged hijackers, nor does the fact that the FBI withheld the original airline manifests from public scrutiny for years after 2001. US Government secrecy does not contribute to the alleged hijackers' guilt in any way. Who had access to those original manifests? In fact, the lack of transparency and accountability is suspicious and tends to detract from US Government's credibility on 9/11 more than anything else.
No. Bukhari brothers(CNN, 9/13/01) indentities were alleged to have been stolen. Ameer Bukhari died a year before 9/11.
The next day, CNN manages to obtain a list of 18 hijackers' names and adds the name 'Mosear Caned.' Caned is later scratched from the fake CNN-FBI roster and replaced with the name 'Hani Hanjour', whose flight instructors described as clueless and likely never to make it as a pilot.
Again, this Abbot and Costello game of who's on first doesn't mean that any of the 19 alleged hijackers were responsible for 9/11 terror.
US Army Lt.-Colonel Anthony Shaffer said that Mohammed Atta was known to US intelligence by 2000, and that the DIA failed to act. Shaffer said that he recommended to the FBI that they arrest Atta, and that DoD lawyers prevented the arrest.
In 2005, US politician Curt Weldon went public with Shaffer's revelations about Able Danger and Mohammed Atta.
None of this was mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. Why not?
But less importantly, for lack of wanting to embroil ourselves in the FBI-CNN game of 'Who's on First?', why would suicide pilots even need to cover their tracks with stolen identities?
And, why steal Saudi or Saudi-American identities(the CIA ran a special visa program for Mujahideen-Qaeda anticommunist jihadis since the 1980s) if their goal was to deflect the CIA's attention away from Saudi and Arab country nationals in general? Why not steal the identities of Greek or even Indian nationals? Why make things hard for fellow Arabs after the sword operation is over and done with, and Allah forgives the "pious Muslim hijackers"(religious oxymoron alert) for leaving a Holy Koran back at the strip club the day before?
There is no such thing as "al-Qaeda", and there is no such thing as US Gov't credibility when it comes to 9/11.
From America's Air Force:
You guys seem to forget that before 9-11 airline hijackings here and worldwide were viewed as hostage situations and not potential bombing attacks. That influenced the US fighter response posture as well.
On 9/11 NORAD attempted to protect Washington by scrambling fighters from Langley Air Force Base. This was ineffective, though, and questions were raised almost immediately about the decision. Why, it was asked, didn't they launch fighters from the much closer Andrews Air Force Base, instead? The answer is rather simple: Andrews is not a NORAD controlled base and was outside NORAD's command structure. They had to use the jets at Langley for a quick response (they did not get Andrews and other bases involved until after they realized the hijacked planes were being used as bombs).
Like I said before post 9-11 airline hijackings here and worldwide were viewed as hostage situations and not potential bombing attacks and I think that's a bigger factor in this whole 9-11 NORAD response thing than most realize. Before this crashing a jet into a building was just crazy...
And consider this for discussion here: Even if interceptors caught up with the hijacked planes what could they do? They probably would have ended up watching the planes fly into their targets; seriously. Given the situation before 9-11 I really doubt NORAD would have ordered fighters to shoot down huge airliners full of US passengers over the USA; especially after they got over the cities and other populated areas. Nobody knew what was coming till pretty much after it happened.
That' it for me... You guys enjoy filling up the rest of the thread.
- toss around a few red herrings and run - a new tactic, variatiion on the old drive by smear, I guess but not especially effective - no OCT arguments are, when one digs a bit.
1. you say that hijackings were usually treated as hostage situations, so no big response on 911 is not surprising - BUT - after two hickacked aircraft were flown into the WTC buildings, and a third was heading for Washington and still an hour away from impact, I expect even the dimmer bulbs in the pentagon, whose numbers are probably considerable, could see the danger of that 3rd plane heading for Washington, and it is not hard to figure the immediate response in any 'real' situation would be get some aircraft in the air, at least - leading to
2 - you say they would not have shot down a passenger plane - maybe, maybe not, that is not the point, but a red herring - the defence planes SHOULD HAVE been in the air at least, and that they were not can be the result of only one thing - some kind of stand down until it was too late to do anything - leading to
3 - you say Andrews was not under NORAD command, therefore they did not respond - I just cannot imagine the people in the higher levels of US defence being that constrained - just imagine, following your proposal, people at Andrews watching the ongoing whatever that morning - well, folks, two planes have been flown into the WTC in New York, and a third at least is heading for Washington. NORAD says they have no planes available - we do, but it ain't our job to protect Washington, so we'll just sit here with our thumbs up our asses as usual - really, do you want to say that happened? Maybe - but I find it a bit hard to believe. High level US Defence people can't use telephones? Hey, Jack, this is Bob at Norad - we have a potential threat heading for Washington, and no planes near enough - do you have anything at Andrews? etc etc. Again, maybe they are that stupid and incompetent, but I kind of doubt it (it is kind of telling too that after that day, how many high level Defence people got reprimanded or even fired? Nobody, as far as I know - quite a few promotions, however - for a job well done, maybe?????
- and to finish - one could easily think of another reason there were no fighter planes in the air over Washington - in reality, there was no plane heading for the pentagon at all, thus no need for defence (and also quite an increased danger of fighter pilots flying around saying things getting recorded like 'What plane are you talking about, Mission Command?' etc). I don't know what happened that day, there are signs it may have just been some kind of f-up - but there are no signs of any serious aircraft wreckage around the Pentagon, and planes do not disintegrate like that - like the three tall buildings falling down in a way no tall buildings have ever fallen before (without controlled demolition), on 911 we have supposedly four major-size jetliners crashing, with not a single tail assembly or recognizable engine or wing or fuselage part or anything else - four huge airliners just disintegrating.
Sure dark down here, Alice, in the land of the MSM. And something smells reaeaeaeaealllly bad .... let's head back to internetland where there is at least some light and truth floating around and the mushroom food much easier to detect and avoid ...
9/11Myths.com: No Proof that Mohammed Atta is alive
Yes, turn yourself over to the authorities, Mohammed Atta, wherever you are. I'd be angry too if my "pious Muslim" son and engineer making good money in Germany decided to ditch the good life to become a patsy for colder warriors. And then disappear without a trace.
Atta is either dead courtesy of Murder Inc., or he's had a totally fabulous identity makeover by US federal witness protection, like US-Qaeda Army Sargent Ali Mohamed
And so Bonner originally stated that they knew who all 19 hijackers were by 11 am on 9/11. Apparently he lied. The fact that Bonner lied doesn't support the Government's case against the alleged hijackers, ....
No, Fidel, he did not lie. Bonner claimed that they had a list of probable suspects by 11am on 9/11.
He did have that list, and that list did contain the names of the hijackers. I have no idea how you twisted that in your head to make it seem like he was lying.
...nor does the fact that the FBI withheld the original airline manifests from public scrutiny for years after 2001. US Government secrecy does not contribute to the alleged hijackers' guilt in any way. Who had access to those original manifests? In fact, the lack of transparency and accountability is suspicious and tends to detract from US Government's credibility on 9/11 more than anything else.
The FBI did not withhold that information. If it had, the Boston Globe would not have been able to publish the lists that it did.
No. Bukhari brothers(CNN, 9/13/01) indentities were alleged to have been stolen. Ameer Bukhari died a year before 9/11.
That does not contradict anything I said. Besides that article comes from the days right after the attack, when the FBI were still conducting their investigation and any information released to the public could not be considered definitive.
The next day, CNN manages to obtain a list of 18 hijackers' names and adds the name 'Mosear Caned.' Caned is later scratched from the fake CNN-FBI roster and replaced with the name 'Hani Hanjour', whose flight instructors described as clueless and likely never to make it as a pilot.
Again, this Abbot and Costello game of who's on first doesn't mean that any of the 19 alleged hijackers were responsible for 9/11 terror.
Fidel, the CNN lists are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
Fidel, the CNN lists are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
Fidel, the CNN lists are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
CNN flubbing up Hanjour's name means nothing, nor does Hanjour's lack of piloting skills (all he had to do was crash the plane, after all).
US Army Lt.-Colonel Anthony Shaffer said that Mohammed Atta was known to US intelligence by 2000, and that the DIA failed to act. Shaffer said that he recommended to the FBI that they arrest Atta, and that DoD lawyers prevented the arrest.
In 2005, US politician Curt Weldon went public with Shaffer's revelations about Able Danger and Mohammed Atta.
None of this was mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. Why not?
See below.
But less importantly, for lack of wanting to embroil ourselves in the FBI-CNN game of 'Who's on First?', why would suicide pilots even need to cover their tracks with stolen identities?
And, why steal Saudi or Saudi-American identities(the CIA ran a special visa program for Mujahideen-Qaeda anticommunist jihadis since the 1980s) if their goal was to deflect the CIA's attention away from Saudi and Arab country nationals in general? Why not steal the identities of Greek or even Indian nationals? Why make things hard for fellow Arabs after the sword operation is over and done with, and Allah forgives the "pious Muslim hijackers"(religious oxymoron alert) for leaving a Holy Koran back at the strip club the day before?
There is no such thing as "al-Qaeda", and there is no such thing as US Gov't credibility when it comes to 9/11.[/size]
They didn't use secret identities.
9/11Myths.com: No Proof that Mohammed Atta is alive
Yes, turn yourself over to the authorities, Mohammed Atta, wherever you are. I'd be angry too if my "pious Muslim" son and engineer making good money in Germany decided to ditch the good life to become a patsy for colder warriors. And then disappear without a trace.
Atta is either dead courtesy of Murder Inc., or he's had a totally fabulous identity makeover by US federal witness protection, like US-Qaeda Army Sargent Ali Mohamed
So, here you are arguing that Mohammed Atta had nothing to do with the attacks.
US Army Lt.-Colonel Anthony Shaffer said that Mohammed Atta was known to US intelligence by 2000, and that the DIA failed to act. Shaffer said that he recommended to the FBI that they arrest Atta, and that DoD lawyers prevented the arrest.
In 2005, US politician Curt Weldon went public with Shaffer's revelations about Able Danger and Mohammed Atta.
So, here you are arguing that the US knew that Mohammed Atta was organising the attacks.
This is a contradiction.
He did have that list, and that list did contain the names of the hijackers. I have no idea how you twisted that in your head to make it seem like he was lying.
Okay, but the list wasn't finalized until the Sept.14th, so technically, Bonner's list wasn't the finalized fake one on 9/11 either. I'm not saying Bonner was deliberately lying, just that he wasn't dealing truth to the public on 9/11.
The FBI has named five hijackers on board Flight 11, whereas Ms Sweeney spotted only four.
Also, the seat numbers she gave were different from those registered in the hijackers' names.
Sounds like more than a mix-up to me.
FBI admits Hanjour may not have had a plane ticket, but Hanjour the clueless pilot's name shows up on the FBI faxes on 9/11 anyway? WTF?
Not legal proof? Actually, it's no wonder. Actually, they did have the opportunity to check DNA samples against flight manifests at the Pentagon crash site. And you'll never guess what they did instead.
Complete and original flight manifests were not released to the public by FOI requests prior to at least 2008.
Fidel, the CNN lists are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
Fidel, the CNN lists are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
Wrong again. FBI has dibs on relase of any information from a federal crime scene. So why were CNN's list, Boston Globe's list, and USA Today's list not all the same?
Anyway, all of this is circumstantial evidence and proves nothing either way. The invisible enemy lead by Elvis bin Laden doesn't exist. "Al-Qaeda" is a marketing gimmick. And you don't have to buy it if you don't want to.
Okay, but the list wasn't finalized until the Sept.14th, so technically, Bonner's list wasn't the finalized fake one on 9/11 either. I'm not saying Bonner was deliberately lying, just that he wasn't dealing truth to the public on 9/11.
Bonner's list was a preliminary one at the beginning of the investigation. The final list on Sept. 14th was the results of the investigations that occurred in the intervening time. There was no deceit at all, as far as I can see.
The FBI has named five hijackers on board Flight 11, whereas Ms Sweeney spotted only four.
Also, the seat numbers she gave were different from those registered in the hijackers' names.
Sounds like more than a mix-up to me.
I think it is entirely possible that Ms. Sweeney could have been mistaken in that time interval. She was, after all, in a highly fluid and chaotic crisis situation.
FBI admits Hanjour may not have had a plane ticket, but Hanjour the clueless pilot's name shows up on the FBI faxes on 9/11 anyway? WTF?
You should include links that actually back up your claims. That link does not support your claim.
Not legal proof? Actually, it's no wonder. Actually, they did have the opportunity to check DNA samples against flight manifests at the Pentagon crash site. And you'll never guess what they did instead.
That is not what Mueller said.
He said the following:
and
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/21/se.25.html
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/27/se.24.html
Complete and original flight manifests were not released to the public by FOI requests prior to at least 2008.
This is simply incorrect. All the official flight manifests were made available to the public by 2006 at the latest, during the Moussaoui trial.
Wrong again. FBI has dibs on relase of any information from a federal crime scene. So why were CNN's list, Boston Globe's list, and USA Today's list not all the same?
Anyway, all of this is circumstantial evidence and proves nothing either way. The invisible enemy lead by Elvis bin Laden doesn't exist. "Al-Qaeda" is a marketing gimmick. And you don't have to buy it if you don't want to.[/size]
CNN did not get their information "from a crime scene". They got it from a variety of sources that did not include the FBI. The Boston Globe got their information from American Airlines, if I recall correctly, and god knows where the USA Today info came from, but unless you can show that the FBI controlled the press and told them what to print, you have no real argument.
No paper trail by spring of 2002? How could that be? I wonder how the FBI, CNN, Boston Globe or anyone could possibly know who the 18, or was it 19 alleged hijackers' were in 2001 then if no paper trail existed - "not a single scrap of paper"? And at least six of the alleged hijackers announced their excellent health at some point.
U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson Lied about 9/11: FBI Now Admits his Wife Couldn’t Have Called Him from Hijacked Plane CBC interview
Chad Kinder of American Airlines" "There were no Airfones on flight 77"
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well BBC 9/23/01
ObL was likely in hospital on 9/11 not orchestrating terror What we are dealing with is criminilization of the upper echelons of the state.
Rest assured, there is no such thing as "al-Qaeda."
9/11 ANALYSIS: 9/11 and America’s Secret Terror Campaign
The Imperial Anatomy of Al-Qaeda, Part III Andrew Gavin Marshall
In September of 2000, more than a year before 9/11, Able Danger, “a small, highly classified military intelligence unit identified Mohammed Atta and three other future hijackers as likely members of a cell of Al Qaeda operating in the United States,” and in the summer of 2000, Able Danger recommended that the information be shared with the FBI to go in and remove the terrorist cell. However, the information was not shared and the recommendation was rejected, apparently because “Mr. Atta, and the others were in the United States on valid entry visas.” Further:
A former spokesman for the Sept. 11 commission, Al Felzenberg, confirmed that members of its staff, including Philip Zelikow [a friend of Condi Rice who later joined the Bush administration], the executive director, were told about the program on an overseas trip in October 2003 that included stops in Afghanistan and Pakistan.[71]
A Pentagon spokesman said that the 9/11 Commission looked into the issue during the Commission hearings; however, they “chose not to include it in the final report. [...]
Further, Navy Captain Scott Philpott has also gone on record along with Schaffer, claiming that they were “discouraged from looking further into Atta” and their attempts to share information with the FBI were thwarted.[73] Congress then began an investigation into the “Able Danger” program. According to Congressional testimony:
Pentagon lawyers during the Clinton administration ordered the destruction of intelligence reports that identified September 11 leader Mohamed Atta months before the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.
What we are dealing with is the criminalization of the upper echelons of the state. Canada's stoogeaucracy is fully compliant with ongoing atrocities and violations of international law since Nuremberg being perpetrated against nations of desperately poor people in Central Asia and elsewhere.
The Truth behind 9/11: Who Is Osama Bin Laden? At 11am, on the morning of 9/11, the Bush administration had announced that Osama was behind the attacks.
by Michel Chossudovsky
Without an "outside enemy", there could be no "war on terrorism". The entire national security agenda would collapse "like a deck of cards". The war criminals in high office would have no leg to stand on.
It was consequently crucial for the development of a coherent antiwar and civil rights movement, to reveal the nature of Al Qaeda and its evolving relationship to successive US adminstrations. Amply documented but rarely mentioned by the mainstream media, Al Qaeda was a creation of the CIA going back to the Soviet-Afghan war. This was a known fact, corroborated by numerous sources including official documents of the US Congress. The intelligence community had time and again acknowledged that they had indeed supported Osama bin Laden, but that in the wake of the Cold War: "he turned against us".
After 9/11, the campaign of media disinformation served not only to drown the truth but also to kill much of the historical evidence on how this illusive "outside enemy" had been fabricated and transformed into "Enemy Number One".
"International affairs is very much run like the mafia." - Chomsky
"International affairs is very much run like the mafia." - Chomsky
Thanks for the Chomsky quote Fidel: It All Comes Down To Control.
"International affairs is very much run like the mafia." - Chomsky
Thanks for the Chomsky quote Fidel: It All Comes Down To Control.
- with, of course, the logical extension that countries are run by families .... obvious enough when you look behind the fictions of the MSM ... Canada' leading families meet regularly at Bay St ....
The 'Meaning' of 9/11: It's Not What You Think
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26334.htm
"The aim of all this giving is to create and sustain an obsessive hatred of Muslims, all Muslims and generous support for Israel...'
You could have quoted some of that article, NDPP.
"There's also big money behind the mosque opposition, as highlighted by the relationship between [David] Horowitz's Los Angeles-based nonprofit, Jihad Watch - the website run by Spencer "dedicated to bringing public attention to the role that jihad theology and ideology play in the modern world" - and Joyce Chernick, the wife of a wealthy California tech company founder.
"Though it was not listed on the public tax reports filed by Horowitz's Freedom Center, Politico has confirmed that the lion's share of the $920,000 it provided over the past three years to Jihad Watch came from Chernick, whose husband, Aubrey Chernick, has a net worth of $750 million, as a result of his 2004 sale to IBM of a software company he created, and a security consulting firm he now owns.
"A onetime trustee of the ...Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Aubrey Chernick led the effort to pull together $3.5 million in venture capital to start Pajamas Media, a conservative blog network ...
"The David Horowitz Freedom Center had a budget of $4.5 million last year, according to its tax filings, of which $290,000 came from the conservative Bradley Foundation, which also gave $75,000 to the Center for Security Policy last year. Horowitz has received an average of $461,000 a year in salary and benefits over the past three years, while Spencer has pulled in an average of $140,000, according to the center's IRS filings."
Laura Rozen follows up on her Politico blog, detailing the trail of donations from 2008 990 filings for Chernick's charitable foundation, the Fairbrook Foundation, listing all the familiar suspects - CAMERA, Horowitz, MEMRI, Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy, the Israeli nationalist "Stand With Us" campus project - and a few less familiar, such as the American Friends of Ateret Cohanim, dedicated to thwarting our stated policy of no more settlements where it counts: in East Jerusalem.
Good ol' hatemeister Davey-boy Horowitz. Why am I not surprised?
No paper trail by spring of 2002? How could that be? I wonder how the FBI, CNN, Boston Globe or anyone could possibly know who the 18, or was it 19 alleged hijackers' were in 2001 then if no paper trail existed - "not a single scrap of paper"? And at least six of the alleged hijackers announced their excellent health at some point.
From two paragraphs lower than your quoted text:
Bolding mine for emphasis.
U.S. Solicitor General Ted Olson Lied about 9/11: FBI Now Admits his Wife Couldn’t Have Called Him from Hijacked Plane CBC interview
Chad Kinder of American Airlines" "There were no Airfones on flight 77"
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well BBC 9/23/01
ObL was likely in hospital on 9/11 not orchestrating terror What we are dealing with is criminilization of the upper echelons of the state.
Rest assured, there is no such thing as "al-Qaeda."
I notice that you completely ignored my points, Fidel.
For instance, Saeed al-Ghamdi, an alleged Flight 93 hijacker who turned up alive later, says that CNN showed his photo on broadcast TV. al-Ghamdi said that CNN likely obtained his photo from a flight safety school he participated in Florida. Abdul al-Omari is actually an airline pilot in Saudi Arabia today. Same age, same name as one of the alleged hijackers on 9/11.
If that's true, then information which the FBI and CNN broadcast concerning the alleged hijackers in general was possibly not determined by real investigation into the events of 9/11. Six or seven of the alleged hijackers named by the FBI were found alive and well in various countries within the year. There is a possibility that the information about the alive and well hijackers was not due to any real observations made by the FBI stemming from the events of 9/11. It smells as though they may have falsified part of the list of 19 and perhaps even the entire list. I believe it's possible that some or all of the list of 19 alleged hijackers is fabricated evidence.
Construction Complete On 9/11 Truther Memorial
For instance, Saeed al-Ghamdi, an alleged Flight 93 hijacker who turned up alive later, says that CNN showed his photo on broadcast TV. al-Ghamdi said that CNN likely obtained his photo from a flight safety school he participated in Florida. Abdul al-Omari is actually an airline pilot in Saudi Arabia today. Same age, same name as one of the alleged hijackers on 9/11.
If that's true, then information which the FBI and CNN broadcast concerning the alleged hijackers in general was possibly not determined by real investigation into the events of 9/11. Six or seven of the alleged hijackers named by the FBI were found alive and well in various countries within the year. There is a possibility that the information about the alive and well hijackers was not due to any real observations made by the FBI stemming from the events of 9/11. It smells as though they may have falsified part of the list of 19 and perhaps even the entire list. I believe it's possible that some or all of the list of 19 alleged hijackers is fabricated evidence.
I guess you can not provide a link to the list I asked for. I am not really all that surprised, to be honest.
Fidel, CNN articles are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
Fidel, CNN articles are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
Fidel, CNN articles are not official, and do not come from the FBI.
Just because you conflate the CNN with the FBI in your head does not make them the same organisation.
"al-Qaeda" is all in your head, Pants. You've been mind-fucked by an invisible enemy that doesn't exist.
This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.
"al-Qaeda" is all in your head, Pants. You've been mind-fucked by an invisible enemy that doesn't exist.
This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.
And once again, you ignore all my points and post something irrelevant instead.
Where are your points? There are none. There's no real proof that 19 Arabs even boarded the planes. What you're showing us amounts to so much circumstantial evidence. It's not established fact. There is a difference. You believe because it's what you were led to believe. You want to believe. Buckle-up, Dorothy. Kansas is going bye-bye.
33 USAF Bases Were Within Range On 911
Where are your points? There are none. There's no real proof that 19 Arabs even boarded the planes. What you're showing us amounts to so much circumstantial evidence. It's not established fact. There is a difference. You believe because it's what you were led to believe. You want to believe. Buckle-up, Dorothy. Kansas is going bye-bye.
33 USAF Bases Were Within Range On 911
Yes, Fidel, keep ignoring the evidence so that your precious beliefs do not go challenged.
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/wire_stories/0906...
What were they doing in Portland? Why was Atta's luggage not loaded on the plane and circumstantial evidence left behind for the feds to scoop up? Was Mohammed Atta going somewhere special that required luggage? What was wrong with toting his Koran in a carry-on bag?
Multiple identities of hijack suspects confound FBI
The stolen and phony IDs have created problems for investigators. “Obviously that’s been a concern,” said Judy Orihuela, spokeswoman for the FBI in Miami.
Colonel Shaffer stated that the Able Danger project revealed Mohammed Atta entered the US in January 2000. But the 9/11 Commission Cover-up stated that Atta wasn't in the US until June 2000.
Construction Complete On 9/11 Truther Memorial
The reviewer goes on to state that even the convoluted landscaping suggests the way a labyrinthine network of federal agencies, defense contractors, and oil companies went to enormous lengths to make it look as though an Egyptian man leading a group of 15 Saudi Arabians had attacked the United States, then used this as a pretext for invading Iraq and Afghanistan to gain access to priceless Central Asian pipelines and begin devaluing the American dollar in preparation for an economic war with China that will plummet the global econ≠omy into a massive depression from which a single fascist corporate state will eventually emerge.
I trust The Onion is paying royalties to rabble.ca/babble
What were they doing in Portland? Why was Atta's luggage not loaded on the plane and circumstantial evidence left behind for the feds to scoop up? Was Mohammed Atta going somewhere special that required luggage? What was wrong with toting his Koran in a carry-on bag?
Why do you ask so many irrelevant questions?
Multiple identities of hijack suspects confound FBI
....
Colonel Shaffer stated that the Able Danger project revealed Mohammed Atta entered the US in January 2000. But the 9/11 Commission Cover-up stated that Atta wasn't in the US until June 2000.
This is not evidence of a false flag operation.
What were they doing in Portland? Why was Atta's luggage not loaded on the plane and circumstantial evidence left behind for the feds to scoop up? Was Mohammed Atta going somewhere special that required luggage? What was wrong with toting his Koran in a carry-on bag?
Why do you ask so many irrelevant questions?
Because asking pertinent questions is basic police work?
Multiple identities of hijack suspects confound FBI
....
Colonel Shaffer stated that the Able Danger project revealed Mohammed Atta entered the US in January 2000. But the 9/11 Commission Cover-up stated that Atta wasn't in the US until June 2000.
This is not evidence of a false flag operation.
I see you cut past your own quote where you state emphatically that the alleged hijackers used no "secret identities." That's not what the feds said about it. Are you a disinformation jockey?
And they still have to be considered alleged hijackers as there was no actual criminal trial where anything was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. What you're left with is the incredible 9/11 Commission Cover-up. The investigation wasn't even legit according to two 9/11 Commissioners/whistleblowers themselves. If we know one thing, it's that you have no proof of anyone's guilt in perpetrating 9/11. And neither does the FBI have any hard proof.
Because asking pertinent questions is basic police work?
I see you cut past your own quote where you state emphatically that the alleged hijackers used no "secret identities." That's not what the feds said about it. Are you a disinformation jockey?
And they still have to be considered alleged hijackers as there was no actual criminal trial where anything was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. What you're left with is the incredible 9/11 Commission Cover-up. The investigation wasn't even legit according to two 9/11 Commissioners/whistleblowers themselves. If we know one thing, it's that you have no proof of anyone's guilt in perpetrating 9/11. And neither does the FBI have any hard proof.
To be honest, it i snot even evidence they used flase identities. All that confusiona bout their names might be simply due to the fact that the investigation was in its early days when that article was written.
I did not bring that up because I decided it was not pertinent.
What is pertinent to our discussion is that you have yet to provide any evidence, or even rationally discuss the ponts I have brought up.
Okay, but why were you insisting that Boston Globe was a favoured FBI leak for the real passenger lists? Obviously even the Globe's lists were innaccurate and possibly for reasons other than the FBI being caught with their pants down. Who had access to those "official" passenger lists between 2001 and 2006? If six or seven people were wrongly accused, what about the rest of the accused hijackers? And what if...?
What if 19 Arabs and an Egyptian were murdered, their identities stolen, and the real 9/11 perps fitted them up for it?
What if Able Danger itself was a lie in order to create additional circumstantial evidence tying Mohammed Atta et al to 9/11 terror? They have been long on accusations and short on proof.
I'm trying to discuss this rationally, and I wish you'd meet me half way. But please, no more disinformation or half-baked theories as to why we should believe the US Government when it comes to 9/11 fairy tales and climate change denialism. In case you were wondering, no, there was no criminal investigation of what was the worst building collapses in history with mass murder for an appetizer and prelude to even more mass murder and immoral warfiteering in response.
And it's obvious that a number of people falsely accused of hijacking planes on 9/11 were slandered by the US Government and never offered so much as an apology. Meanwhile, the FBI and CIA were entirely uninterested in questioning any of the bin Laden family traveling US skies in and around the date of 9/11/01.
I know what you're thinkin'. You're thinking, why didn't I just take the BLUE pill?
Okay, but why were you insisting that Boston Globe was a favoured FBI leak for the real passenger lists?
I never said that.
Obviously even the Globe's lists were innaccurate and possibly for reasons other than the FBI being caught with their pants down. Who had access to those "official" passenger lists between 2001 and 2006?
The airlines, for one.
If six or seven people were wrongly accused, what about the rest of the accused hijackers? And what if...?
No one was wrongly accused. There was some errors during th eearly part of the investigation, and in the reporting. But none of the people who happened to share names with the hijackers were charged with anything, were they?
What if 19 Arabs and an Egyptian were murdered, their identities stolen, and the real 9/11 perps fitted them up for it?
What if Able Danger itself was a lie in order to create additional circumstantial evidence tying Mohammed Atta et al to 9/11 terror? They have been long on accusations and short on proof.
What if it were actually aliens from the Planet Lizardo? What if it was unicorns?
Unless you have some evidence for these other claims of yours, they are useless speculations.
I'm trying to discuss this rationally, and I wish you'd meet me half way. But please, no more disinformation or half-baked theories as to why we should believe the US Government when it comes to 9/11 fairy tales and climate change denialism.
Now I'm disseminating disinformation and deny climate change? Do you read my posts, or do you just make stuff up and pretend I wrote it?
In case you were wondering, no, there was no criminal investigation of what was the worst building collapses in history with mass murder for an appetizer and prelude to even more mass murder and immoral warfiteering in response.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBOM
To be honest, I was not wondering that, as I already knew that you were incorrect about there being no criminal investigation.
And it's obvious that a number of people falsely accused of hijacking planes on 9/11 were slandered by the US Government and never offered so much as an apology. Meanwhile, the FBI and CIA were entirely uninterested in questioning any of the bin Laden family traveling US skies in and around the date of 9/11/01.
The US did not apologise for mistreating someone! OMG! That is unheard of!
Any other unimportant stuff you would like to add?
I know what you're thinkin'. You're thinking, why didn't I just take the BLUE pill?
Actually, I am wondering why you always add size tags, and quote The Matrix.
I know what you're thinkin'. You're thinking, why didn't I just take the BLUE pill?
Actually, I am wondering why you always add size tags, and quote The Matrix.
that movie is kinda awesome.
Okay, but why were you insisting that Boston Globe was a favoured FBI leak for the real passenger lists?
I never said that.
How do manage to make it through the day? For the ninth time already, you said so right here Or are you just naturally forgetful?
Obviously even the Globe's lists were innaccurate and possibly for reasons other than the FBI being caught with their pants down. Who had access to those "official" passenger lists between 2001 and 2006?
The airlines, for one.
So why is it that none of the 19's names appeared on the passenger lists released the same day by both United Airlines and American Airlines?
Why were eight people on the "original" FBI list found alive and living in different countries?
The truth is, you don't know. And the fact that you don't know doesn't prove a thing in favour of the gladio gang in Warshington.
No one was wrongly accused. There was some errors during th eearly part of the investigation, and in the reporting. But none of the people who happened to share names with the hijackers were charged with anything, were they?
So, why did Saudi Airlines threaten to sue for defamation of its pilots?
Perhaps the biggest hole in the fairy tale of the 19 terrorists, who were “armed with nothing more than box cutters,” involves the not-insignificant fact that at least 10 of them are still walking the earth today.
“After at least ten named on the FBI’s final list of 19 have been verified to be alive,” writes Zarembka,“with proof that least one other, Ziad Jarrah, had his identity doubled and therefore fabricated, the FBI has nevertheless refused to make the necessary corrections to exonerate those falsely accused.”
Of the 11 individuals who had “stolen identities,” most of them are pilots or work in some capacity for the airlines.
In case you were wondering, no, there was no criminal investigation of what was the worst building collapses in history with mass murder for an appetizer and prelude to even more mass murder and immoral warfiteering in response.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBOM
That's right, there is supposed to be an ongoing investigation WRT 9/11. They are stalling WRT finding themselves guilty of anything, and they have no intention of releasing "the evidence" for public scrutiny due to reasons of "national security", which means whatever in hell they want it to mean. This is essentially how the former USSR operated.
There has been no legitimate criminal trial though. The real perps are still out there, free as the wind and orchestrating murder in Afghanistan, Iraq and occupying several more countries militarily.
I like The Matrix quotes. I don't expect anyone to be convinced about anything which is healthy. Once I take that pill, I'm Crossing the Rubicon, and conversely...
Cypher: You know, I know this steak doesn't exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize?
[Takes a bite of steak]
Cypher: Ignorance is bliss.
How do manage to make it through the day?
Part of my strategy involves ignoring petty jibes.
For the ninth time already, you said so right here Or are you just naturally forgetful?
There is a difference between the idea that Globe and everyone else was not being restricted (which is what I was claiming) and the idea that the Globe served as a mouthpiece for the FBI (what you twisted my words to mean in your head).
So, I never said that.
So why is it that none of the 19's names appeared on the passenger lists released the same day by both United Airlines and American Airlines?
Because those were victim lists, as I have already stated, and provided links to support, and even quoted text to support, but you still ignore.
Why were eight people on the "original" FBI list found alive and living in different countries?
Which "original" list is this?
The truth is, you don't know. And the fact that you don't know doesn't prove a thing in favour of the gladio gang in Warshington.
Petty jibes like this one, for example.
So, why did Saudi Airlines threaten to sue for defamation of its pilots?
Whom did they threaten to sue?
Perhaps the biggest hole in the fairy tale of the 19 terrorists, who were “armed with nothing more than box cutters,” involves the not-insignificant fact that at least 10 of them are still walking the earth today.
“After at least ten named on the FBI’s final list of 19 have been verified to be alive,” writes Zarembka,“with proof that least one other, Ziad Jarrah, had his identity doubled and therefore fabricated, the FBI has nevertheless refused to make the necessary corrections to exonerate those falsely accused.”
Of the 11 individuals who had “stolen identities,” most of them are pilots or work in some capacity for the airlines.
I have no idea what you are arguing here. I suspect you may be in the same boat.
That's right, there is supposed to be an ongoing investigation WRT 9/11. They are stalling WRT finding themselves guilty of anything, and they have no intention of releasing "the evidence" for public scrutiny due to reasons of "national security", which means whatever in hell they want it to mean. This is essentially how the former USSR operated.
There has been no legitimate criminal trial though. The real perps are still out there, free as the wind and orchestrating murder in Afghanistan, Iraq and occupying several more countries militarily.
More ranty irrelevancies.
For the ninth time already, you said so right here Or are you just naturally forgetful?
There is a difference between the idea that Globe and everyone else was not being restricted (which is what I was claiming) and the idea that the Globe served as a mouthpiece for the FBI (what you twisted my words to mean in your head).
So, I never said that.
Never said what? I have no idea what you're talking about.
You should probably never consider pursuing a life of crime. You'd prolly forget your Blackberry with all your confessions on it somewhere for the cops to recover.
9/11 Truth and America's "Global War on Terrorism": The Pretext to Wage War is Totally Fabricated
Concurrently, a fake anti-war activism emerged in the wake of 9/11 which broadly consisted in stating: "I am against the war but I support the war on terrorism". Meanwhile, several NGOs became actively involved in humanitarian projects in Afghanistan, in close liaison with USAID and the Pentagon. (See Yves Engler, The Humanitarian Invastion of Afghanistan: Occupation by NGO, Global Research, September 5, 2010).
This acceptance of the "war on terrorism" was in large part based on the acceptance of the official 9/11 narrative, namely that the US was under attack, that the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by Muslims, that the Taliban were protecting Al Qaeda and providing refuge to its illusive leader Osama bin Laden.
Ironically, many "Progressives" in America not only accepted the official 9/11 narrative, they were also involved in smearing the 9/11 Truth Movement. By slurring those who questioned the official 9/11 story (backed by carefully researched evidence and analysis), they (unwittingly) provided legitimacy to the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, the Palestinian occupied territories as well as the targeting of Iran, as part of the "Global War on Terror" GWOT).
The so-called "War on Terrorism" is a lie. Amply documented, the pretext to wage this war is totally fabricated.
When will workers learn not to accept their terrible lies?
The 9/11 Commission Report is nothing but a pack of LLLLLIES! And our stooges in Ottawa have played along with those lies.
Closing for length.