An Even Newer 9/11 Thread

Did CNN claim that none of the hijacked planes were able to transmit the hijack code?

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 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.

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.

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." [7] 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.

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.

What that proves is that ordinary lives are expendable as far as the US Government and US hawks are concerned.

They even track Santa fcs. Was Elvis bin Laden's pre-planned "new Pearl Harbor" a complete surprise to FDR Bush, 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 [15] - 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 [16] .

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.

- 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 [22], 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 [23])

- 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 ....

It seems that the hijackers simply turned the transponders off immediately. So, how is this evidence for  a false flag operation?

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.

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 [25]

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.

That is not evidence for your claim. It is some completely irrelevant issue that doesn't even involve US air space.

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...

- 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.

- 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!!!!

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.

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.

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.

- 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 [40]

Zacarias Moussaoui fought for the CIA in Chechnya [41]

CIA-ISI Created “Al Qaeda Network”, Blamed for Pakistan Troubles [42] 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

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.

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.

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.

9/11 Cameraman Faces Extradition to United States grtv

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.

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.

None of that contradicts what I said.

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.

- 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 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

-- 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.

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

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 [55]

Unclassified document on Saudi Flight 207 [56] (pdf)

And yet The 9/11 Commission Report(pdf) [56] 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?

- 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.

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 [59]

Can anyone sound like General Colin Powell over a phone these days? [60]

Well I just don't understand it. Because The Washington Post [61] 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 [62] 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.

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.

The news articles to which you have linked are lists of the victims. Thus, they do not include the names of the hijackers.

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.

Combat maneuvers? I do not think crashing a plane into a building requires good piloting skills, nor does it count as combat maneuvering.

That's not official information. Those are just 9/11 conspiracy sites that confuse the victim lists with comprehensive passenger lists.

If there is so much evidence, then why is it so difficult to provide examples of this evidence?

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... [70]

Screenshots of the manifests:

http://www.911myths.com/images/2/25/Flight_11_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif [71]

http://www.911myths.com/images/b/bf/Flight_77_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif [72]

http://www.911myths.com/images/9/91/Flight_93_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif [73]

http://www.911myths.com/images/3/3c/Flight_175_Manifest_Moussaoui.gif [74]

Well, until they produce a solid argument supported by verifiable evidence, it does not matter what they think.

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.

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?

Even their circumstantial evidence is wonky. There is no such thing as "al-Qaeda"

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).

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.

- 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 ...

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 [84]. CNN erred when it claimed that the FBI list only contained 18 names.

There is no contradiction.

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.

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.

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.

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.

- 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 [93]

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.

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.

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.

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).

See below.

They didn't use secret identities.

So, here you are arguing that Mohammed Atta had nothing to do with the attacks.

So, here you are arguing that the US knew that Mohammed Atta was organising the attacks.

This is a contradiction.

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.

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.

You should include links that actually back up your claims. That link does not support your claim.

That is not what Mueller said.

He said the following:

and

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/21/se.25.html [99]

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/27/se.24.html [100]

This is simply incorrect. All the official flight manifests were made available to the public by 2006 at the latest, during the Moussaoui trial.

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 [102] CBC interview

Chad Kinder of American Airlines" [103]  "There were no Airfones on flight 77"

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well [104] BBC 9/23/01 

ObL was likely in hospital on 9/11 not orchestrating terror [105] 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

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

"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.

Good ol' hatemeister Davey-boy Horowitz. Why am I not surprised?

From two paragraphs lower than your quoted text:

Bolding mine for emphasis.

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

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.

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

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... [122]

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

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.

I trust The Onion is paying royalties to rabble.ca/babble

Why do you ask so many irrelevant questions?

This is not evidence of a false flag operation.

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.

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?

I never said that.

The airlines, for one.

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 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.

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?

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.

The US did not apologise for mistreating someone! OMG! That is unheard of!

Any other unimportant stuff you would like to add?

Actually, I am wondering why you always add size tags, and quote The Matrix.

that movie is kinda awesome.

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 [137]: Ignorance is bliss.

Part of my strategy involves ignoring petty jibes.

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.

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.

Which "original" list is this?

Petty jibes like this one, for example.

Whom did they threaten to sue?

I have no idea what you are arguing here. I suspect you may be in the same boat.

More ranty irrelevancies.

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

 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.