Elk County Forum

Maybe its just me but I thought that after 9/11 it was established that all high rise buildings will collapse after a fire??


China Skyscraper Fire Kill 42, Does Not Collapse    MSNBC
November 15, 2010

Editor's note: According to the official government version of physics, steel structure buildings routinely collapse after catching fire.

SHANGHAI, China — Flames engulfed a high-rise apartment building in Shanghai on Monday, killing 42 people, injuring dozens more and forcing some residents to jump from their windows to escape, according to reports.

The 28-story building in the Jing'an District of the Chinese city was being renovated when a fire broke out at 2 p.m. local time (1 a.m. ET), the state-run Xinhua News Agency reported.

A witness said building materials caught fire, then spread to scaffolding and then to the building, which housed many retired teachers, Xinhua reported.

The fire appeared to have been put out about six hours later, and firefighters could be seen removing bodies from the building.

The death toll was initially put at at least eight, but later Xinhua reported that 42 people had been killed.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40190224/ns/world_news-asia-pacific?gt1=43001 (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40190224/ns/world_news-asia-pacific?gt1=43001)

I'd say something like "watch this video and learn the truth" but anyone who really wanted to know the truth would have done it by now. So... to the few members of the choir, those of us who don't need more proof, this video is interesting because an ordinary citizen is doing what serious investigators should have done; would have done if they were looking for the truth instead of trying to hide it.

And yet people will still say that it was Muslim extremists.  And for a while I was quilty of the same.  But wht boggoles my mind the most is people will say that they don't trust our gov't, except on this one issue.


BTW Teresa, that was one of the best videos on the subject I've seen yet.

Uh, then why bother with the planes? Why would George Bush coordinate such a thing? Why don't people talk to the fire service and the engineers and the architect who built it. Actually, he did do a program explaining what happened.  I saw it and wish I could find it again. How could a group of people get access to the internal workings of the building with enough materials long enough to pull it off? It's a very secure building and has been since it was bombed the first time in 1993. Everybody has seen the shows on demolitions dropping old buildings in their own tracks.That takes a lot of planning, days of wiring, setting the demolition materials, cutting support beams, drilling holes etc. And that is on totally empty building with no people, no furnishings n nothing. It's a big process!. Has anybody asked them for their opinion on what it would take to bring down the towers?
Why  did the Muslim extremists who took credit for the whole thing  later say they didn't expect them to fall down? What about the other planes? Why just one bombing and not the Pentagon and the White House too? If they could access the one they could access the others.
They came down because of the way they were designed...never expected the attack of planes to upset the hanging design of the whole building hanging inside the framework. By the way the molton stuff coming down the sides was proven to be the aluminum skin, not steel. Some of the temps mentioned were accurate as far as it went, but there are a lot of factors that cause metals to go above and below "melt rates" during an uncontrolled situation like that was. As far as I know nobody has ever said that all high rise buildings fall down if they catch on fire. That is totally false. Many people heard "explosions"on 911.  Sure, very common, but not from bombs. It's from the fire itself as it blows out windows and reaches fresh air and pockets of air. That's what causes flash overs and back drafts. I really don't understand why some people need to believe that our Gov't, especially George Bush crafted that incident. Why,why,why?

Short answer is that without 9/11 we wouldn't have the war in Iraq...Duh!

So 343 firefighters and a lot of other innocent people had to die needlessly? So attack Sadam for some other reason! He could have just lied about wmd threats or something else and gotten the job done. Sorry, I just can't buy that. George Bush is supposed to be a good Christian man with good Christian values. He could set those aside that easily? I just can't accept that. An entire war that has cost mind boggling amounts, has accomplished very little and has gone on for what seems like forever? 

Was the fire in China caused by a big ass jet carrying roughly 150-200 passengers, 4600 gallons of fuel, with a 900,000 pound takeoff weight, slamming in between the 60th and 80th floor of a building thats 110 stories tall, slamming into the building at 200 mph? Your building was 28 stories, with my figuring and I am not the brightest of bright, that leaves 30 floors of the WTC, making it still 2 floors bigger than your building, above a weakened structure. With all that weight on top of the weakened structure slamming down and the heat from 4600 gallons of jet fuel burning for 45 minutes at 2000 degrees, I wonder why the son of a bitch collapsed. I wonder why your supposedly super thermite didn't cut the beams and cause it to instantly collapse, not 45 minutes later. I have watched both sides go back and forth but I'm not siding with the kooks that talk about super thermite, that no one had ever heard of until 9/11. I did watch an episode where they took 200 pounds of pure thermite to a metal beam that was preloaded with a ton of weight and it was unable to melt the beam, thus enters your argument that it wasn't thermite, it was super thermite. The plane that struck the Pentagon made a nice round hole. The conspiracy on this was that it was not a plane but a missle because of the round hole. But the security camera caught a plane and some plane fragments. I suppose the CIA planted the plane fragments. Flight 93, just a hole, nothing else, in a field in Pennsylvania was caused by an explosion. Well, no shit. If these planes did not crash like they say, into the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania, then where did all the people go that were on these flights and the planes themselves? I do not, and WILL NOT, think that our government would deliberately kill 3000 of our own citizens just to go to war to get Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden, as someone had said. They do not need to kill in order to declare war.

Of course the Muslim extremists didn't do it. Ahmadinejad, aka Uncle Tom, a nut case from Iran, who wants everybody who is not Muslim dead, says that the US Government pulled this off to start war against the "peaceful" Muslims. He also stated that Germany never committed atrocities against the Jews. I don't follow this nut case and it is amazing how this pops up again after Jesse Ventura comes back with a new season of Conspiracy Theories. There's a reason why they call it THEORY, if you can prove it, then it's no longer a THEORY.--Robert (these are my thoughts, the way I remember them from 9/11)


P.S. Don't want you pissed off at me Teresa. And Billy, you're demoted from dump truck to wheelbarrow.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 21, 2010, 09:53:17 AM
Uh, then why bother with the planes?

Because the majority of folks wouldn't have bought a "bomb" scenrio, just ask around, they still don't.

QuoteWhy would George Bush coordinate such a thing?

1) to set in motion the invasion of iraq
2) to implement the Patriot Act, giving the federal gov't the authority to spy on whoever they wanted without having to worry about Due process, the constitution, or anything else
3) to set in place the groundwork neccessary to instill the biggest defense budget in human history

QuoteWhy don't people talk to the fire service and the engineers and the architect who built it. Actually, he did do a program explaining what happened.  I saw it and wish I could find it again.

Impossile. The guy who built the thing, Minoru Yamasaki, died February 7, 1986.  His firm, Yamasaki & Associates, closed on December 31, 2009.

QuoteHow could a group of people get access to the internal workings of the building with enough materials long enough to pull it off? It's a very secure building and has been since it was bombed the first time in 1993. Everybody has seen the shows on demolitions dropping old buildings in their own tracks.That takes a lot of planning, days of wiring, setting the demolition materials, cutting support beams, drilling holes etc.

Simple, flash a gov't badge, bring in a work crew, set up and ready in a matter of hours.  The planning doesn't take that long.  A demo expert (sf trained) could do it in  a matter of hours.

QuoteWhy  did the Muslim extremists who took credit for the whole thing  later say they didn't expect them to fall down?

cite your sources

QuoteWhat about the other planes? Why just one bombing and not the Pentagon and the White House too? If they could access the one they could access the others.

Pentagon was hit.  The other plane was supposededly brought down by passengers.  Why?  Why not engage the auto-pilot?

QuoteThey came down because of the way they were designed...never expected the attack of planes to upset the hanging design of the whole building hanging inside the framework. By the way the molton stuff coming down the sides was proven to be the aluminum skin, not steel.

Or so the story goes.  Seems fishy to me.  I mean, molten aluminum, pours out the window only seconds after the crash.  So the fire reached temps high enough to melt the airplane skin in mere seconds?  Doubtful.  As for the fire upsetting the hanging design...doesn't hold water.  Why wasn't the hanging designed upset in 1975 when a fire set on the 11th floor, spread to 6 other floors, and burned for three hours?  This taking place before the added security and safety features that were installed after the '93 bombing attempt?

QuoteAs far as I know nobody has ever said that all high rise buildings fall down if they catch on fire. That is totally false.

No its not.  That is the "offical" story given.  That the Towers came down because of the fire.  That is what the public was led to believe.

QuoteMany people heard "explosions"on 911.  Sure, very common, but not from bombs. It's from the fire itself as it blows out windows and reaches fresh air and pockets of air. That's what causes flash overs and back drafts. I really don't understand why some people need to believe that our Gov't, especially George Bush crafted that incident. Why,why,why?

Really?  You ever heard of a silent bomb??...Me neither.  I don't understand why some people can't see the truth when it is as plain as the nose on their face.

Quote from: kshillbillys on November 21, 2010, 11:00:07 AM
Was the fire in China caused by a big ass jet carrying roughly 150-200 passengers, 4600 gallons of fuel, with a 900,000 pound takeoff weight, slamming in between the 60th and 80th floor of a building thats 110 stories tall, slamming into the building at 200 mph? Your building was 28 stories, with my figuring and I am not the brightest of bright, that leaves 30 floors of the WTC, making it still 2 floors bigger than your building, above a weakened structure. With all that weight on top of the weakened structure slamming down and the heat from 4600 gallons of jet fuel burning for 45 minutes at 2000 degrees,

Nope. The building in China wasn't hit by a plane.  But it and just about every other high rise to catch fire in the last 100 years didn't collapse, even after burning longer than the WTC.  Also, the WTC fire didn't burn at 2000 degrees for 45 minutes.  Physically impossible. Espcially when we consider that the Open Air burning temp. of jet fuel is roughly 549.5 °F. At first, it might have reached 2000 but that temp. would have dropped as fuel was consumed.

QuoteI wonder why the son of a bitch collapsed. I wonder why your supposedly super thermite didn't cut the beams and cause it to instantly collapse, not 45 minutes later.

I wonder why it collapsed myself.  Considering that the temps produced by that fire would not have exceeded those necessary to melt steel beams, either at the  point of impact or further away.

QuoteI have watched both sides go back and forth but I'm not siding with the kooks that talk about super thermite, that no one had ever heard of until 9/11. I did watch an episode where they took 200 pounds of pure thermite to a metal beam that was preloaded with a ton of weight and it was unable to melt the beam, thus enters your argument that it wasn't thermite, it was super thermite.

I also saw that expirment.  The problem is that the thermite was place in plastic bags.  Thus allowing the thermite to expand in all directions, it wasn't concentrated.  Kinda like holding a firecracker in your hand, if your hand is flat then you will recieve only minimal burns, close your hand and it gets blown off.

QuoteThe plane that struck the Pentagon made a nice round hole. The conspiracy on this was that it was not a plane but a missle because of the round hole. But the security camera caught a plane and some plane fragments. I suppose the CIA planted the plane fragments.

Really?  I haven't seen any footage showing a Boeing 757 crashing into the pentagon, in fact...

QuoteFlight 93, just a hole, nothing else, in a field in Pennsylvania was caused by an explosion. Well, no shit.

Okay, then answer me this..What other plane crash in the history of plane crashes didn't leave debris from the plane?  In fact, what other plane crash only left a hole in the ground and didn't string out debris for several hundred yards??  Answer...not a single one.

QuoteIf these planes did not crash like they say, into the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania, then where did all the people go that were on these flights and the planes themselves? I do not, and WILL NOT, think that our government would deliberately kill 3000 of our own citizens just to go to war to get Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden, as someone had said. They do not need to kill in order to declare war.

I don't know where the people went.  Considering the history of our gov't I wouldn't put anything past them.  Bush needed a reason to go to war that the american people would get behind.  He couldn't just go all willy-nilly like. 

QuoteOf course the Muslim extremists didn't do it. Ahmadinejad, aka Uncle Tom, a nut case from Iran, who wants everybody who is not Muslim dead, says that the US Government pulled this off to start war against the "peaceful" Muslims. He also stated that Germany never committed atrocities against the Jews. I don't follow this nut case and it is amazing how this pops up again after Jesse Ventura comes back with a new season of Conspiracy Theories. There's a reason why they call it THEORY, if you can prove it, then it's no longer a THEORY.--Robert (these are my thoughts, the way I remember them from 9/11)

Uncle Tom didn't come up this "theory", Americans did.  He just went along with it.  And this didn't just pop up because of Ventura, people have been looking for the truth since this begun.

QuoteP.S. Don't want you pissed off at me Teresa. And Billy, you're demoted from dump truck to wheelbarrow.

All that being said Robert...I ain't trying to start nothing, just giving my opinion.  As far as being demoted...I think I would rather "drive" a wheelbarrel than that orange piece of bone jarring, kidney rattleing, single axle, pain in the ass to dump hunk of scrap!

Kind of off topic, but I thought it fit...turn your sound down if you have kids around.

There is just so much that I'd share about how those buildings fell that is so much more fire science than you are acknowledging, but I'd just be accused of flapping my lips again. If I could put one of the DELTech fire science majors on here he/she could explain it better than I and maybe you'd listen. It's not as simple as some people think, but explained properly it's not rocket science either. In the meantime Wikipedia still has an excellent article on the towers from start to finish. Next year will be the 10th. It will all be hashed over again and once again the builders and structural engineers  and metallurgists and fire fighters will be ignored because conspiracy theories are more fun.Just because some fool heard the word Bentonite used in conjunction with the buildings they figured that had to be an explosive! It's not.

No. They will be ignored because the official story doesn't hold water.  If it did then it would be possible to melt steel simply by pouring Agas on it and setting it on fire. 

So, thermite needs to be squeezed like a firecracker in a closed hand? Conspiracy theorists stated that it just had to be painted on therefore it was not encased or enclosed in the way that they explained it. Still explain to me where super thermite comes from and how it is made. I'm sure the government would like to know. Whenever your conspiracy theorists come up with super thermite, the government would surely make that person a very rich individual or kill them and have their entire family killed and have all information about them erased to where they never existed. I don't buy in to how George Bush done this, blah blah blah, kiss my ass. Yeah, I know Fidel Castro was the other man on the grassy knoll that killed JFK because we know that a marksman from the army couldn't shoot off in rapid succession 3 shots to kill the President, there had to be another. And that Lyndon Johnson had it done. And the killing of Marilyn Monroe was to shut her up. And Vietnam was just to try out Agent Orange on the people. The Muslims weren't the ones who drove the van into the WTC and tried to blow it up back in 93. And the Muslims didn't take a boat and pull alongside the SS Cole and blow a big hole in it killing I think 21 sailors. The Muslims surely didn't come up with flying fully fueled commercial jet airliners into the WTC. And I expect Uncle Tom to break out any day now with a song and dance. I know what it is, that I don't agree with you. It's the contrails in the sky man. They're putting chemicals in the air to keep the American citizens submissive. It's all about the mind control dude. LMAO! NUT!---Robert

Like I said~~~~~ I believe what I believe.. and you believe what you believe..  :)
But I've never in my entire life seen 2 buildings fall so perfectly and in such order (kinda like a beautiful domino effect) all straight down... and not hitting other buildings..or caving in the middle like fires do to structures..
If it had collapsed because of the  "huge chunk taken from one of its corners" it would have fallen over.. but all four corners gave way at the same moment!
I mean~~just beautifully bam bam bam bam.. nice and neat all the way to the bottom in a compact little pile....Then.. the next one.. EXACTLY the same way...
Why you must ask?? Because skyscrapers collapse at free fall speed due to fires all the time didn't you all know that?..just amazing isn't it.. .... ::)


You know? I'm blond.. but I am far from stupid.. I see a purple spotted sheep in a field of white ones.. I'm gonna say that I can't believe it.. but you know? when you see it.. its kinda hard to deny.

But go ahead and convince yourselves that the little part of damage at the top of the building caused the perfect fall of the whole structure.. Not just one.. but 3...(.WTC7 collapsed at 5:20 PM, hours after the twin towers collapsed.... nice and perfect....straight down..exactly the same way...)

The World Trade Center towers 1,2, and 7 still the hold the distinction of being the only steel framed high rises to ever collapse due to fire.

Watch this....
Hmmm.... A 30-story high-rise engulfed in an inferno and still standing?




Must be really embarrassing for the "REAL" perpetrators of 911 when something like this happens and everyone sits there waiting for the "inevitable" collapse which never happens.........

Quote from: kshillbillys on November 21, 2010, 08:18:38 PM
So, thermite needs to be squeezed like a firecracker in a closed hand? Conspiracy theorists stated that it just had to be painted on therefore it was not encased or enclosed in the way that they explained it. Still explain to me where super thermite comes from and how it is made. I'm sure the government would like to know. ...

The thermite being painted on is only one theory, there are others.  Look at the video that teresa posted on it.  That person was able to cut steel beams with "homemade" thermite.  I'm pretty sure they could come up with super thermite, afterall they also came up with Nuclear bombs, right?  As for the rest of your post, YOU brought that stuff up, not me (btw, Monroe was killed to shut her up, there were 2 shooters when kennedy was killed...just sayin').  But you are 100% correct about one thing...it is about mind control. 

But for the record, I don't personally believe that George W. Bush came up with the idea on his own, he just wasn't that smart.  Someone was pulling his strings the same way they are pulling obamas.  I'll leave you with this food for thought...

1)  Without 9/11 we wouldn't have a war in iraq or Afghanistan.
2)  We wouldn't have a defense budget of world conquest porportions.
3)  We wouldn't have the Patriot Act.
4)  We wouldn't have the Dept. of Homeland Security.
5)  We wouldn't have had all the new "security" put into place (which hasn't stopped a single terrorist).

Theres more, but thats just a few to think about.  Look, I didn't want to believe that segments of our gov't would do something like this either.  We're "supposed" to be the Good guys, right?  But there are way too many questions and coincidences that go unanswered and unexplained.  I mean, just hours after it happened we knew there were 5 hijackers, how they did it, how they planned it, we had video survillance of their whereabouts and movements prior to the attack.  That is a huge Red Flag by itself, our gov't NEVER moves that fast...ever.  The D.C. snipers, BTK, more recently that dude in Time Square...how come we didn't know who they were just hours after they acted?  Look at the "partial" list of passengers of those flights that were put out shortly after 9/11...none of them match up.  Names are missing, changed, and the number of passengers don't add up.  Bush has put out two different stories of what happened that morning.  Too many things that just don't add up.

As for contrails...well you've obviously been drinkin' the flourinated water...thats just crazy talk ;).  By the way, I can't drive the wheel barrel,...it has a flat. :angel:

Teresa, that collapse I can explain and you will understand. First of all, you've never seen another like it because at the time they were one of a kind buildings that had never been designed like that or used before.They were to be extremely light weight to be so huge. Remember that project went on for many many years and was full of controversy of it's own with a lot of people not wanting them there at all. Now as far as the design inside the buildings. Imagine an open cardboard box. Now run a box knife around the inside edge and cut the bottom  completely out. Set it aside. Now cut a square whole in the center of that bottom piece and set a smaller box that fits just over the hole and cut the bottom out of it too. The little box is the elevator and conduit shaft. The stair towers were there too. Now prefab lots and lots of those boxes and floors and boxes for the elevator shafts.  Put  cardboard "floor" you cut out of the big box back in and fashion bent paperclips at the corners (These are very strong paperclips!)to hold the floor to the side walls hold with tape or glue. Do the same to hold the elevator shaft hole in the middle to the  modular premade concrete floor that it goes through. Now in your mind see many many of these stacked on top of each other. Now add cross bracing for strength and replace the cardboard sides with open steel columns covered with shiny aluminum alloy skin. The weakest part of the whole thing were those clips that held the floors to the sidewalls.They were extremely strong, like angle iron but weren't designed to withstand that kind of fire or the weight of more than it's own floor. (There was fireproofing materials inside the cross braces but it couldn't work because of the big airplane that was through the wall and destroyed the integrity of and overwhelmed the sprinkler system. ) When the clips on one floor finally failed do to the heat and damage, it  pancaked and added it's weight to the floor beneath it, which then let go and so on straight down. The building was absolutely perpendicular so it dropped straight down and there was little or no wind at the bottom that day.The air that pushed the huge cloud of dust down the street was from the air trapped inside the building that was released as it fell.

Alex Jones may not be someone you listen to.. but take the time to listen to this..
There is so much proof of so many things....It has gone way beyond "theory".. ......WHEN are people going to wake up?..
People who look at the real truth are sometimes considered Un-American.. *because we believe the worst about our government*..but to me.. we  ARE the REAL Americans. To love our country and our freedoms so much that we are willing to look deep and see the truth..
My God.. if we don't start seeing and acknowledging the truth of what are Government is and the things it is capable of..then how are We The People going to be prepared for what else is most likely coming?

Alex is outspoken and not afraid to dig and get information and footage that is stifled and hidden by others..
I suppose there are those that can see and hear actual footage and STILL deny the truth.. For that I don't know what to say.. other than I really feel sorry for you.. or I envy the fact that you can disassociate yourselves from the reality's of real life.

Watch these... and THEN convince yourselves that it wasn't a Black Op.




Around the 10.00 mark is the footage.. but Jones pinpoints so much in the time before.



If EVERYONE finally wakes up and admits what is going on from inside our countries borders.. absolutely NOTHING will change. I still think we are going to slide downhill...............................................
But I'll be damned if I will be sliding and not know why.........

Teresa, there is no way I can reassure you if you won't accept that the airplanes hitting and entering the buildings did enough structural damage to the design, the "hanging" feature, along with the perfect storm of the heat of the fire to start the collapse. Those planes entered the buildings with no spat, no resistance, like a knife cutting butter.It was the design that doomed them. Light weight, hanging inside a shell, so there could be very little wasted space inside. No beams to break up the floor spaces. It basically hung from the top supported by cross beams. None of your fire examples were hit by planes. Because of the fire service web sites ,we do see all kinds of tape. In some countries with different building codes, some are unfortunately built to burn because there is no safety oversight. Go to Fire Geezer if you are really interested. Or Fire fighter Close Calls ,The Secret List.
As far as far as those interviews with the firefighters, very unfair. Those poor guys didn't have all the facts yet, it was fresh, raw and still going on! In the fire service, "explosion" doesn't mean bomb.  Sure it could be, but there are many things that explode that have nothing to do with "bombs''Walls blowout and make noise, glass blows out, "Bleves",with railroad tank cars, or sealed containers, gas build up, heat build up, electrical vaults and lots more that can go boom. and make noise. The one pair were talking and said the floors came down "as if" there had been charges placed on them and dropped them. They didn't say that they had been bombed. Sure, I can see how it could seem that way at the time. The investigations explained the design and what happened. Under those horrible circumstances would you want to have a mike stuck in your face and be expected to make sense and have every detail right? Normally the officers would not have allowed those guys to talk to the press just for that reason.There are PIOs who do that, .just so the they don't have to defend something when they misspoke under pressure. A lot of top ranking officers were killed! The Commish, the Chaplin, brigade chiefs, etc. Some information about who knew what and when is just plain wrong, but after 9 years how does  anyone prove it?. I don't have vaults full of tape like the TV News does.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 22, 2010, 03:06:51 PM
Teresa, there is no way I can reassure you if you won't accept that the airplanes hitting and entering the buildings did enough structural damage to the design, the "hanging" feature, along with the perfect storm of the heat of the fire to start the collapse.

You are right about one thing....... I don't believe it!  There is no way you can "reassure"  me about anything where this is concerned..
I don't need reassured.. People like you and the mainstream liberal media try to do that every day. Works on most people too.. :)

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 22, 2010, 03:06:51 PM

As far as far as those interviews with the firefighters, very unfair. Those poor guys didn't have all the facts yet, it was fresh, raw and still going on!

I know.. Those poor misinformed confused firemen... Poor untrained things..  They just didn't have all the facts yet.. Had no idea what they were talking about. They were just so shook up that all the facts were confusing to them. ( THAT is when the facts are the clearest) The "facts" that weren't most likely supposed to be spoken until "briefed"..
Amazing that no matter what people say they actually heard...somehow there are those that are telling them that they really didn't hear that.. and that they don't know what they are talking about.

Sorry.. don't feed me shit and tell me its sugar.. You can believe whatever you want to. I'm just going by first account facts out there.
Interpret them anyway you want to and if your mind can't wrap itself around that anyone could be so black hearted as to do something like this... Then keep your mind where its at.. It will..I'm sure help you sleep better at night.

Oh and by the way.......were you there? Were you inside those buildings? Did you build those buildings? Do you have any expert explanation on how the 3rd building went down? and why the Pentagon's grounds trees lawn etc  was virtually rubbish and damage free when a jetliner was supposed to come crashing into the outside of the building?

You seem to have all the answers on it all I was just wondering.  

But you are right..  The damage is done.. They got by with it.. Just like everything else that is going on.. after 9 years.. who is going to prove it?
You know... don't even bother answering.. Just go back to your cozy corner tell yourself that all is golden in the land of rainbows..tuck your head under your covers and all will be good.
I wished I could find a pair of blinders that fit me that well. I could probably sleep better at night too.

I haven't lived in Howard since 1981, but Teresa is a friend of mine and through her I've seen some of the postings on this subject and would like to contribute.

First of all, as to burning jet fuel and melted steel.  I've attached a photo I took during my 43 months as a contractor in Iraq.  It is one of the many burned out tankers we towed into the "recovery yard" after hitting IED's and burning to a crisp.  This one was carrying a full load of JP-8, which is jet fuel.  Jet fuel, diesel and kerosene are essentially the same thing.  Anyone who has ever cooked on a kerosene stove should know that "jet fuel", even when highly pressurized and oxygenated to a blue flame does not melt the stove, or the pan. 

If you'll examine the photo you'll see that even though the fuel to steel ration was thousands of times greater than possible in the fires of 9/11 the thin steel of the tank is not even wrinkled.  Definitely not melted.

(http://www.mikestwocents.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/burned-tanker.jpg)

The other thing that should be noted is that the fires were only fed by jet fuel for the first five minutes, not long enough to do any more than set the other normal flammables - desks, papers, furnishings - ablaze.  Most of the fuel in the second plane that hit was consumed in a massive fireball.  We've all seen it many times.

The black smoke indicated the fire was not hot enough to burn all of the carbon in the flammables.  It was not a hot fire.

This should put an end to the ridiculous idea, held by only the most ignorant, that the buildings came down because of the fires.  It has never happened in history, before or - as the theme of this thread suggests - after 9/11.

The question of collapse versus controlled demolition is also very easily answered with nothing more than basic high school physics.  Okay... so we just eliminated the majority of America's population.

The mere fact that the buildings collapsed at near free fall speed is all that is necessary to determine that energy OTHER THAN GRAVITATIONAL ENERGY was involved.

Gravitational Potential Energy: Potential energy is the energy stored in a body or in a system due to its position in a force field. When a mass is lifted up, the force of gravity will act so as to bring it back down.

In other words, if you put a bowling ball on closet shelf seven feet above the floor you have not only stored the bowling ball, you have stored potential gravitational energy equal to the weight of the bowling ball.

Kinetic Energy: The energy an object possesses due to its motion.

If you nudge that bowling ball off the shelf the potential gravitational energy is converted to kinetic energy which accelerates the ball toward the Earth at a rate of 32 feet per second, per second.  In other words, after 2 seconds the ball will be traveling at 64 feet per second, and after 3 seconds at 96 feet per second, and so on.

Place the bowling ball on a shelf 1,350 feet from the ground (the height of the twin towers) and it would take about 10.5 seconds to hit the ground.

The theory that the buildings collapsed does not admit to any other energy than gravitational energy being present. 

Let's ask a simple question.  If I drop you from thirty feet above the ground and there is nothing between you and the ground, and someone drops me from thirty feet but there is a tree between me and the ground, which one of us will hit the ground first?  You will.  Unless at the same time someone eliminates the tree just before my fall is slowed by hitting a limb.

One more point I'd like to make.  Remember the "pancake theory", that one floor, hit the next, and the next, and "pancaked" driving them to the ground.

Remember the enormous dust cloud that exploded outward like the pyroclastic flow from a volcano (further evidence of intense heat energy at the time of the collapse) - a dust cloud composed of thousands of tons of pulverized concrete?  How do you drive a nail when your hammer just turned to dust?

I could go on and on and on pointing out the obvious reasons the three buildings did not collapse but were destroyed in controlled demolitions - obvious to those who have enough knowledge.

And as for opportunity to lace the buildings with explosives, all you have to do is look at who was in charge of security.  And did you know there were "security personnel" working round the clock shifts in both towers for two weeks prior to 9/11, and the bomb sniffing dogs had been suspended for a week before?  Do some research.  It's all there on those damn nasty "conspiracy theorist" and "truther" sites.

If you know anything about history you'll know that there isn't much that wasn't conspired, and not for the benefit of the peons.

Teresa and Sailmexico execellent posts!

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 22, 2010, 09:32:00 AM
The air that pushed the huge cloud of dust down the street was from the air trapped inside the building that was released as it fell.

Wait a minute, I thought that windows were blown out so how could air be trapped inside?  Also, where did the dust come from? 

Oh, one more thing I'd like you to ponder...just hours after the "attacks" on 9/11 our gov't knew who, how, why, etc. about the attacks...yet just recently WITH enhanched security measures a "misslle like" object was seen off the coast of california, HEADING towards california...yet for some reason they still haven't been able to figure out what the hell it was.

Once again, poor well meaning Diane is in over her head.  No offense darlin' but you can't have it all ways.  

As a sailor I know something about the forces of air.  Consider the Mirabella V.  At 246′ in length, and a displacement of 816 tons, she is the largest single masted sailing yacht ever built.  What does the Mirabella V http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirabella_V (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirabella_V) have in common with the Twin Towers?  Her sail area is equal to the square footage of each of the tower's 110 floors – 40,000 square feet.  That's a lot of air resistance.

So, once again we have resistance that would have slowed the collapse of the buildings IF collapse is what they did.  How much resistance was there in actuality?  None.  The roof hit the ground in 10.5 seconds.  (In the instance of WTC7's 47 stories it was 6.5 seconds)

Consider one more thing.  Each floor did contain air and, with the exception of the few floors where the airplanes hit, the windows were sealed.  What does a stunt man use to break his fall from a great height?  An airbag.  In a collapse, the air in each floor would have been sealed until the windows blew out, and just like giant airbags they would have contributed something to the absorption of energy.  And any contribution to the absorption of the gravitational energy would have slowed the collapse.  That is... if it were a collapse.

Here is a link to the best analysis I've seen of a gravitational collapse, and why that's not what we saw on 9/11

Why would he lie??

Please note that I have went through several videos. There is a huge majority of conspiracy f*cking nuts on the internet that believe that we are being visited by gray aliens, blue aliens, sasquatch is an alien and that Elvis just went back to his home planet. One conspiracy was that a UFO crashed into the WTC. These individuals piss me off. But like the majority of them they are just like something you can scrape off the bottom of your shoe with a stick. Within minutes of the WTC being attacked they had a list of the terrorists? Yes, they have a list of everyone getting on the damn plane. And I suppose the Japanese didn't bomb Pearl Harbor. But I can guarantee that within seconds they knew it was the Japs bombing Pearl Harbor. Note the video where everyone is running down the street screaming as the south tower collapsed. All these people in New York must be idiots because what they saw were planes hitting the damn buildings. Please note the very last comment from Usama bin Laden on here, you may have to watch it a couple of times. Read what's under his beard then go back and read the little red boxes. For every stupid clip you put up I can put one up too. Have a bowl of fruit loops and drink your koolaid.---Robert

Please note that George Bush is not in this picture and the absense of the democratic congress, but I am with the conspiracy theorists on this: most of the men DO look like sasquatch. I wonder why the Muslim world would be rejoicing us blowing up our own Towers so we could go to war to KICK THEIR ASS? ---Robert

So Robert.. How do you really feel?  LOL Come on.. Chill a little bit here.
I understand your frustration.. I feel the same way only this time I am on the opposite side of the table my friend.

and WHY does it make you so mad?
Other than just refusing to acknowledge the "facts".. what don't you see here?

Do you REALLY think I want my countries government to be involved in things of this nature?
I mean. come on!.. Do you think I want to believe it?  I LIKE George Bush.. I STILL like George Bush.. It is so much bigger than George Bush that it isn't even funny. Hell ~George's strings were pulled just like every body elses.. He couldn't have stopped it if he had of tried.. Probably ended up like the Kennedy's if he had of.. and he knew it.

I don't want to believe it either.. but how can you actually go through everything.. and deny what is right in front of your eyes?
You aren't stupid.. and you aren't blind...and you are one hell of an American.. so what are you not seeing?
Why does it make you so mad at people like me..who think that this is just a small small section of what our dear Government has been involved in since God only knows...

You think the Kennedy's were killed by some no count off the street citizen? You think an Illegal like Obama is here without full corruption behind it? He's a sock puppet! Just like they all are..
You talk of one world government and socialization and the government behind Fema camps..screwing with us growing our food.. messing with our water.. taking away our guns.. but yet.......
you refuse to look at the facts of this.. why?
Unless Americans start opening up their eyes ..so we can band together... it is only going to allow them to continue to do whatever they want in the most horrendous way that they want. The people behind running this huge show are soul-less...so you can not even consider that they would blink at killing thousands to complete their "mission"..
I'm just talking out loud here..trying to understand..

I believe what I believe and I follow no one on anything when it comes to my own beliefs..I am not called the Research Queen for nothing..  :)
So I'm not on a mad rant .. I'm not going to get into a yelling and screaming match with you either.. You 're a friend..I know what you stand for. That is why I am so amazed by your reaction to this.
I am seriously confused about how you think the government is total worthless pig shit until it comes to this.. and now they are the victims and innocent of all involvement?
Really??

So... a simple question my friend... How DID the 3rd building come down..?
and if a plane hit the pentagon....why wasn't any of the grounds messed up or anything on the outside damaged?

I'm listening.

Structural design
The structural engineering firm Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson worked to implement Yamasaki's design, developing the tube-frame structural system used in the twin towers. The Port Authority's Engineering Department served as foundation engineers, Joseph R. Loring & Associates as electrical engineers, and Jaros, Baum & Bolles as mechanical engineers. Tishman Realty & Construction Company was the general contractor on the World Trade Center project. Guy F. Tozzoli, director of the World Trade Department at the Port Authority, and Rino M. Monti, the Port Authority's Chief Engineer, oversaw the project.[26] As an interstate agency, the Port Authority was not subject to local laws and regulations of the City of New York including building codes. Nonetheless, the structural engineers of the World Trade Center ended up following draft versions of the new 1968 building codes.[27] The tube-frame design, earlier introduced by Fazlur Khan, was a new approach which allowed open floor plans rather than columns distributed throughout the interior to support building loads as had traditionally been done. The World Trade Center towers utilized high-strength, load-bearing perimeter steel columns called Vierendeel trusses that were spaced closely together to form a strong, rigid wall structure, supporting virtually all lateral loads such as wind loads, and sharing the gravity load with the core columns. The perimeter structure containing 59 columns per side was constructed with extensive use of prefabricated modular pieces each consisting of three columns, three stories tall, connected by spandrel plates.[27] The spandrel plates were welded to the columns to create the modular pieces off-site at the fabrication shop.[28] Adjacent modules were bolted together with the splices occurring at mid-span of the columns and spandrels. The spandrel plates were located at each floor, transmitting shear stress between columns, allowing them to work together in resisting lateral loads. The joints between modules were staggered vertically so the column splices between adjacent modules were not at the same floor.[27]

The core of the towers housed the elevator and utility shafts, restrooms, three stairwells, and other support spaces. The core –a combined steel and concrete structure–[29][30] of each tower was a rectangular area 87 by 135 feet (27 by 41 m) and contained 47 steel columns running from the bedrock to the top of the tower. The large, column-free space between the perimeter and core was bridged by prefabricated floor trusses. The floors supported their own weight as well as live loads, providing lateral stability to the exterior walls and distributing wind loads among the exterior walls.[31] The floors consisted of 4 inches (10 cm) thick lightweight concrete slabs laid on a fluted steel deck. A grid of lightweight bridging trusses and main trusses supported the floors. The trusses connected to the perimeter at alternate columns and were on 6 foot 8 inch (2.03 m) centers. The top chords of the trusses were bolted to seats welded to the spandrels on the exterior side and a channel welded to the core columns on the interior side. The floors were connected to the perimeter spandrel plates with viscoelastic dampers which helped reduce the amount of sway felt by building occupants. The trusses supported a 4-inch (100 mm) thick lightweight concrete floor slab with shear connections for composite action.[32]

Hat trusses (or "outrigger truss") located from the 107th floor to the top of the buildings were designed to support a tall communication antenna on top of each building.[32] Only 1 WTC (north tower) actually had an antenna fitted; it was added in 1978.[33] The truss system consisted of six trusses along the long axis of the core and four along the short axis. This truss system allowed some load redistribution between the perimeter and core columns and supported the transmission tower.[32]

The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements.[34] During the design process, wind tunnel tests were done to establish design wind pressures that the World Trade Center towers could be subjected to and structural response to those forces.[35] Experiments also were done to evaluate how much sway occupants could comfortably tolerate, however, many subjects experienced dizziness and other ill effects.[36] One of the chief engineers Leslie Robertson worked with Canadian engineer Alan G. Davenport to develop viscoelastic dampers to absorb some of the sway. These viscoelastic dampers, used throughout the structures at the joints between floor trusses and perimeter columns along with some other structural modifications, reduced the building sway to an acceptable level.[37]

Construction

World Trade Center under construction in 1971In March 1965, the Port Authority began acquiring property at the World Trade Center site.[38] Demolition work began on March 21, 1966, to clear thirteen square blocks of low rise buildings in Radio Row for construction of the World Trade Center.[39] Groundbreaking for the construction of the World Trade Center took place on August 5, 1966.[40]

The site of the World Trade Center was located on landfill with the bedrock located 65 feet (20 m) below.[41] To construct the World Trade Center, it was necessary to build a "bathtub" with a slurry wall around the West Street side of the site, to keep water from the Hudson River out.[42] The slurry method selected by Port Authority's chief engineer, John M. Kyle, Jr., involved digging a trench, and as excavation proceeded, filling the space with a "slurry" mixture composed of bentonite and water, which plugged holes and kept groundwater out. When the trench was dug out, a steel cage was inserted and concrete was poured in, forcing the "slurry" out. It took fourteen months for the slurry wall to be completed; it was necessary before excavation of material from the interior of the site could begin.[43] The 1.2 million cubic yards (917,000 m3) of material excavated were used to expand the Manhattan shoreline across West Street to form Battery Park City (along with other fill and dredge material).[44][45]

In January 1967, the Port Authority awarded $74 million in contracts to various steel suppliers, and Karl Koch was hired to erect the steel.[46] Tishman Realty & Construction was hired in February 1967 to oversee construction of the project.[47] Construction work began on the North Tower in August 1968; construction on the South Tower was underway by January 1969.[48] The original Hudson Tubes, carrying PATH trains into Hudson Terminal, remained in service as elevated tunnels during the construction process until 1971 when a new PATH station opened.[49]

The topping out ceremony of 1 WTC (North Tower) took place on December 23, 1970, while 2 WTC's ceremony (South Tower) occurred later on July 19, 1971.[48] The first tenants moved into the North Tower in December 1970; the South Tower accepted tenants in January 1972.[50] When the World Trade Center twin towers were completed, the total costs to the Port Authority had reached $900 million.[51] The ribbon cutting ceremony was on April 4, 1973.[52

Destruction
Main articles: September 11 attacks, American Airlines Flight 11, United Airlines Flight 175, and Collapse of the World Trade Center

The World Trade Center on fire with the Statue of Liberty in the foregroundOn September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked American Airlines Flight 11 and crashed it into the northern facade of the north tower at 08:46, impacting between the 93rd and 99th floors. Seventeen minutes later, a second team of terrorists crashed the similarly hijacked United Airlines Flight 175 into the south tower, impacting between the 77th and 85th floors.[113] The damage caused to the north tower by Flight 11 destroyed any means of escape from above the impact zone, trapping 1,344 people.[114] Flight 175 had a much more off-centered impact compared to Flight 11, and a single stairwell was left intact; however, only a few people managed to successfully pass through it before the tower collapsed. Although the south tower's floors of impact were lower, a smaller number, less than 700, were killed instantly or trapped.[115] At 9:59 a.m., the south tower collapsed due to fire, which caused steel structural elements, already weakened from the plane impact, to fail. The north tower collapsed at 10:28 a.m., after burning for approximately 102 minutes.[116]

At 5:20 p.m.[117] on September 11, 2001, 7WTC started to collapse with the crumble of the east penthouse, and it collapsed completely at 5:21 p.m.[117] due to uncontrolled fires causing structural failure.[118] 3WTC, a Marriott hotel, was destroyed during the collapse of the two towers. The three remaining buildings in the WTC plaza sustained heavy damage from debris and were ultimately demolished.[119] The Deutsche Bank Building across Liberty Street from the World Trade Center complex was later condemned due to the uninhabitable toxic conditions inside; it is undergoing deconstruction.[120][121] The Borough of Manhattan Community College's Fiterman Hall at 30 West Broadway was also condemned due to extensive damage in the attacks and is slated for deconstruction.[122]

The concrete flooring falling from 110 stories, each floor being crushed by the floor above it, I would surely think that would stir up one hell of a dust cloud as it fell. A note from a previous video clip, the first tower to fall did not fall straight down as people would like to think, with a lot of the top floors striking tower 7, the Post Office and Verizon buildings; roughly 8 hours later was the collapse of tower 7. The summer of 2003 back when I was still driving a truck, I had went to Manhattan Island in a smaller rented truck to deliver some cabinets. We took a cab down to the WTC site, but all I saw was a hole in the ground with a hell of a lot of construction going on. Across the way was a bunch of pictures, artifacts, pictures of buildings and people. As with the day the towers fell, it was a very moving day. It brought out a lot of emotions and sorry, I just don't see the conspiracy.--Robert

Well.. it looks like we will have to shake hands and agree to disagree on this one.. :)
Unless of course.. you want to duel it out..

10 paces..back to back... on the 10th , turn and fire?
your choice of firearm....
But.....................
(Can we wait until after the holidays though? I have a lot of cooking to do, and I can't be taking time off to sharpen my shootin' skills right now.  ;D

When did I ever say that planes didn't hit the towers?  I never said that, I said that the damage caused by the planes and fire wouldn't have been enough to collapse the buildings (wtc).  I do not believe a plane hit the pentagon or that one went down in Penn. as there is no plane debris at either site, no skid mark at either site.  I do not believe that the jet fuel fire burned hot enough to vaporize the wreckage, as this result would have been evident at many other plane crashes prior to 9/11, yet is not. As to your videos...

1)  Video #1 shows most of the fuel being consumed during the intial impact and therefore was not used to fuel the fire afterwards, that according to "officals" was what melted the steel beams causing collapse.

2) Video #2 implies that we were attacked for our support of Isreal.  It offers no proof of any kind other than to point towards american foregin policies. 

But like Teresa said, I just don't think that we are going to see eye to eye on this.  Thats okay, you're are still a hellva guy and on a very short list of people I would call my friend.  But before I close heres some more food for thought (calm down Robert, it isn't actually FOOD, thats just an expression ;))...





These video clips are taken from video titled 911 Loose Change.

Found the full length video...I'll let it speak for itself.

Teresa---Robert says he would love to have a duel with you. How about 4th of July and you pick the Roman Candles?

No Teresa,I was not personally there. I was lucky. I was at a fire service conference at the time. BUT I do have friends who were there and some who lost brothers and sisters, cousins, other family members and lots of friends. We are an easy train ride or drive to NYC.  Lots of people here work in both Philly and NYC., and Washington. Remember Cantor Fitzgerald that was on the floor that took a direct hit from one plane? Several were there. Do you think those many, many thousands who were affected would have just walked away and not dug on this and investigated and continued to pursue it if there was any chance of a Gov't conspiracy? And the fire fighters do talk, even now. I have several personal friends who now work as FDNY and were hired when all those fire fighters had to be replaced. One lives on Statten Island and takes the ferry to work. They still talk about all of it, including the damage done to the other buildings, how that happened and why the one building was deliberately taken down. Sure even though the buildings did fall straight down, the footprint on the way to the ground got bigger and bigger as the "rubble" was added as the stuff fell. Yes, there was side damage which damaged other buildings.
On a different note. Where did some of you get the idea there were no plane parts inside the pentagon?  Don't you remember the story of the burned soldier talking about being rescued and the airplane wheel that was next to him?  They also had the nose wheel and other parts and pieces that had to be moved to get to the victims. There are many many photos, most of which are still classified. It was  the pentagon! They didn't let just anybody with a camera inside. There was some plane rubble outside, not much, but I saw lots of building rubble outside the hole in the TV shots thereat the time. It was cleaned up fairly easily. It was not a high rise building!
As far as the flight 93 crash in PA, why aren't you interested in that, where there still are questions about what brought the plane down? We know the passengers did try to take over the plane, but it has never been proven that they were successful. There were lots of witnesses that saw it go down, almost straight down, and even a seismograph reading when it hit the soft ground, so it is well documented that the event did happen. But there is some question as to whether the plane started coming apart before it hit the ground because of debris that was found relatively far away, not close to the site of impact and couldn't be explained due to wind or other forces. That one I'd like to know more about.

Robert would benefit from studying history.  He would find that it is replete with conspiracies that have been proven true.  Check out "Operation Northwood", just Google it and you'll find that it is an established fact that the U.S. government had plans to kill U.S. citizens and blame it on the Cubans.  Just because the plan was never carried out doesn't mean they weren't serious.

Check out the USS Liberty incident of 1967 http://www.rense.com/general87/shad.htm (http://www.rense.com/general87/shad.htm) and you'll find another false flag operation that was carried out, but failed.  Although the Israelis tried for two hours to sink the Liberty, using aircraft and torpedo boats, the Liberty refused to sink.  The investigation by the two governments involved, Israel and the U.S., (foxes investigating a raid on the hen house) determined it was a case of mistaken identity.  Only a landlubber would fall for that pile of crap.  The first thing a sailor looks for is the flag, and the crew of the liberty, during the heat of battle hoisted their biggest flag... impossible to miss.  

There was a U.S. carrier less than 200 miles away (that's five minutes in a fighter plane) and they had scrambled aid but were ordered to return immediately.  This is treason.

34 seamen were killed and 172 wounded.  U.S. citizens were sacrificed in an effort to blame the Egyptians and give the U.S. a legitimate reason to enter the war between Egypt and Israel.  In other words... a false flag operation for the purpose of tricking the American public into fighting Israel's enemies.  Hmmm... sound familiar?

While you're checking history, with your pious "our government would never be involved in anything so heinous" check out the fact that Eisenhower re-classified several hundred thousand surrendered German soldiers after WWII had ended from POW (prisoner of war) to DEF (disarmed enemy fighter) so that he could deny them the food and shelter assured by the Geneva convention.  An estimated 800,000 of them were starved to death in Ike's death camps, and not a word of it can be found in the history books in our schools.  But it is a verified fact of history.

You also appear to be woefully lacking in your knowledge of the history of the Pearl Harbor false flag operation.

In July of 1941, Japanese assets in England and America were frozen, illegally confiscating Japanese property. Churchill and FDR cutting off 90% of Japan's oil supply and 75% of its foreign trade, also imposed a trade embargo. During a meeting with Churchill in August of 1941, Roosevelt made an agreement with Churchill to declare war on Japan if Japan invaded British or Dutch colonies in Asia.

On November 26th, 1941, FDR's Secretary of State Cordell Hull delivered an ultimatum to Japan; dictating what policies Japan must follow.On November 25, 1941 Japan's Admiral Yamamoto sent a radio message to the group of Japanese warships that would attack Pearl Harbor on December 7. Publicly released naval records prove that from November 17 to 25 the United States Navy intercepted eighty-three messages that Yamamoto sent to his carriers. Part of the November 25 message read: "...the task force, keeping its movements strictly secret and maintaining close guard against submarines and aircraft, shall advance into Hawaiian waters, and upon the very opening of hostilities shall attack the main force of the United States fleet in Hawaii and deal it a mortal blow...

"Robert Stinnett, author of Day Of Deceit, provides the proof. Stinnett's book is dedicated to Congressman John Moss, the author of America's Freedom of Information Act. According to Stinnett, the answers to the secrets of Pearl Harbor can be found in the large number of documents he was able to attain through Freedom of Information Act requests. Cable after cable of decryptions, scores of military messages that America was intercepting, clearly showed that Japanese ships were preparing for war and heading straight for Hawaii. Stinnett, an author, journalist, and World War II veteran, spent sixteen years delving into the National Archives. He read over more than 200,000 documents, and conducted dozens of interviews.

The research led Stinnet to this conclusion: FDR knew.In October 1940 FDR adopted a specific strategy to incite Japan to commit an overt act of war. Part of the strategy was to move America's Pacific fleet out of California and anchor it in Pearl Harbor. Admiral James Richardson, the commander of the Pacific fleet, very strongly opposed keeping the ships in harm's way in Hawaii. He expressed this to Roosevelt, and so the President relieved him of his command. Later Richardson quoted Roosevelt as saying: "Sooner or later the Japanese will commit an overt act against the United States and the nation will be willing to enter the war."

There are so many more.  
The Iran Contra - a covert conspiracy

JFK assassination - concluded by United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) that although JFK was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald it was a conspiracy.

The CIA is in the conspiracy business!  They were investigated by the Church Committee and found for example, the assassinations of Allende in Chile and Mossadegh in Iran. Assassinations against Central and South American leaders and revolutionaries, as well as Africa, Middle East and East Asia. The list was tremendous.

You actually have to be a certified numbskull NOT to believe in conspiracies when you study history.  Their were many plots to kill Queen Elizabeth I.  Back then the were called plots, which is another word for conspiracy.  The Babbington Plot, Ridolfi Plot, Gunpowder Plot, and one led by an 11th great uncle of mine, the Throckmorton Plot.  Luckily for her, and the Protestants of England, she survived them all.

Naive? Stupid? Ignorant? Whatever.  One thing is for certain... easily manipulated.

Diane,
As for the plane in Pennsylvania... the one that contained all the passengers who were supposedly on the two remotely controlled planes that flew into the Twin Towers.  Yeah... those planes were empty dear heart.  It is one of the 9/11 anomolies - there were in all four planes few enough passengers to fit into one of them (if you deduct the 19 fictitious Arabs who were never on the boarding manifest or recorded by any of the security cameras in the airports... all of which by the way were secured by an Israeli owned security company)

Watch this video as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld states in plain English that the plane was shot down over Pennsylvania.  It's called a "Freudian slip", also known as a parapraxis - A verbal mistake that is thought to reveal a repressed belief, thought, or emotion.



I would add that those who deny through cognitive dissonance, or confirmation bias the evidence pointing toward a truth they just can't accept, will never be given enough evidence to change their minds.  I would include you in that category.



Try to understand the "white crow" example of deductive reasoning.  It is simply that you only need to find one white crow to prove that all crows are not black. 

Mr. Sail, Nice photo of the burned fuel tanker but I fail to see the connection. I've had all the training and had some personal experience with them, not bombed of course, but from accidents. One went off an overpass and onto the highway below. They are built to stand some abuse and since it didn't Bleve, it either wasn't very hot over all, vented the cargo, or was empty. Now burning tires are really hot. But I don't know how there can be a comparison with the towers? When I have a minute I'll show your photo to my flammable liquids instructor and see what he says. As far as bowling balls and such ya lost me. I just don't see the comparisons.
 One thing I will say, the owners of the buildings got very complacent after the first attempt in the parking garage explosion when nothing much happened. It was the world trade center, the business heart for many countries here in the US. Because of the time zones involved, places like that are never empty, they are open and doing business 24 hours a day. They don't close for lunch either.
  Bomb sniffing dogs? They were still there.There had been a higher alert shortly before, but all the dogs were not removed. One of them died during the incident. Where do the people you want to believe get this stuff? Do you really think other countries would have stood by and done nothing if they thought our Gov't. did this to them?  As far as just flashing a badge and having free access to the buildings ,surely you jest. This wasn't a scene out of a Die Hard movie. A bunch of people dragging around all the equipment to bring down a building that size?  How would you get to the places to put the explosives in? If you believe that you must believe the OK City bombing was prewired too.That theory is still around. I know our Gov't has it's share of corrupt people and things aren't all rosy because of big business interests and powerful people or people who want to be powerful people or stand in their shadow, but our elected officials, we put them there, did not blow up those buildings! If you really believe our own Gov't is and was and will be the enemy, then our country was lost to powerful interests years ago.
Of course things were done that were considered at the time to be in the interest of our country. Why wouldn't they be? Look at all the stuff from WWII that is finally being declassified now. Many many books are being written about things that happened here and other countries, especially Great Britain. As for flight 93 being empty, you're telling me the 40 or so people who's names and photos we saw, and the stories about them were fake? Their families and friends must love knowing their loved ones didn't exist. I suppose now you'll tell me the locals who saw the plane, the news papers and firefighters and all the personnel were "in on it" too? And the funeral directors and all the memorial services? I don't think so. As far as there not being many on board, that's not that unusual. I've been on many a flight where the majority of the passengers got on at later stops, but it did eventually did fill up. Remotely controlled empty planes? I guess it didn't work very well did it? Good grief!

Quote from: kshillbillys on November 23, 2010, 09:00:28 AM
Teresa---Robert says he would love to have a duel with you. How about 4th of July and you pick the Roman Candles?

Cool! We'll so it at our annual lake party...I'll buy Roberts roman candles at Piedmont..
I'll have mine custom made..  ;D
*whispering* Robert... wear metal underwear.. 
ROTFL~~




SailMexico~~ You have a wealth of knowledge..with facts to back it all up... but.........  sighhh..
You could have God standing here with all the evidence and its not gonna matter..
The lights are on.. but nobodys home.. ::)

Diane,
I'm beginning to understand your problem, but I won't articulate it out of kindness.

I didn't say flight 93 was empty.  Read it again.  It was full.  It was shot down to eliminate the passengers from all planes.   I would explain the possible scenario but what's the use.  I used the simplest example of gravitational potential energy, and kinetic energy with my example of a bowling ball and "lost you".

You need to acknowledge that you aren't bright enough to understand the real evidence and trust the 1,300 architects and engineers who are http://www.ae911truth.org/ (http://www.ae911truth.org/) or the physicists http://www.physics911.net/ (http://www.physics911.net/) or the journalists http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090917032602804 (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20090917032602804) or the professional pilots http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/ (http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/) and who, having studied the evidence, decided the government's conspiracy theory stinks.

As for not getting the connection between the tanker which was carrying a full load of jet fuel when it was set on fire by an IED... what can I say that wouldn't hurt your feelings?  If you don't get the connection, the obvious physical proof that burning jet fuel doesn't melt steel - thin sheet steel - or even warp it, then it's little wonder you would believe the official bullshit story.

The entire official story begins with the ludicrous idea that student pilots, small in stature, could - with a 400% rate of success - overpower four large ex military pilots and their copilots and remove them from the cockpit armed with some cheap box cutters, and then navigate from 30,000 feet to targets that were not in sight.

Let's forget the problem of flying the airplane and just deal with the problem of navigation.  It would be impossible for anyone without a lot of experience.

I am a pilot with 900 hours of flight time.  That's quite a bit considering private pilots fly on average about 24 hours annually.  I got my hours within a few years selling airplanes in the early '70s.  I can tell you that without a doubt I could not have done what the "terrorists" are reported to have done.  Particularly the 747 that supposedly struck the Pentagon.

Even if they could have flown an airplane that is as different from a Cessna 150 trainer as a bicycle is from a bus... THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIND THE PENTAGON.  How would they have know which way to go?  You think it's easy because you've never piloted a plane.  I've been lost flying a plane at 120 miles per hour.  It is four times more difficult to navigate at four times the speed.  

Pilots use sophisticated navigational instruments.  In my day we followed an OMNI signal and flew in and out on radials.  These days GPS is used, but you have to be familiar with the instrumentation.  There is no evidence that these student pilots had any such training.  They would not have gotten it in the training they received in Florida.

And in response to another of your posts.  Yes, and airplane hit the Pentagon, but it was not a 747.  The wreckage from 200 tons of airplane is immense.  And the engines alone weigh 50,000 lbs each and are made from indestructable titanium.  There was only ONE hole bored through three sections of the Pentagon... not the two that would have evidenced an airplane with two engines.

Each wing of a 747 weighs 95,000 lbs - as much as two fully loaded semi-trailers.  They would not have simply folded up and entered the small hole we see in the initial photos of the Pentagon crash site.

I want to make two more points concerning the Pentagon.  They will, I think, point out the level of naivete among ordinary citizens like yourself, which permits such bullshit to be believed.  

In Iraq we had anti missile weapons placed all over the base and particularly surrounding the building where all the bigshots worked.  They were called Phalanx Anti Missile systems.  They were developed by the Navy and nothing can get past one.  Take a look http://www.metacafe.com/watch/333517/phalanx_anti_missile_system/ (http://www.metacafe.com/watch/333517/phalanx_anti_missile_system/)

The Pentagon is surely the most protected building on planet Earth.  I don't know for a fact that it is protected by Phalanx systems, but I'm sure it is protected by technology as good or better.  Nothing could have hit the Pentagon unless it was permitted to.  Consider that there had to have been a stand down order, and there is evidence of that fact, or the best military in the world would have scrambled fighters within the first few minutes after it was reported at 8:20 that an airliner had been hijacked.  

By 9:37 when the Pentagon was hit the sky should have been filled with fighters.

Even without the fighters the Pentagon's anti missile defense systems should have protected it.

The second point is this.  How many security cameras do you suppose the Pentagon has?  More than the average convenience store I'd bet.  And all the government would have to do to prove their version of what happened is show us the film.  But they don't do that, because it never happened.  

The FBI confiscated video recordings from several private businesses near the Pentagon in the immediate aftermath of the attack.  Why?

It is important to remember, until it is proven exactly who was behind the 9/11 attacks, if Muslim extremists were not, that our government is incredibly well infiltrated, both overtly and covertly, by Israelis.  The Mossad has operatives all over the world including the United States, in the form of nationalized citizens whose loyalty to Israel is greater than to their own country.  They are called Sayanim.

It is very possible, and in fact likely, that 9/11 was a Mossad operation.  Consider the "dancing Israelis" found filming the 9/11 attacks and then celebrating. http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html?q=fiveisraelis.html (http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html?q=fiveisraelis.html)

Who are our boys really fighting for as they die in a war against the sworn enemies of Israel. I just read the book "The Other Side of Deception" by ex Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky.  In it he outlines the way in which the U.S. was tricked into bombing Libya, enemy of Israel. 

It is a bit lengthy, but I'm pasting this for those who might be interested in some truth in history.

Taken from The Other Side of Deception by Victor Ostrovsky

{p. 32} It seemed that the whole building was going berserk. Everybody and his dog were looking for information that could stop Jordan's King Hussein's efforts for a peace initiative. ...

The American Jewish community was divided into a three-stage action team. First were the individual sayanim (if the situation had been reversed and the United States had convinced Americans working in Israel to work secretly on behalf of the United States, they would be treated as spies by the Israeli government). Then there was the large pro-Israeli lobby. It would mobilize the Jewish community in a forceful effort in whatever direction the Mossad pointed them. And last was B'nai Brith. Members of that organization could be relied on to make friends among non-Jews and tarnish as anti-Semitic whomever they couldn't sway to the Israeli cause. With that sort of one-two-three tactic, there was no way we could strike out.

{p. 113} "It's the old Trojan dick trick." He lit a cigarette.

"What's that?" I couldn't help smiling; I'd never heard it called that before.

"I knew that would get your attention," he said, grinning. "Shimon activated Operation Trojan in February of this year." {the only Shimon in the index is Shimon Peres}

I nodded. I'd still been in the Mossad when that order was given, and because of my naval background and acquaintance with most of the commanders in the navy, I participated in the planning for the operation as liaison with the navy.

A Trojan was a special communication device that could be planted by naval commandos deep inside enemy territory. The device would act as a relay station for misleading transmissions made by the disinformation unit in the Mossad, called LAP {footnote: LAP: LohAma Psicologit. Psychological warfare, or, as it's known in the West, disinformation}, and intended to be received by American and British listening stations. Originating from an IDF navy ship out at sea, the prerecorded digital transmissions could be picked up only by the Trojan. The device would then rebroadcast the transmission on another frequency, one used for official business in the enemy country, at which point the transmission would finally be picked up by American ears in Britain.

The listeners would have no doubt they had intercepted a genuine communication, hence the name Trojan, reminiscent of the mythical Trojan horse. Further, the content of the messages, once deciphered, would confirm information from other intelligence sources, namely the Mossad. The only catch was that the Trojan itself would have to be located as close as possible to the normal origin of such transmissions, because of the sophisticated methods of triangulation the Americans and others would use to verify the source.

In the particular operation Ephraim was referring to, two elite units in the military had been made responsible for the delivery of the Trojan device to the proper location. One was the Matkal {footnote: Matkal: Top military reconnaissance unit of the Israeli army} reconnaissance unit and the other was Flotilla 13, the naval commandos. The

{p. 114} commandos were charged with the task of planting the Trojan device in Tripoli, Libya.

On the night of February 17-18, two Israeli missile boats, the SAAR 4-class Moledet, armed with Harpoon and Gabriel surface-to-surface missiles, among other weaponry, and the Geula, a Hohit-class mlsslle boat with a helicopter pad and regular SAAR 4-class armament, conducted what seemed like a routine patrol of the Mediterranean, heading for the Sicilian channel and passing just outside the territorial waters of Libya. Just north of Tripoli, the warships, which were visible to radar both in Tripoli and on the Italian island of Lampedusa, slowed down to about four knots - just long enough to allow a team of twelve naval commandos in four wet submarines nicknamed "pigs" and two low-profiled speedboats called "birds" to disembark. The pigs could carry two commandos each and all their fighting gear. The birds, equipped with an MG 7.62-caliber machine gun mounted over the bow and an array of antitank shoulder-carried missiles, could facilitate six commandos each, while towing the empty pigs. The birds brought the pigs as close to the shore as possible, thus cutting down the distance the pigs would have to travel on their own. (The pigs were submersible and silent but relatively slow.)

Two miles off the Libyan coast, the lights of Tripoli could be seen glistening in the southeast. Eight commandos slipped quietly into the pigs and headed for shore. The birds stayed behind at the rendezvous point, ready to take action should the situation arise. Once they reached the beach, the commandos left their cigar-like transporters submerged in the shallow water and headed inland, carrying a dark green Trojan cylinder six feet long and seven inches in diameter. It took two men to carry it.

A gray van was parked on the side of the road about one hundred feet from the water, on the coastal highway leading from Sabratah to Tripoli and on to Benghazi. There was hardly any traffic at that time of night. The driver of the van seemed to be repairing a flat tire. He stopped working as the team approached and opened the back doors of the van. He was a Mossad combatant. Without a word said, four of the men entered the van and headed for the city. The other four returned to the water, where they took a defensive position by the submerged pigs. Their job was to hold this position to ensure an escape route for the team now headed for the city.

At the same time, a squadron of Israeli fighters was refueling south of Crete, ready to assist. They were capable of keeping any ground forces away from the commandos, allowing them a not-so clean getaway. At this point, the small commando unit was divided {p. 115} into three details - its most vulnerable state. Were any of the details to run into enemy forces, they were instructed to act with extreme prejudice before the enemy turned hostile.

The van parked at the back of an apartment building on Al Jamhuriyh Street in Tripoli, less than three blocks away from the Bab al Azizia barracks that were known to house Qadhafi's headquarters and residence. By then, the men in the van had changed into civilian clothing. Two stayed with the van as lookouts and the other two helped the Mossad combatant take the cylinder to the top floor of the five-story building. The cylinder was wrapped in a carpet.

In the apartment, the top section of the cylinder was opened and a small dishlike antenna was unfolded and placed in front of the window facing north. The unit was activated, and the Trojan horse was in place.

The Mossad combatant had rented the apartment for six months and had paid the rent in advance. There was no reason for anyone except the combatant to enter the apartment. However, if someone should decide to do so, the Trojan would self-destruct, taking with it most of the upper part of the building. The three men headed back to the van and to their rendezvous with their friends on the beach.

After dropping the commandos at the beach, the combatant headed back for the city, where he would monitor the Trojan unit for the next few weeks. The commandos wasted no time and headed out to sea. They didn't want to be caught in Libyan waters at daybreak. They reached the birds and headed at full speed to a prearranged pickup coordinate, where they met with the missile boats that had brought them in.

By the end of March, the Americans were already intercepting messages broadcast by the Trojan, which was only activated during heavy communication traffic hours. Using the Trojan, the Mossad tried to make it appear that a long series of terrorist orders were being transmitted to various Libyan embassies around the world (or, as they were called by the Libyans, Peoples' Bureaus). As the Mossad had hoped, the transmissions were deciphered by the Americans and construed as ample proof that the Libyans were active sponsors of terrorism. What's more, the Americans pointed out, Mossad reports confirmed it.

The French and the Spanish, though, were not buying into the new stream of information. To them, it seemed suspicious that suddenly, out of the blue, the Libyans, who'd been extremely careful in the past, would start advertising their future actions. They also found it suspicious that in several instances Mossad reports were worded similarly

{p. 116} to coded Libyan communications. They argued further that, had there truly been after-the-fact Libyan communications regarding the attack, then the terrorist attack on the La Belle discotheque { La Belle discotheque: The terrorist attack on this location was said to have been linked to the Libyans and was the catalyst for the April 14 bombing of Libya by the Americans} in West Berlin on April 5 could have been prevented, since surely there would have been communications before, enabling intelligence agencies listening in to prevent It. Since the attack wasn't prevented, they reasoned that it must not be the Libyans who did it, and the "new communications" must be bogus. The French and the Spanish were right. The information was bogus, and the Mossad didn't have a clue who planted the bomb that killed one American serviceman and wounded several others. But the Mossad was tied in to many of the European terrorist organizations, and it was convinced that in the volatile atmosphere that had engulfed Europe, a bombing with an American victim was just a matter of time Heads of the Mossad were counting on the American promise to retaliate with vengeance against any country that could be proven to support terrorism. The Trojan gave the Americans the proof they needed. The Mossad also plugged into the equation Qadhafi's lunatic image and momentous declarations, which were really only meant for internal consumption. It must be remembered that Qadhafi had marked a line in the water at that time, closing off the Gulf of Sidra as Libyan territorial waters and calling the new maritime border the line of death (an action that didn't exactly give him a moderate image). Ultimately, the Americans fell for the Mossad ploy head over heels dragging the British and the Germans somewhat reluctantly in with them. Operation Trojan was one of the Mossad's greatest successes. It brought about the air strike on Libya that President Reagan had promised - a strike that had three important consequences. First, it derailed a deal for the release of the American hostages in Lebanon, thus preserving the Hizballah (Party of God) as the number one enemy in the eyes of the West. Second, it sent a message to the entire Arab world, telling them exactly where the United States stood regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict. Third, it boosted the Mossad's image of itself, since it was they who, by ingenious sleight of hand, had prodded the United States to do what was right. It was only the French who didn't buy into the Mossad trick and

{p. 117} were determined not to ally themselves with the aggressive American act. The French refused to allow the American bombers to fly over their territory on their way to attack Libya.

On April 14, 1986, one hundred and sixty American aircraft dropped over sixty tons of bombs on Libya. The attackers bombed Tripoli international airport, Bab al Azizia barracks, Sidi Bilal naval base, the city of Benghazi, and the Benine airfield outside Benghazi. The strike force consisted of two main bodies, one originating in England and the other from flattops in the Mediterranean. From England came twenty-four F-111s from Lakenheath, five EF-111s from Upper Heyford, and twenty-eight refueling tankers from Mildenhall and Fairford. In the attack, the air force F-111s and the EF-111s were joined by eighteen A-6 and A-7 strike and strike support aircraft, six F\A-18 fighters, fourteen EA-6B electronic jammer planes, and other support platforms. The navy planes were catapulted from the carriers Coral Sea and America. On the Libyan side, there were approximately forty civilian casualties, including Qadhafi's adopted daughter. On the American side, a pilot and his weapons officer were killed when their F-111 exploded.

After the bombing, the Hizballah broke off negotiations regarding the hostages they held in Beirut and executed three of them, including one American named Peter Kilburn. As for the French, they were rewarded for their nonparticipation in the attack by the release at the end of June of two French journalists held hostage in Beirut. (As it happened, a stray bomb hit the French embassy in Tripoli during the raid.)

Ephraim had spelled it all out for me and confirmed some of the information I'd already known. He then went on. "After the bombing of Libya, our friend Qadhafi is sure to stay out of the picture for some time. Iraq and Saddam Hussein are the next target. We're starting now to build him up as the big villain. It will take some time, but in the end, there's no doubt it'll work."

"But isn't Saddam regarded as moderate toward us, allied with Jordan, the big enemy of Iran and Syria?"

"Yes, that's why I'm opposed to this action. But that's the directive, and I must follow it. Hopefully, you and I will be done with our little operation before anything big happens. After all, we have already destroyed his nuclear facility, and we are making money by selling him technology and equipment through South Africa."

{p. 254} In the following weeks, more and more discoveries were made regarding the big gun and other elements of the Saddam war machine. The Mossad had all but saturated the intelligence field with information regarding the evil intentions of Saddam the Terrible, banking on the fact that before long, he'd have enough rope to hang himself. It was very clear what the Mossad's overall goal was. It wanted the West to do its bidding, just as the Americans had in Libya with the bombing of Qadhafi. After all, Israel didn't possess carriers and ample air power, and although it was capable of bombing a refugee camp in Tunis, that was not the same. The Mossad leaders knew that if they could make Saddam appear bad enough and a threat to the Gulf oil supply, of which he'd been the protector up to that point, then the United States and its allies would not let him get away with anything, but would take measures that would all but eliminate his army and his weapons potential, especially if they were led to believe that this might just be their last chance before he went nuclear.

My my, you have been busy since I left to make a big pan of apple crisp for a nice neighbor. The one thing I have learned since I went back and reread all the posts is how amusing it is to see you disagree with each other and yet you are each POSTIVE you know all about 9-11 and how it all happened. But no matter what I say it has to be wrong, even if I wasn't the one who said it.  When one reads extreme writing not based on plausible evidence, errors can happen since the authors don't check their stories with each other. Four planes, two planes and two missiles, shot down, not shot down  Many people, no people, full planes, empty planes, wired buildings or not, dogs, no dogs. Lets see where do I start. Mr Sail. I never said the PA plane was a 747, at least I don't think I did,, since it was a 757 and I did say very clearly that I had questions about the incident. You are correct in that I did misread that it was empty, but you are saying that the others were empty? So the nearly 150 people who died in those didn't exist? Their names that are read  each year on 911 are fake? Their families that show up are all actors and have come back for 9 years?  That Bush would attack the Pentagon? His own Military? Perhaps the Capitol or his own White House?Also you didn't lose me in the physics of the bowling ball,and all. It's just I don't see the connection.There are too may variables. Not all the floors on the towers were the same, but all were connected to the curtain walls the same.The floors weren't empty.They had furniture and all manner of stuff would be falling and burning and shifting. The windows, 18 inches wide, did indeed blow out as the building came down, which in itself would change the equation as air pressure in the building changed from down to sideways and so on. Your examples took none of that into account.  So now the Jews did it? I wondered which of you would make that comment, it was just a matter of time. Now if you said Rumsfeld did it I might consider it. GRRRR!
   You said I'm not a pilot...are you sure?  ;) You people only know what I've told you. Ya ever hear of the Civil Air Patrol? There is a wing right over in New Castle at the air base and another in Dover. One of my best girl friends went to college on a CAP scholarship. And my father was a pilot, loved planes and got his license right there in Howard. My lips are sealed. ;D As far as 9-11 is concerned you'll get to rehash every bit next year.
Mr. Sail, I don't recall ever saying that the steel, or iron "melted"on the Twin Towers. I've been to a number of warehouse fires where the steel buckled, stretched, lost its strength, warped and could no longer do its job, so things fell , but never "melted,"so your truck photos didn't show me anything new. I said it was the aluminum skin that melted and flowed down the building, I  can't help what others said they thought they saw. I've toured a couple of steel mills over the years, back when they were still operating, and know what a Bessemer furnace is, so I know a little about the process and the alloys etc.  I know more about it from the fire side. At about 1500 degrees steel starts to fail, but  it begins  at much lower temps.
Taking Al out to dinner now.BYE

You really are a wonder miss Diane. 

If you knew anything about molten aluminum you'd know that it is not bright orange, it is silver in color.  Molten iron is bright orange.  And "weakened" steel would definitely not result in a straight down collapse at free fall speed.  The key is that the buildings fell in virtually the same time a brick (since you don't get bowling balls) would have taken to fall the same distance through thin air.  That is all one needs to know to eliminate gravitational collapse as a possibility, which leaves us with what?  The use of explosives.

Investigators should not assume anything before making conclusions, and their conclusions should be based upon the evidence.  When you express incredulity "That Bush would attack the Pentagon? His own Military? Perhaps the Capitol or his own White House?" you have already made your conclusions.

I did not say flight 93 was a 747, I was referring to the plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon.

As for the my theory concerning the fate of the passengers here are some facts.  FACTS!

The total capacity of all four planes was 762, and yet there were in total only 229 passengers, including the 19 alleged hijackers.

There is no physical evidence that flight 11 hit the first tower.  There was one short clip taken by a film crew filming a fireman.  It is impossible to say what plane is in the video.

Ditto flight 175 and the second tower.

This is the first incident in which the flight recorders - black boxes - have not been recovered.  It is unprecedented.

There is no physical evidence that the Pentagon was hit by a 747 - Flight 77.

Flight 77 originated at Dulles, just 20 miles from the Pentagon, and yet flew hundreds of miles before returning toward Washington D C.  Why?

Flight 93 was shot down.  Why?

If this was a covert operation carried out by the CIA in conjunction with Mossad - and made to look like Islamic extremists did it, then a whole new set of possibilities unfold.  They could have access to secure buildings.  Complicity at the highest levels of government could be expected.  A scenario to transfer all of the passengers and crew from the scheduled flights to one flight - flight 93, which had more than enough time to land at a military base in Ohio and load passengers from the other three flights - and then shoot that flight down, killing the unwitting passengers.

If you think that sort of thing is beyond the capability of your beloved government then I suggest you read their plans for "Operation Northwoods" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods)

Here is an excerpt:
It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

    a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.
    b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio[15] stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.


It is an undeniable fact of history that the covert operatives of the United States Government have taken innocent lives to further its political agenda.  You are naive if you think the President of the United States serves your interests or the interests of ordinary citizens.  We are nothing more than slaves in the opinion of the elite.  They think absolutely nothing about sending tens of thousands of young men off to die if it will mean making a profit for the corporations and bankers who truly do run the show.

Why did we lose 58,000 men in Vietnam?  One of whom was my 19 year old brother.  For the sole benefit of the military industrial complex.  War is immensely profitable.  George Bush's grandfather Prescott Bush, another member of Yale's secret "Skull and Bones" society, was making money from Hitler's military armament.  Documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s.

War was the goal of 9/11.  Lying by means of a "false flag" attack has forever been every government's way of tricking its population into a war.  There is nothing new in a government lying to their people to start a war. Indeed because most people prefer living in peace to bloody and horrific death in war, any government that desires to initiate a war usually lies to their people to create the illusion that support for the war is the only possible choice they can make.

Lyndon Johnson lied about the Gulf of Tonkin attacks, and it caused the public to at first support our involvement in Vietnam.   

President McKinley lied to the American people that the USS Maine had been sunk in Havana Harbor by a Spanish mine. The American people, outraged by this apparent unprovoked attack, supported the Spanish American War. The Captain of the USS Maine had insisted the ship was sunk by a coal bin explosion, investigations after the war proved that such had indeed been the case. There had been no mine.

FDR lied when he claimed Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack. It wasn't. The United States saw war with Japan as the means to get into war with Germany, which Americans opposed. So Roosevelt needed Japan to appear to strike first. Following an 8-step plan devised by the Office of Naval Intelligence, Roosevelt intentionally provoked Japan into the attack. Contrary to the official story, the fleet did not maintain radio silence, but sent messages intercepted and decoded by US intercept stations. Tricked by the lie of a surprise attack, Americans marched off to war.

Did these presidents care that their lies were going to cost innocent American lives?  Hell no!

So why Diane do you have such a difficult time believing that Bush and his cronies might have lied to get us to go to war.  It is a proven fact he lied after 9/11 in order to take us into Iraq.  There were no WMDs.  No weapons of mass destruction.  But lets suppose there had been... would we have then been justified to invade Iraq?

If your neighbor is armed and crazy, do you have the right to enter his home and kill him? 

But that's fodder for another post on the ethics of war.

Now you've got me thinking Diane.  As I reread the excerpt taken from the Operation Northwoods plan I noticed what should have jumped off the page at me... or anyone investigating the events of 9/11.   I've highlighted it below.

Taken from "Operation Northwoods", the government's plan to trick Americans into a war with Cuba in the '60s.

It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

    a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.
    b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio[15] stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.

Carefully selected aliases!  What do you suppose that means?  What are carefully selected aliases?  Do you know any of the passengers that were alleged to be aboard flights 77, 175, 93 or 11?  I know I don't.  Maybe they were CAREFULLY SELECTED ALIASES.  Or maybe only some of them were.

For me it's enough to know there is a precedent for this kind of planning on the part of our government.  I don't have to know all the details.  Like I've said before, I only need to see one white crow to know all crows are not black.

Diane and Others, heres a suggestion...Instead of trying to debate this issue using strawman arguments and trying to punch holes in the varying conspiracies with "what if" and "how could they" type questions, how about presenting actual facts to either explain what happend or to refute the theories??  So far, more facts have been presented on this thread in favor of 9/11 being an inside job than not.  All the arguments against the theories have been "How could Bush do it by himself?" or simply regurgitated bits of the offical story or out right lies, as in...

QuoteWhy don't people talk to the fire service and the engineers and the architect who built it. Actually, he did do a program explaining what happened.  I saw it and wish I could find it again.

Like I stated earlier, it would have been impossible for a person to see the architect do a program explaining what happened as he died in 1986.  Watch the video I posted on page 4 of this thread.  Bear in mind that the "powers that be" have, for the most part, all favored a One World solution to the problems we face (i.e. New World Order).  Well guess what...they gave birth to it on 9/11.

tell me again that bombs weren't used...

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 23, 2010, 09:19:30 AM
On a different note. Where did some of you get the idea there were no plane parts inside the pentagon?  Don't you remember the story of the burned soldier talking about being rescued and the airplane wheel that was next to him?  They also had the nose wheel and other parts and pieces that had to be moved to get to the victims. There are many many photos, most of which are still classified. It was  the pentagon! They didn't let just anybody with a camera inside. There was some plane rubble outside, not much, but I saw lots of building rubble outside the hole in the TV shots thereat the time. It was cleaned up fairly easily. It was not a high rise building!

OMG...Seriously...make up your mind would ya...either jet fuel burns at temp.s so high that it vaporizes the plane upon impact with a building or it doesn't...which is it?  And speaking of really high temps, how is it that "supposed" parts of an airplane (parts small enough to be carried by hand) managed to escape the pentagon fire without so much as a smudge or any trace of fire evidence?  And since I'm on the subject of fires...how is it that the planes that hit the towers disengrated on impact causing a fire with temps so high that it melted metal that a passport of one of the so-called terrorists managed to escape, espcially when you HAVE to consider that he WAS ON THE PLANE AND INCENERATED ON IMPACT??

Open your eyes...

Varmit--Son, I set through the entire agonizing video you wanted me to watch as we discussed today. So you set and watch more or less the same thing, just do more reading. I told you once, for every video you put up, I will put them up too. I know the old saying of you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. I hope this will make you put down the koolaid, but I know i'm just pissin in the wind. And, listening to the ignorance coming from this guy's mouth, he sounds like a 16 year old doing a high school project on conspiracy theories or plots but i guess that's just because I am NAIVE, STUPID, IGNORANT, WHATEVER  AND EASILY MANIPULATED. Alright, you 3 get on here and manipulate me and make me see it your way.---Robert

Well Robert.. You can't have it both ways..so I guess you think that our government is pure and good and is no way corrupt or a soulless power machine..
I hope YOU have enough Koolaid to get you through the next few years..You are gonna need it.. :)
I'd offer to make you some extra.. but I don't have a clue as to what is in yours. I only drink the kind my grand kids drink.. you know.. the regular kind without the hallucinogenics  ;D

((How many roman candles you gonna need.? I only need one.))  :angel:

I watched some of those videos, and to me they didn't prove a damn thing.  The video that tries to debunk the pentagon theory by saying that Loose Change didn't show the actual impact spot..."Lets move to the left and see the ACTUAL spot..."  In the video all they show is a picture of smoke, not the pentagon wall.  They said "Loose Change lied, there is debris all over the place"...yes, small hand-held pieces that weren't damaged by fire.  In another video they complain that "Loose Change points out a passport but doesn't say anything about a life jacket or a "suit" (their spelling, not mine ;D) cushion! Things get moved around during a plane crash."  Funny, that these things including the passport weren't comsumed during the inital impact that resulted in a fire so hot it melted steel, which according to officals, is what led to the collapse of the WTC towers.

Which brings me to my next point...Ever notice how the "offical" story changed?  First the buildings collapsed because of structural damage from the impact.  Then, it was because of fire weaking the supports.  Next, it was a combination of both. Seems to me that if the Towers were such light-weight buildings they would have begun to collapse immediately under the added weight (almost 100 tons empty) of a passenger jet plane not to mention the 10,000 pounds of fuel, nor the kinetic enegry released when said 100 tons crashed into them.

Could it be that the consipracy theories came about because of exetremely sketchy information put out about 9/11?  I don't adhere to any said theory, save one, and that is that 9/11 was an inside job.  Seems to me that if the gov't wanted to prove otherwise, they would have spent more time and money investigating the causes of 9/11 than they did on proving weather or not Clinton got a blowjob from Monica.  One other thing I'd to pointout.  Ever notice the arguments against 9/11 Truthers...

They usually go something like this "you say the gov't lied??  HA! I have offical gov't documents and testimony clearly stating that the gov't didn't lie."...

Kinda like taking a rapists word for it when he says he didn't do it. 

Also, pay attention to how alot of New agencies and so-called debunkers portray truthers.  They are accused of supporting terrorists simply for asking questions!! I mean, WTF!!  This is America, right?  It is our Constitutional Right, if not Duty, to question EVERYTHING our gov't does.  The same gov't, by the way, that has accused militas, Ron Paul supporters, and RETURNING MILITARY VETERANS, of being potential terrorists.  The same gov't whose main spokesperson, the President, actually stood up and said "Let us not tolerate outragerous conspiracy theories..." 




In other words, to hell with the Freedom of speech.  Well, golly gee Mr. President, just who is it we should be more afraid of,  a group of people livin in caves 10,000 miles away or the folks living in our nations capital that have taken away, or tried to take, more of our freedoms, lives, and way of life then any other foreginers in history??

Robert,
How about a meaningful video that isn't filled with speculation, based upon analysis of the "black box" data recorder information released by the NTSB?

Let's end the discussion once and for all concerning the plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon WITH SOME HARD DATA!

9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE
FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled "FLT DECK DOOR", cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08:50:54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, "...all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers..."[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3]

What more could you possibly ask for?  The official information released by the government themselves contradicts the entire farce. 

In every crime there is a slip up.  Investigators count on it.  The criminal drops something at the scene, leaves a finger print, or can't keep his story straight.  I'm sure the NTSB never thought  to check the recorder for information concerning the opening of the cockpit door, and the fact that it was never opened means the government is lying.

Many of us have known they were lying.  Some have a better nose for bullshit than others.  But if you can't smell it now... you just don't own a nose.

Trust me, I do have a nose and have smelled a lot of bullshit lately with this thread...We just don't agree. No need for you to be an ass about it. You won't change my mind and I won't change yours. That's life.

Sorry if I came of as an ass.  It's the frustration.  It seems that for some people, and I'd have to include you Robert, hard evidence means nothing.  I have absolutely no doubt that your mind can not be changed. 

The data recorder information is not opinion it is physical evidence that on AA flight 77 the cockpit door was not opened after take off. 

So now what are we to believe?  That the student pilot Arab highjackers took over the plane before takeoff, communicated with ground control, taxied to the runway and took off?   You might believe that, but I don't. 

Whatever you believe is not based upon fact but rather fiction.  There are lots of people who prefer to live in a fantasy world.  It seems much safer there.  I don't think it is... but it seems to be.

Listening to that conversation on the tape makes me so furious I can't even describe it.!
How can anyone.. anywhere hear that conversation and not ask WTF??
I'm so sick and tired of being lied to and manipulated by those who weld the power stick.
Just like the guy in the video..
We are to assume the position of idiot. ( Because that is what the government thinks that we are) Bend over and take with a smiling brainless attitude what ever they want to stick up our butts and feed us. We are to smile,.nod and slowly repeat over and over all the bullshit that they feed us, until we as human beings believe it.

How many of us that had actual REAL documented proof of something "with Real experts backing us up with professional REAL data".. would be able to talk to someone who insists that they will not comment.. that everything that they have is "on a website"..  ::) and just keeps repeating over and over and over their rhetoric, canned,robotized full of lies and cover up story  of"policy".. Policy my ass!
The only policy they have is to lie and deceive and hope that by programming and conditioning the "naive and ignorant sheep".. that they will follow blindly no matter how stupid or ridiculous their twisted storys get. Looks like it has worked...  
And I can tell you right now that you Jennifer and Robert would be the first in line to demand valid answers if you had been on the other end of that conversation.  And don't you lie to me and tell me you wouldn't..
((I have seen what happens with you guys when you want answers **Mr Murphy ring a bell**? Got all this data and proof..and what is happening. Someone who welds the power stick feeding you shit and trying to convince you its honey~~By the way~~ Hows that honey tasting?))
Stop... back up.. clear your head... look at the evidence.. listen and actually SEE what your eyes and brain sees.. Then don't be afraid to stand up !! Stand up as an American and see the truth! We are at sad level of critical thinking that  is fast permeating American society.  It is exactly how the governmental powers get away with the things they do.  They know Americans are incapable of critical thought, and are dumbed down.  The dumbing down of America was engineered. And they are doing a damned good job of it too.  Just like thinking~~~ "Explosives in the building would mean someone was involved who had intimate access to secure buildings... that would implicate the government... but the government couldn't do such a thing... therefore there were no explosives involved... the buildings collapsed."  
Use the same analogy with child molesters.. Wife beaters...child abuse.. and see how that is to swallow. Same thing!

Thank god I can still open and see with my own eyes.. think for myself.. and actually recognize a turd floating in a bowl of punch before I glub down a big glass of it.

You go girl !! 

CAVEAT EMPTOR...

Governments can and do cover big things up.  I know from personal experience.
Was the US Government behind/involved in in 9/11?  I hope not, but am realistic enough to realize that it could be.
Does any one here have the first hand evidence to prove their case.  Probably not.  And if you do, what's gained in this venue?
Does it warrant the level of debate we see here?  Read the following, and you decide...

Regardless of your take in re 9/11, there are some things I know for sure.  Things we might all do well to ponder.

1.  There is and has been a 'progressive' political movement in the US for decades. The progressive template finds its' roots in the works of the likes of Marx and Lenin. The practical results of their plans end up looking like the USSR, Nazi Germany, North Viet Nam, North Korea, Red China or any number of other repressive, regimes that crush freedom and liberty for the average individual citizen.

2.  One of the progressive objectives is centralized management & control of the economy, transportation, health care, agriculture, education and more.  Propaganda is king.  True individual liberty is at odds with the progressive agenda.

3.  We now have a federal govt crawling with many people  (both elected & otherwise) who, to one degree or another, buy into the progressive ideology both on the left and right.

4.  We now have an executive branch that is crawling with people have publicly embraced the concepts of progressivism, socialism, Marxism, communism, and/or the new label: social justice.  All of these being anti-republic, man as god, man made utopian seeking forms of governance.

5.  Some associates of our current administration include advisers (official & otherwise) who have been shown to embrace radical revolutionary means to accomplish their ends.

6. One very effective tactic of subversive revolutionaries is to divide and conquer.  Be it race, wealth envy, or even exploiting distractions like the debate over 9/11.  By creating, fostering or furthering distractions and debates that will change nothing, the progressive agenda can be furthered in the present while the true proponents & protectors of liberty are busy arguing and debating with both sides relying on dubious 'evidence' that some unknown third party put together.  Neither side having the expertise or first hand access to all the information needed to successfully prove their case.

Don't become a pawn.  Beware the slight of hand.  Watching one hand too closely might cause you to miss what the other hand is really doing.

So Patriot, you consider the debate considering 9/11 to be a distraction.  A distraction from what?  9/11 was a turning point in American history.  A juncture at which Americans were told "they went thata way!", as the powers that be, and their lacky media pointed toward the middle east.  As a result several things happened, none of which were good for Americans.

• The Patriot Act moved Americans one step closer to totalitarian control
• Wealth began a multi trillion dollar transfer into the pockets of the elite equity holders in the military-industrial complex
• Misguided American patriotism began to support (once again) the sacrifice of its youth in an unwarranted wars
• Americans were (all too easily) inspired toward hatred of people from the Muslim culture
• The wholesale slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent men women and children

One does not need "personal experience" to know the truth of something.  Have you ever personally experienced the splitting of an atom, or seen with your own eyes a quark?

A simple understanding of classical physics is all one needs to positively know the three buildings did not collapse from gravitational potential energy on 9/11.  A blind man who reads the collapse times and height of the buildings in brail can know it.

If there has ever been an event in American history more worthy of an honest investigation I'd like to know what it was.  The investigation will not take place if the debate does not continue. 

Every day more people are realizing the official story stinks.  Even Geraldo Revera, paragon of investigative journalists <cough> has recently decided there may be something to the truth movement, thanks to the "Building What" ad campaign.

America is doomed if the treachery of our current fascist government is not revealed.  But even then Americans must be shaken from their apathy and take action before they are tagged, disarmed and bled to death.

World domination is the goal of the ZioNeocons, and apathetic Americans are helping them reach that goal.

Quote from: Sailmexico on November 24, 2010, 12:22:17 PM
So Patriot, you consider the debate considering 9/11 to be a distraction. 

I am suggesting that the energy put forth in debating such things ad nauseam in venues like this likely solves little, changes few minds and can serve as a distraction from the current acts of those who would sully the republic.

Quote from: Sailmexico on November 24, 2010, 12:22:17 PM
World domination is the goal of the ZioNeocons, and apathetic Americans are helping them reach that goal.

Do you know anyone who goes by the name Anmar?  Zionist Neocons or ZioNeocons (interesting conjunction) were something Anmar alluded to several times back in Oct of this year.  And a term not terribly common in ElkSpeak.  Just wondering if you two knew each other.

Patriot - No I don't know anyone by the name Anmar, and although I'm sure the term has been used before and I've probably seen it, I coined the term on the spot.  It's a reasonable moniker for the two ideologies most responsible for the current world "situation" and undoubtedly in collusion.

I am not an anti Semite, or anti any culture.  I am anti ignorance, cruelty, selfishness and arrogance, no matter what the bloodline.

Interestingly enough few people realize that most Zionists are not Semites, they are Khazars... Ashkanzi Jews of Eastern European descent, whose ancestors were converted to Judaism in the 7th century.  Ironically Palestinians are the Semites.

And I agree with you that debating 9/11 in Howard Kansas is a form of mental masturbation.  But on a rainy day when there is nobody influential to debate... well like I said... it'll have to do.

I'm getting ready to really throw a snake in the hen house though.  It should be fun <evil laugh>.

Quote from: Sailmexico on November 24, 2010, 01:24:08 PM
Patriot - No I don't know anyone by the name Anmar...
...I'm getting ready to really throw a snake in the hen house though.  It should be fun <evil laugh>.

Okeedokee.  Well it almost seemed like you have an evil twin out there.  Toss the snake, I hear they taste like chicken.

Quoteone given to intellectualism & verbosity.

Sounds like an insult.  I'll take it to mean informed and articulate. 

I'm certainly no intellectual.  I'm just a barely-got-out-of-high-school graduate, with a PHD in the school of hard knocks.  I was formed in the Judeo-Christian, conservative, Republican, capitalist mold, but evidently had too much compassion and not enough fear to maintain my shape.  I'd probably be labeled a Liberal, but I just consider myself to be what Americans think they are when they espouse "liberty and justice for all". 

I for one like the talk about 9/11.  It is intellectually stimulating and interesting. 

I 'm not going to add much more because some of you will beat me down because I'm not out where you are and no matter what I say I am one of "them." If I am to be convinced that our Pres. did that to us then there better never be another Republican President in my lifetime,I would be so disgusted. Teresa said something about getting information from the Internet. Almost none of mine came from there. I don't need it,especially not those "alternative sites." Being in the fire service, we have totally different channels for information. After the first trade center bombing we had a speaker at a special conference in Dover nine months later when the investigations were finished. His name was Paul Maniscalco. He was the officer in charge of the entire incident and coordinated with the police, Security, Port Authority etc. He did a three hour program in ugly graphic detail with information and photos not available to the public. He also wrote a handbook on the Incident Command System that is commonly used today. A very good professional source. By the time 2001 happened he had retired. A contemporary of his, who I will not name, came back here and did another program. It was much later because the NYC investigation went on for so long. Among other things we learned what was proved, what was possibly true, what was speculation and what was false. Again we heard radio messages and dispatches, heard and saw witness accounts of the first and second planes and saw much footage that is not available to the public. Much of it was raw footage at the time and had not been cleaned up or edited.. You might have heard of Lou Angeli, a personal good friend of many years, who is a fire service photographer.  He was there within two hours of the towers' fall. He was allowed access to everything because everybody knows who he is.   He too got loads of footage and many, many interviews, especially from the fire fighters themselves. I've seen a lot of his stuff too. We also have seen programs done by the construction firm who built the buildings, the structural engineers and the design engineers, and the architects,  Minoru Yamasak's associates. The fire service has a vested interest in knowing how buildings are designed so we won't be in them when they fall down! I'm sorry Frank Brannigan isn't still alive.   He was the real pro when it came to knowing what buildings do when they are on fire and what things cause what to happen .Unfortunately that is one weak spot with architectural design.They want buildings to be pleasing to the eye and fit the budget of those who hire them. Safety is something the fire service has to fight for.
We have to know a lot about a lot of different things and how they look and act while burning.  Fire chemistry, metallurgy, gasses, pet-chem, general poisons, MSDS, the entire placarding system,and lots more. I also took the Fire Marshals arson course.  Some 2000 slides and several weekends later I could almost always find the source of a fire and what caused it.vThermite anyone?I even know how to make it! So say "poor Diane, in over her head again" all you want. You don't really know who I am, or who my connections are. I really am your friend, or I try to be. Leave it at that..I'm really sorry some of you feel the way you do, but that's your problem and I can't fix that even as much as I'd like to.

Thank you Twirldoggy.. I feel that way about a lot of subjects in here that is discussed.. I have learned a lot and also actually changed my way of thinking on several issues because of the debates.

Patriot... ..just for your information.. I'm probably closer to being this guys "evil twin" than you can imagine. I've known him most of my adult life.. Been through a whole lot together..
He's definitely on the top rung of the ladder in intelligence and one who never yells fire unless its blazing..one of those very few who I would trust enough to call from my bunker when the shit hits the fan.... * I'm just sayin.......* :)

Having said that.. I want to share with you something.  I have been talking extensively with a die hard Liberal whom I have never met in person. ( one of my facebook friends actually) for a few weeks.  It has been interesting and actually enlightening in some areas. I have found that actually I am an independently conservative cake with a thin layer of liberal icing. :)
He also decided after talking to me that he isn't as hard nosed Liberal as he thought.. as we agreed on several issues. He is a gun owner.. so fortunately that subject was agreed on. from the start but we both agreed to open up our minds * that sometimes is the hard part*
and get off our mind set stools.. to just really listen to each others views and arguments.

What I'm getting at is... I have admitted finally that I have had a stubborn mindset about some things. .. where actually~~ I DO see where I have been not listening to my own thoughts and gut feelings. In my heart I believed one way but by stubborn hard nose conservative outer grit.. I'd be damned if I would admit it.

I've changed.. All of a sudden I'm not afraid to stand up and say what I feel in my heart.. (I've believed 9/11 was an inside job the first day I watched the buildings fall.) It made me sick and horrified.. but I still believed what I saw. But I never said too much outside of family.. When I did say things pertaining to it.. some would nod their head in agreement.. ( and stayed silent) and then those that disagreed loudly protested.. I guess they thought it made them look like better Americans.
But what kind of American can help cover up such an atrocity as this one? When did digging and searching for the truth become something to hide or be muffled?

Sailmexico is dead on when he says "America is doomed if the treachery of our current fascist government is not revealed.  But even then Americans must be shaken from their apathy and take action before they are tagged, disarmed and bled to death."..
There is "no sides" here folks!  We talk and discuss the corruption of the government.and the socialistic direction it is taking every single day! Easy to talk about Obama being an illegal..( I mean the PROOF of him being otherwise to me isn't there) Its easy to see the George Soros cronies....and the Acorn crooks..
But... we can not  physically SEE the people who have died or the people whose lives have been forever ruined by these people on our TV and computer screens.
9/11 is on such a huge visual scale that it is hard to imagine that there are those out there that really DON'T have a heart.. conscience and their soul is black as tar. I mean we WATCHED it..like you would a movie.. people screaming.. and jumping out of buildings.. and every gory bit of the battlefield..
WE SAW IT!! It was like we were there! Americans couldn't have done this!! I mean~~ Americans hearts are kind and good.................................................. right?  I still like to hope that the majority is..

The fact that we as Americans question it.. and continue to dig and research events even if what we find is hard to swallow... is proof that our hearts and minds aren't made up of what we are having to see. That we ARE Free Americans and no one is going to be able to do this and get away with it.

If we get docile and quit caring.. ( which is what the ones in power in government want us to do) then they win. They will be able to program us.. load us up in cattle cars.. tell us we can't grow our vegetables... tell us we have to be strip searched to pass into another city.. tell us we can't pray with our kids.. and I'm afraid that we will be so numb and blind with no will of our own left... that it WILL happen.  Its been proven time and time and time again many times in history... Not drama.... fact!
Think about it!!!

Teresa... dead on darlin'.  Thanks for the compliment too (evil twin).

I read a book a few years ago entitled Freakonomics.  It was an enlightening read, written by a statistician.  Among many of the things he was able to prove using statistical analysis was that the higher up the organizational ladder you climb the more dishonesty you find.  It makes sense if you think about it.  A dishonest lier has a distinct advantage over an honest person in achieving personal advantage over others.

Imagine a game of Monopoly with three honest players and a sociopath, who has no conscience.  The dishonest player will win every game... especially if he is the banker.  He miscounts a move avoiding jail, or palms a 500, or miscounts change.  Whatever.

Shouldn't we expect the same thing in politics?  The ones at the top are not the "cream" of society in terms of morality and honesty; they are the shit that floats.  But we've been conditioned to trust them.  They smile and lie to us and make their deals with the devil, and we lose... and lose... and now we're on the verge of losing everything.  And forget about our children or grandchildren.  They were broke before they were born.

Who will our grandchildren blame?  I know who I blame.  My grandfather for letting FDR lie us into World War II, and my great grandfather for allowing Wilson to give the bastards (Federal Reserve) the monopoly on printing our own money and then loaning it to us at interest.  Our grandchildren will blame us and they'll have every right to do it.  It will be common knowledge then that we stupidly accepted the lies of 9/11, and supported the war crimes of Afghanistan and Iraq, enriching the elite who own the equity in the companies have profited billions of dollars from those wars.

Well Robert & Jennifer, I guess I join your ranks as being one of the "stupid ones" but I do not believe in all the conspiracy theories about our / my Govt. on 9-11. For ever "truther" that has the "proof" the "other side" has "their proof" too. As for needing the attacks to go to war with Iraq, has everyone forgot the whole world thought that Saddam  had WMD's . That was excuse enough. I will now retire to the pasture with the rest of "the sheep' but I would like to hear WARPH's & Sarge's take on this . I do value their well thought out opinion

Jarhead

Quotehas everyone forgot the whole world thought that Saddam  had WMD's . That was excuse enough.

First of all, the whole world did not believe Saddam had WMD's.  Maybe in your uninformed world but the whole point here is the reason you were uninformed it that you were lied to by your government.  Bush, Cheney and the rest of the club knew for a fact Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction.  You should know this by now.

Just google the keywords and you'll find plenty more where this came from

On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail.

BUT more importantly, let's assume Saddam did have WMDs.  Let's assume your neighbor Bubba is armed to the teeth and is given to screaming at you from his front porch, and you think he's crazy.  You've notified the authorities and complained; you've told them he poses a threat to you and your family. 

Since the police tell you they can't do anything because he really hasn't done anything illegal.  They issue a warning.

That's not enough for you so you break into his house and kill him (and a few of his children... but hey... that's just collateral damage). 

Now what do the laws of any civilized country in the world say about that?  What would they do to you?  They'd try you for murder and justifiably so. 

So if attacking Saddam and displacing over a million innocent Iraqis from their homes and killing untold thousands of them is "good enough for you", then maybe you're guilty of sanctioning murder.  Because murder is what it is.

Oh yeah... the police searched your neighbor's house and didn't find any weapons after all.  But you'd probably justify that because he was a bad father and abusive husband, and you rid the house of this monstrous individual - along with some of those he abused.

I was with you Sail.. until the last paragraph..

Quote from: Sailmexico on November 24, 2010, 06:03:19 PM
J
Oh yeah... the police searched your neighbor's house and didn't find any weapons after all.  But you'd probably justify that because he was a bad father and abusive husband, and you rid the house of this monstrous individual - along with some of those he abused.

Yep.. I'd be the one with the rope ..or gun.. and afterwords finding the deep well in the country to drop the scank..

after all..Nobody misses Earl at all..  :P

(( I said I had a "thin" layer of Liberal.. mostly I'm just a redneck.. LOL)

You missed the point T.  I'm not sanctioning abusive fathers and husbands. 

So since I've confused you with analogy, let me strip away the analogy and speak directly. 

Many Americans have justified the elimination of Saddam Hussein as a good think because he was a cruel dictator.  He probably was.  But did he do more harm to his people than the U.S. Military has done?  Not even close.

I met plenty of Iraqis while I was in Iraq that would loved to have had Saddam back in lieu of our military.  I asked them and they told me so.

Anyone who studies the history of America's intervention in Central America, or the Middle East knows that our covert operations under the CIA and NSA have trained revolutionary guerrillas and helped them topple democratically elected leaders, and subverted governments so that they would sign over lucrative lease agreements for their countries natural resources.

Saddam's biggest mistake was made when he opted to accept Euros for his oil, and OPEC nations took note of the money he made when the dollar slid against the Euro.  They got the message when a year later we invaded Iraq.  You see it wasn't about WMDs or the fact that Saddam was a vicious dictator... hell we put him there.  It was about the money.  It's always about the money.

I get your point, and I agree with you.  Men who abuse their wives and children should be hung... but legally.  I am not in favor of lynching, whether domestic or international.

I must agree that we have/had no business in Iraq or Afghanistan. It is obvious that it is a money driven operation, (can you say big oil?). As far as the truthers are concerned, I must agree that this whole theory is a bit far-fetched. But I am just a left leaning liberal here in the Kansas flint hills.   HHmmmpphh, never thought I would be agreeing with Robert, you never know do yah?  ;D ;D

I've got another question for all you gun totin' patriotic rednecks; and I think I already know the answer.

If someday a more powerful country, like China (they aren't yet, but it could happen) decides to invade America, ostensibly for our own good, and the good of the world.  And along with them they bring a private force of armed thugs (like Blackwater, Dynacorp, and hundreds of others in Iraq) who begin killing innocent people, almost randomly.

"In September 2005, Brigadier General Karl Horst, deputy commander of the Third Infantry Division charged with Baghdad security after the 2003 invasion, said of DynCorp and other PMCs in Iraq: These guys run loose in this country and do stupid stuff. There's no authority over them, so you can't come down on them hard when they escalate force... They shoot people, and someone else has to deal with the aftermath. It happens all over the place."

What would you do?  You're armed like Iraqi citizens were, and still are.  Do you just accept foreign occupation without a whimper?  Or do you fight?  

The Chinese media would call you an insurgent.  Would you be an insurgent?  The Chinese military would not list your death as an innocent citizen, but as an enemy combatant.  And in fact you would be the enemy.  But the enemy of what; and of whom?

I saw a brief teaser for a History channel, or Discovery channel program about snipers.  The American sniper was talking about what he looks for in a target.  This young man with a rifle is now the equivalent of arresting officer, judge and jury... at 1,000 yards.  The television shows some Iraqis in a white car and the soldier tells the camera why they should be taken out.

I won't watch the program because it would make me too angry.  Why should I be angry?  I know which of the two is on foreign soil.  I know which of the two is defending his own country.  I know which of the two I'd be if China ever did to the U.S. what we've done to Iraq.

Does that make me a traitor to America?  The fact that I don't support their wars?  Hardly.  it makes me a true American.  But not the kind we've become... the kind we've always thought we were.  Defenders of what is right.

I'll add one more thing.  I am braver than any f'n coward who would sanction the killing of one single innocent child in order to save an entire nation.  That simply makes it a nation of cowards.  And that is what I think America has become... with too few exceptions.  I hope anyone reading this is one of those exceptions.

China won't invade the US, they'll simply buy it. One of us on here want us to sell all Gov't owned lands except the parks. China will be happy to buy it just as they are buying land in Africa. :P

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 24, 2010, 07:45:02 PM
China won't invade the US, they'll simply buy it. One of us on here want us to sell all Gov't owned lands except the parks. China will be happy to buy it just as they are buying land in Africa. :P

Yep the Government has no business in being in the real estate holding business. 

For the record, I am not calling anyone stupid weather they agree with me or not on 9/11.  All I'm saying is look at the info. that is out there on both sides of the issue, and look at the faults of both sides.  And ask yourself, "Why?"  Who had the greatest motive?  Who stood to gain the most from it?

Don't get me wrong, Saddam Hussein was an evil son-of-a-bitch and I'm glad he is dead.  But I DO NOT feel the same way towards all Iraqi citizens.  Osama and Bush...to quote a song "...two parts of the same 7 headed dragon."  Don't forget that we were buddy/buddy with Al Quadea until Desert Storm, and we are supposed to believe that he suddenly flipped the script because we didn't want his help in Kuwait?  
But that is not the point I was wanting to make.

I love conspiracies, I love the debate they generate, and some like 9/11 I truly believe in.  Now, regardless of who did what, nothing will change the fact that alot of people needlessly lost their lives that day.  Whoever is responsible WILL come to justice, either in this life or the next, make no mistake about that.  However, I agree with Patriot, in that we shouldn't miss the bigger picture in this.  Now, whether 9/11 was an inside job (which I think it was), or caused by outside forces, the important thing to be wary of is the change it has affected.  Not just in America but throughout the world.

well said....
Thanks.... :)

Quote from: Varmit on November 24, 2010, 08:09:48 PM
For the record, I am not calling anyone stupid weather they agree with me or not on 9/11.  All I'm saying is look at the info. that is out there on both sides of the issue, and look at the faults of both sides.  And ask yourself, "Why?"  Who had the greatest motive?  Who stood to gain the most from it?

Who stood to gain the most from the collapse of the World Trade Centers, an attack on American soil, on American civilians? This is not a hard question. I could ask my 13 year old who stood to gain the most from it. Would America, my country, born and raised in, love and will defend, arguably the most powerful nation in the world, have to prove itself to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and whoever else you all can throw in there? WE had to prove ourselves toTHEM, when Usama bin Laden and other terrorist organizations like Al Quaeda and the Taliban wouldn't have had to prove theirself to the world that they could attack America, in it's largest city, holding our air transporation at hostage, bringing our financial network and economy to its knees with their terrorism? Think about that a little bit. Who had the most to gain from it! THEY DID! NOT THE USA! WE HAD NOTHING TO PROVE BUT WE DO NOW! Varmit, you and I will continue to argue about this stupidity. As for SailMexico, who says that me and others are all wrong and brainwashed, I'm glad we are the majority and you are just something to be scraped from the bottom of a shoe.--Mr. Robert L. Walker

Quote from: kshillbillys on November 25, 2010, 08:00:22 PM
As for SailMexico, who says that me and others are all wrong and brainwashed, I'm glad we are the majority and you are just something to be scraped from the bottom of a shoe.--Mr. Robert L. Walker

Hey !!  That's not nice....  :'(   I resemble that remark..
Let me tell you ~~~If you ever have to scrape me off your shoe.. it will literally be the sweeeetest smelling stuff you ever did smell..  :-*  In fact you will want it to stay on there all day and maybe even wear your shoes to bed with you..  ;D

You know... as far as this topic is concerned... I'm done with it... to me..what happened ( and what is happening right now in our government is as obvious as the nose on your face..
To you?  Its not..  There really isn't much more that can be said.. I guess you believe the way you want to... and I'll do the same..  ;)

But.........................Robert dude.....You got bigger problems looking you in the eye than arguing with us.
Ohhh yea~~~ big BIG problems.. I don't even think you have a clue as to who you are going up against come July..
I suggest you get your happy ass to Missouri.. buy some RC (roman candle) ammo  and start practicing .. You are going to need it.. oh by the way .. did I tell you that we are going to dueling naked? **better practice high jumping while you're at it*  
Hee heeeheee heeee (http://www.cascity.com/howard/animations/112.gif)

Teresa, I'm a little bit shy and timid. I have no confidence and I cover up my body with clothes. Thus the reason why I haven't already come to you to get a massage. Jennifer and I have been together for 17 years. We've only recently begun undressing in front of each other. This should've been done years ago, because as we are older now, this is not a pretty sight. I have every bit of confidence that I shall be able to wound you in the duel. I am certain that once you see me naked that you'll be laughing so damn hard that you will not be able to shoot and maybe even have some nausea and uncontrollable vomiting mixed with sheer terror. To see my big fat hairy 6'2" 300 pound ass in my cowboy boots and straw hat will give you nightmares. With that being said, I am not a mindless drone. I do not believe every damn thing that those chicken shits in the government tell us. And I will not be told how to think, by them or anyone else. I have my own thoughts, my own mind, my own mouth and I will use them at my discretion. It does piss a lot of people off that I will point blank tell them exactly how I think or what I think about anything. We will disagree on 9/11 but there's many other things that we do positively, absolutely, without a doubt, agree on. Now, I'm calling some friends in Missouri and having some special Roman Candles made up and as a back up plan, maybe some bottle rockets. Stock up on the Pepto, it helps with the nausea.---Robert

 ;D ;D ;D  You ass wipe~~~ LOL

Quote from: kshillbillys on November 25, 2010, 08:00:22 PM
Who had the most to gain from it! THEY DID! NOT THE USA! WE HAD NOTHING TO PROVE BUT WE DO NOW! Varmit, you and I will continue to argue about this stupidity.

Really?...So Al Quadea has ties with production companies and defense contractors who are making money off of the war?  I doubt it.  But what I do know for a fact, is that our gov't now has more power over us than it ever did.  It has more "control" systems in place now than it ever did.  It also has more money allocated for "defense" than it ever did.  I think the gov't has gained the most since this whole thing started.  
As American citizens we have done nothing but lose since 9/11.

Hillbilly has reduced the entire issue down to which nation had what to prove to whom, like some juvenile battle between prepubescent boys on a playground fighting to prove who is the toughest.  He blames the world's financial problems we're facing on terrorism, rather than the central banking system.  I doubt he could tell you the difference between a Federal Reserve Note and a Treasury Note, or that the nation's financial problems are rooted in one day that truly will live in infamy, but it wasn't in 1941; it was in 1913.  No.  The issues are very simple to a simple person. "It's that damn Al Qaeda that started it all and we'll show them who's boss". 

God help us because I'm sure he's right about one thing... he is a member of the majority.

S.Mexico, I was the one that brought up who had the most to gain, not hillbilly. 

Robert, thanks for that disturbing mental picture, if I am late to work monday it will be your fault, as I doubt sleep will come easy for many moons to come.

Robert and Teresa, can I have the Ticket Sales and Concessions for the duel, that would be a big crowd draw.

Robert, Bush might have done it, I heard yesterday that they are wanting to indict Bush for Lindberg's plane crash.

Tickets will be available Jan 1st... LOL
Bring blinders or heavy sunglasses.. you will need it.  ;D

Teresa, if you wear the same outfit as Robert we can get a bigger crowd.

Quote from: frawin on November 26, 2010, 01:55:16 PM
Teresa, if you wear the same outfit as Robert we can get a bigger crowd.

Hey...was there a pun intended in that, or is it just me?? ;D

Could this have started it all:



LOL...no, the Simpson's are innocent.... but I figured the video fits in with some of what I have read on this thread.  

But if I was really interested in pursuing this, I guess I would ask these questions:

* Do you think the Bush administration knew something was coming or have we forgotten all those memos, warnings from foreign intelligence agencies that Connie Rice said were "historical documentation" and "we" had no reason to believe anyone would use aircraft as bombs?  

* Was it simply incredible incompetence by Bush and his co-harts?

* Were they all asleep at the wheel or out to lunch like Rice?

* Or was it that Bush and company were so intent on invading Iraq they didn't bother to pay attention to anything else?

* Why did Bush allow Bin Laden's sister, someone you would think to be a person of key interest to the FBI, leave the country during a national airport lock down?

* What is the FBI hiding on 9/11?  

* Why was NORAD conducting war games during the attacks and why was the air guard and our sophisticated early warning system unable to shoot down those hijacked planes? * Why has the Bush administration refused to release the information concerning what they were doing during the events leading up to 9/11?

* Why was the 9/11 commission only allowed to exist on the condition that if it found any wrongdoing by administrative officials, it couldn't prosecute them?

* Why was Bush allowed to handpick members of that committee himself instead of an independent commission?

* Why did Cheney have to hold Bush's hand at the hearings?

* And the biggest question would be, was it in fact a black op designed to give the Project for a New American Century its new Pearl Harbor?  They did after all get everything they wanted from tax breaks to the rich, increased defense spending, the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, a military police state right out of a George Orwell novel with the Patroit Act and the unitary executive which essentially makes the president a dictator.

* Lastly, why isn't there a real and continuing investigation?

There's probably still plenty of unanswered questions many of us would like to see answered.  Aside from the patriot act, there have been many laws put in place that effect our civil liberties which stem from 9/11 and the 'terrorist threat'.  One only has to compare airports post and pre 9/11 to see how easily the masses can be told to accept things "for their own safety."  I really feel the "war on terror" will never end --- it's perfect.  There is no real tangible enemy.... it can be used to justify pretty much anything the US wants to do. Some of the theories surrounding 9/11 are just way too outlandish, but also I think that the US Government had some role to play... might be wrong... but something tells me that it wasn't just Al Queida and that the truth lies somewhere in between.

So I guess I'll just leave it to Teresa, Sailmexico, Varmit, Robert and Diane to hash it out and come up with the real facts instead of a lot of... lets see, lets call it mimic dribble on some of these posts.  I love Teresa's lines, "Sorry.. don't feed me shit and tell me its sugar.." and  "The damage is done.. They got by with it.. Just like everything else that is going on.. after 9 years.. who is going to prove it?"   Well said, girl!  Oh... and no, I am not a conspiracy theorist....  just like everyone else, I would like the real facts as to what happened on that day.

Warph,
All good points, but to say you are not a "conspiracy theorist" is to turn a blind eye to history.  Every event in history was a conspiracy on some level or another.  Wars are begun by conspiring men seeking to profit from them.  Once they are begun and nations become enemies they conspire against one another. 

I've mentioned in other posts several of the major conspiracies that were later proven to be just as the theorists claimed them to be.  A google search of "conspiracy theories proven true" will show many of them.

In spite of the historical precedent for conspiracies; the fact that they are common in history as beans are in bean soup, the public chooses to deny them.  Why they do is probably more a matter of psychology, a mass psychology that the conspirators understand well, and rely upon.

You say

QuoteSome of the theories surrounding 9/11 are just way too outlandish

I'm not sure which theories you consider to be too outlandish, and some definitely are.  Some claim that no airplanes hit the twin towers on 9/11; that they were holographic images.  That is such obvious bullshit that it in my opinion it is disinformation injected into the legitimate argument to defame and cast doubt on serious discussion.

People continue to say that "both sides" have evidence, but if you take an objective look at it, the only evidence there is for the widely accepted fact that the highjackers used cheap plastic box cutters is one cell phone call.  A phone call that has been proven to have been impossible to make.  All of the evidence supporting the official "conspiracy theory" is hearsay, and some easily planted crap like flight manuals left in a rental car, etc.

It should not be forgotten that if you believe the government's account of events on 9/11 you are a "conspiracy theorist"... because it was a conspiracy, and it has not been proven at all - therefor it is a theory.  It is an impossible scenario but because of the general public's ineptitude at critical thinking, knowledge and inherent trust in authority it seems more plausible.  The believe what they are told, especially when they are told it over and over, by a source their authorities.

But what about the Pentagon? It has been proved over and over that popular "Anti Gov't" accounts were untrue.There were many witnesses who saw the plane hit. There were the many stories of the injured people who survived, what they saw, how they were trapped.There was debris inside and out. And to say the hole "wasn't big enough? Who out there is a "hole expert?" 
My neighbor across the street flew for Delta his whole career as a pilot, including 911. He told me an awful lot about their hostile person training. This was before they had all the heavily reinforced doors on the cock pit. He said their training, and I'm sure it would be mostly the same with all airlines ,was  to cooperate with hijackers as much as possible and try to find out what they wanted and not risk the passengers lives if at all possible. If they took one or more hostages they were try to do whatever was possible to keep them alive. If that wasn't possible they were to try to keep as many as possible alive. Now all this was told to me much later and I'm probably saying too much. The hijacker with the flying lessons probably told the real pilot what to do and didn't actually take over the controls, or didn't until they were right near the pentagon, hence no problem finding it. (I had asked the same question...how did he find it? ) As far as how far away from Dulles they went before they made the turn back toward DC ,he figured it had to do with the hijackers getting organized and/or a period of time when the pilot was trying to negotiate with the hijackers and stayed on his original course. We'll never know for sure. Bill told me lot from a commercial pilots point of view about what would and would not have happened. Now as far as to why the fighter jets didn't shoot down the planes over NYC..They did scramble once the planes were obviously starting toward restricted air space, but think about it, where would the planes have crashed? In a residential neighborhood? Into a school? Who knew? It was a can't win situation. As far as I'm concerned,much of it can remain secret if it keeps bits and pieces of information out of enemy hands. If their intention is to simply disrupt American lives and make some of us paranoid, they are being very successful. If they get you to distrust your own Gov't ,they win. They must really be laughing at our reaction to this TSA thing.  If they learn what can make us and our Gov't over react, again they win. We've got to figure out how to be more clever than that with out turning our country into an armed camp, though that may be coming. I'll say no more.

Quote from: Sailmexico on November 26, 2010, 05:29:18 PM

It should not be forgotten that if you believe the government's account of events on 9/11 you are a "conspiracy theorist"... because it was a conspiracy, and it has not been proven at all - therefor it is a theory. 

Sorry... the label "conspiracy theorist" doesn't fit.   Like I stated before: "I think that the US Government had some role to play... might be wrong... but something tells me that it wasn't just Al Queida and that the truth lies somewhere in between."  Simple as that.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 26, 2010, 08:38:21 PM
But what about the Pentagon? It has been proved over and over that popular "Anti Gov't" accounts were untrue.There were many witnesses who saw the plane hit. There were the many stories of the injured people who survived, what they saw, how they were trapped.There was debris inside and out. And to say the hole "wasn't big enough? Who out there is a "hole expert?"  ......

No. The "Anti Gov't" accounts have not been proven over and over again to be untrue.  There is questions about the debris...no large pieces being found at ANY of the crash sites?...etc.  As for witnesses, if they are so reliable (and they're not) why does law enforcement need more than just their testimony?  As for your pilot friends opinion...the supposed hijackers were using box cutters (or so we were told) for crying out loud.  Honestly, what would they have done if someone tried to stop them?...give that person a nasty paper cut?  

There was only one, count it one, fighter scrambled that day...from an airbase in Mass.  Again, you cannot use Gov't statements issued from Gov't personnel to prove the Gov't isn't lying.

You say that you like to look at all sides of an issue.  Why is this one any different?  There is a link to some interesting videos that go into detail about 9/11, both before and after.  Watch'em with an open mind and then take another look at what we were told.  The link is on the "How deep is the Rabbit hole" thread.

My source says two F15  National Guard fighters from Otis scrambled. My comments about shooting down the planes still stands. Ask about scrambles at the pentagon and I'll agree, I think they got caught napping. As far as the "box cutters" go...where did that come from? While some box cutters are wimpy, with break off blades, not all are and might not have been true box cutters at all. That probably isn't reliable on either side. When my friend shared his training with me that was not opinion, that was fact!!!!! 
  Why is this different? I told you why in great detail! I saw the photos, heard from the people who were there, listened to the dispatches.  Live, not on tape. We got to ask very candid questions.These were first responders, firefighters, photographers, not reporters ,not Gov't officials. These were people some of which have since died, and some that are still trying to get help that was promised and was never delivered. They had no axe to grind they were just doing their jobs.

If your source is correct that brings the total number of fighter jets to three.  So, that means our gov't, during an attack on our country, only scrambled 3 jets??  C'mon!!  If the attack had been real the sky would have been full of fighter, bombers, survalliance aircraft.  It wasn't.  The question is why?  They had plenty of time.  They weren't caught napping as there are numerous radar aircraft as well as ground based defensive radar stations operating 24/7 that would have picked on any craft heading towards the pentagon, that is of course unless they were told to stand down.

The "box cutter" theory is what we were told by officals.  I just don't believe that 4 or 5 guys with knives could take over an airplane when they were outnumbered.  Americans just don't put up with that. 

I find it very hard to believe that four Boeing 747 type aircraft crashed on the same day without a single wing, tail piece, or large section of fuelage not being found at any crash site. 

But...that is neither here nor there seeing as how you are not willing to at least view other evidence.  You cite firefighters, first responders like they knew exactly what was happening and yet earlier you stated...

Quote..As far as far as those interviews with the firefighters, very unfair. Those poor guys didn't have all the facts yet, it was fresh, raw and still going on! ...The one pair were talking and said the floors came down "as if" there had been charges placed on them and dropped them. They didn't say that they had been bombed. Sure, I can see how it could seem that way at the time. The investigations explained the design and what happened. Under those horrible circumstances would you want to have a mike stuck in your face and be expected to make sense and have every detail right? Normally the officers would not have allowed those guys to talk to the press just for that reason.There are PIOs who do that, .just so the they don't have to defend something when they misspoke under pressure. A lot of top ranking officers were killed! The Commish, the Chaplin, brigade chiefs, etc. Some information about who knew what and when is just plain wrong, but after 9 years how does  anyone prove it?. I don't have vaults full of tape like the TV News does.

So which is it??  Either these guys knew what happened or they didn't?  Fact of the matter is during a crisis situation not all dispatches are accurate.  A lot of times the dispatched info just gets repeated because the dispatcher heards it from this guy who heard it from this guy who knows a guy that was there. 

Heres a question, if the pentagon was struck by a plane, why hasn't the gov't released the security camera footage?  Its not like they would be giving any secerts away.  According to officals terrorists already know how to do it.  So why not release the tapes and put the conterversy to rest?  Unless of course, they have something to hide.

Do yourself a favor, review the dissenting evidence.  Look at both sides and see for yourself.

What part of Flight 77's black box flight recorder proved the cockpit door was not opened after takeoff don't you get?  The official story, that the Pentagon was hit by flight 77 has been completely and totally debunked by this one fact. 

All it takes to disprove the assertion that all crows are black is the existence of one white crow.  Applied to 911 - All it take to disprove the assertion that the government's version of events is false is ONE false claim.  ONE! 

Every aspect of what happened does not have to be disproven.  And contrary to the claim of those who accept the government's version the burden of proof is on them.  They have not, and can not prove their case.  That is the reason the government refuses to have an impartial forensic investigation.  If their claims were true they would welcome any investigation.  If the Pentagon's claims were true they would produce the video evidence, and the destruction of WTC7 would be easily explained.

Anyone who supports the government's false claims is, in my opinion, complicit in the most horrendous crime in American History.

Look, heres the thing.  We are going in circles here.  Which is exactly what the "establishment" wants...dissension among the "commoners".  Why??  To keep us focused on minute details so that we don't see the bigger picture.  The question isn't whether or not a plane hit the pentagon or the towers.  The question is why did the attacks happen in the first place?  To answer that question all one has to do is look at the changes that have occurred since 9/11.  

Mr.Sail. I've just been doing some research and apparently there is also some question as to whether there even was a cockpit door on flight 77. I know back then I flew in some that only had a curtain at the cock pit door. I guess that wouldn't be hard to find out if it mattered.
  As far as the whole thing is concerned, you all don't even agree among yourselves, depending on whose conspiracy theory you read. Black boxes, no black boxes, data recorders or voice recorders or both or neither? One of you didn't even think a plane had hit the Pentagon ...so martians took flight 77? All the witnesses ,including the military were wrong? The security cameras lied, as did the people outside who saw it go down, saw the wing shear off as it partly hit the ground and sliced into the first floor. The responding firefighters and police officers, who were there for a long time, lied about what they saw, who they rescued and the parts of the plane they collected.  I don't know if it was reconstructed or not. Usually when a plane crashes, the parts are secured and taken to a big warehouse where the plane is reconstructed and analyzied. The ME was in on it too? 184 bodies  were recovered at the Pentagon and identified except for 5 from the building fire, they weren't from the plane.They know who they were,  but they were incinerated so recovery was impossible.  You will get to rehash it all from start to finish next year when I'm sure it will be covered again in incredible detail and all the people who want publicity will show up again. Varmit, I will look at all those videos later today.

Diane

QuoteI've just been doing some research and apparently there is also some question as to whether there even was a cockpit door on flight 77.

You have got to be kidding.  Sorry dear, but to say there might not have been a cockpit door on a 747 is as ludicrous as saying "There was no evidence of wings at the crash site because flight 77 didn't have wings."  Saying such a thing does explain many of your prior posts.

Varmit

QuoteTo answer that question all one has to do is look at the changes that have occured since 9/11. 

I could not agree with you more.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 27, 2010, 10:52:42 AM
  As far as the whole thing is concerned, you all don't even agree among yourselves, depending on whose conspiracy theory you read. Black boxes, no black boxes, data recorders or voice recorders or both or neither?

And why do you suppose that is?...Could it be that the offical story doesn't make sense?  That the officals, to this day, can't even get their story straight?  That none of the lists of passengers from match? 

QuoteOne of you didn't even think a plane had hit the Pentagon ...so martians took flight 77? All the witnesses ,including the military were wrong? The security cameras lied, as did the people outside who saw it go down, saw the wing shear off as it partly hit the ground and sliced into the first floor. The responding firefighters and police officers, who were there for a long time, lied about what they saw, who they rescued and the parts of the plane they collected.

The offical story, and the eye witnesses reported that they saw flight 777 skid across the pentagon lawn before hitting the building...wheres skid mark?  The security cameras...good question, why hasn't the gov't released that footage?  Wing sheared off...really, then where is it?  Cops and firefighters...arrived after the fact, weren't on scene at the time of impact.  Parts of the plane they collected...where was the heavy equipment needed to clean up the debris?...oh, thats right...all the debris was small enough to be carried away by hand at ALL FOUR CRASH SITES.  Convienent.

QuoteI don't know if it was reconstructed or not. Usually when a plane crashes, the parts are secured and taken to a big warehouse where the plane is reconstructed and analyzied.

Remember now Diane, the offical story is that all four planes were compeletly "vaporized" at the time of the crashes.  Remarkable, in that this type of destruction to a plane has never happened before, yet all four planes that crashed on the same day suffered the same fate.

QuoteThe ME was in on it too? 184 bodies  were recovered at the Pentagon and identified except for 5 from the building fire, they weren't from the plane.They know who they were,  but they were incinerated so recovery was impossible.

Why would the ME have to be in on it to?  All he did was identify bodies and determine the cause of death, which was pretty evident.  By the way, where do you suppose the ME got the list of passengers from?  And which list did he use?  Because the list the FBI put out doesn't match the list put out by the airline which doesn't match the list put out by anyone else etc?


By the way, no one is saying that the Pentagon wasn't attacked.  They're just saying it wasn't a plane that hit it.

Varmit,
I do not even pretend know the answers to your questions but I do know this---back in the early 70's, right about dark , several people south of town heard a plane fly over with engine sputtering, then the lights went out. A single engine plane carrying 3 Texas hunters returning from an Iowa pheasant hunting trip had run out of fuel. They think they were trying to make an emergency landing in a pasture but the wheels on their plane hooked the main electric transmission line running into Longton. The remains of the wreck were directly below the electric lines. I would guess the lines are 50-60 feet above the ground and that little plane made a hole between 2-3 feet deep and they loaded what was left of the whole plane in a trailer made from the bed of a pick-up truck. Now if a plane gliding, then "tripped" and slammed to the ground for 50 feet, was reduced to that size---wonder what happens when a plane going several hundred miles an hour smashes into reinforced concrete ?

Jarhead,
Your story of the wreckage of a private plane fitting into a small trailer is anecdotal evidence that doesn't pass the smell test.  Neither is there an official record of such an accident.  Check it out for yourself here http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp)

The NTSB reports 119 fatal accidents in the state of Kansas during the 1970's, none of which occurred near Longton. 

While hitting reinforced concrete at 510 miles per hour would do tremendous damage to the 200 ton mass of an airliner it would not disappear. 

As for you assertion, though not specific but rather insinuated, that there was enough reinforced concrete to somehow destroy the airplane to the point of elimination... it simply isn't true.  The only reinforced concrete wall was the exterior wall as shown by these photos.  The inner walls were two layers of unfilled brick, which would barely have offered resistance to such a force.

(http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/PentagonRings.jpg)

This hardly looks like the path of a 747.

(http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/Exit1.jpg)

(http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/Exit2.jpg)

So we have one known reinforced concrete wall, at the front of the building, and one two-layer brick wall at the rear. In between would have been internal walls which would offer further resistance, but don't believe anyone who gives you totals like "nine feet of reinforced concrete"

It should be also noted that whatever hit the Pentagon had ONE engine, else there would be two exit holes.  Nothing past the outside wall would have been able to stop two 747 jet engines made of titanium and weighing 50,000 pounds apiece.

Fair enough Jarhead, but answer me this, why is it that folks who profess to have a strong distrust of the gov't, buy the offical story of 9/11 with no question?  I'm not trying to start anything here, I just don't understand their logic.

Quote sailmexico
The NTSB reports 119 fatal accidents in the state of Kansas during the 1970's, none of which occurred near Longton.

Really ?? So I really don't give a rats ass what YOUR web site says. I know what I saw. You want witness's ? call Ron Vestal in Longton  he heard the plane sputtering before it crashed---and he went to the crash site. If he's still alive, get a hold of Cig Cigannero the KGE man from Moline who found the crash. Watts funeral home in Moline put what was left of the bodies in trash bags. Fred Tyler from Moline was there. ask him . Ask JR Ferguson here in Longton,and was later a deputy Sherriff for the county, Hell ask his son, Elk county Deputy Dan Ferguson, I think he can enlighten you. You want more witness's that went to the site of the crash I will give you their names and furnish ph numbers. Better yet, come to Longton and I will personally take you to where the plane crashed as I'm sure there is still a depression in the ground and after pastures are burnt we can still find small pieces of aluminum. On second thought, maybe you better not come here until you apologize for calling me a liar

Varmit, I was wrong about the plane that crashed south of Longton. It left Nebraska , not Iowa, and it's destination was Neosho ,Mo, not Texas BUT if sailmexico wants to go back and check out HIS website and look up fatal crashes just look at Oct 20,1971---tail # N2784N----Cessna 182J---fatalities-3---site NEAR LONGTON,KS.
(your apology accepted !!!! )

My My My...We're still at it are we? Varmit, I never said the firefighters saw the plane crash, but they saw the aftermath  a few minutes later including the plane parts and the injured and the bodies. Who said the planes "vaporized?''I didn't. I said 5 of the bodies in the building were incinerated and not recovered. They figured out who was missing but they couldn't recover anything ,just as was the case with a few people at the towers. So you are still saying that it wasn't a plane that hit but somehow the passengers from flight 77 wound up dead inside the pentagon? That airplane was never seen again and it's ID numbers were seen by a driver nearby who was, he said, a pilot himself and caught sight of part of the numbers before it hit. Some say it hit the ground just feet before entering between the first and second floor, other say it hit the helipad just feet before entering the building. Regardless the rubble outside when the build's several stories collapsed would have hidden any marks on the ground. It was a beautiful September day and lots of people were out and about. By the way, the plane traveled 310 feet into and through the building's A B and C rings The engines likely would not have reappeared out the exit hole.They were off the plane by then so the "two hole" theory doesn't work . Yes, the plane parts and rubble were relatively small. Why wouldn't they be?  The plane burned in a hot fire. A plane is a hollow tube filled with fuel and people and luggage etc. There really isn't much soild or bulk there. And the building, several stories, fell on it.
  There are photos of equipment working to clear the rubble. I just looked at one on snopes. and googled several others, just looking for photos and found many. I guess it depends on how you search, but I found lots of photos with no problem, including the very poor security camera footage that CNN. com has. If you can find Joel v.d. Reijden's site there are photos of wheels and things.
Varmit the reason most people believe the stories that were released at the time is because not everything is different from what it is told to be. Sometimes things really are what they seem to be. I wouldn't want every detail released either just for someone's gory pleasure. There is such a thing as "need to know." Too much public information can help our enemies! Loose lips sink ships!
 The terrible photos of the people who were so brutally killed in the lower parking garages after the first Trade Center bombing weren't released to the public either.The average person doesn't need to see a man's body after it was blown through a chain link fence like pushing cabbage through a cole slaw cutter because of the pressure wave caused by the bomb going off on his car's parking floor.
 You were mad at our Gov't before 911 and I'm sure you'll still be mad even if the terrorists who set this up confessed to a man. So think what you want.

Fair enough Jarhead, but answer me this, why is it that folks who profess to have a strong distrust of the gov't, buy the offical story of 9/11 with no question?  I'm not trying to start anything here, I just don't understand their logic.


Right you are Billy. I do have a strong distrust of THIS CURRANT Govt .!!! I meant to call you out on your statement that you don't think Oswald acted alone in shooting JFK.  Oswald shot Kennedy and needed no help. How do I know this ?? Because my senior Drill Instructor told me so !!! He said," that's what happens when you put a deadly weapon in the hands of one motivated Marine" So would you doubt what your Drill Instructor told you, Billy ?? I thought not !! :)

Quote from: jarhead on November 27, 2010, 06:08:58 PM
Because my senior Drill Instructor told me so !!! He said," that's what happens when you put a deadly weapon in the hands of one motivated Marine" So would you doubt what your Drill Instructor told you, Billy ?? I thought not !! :)

Actually Jarhead, I would doubt what he told me if it made no sense...guess thats the difference between Army and Marines...one has the ability to think for themselves the other doesn't...Ones looking for a few good men, the other already has them ;D

Time to put on hip boots before reading any further. ;D ;D ;D ::) ::) ::)

Jarhead,
What would I apologize for.  In looking for official details I failed to find any record of a crash near Longmont in the 70's.  I didn't call anyone a liar.  And it's not MY website.  It's the site of the National Transportation Safety Board.

It's interesting that the issue became your veracity rather than the ridiculous assertion that 200 tons of airplane debris could disappear in the crash at the Pentagon.

Stupid me... how could I doubt the word of anyone who considers the final word on the JFK assassination to be that of his drill sergeant.  You might want to tell your drill sergeant that the investigation by The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was established in 1976 to investigate the John F. Kennedy assassination.... The Committee investigated until 1978, and in 1979 issued its final report, concluding that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, and was very likely a result of a conspiracy.  That means he did not act alone!

They obviously failed to check with your drill sergeant. <I apologize in advance for the sarcasm>

s.mexico
Fair enough. So go back to THE NTSB website YOU posted and look up the crash on Oct 20th 1971. I do believe in my looking for "official details" it plainly says" LONGTON, Ks." I haven't a clue as to why you were looking for Longmount.
What is a drill sergeant ?? In the Corps they have drill instructors but no drill sergeants, but stupid me, I do think either the Army or Air Force call their instructors drill sergeants. I will check with Oliver Stone when he returns from having Thanksgiving dinner with Chavez to what REALLY happened to JFK.I also apologize in advance for the sarcasm, sir, but all that was said about Oswald was said with tongue in cheek to Varmit. It's a personal little joust we have with each other---but that's OK.

Quote from: Sailmexico on November 27, 2010, 03:26:09 AM
All it takes to disprove the assertion that all crows are black is the existence of one white crow.  Applied to 911 - All it take to disprove the assertion that the government's version of events is false is ONE false claim.  ONE!  

Here's a picture of one white crow. Some people may not have believed that there was white crows. What I want to know is how many false claims do you need to keep posting? You're like a man on a mission to make us believe what you believe or we are all stupid. I don't know where the hell Teresa dug you up from but you come to Longton and I'll bury you. And I don't give a damn if she kicks me off this forum. I'm so pissed off at you right now, I'd put a boot in your ass. So please come on down and look me up. Maybe we'll go look for this "mythical" airplane crash that Jarhead told you about and you want to call him a liar on. And don't say you didn't call him a liar or that I'm naive and ignorant. Don't worry about it, we can talk about it if your little p.o.s. ass shows up. ---Robert L. Walker, LONGTON, KS, USA (notice LONGTON, not LONGMONT)

P.S. YOU CAN LEAD A HORSE TO WATER BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE HIM DRINK.

Robert Robert Robert... what are you so afraid of... ? Information? or is it information that you know makes sense but you're too stubborn to change your mind..?Or are you just pissed off because someone actually can cite facts to back up any argument..?
I mean.. you and I are on total opposite sides of the fence here.. and I'm not all huffed and puffed up about it against you..
Seriously..
Why the hatred... All Sailmexico has done is post facts.. Not HIS facts.. FACTS that are documented..
Personally ... anyone that has REAL facts that is documented that proves that 3 buildings came tumbling perfectly down from 2 aircrafts....and not just some BS hokey propaganda that is being fed to the sheep as fodder.. then I'd say you have a case.
But I haven't seen or heard it yet..
BUT~~of course that is my opinion and the way I see it.. How you see it is your right too...
so keep your boots on.. and unwind your panties... You're going to give yourself a stroke..  ::)
and I'd hate for your tombstone to read.. death by a verbal disagreement.  :) (Not too impressive at all)

I would much rather see it read..
Death by a a lethal shot from a roman candle from the Almighty Ninja Blonde.  ;D

No, information doesn't piss Robert off. The fact that he keeps cramming shit down peoples' throats does. The fact that he insinuated (oh shit, I used a big word) that Jarhead is a liar pisses US off. Anyone that doesn't agree with this "man" is an idiot according to him. Robert's panties are not in a wad and he ain't gonna have a stroke over it. Robert's got more important things going on in his life right now than to really give a good G*d damn what anyone thinks of him or says to him. Mr. Mexican is like Anmar's know it all evil twin or something and anyone that doesn't agree with him shouldn't have a say in a damn thing and is too naive to live. This thread is nothing but BS. And no one is gonna get by with calling Jarhead or any-damn-body a liar, or stupid or WTF-ever. Now, Robert's asleep, but I'm wide awake because I'm having a helluva time sleeping here lately, so I should probably just hit the delete button and get off the subject but because of lack of sleep and all-around bitchiness, here I am. No one on the "theory" side of things has cited FACTS to back up any argument, only THEORIES. Now here is THE documentation, NOT the conspiracy theorists "documentation." This is the official report, not a youtube clip from someone's backyard. And no, I don't expect you to read one damn sentence of it, since I have read every damn letter. This shit that you people keep putting out there, the propaganda, is no worse than spitting into and slapping the faces of the families of and people that lost their lives that day and the Americans of this country. It makes me sick! You all say it's a coverup? One hell of one if that's true. The whole world is backing this "story", not the theorists. I mean, Usama bin Laden even knows what the hell happened that day. He's already took credit for it.----Jennifer

"WE HAVE SOME PLANES"

Tuesday, September 11, 2001, dawned temperate and nearly cloudless in the eastern United States. Millions of men and women readied themselves for work. Some made their way to the Twin Towers, the signature structures of the World Trade Center complex in New York City. Others went to Arlington, Virginia, to the Pentagon. Across the Potomac River, the United States Congress was back in session. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, people began to line up for a White House tour. In Sarasota, Florida, President George W. Bush went for an early morning run.

For those heading to an airport, weather conditions could not have been better for a safe and pleasant journey. Among the travelers were Mohamed Atta and Abdul Aziz al Omari, who arrived at the airport in Portland, Maine.


1.1 INSIDE THE FOUR FLIGHTS
Boarding the Flights
Boston: American 11 and United 175. Atta and Omari boarded a 6:00 A.M. flight from Portland to Boston's Logan International Airport.1

When he checked in for his flight to Boston, Atta was selected by a computerized prescreening system known as CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System), created to identify passengers who should be subject to special security measures. Under security rules in place at the time, the only consequence of Atta's selection by CAPPS was that his checked bags were held off the plane until it was confirmed that he had boarded the aircraft. This did not hinder Atta's plans. 2

Atta and Omari arrived in Boston at 6:45. Seven minutes later, Atta apparently took a call from Marwan al Shehhi, a longtime colleague who was at another terminal at Logan Airport. They spoke for three minutes.3 It would be their final conversation.

Between 6:45 and 7:40, Atta and Omari, along with Satam al Suqami, Wail al Shehri, and Waleed al Shehri, checked in and boarded American Airlines Flight 11, bound for Los Angeles. The flight was scheduled to depart at 7:45.4

In another Logan terminal, Shehhi, joined by Fayez Banihammad, Mohand al Shehri, Ahmed al Ghamdi, and Hamza al Ghamdi, checked in for United Airlines Flight 175, also bound for Los Angeles. A couple of Shehhi's colleagues were obviously unused to travel; according to the United ticket agent, they had trouble understanding the standard security questions, and she had to go over them slowly until they gave the routine, reassuring answers.5 Their flight was scheduled to depart at 8:00.

The security checkpoints through which passengers, including Atta and his colleagues, gained access to the American 11 gate were operated by Globe Security under a contract with American Airlines. In a different terminal, the single checkpoint through which passengers for United 175 passed was controlled by United Airlines, which had contracted with Huntleigh USA to perform the screening.6

In passing through these checkpoints, each of the hijackers would have been screened by a walk-through metal detector calibrated to detect items with at least the metal content of a .22-caliber handgun. Anyone who might have set off that detector would have been screened with a hand wand-a procedure requiring the screener to identify the metal item or items that caused the alarm. In addition, an X-ray machine would have screened the hijackers' carry-on belongings. The screening was in place to identify and confiscate weapons and other items prohibited from being carried onto a commercial flight.7 None of the checkpoint supervisors recalled the hijackers or reported anything suspicious regarding their screening.8

While Atta had been selected by CAPPS in Portland, three members of his hijacking team-Suqami, Wail al Shehri, and Waleed al Shehri-were selected in Boston. Their selection affected only the handling of their checked bags, not their screening at the checkpoint. All five men cleared the checkpoint and made their way to the gate for American 11. Atta, Omari, and Suqami took their seats in business class (seats 8D, 8G, and 10B, respectively). The Shehri brothers had adjacent seats in row 2 (Wail in 2A,Waleed in 2B), in the first-class cabin. They boarded American 11 between 7:31 and 7:40. The aircraft pushed back from the gate at 7:40. 9

Shehhi and his team, none of whom had been selected by CAPPS, boarded United 175 between 7:23 and 7:28 (Banihammad in 2A, Shehri in 2B, Shehhi in 6C, Hamza al Ghamdi in 9C, and Ahmed al Ghamdi in 9D).Their aircraft pushed back from the gate just before 8:00.10

Washington Dulles: American 77. Hundreds of miles southwest of Boston, at Dulles International Airport in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C., five more men were preparing to take their early morning flight. At 7:15, a pair of them, Khalid al Mihdhar and Majed Moqed, checked in at the American Airlines ticket counter for Flight 77, bound for Los Angeles. Within the next 20 minutes, they would be followed by Hani Hanjour and two brothers, Nawaf al Hazmi and Salem al Hazmi.11

Hani Hanjour, Khalid al Mihdhar, and Majed Moqed were flagged by CAPPS. The Hazmi brothers were also selected for extra scrutiny by the air-line's customer service representative at the check-in counter. He did so because one of the brothers did not have photo identification nor could he understand English, and because the agent found both of the passengers to be suspicious. The only consequence of their selection was that their checked bags were held off the plane until it was confirmed that they had boarded the aircraft.12

All five hijackers passed through the Main Terminal's west security screening checkpoint; United Airlines, which was the responsible air carrier, had contracted out the work to Argenbright Security.13 The checkpoint featured closed-circuit television that recorded all passengers, including the hijackers, as they were screened. At 7:18, Mihdhar and Moqed entered the security checkpoint.

Mihdhar and Moqed placed their carry-on bags on the belt of the X-ray machine and proceeded through the first metal detector. Both set off the alarm, and they were directed to a second metal detector. Mihdhar did not trigger the alarm and was permitted through the checkpoint. After Moqed set it off, a screener wanded him. He passed this inspection.14

About 20 minutes later, at 7:35, another passenger for Flight 77, Hani Han-jour, placed two carry-on bags on the X-ray belt in the Main Terminal's west checkpoint, and proceeded, without alarm, through the metal detector. A short time later, Nawaf and Salem al Hazmi entered the same checkpoint. Salem al Hazmi cleared the metal detector and was permitted through; Nawaf al Hazmi set off the alarms for both the first and second metal detectors and was then hand-wanded before being passed. In addition, his over-the-shoulder carry-on bag was swiped by an explosive trace detector and then passed. The video footage indicates that he was carrying an unidentified item in his back pocket, clipped to its rim.15

When the local civil aviation security office of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) later investigated these security screening operations, the screeners recalled nothing out of the ordinary. They could not recall that any of the passengers they screened were CAPPS selectees. We asked a screening expert to review the videotape of the hand-wanding, and he found the quality of the screener's work to have been "marginal at best." The screener should have "resolved" what set off the alarm; and in the case of both Moqed and Hazmi, it was clear that he did not.16

At 7:50, Majed Moqed and Khalid al Mihdhar boarded the flight and were seated in 12A and 12B in coach. Hani Hanjour, assigned to seat 1B (first class), soon followed.The Hazmi brothers, sitting in 5E and 5F, joined Hanjour in the first-class cabin.17

Newark: United 93. Between 7:03 and 7:39, Saeed al Ghamdi, Ahmed al Nami, Ahmad al Haznawi, and Ziad Jarrah checked in at the United Airlines ticket counter for Flight 93, going to Los Angeles. Two checked bags; two did not. Haznawi was selected by CAPPS. His checked bag was screened for explosives and then loaded on the plane.18

The four men passed through the security checkpoint, owned by United Airlines and operated under contract by Argenbright Security. Like the checkpoints in Boston, it lacked closed-circuit television surveillance so there is no documentary evidence to indicate when the hijackers passed through the checkpoint, what alarms may have been triggered, or what security procedures were administered. The FAA interviewed the screeners later; none recalled anything unusual or suspicious.19

The four men boarded the plane between 7:39 and 7:48. All four had seats in the first-class cabin; their plane had no business-class section. Jarrah was in seat 1B, closest to the cockpit; Nami was in 3C, Ghamdi in 3D, and Haznawi in 6B.20

The 19 men were aboard four transcontinental flights.21 They were planning to hijack these planes and turn them into large guided missiles, loaded with up to 11,400 gallons of jet fuel. By 8:00 A.M. on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001, they had defeated all the security layers that America's civil aviation security system then had in place to prevent a hijacking.

The Hijacking of American 11
American Airlines Flight 11 provided nonstop service from Boston to Los Angeles. On September 11, Captain John Ogonowski and First Officer Thomas McGuinness piloted the Boeing 767. It carried its full capacity of nine flight attendants. Eighty-one passengers boarded the flight with them (including the five terrorists).22

The plane took off at 7:59. Just before 8:14, it had climbed to 26,000 feet, not quite its initial assigned cruising altitude of 29,000 feet. All communications and flight profile data were normal. About this time the "Fasten Seatbelt" sign would usually have been turned off and the flight attendants would have begun preparing for cabin service.23

At that same time, American 11 had its last routine communication with the ground when it acknowledged navigational instructions from the FAA's air traffic control (ATC) center in Boston. Sixteen seconds after that transmis-sion, ATC instructed the aircraft's pilots to climb to 35,000 feet. That message and all subsequent attempts to contact the flight were not acknowledged. From this and other evidence, we believe the hijacking began at 8:14 or shortly thereafter.24

Reports from two flight attendants in the coach cabin, Betty Ong and Madeline "Amy" Sweeney, tell us most of what we know about how the hijacking happened. As it began, some of the hijackers-most likely Wail al Shehri and Waleed al Shehri, who were seated in row 2 in first class-stabbed the two unarmed flight attendants who would have been preparing for cabin service.25

We do not know exactly how the hijackers gained access to the cockpit; FAA rules required that the doors remain closed and locked during flight. Ong speculated that they had "jammed their way" in. Perhaps the terrorists stabbed the flight attendants to get a cockpit key, to force one of them to open the cockpit door, or to lure the captain or first officer out of the cockpit. Or the flight attendants may just have been in their way.26

At the same time or shortly thereafter, Atta-the only terrorist on board trained to fly a jet-would have moved to the cockpit from his business-class seat, possibly accompanied by Omari. As this was happening, passenger Daniel Lewin, who was seated in the row just behind Atta and Omari, was stabbed by one of the hijackers-probably Satam al Suqami, who was seated directly behind Lewin. Lewin had served four years as an officer in the Israeli military. He may have made an attempt to stop the hijackers in front of him, not realizing that another was sitting behind him.27

The hijackers quickly gained control and sprayed Mace, pepper spray, or some other irritant in the first-class cabin, in order to force the passengers and flight attendants toward the rear of the plane.They claimed they had a bomb.28

About five minutes after the hijacking began, Betty Ong contacted the American Airlines Southeastern Reservations Office in Cary, North Carolina, via an AT&T airphone to report an emergency aboard the flight. This was the first of several occasions on 9/11 when flight attendants took action outside the scope of their training, which emphasized that in a hijacking, they were to communicate with the cockpit crew. The emergency call lasted approximately 25 minutes, as Ong calmly and professionally relayed information about events taking place aboard the airplane to authorities on the ground.29

At 8:19, Ong reported: "The cockpit is not answering, somebody's stabbed in business class-and I think there's Mace-that we can't breathe-I don't know, I think we're getting hijacked." She then told of the stabbings of the two flight attendants.30

At 8:21, one of the American employees receiving Ong's call in North Carolina, Nydia Gonzalez, alerted the American Airlines operations center in Fort Worth, Texas, reaching Craig Marquis, the manager on duty. Marquis soon realized this was an emergency and instructed the airline's dispatcher responsible for the flight to contact the cockpit. At 8:23, the dispatcher tried unsuccessfully to contact the aircraft. Six minutes later, the air traffic control specialist in American's operations center contacted the FAA's Boston Air Traffic Control Center about the flight. The center was already aware of the problem.31

Boston Center knew of a problem on the flight in part because just before 8:25 the hijackers had attempted to communicate with the passengers. The microphone was keyed, and immediately one of the hijackers said, "Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet." Air traffic controllers heard the transmission; Ong did not. The hijackers probably did not know how to operate the cockpit radio communication system correctly, and thus inadvertently broadcast their message over the air traffic control channel instead of the cabin public-address channel. Also at 8:25, and again at 8:29, Amy Sweeney got through to the American Flight Services Office in Boston but was cut off after she reported someone was hurt aboard the flight. Three minutes later, Sweeney was reconnected to the office and began relaying updates to the manager, Michael Woodward.32

At 8:26, Ong reported that the plane was "flying erratically." A minute later, Flight 11 turned south. American also began getting identifications of the hijackers, as Ong and then Sweeney passed on some of the seat numbers of those who had gained unauthorized access to the cockpit.33

Sweeney calmly reported on her line that the plane had been hijacked; a man in first class had his throat slashed; two flight attendants had been stabbed-one was seriously hurt and was on oxygen while the other's wounds seemed minor; a doctor had been requested; the flight attendants were unable to contact the cockpit; and there was a bomb in the cockpit. Sweeney told Woodward that she and Ong were trying to relay as much information as they could to people on the ground.34

At 8:38, Ong told Gonzalez that the plane was flying erratically again. Around this time Sweeney told Woodward that the hijackers were Middle Easterners, naming three of their seat numbers. One spoke very little English and one spoke excellent English. The hijackers had gained entry to the cockpit, and she did not know how. The aircraft was in a rapid descent.35

At 8:41, Sweeney told Woodward that passengers in coach were under the impression that there was a routine medical emergency in first class. Other flight attendants were busy at duties such as getting medical supplies while Ong and Sweeney were reporting the events.36

At 8:41, in American's operations center, a colleague told Marquis that the air traffic controllers declared Flight 11 a hijacking and "think he's [American 11] headed toward Kennedy [airport in New York City].They're moving everybody out of the way. They seem to have him on a primary radar. They seem to think that he is descending."37

At 8:44, Gonzalez reported losing phone contact with Ong. About this same time Sweeney reported to Woodward," Something is wrong. We are in a rapid descent . . . we are all over the place." Woodward asked Sweeney to look out the window to see if she could determine where they were. Sweeney responded: "We are flying low. We are flying very, very low. We are flying way too low." Seconds later she said, "Oh my God we are way too low." The phone call ended.38

At 8:46:40, American 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City.39 All on board, along with an unknown number of people in the tower, were killed instantly.

The Hijacking of United 175
United Airlines Flight 175 was scheduled to depart for Los Angeles at 8:00. Captain Victor Saracini and First Officer Michael Horrocks piloted the Boeing 767, which had seven flight attendants. Fifty-six passengers boarded the flight.40

United 175 pushed back from its gate at 7:58 and departed Logan Airport at 8:14. By 8:33, it had reached its assigned cruising altitude of 31,000 feet. The flight attendants would have begun their cabin service.41

The flight had taken off just as American 11 was being hijacked, and at 8:42 the United 175 flight crew completed their report on a "suspicious transmission" overheard from another plane (which turned out to have been Flight 11) just after takeoff. This was United 175's last communication with the ground.42

The hijackers attacked sometime between 8:42 and 8:46.They used knives (as reported by two passengers and a flight attendant), Mace (reported by one passenger), and the threat of a bomb (reported by the same passenger). They stabbed members of the flight crew (reported by a flight attendant and one passenger). Both pilots had been killed (reported by one flight attendant).The eyewitness accounts came from calls made from the rear of the plane, from passengers originally seated further forward in the cabin, a sign that passengers and perhaps crew had been moved to the back of the aircraft. Given similarities to American 11 in hijacker seating and in eyewitness reports of tactics and weapons, as well as the contact between the presumed team leaders, Atta and Shehhi, we believe the tactics were similar on both flights.43

The first operational evidence that something was abnormal on United 175 came at 8:47, when the aircraft changed beacon codes twice within a minute. At 8:51, the flight deviated from its assigned altitude, and a minute later New York air traffic controllers began repeatedly and unsuccessfully trying to contact it.44

At 8:52, in Easton, Connecticut, a man named Lee Hanson received a phone call from his son Peter, a passenger on United 175. His son told him: "I think they've taken over the cockpit-An attendant has been stabbed- and someone else up front may have been killed. The plane is making strange moves. Call United Airlines-Tell them it's Flight 175, Boston to LA." Lee Hanson then called the Easton Police Department and relayed what he had heard.45

Also at 8:52, a male flight attendant called a United office in San Francisco, reaching Marc Policastro. The flight attendant reported that the flight had been hijacked, both pilots had been killed, a flight attendant had been stabbed, and the hijackers were probably flying the plane. The call lasted about two minutes, after which Policastro and a colleague tried unsuccessfully to contact the flight.46

At 8:58, the flight took a heading toward New York City.47

At 8:59, Flight 175 passenger Brian David Sweeney tried to call his wife, Julie. He left a message on their home answering machine that the plane had been hijacked. He then called his mother, Louise Sweeney, told her the flight had been hijacked, and added that the passengers were thinking about storming the cockpit to take control of the plane away from the hijackers.48

At 9:00, Lee Hanson received a second call from his son Peter:

It's getting bad, Dad-A stewardess was stabbed-They seem to have knives and Mace-They said they have a bomb-It's getting very bad on the plane-Passengers are throwing up and getting sick-The plane is making jerky movements-I don't think the pilot is flying the plane-I think we are going down-I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a building-Don't worry, Dad- If it happens, it'll be very fast-My God, my God.49
The call ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman scream just before it cut off. He turned on a television, and in her home so did Louise Sweeney. Both then saw the second aircraft hit the World Trade Center.50

At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center.51 All on board, along with an unknown number of people in the tower, were killed instantly.

The Hijacking of American 77
American Airlines Flight 77 was scheduled to depart from Washington Dulles for Los Angeles at 8:10. The aircraft was a Boeing 757 piloted by Captain Charles F. Burlingame and First Officer David Charlebois. There were four flight attendants. On September 11, the flight carried 58 passengers.52

American 77 pushed back from its gate at 8:09 and took off at 8:20. At 8:46, the flight reached its assigned cruising altitude of 35,000 feet. Cabin service would have begun. At 8:51, American 77 transmitted its last routine radio communication. The hijacking began between 8:51 and 8:54. As on American 11 and United 175, the hijackers used knives (reported by one passenger) and moved all the passengers (and possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft (reported by one flight attendant and one passenger). Unlike the earlier flights, the Flight 77 hijackers were reported by a passenger to have box cutters. Finally, a passenger reported that an announcement had been made by the "pilot" that the plane had been hijacked. Neither of the firsthand accounts mentioned any stabbings or the threat or use of either a bomb or Mace, though both witnesses began the flight in the first-class cabin.53

At 8:54, the aircraft deviated from its assigned course, turning south. Two minutes later the transponder was turned off and even primary radar contact with the aircraft was lost. The Indianapolis Air Traffic Control Center repeatedly tried and failed to contact the aircraft. American Airlines dispatchers also tried, without success.54

At 9:00, American Airlines Executive Vice President Gerard Arpey learned that communications had been lost with American 77.This was now the second American aircraft in trouble. He ordered all American Airlines flights in the Northeast that had not taken off to remain on the ground. Shortly before 9:10, suspecting that American 77 had been hijacked, American headquarters concluded that the second aircraft to hit the World Trade Center might have been Flight 77. After learning that United Airlines was missing a plane, American Airlines headquarters extended the ground stop nationwide.55

At 9:12, Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane. She asked her mother to alert American Airlines. Nancy May and her husband promptly did so.56

At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. She reported that the flight had been hijacked, and the hijackers had knives and box cutters. She further indicated that the hijackers were not aware of her phone call, and that they had put all the passengers in the back of the plane. About a minute into the conversation, the call was cut off. Solicitor General Olson tried unsuccessfully to reach Attorney General John Ashcroft.57

Shortly after the first call, Barbara Olson reached her husband again. She reported that the pilot had announced that the flight had been hijacked, and she asked her husband what she should tell the captain to do. Ted Olson asked for her location and she replied that the aircraft was then flying over houses. Another passenger told her they were traveling northeast. The Solicitor General then informed his wife of the two previous hijackings and crashes. She did not display signs of panic and did not indicate any awareness of an impending crash. At that point, the second call was cut off.58

At 9:29, the autopilot on American 77 was disengaged; the aircraft was at 7,000 feet and approximately 38 miles west of the Pentagon.59 At 9:32, controllers at the Dulles Terminal Radar Approach Control "observed a primary radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed." This was later determined to have been Flight 77.

At 9:34, Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport advised the Secret Service of an unknown aircraft heading in the direction of the White House. American 77 was then 5 miles west-southwest of the Pentagon and began a 330-degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2,200 feet, pointed toward the Pentagon and downtown Washington. The hijacker pilot then advanced the throttles to maximum power and dove toward the Pentagon.60

At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour.61 All on board, as well as many civilian and military personnel in the building, were killed.

The Battle for United 93
At 8:42, United Airlines Flight 93 took off from Newark (New Jersey) Liberty International Airport bound for San Francisco. The aircraft was piloted by Captain Jason Dahl and First Officer Leroy Homer, and there were five flight attendants. Thirty-seven passengers, including the hijackers, boarded the plane. Scheduled to depart the gate at 8:00, the Boeing 757's takeoff was delayed because of the airport's typically heavy morning traffic.62

The hijackers had planned to take flights scheduled to depart at 7:45 (American 11), 8:00 (United 175 and United 93), and 8:10 (American 77). Three of the flights had actually taken off within 10 to 15 minutes of their planned departure times. United 93 would ordinarily have taken off about 15 minutes after pulling away from the gate. When it left the ground at 8:42, the flight was running more than 25 minutes late.63

As United 93 left Newark, the flight's crew members were unaware of the hijacking of American 11.Around 9:00, the FAA, American, and United were facing the staggering realization of apparent multiple hijackings. At 9:03, they would see another aircraft strike the World Trade Center. Crisis managers at the FAA and the airlines did not yet act to warn other aircraft.64 At the same time, Boston Center realized that a message transmitted just before 8:25 by the hijacker pilot of American 11 included the phrase, "We have some planes."65

No one at the FAA or the airlines that day had ever dealt with multiple hijackings. Such a plot had not been carried out anywhere in the world in more than 30 years, and never in the United States. As news of the hijackings filtered through the FAA and the airlines, it does not seem to have occurred to their leadership that they needed to alert other aircraft in the air that they too might be at risk.66

United 175 was hijacked between 8:42 and 8:46, and awareness of that hijacking began to spread after 8:51. American 77 was hijacked between 8:51 and 8:54. By 9:00, FAA and airline officials began to comprehend that attackers were going after multiple aircraft. American Airlines' nationwide ground stop between 9:05 and 9:10 was followed by a United Airlines ground stop. FAA controllers at Boston Center, which had tracked the first two hijackings, requested at 9:07 that Herndon Command Center "get messages to airborne aircraft to increase security for the cockpit." There is no evidence that Herndon took such action. Boston Center immediately began speculating about other aircraft that might be in danger, leading them to worry about a transcontinental flight-Delta 1989-that in fact was not hijacked. At 9:19, the FAA's New England regional office called Herndon and asked that Cleveland Center advise Delta 1989 to use extra cockpit security.67

Several FAA air traffic control officials told us it was the air carriers' responsibility to notify their planes of security problems. One senior FAA air traffic control manager said that it was simply not the FAA's place to order the airlines what to tell their pilots.68 We believe such statements do not reflect an adequate appreciation of the FAA's responsibility for the safety and security of civil aviation.

The airlines bore responsibility, too. They were facing an escalating number of conflicting and, for the most part, erroneous reports about other flights, as well as a continuing lack of vital information from the FAA about the hijacked flights. We found no evidence, however, that American Airlines sent any cockpit warnings to its aircraft on 9/11. United's first decisive action to notify its airborne aircraft to take defensive action did not come until 9:19, when a United flight dispatcher, Ed Ballinger, took the initiative to begin transmitting warnings to his 16 transcontinental flights: "Beware any cockpit intrusion- Two a/c [aircraft] hit World Trade Center." One of the flights that received the warning was United 93. Because Ballinger was still responsible for his other flights as well as Flight 175, his warning message was not transmitted to Flight 93 until 9:23.69

By all accounts, the first 46 minutes of Flight 93's cross-country trip proceeded routinely. Radio communications from the plane were normal. Heading, speed, and altitude ran according to plan. At 9:24, Ballinger's warning to United 93 was received in the cockpit. Within two minutes, at 9:26, the pilot, Jason Dahl, responded with a note of puzzlement: "Ed, confirm latest mssg plz-Jason."70

The hijackers attacked at 9:28. While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent, the FAA's air traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio transmissions from the aircraft. During the first broadcast, the captain or first officer could be heard declaring "Mayday" amid the sounds of a physical struggle in the cockpit. The second radio transmission, 35 seconds later, indicated that the fight was continuing. The captain or first officer could be heard shouting:" Hey get out of here-get out of here-get out of here."71

On the morning of 9/11, there were only 37 passengers on United 93-33 in addition to the 4 hijackers. This was below the norm for Tuesday mornings during the summer of 2001. But there is no evidence that the hijackers manipulated passenger levels or purchased additional seats to facilitate their operation.72

The terrorists who hijacked three other commercial flights on 9/11 operated in five-man teams. They initiated their cockpit takeover within 30 minutes of takeoff. On Flight 93, however, the takeover took place 46 minutes after takeoff and there were only four hijackers. The operative likely intended to round out the team for this flight, Mohamed al Kahtani, had been refused entry by a suspicious immigration inspector at Florida's Orlando International Airport in August.73

Because several passengers on United 93 described three hijackers on the plane, not four, some have wondered whether one of the hijackers had been able to use the cockpit jump seat from the outset of the flight. FAA rules allow use of this seat by documented and approved individuals, usually air carrier or FAA personnel. We have found no evidence indicating that one of the hijackers, or anyone else, sat there on this flight. All the hijackers had assigned seats in first class, and they seem to have used them. We believe it is more likely that Jarrah, the crucial pilot-trained member of their team, remained seated and inconspicuous until after the cockpit was seized; and once inside, he would not have been visible to the passengers.74

At 9:32, a hijacker, probably Jarrah, made or attempted to make the following announcement to the passengers of Flight 93:"Ladies and Gentlemen: Here the captain, please sit down keep remaining sitting. We have a bomb on board. So, sit." The flight data recorder (also recovered) indicates that Jarrah then instructed the plane's autopilot to turn the aircraft around and head east.75

The cockpit voice recorder data indicate that a woman, most likely a flight attendant, was being held captive in the cockpit. She struggled with one of the hijackers who killed or otherwise silenced her.76

Shortly thereafter, the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones. These calls between family, friends, and colleagues took place until the end of the flight and provided those on the ground with firsthand accounts. They enabled the passengers to gain critical information, including the news that two aircraft had slammed into the World Trade Center.77

At 9:39, the FAA's Cleveland Air Route Traffic Control Center overheard a second announcement indicating that there was a bomb on board, that the plane was returning to the airport, and that they should remain seated.78 While it apparently was not heard by the passengers, this announcement, like those on Flight 11 and Flight 77, was intended to deceive them. Jarrah, like Atta earlier, may have inadvertently broadcast the message because he did not know how to operate the radio and the intercom. To our knowledge none of them had ever flown an actual airliner before.

At least two callers from the flight reported that the hijackers knew that passengers were making calls but did not seem to care. It is quite possible Jarrah knew of the success of the assault on the World Trade Center. He could have learned of this from messages being sent by United Airlines to the cockpits of its transcontinental flights, including Flight 93, warning of cockpit intrusion and telling of the New York attacks. But even without them, he would certainly have understood that the attacks on the World Trade Center would already have unfolded, given Flight 93's tardy departure from Newark. If Jarrah did know that the passengers were making calls, it might not have occurred to him that they were certain to learn what had happened in New York, thereby defeating his attempts at deception.79

At least ten passengers and two crew members shared vital information with family, friends, colleagues, or others on the ground. All understood the plane had been hijacked. They said the hijackers wielded knives and claimed to have a bomb. The hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and they forced the passengers to the back of the aircraft.80

Callers reported that a passenger had been stabbed and that two people were lying on the floor of the cabin, injured or dead-possibly the captain and first officer. One caller reported that a flight attendant had been killed.81

One of the callers from United 93 also reported that he thought the hijackers might possess a gun. But none of the other callers reported the presence of a firearm. One recipient of a call from the aircraft recounted specifically asking her caller whether the hijackers had guns. The passenger replied that he did not see one. No evidence of firearms or of their identifiable remains was found at the aircraft's crash site, and the cockpit voice recorder gives no indication of a gun being fired or mentioned at any time. We believe that if the hijackers had possessed a gun, they would have used it in the flight's last minutes as the passengers fought back.82

Passengers on three flights reported the hijackers' claim of having a bomb. The FBI told us they found no trace of explosives at the crash sites. One of the passengers who mentioned a bomb expressed his belief that it was not real. Lacking any evidence that the hijackers attempted to smuggle such illegal items past the security screening checkpoints, we believe the bombs were probably fake.83

During at least five of the passengers' phone calls, information was shared about the attacks that had occurred earlier that morning at the World Trade Center. Five calls described the intent of passengers and surviving crew members to revolt against the hijackers. According to one call, they voted on whether to rush the terrorists in an attempt to retake the plane. They decided, and acted.84

At 9:57, the passenger assault began. Several passengers had terminated phone calls with loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the callers ended her message as follows: "Everyone's running up to first class. I've got to go. Bye."85

The cockpit voice recorder captured the sounds of the passenger assault muffled by the intervening cockpit door. Some family members who listened to the recording report that they can hear the voice of a loved one among the din. We cannot identify whose voices can be heard. But the assault was sustained.86

In response, Jarrah immediately began to roll the airplane to the left and right, attempting to knock the passengers off balance. At 9:58:57, Jarrah told another hijacker in the cockpit to block the door. Jarrah continued to roll the airplane sharply left and right, but the assault continued. At 9:59:52, Jarrah changed tactics and pitched the nose of the airplane up and down to disrupt the assault. The recorder captured the sounds of loud thumps, crashes, shouts, and breaking glasses and plates. At 10:00:03, Jarrah stabilized the airplane.87

Five seconds later, Jarrah asked, "Is that it? Shall we finish it off?" A hijacker responded, "No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off." The sounds of fighting continued outside the cockpit. Again, Jarrah pitched the nose of the aircraft up and down. At 10:00:26, a passenger in the background said, "In the cockpit. If we don't we'll die!" Sixteen seconds later, a passenger yelled, "Roll it!" Jarrah stopped the violent maneuvers at about 10:01:00 and said, "Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!" He then asked another hijacker in the cock-pit, "Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?" to which the other replied, "Yes, put it in it, and pull it down."88

The passengers continued their assault and at 10:02:23, a hijacker said, "Pull it down! Pull it down!" The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them. The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right. The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting "Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest." With the sounds of the passenger counterattack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20 minutes' flying time from Washington, D.C.89

Jarrah's objective was to crash his airliner into symbols of the American Republic, the Capitol or the White House. He was defeated by the alerted, unarmed passengers of United 93.

1.2 IMPROVISING A HOMELAND DEFENSE
The FAA and NORAD
On 9/11, the defense of U.S. airspace depended on close interaction between two federal agencies: the FAA and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).The most recent hijacking that involved U.S. air traffic controllers, FAA management, and military coordination had occurred in 1993.90 In order to understand how the two agencies interacted eight years later, we will review their missions, command and control structures, and working relationship on the morning of 9/11.

FAA Mission and Structure. As of September 11, 2001, the FAA was mandated by law to regulate the safety and security of civil aviation. From an air traffic controller's perspective, that meant maintaining a safe distance between airborne aircraft.91

Many controllers work at the FAA's 22 Air Route Traffic Control Centers. They are grouped under regional offices and coordinate closely with the national Air Traffic Control System Command Center, located in Herndon,



FAA Air Traffic Control Centers


Reporting structure, Northeast Air Defense Sector
Graphics courtesy of ESRI

Virginia, which oversees daily traffic flow within the entire airspace system. FAA headquarters is ultimately responsible for the management of the National Airspace System. The Operations Center located at FAA headquarters receives notifications of incidents, including accidents and hijackings.92

FAA Control Centers often receive information and make operational decisions independently of one another. On 9/11, the four hijacked aircraft were monitored mainly by the centers in Boston, New York, Cleveland, and Indianapolis. Each center thus had part of the knowledge of what was going on across the system. What Boston knew was not necessarily known by centers in New York, Cleveland, or Indianapolis, or for that matter by the Command Center in Herndon or by FAA headquarters in Washington.

Controllers track airliners such as the four aircraft hijacked on 9/11 primarily by watching the data from a signal emitted by each aircraft's transponder equipment. Those four planes, like all aircraft traveling above 10,000 feet, were required to emit a unique transponder signal while in flight.93

On 9/11, the terrorists turned off the transponders on three of the four hijacked aircraft. With its transponder off, it is possible, though more difficult, to track an aircraft by its primary radar returns. But unlike transponder data, primary radar returns do not show the aircraft's identity and altitude. Controllers at centers rely so heavily on transponder signals that they usually do not display primary radar returns on their radar scopes. But they can change the configuration of their scopes so they can see primary radar returns. They did this on 9/11 when the transponder signals for three of the aircraft disappeared.94

Before 9/11, it was not unheard of for a commercial aircraft to deviate slightly from its course, or for an FAA controller to lose radio contact with a pilot for a short period of time. A controller could also briefly lose a commercial aircraft's transponder signal, although this happened much less frequently. However, the simultaneous loss of radio and transponder signal would be a rare and alarming occurrence, and would normally indicate a catastrophic system failure or an aircraft crash. In all of these instances, the job of the controller was to reach out to the aircraft, the parent company of the aircraft, and other planes in the vicinity in an attempt to reestablish communications and set the aircraft back on course. Alarm bells would not start ringing until these efforts-which could take five minutes or more-were tried and had failed.95

NORAD Mission and Structure. NORAD is a binational command established in 1958 between the United States and Canada. Its mission was, and is, to defend the airspace of North America and protect the continent. That mission does not distinguish between internal and external threats; but because NORAD was created to counter the Soviet threat, it came to define its job as defending against external attacks.96

The threat of Soviet bombers diminished significantly as the Cold War ended, and the number of NORAD alert sites was reduced from its Cold War high of 26. Some within the Pentagon argued in the 1990s that the alert sites should be eliminated entirely. In an effort to preserve their mission, members of the air defense community advocated the importance of air sovereignty against emerging "asymmetric threats" to the United States: drug smuggling, "non-state and state-sponsored terrorists," and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile technology.97

NORAD perceived the dominant threat to be from cruise missiles. Other threats were identified during the late 1990s, including terrorists' use of aircraft as weapons. Exercises were conducted to counter this threat, but they were not based on actual intelligence. In most instances, the main concern was the use of such aircraft to deliver weapons of mass destruction.

Prior to 9/11, it was understood that an order to shoot down a commercial aircraft would have to be issued by the National Command Authority (a phrase used to describe the president and secretary of defense). Exercise planners also assumed that the aircraft would originate from outside the United States, allowing time to identify the target and scramble interceptors. The threat of terrorists hijacking commercial airliners within the United States-and using them as guided missiles-was not recognized by NORAD before 9/11.98

Notwithstanding the identification of these emerging threats, by 9/11 there were only seven alert sites left in the United States, each with two fighter aircraft on alert. This led some NORAD commanders to worry that NORAD was not postured adequately to protect the United States.99

In the United States, NORAD is divided into three sectors. On 9/11, all the hijacked aircraft were in NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (also known as NEADS), which is based in Rome, New York. That morning NEADS could call on two alert sites, each with one pair of ready fighters: Otis Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, and Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, Virginia.100 Other facilities, not on "alert," would need time to arm the fighters and organize crews.

NEADS reported to the Continental U.S. NORAD Region (CONR) headquarters, in Panama City, Florida, which in turn reported to NORAD headquarters, in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Interagency Collaboration. The FAA and NORAD had developed protocols for working together in the event of a hijacking. As they existed on 9/11, the protocols for the FAA to obtain military assistance from NORAD required multiple levels of notification and approval at the highest levels of government.101

FAA guidance to controllers on hijack procedures assumed that the aircraft pilot would notify the controller via radio or by "squawking" a transponder code of "7500"-the universal code for a hijack in progress. Controllers would notify their supervisors, who in turn would inform management all the way up to FAA headquarters in Washington. Headquarters had a hijack coordinator, who was the director of the FAA Office of Civil Aviation Security or his or her designate.102

If a hijack was confirmed, procedures called for the hijack coordinator on duty to contact the Pentagon's National Military Command Center (NMCC) and to ask for a military escort aircraft to follow the flight, report anything unusual, and aid search and rescue in the event of an emergency. The NMCC would then seek approval from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to provide military assistance. If approval was given, the orders would be transmitted down NORAD's chain of command.103

The NMCC would keep the FAA hijack coordinator up to date and help the FAA centers coordinate directly with the military. NORAD would receive tracking information for the hijacked aircraft either from joint use radar or from the relevant FAA air traffic control facility. Every attempt would be made to have the hijacked aircraft squawk 7500 to help NORAD track it.104

The protocols did not contemplate an intercept. They assumed the fighter escort would be discreet, "vectored to a position five miles directly behind the hijacked aircraft," where it could perform its mission to monitor the aircraft's flight path.105

In sum, the protocols in place on 9/11 for the FAA and NORAD to respond to a hijacking presumed that

the hijacked aircraft would be readily identifiable and would not attempt to disappear;
there would be time to address the problem through the appropriate FAA and NORAD chains of command; and
hijacking would take the traditional form: that is, it would not be a suicide hijacking designed to convert the aircraft into a guided missile.
On the morning of 9/11, the existing protocol was unsuited in every respect for what was about to happen.

American Airlines Flight 11 FAA Awareness. Although the Boston Center air traffic controller realized at an early stage that there was something wrong with American 11, he did not immediately interpret the plane's failure to respond as a sign that it had been hijacked. At 8:14, when the flight failed to heed his instruction to climb to 35,000 feet, the controller repeatedly tried to raise the flight. He reached out to the pilot on the emergency frequency. Though there was no response, he kept trying to contact the aircraft.106

At 8:21, American 11 turned off its transponder, immediately degrading the information available about the aircraft. The controller told his supervisor that he thought something was seriously wrong with the plane, although neither suspected a hijacking. The supervisor instructed the controller to follow standard procedures for handling a "no radio" aircraft.107

The controller checked to see if American Airlines could establish communication with American 11. He became even more concerned as its route changed, moving into another sector's airspace. Controllers immediately began to move aircraft out of its path, and asked other aircraft in the vicinity to look for American 11.108

At 8:24:38, the following transmission came from American 11:

American 11: We have some planes. Just stay quiet, and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport.
The controller only heard something unintelligible; he did not hear the specific words "we have some planes." The next transmission came seconds later:

American 11: Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.109
The controller told us that he then knew it was a hijacking. He alerted his supervisor, who assigned another controller to assist him. He redoubled his efforts to ascertain the flight's altitude. Because the controller didn't understand the initial transmission, the manager of Boston Center instructed his quality assurance specialist to "pull the tape" of the radio transmission, listen to it closely, and report back.110

Between 8:25 and 8:32, in accordance with the FAA protocol, Boston Center managers started notifying their chain of command that American 11 had been hijacked. At 8:28, Boston Center called the Command Center in Herndon to advise that it believed American 11 had been hijacked and was heading toward New York Center's airspace.

By this time, American 11 had taken a dramatic turn to the south. At 8:32, the Command Center passed word of a possible hijacking to the Operations Center at FAA headquarters. The duty officer replied that security personnel at headquarters had just begun discussing the apparent hijack on a conference call with the New England regional office. FAA headquarters began to follow the hijack protocol but did not contact the NMCC to request a fighter escort.111

The Herndon Command Center immediately established a teleconference between Boston, New York, and Cleveland Centers so that Boston Center could help the others understand what was happening.112

At 8:34, the Boston Center controller received a third transmission from American 11:

American 11: Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves.113
In the succeeding minutes, controllers were attempting to ascertain the altitude of the southbound flight.114

Military Notification and Response. Boston Center did not follow the protocol in seeking military assistance through the prescribed chain of command. In addition to notifications within the FAA, Boston Center took the initiative, at 8:34, to contact the military through the FAA's Cape Cod facility. The center also tried to contact a former alert site in Atlantic City, unaware it had been phased out. At 8:37:52, Boston Center reached NEADS. This was the first notification received by the military-at any level-that American 11 had been hijacked:115

FAA: Hi. Boston Center TMU [Traffic Management Unit], we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.
NEADS: Is this real-world or exercise?

FAA: No, this is not an exercise, not a test.116

NEADS ordered to battle stations the two F-15 alert aircraft at Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts, 153 miles away from New York City. The air defense of America began with this call.117

At NEADS, the report of the hijacking was relayed immediately to Battle Commander Colonel Robert Marr. After ordering the Otis fighters to battle stations, Colonel Marr phoned Major General Larry Arnold, commanding general of the First Air Force and NORAD's Continental Region. Marr sought authorization to scramble the Otis fighters. General Arnold later recalled instructing Marr to "go ahead and scramble them, and we'll get authorities later." General Arnold then called NORAD headquarters to report.118

F-15 fighters were scrambled at 8:46 from Otis Air Force Base. But NEADS did not know where to send the alert fighter aircraft, and the officer directing the fighters pressed for more information: "I don't know where I'm scrambling these guys to. I need a direction, a destination." Because the hijackers had turned off the plane's transponder, NEADS personnel spent the next minutes searching their radar scopes for the primary radar return. American 11 struck the North Tower at 8:46. Shortly after 8:50, while NEADS personnel were still trying to locate the flight, word reached them that a plane had hit the World Trade Center.119

Radar data show the Otis fighters were airborne at 8:53. Lacking a target, they were vectored toward military-controlled airspace off the Long Island coast. To avoid New York area air traffic and uncertain about what to do, the fighters were brought down to military airspace to "hold as needed. "From 9:09 to 9:13, the Otis fighters stayed in this holding pattern.120

In summary, NEADS received notice of the hijacking nine minutes before it struck the North Tower. That nine minutes' notice before impact was the most the military would receive of any of the four hijackings.121

United Airlines Flight 175 FAA Awareness. One of the last transmissions from United Airlines Flight 175 is, in retrospect, chilling. By 8:40, controllers at the FAA's New York Center were seeking information on American 11. At approximately 8:42, shortly after entering New York Center's airspace, the pilot of United 175 broke in with the following transmission:

UAL 175: New York UAL 175 heavy.
FAA: UAL 175 go ahead.

UAL 175:Yeah.We figured we'd wait to go to your center.Ah, we hearda suspicious transmission on our departure out of Boston, ah, with someone, ah, it sounded like someone keyed the mikes and said ah everyone ah stay in your seats.

FAA: Oh, okay. I'll pass that along over here.122

Minutes later, United 175 turned southwest without clearance from air traffic control. At 8:47, seconds after the impact of American 11, United 175's transponder code changed, and then changed again. These changes were not noticed for several minutes, however, because the same New York Center controller was assigned to both American 11 and United 175.The controller knew American 11 was hijacked; he was focused on searching for it after the aircraft disappeared at 8:46.123

At 8:48, while the controller was still trying to locate American 11, a New York Center manager provided the following report on a Command Center teleconference about American 11:

Manager, New York Center: Okay. This is New York Center. We're watching the airplane. I also had conversation with American Airlines, and they've told us that they believe that one of their stewardesses was stabbed and that there are people in the cockpit that have control of the aircraft, and that's all the information they have right now.124
The New York Center controller and manager were unaware that American 11 had already crashed.

At 8:51, the controller noticed the transponder change from United 175 and tried to contact the aircraft. There was no response. Beginning at 8:52, the controller made repeated attempts to reach the crew of United 175. Still no response. The controller checked his radio equipment and contacted another controller at 8:53, saying that "we may have a hijack" and that he could not find the aircraft.125

Another commercial aircraft in the vicinity then radioed in with "reports over the radio of a commuter plane hitting the World Trade Center." The controller spent the next several minutes handing off the other flights on his scope to other controllers and moving aircraft out of the way of the unidentified aircraft (believed to be United 175) as it moved southwest and then turned northeast toward New York City.126

At about 8:55, the controller in charge notified a New York Center manager that she believed United 175 had also been hijacked. The manager tried to notify the regional managers and was told that they were discussing a hijacked aircraft (presumably American 11) and refused to be disturbed. At 8:58, the New York Center controller searching for United 175 told another New York controller "we might have a hijack over here, two of them."127

Between 9:01 and 9:02, a manager from New York Center told the Command Center in Herndon:

Manager, New York Center: We have several situations going on here. It's escalating big, big time. We need to get the military involved with us.. . . We're, we're involved with something else, we have other aircraft that may have a similar situation going on here.128
The "other aircraft" referred to by New York Center was United 175. Evidence indicates that this conversation was the only notice received by either FAA headquarters or the Herndon Command Center prior to the second crash that there had been a second hijacking.

While the Command Center was told about this "other aircraft" at 9:01, New York Center contacted New York terminal approach control and asked for help in locating United 175.

Terminal: I got somebody who keeps coasting but it looks like he's going into one of the small airports down there.
Center: Hold on a second. I'm trying to bring him up here and get you-There he is right there. Hold on.

Terminal: Got him just out of 9,500-9,000 now.

Center: Do you know who he is?

Terminal: We're just, we just we don't know who he is.We're just picking him up now.

Center (at 9:02): Alright. Heads up man, it looks like another one coming in.129

The controllers observed the plane in a rapid descent; the radar data terminated over Lower Manhattan. At 9:03, United 175 crashed into the South Tower.130

Meanwhile, a manager from Boston Center reported that they had deciphered what they had heard in one of the first hijacker transmissions from American 11:

Boston Center: Hey . . . you still there?
New England Region:Yes, I am.

Boston Center: . . . as far as the tape, Bobby seemed to think the guy said that "we have planes." Now, I don't know if it was because it was the accent, or if there's more than one, but I'm gonna, I'm gonna reconfirm that for you, and I'll get back to you real quick. Okay?

New England Region: Appreciate it.

Unidentified Female Voice: They have what?

Boston Center: Planes, as in plural.

Boston Center: It sounds like, we're talking to New York, that there's another one aimed at the World Trade Center.

New England Region: There's another aircraft?

Boston Center: A second one just hit the Trade Center.

New England Region: Okay. Yeah, we gotta get-we gotta alert the military real quick on this.131

Boston Center immediately advised the New England Region that it was going to stop all departures at airports under its control. At 9:05, Boston Center confirmed for both the FAA Command Center and the New England Region that the hijackers aboard American 11 said "we have planes." At the same time, NewYork Center declared "ATC zero"-meaning that aircraft were not permitted to depart from, arrive at, or travel through New York Center's airspace until further notice.132

Within minutes of the second impact, Boston Center instructed its controllers to inform all aircraft in its airspace of the events in New York and to advise aircraft to heighten cockpit security. Boston Center asked the Herndon Command Center to issue a similar cockpit security alert nationwide. We have found no evidence to suggest that the Command Center acted on this request or issued any type of cockpit security alert.133

Military Notification and Response. The first indication that the NORAD air defenders had of the second hijacked aircraft, United 175, came in a phone call from New York Center to NEADS at 9:03.The notice came at about the time the plane was hitting the South Tower.134

By 9:08, the mission crew commander at NEADS learned of the second explosion at the World Trade Center and decided against holding the fighters in military airspace away from Manhattan:

Mission Crew Commander, NEADS: This is what I foresee that we probably need to do. We need to talk to FAA. We need to tell 'em if this stuff is gonna keep on going, we need to take those fighters, put 'em over Manhattan. That's best thing, that's the best play right now. So coordinate with the FAA. Tell 'em if there's more out there, which we don't know, let's get 'em over Manhattan. At least we got some kind of play.135
The FAA cleared the airspace. Radar data show that at 9:13, when the Otis fighters were about 115 miles away from the city, the fighters exited their holding pattern and set a course direct for Manhattan. They arrived at 9:25 and established a combat air patrol (CAP) over the city.136

Because the Otis fighters had expended a great deal of fuel in flying first to military airspace and then to New York, the battle commanders were concerned about refueling. NEADS considered scrambling alert fighters from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to New York, to provide backup. The Langley fighters were placed on battle stations at 9:09.137 NORAD had no indication that any other plane had been hijacked.

American Airlines Flight 77
FAA Awareness. American 77 began deviating from its flight plan at 8:54, with a slight turn toward the south. Two minutes later, it disappeared completely from radar at Indianapolis Center, which was controlling the flight.138

The controller tracking American 77 told us he noticed the aircraft turning to the southwest, and then saw the data disappear. The controller looked for primary radar returns. He searched along the plane's projected flight path and the airspace to the southwest where it had started to turn. No primary targets appeared. He tried the radios, first calling the aircraft directly, then the air-line. Again there was nothing. At this point, the Indianapolis controller had no knowledge of the situation in New York. He did not know that other aircraft had been hijacked. He believed American 77 had experienced serious electrical or mechanical failure, or both, and was gone.139

Shortly after 9:00, Indianapolis Center started notifying other agencies that American 77 was missing and had possibly crashed. At 9:08, Indianapolis Center asked Air Force Search and Rescue at Langley Air Force Base to look for a downed aircraft. The center also contacted the West Virginia State Police and asked whether any reports of a downed aircraft had been received. At 9:09, it reported the loss of contact to the FAA regional center, which passed this information to FAA headquarters at 9:24.140

By 9:20, Indianapolis Center learned that there were other hijacked aircraft, and began to doubt its initial assumption that American 77 had crashed. A discussion of this concern between the manager at Indianapolis and the Command Center in Herndon prompted it to notify some FAA field facilities that American 77 was lost. By 9:21, the Command Center, some FAA field facilities, and American Airlines had started to search for American 77.They feared it had been hijacked. At 9:25, the Command Center advised FAA headquarters of the situation.141

The failure to find a primary radar return for American 77 led us to investigate this issue further. Radar reconstructions performed after 9/11 reveal that FAA radar equipment tracked the flight from the moment its transponder was turned off at 8:56. But for 8 minutes and 13 seconds, between 8:56 and 9:05, this primary radar information on American 77 was not displayed to controllers at Indianapolis Center.142 The reasons are technical, arising from the way the software processed radar information, as well as from poor primary radar coverage where American 77 was flying.

According to the radar reconstruction, American 77 reemerged as a primary target on Indianapolis Center radar scopes at 9:05, east of its last known posi-tion. The target remained in Indianapolis Center's airspace for another six minutes, then crossed into the western portion of Washington Center's airspace at 9:10.As Indianapolis Center continued searching for the aircraft, two managers and the controller responsible for American 77 looked to the west and southwest along the flight's projected path, not east-where the aircraft was now heading. Managers did not instruct other controllers at Indianapolis Center to turn on their primary radar coverage to join in the search for American 77.143

In sum, Indianapolis Center never saw Flight 77 turn around. By the time it reappeared in primary radar coverage, controllers had either stopped looking for the aircraft because they thought it had crashed or were looking toward the west. Although the Command Center learned Flight 77 was missing, neither it nor FAA headquarters issued an all points bulletin to surrounding centers to search for primary radar targets. American 77 traveled undetected for 36 minutes on a course heading due east for Washington, D.C.144

By 9:25, FAA's Herndon Command Center and FAA headquarters knew two aircraft had crashed into the World Trade Center. They knew American 77 was lost. At least some FAA officials in Boston Center and the New England Region knew that a hijacker on board American 11 had said "we have some planes." Concerns over the safety of other aircraft began to mount. A manager at the Herndon Command Center asked FAA headquarters if they wanted to order a "nationwide ground stop." While this was being discussed by executives at FAA headquarters, the Command Center ordered one at 9:25.145

The Command Center kept looking for American 77. At 9:21, it advised the Dulles terminal control facility, and Dulles urged its controllers to look for primary targets. At 9:32, they found one. Several of the Dulles controllers "observed a primary radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed" and notified Reagan National Airport. FAA personnel at both Reagan National and Dulles airports notified the Secret Service. The aircraft's identity or type was unknown.146

Reagan National controllers then vectored an unarmed National Guard C130H cargo aircraft, which had just taken off en route to Minnesota, to identify and follow the suspicious aircraft. The C-130H pilot spotted it, identified it as a Boeing 757, attempted to follow its path, and at 9:38, seconds after impact, reported to the control tower: "looks like that aircraft crashed into the Pentagon sir."147

Military Notification and Response. NORAD heard nothing about the search for American 77. Instead, the NEADS air defenders heard renewed reports about a plane that no longer existed: American 11.
At 9:21, NEADS received a report from the FAA:

FAA: Military, Boston Center. I just had a report that American 11 is still in the air, and it's on its way towards-heading towards Washington.
NEADS: Okay. American 11 is still in the air?

FAA: Yes.

NEADS: On its way towards Washington?

FAA: That was another-it was evidently another aircraft that hit the tower. That's the latest report we have.

NEADS: Okay.

FAA: I'm going to try to confirm an ID for you, but I would assume he's somewhere over, uh, either New Jersey or somewhere further south.

NEADS: Okay. So American 11 isn't the hijack at all then, right?

FAA: No, he is a hijack.

NEADS: He-American 11 is a hijack?

FAA: Yes.

NEADS: And he's heading into Washington?

FAA: Yes. This could be a third aircraft.148

The mention of a "third aircraft" was not a reference to American 77.There was confusion at that moment in the FAA. Two planes had struck the World Trade Center, and Boston Center had heard from FAA headquarters in Washington that American 11 was still airborne. We have been unable to identify the source of this mistaken FAA information.

The NEADS technician who took this call from the FAA immediately passed the word to the mission crew commander, who reported to the NEADS battle commander:

Mission Crew Commander, NEADS: Okay, uh, American Airlines is still airborne. Eleven, the first guy, he's heading towards Washington. Okay? I think we need to scramble Langley right now. And I'm gonna take the fighters from Otis, try to chase this guy down if I can find him.149
After consulting with NEADS command, the crew commander issued the order at 9:23:"Okay . . . scramble Langley. Head them towards the Washington area.. . . f they're there then we'll run on them.. . .These guys are smart." That order was processed and transmitted to Langley Air Force Base at 9:24. Radar data show the Langley fighters airborne at 9:30. NEADS decided to keep the Otis fighters over New York. The heading of the Langley fighters was adjusted to send them to the Baltimore area. The mission crew commander explained to us that the purpose was to position the Langley fighters between the reported southbound American 11 and the nation's capital.150

At the suggestion of the Boston Center's military liaison, NEADS contacted the FAA's Washington Center to ask about American 11. In the course of the conversation, a Washington Center manager informed NEADS: "We're looking-we also lost American 77."The time was 9:34.151This was the first notice to the military that American 77 was missing, and it had come by chance. If NEADS had not placed that call, the NEADS air defenders would have received no information whatsoever that the flight was even missing, although the FAA had been searching for it. No one at FAA headquarters ever asked for military assistance with American 77.

At 9:36, the FAA's Boston Center called NEADS and relayed the discovery about an unidentified aircraft closing in on Washington: "Latest report. Aircraft VFR [visual flight rules] six miles southeast of the White House. . . . Six, southwest. Six, southwest of the White House, deviating away." This startling news prompted the mission crew commander at NEADS to take immediate control of the airspace to clear a flight path for the Langley fighters: "Okay, we're going to turn it . . . crank it up. . . . Run them to the White House." He then discovered, to his surprise, that the Langley fighters were not headed north toward the Baltimore area as instructed, but east over the ocean. "I don't care how many windows you break," he said. "Damn it.. . . Okay. Push them back."152

The Langley fighters were heading east, not north, for three reasons. First, unlike a normal scramble order, this order did not include a distance to the target or the target's location. Second, a "generic" flight plan-prepared to get the aircraft airborne and out of local airspace quickly-incorrectly led the Langley fighters to believe they were ordered to fly due east (090) for 60 miles. Third, the lead pilot and local FAA controller incorrectly assumed the flight plan instruction to go "090 for 60" superseded the original scramble order.153

After the 9:36 call to NEADS about the unidentified aircraft a few miles from the White House, the Langley fighters were ordered to Washington, D.C. Controllers at NEADS located an unknown primary radar track, but "it kind of faded" over Washington. The time was 9:38.The Pentagon had been struck by American 77 at 9:37:46.The Langley fighters were about 150 miles away.154

Right after the Pentagon was hit, NEADS learned of another possible hijacked aircraft. It was an aircraft that in fact had not been hijacked at all. After the second World Trade Center crash, Boston Center managers recognized that both aircraft were transcontinental 767 jetliners that had departed Logan Airport. Remembering the "we have some planes" remark, Boston Center guessed that Delta 1989 might also be hijacked. Boston Center called NEADS at 9:41 and identified Delta 1989, a 767 jet that had left Logan Airport for Las Vegas, as a possible hijack. NEADS warned the FAA's Cleveland Center to watch Delta 1989.The Command Center and FAA headquarters watched it too. During the course of the morning, there were multiple erroneous reports of hijacked aircraft. The report of American 11 heading south was the first; Delta 1989 was the second.155

NEADS never lost track of Delta 1989, and even ordered fighter aircraft from Ohio and Michigan to intercept it. The flight never turned off its transponder. NEADS soon learned that the aircraft was not hijacked, and tracked Delta 1989 as it reversed course over Toledo, headed east, and landed in Cleveland.156 But another aircraft was heading toward Washington, an aircraft about which NORAD had heard nothing: United 93.

United Airlines Flight 93
FAA Awareness. At 9:27, after having been in the air for 45 minutes, United 93 acknowledged a transmission from the Cleveland Center controller. This was the last normal contact the FAA had with the flight.157

Less than a minute later, the Cleveland controller and the pilots of aircraft in the vicinity heard "a radio transmission of unintelligible sounds of possible screaming or a struggle from an unknown origin."158

The controller responded, seconds later: "Somebody call Cleveland? "This was followed by a second radio transmission, with sounds of screaming. The Cleveland Center controllers began to try to identify the possible source of the transmissions, and noticed that United 93 had descended some 700 feet. The controller attempted again to raise United 93 several times, with no response. At 9:30, the controller began to poll the other flights on his frequency to determine if they had heard the screaming; several said they had.159

At 9:32, a third radio transmission came over the frequency: "Keep remaining sitting. We have a bomb on board." The controller understood, but chose to respond: "Calling Cleveland Center, you're unreadable. Say again, slowly." He notified his supervisor, who passed the notice up the chain of command. By 9:34, word of the hijacking had reached FAA headquarters.160

FAA headquarters had by this time established an open line of communication with the Command Center at Herndon and instructed it to poll all its centers about suspect aircraft. The Command Center executed the request and, a minute later, Cleveland Center reported that "United 93 may have a bomb on board. "At 9:34, the Command Center relayed the information concerning United 93 to FAA headquarters. At approximately 9:36, Cleveland advised the Command Center that it was still tracking United 93 and specifically inquired whether someone had requested the military to launch fighter aircraft to intercept the aircraft. Cleveland even told the Command Center it was prepared to contact a nearby military base to make the request. The Command Center told Cleveland that FAA personnel well above them in the chain of command had to make the decision to seek military assistance and were working on the issue.161

Between 9:34 and 9:38, the Cleveland controller observed United 93 climbing to 40,700 feet and immediately moved several aircraft out its way. The controller continued to try to contact United 93, and asked whether the pilot could confirm that he had been hijacked.162 There was no response.

Then, at 9:39, a fourth radio transmission was heard from United 93:

Ziad Jarrah: Uh, this is the captain. Would like you all to remain seated. There is a bomb on board and are going back to the airport, and to have our demands [unintelligible]. Please remain quiet.
The controller responded: "United 93, understand you have a bomb on board. Go ahead." The flight did not respond.163

From 9:34 to 10:08, a Command Center facility manager provided frequent updates to Acting Deputy Administrator Monte Belger and other executives at FAA headquarters as United 93 headed toward Washington, D.C. At 9:41, Cleveland Center lost United 93's transponder signal. The controller located it on primary radar, matched its position with visual sightings from other aircraft, and tracked the flight as it turned east, then south.164

At 9:42, the Command Center learned from news reports that a plane had struck the Pentagon. The Command Center's national operations manager, Ben Sliney, ordered all FAA facilities to instruct all aircraft to land at the nearest airport. This was an unprecedented order. The air traffic control system handled it with great skill, as about 4,500 commercial and general aviation aircraft soon landed without incident.165

At 9:46 the Command Center updated FAA headquarters that United 93 was now "twenty-nine minutes out of Washington, D.C."

At 9:49, 13 minutes after Cleveland Center had asked about getting military help, the Command Center suggested that someone at headquarters should decide whether to request military assistance:

FAA Headquarters: They're pulling Jeff away to go talk about United 93.
Command Center: Uh, do we want to think, uh, about scrambling aircraft?

FAA Headquarters: Oh, God, I don't know.

Command Center: Uh, that's a decision somebody's gonna have to make probably in the next ten minutes.

FAA Headquarters: Uh, ya know everybody just left the room.166

At 9:53, FAA headquarters informed the Command Center that the deputy director for air traffic services was talking to Monte Belger about scrambling aircraft. Then the Command Center informed headquarters that controllers had lost track of United 93 over the Pittsburgh area. Within seconds, the Command Center received a visual report from another aircraft, and informed headquarters that the aircraft was 20 miles northwest of Johnstown. United 93 was spotted by another aircraft, and, at 10:01, the Command Center advised FAA headquarters that one of the aircraft had seen United 93 "waving his wings." The aircraft had witnessed the hijackers' efforts to defeat the passengers' counterattack.167

United 93 crashed in Pennsylvania at 10:03:11, 125 miles from Washington, D.C. The precise crash time has been the subject of some dispute. The 10:03:11 impact time is supported by previous National Transportation Safety Board analysis and by evidence from the Commission staff's analysis of radar, the flight data recorder, the cockpit voice recorder, infrared satellite data, and air traffic control transmissions.168

Five minutes later, the Command Center forwarded this update to headquarters:

Command Center: O.K. Uh, there is now on that United 93.
FAA Headquarters: Yes.

Command Center: There is a report of black smoke in the last position I gave you, fifteen miles south of Johnstown.

FAA Headquarters: From the airplane or from the ground?

Command Center: Uh, they're speculating it's from the aircraft.

FAA Headquarters: Okay.

Command Center: Uh, who, it hit the ground. That's what they're speculating, that's speculation only.169

The aircraft that spotted the "black smoke" was the same unarmed Air National Guard cargo plane that had seen American 77 crash into the Pentagon 27 minutes earlier. It had resumed its flight to Minnesota and saw the smoke from the crash of United 93, less than two minutes after the plane went down. At 10:17, the Command Center advised headquarters of its conclusion that United 93 had indeed crashed.170

Despite the discussions about military assistance, no one from FAA headquarters requested military assistance regarding United 93. Nor did any manager at FAA headquarters pass any of the information it had about United 93 to the military.

Military Notification and Response. NEADS first received a call about United 93 from the military liaison at Cleveland Center at 10:07. Unaware that the aircraft had already crashed, Cleveland passed to NEADS the aircraft's last known latitude and longitude. NEADS was never able to locate United 93 on radar because it was already in the ground.171

At the same time, the NEADS mission crew commander was dealing with the arrival of the Langley fighters over Washington, D.C., sorting out what their orders were with respect to potential targets. Shortly after 10:10, and having no knowledge either that United 93 had been heading toward Washington or that it had crashed, he explicitly instructed the Langley fighters: "negative- negative clearance to shoot" aircraft over the nation's capital.172

The news of a reported bomb on board United 93 spread quickly at NEADS. The air defenders searched for United 93's primary radar return and tried to locate other fighters to scramble. NEADS called Washington Center to report:

NEADS: I also want to give you a heads-up, Washington.
FAA (DC): Go ahead.

NEADS: United nine three, have you got information on that yet?

FAA:Yeah, he's down.

NEADS: He's down?

FAA:Yes.

NEADS: When did he land? 'Cause we have got confirmation-

FAA: He did not land.

NEADS: Oh, he's down? Down?

FAA: Yes. Somewhere up northeast of Camp David.

NEADS: Northeast of Camp David.

FAA: That's the last report. They don't know exactly where.173

The time of notification of the crash of United 93 was 10:15.174 The NEADS air defenders never located the flight or followed it on their radar scopes. The flight had already crashed by the time they learned it was hijacked.

Clarifying the Record
The defense of U.S. airspace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with preexisting training and protocols. It was improvised by civilians who had never handled a hijacked aircraft that attempted to disappear, and by a military unprepared for the transformation of commercial aircraft into weapons of mass destruction. As it turned out, the NEADS air defenders had nine minutes' notice on the first hijacked plane, no advance notice on the second, no advance notice on the third, and no advance notice on the fourth.

We do not believe that the true picture of that morning reflects discredit on the operational personnel at NEADS or FAA facilities. NEADS commanders and officers actively sought out information, and made the best judgments they could on the basis of what they knew. Individual FAA controllers, facility managers, and Command Center managers thought outside the box in recommending a nationwide alert, in ground-stopping local traffic, and, ultimately, in deciding to land all aircraft and executing that unprecedented order flawlessly.

More than the actual events, inaccurate government accounts of those events made it appear that the military was notified in time to respond to two of the hijackings, raising questions about the adequacy of the response. Those accounts had the effect of deflecting questions about the military's capacity to obtain timely and accurate information from its own sources. In addition, they overstated the FAA's ability to provide the military with timely and useful information that morning.

In public testimony before this Commission in May 2003, NORAD officials stated that at 9:16, NEADS received hijack notification of United 93 from the FAA.175This statement was incorrect. There was no hijack to report at 9:16. United 93 was proceeding normally at that time.

In this same public testimony, NORAD officials stated that at 9:24, NEADS received notification of the hijacking of American 77.176 This statement was also incorrect. The notice NEADS received at 9:24 was that American 11 had not hit the World Trade Center and was heading for Washington, D.C.177

In their testimony and in other public accounts, NORAD officials also stated that the Langley fighters were scrambled to respond to the notifications about American 77,178 United 93, or both. These statements were incorrect as well. The fighters were scrambled because of the report that American 11 was heading south, as is clear not just from taped conversations at NEADS but also from taped conversations at FAA centers; contemporaneous logs compiled at NEADS, Continental Region headquarters, and NORAD; and other records. Yet this response to a phantom aircraft was not recounted in a single public timeline or statement issued by the FAA or Department of Defense. The inaccurate accounts created the impression that the Langley scramble was a logical response to an actual hijacked aircraft.

In fact, not only was the scramble prompted by the mistaken information about American 11, but NEADS never received notice that American 77 was hijacked. It was notified at 9:34 that American 77 was lost. Then, minutes later, NEADS was told that an unknown plane was 6 miles southwest of the White House. Only then did the already scrambled airplanes start moving directly toward Washington, D.C.

Thus the military did not have 14 minutes to respond to American 77, as testimony to the Commission in May 2003 suggested. It had at most one or two minutes to react to the unidentified plane approaching Washington, and the fighters were in the wrong place to be able to help. They had been responding to a report about an aircraft that did not exist.

Nor did the military have 47 minutes to respond to United 93, as would be implied by the account that it received notice of the flight's hijacking at 9:16. By the time the military learned about the flight, it had crashed.

We now turn to the role of national leadership in the events that morning.


1.3 NATIONAL CRISIS MANAGEMENT
When American 11 struck the World Trade Center at 8:46, no one in the White House or traveling with the President knew that it had been hijacked. While that information circulated within the FAA, we found no evidence that the hijacking was reported to any other agency in Washington before 8:46.179

Most federal agencies learned about the crash in New York from CNN.180 Within the FAA, the administrator, Jane Garvey, and her acting deputy, Monte Belger, had not been told of a confirmed hijacking before they learned from television that a plane had crashed.181 Others in the agency were aware of it, as we explained earlier in this chapter.

Inside the National Military Command Center, the deputy director of operations and his assistant began notifying senior Pentagon officials of the incident. At about 9:00, the senior NMCC operations officer reached out to the FAA operations center for information. Although the NMCC was advised of the hijacking of American 11, the scrambling of jets was not discussed.182

In Sarasota, Florida, the presidential motorcade was arriving at the Emma

E. Booker Elementary School, where President Bush was to read to a class and talk about education. White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card told us he was standing with the President outside the classroom when Senior Advisor to the President Karl Rove first informed them that a small, twin-engine plane had crashed into the World Trade Center. The President's reaction was that the incident must have been caused by pilot error.183

At 8:55, before entering the classroom, the President spoke to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, who was at the White House. She recalled first telling the President it was a twin-engine aircraft-and then a commercial aircraft-that had struck the World Trade Center, adding "that's all we know right now, Mr. President."184

At the White House, Vice President Dick Cheney had just sat down for a meeting when his assistant told him to turn on his television because a plane had struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The Vice President was wondering "how the hell could a plane hit the World Trade Center" when he saw the second aircraft strike the South Tower.185

Elsewhere in the White House, a series of 9:00 meetings was about to begin. In the absence of information that the crash was anything other than an accident, the White House staff monitored the news as they went ahead with their regular schedules.186

The Agencies Confer
When they learned a second plane had struck the World Trade Center, nearly everyone in the White House told us, they immediately knew it was not an accident. The Secret Service initiated a number of security enhancements around the White House complex. The officials who issued these orders did not know that there were additional hijacked aircraft, or that one such aircraft was en route to Washington. These measures were precautionary steps taken because of the strikes in New York.187

The FAA and White House Teleconferences. The FAA, the White House, and the Defense Department each initiated a multiagency teleconference before 9:30. Because none of these teleconferences-at least before 10:00- included the right officials from both the FAA and Defense Department, none succeeded in meaningfully coordinating the military and FAA response to the hijackings.

At about 9:20, security personnel at FAA headquarters set up a hijacking teleconference with several agencies, including the Defense Department. The NMCC officer who participated told us that the call was monitored only periodically because the information was sporadic, it was of little value, and there were other important tasks. The FAA manager of the teleconference also remembered that the military participated only briefly before the Pentagon was hit. Both individuals agreed that the teleconference played no role in coordinating a response to the attacks of 9/11.Acting Deputy Administrator Belger was frustrated to learn later in the morning that the military had not been on the call.188

At the White House, the video teleconference was conducted from the Situation Room by Richard Clarke, a special assistant to the president long involved in counterterrorism. Logs indicate that it began at 9:25 and included the CIA; the FBI; the departments of State, Justice, and Defense; the FAA; and the White House shelter. The FAA and CIA joined at 9:40. The first topic addressed in the White House video teleconference-at about 9:40-was the physical security of the President, the White House, and federal agencies. Immediately thereafter it was reported that a plane had hit the Pentagon. We found no evidence that video teleconference participants had any prior information that American 77 had been hijacked and was heading directly toward Washington. Indeed, it is not clear to us that the video teleconference was fully under way before 9:37, when the Pentagon was struck.189

Garvey, Belger, and other senior officials from FAA headquarters participated in this video teleconference at various times. We do not know who from Defense participated, but we know that in the first hour none of the personnel involved in managing the crisis did. And none of the information conveyed in the White House video teleconference, at least in the first hour, was being passed to the NMCC. As one witness recalled,"[It] was almost like there were parallel decisionmaking processes going on; one was a voice conference orchestrated by the NMCC . . . and then there was the [White House video teleconference].. . . n my mind they were competing venues for command and control and decisionmaking."190

At 10:03, the conference received reports of more missing aircraft,"2 possibly 3 aloft," and learned of a combat air patrol over Washington. There was discussion of the need for rules of engagement. Clarke reported that they were asking the President for authority to shoot down aircraft. Confirmation of that authority came at 10:25, but the commands were already being conveyed in more direct contacts with the Pentagon.191

The Pentagon Teleconferences. Inside the National Military Command Center, the deputy director for operations immediately thought the second strike was a terrorist attack. The job of the NMCC in such an emergency is to gather the relevant parties and establish the chain of command between the National Command Authority-the president and the secretary of defense- and those who need to carry out their orders.192

On the morning of September 11, Secretary Rumsfeld was having breakfast at the Pentagon with a group of members of Congress. He then returned to his office for his daily intelligence briefing. The Secretary was informed of the second strike in New York during the briefing; he resumed the briefing while awaiting more information. After the Pentagon was struck, Secretary Rumsfeld went to the parking lot to assist with rescue efforts.193

Inside the NMCC, the deputy director for operations called for an all-purpose "significant event" conference. It began at 9:29, with a brief recap: two aircraft had struck the World Trade Center, there was a confirmed hijacking of American 11, and Otis fighters had been scrambled. The FAA was asked to provide an update, but the line was silent because the FAA had not been added to the call. A minute later, the deputy director stated that it had just been confirmed that American 11 was still airborne and heading toward D.C. He directed the transition to an air threat conference call. NORAD confirmed that American 11 was airborne and heading toward Washington, relaying the erroneous FAA information already mentioned. The call then ended, at about 9:34.194

It resumed at 9:37 as an air threat conference call,* which lasted more than eight hours. The President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley all participated in this teleconference at various times, as did military personnel from the White House underground shelter and the President's military aide on Air Force One.195

Operators worked feverishly to include the FAA, but they had equipment problems and difficulty finding secure phone numbers. NORAD asked three times before 10:03 to confirm the presence of the FAA in the teleconference. The FAA representative who finally joined the call at 10:17 had no familiarity with or responsibility for hijackings, no access to decisionmakers, and none of the information available to senior FAA officials.196

* All times given for this conference call are estimates, which we and the Department of Defense believe to be accurate within a ± 3 minute margin of error.

We found no evidence that, at this critical time, NORAD's top commanders, in Florida or Cheyenne Mountain, coordinated with their counterparts at FAA headquarters to improve awareness and organize a common response. Lower-level officials improvised-for example, the FAA's Boston Center bypassed the chain of command and directly contacted NEADS after the first hijacking. But the highest-level Defense Department officials relied on the NMCC's air threat conference, in which the FAA did not participate for the first 48 minutes.197

At 9:39, the NMCC's deputy director for operations, a military officer, opened the call from the Pentagon, which had just been hit. He began: "An air attack against North America may be in progress. NORAD, what's the situation?" NORAD said it had conflicting reports. Its latest information was "of a possible hijacked aircraft taking off out of JFK en route to Washington D.C." The NMCC reported a crash into the mall side of the Pentagon and requested that the Secretary of Defense be added to the conference.198

At 9:44, NORAD briefed the conference on the possible hijacking of Delta 1989.Two minutes later, staff reported that they were still trying to locate Secretary Rumsfeld and Vice Chairman Myers. The Vice Chairman joined the conference shortly before 10:00; the Secretary, shortly before 10:30.The Chairman was out of the country.199

At 9:48, a representative from the White House shelter asked if there were any indications of another hijacked aircraft. The deputy director for operations mentioned the Delta flight and concluded that "that would be the fourth possible hijack." At 9:49, the commander of NORAD directed all air sovereignty aircraft to battle stations, fully armed.200

At 9:59, an Air Force lieutenant colonel working in the White House Military Office joined the conference and stated he had just talked to Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley. The White House requested (1) the implementation of continuity of government measures, (2) fighter escorts for Air Force One, and (3) a fighter combat air patrol over Washington, D.C.201

By 10:03, when United 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, there had been no mention of its hijacking and the FAA had not yet been added to the tele-conference.202

The President and the Vice President
The President was seated in a classroom when, at 9:05,Andrew Card whispered to him: "A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack." The President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis. The press was standing behind the children; he saw their phones and pagers start to ring. The President felt he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening.203

The President remained in the classroom for another five to seven minutes, while the children continued reading. He then returned to a holding room shortly before 9:15, where he was briefed by staff and saw television coverage. He next spoke to Vice President Cheney, Dr. Rice, New York Governor George Pataki, and FBI Director Robert Mueller. He decided to make a brief statement from the school before leaving for the airport. The Secret Service told us they were anxious to move the President to a safer location, but did not think it imperative for him to run out the door.204

Between 9:15 and 9:30, the staff was busy arranging a return to Washington, while the President consulted his senior advisers about his remarks. No one in the traveling party had any information during this time that other aircraft were hijacked or missing. Staff was in contact with the White House Situation Room, but as far as we could determine, no one with the President was in contact with the Pentagon. The focus was on the President's statement to the nation. The only decision made during this time was to return to Washington.205

The President's motorcade departed at 9:35, and arrived at the airport between 9:42 and 9:45. During the ride the President learned about the attack on the Pentagon. He boarded the aircraft, asked the Secret Service about the safety of his family, and called the Vice President. According to notes of the call, at about 9:45 the President told the Vice President: "Sounds like we have a minor war going on here, I heard about the Pentagon. We're at war . . . some-body's going to pay."206

About this time, Card, the lead Secret Service agent, the President's military aide, and the pilot were conferring on a possible destination for Air Force One. The Secret Service agent felt strongly that the situation in Washington was too unstable for the President to return there, and Card agreed. The President strongly wanted to return to Washington and only grudgingly agreed to go elsewhere. The issue was still undecided when the President conferred with the Vice President at about the time Air Force One was taking off. The Vice President recalled urging the President not to return to Washington. Air Force One departed at about 9:54 without any fixed destination. The objective was to get up in the air-as fast and as high as possible-and then decide where to go.207

At 9:33, the tower supervisor at Reagan National Airport picked up a hotline to the Secret Service and told the Service's operations center that "an aircraft [is] coming at you and not talking with us." This was the first specific report to the Secret Service of a direct threat to the White House. No move was made to evacuate the Vice President at this time. As the officer who took the call explained, "[I was] about to push the alert button when the tower advised that the aircraft was turning south and approaching Reagan National Airport."208

American 77 began turning south, away from the White House, at 9:34. It continued heading south for roughly a minute, before turning west and beginning to circle back. This news prompted the Secret Service to order the immediate evacuation of the Vice President just before 9:36. Agents propelled him out of his chair and told him he had to get to the bunker. The Vice President entered the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37.209

Once inside, Vice President Cheney and the agents paused in an area of the tunnel that had a secure phone, a bench, and television. The Vice President asked to speak to the President, but it took time for the call to be connected. He learned in the tunnel that the Pentagon had been hit, and he saw television coverage of smoke coming from the building.210

The Secret Service logged Mrs. Cheney's arrival at the White House at 9:52, and she joined her husband in the tunnel. According to contemporaneous notes, at 9:55 the Vice President was still on the phone with the President advising that three planes were missing and one had hit the Pentagon. We believe this is the same call in which the Vice President urged the President not to return to Washington. After the call ended, Mrs. Cheney and the Vice President moved from the tunnel to the shelter conference room.211

United 93 and the Shootdown Order
On the morning of 9/11, the President and Vice President stayed in contact not by an open line of communication but through a series of calls. The President told us he was frustrated with the poor communications that morning. He could not reach key officials, including Secretary Rumsfeld, for a period of time. The line to the White House shelter conference room-and the Vice President-kept cutting off.212

The Vice President remembered placing a call to the President just after entering the shelter conference room. There is conflicting evidence about when the Vice President arrived in the shelter conference room. We have concluded, from the available evidence, that the Vice President arrived in the room shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.The Vice President recalled being told, just after his arrival, that the Air Force was trying to establish a combat air patrol over Washington.213

The Vice President stated that he called the President to discuss the rules of engagement for the CAP. He recalled feeling that it did no good to establish the CAP unless the pilots had instructions on whether they were authorized to shoot if the plane would not divert. He said the President signed off on that concept. The President said he remembered such a conversation, and that it reminded him of when he had been an interceptor pilot. The President emphasized to us that he had authorized the shootdown of hijacked aircraft.214

The Vice President's military aide told us he believed the Vice President spoke to the President just after entering the conference room, but he did not hear what they said. Rice, who entered the room shortly after the Vice President and sat next to him, remembered hearing him inform the President, "Sir, the CAPs are up. Sir, they're going to want to know what to do." Then she recalled hearing him say, "Yes sir." She believed this conversation occurred a few minutes, perhaps five, after they entered the conference room.215

We believe this call would have taken place sometime before 10:10 to 10:15.

Among the sources that reflect other important events of that morning, there is no documentary evidence for this call, but the relevant sources are incomplete. Others nearby who were taking notes, such as the Vice President's chief of staff, Scooter Libby, who sat next to him, and Mrs. Cheney, did not note a call between the President and Vice President immediately after the Vice President entered the conference room.216

At 10:02, the communicators in the shelter began receiving reports from the Secret Service of an inbound aircraft-presumably hijacked-heading toward Washington. That aircraft was United 93.The Secret Service was getting this information directly from the FAA. The FAA may have been tracking the progress of United 93 on a display that showed its projected path to Washington, not its actual radar return. Thus, the Secret Service was relying on projections and was not aware the plane was already down in Pennsylvania.217

At some time between 10:10 and 10:15, a military aide told the Vice President and others that the aircraft was 80 miles out. Vice President Cheney was asked for authority to engage the aircraft.218 His reaction was described by Scooter Libby as quick and decisive, "in about the time it takes a batter to decide to swing." The Vice President authorized fighter aircraft to engage the inbound plane. He told us he based this authorization on his earlier conversation with the President. The military aide returned a few minutes later, probably between 10:12 and 10:18, and said the aircraft was 60 miles out. He again asked for authorization to engage. The Vice President again said yes.219

At the conference room table was White House Deputy Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten. Bolten watched the exchanges and, after what he called "a quiet moment," suggested that the Vice President get in touch with the President and confirm the engage order. Bolten told us he wanted to make sure the President was told that the Vice President had executed the order. He said he had not heard any prior discussion on the subject with the President.220

The Vice President was logged calling the President at 10:18 for a two-minute conversation that obtained the confirmation. On Air Force One, the President's press secretary was taking notes; Ari Fleischer recorded that at 10:20, the President told him that he had authorized a shootdown of aircraft if necessary.221

Minutes went by and word arrived of an aircraft down in Pennsylvania. Those in the shelter wondered if the aircraft had been shot down pursuant to this authorization.222

At approximately 10:30, the shelter started receiving reports of another hijacked plane, this time only 5 to 10 miles out. Believing they had only a minute or two, the Vice President again communicated the authorization to "engage or "take out" the aircraft. At 10:33, Hadley told the air threat conference call: "I need to get word to Dick Myers that our reports are there's an inbound aircraft flying low 5 miles out. The Vice President's guidance was we need to take them out."223

Once again, there was no immediate information about the fate of the inbound aircraft. In the apt description of one witness, "It drops below the radar screen and it's just continually hovering in your imagination; you don't know where it is or what happens to it." Eventually, the shelter received word that the alleged hijacker 5 miles away had been a medevac helicopter.224

Transmission of the Authorization from the White House to the Pilots
The NMCC learned of United 93's hijacking at about 10:03.At this time the FAA had no contact with the military at the level of national command. The NMCC learned about United 93 from the White House. It, in turn, was informed by the Secret Service's contacts with the FAA.225

NORAD had no information either. At 10:07, its representative on the air threat conference call stated that NORAD had "no indication of a hijack heading to DC at this time."226

Repeatedly between 10:14 and 10:19, a lieutenant colonel at the White House relayed to the NMCC that the Vice President had confirmed fighters were cleared to engage inbound aircraft if they could verify that the aircraft was hijacked.227

The commander of NORAD, General Ralph Eberhart, was en route to the NORAD operations center in Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado, when the shootdown order was communicated on the air threat conference call. He told us that by the time he arrived, the order had already been passed down NORAD's chain of command.228

It is not clear how the shootdown order was communicated within NORAD. But we know that at 10:31, General Larry Arnold instructed his staff to broadcast the following over a NORAD instant messaging system: "10:31 Vice president has cleared to us to intercept tracks of interest and shoot them down if they do not respond per [General Arnold]."229

In upstate New York, NEADS personnel first learned of the shootdown order from this message:

Floor Leadership: You need to read this.. . .The Region Commander has declared that we can shoot down aircraft that do not respond to our direction. Copy that?
Controllers: Copy that, sir.

Floor Leadership: So if you're trying to divert somebody and he won't divert-

Controllers: DO [Director of Operations] is saying no.

Floor Leadership: No? It came over the chat.. . .You got a conflict on that direction?

Controllers: Right now no, but-

Floor Leadership: Okay? Okay, you read that from the Vice President, right? Vice President has cleared. Vice President has cleared us to intercept traffic and shoot them down if they do not respond per [General Arnold].230

In interviews with us, NEADS personnel expressed considerable confusion over the nature and effect of the order.

The NEADS commander told us he did not pass along the order because he was unaware of its ramifications. Both the mission commander and the senior weapons director indicated they did not pass the order to the fighters circling Washington and New York because they were unsure how the pilots would, or should, proceed with this guidance. In short, while leaders in Washington believed that the fighters above them had been instructed to "take out" hostile aircraft, the only orders actually conveyed to the pilots were to "ID type and tail."231

In most cases, the chain of command authorizing the use of force runs from the president to the secretary of defense and from the secretary to the combatant commander. The President apparently spoke to Secretary Rumsfeld for the first time that morning shortly after 10:00. No one can recall the content of this conversation, but it was a brief call in which the subject of shootdown authority was not discussed.232

At 10:39, the Vice President updated the Secretary on the air threat conference:

Vice President: There's been at least three instances here where we've had reports of aircraft approaching Washington-a couple were confirmed hijack. And, pursuant to the President's instructions I gave authorization for them to be taken out. Hello?
SecDef: Yes, I understand. Who did you give that direction to?

Vice President: It was passed from here through the [operations] center at the White House, from the [shelter].

SecDef: OK, let me ask the question here. Has that directive been transmitted to the aircraft?

Vice President: Yes, it has.

SecDef: So we've got a couple of aircraft up there that have those instructions at this present time?

Vice President: That is correct. And it's my understanding they've already taken a couple of aircraft out.

SecDef: We can't confirm that. We're told that one aircraft is down but we do not have a pilot report that did it.233

As this exchange shows, Secretary Rumsfeld was not in the NMCC when the shootdown order was first conveyed. He went from the parking lot to his office (where he spoke to the President), then to the Executive Support Center, where he participated in the White House video teleconference. He moved to the NMCC shortly before 10:30, in order to join Vice Chairman Myers. Secretary Rumsfeld told us he was just gaining situational awareness when he spoke with the Vice President at 10:39. His primary concern was ensuring that the pilots had a clear understanding of their rules of engagement.234

The Vice President was mistaken in his belief that shootdown authorization had been passed to the pilots flying at NORAD's direction. By 10:45 there was, however, another set of fighters circling Washington that had entirely different rules of engagement. These fighters, part of the 113th Wing of the District of Columbia Air National Guard, launched out of Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland in response to information passed to them by the Secret Service. The first of the Andrews fighters was airborne at 10:38.235

General David Wherley-the commander of the 113th Wing-reached out to the Secret Service after hearing secondhand reports that it wanted fighters airborne. A Secret Service agent had a phone in each ear, one connected to Wherley and the other to a fellow agent at the White House, relaying instructions that the White House agent said he was getting from the Vice President. The guidance for Wherley was to send up the aircraft, with orders to protect the White House and take out any aircraft that threatened the Capitol. General Wherley translated this in military terms to flying "weapons free"-that is, the decision to shoot rests in the cockpit, or in this case in the cockpit of the lead pilot. He passed these instructions to the pilots that launched at 10:42 and afterward.236

Thus, while the fighter pilots under NORAD direction who had scrambled out of Langley never received any type of engagement order, the Andrews pilots were operating weapons free-a permissive rule of engagement. The President and the Vice President indicated to us they had not been aware that fighters had been scrambled out of Andrews, at the request of the Secret Service and outside the military chain of command.237 There is no evidence that NORAD headquarters or military officials in the NMCC knew-during the morning of September 11-that the Andrews planes were airborne and operating under different rules of engagement.

What If?
NORAD officials have maintained consistently that had the passengers not caused United 93 to crash, the military would have prevented it from reaching Washington, D.C. That conclusion is based on a version of events that we now know is incorrect. The Langley fighters were not scrambled in response to United 93; NORAD did not have 47 minutes to intercept the flight; NORAD did not even know the plane was hijacked until after it had crashed. It is appropriate, therefore, to reconsider whether United 93 would have been intercepted.

Had it not crashed in Pennsylvania at 10:03, we estimate that United 93 could not have reached Washington any earlier than 10:13, and probably would have arrived before 10:23.There was only one set of fighters circling Washington during that time frame-the Langley F-16s.They were armed and under NORAD's control. After NEADS learned of the hijacking at 10:07, NORAD would have had from 6 to 16 minutes to locate the flight, receive authorization to shoot it down, and communicate the order to the pilots, who (in the same span) would have had to authenticate the order, intercept the flight, and execute the order.238

At that point in time, the Langley pilots did not know the threat they were facing, did not know where United 93 was located, and did not have shoot-down authorization.

First, the Langley pilots were never briefed about the reason they were scrambled. As the lead pilot explained, "I reverted to the Russian threat. ...I'm thinking cruise missile threat from the sea. You know you look down and see the Pentagon burning and I thought the bastards snuck one by us.. . . [Y]ou couldn't see any airplanes, and no one told us anything."The pilots knew their mission was to divert aircraft, but did not know that the threat came from hijacked airliners.239

Second, NEADS did not have accurate information on the location of United 93. Presumably FAA would have provided such information, but we do not know how long that would have taken, nor how long it would have taken NEADS to locate the target.

Third, NEADS needed orders to pass to the pilots. At 10:10, the pilots over Washington were emphatically told, "negative clearance to shoot." Shootdown authority was first communicated to NEADS at 10:31. It is possible that NORAD commanders would have ordered a shootdown in the absence of the authorization communicated by the Vice President, but given the gravity of the decision to shoot down a commercial airliner, and NORAD's caution that a mistake not be made, we view this possibility as unlikely.240

NORAD officials have maintained that they would have intercepted and shot down United 93.We are not so sure. We are sure that the nation owes a debt to the passengers of United 93.Their actions saved the lives of countless others, and may have saved either the Capitol or the White House from destruction.

The details of what happened on the morning of September 11 are complex, but they play out a simple theme. NORAD and the FAA were unprepared for the type of attacks launched against the United States on September 11, 2001.They struggled, under difficult circumstances, to improvise a homeland defense against an unprecedented challenge they had never before encountered and had never trained to meet.

At 10:02 that morning, an assistant to the mission crew commander at NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector in Rome, New York, was working with his colleagues on the floor of the command center. In a brief moment of reflection, he was recorded remarking that "This is a new type of war."241

He was, and is, right. But the conflict did not begin on 9/11. It had been publicly declared years earlier, most notably in a declaration faxed early in 1998 to an Arabic-language newspaper in London. Few Americans had noticed it. The fax had been sent from thousands of miles away by the followers of a Saudi exile gathered in one of the most remote and impoverished countries on earth.

Yes, we've all heard the BS Official story that was put out.  Several problems with it though.  The article you posted listed 19 hijackers.  All of the hijackers were killed in the crashes right?  Wrong.  Waleed al Sheri was supposed to have been one of the hijackers on American Flight 11, which crashed into the Towers.  How is that possible when he is alive and well in Casablanca, Morocco.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm)

But wait...theres more.  In an article you posted it stated that the military hadn't been notified in time and that fighters from langely weren't clear on their mission or orders.  Thats BS.  The Pentagon didn't know what was coming?? Please.  We can track missles from the other side of the world the very second they're launched, but we can't identify a passenger jet that has deviated from its flight plan and is manuvering very erratically after we had already been hit by at least one? 

Just those two "inaccuraices" or whatever you want to call them are enough to cast doubt over the entire story.  As far as

Quote from: kshillbillys on November 28, 2010, 01:46:38 AM
This shit that you people keep putting out there, the propaganda, is no worse than spitting into and slapping the faces of the families of and people that lost their lives that day and the Americans of this country. It makes me sick! You all say it's a coverup? One hell of one if that's true. The whole world is backing this "story", not the theorists. I mean, Usama bin Laden even knows what the hell happened that day. He's already took credit for it.----Jennifer

slapping the faces of the people that died that day and their families, let me tell you something.  For six years I wore the uniform of an 11B Infantry Soldier in the United States Army.  Proud to serve my country.  I don't want to spit in anyones face.  I want the TRUTH.  The dead and their families deserve the TRUTH.  And so far, they haven't got it.  I mean, C'mon.  Don't you think it is just a little odd that on the very morning of 9/11 NORAD and the Pentagon were wargamming this exact possibility?  Isn't just a little odd that Osama, who supposedly hate us, buys the same story that his worst enemy puts out?  If his goal is to cause unrest and disruption within our country don't you think he'd side with the "conspiritist" and lend even more creditability to their story and make our gov't look that much worse? 
Isn't just a little weird how a bunch of cave dewelling terrorists were able to orchestrate, fund, and pull off the biggest attack since Pearl Harbor haven't been able to attack again?  And it isn't because "we've been kicking their asses", because we haven't been doing a damn thing about the folks over here.  Shit..we won't even secure our own borders!! 
The whole world is backing this story??  You might want to do a little more research.

To many things don't add up. 

This little story was found on the same bbc website that you cited in your post, Varmit. Are you saying that this is impossible, that no one would've used someone else's passport? I suspect you didn't care to read it all or you wouldn't have brought it up.

Teresa, Information that I know makes sense but I'M TOO STUBBORN TO CHANGE MY MIND? I'M TOO STUBBORN? The information that makes sense has already been released unlike the crap you all are trying to shovel. Don't accuse of me of being too stubborn, when you all don't listen to reason or anything that the few of us disputing your "theoretical facts" are trying to say.


The FBI has said that the identities of some of its list of 19 hijackers behind last week's devastating attacks are in doubt.
It believes that some of the hijackers used false identities, possibly even names of people who are still alive, which could significantly complicate the manhunt.

In another development, US police arrested a man with the same name as a man with ties to suspected terrorist mastermind, Osama Bin Laden.

Nabil Al-Marabh, one of nearly 200 names on a wanted list drawn up by the Bureau, was detained just outside Chicago.

He was the original target of a raid on a house in Detroit, Michigan, where police instead found three men allegedly in possession of airport diagrams.

All three have been arrested and charged.



The FBI list of those wanted in relation to last week's devastating attacks includes suspects, possible associates of these suspects, and potential witnesses.




Fire destroyed the voice recorder from the Pentagon attack

At least two people being held as material witnesses to the attacks were brought before a federal judge in Manhattan on Thursday in a closed hearing, said law enforcement sources.

Officials say four people are being held as material witnesses, but have not confirmed whether all four appeared in court.

In a setback to the investigation, the FBI confirmed that the black box cockpit voice recorder from the Pentagon attack is too badly damaged to be of any use.

Arabic appeal

As part of the massive inquiry to track down suspects and their acquaintances, the FBI has appealed for the help of Arabic speakers in translating documents and communications.




Three men were arrested at this house near Detroit

Hundreds of people have reportedly responded to the appeal from the Detroit area, which has the country's highest concentration of Arab Americans.

"The Arabic-American community and others immediately overwhelmed our telephone switchboard," said FBI director Robert Mueller, expressing his thanks to a community which has reported numerous incidents of harassment since last week's attacks.

Farsi and Pashtu speakers are also being sought and computer software experts have been called in to work on encrypted messages.

It is thought that those who carried out the attacks used computers in public libraries to leave messages for each other either by e-mail or through pre-arranged websites.

American financial regulators also say they are pursuing leads into whether those behind the attacks may have used their inside knowledge to trade in shares in the airline, insurance and banking sectors, potentially making millions of dollars.

Confusion

But there is growing confusion as the bureau starts investigating the possibility that some of the suspected hijackers used fake identities of people who may still be alive.

Saudi Arabians are said to be outraged by the publication of names of citizens who they claim have since been located, and may have had their identity papers stolen.




President Bush has backed the Arab and Muslim communities

One of those named, Abdelaziz al-Omari, is believed to be a pilot who crashed a plane into the World Trade Center's North Tower.

But the Saudis say Mr al-Omari is alive and well and working as an electrical engineer. He says his passport was stolen in Denver, Colorado, in 1995.

Saudi officials have reportedly said it is possible that another three people whose names appear on the list are also alive.

Correspondents say that such revelations can only complicate the already immensely difficult task of establishing the background and connections of the attackers.

Government backing

The US Attorney-General, John Ashcroft - who is heading the main investigation - has said he believes certain unnamed foreign governments assisted those attackers.




The FBI has warned there could be more attacks

"It is pretty clear that the networks that conduct these kind of events are harboured, supported, sustained and protected by a variety of foreign governments," he said.

Mr Ashcroft has also disclosed that the authorities are looking into whether other flights - apart from the four that crashed last Tuesday - had been targeted for hijacking.

He said the FBI was investigating whether mechanical failure may have thwarted the hijacking of a fifth plane on the day of the attacks.

Agents are looking into an American Airlines flight which was due to leave Boston for Los Angeles on 11 September, but was cancelled at the last minute for technical reasons.

The FBI is particularly keen to trace a number of men with Arabic sounding names who are believed to have left the plane when the flight was cancelled, and failed to rebook their seats when it eventually went back into service.

The authorities also believe they may have foiled an attempt to hijack a United Airlines flight from San Antonio in Texas to Denver, Colorado.

Four men of Middle Eastern origin reportedly bought seats on the flight.

A Saudi medical student has been taken into custody and flown to New York for questioning, while three other men are being sought by detectives.

Two other Arabs were arrested on a train heading to San Antonio. The authorities say they were carrying hair dye, thousands of dollars in cash, and the type of knives believed to have been used by hijackers on the other flights.

Robert and Jarhead, I agree with you 1000%. I am disappointed that the Forum has gone down to such a low level.

Like I said earlier.. And I say it WITHOUT ranting and raving ....
You can't argue with people who refuse to see what is right before them..
Does it bother me that there are those of you don't agree? No... I believe differently than a lot  of you on lots of different issues.. so this is just one of those areas that I believe what I believe and you believe what you believe.

Frank.. as far as the forum "going to a low level?" That is your opinion.. and you are entitled to it..
I think it has brought forth some good debate and shown both sides of an issue.

And~~~for the record.. I have 19 personal messages in my inbox right now specifically to this subject.  14  agreeing with Varmit and Sail  ( I think I can add Warph in this) and myself.. and 4 disagreeing ) and one promising to do more research as he wasn't yet sure how he felt.
None of them wanted to post publicly.
All of them said that they enjoyed reading this thread.. No one was ranting and raving or mad or said anything derogatory about either side.  Sad that more people just won't stand up and say how they feel publicly. I'm afraid that is what is happening more and more. is the fear of standing up for your beliefs.
So Frank~~.. I don't think this thread or this forum has hit a low level.. Quite the contrary.. I think there are more people out there that want to know the real truth and enjoy reading and learning from those who take the time to do the research..
For those of you who want to.. continue to enjoy the forum... :)

I really enjoy reading the different opinions, but I don't have enough knowledge of the subject to post.

I guess I sure wasted my time.  >:(

Quote from: sixdogsmom on November 24, 2010, 06:44:03 PM
I must agree that we have/had no business in Iraq or Afghanistan. It is obvious that it is a money driven operation, (can you say big oil?). As far as the truthers are concerned, I must agree that this whole theory is a bit far-fetched. But I am just a left leaning liberal here in the Kansas flint hills.   HHmmmpphh, never thought I would be agreeing with Robert, you never know do yah?  ;D ;D

How does being in iraq and/or Afghanistan benefit big oil??????????????????????????????

Good question, Frawin. 

I'd like to see the answer for that one...

Red and Frank, Might I suggest that you both Google "The War In Iraq And Big Oil"? You will see dozens of articles; most avering that Big Oil is the winner in Iraq.

Actually I did read it.  And it is precisely the fact that the FBI cannot say for sure who the hijackers are that lends doubt to their ability to pin 9/11 on al quadea and osama bin laden.  I mean, I can take credit for the Kennedy assasination, doesn't mean I did it.  You say that the evidene presented by me and others doesn't make sense.  Well, we think the same way about the gov'ts story.  Just a few things that don't make sense...

1.  Fighter jets (very few) scrambled to protect the white house and pentagon that a) go in the wrong direction b) supposedely are unclear of their mission c)  cannot locate a target

2.  The Pentagon and the White house, both protected by some of the most advanced radar on the planet cannot locate a passenger jet

3.  That our gov't, who cannot decide wether or not to buy toilet paper without a 6 month committee, spends more on the "clintongate" investigation than on the investigation covering the biggest attack since pearl harbor

4.  The Secert Service after leaning of the second tower impact allows the president to stay at an unsecured location

5.  Bush admits to seeing the first tower impact on television when in fact no such footage was released until the following day

6.  NORAD and the WTC security just happened to be war gaming the possibility of terrorists using passenger jets on the very day the event occured

7.  And this one I haven't researched that well but, William Cooper was shot outside his home, by Eager County police, just 2 months after predicting 9/11

If you don't like the evidence presented by Loose Change or Alex Jones watch the Esoteric Agenda.  Either way all I'm saying is that we should be willing to keep an open mind and consider different alternatives and decide for ourselves.  The hardest thing we will ever do is question our own core belifes and ask ourselves why we believe them. 

SDM, you need to read all of the articles, not just the ones from the liberal left. Big Oil Companies are the only ones with the resources and expertise to develop the oil fields. Big oil companies have developed nearly all of the worlds oil.  If the Iraqi oil fields were not developed at all the big oil companies would benefit more from the higher world oil prices that would come. Exxon and others know if they don't do it, the Russians, Chinese and others eventually would and then we would be buying it from them. Just because Exxon develops the fields it doesn't mean they will get the oil for nothing, they will still have to buy it at the market price. They will get a portion of the oil or equal monetary value for the investment of producing the fields. America has had the cheapest and the most plentiful supplies of energy in the world and it is because the Big American Oil companies took the risk and developed the worlds oil. Who would you have do it, Chrysler or GMC who don't have enough capital  to stay in business. Do you have any idea how much capital it takes to develop fields like Iraq and other Middle Eastern fields and how long it takes to get a return on your money.

But, Frank; may I remind you that we were told that the reason we were entering Iraq was because of the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Oil was not in the equation according to the Bush/Cheney administration.

Hey, speaking of WMD's...where did they all go? 

Varmit,
My guess would be Bekaa Valley in Lebanon but who really knows. After all we gave that worm a good years warning and a lot can be hid in a year or carted off to another country

I won't disagree with you there Jarhead, but that is not what we were told.  The American people were told that we invaded iraq because saddam had WMD's.  Not that he was hiding them or had moved them, but that he without a doubt had them.  An outrigh lie.  Now you would think that with the tech. that we have (satillites able to read car license plate numbers etc) you'd think that we'd be able to tell if he was moving them.  More importantly, you'd think that we'd use that tech. to confirm reports that he had them in the first place.  Kinda makes one wonder what else the gov't lied about...

Teresa, I have a great amount of respect for you , your intelligence and your tenacity in checking things out, but I think this subject looks like an elaborate story put together by Obama and his group of henchmen to get Obama elected again in 2012. He is running scared and they will stoop to any level and this just might be what it takes.

Quote from: sixdogsmom on November 28, 2010, 08:20:16 PM
But, Frank; may I remind you that we were told that the reason we were entering Iraq was because of the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Oil was not in the equation according to the Bush/Cheney administration.

Is that some diversionary tactic or what, I don't see what that has to do with what my comments were about the oil production. I certainly never indicated we went into Iraq for the oil.

I've decided to make one more post to this forum.  It has been an interesting look at the public debate from a more personal perspective than I am used to, and frankly it has left me pretty disgusted.

You can continue eternally to debate the multiplicity of details concerning 9/11 and the resulting wars - for truly they would not have been possible without the "pearl harbor effect" of 9/11 - but it boils down to one thing, whoever brought down WTC7 is responsible for 9/11.  You'd have to be pretty naive to believe Osama Bin Laden (trained by the CIA lest anyone forget), and his crew of Islamic extremists were responsible.  Give it up and stop wasting time while the real perps get away with it.

What really disgusts me however, is the way the majority of American's can justify, or deny the need to justify, the continuing slaughter of innocent men women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The only conceivable justification is the "eye for an eye" of some sort of demented revenge for the loss of innocent American lives on 9/11.  So let's examine the facts of that.

IF 9/11 was solely the result of an attack by Muslim extremists they were Saudi Arabian, not Iraqis, or Afghans.  So the connection must be that they are all "rag heads" i.e. Muslims. And the thinking then is that the death of 3,000 innocent Christian Americans must be avenged by the death of innocent Muslims.

What would be a fair exchange in an eye for an eye?  3,000 innocent Muslims?  Would that be enough to sate the American indignant need for justice - or revenge?

Well, in Iraq alone, as of 2006, the estimated number of innocent deaths, according to the Lancet, one of the oldest scientific medical journals in the world, in the second of two peer reviewed reports, was 654,965.  Four years later I'm certain the number is much higher.

That would mean that for each eye America lost on 9/11 it has taken over 200,000 in return.  I think even Moses would have considered that excessive.

What difference does it make whether we entered the war because of the threat of WMDs, or for oil, or to control the middle east on behalf of Israel, or to rid the world of Saddam Hussein, any other reason.  The fact is America has a lot of innocent blood on its hands.  Too much blood for a so called Christian nation.  Too much blood for people who consider themselves to be the purveyors of peace and freedom to the rest of the world.

If you are not ashamed of America, then I am ashamed of you.  I find it utterly disgusting.

Quote from: Sailmexico on November 29, 2010, 11:24:57 AM

That would mean that for each eye America lost on 9/11 it has taken over 200,000 in return.  I think even Moses would have considered that excessive.

It was not moses who said an eye for an eye.  Try Hammurabi He wrote that law long before Moses came along, and that law was not a law that exacted an eye for an eye. It was a limitation law which limited an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.  Which ment you could not ask for their head if you just lost an eye....

QuoteThe fact is America has a lot of innocent blood on its hands.  Too much blood for a so called Christian nation.  Too much blood for people who consider themselves to be the purveyors of peace and freedom to the rest of the world.

If you are not ashamed of America, then I am ashamed of you.  I find it utterly disgusting.

IF your so ashamed of America, why are you here?  Go somewhere you can be proud of.   Goodbye, don't let the doorknob embed itself in your ass as you leave.

I've been reading..........I find interesting posts on both sides.

OMG you are correct comrade srkruzich!!  How could I show disrespect for the motherland?  I promise I will never again look at the facts, or criticize Amerika, the homeland.  Please please let me stay in our wonderful country.

I am literally amazed by the amount of posts in this thread.........I read it when it started and thought this wont get any response but then it took off like a house afire!

I think 9-11 happened not because of any government conspiracy as such but as a result of the ungodly amount of arrogance HELD by that government...That nobody would DARE do such a thing here......

Jesse Ventura????? Are you guys serious?? I watched that show out of curiosity when it first came on.....much ado about nothing was my conclusion.....takes a little bit of info.....talks to a couple of "conspiracy experts" and leaves a WHOLE LOT up to the imagination of the viewer....which means if you see the boogeyman he's gonna be there.

The Truth is ALWAYS somewhere in the middle

The truth is always somewhere in the middle?  Like... "Who is the father of your child Mary?"  "Ahhhh... they both got me pregnant?" 

What is the answer to the question who imploded WTC7? 

The truth is in the middle? 

The truth is WTC7 was never hit by an airplane. 

The truth is it fell in 6.5 seconds. 

The truth is even NIST's lead technical investigator, Shyam Sunder, stated in the WTC 7 technical briefing that free fall could only happen when an object "has no structural components below it."[ii] The only way for a building to have no structural components below it is to remove the lower structural components with an external force such as explosives.  If the upper part of a building is crushing its lower structural components, in other words, doing the work of removing them, not all of its energy will be converted into motion and its descent will not be free fall. 

The truth is NIST in its final report issued in November 2008 did finally acknowledge that Building 7 descended at free fall.  According to NIST, "This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories, or 32.0 meters (105 ft), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s [a period of 2.25 seconds]."[v] However, NIST did not attempt to explain how Building 7's free fall descent could have occurred.

This is a tacit admission by NIST that World Trade Center #7 was demolished using external force, such as explosives.

This is not debatable.  It is a the truth. 

WTC7 is the "white crow".

One man argues that all crows are black.  A man says, "I'm sorry but you are wrong about that."; and he produces a white crow to prove that all crows are not black.  Is the truth somewhere in the middle?  Either all crows are black or they are not. 

Either Muslim student pilot highjackers brought down the three World Trade Center buildings... or they did not!  If they did not, then who did?  That is the question, and it deserves a REAL investigation.  Not a bogus governmental cover up.

All truth is NOT somewhere in the middle.

If you want to know about someone, look at their history.

If a person is on trial for murder and the prosecution presents to the jury a copy of a prior plan for a different murder written by the accused; would it be meaningful?

Would the prior murder plan of the accused still be meaningful even though it was never carried out?  Probably.

Why would it matter?  Because it would indicate to the jury that the man was capable of murder, or at least the contemplation of it.

Operation Northwoods was a covert plan of the U.S. government in the 60's for a false flag operation intended to encourage the support of Americans for a war with Cuba. It involved the sacrifice of innocent American citizens.

Was it a serious plan? Well the plan was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed by Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer and sent to the Secretary of Defense. Although part of the U.S. government's Cuban Project anti-communist initiative, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted and the proposals included in the plan were never executed.

This is an excerpt from section 8 of the plan:
 
a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

The drone was to be flown over Cuban airspace and shot down.  The shootdown was to be blamed on the Cuban government.  Sound familiar?

The CIA and FBI have been creating fake identities for years.  The FBI/CIA are busy now creating fictitious identities that they will need 30 years from now, complete with totally made up backgrounds right down to pictures in high school year books.

The families of the victims of 9/11, so many of whom are demanding a real investigation, are all members of the families of those who died in the buildings... not the airplanes.  Oddly the families of the passengers have been totally silent.  Not a peep out of them.

Perhaps there were no passengers.  Perhaps they were - to quote from Operation Northwoods "carefully prepared aliases". 

You think it sounds absurd?  Well so does Operation Northwoods.  But Operation Northwoods is a fact of history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods)

Knowing our government is capable of such a thing should make us more wary, and more demanding of a real investigation.  Why is there such resistance to an investigation if there is nothing to hide?

Mr Sail. Nobody in the fire service ever said Building 7 was hit by a plane. It was heavily damaged by debris from the outer columns and skeleton of the towers when they fell.  A many story gouge was taken out on one side and it became very unstable after a period of time. One of the main supporting columns was severely damaged. It started creaking and groaning and the fire fighters who were still in it fighting the fires and nearby looking for survivors were eventually pulled back. A safety zone for collapse, as is commonly done, had been established. Because the building didn't look quite vertical, they set up equipment to make sure if it lost any more vertical they would know. It didn't "implode", it collapsed.There are plenty of photos if you just look for them.
Keep in mind nobody knew for sure that the incident was over. They didn't know if anything else, more air attacks, subway bombing, bridge bombing were yet to come. Remember seeing the pictures of the thousands of people walking across the bridges going home? And the boats, ferries, etc. picking up people to get them away from lower Manhattan? People were very worried that there might be secondary attacks. Even an old out of service antique fire boat was put back in service again in a hurry.
 Keep in mind NYFD had been devastated. Officers and entire companies had been wiped out and the remaining fire fighters wouldn't leave the pile.  Fire companies from all over the country, especially here on the east coast, went to help and were used. That included a number of my people who went up that day, stayed for several days, came home and then went back.  A few had friends and relatives to stay with and were given leave from work to help. Over and over that happened for many months. My guys were right there, on the pile, when much of the secondary stuff happened. Now building 6, with only a few floors, was also deemed to be becoming unstable.They decided to take it down too. Explosives, as with Building 7 were considered, but the city decided not to risk any more lives setting the charges so they cabled and pulled it down using construction cranes. Why didn't your "sources" know that? Where are all these people demanding investigations? Except for some first responder health issues, to my knowledge the lawyers long ago settled  all the insurance claims, including people who "died' elsewhere and weren't even there!
 Now, as far as the killing of innocent people? That cuts both ways. War always takes innocent lives, its a terrible thing .But we are talking about terrorists! "They" have killed hostages for many years."They'' ran children across mine fields to clear them during the Iraq/ Iran war. As a culture "they'' treat women very poorly, or are allowed to. People here aren't going to take that lightly. They just don't seem to hold life in as high regard as we think we do. I know some very nice Muslims who came here to get away from all that and as professionals and academics they do well here. I feel very badly for them. Many of them back home can't rise up against the terrorists because they are scared to death. Many of the people live in poverty and terrorism, or the appearance of it pays very well. Families are promised huge improvements in their lifestyles.  Widows are promised life long care. I do hope we can get out of there soon. By the way ,your Northwoods post has already been posted before. The salient point being...it didn't happen! It wasn't accepted. We are always going to have and need spies! We need to have something going for us, not just the enemy

  Dont bite ME sailmexico.........I generally keep my thoughts about what the government may or may not be guilty of to myself. I keep my own counsel on such things.
  I've already read all your posts...all varmits posts and alll Dianes posts.....so stand down soldier.

Diane sincerely hopes she is finished!  ;D  I think I am and then someones comes out with something and I just feel I have to comment. As years go by it is easier and easier for the conspiracy folks to find followers. Memories do fade when the only information people ever had was what they saw on TV or read in the papers. It's easy to for someone who has an axe to grind to create people who don't exist and never did and to have people who weren't ever there talk about things that never happened, especially if there is money involved. The people of New York are tough. Life goes on.
Now, the PA plane is something else. There is some possibility that it might  have been shot down by scrambled jets, but that would be classified if it were true. There are also other explanations that are also plausible, including the existing story as released.

"They" killed innocents...."They" marched children across minefields..."They" don't regard human life as much as we do....yeaaah, I'm wondering if anyone fom east Timor would agree with you on that one?

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Asia/GenocideEastTimor_Z.html (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Asia/GenocideEastTimor_Z.html)

Seeing as how it was "We" not "they" that supplied the weapons and funds to Indnesia to use against civilians.  Also, you might want to see what the sanctions placed against iraq did to the iraqi people (1.5 million dead), and remember we were the biggest pusher of the sanctions.  Now, you might say that the sanctions were a product of war, but the bombing of baby food factories sure as hell isn't. Neither is the bombing and destruction of food warehouses and storage facilities or water purification plants.  Those are not military targets and only serve to cripple and harm the civilian population.

Diane, we do not see eye to eye on many issues but you are absolutely right and I am glad you were on here sticking up for the brave men and women, the firefighters and boys in blue. I do get very pissed off about this subject. This is something that I was damn sure old enough to witness and understand, although on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, I was in my truck heading to Tulsa as it happened, listening to my radio, when all the music on every station I could find was gone. What came across the radio was news. At first there was a report of a plane crashing into the WTC and I thought maybe it was foggy, maybe something was wrong with the plane. And no one seemed to know what had happened. And I remembered watching on the history channel of an old plane crashing into the empire state building. And as I listened to them report the news about this and discussing it, they were talking it may have been a hijacking. And then a report comes on there that a 2nd plane has hit the other tower, which left no doubt in anyones minds that it was not a freak accident. By the time I got to Port 33 at Inola, which is east of Tulsa, there was a line of trucks waiting to get dumped. No one was working the probe shack. I walked up there to see what was going on and in there they had drug out an old TV and was watching the news. And this is where it gets interesting. Varmit stated that picures of  the 1st plane flying into the WTC were not released until the following day, and yet it had only been around 3 hours, give or take, and we were all sitting there watching the first plane and then the second plane, fly straight into the WTC.  The skies of Tulsa came to a stand still, there were jets everywhere. There were military jets too. And military helicopters, I don't know why they were there but they were military. I then headed home to be with my family. Now in the future on other posts, can we go back to hating each others' comments? But on this one, we agree. Now i've gotta go wash my mouth out with soap.----Robert

Yes, I knew I had seen tape of the first jet too, later the same day, but it wasn't worth arguing about that also.There were a number of tourist photos and tapes etc. released the next day. One of the things I have a hard time with, maybe it was just how I was raised, but I remember clearly some events only having a certain amount of information released and much   remained"classified."Sometimes that meant still under investigation sometimes not. Nobody questioned it. Everyone assumed it was for security as was common during WWII. Now if every gritty, nasty, visually disgusting or disturbing photo isn't released to the public, somebody yells conspiracy, what are "they" hiding. Are we really that desensitized? Has TV turned us into a pack of vultures? I wouldn't want the body of my loved one shown that way.  Many know that the FDNY Chaplin, father Mychal Judge died on 911 but how many know or remember how? Yes, there are a few photos but they are not bad, just sad.. As far as your last comment...no comment. ;D

One more post and I'm done with this. 

For the record, NO ONE is putting down the NYFD, or NYPD, or any of the folks that lost their lives that day.  What we are doing is questioning the bullshit story put out by our gov't and mainstream media.  Both of which have proven themselves to be inept and corrupt.  If asking questions makes me "desensitized" or anti-american or whatever, then I say so be it.  I'd rather know the truth.

Wow!  Everyone has had much to say.  There are a some things I hope all sides will consider.

The false dichotomy here appears to boil down to a group who staunchly defends their government to a fault and another who questions their government without end.  MRSc2u said the truth lies somewhere in the middle.  Let me suggest that REALITY lies somewhere other than at the extremes.

The outcomes of centuries of history make clear three things:

1.  There are always those in powerful positions who will employ their power for personal, if not evil, ends.  Sometimes with a sincerely held  belief that they are 'doing good.'
2.  If not for less informed and/or deceived masses, the powerful would have nothing over which to wield their powers negatively.
3.  There are always those among the masses who see the errors of the powerful well in advance of the masses themselves.  There is usually a prophet.

Life experience makes clear a fourth & fifth:

4.  There will always be lunatics who see ghosts under every bed they've ever slept in.
5.  There will always be some who believe that 'it can never happen here'.

The world today, including the USA, are not exempt from these realities.  Humans are humans, no matter where they live.  The only real difference in the outcomes of their motivations is in scale & effect.  Aboriginal tribes have much less influence on global issues than do western Europeans.  Congo tribes less than North Americans.

Let me admonish all to hold to reason.

For those who would be hypercritical of our government, remember that America, overall, has produced more wealth & liberty for the individual than any other nation or empire in history.  Yes, a questioning electorate was the final check and balance in the vision of our founders.  Tread carefully!  Know too, that influences outside the halls of government do exist. They, too, have power to wield. Listen carefully to all your words, and beware that you don't give the impression of being lunatics who see ghosts under every bed you've ever slept in.  For in doing so, you may lose the very audience you seek to enjoin.

For those who refuse to consider that our leaders & institutions would deceive the masses, do not believe we are immune to the outcomes & truths of history.  No human (or human run institution) is without flaw and fault.  Remember the well documented cases (as proven by our government's own declassified records) when government has acted in its' own interests and harmed those it was to protect in the process.  It can and has happened here!  Remember well, that the very founding of the institutions you defend were born out of distrust of & revolt against other institutions.  Beware lest you be seen as blind & foolish just as your opponents seem headstrong & unpatriotic.

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."
 --  Thomas Jefferson

Sadly, humans do not always debate based on fact & logic.  Emotion & emotional attachments too often become the basis of the debate.  This is true of those on all sides of an issue.  Let us adhere to reason & reasonableness on all sides and in all things.

To the logical questioners among you, have compassion.  To the trusting faithful among you, have reason.

To all sides, remember you could be, at least in part, both right and wrong.

Quote4.  There will always be lunatics who see ghosts under every bed they've ever slept in.
5.  There will always be some who believe that 'it can never happen here'.

Those are the two to worry about

Maybe the wikileaks guy will release the "smoking gun" in one of his "leaks"........ ;)

Myself......I think there are pressing matters to keep an eye on in the PRESENT.........some of THEM could still be stopped or changed.......9-11 can never be any different than it was.

I understand that nobody is intentionally trying to put down NYFD,but  you are when you don't believe what my friends who were there, live, and were part of what went on with building 6 and 7, and worked the pile for many weeks, off and on, and helped recover bodies, told me and I shared with you. I have a Newark firefighter friend who in his real life is an accountant specializing in turning around failing businesses who would have been in tower one had the whole thing happened just a little later. Shall I tell him you are calling him a liar?  Do I think this kind of thing could happen again? Of course! That's why the fire service takes all the WMD, Incident Command, Local and Foreign Terrorist Training that we do.  over and over and over again. and more is added as new potentials  are discovered. Heck, I've even had Geiger counter and dosimeter training.
As far as "defending the Gov't", leave it to you to put in those terms. We see ourselves as  defending and serving the public no matter who did it. Could it have been? Sure, but it wasn't. Remember the fire service went through every scrap looking for their friends and the bodies of the public. Those deep fires down in the pits burned for many days before the cranes helped pull it apart so it could eventually  be extinguished for good. The Fire Marshals ,who  are experts in arson cases were there too looking for any evidence of any kind. After it was decided that there could be no more survivors, the trucks hauled rubble over to Fresh Kills land fill and everything down to the last scrap was gone over again.They found bones and rings and all sorts of personal effects. As far as the building falling from prewired explosives, I have yet to see any real proof that it happened. NoThermite of any kind was found anywhere, but considering it's made from simple materials I can see where some of the materials separately could easily have been found. Firefighters did go down into the lower levels and the subways as would be a normal assignment to start clearing the public and checking for fire or problems. By radio they did not report anything suspicious or wiring or anything thing else that wasn't normal.There were mistakes made that day but missing explosives wasn't one of them.
 Go find some footage of buildings that were intentionally taken down. Watch exactly how the building falls. Not the same at all. There were some mistakes made that day ,some which changed the NYFD's dispatch procedures. They followed the standard preplan for the towers not realizing the frailty of the building design when hit by much larger planes carrying much more fuel than were around when the buildings were designed back in the 60's. I don't know what more I can say, so I won't. You will believe forever that the firefighters and the Fire Marshals and Police officers and the design engineers, construction workers and crane operators and all the other specialties that were needed there lied and that hurts terribly.So be it.

Quote from: thats MRSc2u on November 30, 2010, 09:51:37 AM
Myself......I think there are pressing matters to keep an eye on in the PRESENT.........some of THEM could still be stopped or changed.......9-11 can never be any different than it was.

Couldn't agree more MRSc2u, read my thread regarding a coup. 
I read Diane's last post, and I think, "God knows, I tried.  Oh... is that a violin I hear above the sounds of the crackling fires?"
I think I'll head to one of the vomitoria  now before the crowds start to leave.

So Patriot, you don't think it could ever happen again, so we're wasting our time with all the training to respond? Interesting. So right now in the here and now we have nothing to worry about...even more interesting.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 30, 2010, 01:16:50 PM
So Patriot, you don't think it could ever happen again, so we're wasting our time with all the training to respond? Interesting. So right now in the here and now we have nothing to worry about...even more interesting.

Wrong again, Diane.  I addressed nothing of the kind.  Said nothing about the potential for future disasters nor the training of any emergency responders.  What I addressed was the futility of incessant rumination of emotional defenses/debates on either side of matters about historical events and the self limiting positions people sometimes take.  I addressed the narrow issues to which you and others sometimes limit themselves.  Jeeze, learn to read for context & overall meaning, will ya?  Its' not always about you or your little corner of the globe.

With respect to the 'here and now" there are some current events/issues/decisions of historical magnitude that need to be dealt with in this country.  Issues that could well dwarf first responder's training programs. Issues that go to the very core of our republic's continued viability.  I'm sorry if fire department training programs don't rise to that level of historical importance. 

As to what I 'think'... at the moment, I opine that your world view & reaction to myself & others here seems akin to that of Chicken Little... limited in scope, absent consideration given to viable alternatives, lacking depth & given to overblown expressions of self-importance.

So then what did you mean with "God knows I tried?"I did not start the business about 911 and the building not collapsing. I just responded because I am very familiar with the subject. There is no real proof that anybody but the terrorists did anything. When you are ill do you go to a Doctor or Glen Beck?  ;) That's OK, Truthers have to hate anybody with a different view...it's in the Handbook. ;D They aren't allowed to listen to anybody except other Truthers and must bash anyone with an original thought, so you are right up to form. If you don't have a group to hang out with ya get kicked out. They also cannot allow themselves to ever be proven wrong about anything. :P Their psyche can't stand it and they get really mad and attack in as mean a way as possible . You'll get extra points for cutting on me so enjoy it. It doesn't bother me in the least. ;D ;D ;D By the way, certainly not everything is about me or here, 911 WAS. All four planes went down within two hours of here in three different directions. North, west and south west.You still haven't figured out where I live. 8)

Quote from: Patriot on November 30, 2010, 02:00:08 PM

As to what I 'think'... at the moment, I opine that your world view & reaction to myself & others here seems akin to that of Chicken Little... limited in scope, absent consideration given to viable alternatives, lacking depth & given to overblown expressions of self-importance.

Hmmmm..... you might have a good point on this last paragraph, Patriot.  

Lets try this one on for size.
 
Are we safer now than we were on 9/11?  It sounds like a simple question, amenable to an answer or at least a serious conversation... and I like simple.  We are so polarized in America these days that it almost seems more difficult to tell now than it was in the immediate aftermath of the attacks.  Let me try and answer the question as fairly as I know how.

So of course we are safer.  

During the 1990s, al-Qaeda ran training camps through which as many as 20,000 fighters may have passed.  It was able to operate successfully during that decade and into the next because most governments treated the group as an annoyance rather than a major national-security challenge.  After the attacks, the world's attitude changed dramatically, and the series of security measures instituted since then have proved effective.  Take one example: sealing cockpit doors has made it highly unlikely that an airplane could ever again be used as a missile.  In addition, U.S. forces went on the offensive in Afghanistan, toppling the regime that supported al-Qaeda, destroying its camps and chasing its recruits around the mountains of the region.  Washington, in partnership with other governments, has tracked the communications, travel and...most important.... money that fuels terrorism operations... blocking these at every turn.   I continue to believe, the Bush administration deserves credit for these measures.   Whatever one may think of its subsequent decisions, its policies to secure the homeland and go after al-Qaeda in 2001 and 2002 were mostly smart and successful.

As much as it pains me to admit this.... Obuma's decision to amp up the campaign against al-Qaeda in Pakistan has further fractured the group.  As a result, al-Qaeda "central".... Osama bin Laden and his gang... has been whittled down to about 400 fighters.  It has been unable to execute large-scale attacks of the kind that were at the core of its strategy....to hit high-value American targets that held military or political symbolism.  Instead, the terrorist attacks after 9/11 have been launched by smaller local groups, self-identified as affiliates of al-Qaeda, against much easier sites.... the nightclub in Bali; cafes in Casablanca and Istanbul; hotels in Amman, Jordan; train stations in Madrid, Tokyo and London.  The fatal problem with these kinds of attacks is that they kill ordinary civilians.... not U.S. soldiers or diplomats... and turn the local population against Islamic radicals.

The real threat of al-Qaeda was that it would inspire some percentage of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims, sending out unstoppable waves of jihadis.  It didn't work.  In fact, according to stats from State... across the Muslim world, militant Islam's appeal has plunged.  In the half of the Muslim world that holds elections, parties that are in any way associated with Islamic jihad tend to fare miserably, even in Pakistan, which has the most serious terrorism problem of any country today.  Imagine that.  Over the past couple of years, imams and muslim leaders across the world have been denouncing suicide bombings, terrorism and al-Qaeda with regularity.  But for some reason, you do not hear of this through the American media.    The American media.... MSM... hmmmm... I wonder why?  (Tongue in cheek).

Of course, we are not 100 percent safe... nor will we ever be.  Case in point: The 19 yr. old college student that wanted to kill 10.000 people in Portland, OR.  Open societies and modern technology combine to create a permanent danger.... small groups of people can do terrible things... tho' I imagine it would be tough to do terrorism in North Korea.  We could make ourselves much safer still, but that would mean many, many more restrictions on our freedoms to move, congregate, associate and communicate.  

So the legitimate question now is: Have we gone too far?  Has Obuma's vast expansion in governmental powers and bureaucracies... layered on top of the already enormous military-industrial complex of the Cold War.... warranted?  Does an organization that has as few as 400 members and waning global appeal require the permanent institutional response we have created?   Believe it or not... I've been pondering this for some time now.  During the Bush years there was a reluctance on the left to acknowledge that the administration could have done anything worthwhile to counter terrorism.  I have started to think the far greater problem is on the far-right... why?.. because where it has become an article of faith that we are gravely threatened by vast swarms of Islamic terrorists, some within this country.  This campaign to spread a sense of imminent danger has fueled a climate of fear and anger.  It has created suspicions about U.S. Muslims who are more assimilated than in any other country in the world.  Ironically, this is precisely the intent of terrorism, wouldn't you say?  My opinion anyway.

Hell, I really believe that Bin Laden knew he could never weaken America directly, even if he blew up a dozen buildings or ships here in the United States.  But, he probably knew he could provoke an overreaction by which America weakened itself.  And that, sport fans, is what has happened.

Well, shut my mouth wide open..not bad, not bad at all.

Thanks WARPH. Great analysis.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 30, 2010, 02:38:50 PM
So then what did you mean with "God knows I tried?"I did not start the business about 911 and the building not collapsing. I just responded because I am very familiar with the subject. There is no real proof that anybody but the terrorists did anything. When you are ill do you go to a Doctor or Glen Beck?  ;) That's OK, Truthers have to hate anybody with a different view...it's in the Handbook. ;D They aren't allowed to listen to anybody except other Truthers and must bash anyone with an original thought, so you are right up to form. If you don't have a group to hang out with ya get kicked out. They also cannot allow themselves to ever be proven wrong about anything. :P Their psyche can't stand it and they get really mad and attack in as mean a way as possible . You'll get extra points for cutting on me so enjoy it. It doesn't bother me in the least. ;D ;D ;D By the way, certainly not everything is about me or here, 911 WAS. All four planes went down within two hours of here in three different directions. North, west and south west.You still haven't figured out where I live. 8)

Seriously??   You can sit back on your sanctimonious throne and actually have the gall to say all that? I HAVE NEVER HATED anyone who disagreed with me.. nor do I imagine anyone else in this forum on the "Truthers" side has.  >:(
You know Diane.. I have sat in this forum for the past year or so.. biting my tongue..*as LOTS of people have been doing* listening to you blow and go on how important and smart you are....and how no one will ever know where you stand because you just like the debate yada yada yada.. Debate is one thing.. but seems what you also seem to like is stirring the pot..and when someone says one little thing against you or what you have posted.. then it's ALL about you! Everything is always ALL ABOUT YOU!~~you pitch your tantrums calling fowl play... and putting on the big poor me theatrics....  crybaby whining threatening to not say another word.. ( which most of us hold our breath in hopeful anticipation) but like most Narcissists.. you are right back making sure every topic has your first hand experience written all over it. It doesn't matter what is being said..  YOU have done it.. YOU have seen it.. You have been there.  YOU will in one way or another up everyone and make sure that we all know that you have done it better.  Have you always held the title Miss Know It All Diane..?

Do you realize that you negatively judge people for things that you do the exact same thing?  

Take the statement..." they also cannot allow themselves to ever be proven wrong about anything"  :o WHAT??  
Good Lord Diane.. you need to step back and take a good hard long look in the mirror! Talk about calling the kettle black..
I actually sometimes feel sorry for you.. You seem to be dealing with some pretty emotional deep insecurities. You always have to be the center of attention.. always have to be right.. always have to have the last say and have to try to prove ( maybe to yourself..) that you are the expert  on every single subject that is talked about in here.

I have been more than a little frustrated and at my wits end with this thread I admit.. but like I said in my earlier post...
I believe one way.. others believe another way..  That's just the way it is.  Am I disgusted and tired of the whole thing? You betcha.. and that is precisely why I haven't said or debated anymore in here.  It is futile.. No one's minds are going to be changed..and if everyone is ok with what they believe.. then great.. I know I am.
The thread had run its course and I think everyone probably had agreed..  But you just can't stand it... In this thread..you actually had a few people agree with you. It excited you so much you did 5 triple back flips and thought you had been picked most popular girl in school and decided to  go ahead and take it to the next level of being able to be catty and hateful and still have your "following"...

Lets get one thing straight lady ( and I use that term very very lightly when speaking to you right now) ..
I am not mad at anything anyone SAID about 9-11..What I am..is  I AM totally pissed off at YOU and what you said in that last paragraph that you spouted off in.
How dare you!!  None of those things needed to be said! They were not anything to do with debate that you say you so love to do.. They are only your negative shit stirring opinions..
You throw that kind of crap out hoping that someone will grab the bait..
( which I did) and when its grabbed and acted on...then you will suddenly become the victim and once again. start whining and running around telling everyone how you're being picked on.. Then~~as fast it starts..the tears and self pity dries up like a fart in the wind and you gaily and happily announce how it doesn't bother you in the least.. Its almost like there's mental instability there.. and its kinda creepy actually.
Finally~~
It makes me so mad at myself that I have allowed you to finally get to me.. I've kept others calm all year long.. and now .. I have not done what I always advocate doing in this forum.... and that is ignore and walk away. Instead of retreating.. I reloaded..and fired..
For that , I apologize to the other members of this forum..

Quote from: Warph on November 30, 2010, 03:15:49 PM

Hell, I really believe that Bin Laden knew he could never weaken America directly, even if he blew up a dozen buildings or ships here in the United States.  But, he probably knew he could provoke an overreaction by which America weakened itself.  And that, sport fans, is what has happened.

Bingo!  Not to mention that very overreaction, subsequent division & weakening  may be clouding our vision as to present internal political activities/hasty governmental expansions that could result in a collapse of the Republic that we all probably prefer to the alternatives.  Remember all the empires that have come and gone before us.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 30, 2010, 02:38:50 PM
So then what did you mean with "God knows I tried?"

I had tried to point out that it really isn't about 9/11.  It's about the radical present divisions & emotional knee jerking that 9/11 has wrought.  But your immediate return to the myopic vision about responder training, shows that you missed my point completely.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 30, 2010, 02:38:50 PM
I did not start the business about 911 and the building not collapsing. I just responded because I am very familiar with the subject. There is no real proof that anybody but the terrorists did anything. When you are ill do you go to a Doctor or Glen Beck?  ;) That's OK, Truthers have to hate anybody with a different view...it's in the Handbook. ;D They aren't allowed to listen to anybody except other Truthers and must bash anyone with an original thought, so you are right up to form. If you don't have a group to hang out with ya get kicked out. They also cannot allow themselves to ever be proven wrong about anything. :P

And you're still missing the point.  BTW, your so far down the totem pole your familiarity with the 911 subject is no more or less valid than that of anyone else in this chicken coop. Remember my earlier observation about overblown expressions of self-importance?

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 30, 2010, 02:38:50 PM
Their psyche can't stand it and they get really mad and attack in as mean a way as possible . You'll get extra points for cutting on me so enjoy it. It doesn't bother me in the least. ;D ;D ;D

Don't flatter yourself.  1)  I don't need validation from anyone on this forum.  I'm a tad more secure than that.  2)  If it doesn't bother you, then why continually bring it up.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 30, 2010, 02:38:50 PM
All four planes went down within two hours of here in three different directions. North, west and south west.You still haven't figured out where I live. 8)

I've never really tried to figure out where you live, nor do I really give a rats ass.

Quote from: Teresa on November 30, 2010, 05:11:01 PM
It makes me so mad at myself that I have allowed you to finally get to me.. I've kept others calm all year long.. and now .. I have not done what I always advocate doing in this forum.... and that is ignore and walk away. Instead of retreating.. I reloaded..and fired..
For that , I apologize to the other members of this forum..

Your name's Teresa, not Mother Teresa.  No apology needed here, shit happenzzzz.

I know I said I was done with this thread, but after Dianes last post.....well F'k that.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 30, 2010, 02:38:50 PM
There is no real proof that anybody but the terrorists did anything.

Theres no real proof that terrorists did it either .

QuoteThat's OK, Truthers have to hate anybody with a different view...it's in the Handbook. ;D They aren't allowed to listen to anybody except other Truthers and must bash anyone with an original thought, so you are right up to form.

Funny, cause all I see the Truthers doing is actually looking for the truth, yet they are the ones being called terrorists supporters, anti-american, crazy, stupid, etc...seems to me they aren't the ones with the hate problem.

QuoteThey also cannot allow themselves to ever be proven wrong about anything.

No proof has been offered yet. 

QuoteYou'll get extra points for cutting on me so enjoy it. It doesn't bother me in the least.

Then quit trying to turn everything someone says into a personal attack about you.  And even if it was and it doesn't bother you, then shut the F'K up about it!

QuoteBy the way, certainly not everything is about me or here, 911 WAS. All four planes went down within two hours of here in three different directions. North, west and south west.

No it wasn't about you.  YOU weren't the only one that lost friends that day, YOU weren't the target.  YOU don't live in NYC so YOU DON'T have first hand knowledge of it. 

That's OK, I have no delusions about having friends out there. After all, they are just faking it according to one of you. Patriot,  I did misunderstand your comment. I'm sorry. I guess I'll never understand why my sharing what I knew about 9-11 made some of you so angry. I wouldn't get mad at Teresa if she'd been involved in a big competition, misinformation was posted and she spent some time correcting it because she had been there. And it was one of my "fake" friends that sent me the several pages on the Truthers. Actually, your reaction is what the article said Truthers would do.Try to devalue the worth of someone that has an an opposing idea. Make them appear to be without any knowledge of the subject, preferably publicly. Especially if it's someone in authority. As far as my "whining" that stopped that long ago once I figured out that the crudeness of a few came naturally. I even warned you I would no longer put up with personal attacks. I have been true to my word. However, I have not cussed anybody out, used rude rough language, called anybody stupid or tried to make anyone feel inferior for having a different idea. I just didn't agree and tried to show proof that wasn't just from some blogger but from witnesses who were there. You won't believe me, so be it. I never said I had first hand knowledge
of 9-11 but when people who did talk about it one tends to listen and believe them. So be mad all you want it doesn't change a thing.   I think this TSA mess is more important now anyway and have great concerns about some things that have suddenly dropped off the radar, like illegals. Varmit, I'm sorry if you lost somebody in 9-11. I didn't know that.

I didn't lose anyone on 9/11.

By the way, if you and Mr. Sail hadn't brought up "truthers,"I wouldn't have known what they are. I'd never have heard of them. I knew about "birthers" but truthers was a new one. What I posted was from something that was sent to me by someone who was trying to explain why certain people can debate issues and never get personal or angry and why some can't get past 10 words without moving into personal insults, trying to discredit or embarrass the person when their issues and evidence are strong.   It was very enlightening, and frankly very sad. As I said before, I tried to draw my posting to a close several times but a certain one had to have the last word and kept the misinformation going. You are welcome to read the article for yourself, but rather than posting it here and having some of you think I am rubbing your noses in it, which is not my intent at all, look it up for yourself. (9-11truthers exposed Oct 6 2009.) If you Google it, it's the second one, although the first one is pretty entertaining too.
There are more than a couple of you who could heed your own lesson. Instead of blowing your top, put on the big boy/girl undies and deal with it. I don't like the suggestion I should be injured ,especially by someone who later denied it and I think deleted it .Slam my hand in a car door? No, I haven't forgotten, nor will I.  No apologies, no nothing. Don't lecture me on what  should or shouldn't have been said. I'm still waiting for some apologies myself. Calling me a bastard was OK?  HA! No, I don't like being called a liar and, I didn't like having people who were at the pile and in the mouth of the beast being called liars. If they were paid off they sure didn't share any with me!  ;) I also don't like being patronized like some teen aged girl. ( Poor Diane, she's in over her head again) I have more than 40 years experience now and it's still going on. Some of you who were in the military for a few years want to be still be seen as experts. Can any of you match an active 42 years?  I think I must have learned something along the way. You don't want to hear about our training, I still don't know why not. You all talk about your experiences and I enjoy hearing about all of them.
I have one fellow here I admire very much. He started out as a firefighter and was in NYC for much of what happened, including what went on with buildings 6 and7. Later he joined the Marines and served for several years and is thankfully home safe to stay. Would you have the nerve to call a Marine a liar? Actually I've had several of them offer to come on here and try to explain 9-11  from their point of view. I told them I wouldn't risk having them treated like a few of you treat me and they just laughed.  Actually they were a lot more sympathetic to your concerns than I would have thought. As the one young man said, "You have to remember they have no point of reference." So go ahead and let me have it again if it makes you feel better. I'm used to being your whipping boy/girl now.  But I'll not change my passion about certain things just to please you. I'll also appreciate  you not putting words in my mouth that I didn't say. If I come across too strong, that I will apologize for.
  As far as 9-11, listen to each other! Those of you who think it was a Gov't conspiracy can't even agree among yourselves!
It's actually kind of funny in a morbid sort of way. No more 9-11 I don't know why it started up in the first place
    Now "it all about me" will be very busy for a few days so I'll probably stay off here. I've got food bank collections to deliver, the rest of the kid's Christmas party things to organize,(which is pain since our sound system blew) We just put a Toys for Tots box by the fire station tree so I'll be donating to that. Tomorrow night is the start of Newark Winter Fest and the annual reindeer run which benefits the Special Olympics.They register and start at our fire house so I'll be helping at registration. Then we light City Christmas tree and have hot chocolate, roasted chestnuts and Christmas carols, and shiver. ;D I'll be helping Santa get dressed before he leads the run down the street on Ol' Bessie, our 1926 Seagraves pumper. Saturday night is our firehouse Christmas banquet and dance. Monday is Bingo night once again and I'll sell games for that again.  Next week I need to go to a couple of schools to make a fuss over three fire prevention winners who were unable to come to us to get their awards. Then I need  to count up all  the fire prevention programs and count about how many people I contacted this year for our end of year tally.  But...It's all about me. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ::)

Good gawd woman.... take a breath, will ya?

Quote from: Diane Amberg on December 02, 2010, 05:35:27 PM
By the way, if you and Mr. Sail hadn't brought up "truthers,"I wouldn't have known what they are. I'd never have heard of them. I knew about "birthers" but truthers was a new one.

So you'd have us believe that this is the first time you've ever heard of somone calling for the truth about 9/11?  I find that hard to believe given that you make reference to hearing this argument before.  

" Next year will be the 10th. It will all be hashed over again and once again the builders and structural engineers  and metallurgists and fire fighters will be ignored because conspiracy theories are more fun"

QuoteWhat I posted was from something that was sent to me by someone who was trying to explain why certain people can debate issues and never get personal or angry and why some can't get past 10 words without moving into personal insults, trying to discredit or embarrass the person when their issues and evidence are strong.  

Interesting...espcially seeing as how I haven't insulted anyone on this thread.  In fact it was the opposing side of this debate that started in with the insults and name calling.  From your 3rd post on this thread...

 

QuoteJust because some fool heard the word Bentonite used in conjunction with the buildings they figured that had to be an explosive! It's not.

QuoteThere are more than a couple of you who could heed your own lesson. Instead of blowing your top, put on the big boy/girl undies and deal with it. I don't like the suggestion I should be injured ,especially by someone who later denied it and I think deleted it .Slam my hand in a car door? No, I haven't forgotten, nor will I.

Then enlighten us Diane.  I haven't forgotten who made that comment either.  And seeing as how that person is agreeing with you on this thread, it really doesn't apply here.  Unless of course, you are trying to paint "Truthers" in an unfavorable light.  You know, attacking them instead of their argument.  

QuoteHA! No, I don't like being called a liar and,...

Then don't lie.  You stated on the very first page of this thread that you'd seen a program in which the architect who designed and built the towers explain what happened.  That was a lie.  The architect died before 9/11.  So, if you don't like being called a liar, don't lie.  

QuoteI didn't like having people who were at the pile and in the mouth of the beast being called liars. If they were paid off they sure didn't share any with me!  ;)

You said yourself that the people there helping to clean up etc, didn't know for sure what had happened.  

QuoteI also don't like being patronized like some teen aged girl. ( Poor Diane, she's in over her head again) I have more than 40 years experience now and it's still going on. Some of you who were in the military for a few years want to be still be seen as experts. Can any of you match an active 42 years?  I think I must have learned something along the way. You don't want to hear about our training, I still don't know why not. You all talk about your experiences and I enjoy hearing about all of them.

And yet you would have us take your word for what happened that day, even though the information you present you admit to gaining second hand.  Seeing as how you were at a fire service conference at the time.

QuoteI have one fellow here I admire very much. He started out as a firefighter and was in NYC for much of what happened, including what went on with buildings 6 and7. Later he joined the Marines and served for several years and is thankfully home safe to stay. Would you have the nerve to call a Marine a liar?

What does his being a marine have to do with anything?  Not that it really matters, but if I think he's lying then I'll call him on it.

QuoteActually I've had several of them offer to come on here and try to explain 9-11  from their point of view. I told them I wouldn't risk having them treated like a few of you treat me and they just laughed.

And yet you'd treat vets in a way you that you'd not have them treated.  Interesting.

 

QuoteActually they were a lot more sympathetic to your concerns than I would have thought. As the one young man said, "You have to remember they have no point of reference."

And how does that make us any different from you, Diane?  Again, their being service members doesn't grant them any special insight.  In fact, I would say that it hampers their ability to see the truth, in that they are obligated to follow orders given to them without the benefit of enough time to analyize them.

QuoteAs far as 9-11, listen to each other! Those of you who think it was a Gov't conspiracy can't even agree among yourselves!
It's actually kind of funny in a morbid sort of way. No more 9-11 I don't know why it started up in the first place  

Thats the thing, we don't have to agree on every specific detail about what happend.  All we are doing is pointing to huge gaping holes in the offical story.  No one, other than those actually responsible it, knows for sure what happened.  

My goodness, this is about the last place I expected to be this morning but I saw you had posted again and wanted to see what you had to say.  No, YOU have not insulted me deliberately on this subject, but I stand on my principles. I did not lie to you about the program on either PBS or Discovery or where ever I saw it. I've tried to find it again but it just isn't out there. As far as who did the program, it obviously wasn't Yamasaki I was referring to, as you say he had died sometime before.This project started when I was still in high school. But Yamasaki wasn't a one man shop. He had a bunch of associates and the whole firm of Emery Roth and Sons as architects working with him, as well as all the various design engineers construction engineers etc.  It's a long list. It was one of them that hosted the program and showed the drawings of the buildings and that tubular design and the animation of the floor supports giving 'way. It also showed how the heat from the modern jets and all that fuel burning overwhelmed the fire resistant material that had been sprayed on the inside of the beams and of course the sprinklers were destroyed. As far as my comment about some fool hearing the word Bentonite....who did you think I was talking about? Certainly nobody on here, as it didn't come up from any of you.  It really isn't all about you either.  ;D ;D ;D It came from from an article I found after we had started talking about all this. I don't have any idea who it was but my comment still stands. As far as your comments about my friends...well, that is sad but there is apparently nothing that people who were there at the time and for a very long time after can say that you would believe. Perhaps someday they will how the tapes again of the cranes pulling down Bld. 6. No, I had never heard of an organized group called "truthers" before, strange as that might seem. But enough from me or I'll get yelled at for posting"too much,"not that others don't post much longer pieces than I do. ;) Have beautiful winter weekend and I do mean that seriously.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on December 03, 2010, 09:19:44 AM
I did not lie to you about the program on either PBS or Discovery or where ever I saw it. I've tried to find it again but it just isn't out there. As far as who did the program, it obviously wasn't Yamasaki I was referring to, as you say he had died sometime before.

Yes, it was as you plainly stated so.  You made no references to others that may have worked on the project.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 21, 2010, 09:53:17 AM
Uh, then why bother with the planes? Why would George Bush coordinate such a thing? Why don't people talk to the fire service and the engineers and the architect who built it. Actually, he did do a program explaining what happened.  I saw it and wish I could find it again.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on December 03, 2010, 09:19:44 AM
As far as my comment about some fool hearing the word Bentonite....who did you think I was talking about? Certainly nobody on here, as it didn't come up from any of you.

Never said it was directed at anyone on here.  I posted it to show that it isn't truthers that are calling names and such, as you stated.  You referenced an article that was sent to you...

Quote
And it was one of my "fake" friends that sent me the several pages on the Truthers. Actually, your reaction is what the article said Truthers would do.Try to devalue the worth of someone that has an an opposing idea. Make them appear to be without any knowledge of the subject, preferably publicly. Especially if it's someone in authority. As far as my "whining" that stopped that long ago once I figured out that the crudeness of a few came naturally. I even warned you I would no longer put up with personal attacks. I have been true to my word. However, I have not cussed anybody out, used rude rough language, called anybody stupid or tried to make anyone feel inferior for having a different idea.

You've taken what I said out of context.  The fact is that you've been caught and now are trying to backpeddle.  On several occasions you stated that you had information that wasn't availble to the public but you won't state your source, you said that you heard the original dispatches not tapes then say that you heard the dispacthes from tapes.  Then when someone calls you out on your inconsistencies you go off on a rant about how you're being attacked personally and bring up things that were said on different threads that have nothing to do with the discussion.  Yet, over all that we get lectured about how we are insulting the victims, about how we should take your word for it...c'mon.

 Varmit, I don't know how to word this.The dispatches we heard were on recording tape  live from the dispatch centers. Every word is recorded for a period of time. It was not "commercial" tape that was made available to the public. Some parts have since been released after the investigations were over, but at the time we heard them first they were not available to the public.
   I don't know what you mean by "caught." How I worded something might have been clearer, but there is nothing I need to worry about being "caught" doing. I didn't lie. There was such a program. If I'd known I was going to be under a microscope I'd have been more careful of how I worded what I said. I know I didn't use his name in relation to the show. What difference does it make? It was a program. " He " was indeed an architect with the firm, one of several. Besides the firm was called "Yamasaki and Associates, "not the Yamasaki Company. Who knows which one of them did what? It was a huge project. I'm sure THEY do, but at this point at our level of interest, what difference does it make? As far as not naming sources...not public means just that, not public. Why would I name sources? A few things came from FDNY,(proprietary) a few from NYPD and others from other sources including Lou Angeli.  He'll have another show coming out later this year and recently had one on.
You sure must be having a good time trying to discredit me. Do you have that much time on your hands? According to that article on truthers that would be typical.  ;D ;D ;D ;D Did you read it? Keep in mind I didn't author it. You guys post all kind of tapes and blogs and reports, some that could be seen as very controversial, and that's never questioned, but when I posted something, wow, everything blew up and the anger was flying. What happened to MY freedom of speech?  Constitutional protection stops at my door? But if you consider us worthless I guess we don't rate that either. HA! ;D
  I'd never fault someone for looking for answers when there are legitimate questions, but disregarding accepted information and denying consistent facts from many, many witnesses, and sources, or not accepting anything until it is manipulated to fit what one already believes or poking around until one finds one other person who believes as they do does not a conspiracy make.
  Is George Bush and his Gov't going to be charged with thousands of murders? If the evidence is so substantial why not? When? There must be at least one lawyer who believes as you (plural) do and wants to make a name for himself. If it's all as obvious as you say, what are they waiting for?  and it has nothing to do with me. Whew, I've got to get off here before someone thinks I've written as much as Red or WARPH. ;)

Quote from: Diane Amberg  date=11/30/2010
I don't know what more I can say, so I won't.

Quote from: Diane Amberg  date=12/3/2010
Now "it all about me" will be very busy for a few days so I'll probably stay off here. I've got food bank collections to deliver, the rest of the kid's Christmas party things to organize,(which is pain since our sound system blew) We just put a Toys for Tots box by the fire station tree so I'll be donating to that. Tomorrow night is the start of Newark Winter Fest and the annual reindeer run which benefits the Special Olympics.They register and start at our fire house so I'll be helping at registration. Then we light City Christmas tree and have hot chocolate, roasted chestnuts and Christmas carols, and shiver. Grin I'll be helping Santa get dressed before he leads the run down the street on Ol' Bessie, our 1926 Seagraves pumper. Saturday night is our firehouse Christmas banquet and dance. Monday is Bingo night once again and I'll sell games for that again.  Next week I need to go to a couple of schools to make a fuss over three fire prevention winners who were unable to come to us to get their awards. Then I need  to count up all  the fire prevention programs and count about how many people I contacted this year for our end of year tally.  But...It's all about me.

Quote from: Diane Amberg  date=Today at 09:19:44 am
But enough from me or I'll get yelled at for posting"too much,"not that others don't post much longer pieces than I do. Wink Have beautiful winter weekend and I do mean that seriously.

Quote from: Diane Amberg  date=Today at 12:29:51 pm
Whew, I've got to get off here before someone thinks I've written as much as Red or WARPH. Wink

And the check's in the mail!  LOL

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 26, 2010, 10:52:17 PM
My source says two F15  National Guard fighters from Otis scrambled....  Why is this different? I told you why in great detail! I saw the photos, heard from the people who were there, listened to the dispatches.  Live, not on tape.

Diane, I don't have to discredit you, you discredit yourself.  You post one thing and then say that you meant another.  But....whatever.

I think the worst thing is the arguments you (pluaral) use.  The firefighters had to be in on it, vicitims families had to be in on it, if Bush did it why not arrest him, etc.  Ya'll fail to see that it is bigger than Bush.  That the families wouldn't have to be in on it, they'd just have to buy the official story, same with the fire departments.  9/11 was a scheme cooked up to to not only invade iraq but to put into place a system that would allow the gov't virtually unchecked power, a basically unlimited "defense" budget, and to drag this country into a war that it cannot and will not win.  Think about it, ten years we've been fighting and are we any safer??...No. We simply have less freedom.  Of course, ya'll won't believe that.  Because you simply fail to look at and see the evidence as a whole.  You actually believe that our gov't is only looking out for our best interest.  Which if you look at history is ludicrious.  You fail to see the connections. 

Quote from: Varmit on December 04, 2010, 12:57:26 AM
9/11 was a scheme cooked up to to not only invade iraq but to put into place a system that would allow the gov't virtually unchecked power...

You've hit the nail on the head, Varmit.

Therein lies the most treacherous motive... unchecked power.  The sheeple would say we need the 'security'.  Learn from history, people!  When the people of a nation give up liberty for 'security', they end up with neither. 

The naysayers say there's no proof in re 9/11, etc., but there's plenty of proof on the unchecked power motive:

1.  Explosive budget growth & deficit spending in the last decade.
2.  The morphing of 'Homeland Security' into a multiheaded omnipotent monster (FEMA,TSA, USINS, ICE, Etc.)
3.  Ever increasing boldness in extra-legislative regulation by the Executive branch via EPA, USDA, DOE, FCC, Etc.
4.  Bully passage of legislation taking over some 20% of the US economy by govt. (healthcare)
5.  Massive increases in 'tzardom', unelected decision/regulation makers in the executive branch
6.  An executive branch that end runs not 1, but 2 court orders in order to stop offshore drilling in an already failing economy
7.  An executive determined to leave our southern border insecure, even if that means taking one of the sovereign states to court.
8.  Government injecting itself into the US auto industry with taxpayer money & leaving secured bondholders at the back of the bankruptcy line holding an empty bag.
9.  Ditto for Wall Street bailouts with trillions in borrowed money that the taxpayer must repay.
10. Allowing almost unchecked money printing & treasury bond sales by the Federal Reserve Corporation leading to devaluation of the dollar, making the US the biggest debtor nation on earth & potentially leading to hyperinflation ($25.00 loaf of bread, anybody)
11.  (Go find 10 more...it won't be hard!)

And it goes on & on.  The hard, factual evidence of government growth & expansion into the lives of the citizenry is obvious.  Only an idiot could miss it. To rephrase Billy Clinton, "It's about the power, stupid!"

We can debate 9/11 till hell freezes over, but ignoring the power grabbing by government could well mean we'll be doing our debating in December, in a government managed 'housing' community around a barrel of burning trash.  With the help of the 'all is well' crowds & the 'hate America first lefty' groups, we could be there by December 2011!

Our condition isn't about Democrat/Republican.  It's about the ruling class vs. the people.  It's about POWER!  WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Honestly all those things you have pointed out are not of 9/11.  Need to look behind the curtain and it isn't bush, or obama.

You really need to take a look at Soros.  His actions, his companies, foundations all are at work to destroy the wealth in this country.  The progressives/liberal/communists have been trying to destroy this country for 100 years or so.  They tried to go the route of pulling up the 3rd world countries to the level of America in order to usher in their one world agenda. But it failed time after time after time.  So Soros, being the good commie that he is figured out its easier to destroy the wealth of one country than to bring others up to the level of that country.  He proved it with GB when he made 1 billion dollars in 1 ay by hedging against the british pound.  His shorting of the pound caused the currency to fall, and thats how he made the billion.

So he realized he could do it on a grander scale.  This is what your seeing now.  His efforts are to bring America down to the level of greece, ireland, portugal, ect ect in order to make all currencies value the same.  Once that happens the road to create a one world currency is paved and ready to go.  This also will lead to one world government.

 Varmit, now that you highlighted what I wrote on the 26th and I went back and read it, yes, the dispatches I was talking about there were live, not on tape. Others were on tape in the sense they were the dispatch centers' own tape, which isn't "tape"  that can be altered or changed in any way. To us they would count as live. I'm pretty sure they are admissible in court.  Ordinary tape can be altered and/or photo shopped to change or eliminated all kinds of things to change how something seems. Yes I know you'll accuse me of back peddling again. So what! I can't help it that you don't know the system! I thought you were interested in information. Now I know all you wanted to do was try to find evidence against me.( I'll be getting a lawyer soon.) It doesn't matter.  The firefighters didn't have to "buy a story," they were there, but all you want to do is "catch me" and discredit me. Fine, in the long run I agree it doesn't matter.They know the truth and if you don't, too bad. If I said the sun rises in the east you'd say it didn't.
 As far as are we safer?  Nationally, no, I don't think so. "Only an Idiot could miss it" I DID NOT SAY THAT! So when you are gathering up your latest bag of "my" name calling, keep that in mind.
 For the most part I agree with Patriot's latest post. I think locally a lot goes on quietly at a lower level that does help keep us safer and has produced benefits in unexpected ways. I don't know if you have reverse 911 out there or not. We do. We also have a police alert system that ties in with our computers so people can be alerted if an area has had a sudden jump in unsolved crimes or suspicious characters are lurking around, especially on campus or in the campus communities. I-95 has signs up over the highway "report suspicious activity", and people do. The odd parcel or bag left sitting around out of place is always reported now. People are doing much more to protect themselves. I'd tell you abut a "lost and found" incident we had here last night, but since its here you couldn't be interested.
As far as power,  Steve, you are missing the power of big money and big businesses that in many cases has abandoned this country and is making money comfortably overseas. They don't care if they make the money here or there. They too are in very tight with Gov't and will have the best their money and influence can buy. "Sheeple?"  Name calling again...wasn't me! ;)
As far as George Soros goes, you are giving him a lot of undeserved credit. IMHO   He wants to make even more money .He isn't deliberately out to destroy a country. If the country happens to be in the way of his game of making more money he'll do what he has to do. People like that are playing a huge game.There is never "enough" money, it's about the process of making more. I doubt he cares about one world Gov't in the sense you mean. If it can expedite his game ,sure, but I doubt that it's about the money, it's the game of bringing things together to make more. He, like many of his ilk are deal makers. Donald Trump is another one.

Quote from: srkruzich on December 04, 2010, 10:09:37 AM
Honestly all those things you have pointed out are not of 9/11.  Need to look behind the curtain and it isn't bush, or obama.

I agree fully.  I was simply pointing out the clear evidence that our national situation is currently & obviously moving away from the people and toward government control.  Looking at the masses, the jump to Soros is a jump that many (most) sheeple can't make yet. Many of them have bought into the falsehood that government is the answer & can really solve all of or problems!

Hell, Soros & company are really just present occupants of a train that began gaining speed in the early 1900's with the Progressive Enlightenment movement.  It's just now reaching Ramming Speed.  But, again, the average American has been mislead by government run schools about the truths of government for decades (gee who woulda thunk it!).  Asking them to look much beyond current events (current govt growth) is perhaps too much for them to chew all at once.  Asking them to be critically analytical is a tough chore.  Perhaps that also explains the knee jerk reaction/resistance of people to the 'truther' point of view.  I guess ignorance really is bliss!

I sometimes wish I'd taken the blue pill.

Quote from: Patriot on December 04, 2010, 11:08:21 AM
I agree fully.  I was simply pointing out the clear evidence that our national situation is currently & obviously moving away from the people and toward government control.  Looking at the masses, the jump to Soros is a jump that many (most) sheeple can't make yet. Many of them have bought into the falsehood that government is the answer & can really solve all of or problems!

Hell, Soros & company are really just present occupants of a train that began gaining speed in the early 1900's with the Progressive Enlightenment movement.  It's just now reaching Ramming Speed.  But, again, the average American has been mislead by government run schools about the truths of government for decades (gee who woulda thunk it!).  Asking them to look much beyond current events (current govt growth) is perhaps too much for them to chew all at once.  Asking them to be critically analytical is a tough chore.  Perhaps that also explains the knee jerk reaction/resistance of people to the 'truther' point of view.  I guess ignorance really is bliss!

I sometimes wish I'd taken the blue pill.

i agree taking the blue one would be much easier.   IF you dig into who soros is partnered with though  you will find a deep dark evil empire just waiting to take control.  Obama is just like octavius was in 44bc.  he came along after many powerful leaders had systematically dismantled the republic with things like free wheat for all, ect ect ect.... Octavius had a decision.  To return to the republic values and it would be very painful for all for a while or continue the facade and usher in a empire in the guise of a republic.  Romans loved their republic but after giving something for nothing for well over a century to the citizens, they got used to it and were not happy with the idea of parting with it.  Many were trapped and if they had returned to the republic ideals they probably would have died from it.

Soros is very good at history. He studied it and knows what will detroy a country and what will build his social justice society that he wants.  His hero is karl marx.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on December 04, 2010, 11:07:48 AM

As far as power,  Steve, you are missing the power of big money and big businesses that in many cases has abandoned this country and is making money comfortably overseas. They don't care if they make the money here or there. They too are in very tight with Gov't and will have the best their money and influence can buy. "Sheeple?"  Name calling again...wasn't me! ;)
As far as George Soros goes, you are giving him a lot of undeserved credit. IMHO   He wants to make even money .He isn't deliberately out to destroy a country. If the country happens to be in the way of his game of making more money he'll do what he has to do. People like that are playing a huge game.There is never "enough" money, it's about the process of making more. I doubt he cares about one world Gov't in the sense you mean. If it can expedite his game ,sure, but I doubt that about the money, it's the game of bringing things together to make more. He, like many of his ilk are deal makers. Donald Trump is another one.

Diane, you are blinded by the man behind the curtain.  Big business is not the enemy.  They are in fact captialists and capitalism is the only way we can make it.  SOROS has said the only thing stopping one world government, and socialism/communism is capitalism.  His goal is to destroy it from within.  Thats why he uses his money.  He makes the money to destroy.  Where does his money go?  Look at the Tides foudation, One America, and many other foundations all of which are communist and out for the destruction of America.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on December 04, 2010, 11:07:48 AM
As far as power,  Steve, you are missing the power of big money and big businesses that in many cases has abandoned this country and is making money comfortably overseas. They don't care if they make the money here or there. They too are in very tight with Gov't and will have the best their money and influence can buy. "Sheeple?"  Name calling again...wasn't me! ;)
As far as George Soros goes, you are giving him a lot of undeserved credit. IMHO   He wants to make even money .He isn't deliberately out to destroy a country. If the country happens to be in the way of his game of making more money he'll do what he has to do. People like that are playing a huge game.There is never "enough" money, it's about the process of making more. I doubt he cares about one world Gov't in the sense you mean. If it can expedite his game ,sure, but I doubt that about the money, it's the game of bringing things together to make more. He, like many of his ilk are deal makers. Donald Trump is another one.

Dammit diane, it isn't always about money.  What is it about 'you will be like God' you missed in Sunday school?  Read on...

1.  When you have more money than you can spend, it isn't about money any more, it's about pure power & control.  The money is only a tool.  Being godlike is sometimes the goal.
2.  Sheeple is a very fitting term for folks who follow shepherds blindly.
3.  Perhaps you should spend some of your limited time away from the Elk County Forum reading Soros' autobiographies & watching interviews with him.  You'll find he has a self admitted god complex and really wants to rule the planet.  Not making more money...Gaining power & control over others as well as single point one world governance!
4.  Trump really isn't in the same room with Soros.  Trump = Capitalist/Soros = Megalomaniac

Please bear with me, what is the blue pill ?

Viagra!!!!! ;D ;D ;D    Check out The Matrix. They can answer the rest.

Oh I am clueless

  In the Matrix movie..........they offered Keanu one of two pills.........the Red pill opened your eyes to what was really going on....the blue pill let you stay blissfully ignorant..........

  Most people I have met who use that reference really took the PURPLE pill......LOL opening their eyes to what they WANT to and pretending to be ignorant of OTHER "Truths"........and that's all I'll say on that subject because each person is totally responsible for what they "choose" to "see"

I did look that up ! It is complex and I definitley don't want to pursue the Matrix stuff.  Guaranteed to make you depressed.

I hear you Mrsc. Many want a purple pill.

While I was in graduate school at KU, one of our most intellegent professors argued with a brilliant student about whether ignorance was bliss.  The professor said it is always best to know the full truth of any situation.  He was alluding to women's status in our American society.   The student said that ignorance was bliss for many women in our society.  I have thought about what was said for many years.  Now I will have a new reference for ignorance is bliss, blue pill.  

Diane, you totally missed the point I was getting at.  But oh well, I tried.

As for Blue, Red, or Purple pill....I'd say take no pill.  Thats the real choice, REAL power in life.  The truth can only be found by looking at ALL the evidence from all sides.  Why just look at big business or corp.s.?  Why just look at gov'ts.?  Most tend to look only where they are told to look.  Afterall, who is it that made the Pills in the first place? 8)

 :)

QuoteAs for Blue, Red, or Purple pill....I'd say take no pill.  Thats the real choice, REAL power in life.  The truth can only be found by looking at ALL the evidence from all sides.  Why just look at big business or corp.s.?  Why just look at gov'ts.?  Most tend to look only where they are told to look.  Afterall, who is it that made the Pills in the first place?

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner......Varmit LOL

Well, I'm back and I'm sure I'll be accused of stirring the pot, but there are some VERY strange forces at work here that I don't understand so I'll just share what happened and you can accept it, ignore it, call me a liar again, whatever, but here goes. Last night my fire company had it's 122 annual banquet which includes a nice dinner,longevity awards, service awards, door prizes and a nice dance.This year, on the eve of the 9-11 10th year anniversary, we had a surprise guest and speaker. It was Alan Noznesky, from Washington DC Fire Dept. I about fell on the floor! (As you know I've been talking to my friends about 911 and very frustrated that I couldn't / can't get a few of you to believe me and made a few of you really mad.) Noz, as he is called, was on one of the first two pieces to arrive at the Pentagon and was on the first line to attack the fire, working their way inside for a time and then having to pull back. He gave a really good talk about it. His last name seemed very familiar but I figured I'd read something before and and never gave it a thought. After dinner I had a chance to talk to him and his lovely wife for awhile. He shared a lot AGAIN about the incident and conformed it was a plane, not a missile and that there was plenty of debris both inside and out etc, etc. His wife and I started chatting too while Al was talking to him and she was interested in my back ground and how I wound up in Newark Fire. When I was telling her she started to laugh and said "you know you two went to the same High School!" Suddenly the last name made sense. I knew his parents casually from years ago and I graduated from Kennett in 1962, he in 1984. His family had a business in Kennett Square.  His wife was from Downingtown.  Well, that really opened the gates and we had a wonderful time talking. Their son called while we were visiting to tell us it had started snowing at home. I finally dragged myself away because I didn't want to monopolize his time. So there you are ...take it or leave it. Information from the horses mouth. I don't know why it is so important for a few of you to believe the incidents couldn't have happened as told, but I'll not try again. At least unless I need to respond to a question. Maybe Pam can explain this as Karma or something. Oh, and I won a door prize too, and I never win anything. Ron Serling would be proud.

QuoteMaybe Pam can explain this as Karma or something.

LOL Diane......Serendipity maybe :)

And whats your point?  Bear in mind that not every "Truther" or whatever you want to call them, is saying the same thing.  Come to think of it, neither are gov't officals who should be.  My point is that arguing about details is missing the whole point that the conspiracy theroists are trying to make, simply put that there is no way Al Queada was solely responsible for 9/11. 




And another thing, why should we believe the report of a fireman?  Wasn't it you that said, after viewing video of several firefighters stating that they heard explosions, that they might not have had all the facts? 

Nope...in the fire service "explosions" can be many things that aren't related to explosives, in fact they rarely are.Those two guys said "as if' they didn't say the floors fell because of explosives. Back drafts, flash overs, heat buildup blowing out windows, BLEVES all "explode." I'm sure you don't want to hear them all again. While the"black coat" firefighters know a lot, they know what they are working on at any given time. It's the officers and then the fire marshals that get the whole picture.The fire marshal's  final report is usually the final say based on whatever investigation is needed. Some are simple, some can be very complicated. In some cases dogs are added to sniff out certain things such as flammable liquids, especially those that are not in plausible places (arson dogs.) Yes, there are dogs that are trained to sniff out gun powder and TNT and other things that are commonly used in explosives, including fertilizer and oil and more sophisticated chemicals too. Rarely is every bit of residue burned up completely and you know how sensitive a good dog's nose is. My point, and "truther" wasn't my choice of name, that came from the article that was sent to me, is just that, you folks are insisting that different things are all depending on which blogger  you choose to believe. One is positive that a plane didn't hit the Pentagon, it was a missile. Untrue. One said the planes were drones, no people on board at all. Untrue.The Shanksville plane was shot down...I wondered about that myself, but the many witnesses said no, there were no fighters in the area and they saw the plane flip over on its back and drop like a stone with no apparent hit shot or fire.
  I don't care which terrorist group you want to lay the blame on. but they did pull it off. The flight instructors who gave them lessons were interviewed so they know exactly which "pilot" terrorist knew how to do what. Apparently they did know how to make big wide turns and find what they were looking for with the aid of the real pilots before they were disabled or killed. I know I'm never going to convince you, but I thought that recent events  might be interesting to you but I seem to have failed again. I also have no idea what white crows have to do with anything. I can do the same thing. All I have to do is disprove one of the conspiracy stories and they could all become suspect...I found one white crow, so what.There is some twisted logic there.

Oh, I forgot to mention,Noz was a Captain 0n 9-11, has since been promoted to Deputy Chief.

First of all, there were no dogs used in the investigation.  Second, the flight instructors that trained the terrorists were surprised that they were able to pull of the maneuvers necessary to hit their targets.  Terrorists using the real pilots to find the targets is speculation at best.  Because we are talking about multiple alternatives disproving one doesn't rule out the others.  If this wasn't an inside job then how do you account for the FBI pulling agents off an investigation of al queda prior to 9/11?  How do you account for the terrorists student visas being granted when they lacked sufficient reasons for being issued?  How do you account for the gov't disregarding warnings of an attack?  How do you account for the war game scenarios depicting the very circumstance that occurred on 9/11 taking place on 9/11?  How do you account for an invasion plan for iraq and Afghanistan being drawn up prior to 9/11?  

Bottom line, Don't feed me cabbage and try to tell me its collared greens.

My G-d... is this thread still going?  The only one that hasn't put in their two-cents has been anmar.  Where is the little camel driver anyway?  Maybe he took my advice and hustled back to the Sandbox.

And yes, Diane... you by far have out done Red and Moi when it comes to "too long-winded posts."  I keep telling you... you have to lay off the mountain dew.    :angel:

I'm not sure how you mean "investigation" but there were dozens of search dogs used looking for survivors. for many days afterward. The explosives dogs may have working been there afterward but I'm not sure about that. They would have had to have been rubble dogs too. There were still bomb dogs working at the towers in the days before the attack, but since the alert level had been lowered shortly before, some of the dogs had been released from duty.They only step up the numbers when the alert level rises. There were some dogs still working and I know one  died. I didn't remember his name so I looked it up. He was Sirius. He got caught  when one of the towers collapsed. I don't have any details except that it happened.  My friend Irene might n know. She is part of east Coast Canine Rescue.They have and train search dogs, cadaver dogs etc. One of hers, Pulaski, is in Conn.,right now getting advanced rubble and collapse training...bombs, earthquakes that sort of thing. The other is a little older, Pierce. He's also a search dog. Both are yellow labs.
Varmit, how do I account for things you mentioned?  First of all they may not all be true. Some people swear to have knowledge of attack plans in Iraq, but then why did it take us so many years to actually go? Some can be chalked up to our Gov't being very bad at some things, like Visas.  On warnings, there are thousands received every day. Some are reliable cranks who call almost every day and are well known. Some are called in because they think it's funny, like bombs at schools, and some are plausible and have to be checked out.  A few I agree are speculation. Now as far as the "war games" you mentioned. If you are talking about the WMD classes that were going on in Anniston Alabama, they had been scheduled for quite a while, we had people there. I had already had my training here in Wilmington and Dover so I didn't have to take that one. WARPH, to save you from my being any more long winded I won't tell you about the stories from "the mountain" but they are very interesting...has to do with WMD "simulations."
  WARPH, as far as being long winded, my whole career had to do with talking. ;D  I'm very good at it! If you had to pass my fire service or EMT classes we always worked at it until the person got it. I had one young WFD recruit who couldn't go any further in the fire academy until he passed his EMT class.  He just had no feel for it at all. I was called in to tutor him and we worked nights and weekends until I thought he was ready. He had already failed the written exam twice, so it was one more chance or no job. He just didn't understand how to decode a test question. He  wasn't good at written test taking, period. Last chance, he passed with an 88! He's been a paid firefighter for 8 years now and is doing great.
There are people who would love to be able to get up in front of 600 people and give a talk without panicking or having terminal stage fright. I consider myself very blessed. Would you believe in live social circumstances I'm very quiet? ;) :angel:

By investigation, I mean there wasn't much of one.  Even after questions have been raised the gov'ts offical stand is that the case is closed.  Mighty convient.  As for our gov't being very bad at things...I would think that would strengthen the case for an investigation by an Independent group.  On warnings....I wasn't talking about the warnings that get called in by some freak looking to get his jollies.  I was talking about warnings that came from our Special Forces and Black Ops people, not exactly the type to call in a false alarm.  The war games I mentioned weren't of the variety held at the local level, because quite frankly, there isn't much that the local fire or police are going to do against WMDs.  I was talking about the wargames held by the pentagon and varioius military operations that were taking place on 9/11.  Watch the Fabled Enemies video I posted, certainly rasies even more questions about 9/11.