many people STILL DON'T think Osama attacked us on 9-11

[DistressedAmerican]

I've tried posting this to mopaul's related thread:

many people STILL think Osama attacked us on 9-11
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3466643&mesg_id=3466643

I have had NO takers.

Nothing personal mopaul, you know I love ya!
:toast:

Here's what I have to say:

THE PROOF EXISTS! It is right in the 316 pages (paperback anyway) of Richard Clarke's Best Selling book AGAINST ALL ENEMIES: INSIDE AMERICA'S WAR ON TERROR.

The book is a well written and detailed account of the connections between Al Qaeda and the attacks on 9-11. No one in the administration was in a better position to understand the connections than Clarke. That statement is true going back several administrations, Repug and Dem. He is clearly not an administration mouthpiece.

Let us have NO MORE of this MIHOP and LIHOP from people who are not prepared to refute Richard Clarke! This book is well known. Please read it. In particular pay atttention to Chapter 6, Al Qaeda revealed.

"Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside The United States" was not an after the fact Bush fabrication. It is reality.

The Administration was obsessed with Iraq. Did not pay any attention to the Al Qaeda threat. They created suspicion by trying to cover up their massive incompetence. Now the Tin hat crowd are working overtime creating mythology from the wreckage.

[Uris]

1. Right?

I'd like to see another opinion. If Osama is guilty and he has no connections to Iraq, why are we over there?

[jayfish]

10. We Are In Iraq For A Couple Of Reasons.

The first is secure Iraq's oil reserves for use by petro-chemical interests. Please note that this has nothing to do with lowering prices at the pump so we can continue to fuel our SUV's. The second reason is to establish a military presence in the Gulf that could not be accomplished in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait alone. I certainly hope you don't believe that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 or AQ.

Jay

[Media_Lies_Daily]

111. And neither of the reasons stated in your post justified what we've...

...done to the Iraqi people.

[jayfish]

140. You Got That Right.

No reason would.

Jay

[FreedomAngel82]

44. In 1999 before Bush even became president

he was talking about going into Iraq and WMD's. I remember seeing a video of him talking about this. Does anybody have that??? I saw it a good while back so I don't know if it's still around. :( He was obsessed with going there. Gee I wonder why!

[Walt Starr]

2. I'm a strong proponent of the LIHTI theory of 9/11

The Bush Administration Let It Happen Through Incompetence.

It's the only explanation that fits all the facts.

[DistressedAmerican]

6. That I'll Definitely Subscribe To But, You Need A Better Acronym!

[Adelante]

21. I buy that one - LIHTI

:thumbsup:

[Cuban_Liberal]

31. That theory I can buy.

:thumbsup:

[Snivi Yllom]

145. the ONLY 'LIH' theory that can be supported with any logic or fact

yup

[mopaul]

3. i have my opinion, and that's ALL i have

don't ask me to prove anything. i can't.

[ObaMania]

32. I share your opinion MoPaul.

*O*B*L* has completely dropped off the map. If he was so complicit in 9*11 then we'd be after him full force. Imagine how * would look in popularity and polls if he captured him. The problem is though, he can't get him, because if he did, it would turn out that he was merely a cheerleader for them al-kai-ada terra-ists. That would be quite the little embarassment for the * thugs.

JMO

[FreedomAngel82]

46. If he did capture BinLaden

his raitings would be up but then he wouldn't be able to use him again if he wants to plan another attack. He's our very own boogeyman.

[ObaMania]

138. No, he could always use Al*Zahari (sp?), right? n/t

[earth mom]

87. Mopaul, I'm with you too.

LIHOP or MIHOP -either one. Maybe those of us who believe it may not be able to prove it now-but the truth will out someday!

[BlueEyedSon]

4. If Richard Clarke "knew" and Condi & Co ignored his warnings

ON PURPOSE, doesn't that prove LIHOP/MIHOP?

[Walt Starr]

5. No, it proves LIHTI. n/t

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. Groovy.

I've always felt left out because I did not have a nifty acronym to express my point of view. Thanks, Walt!

Now, what's the proper pronunciation? light-y? lie-tee? lit-y?

[Walt Starr]

11. Lie-Tee

Lie as in like a rug. Tee as in golf

:evilgrin:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

18. Or perhaps "lie tea"

Rather than kool-aid, y'know.

[DistressedAmerican]

22. LOL!!!! Maybe We Can Habe A Boston Lie Tea Party!!!

:rofl:

[DistressedAmerican]

36. You Could Also Have Yourself A Cool Frozen Lai Tai On The Beach!!!

Right along side Bin Laden himself. Maui Maybe?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

61. A Rummy and Cokehead?

A Lower Manhattan?

[BlueEyedSon]

8. What about the FBI whistle blowers and Sibel Edmunds?

They have provided credible evidence that there were factions within the gov't and intel agencies that were encouraging incompetence (or incompetent results from competent people), ON PURPOSE.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

13. The Bush administration? Encouraging incompetence?

Surely, you jest. Their entire philosophy of government is based on incompetence. In fact, being incompetent is the only thing they do with any degree of competence whatsoever.

[BlueEyedSon]

19. So you don't know what I'm talking about? Thx for replying anyway.

[DistressedAmerican]

25. Help Me Out! I Showed You Mine. Show Me Yours.

Unless you now just dismiss everything Clarke says because I am not familiar with Seibel Edmunds.

Fill me in and we can discuss it. Shut me off based on these two posts and I have to assume you don't have the goods...

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

34. I know what you're talking about, and I don't care.

It's completely irrelevant.

[BlueEyedSon]

49. Nyah nyah nyah.

[DistressedAmerican]

15. Who is in a better position to know? Clarke! He was there for 25 years

doing this work. The whistle blowers in question were not in positions to judge the motives of cabinet level officials. Clarke was. He was there in the meetings. None of the whistleblowers could be reasonably relied on to detail the motivations of why their memos etc. didn't go up the line.

I'm not familiar with the details of the Sibel Edmunds case. Help me out.

[Dhalgren]

28. See my post #14...

[DistressedAmerican]

9. Being Too Distracted To RECOGNIZE The threat Is Different Than

Recognizing it and doing nothing.

They didn't get it at all! Both MIHOP and LIHOP assume that they did.

[BlueEyedSon]

17. I sincerely think that not all of Bushco is so stupid that they

didn't get it. Those few people at least shut the hell up and LIHOP. At the worst they redirected attention and/or ran interference.

Was there a NORAD training exercise that day? Is that a lie? If there was a drill, what are the chances it would be the same day as 4 hijackings? That's just too much coincidence for me.....

[flyarm]

118. ME TOO!!

FROM A 33YR FLT ATTENDANT ( JUST RETIRED) with one of the two airlines involved...ny based.

fly

[Frederik]

160. Not one drill

6 or 7, one involving live "hjacked" aircraft and one involving false radar blips on the FAA's radar screens... An NRO exercise simulating an aircraft crashing into their building... all on that morning.

[fob]

116. If they were IN ON IT in the first place they didn't have to "get it",

"being distracted" is part of their alibi. The other part is blaming the intelligence, which as you show via Clarke, was rock solid. It was the action/inaction BASED on the intelligence (ie The Admin's moves) that was the problem.

Why else would Asskroft move terrorism DOWN the priority list (and actually move to reduce it's budget allotment) and move hookers in New Orleans UP the priority list? They had to distance themselves from the ability to gather the clues so when it happened they could say they were to far removed from all the clues, which is exactly what they did.

Here's my acronym for what happened;
B ush
U sama
S addam
H alliburton

NOTE: Having "S addam" in there is not saying Iraq had anything to do with 9/11, just that the war for Iraq's oil has been part of bush*s "plan" all along

[Montauk6]

12. I remember where my head was at that day...

The first thing that came to mind was that it HAD to be some kind of inside job, done by Americans. And I think I was recalling Oklahoma and how many wrongly concluded that the perps were Arabic. To this day, I still wonder how Atta et al. could have coordinated 4 planes the way they did without some inside help.

[aaronnyc]

23. It's really not that hard

Find 19 individuals who are willing to give their life, by hijacking some planes and have them fly them into some buildings. They didn't even have to learn the hard part - how to land and take off the plane.
BTW everything did not go as planned - one of the planes landed in the woods of Pennsylvania, instead of its intended target.

People need to get used to the idea that it doesn't take some massive organization with a ton of money to cause catastrophic effects. If "the shoe bomber" had known how to light a match properly he would have taken down a plane. If a handful of people put their mind to it and are really dedicated, they can kill thousands of people.

[FreedomAngel82]

52. Not with these planes

How could ammature wanna-be pilots fly two plane's so perfectly into the buildings? Check out http://www.reopen911.org There's tons of stuff there you should check out and read and watch.

[demodewd]

162. OKC

The Perps at OKC were Arabic as well as McVey. McVey's truck bomb did not cause all that damage. There were bombs inside the building. Windows blew out not in. They quickly brought down the building and hustled away the evidence where it is under 24 security. Sound familiar?

[Dhalgren]

14. If the Bush Admin had acted on Clarke's recommendations

at the appropriate time, with the appropriate measures, 9/11 would not have happened. I think that is a fair statement. Negligence is willful, that's why you can be prosecuted for negligence in the courts. The Bush administration allowed the attacks to take place unimpeded, after they were warned repeatedly, on numerous occasions. Regardless of whether it was negligence or design the Bush administration Let It Happen On Purpose ( the "on purpose" part is in regard to the "willfulness" of negligence). I completely rule out the incompetence argument, because there is no incompetence involved when you willfully do nothing. The very fact that the driving ideology behind the Bush Admin is PNAC and that PNAC had called for a "Pearl Harbor" incident to galvanize the populace, is just additional motive to the willfulness of their inactivity...

[raccoon]

37. Just think about "Who benefits?"

The Bush junta! As you said, the PNAC said a Pearl Harbor incident was needed to galvanize the population. Without 9/11, it would have been much harder for the administration to "pre-emptively" attack Iraq.

It would take another "Pearl Harbor" to start the draft up again.
I don't think that the powerful--no matter which party they belong to--would balk at LIHOP--again.

[redqueen]

139. How very telling that there isn't one response to this post by those

so committed to mocking the idea that LIHOP is even possible.

I suppose it's easier to mock than address such an ugly reality.

[Mnemosyne]

16. Read " 911 On Trial" by Victor Thorn.

It is scientifically well-documented and well-researched. It shows through basic physics and other science how impossible it was for the Towers to have come down the way they did, so perfectly even and into themselves as if they were imploded. Flame me if you must, but this man backs up everything with scientific facts.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

26. This is beautiful.

That Wing TV thing in which he is involved reccomends a lovely book describing how HIV is not the cause of AIDS. Great source, there.

[Mnemosyne]

170. I don't know about any wing tv thing and aids book,

I only know that a friend left me the book and it makes great sense regarding the structural take down of the WTC. There are many fruitcakes out there, some of the things they say are absurd, but I don't automatically discount everything if something makes sense. How do you explain 3 steel structured buildings all "destroyed by fire" within hours of each other when it has never happened before or since in history? How do you explain all 3 collapsing straight into themselves as in most every controlled demolition? It's not always the source but sometimes the information's credibility that you need to analyze.
Sometimes the paranoid ARE being watched.

[allemand]

20. And bin Laden has already admitted his involvement in the 9/11 attack

Bin Laden statement, October 2004:
" While I was looking at the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it came to my mind to punish the oppressor the same way and destroy towers in the U.S. to get a taste of what they tasted, and quit killing our children and women."
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41192

[radwriter0555]

24. Oh yeah? Then why did bin laden SAY he didn't attack us, and why doesn't

then FBI say he did?

Go ahead. Check the FBI's most wanted page on OBL. Splain me why there is no mention of 911.

Then read the infamous October 2001 interview with OBL where he specifically denies all credit for 911, but KNEW about it, and was PROUD of it.

He was informed of the plot and his cooperation in being the sell out guy was secured on July 17, 2001 when he was visited in the American Hospital in Dubai for 2 consecutive days by US Agents.

This is why his family was escorted out of town 2 days later; he was cooperating, in the last days of his life. He had nothing to lose, especially since the US was then going to frame the war on terrorism with the destruction of his arch enemy, Saddam Hussein.

OBL died on December 23, 2001 in the mountains near Tora Bora.

[aaronnyc]

27. Funny how the "Dead" Bin Laden keeps making video tapes n/t

[Guaranteed]

29. Talking about the Kerry v. Bush presidential campaign, no less. nt

[maddiejoan]

33. oh please

the man in those videos is most certainly not Bin Laden, and if he is my aunt with Kidney problems would like the number of his doctor.

[aaronnyc]

41. You can't be serious

What about those videos make you think that it is not Bin Laden. It sure as hell looks like him, and according to people who study this stuff it is his voice (and that includes Al Jazeera which is certainly not a Bush propagandist network).
Is it because he doesn't look sick enough to you? First of all, we don't really have any idea what his medical condition is. Secondly, he is not doing jumping jacks - he is sitting on the ground.

Why would Bush want to look like an incompetent fool, and lie to say that he Didn't catch Osama, when that was the main goal of going into Afghanistan?

Seriously, if you have any logical basis to argue that "I didn't see what I think I saw" - please explain.

[ProfessorGAC]

43. I Think You'll Find, The Answer Will Be No

There is no convincing people who believe in MIHOP. I think it's best to disagree, agreeably, and let it go.
The Professor

[Media_Lies_Daily]

53. Maybe you ought to do a little research before making such strong....

...statements. Take a look at this link and tell me that the Osama claiming responsibility in the video is the same Osama that you see in before and after images:

<http://www.global-conspiracies.com/fake_2001_osama_bin_laden_video_tape.htm>


By the way, most non-US Government video experts consider the video depicting Osama admitting to 911 to be a fake. How come you still beliebelieve it's real?

[The Gigmeister]

65. "Most non-US Government video experts"??

LOL!!

I don't suppose you want to back that up?

I didn't think so...

[Media_Lies_Daily]

120. Why would anyone believe a US Government video expert at this....

...point in time?

I backed my post up with the link I provided...did you even look at the images on that link?

I won't ask you to back up your comments because I know that it's not possible.

[RuleofLaw]

54. Bin Laden tape “faked

You might want to look at this:

"Swiss researchers say they are 95 per cent certain that a recent audio tape attributed to the Saudi dissident, Osama bin Laden, is not genuine.

The Lausanne-based Dalle Molle Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence (IDIAP) claims it was recorded by an impostor."

http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=2251&sid=1485474

[radwriter0555]

132. LOL! "people who study this stuff" are government employees.. No

credible, autonomous source other than "we the people" has said anything credible.

The goal behind the invasion of afghanistan which I predicted, BTW in August, 2000, was to facilitate the ability to install the new Silk Road and to get the heroin trade back on track and to restore the bush regime friendly northern alliance.

Mission accomplished, right?

[aaronnyc]

135. Al Jazeera says it sounds like him

Or is Al Jazeera also pushing the neo-con agenda? Granted, Al Jazeera did not do the "scientific analysis" that our government claims to have done, but they speak Arabic and they say it clearly sounds like him.

Regardless of what the actual goal invading Afghanastan was, from a public relations stand point it would obviously have looked better for Bush if he had killed Bin Laden at Tora Bora. He gains nothing from lying that he did NOT kill him.

[radwriter0555]

136. Al Jazeera is US gubment owned and operated dear.

You didn't know that?

[aaronnyc]

149. Ummm .... are we talking about the same Al Jazeera?

Al Jazeera is actually based in and financed in Qatar. However, if you have ever seen Al Jazeera I don't understand how you could conclude that it is owned and operated by the U.S. gov't. Al Jazeera constantly argues against U.S. foreign policy, and criticizes the NeoCon agenda. Our gov't on numerous occasions has accused Al Jazeera of being anti-U.S. propoganda which is fueling the insurgents in Iraq. The U.S. gov't recently started a new news station - to compete with Al Jazeera in the Arab world.

[maddiejoan]

144. mostly because

It doesn't look like him on any more than a very superficial level.

[tinanator]

146. believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see

but if its coming across your TV, you would be a FOOL to buy into it.
Deception is the rule, not the exception. If it werent for the drive to deceive, we probably wouldnt even have a verbal language.

[Guaranteed]

153. And then we attack them for killing Al Jazeera reporters. nt

[yodermon]

158. Good Grief.

How many times do you have to see this?

[Frederik]

167. Thank you

No, the chubby one is almost certainly not Osama. His voice is also very distorted and partly inaudible in that tape. You'd think a man who used to earn $1 billion a year from laundering Afghan drug money would be able to afford a decent camcorder.

[Frederik]

159. The latest video

probably is real imo - the first "chubby Osama makes inaudible remarks" was perhaps fake. Anyway,
"Pakistani paper Uumat published a lengthy interview with him that reveals much about the motivation of America's arch-enemy. (...) Bin Laden denies his al-Qaida organization was responsible for the suicide attacks against the U.S. But he applauds them. He suggests the attacks were made by Americans from either intelligence agencies or "a hidden government.""
(http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1021-10.htm)

Whether he says he did it or that he didn't, I wouldn't take his word for it. Anyway, he's clearly not a very central player in 9/11, neither in planning and organizing nor in financing, but he may well have had a more peripheral role.

I recommend
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

Paul Thompson has assembled an impressive collection of mainstream news reports on various aspects of the attacks. Some of the links don't work, but it's a well of information.

[radwriter0555]

129. Funny how none of those video tapes show footage post 2001 Not a single

photo or video post-dates October 2001.

Not a single one.

And not one SINGLE tape has been proven to be from him. Every single well timed incident always includes "possible", "alleged" and "purported."

Unless you can show me otherwise, of course.

And, just to make a point, every single alleged posting to an alleged islamic website has always tracked the websites to great britian, dulles, virginia, washington, dc and texas.

See, I pay attention to the details, not the rhetoric.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

42. In support, Mueller of the FBI stated the following...

Robert S. Mueller, III, Director, FBI
Commonwealth Club of California
San Francisco, CA
April 19, 2002
<http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/speeches/speech041902.htm>

QUOTES:

The hijackers also left no paper trail. In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper – either here in the U.S. or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere – that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot. The hijackers had no computers, no laptops, no storage media of any kind. They used hundreds of different pay phones and cell phones, often with prepaid calling cards that are extremely difficult to trace. And they made sure that all the money sent to them to fund their attacks was wired in small amounts to avoid detection.

No paper trail - no links to Osama.

But is Osama dead? No. Just like the FBI has not been able to uncover any links to Osama, no evidence exists supporting the idea that Osama is dead.

[berni_mccoy]

30. Would you take the word of a madman....?

Or will you believe the facts:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1079769,00.html

If you go along with the theory that Osama was used, then you have to assume Clarke was duped and that's why they didn't treat him seriously (and used him during the hearings).

If you go along with the theory that Osama did attack us, then you have to ask why. And the answer isn't because they are crazy religious nut jobs like our administration wants everyone to believe. We've got enough of those (in the form of "Radical Chrishuns") in our country.

Either way, the administration saw it coming and they were either part of it, or incompetent, or could care less. None of the results is any better than the other.

There is one fact and one fact alone that we can all verify: we'll never know the truth.

[Junkdrawer]

35. Who did Osama work for?

Intelligence Matters
by Bob Graham, Jeff Nussbaum

From the Inside Flap

In this explosive, controversial, and profoundly alarming insider’s report, Senator Bob Graham reveals faults in America’s national security network severe enough to raise fundamental questions about the competence and honesty of public officials in the CIA, the FBI, and the White House.

For ten years, Senator Graham served on the Senate Intelligence Committee, where he had access to some of the nation’s most closely guarded secrets. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, Graham co-chaired a historic joint House-Senate inquiry into the intelligence community’s failures. From that investigation and his own personal fact-finding, Graham discovered disturbing evidence of terrorist activity and a web of complicity:

• At one point, a terrorist support network conducted some of its operations through Saudi Arabia’s U.S. embassy–and a funding chain for terrorism led to the Saudi royal family.

• In February 2002, only four months after combat began in Afghanistan, the Bush administration ordered General Tommy Franks to move vital military resources out of Afghanistan for an operation against Iraq–despite Franks’s privately stated belief that there was a job to finish in Afghanistan, and that the war on terrorism should focus next on terrorist targets in Somalia and Yemen.

• Throughout 2002, President Bush directed the FBI to limit its investigations of Saudi Arabia, which supported some and possibly all of the September 11 hijackers.

• The White House was so uncooperative with the bipartisan inquiry that its behavior bore all the hallmarks of a cover-up.

• The FBI had an informant who was extremely close to two of the September 11 hijackers, and actually housed one of them, yet the existence of this informant and the scope of his contacts with the hijackers were covered up.

• There were twelve instances when the September 11 plot could have been discovered and potentially foiled.

• Days after 9/11, U.S. authorities allowed some Saudis to fly, despite a complete civil aviation ban, after which the government expedited the departure of more than one hundred Saudis from the United States.

• Foreign leaders throughout the Middle East warned President Bush of exactly what would happen in a postwar Iraq, and those warnings went either ignored or unheeded.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400063523/qid=1113304079/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/002-7663732-5351262?v=glance&s=books&n=507846


Osama started as a "pied piper" to lure anti-Royal Family radicals into a war with the Soviets in Afghanistan. After the Soviets left, he went back to civilian life and started a business just like his rich Daddy. When Gulf War I started, he reprised his "pied piper" role to again remove anti-Royal Family radicals from Saudi Arabia.

Now, the NeoCons have a direct line to the Saudi Royal Family through the Bush Family. Saudi agents, ostensibly under the financial leadership of Osama, were given a free pass right up to 9-11.

In short, Osama and the Saudis are the perfect cut-out for the NeoCons in order to perform any job they wouldn't want traced back to them.

[redqueen]

58. This really deserves its own thread. n/t

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

62. It already has its own forum, for God's sake. n/t

[redqueen]

63. Why bring up God?

FCOL, some of us don't get to all the forums.

I see why people stay the $#&* out of here.


on edit: nevermind... I see rudeness has it's fan base here, so I suppose that was intentional and won't be reconsidered...

Really nice.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

102. "FCOL, some of us don't get to all the forums."

Yes, and the existence of places like the 9/11 and I/P forums are the only thing that keep GD a) G and b) D.

[tinanator]

155. so which Generals should we discuss?

Powell (Mai Lai aint no thang) or that darling of the new left, Wesley? IMO, nothing should be removed from GD, but thats just based on my (mis?)understanding of the words, General Discussion.

[The Gigmeister]

67. LOL!!

[Junkdrawer]

66. Well...when Graham's book came out, Tweety had him on Hardball...

after the initial pleasantries, Tweety hit him with "Are you saying that the Suadi Government paid the 9-11 hijackers?"

Without blinking, Graham says "Yes!".

Tweety, completely taken aback, thanks Graham for his time, shows the book, and Graham is gone.

Very few interviews after that, and none on his book that I'm aware of.

[redqueen]

74. Yes, more reason why this information needs repeated exposure.

We know freepers come here, and I'm betting they don't visit the other forums as much as this one, which is why I think this should be brought up often and in its own thread.

[Junkdrawer]

82. redqueen, if I posted such a thread, it would quickly get moved...

to the 9-11 forum where it would be lost among all the wacky theories.

But know this: credible people (and the former head of the Senate Intelligence Committee is as credible as they come) question the official version of events regarding 9-11.

[redqueen]

92. *sigh*

I'm learning more and more reasons why people stay out of this forum.

This isn't a 'wacky theory'... by any stretch of the imagination.

[tinanator]

156. and also how easy it is to discredit by association

which is why these specialized forums filled with insanely loaded agendas and disparate POV's is a really bad arrangement.

[Frederik]

150. Exactly

Michael Moore was spot on regarding the Saudi connection. He could have taken it further and gone into WAMY and Omar and Abdullah Bin Laden, who lived a few blocks away from four of the hijackers in Fall's Church, Virginia. And, he could have mentioned that the Bush admin, after taking office, blocked all investigations of Saudi links to terrorism. The block was lifted sept 13, 2001 (see BBC newsnight video at http://www.gregpalast.com/blog.cfm)

But if the Saudi connection is important, so is the Pakistani connection. Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, who was having breakfast with Porter Goss and Bob Graham on 9/11, instructed ISI asset/"al-Qaeda lieutenant"/Daniel Pearl's alleged killer Omar Saed Sheikh to wire $100,000 to Mohammed Atta prior to the attacks. It would appear that it's not just the Saudi govt, but another staunch ally as well. (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&theme=isidrugs)

[Media_Lies_Daily]

38. Why would Osama go to all of the trouble to....

...plan and carry out the mother of all terrorist attacks and then repeatedly deny ANY involvement in the attacks in the months immediately following 911? Osama claimed responsibility only when it became very clear that 911 was proving to be a real aid to his recruitment efforts.

As far as Clarke goes, I have long suspected Clarke of being part of what intell folks call a "limited hangout". The "limited hangout" is an operation designed to reveal SOME of the truth about an intell operation. Even though what is revealed to the public is potentially very damaging, not enough of the truth is revealed to indicate the full extent of an operation's true goals. Additionally, the TRUE planners of the operation remain hidden from view. Clarke had the credibility to carry out such an operation...and it has obviously worked very well since so many people still believe Osama was responsible.

[The Gigmeister]

39. The very few who "Think" he didn't are idiots.

The rest of the people spewing the consiracy bullshit are disruptors and/or propaganda specialists.

[RuleofLaw]

55. Perhaps you could provide some proof?

I am still on the fence as to who did it (9/11) but I have yet to see any proof of Osama Bin Laden being behind it and that 19 people did it. (Please bear in mind that at least six of the people identified as being the hijackers in the weeks after the attacks, were found to be alive in other parts of the world)

[The Gigmeister]

60. Oh good GOD!

Do you REALLY believe that? "Six of them alive"???? REALLY??

Don't you think that if that was true, those six people, or AT LEAST one of them would be making appearances on David Letterman, writing books, and testifying before congress???

I really can't believe how gulible some people are....


Here's a hint...

In the Middle East, many of the names of the hijackers are as common as "John Smith" or "Jim Johnson" in the States. The 19 hijackers are as dead as dead can be. End of story.

[RBHam]

90. You need to do some research, sir...

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
BBC News

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

more...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

Here's how you do it:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=hijackers+still+alive&meta=

[redqueen]

142. It shows intelligence when one is able to admit when one is wrong.

Not too surprising, then, that there's no response to this post.

Thanks for the effort, RBHam.

[RBHam]

96. Why didn't Larry King, ratings hound, interview Atta's girlfriend?

Think of the ratings!

Aren't ratings all that matter?

Daniel Hopsicker, who has conducted the best press investigation regarding the flight schools, interviewed Amanda Keller.

The truth awaits...

http://madcowprod.com/

[Media_Lies_Daily]

109. IMHO, people are much more gullible if they believe the....

...NeoCon version of 911. You do understand that these are the same people that have lied repeatedly to the American people since they seized power in December 2000?

Here's a hint for you...do some research on the alleged hijackers and post what you discover. While you're at it, do some research on the owners of the two flight scools in Florida that the alleged hijackers attended. You may also want to find out which of the alleged hijackers attended US military schools such as the Monterey Language School in California and the Foreign Officers School in Montgomery, AL.

[tinanator]

157. thank goodness those passports survived the inferno

or we would have no clue, judging by the manifests.
I suspect you thrive on gullibilty.

[Frederik]

161. Well

Lead hijacker Mohammed Atta lived with a stripper girlfriend named Amanda Keller in Venice, Florida. You can see a video interview with her on:
www.madcowprod.com

Dan Hopsicker is, amazingly, the only journalist/investigator who has bothered to track her down. She has not been invited to Letterman. She claims to have been visited by FBI agents who warned her not to talk about her relationship with Atta.

I don't know who's gullible, really...

[mopaul]

40. the thread that this thread is in response to is locked.

[redqueen]

143. Un-frickin'-real.

*sigh*

[MadHound]

45. Well then, if you're saying that LIHOP/MIHOP is invalid

I'm expecting that you will have all the answers to the raft of unanswered questions that continue to swirl around the events of 911. For starters, please answer the following:

1. Why did NORAD, an agency that consistently defended this country until 911, who had placed fighter jets next to every single suspicious plane, or hijacked aircraft since its inception, fail so miserably to put a single fighter jet in the air on 911 until it was too late, despite there being at least a forty five minute window of opportunity.

2. Why did the shady stock deals, the put orders, were investigated up until they reached the level of a former CIA officier, and then dropped(and keep in mind the old adage, once CIA, always CIA)?

3. Why did not just one, but two buildings collapse, supposedly due to fire, yet the firefighters ON THE SCENE clearly stated that the fire was completely controlable, calling for only three lines to put out the fires(in case you don't know, if you're calling for only three lines, the fire is controlable)?

4. How did two skyscapers, damaged on the side, defy all the laws of physics and collapse virtually straight down into their own footprint?

I'll let you respond to these few questions, and I really hope you can answer them. For you see, these are just a few of the questions that neither this administration, Clarke, the 911 Commission, nor anyone else can answer with any real facts. They hem and haw and make pious blather, but they simply can't answer these, and many other suchlike questions. And until somebody does, LIHOP/MIHOP theories are going to have fertile ground to grow, justifiably so in my opinion.

[BlueEyedSon]

47. WTC7..?

[MadHound]

69. Yes? What is your question, or answer? n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

48. #3 & #4 Are Funny!

Thanks for the laugh, this morning.
The Professor

[MadHound]

71. It is also funny that nobody has answered them yet,

Including you. Enjoy the laugh, and your morning.

[The Gigmeister]

77. Prove to me that there is no Santa Claus and I'll answer them for you.

Until then, the burden in on you. As it always has been, and always will be.

[demodewd]

163. the burden is on you.

The burden is on you to prove Bin Laden guilty in a court of law not preordained guilty by the Administration,the media,the 911 Commission and by you. That isn't the ways of a democratic Republic but those of a totalitarian state.

[ProfessorGAC]

79. You Were Answered

You are choosing to ignore the answers. One poster even cited a reference.

I knew that would happen, which is why i thought it was funny.

Answer me this: FDNY has some of the finest trained arson and explosive experts on the planet. Why did NONE of them hear a secondary explosion? Don't you think experts in arson and detonation would know what a bomb sounded like when it went off?

MIHOP'ers love to toss out open ended questions, and then use as evidence of the correctness of their views, the lack of answers. When the shoe's on the other foot, it isn't so comfortable, is it?

The Professor

[The Gigmeister]

84. They DID hear it!

"They're" just all in on the conspiracy.

Everyone is. Except for you and me. We're the ignorant dolts "They're" all working against. (That's how they've been able to keep the secret...Not too hard to fool just two of us, you know?)

[MadHound]

89. First of all, if you read down a little further down thread,

You will see I've blown up that PM propaganda piece. Secondly, I'm asking for answers from YOU, not somebody else. If you're coming on here make jabs at me, I'm expecting you have the facts to back them up.

Third, I'm mentioning nothing here about secondary explosions, I'm talking about the NYFD calling for only three lines to put out the fire in each tower. I've been a fireman in my life, and I realize that if you're only calling for three lines, I don't care what diameter, that means that the fire is controlable, that the fire retardant materials and the sprinklers are doing their job, and that the fire is not some raging inferno that is melting steel to the point of weakness.

So, you got any answers, or just more weak one liners?

[ProfessorGAC]

95. Is There Any Convincing You?

No! There is none. I read your other "debunking". Nothing there but conjecture.

So, since facts aren't important, expertise isn't important, critical thought isn't important, and sound analysis is irrelevant, i'll assume your mind is made up.

In addition, the fire fighters calling for lines were NOT on the floor of impact. THEY COULDN'T GET TO THOSE FLOORS! You know it and i know you know it. YOu've seen the films. That is NOT a controllable blaze, but IT a raging inferno. The impact created a BLEVE about 3 seconds after impact on both towers. It's evident from the news video. That shock wave blew the fireproofing away, since it is not designed to withstand a supersonic shock wave. (Kerosene BLEVE's conflagrate at about 1400 feet per second. Not a high explosive, but supersonic.)

I know a few things about explosives myself. My name is on file with the FBI because of the knowledge i have in this area. And, i know a thing or two about physics. Hardened steel does NOT need to get anywhere near it's melting point to lose a substantial part of its tensile strength and begin to suffer losses in coefficient of elasticity and modulus of flex. The building WAS NOT designed, by the admission of the engineering firm that built it, to withstand a fire that large, after structural damage due to impact and a supersonic shock wave, if the combustion source was extrinsic to the building itself.

Look all this up. It's all in the public record.

But, your mind is already made up. I don't believe the al Qaeda thing and reject the Bush association because that idiot and his minions say so. I reject it because the facts don't support it.
The Professor

[MadHound]

105. Again, you're putting words in my mouth, stop it!!

Have I mentioned anywhere on this thread, besides talking with you, anything about explosives? NO, I'm simply asking how two different buildings, damaged differently, both defied the odds and collapsed straight down. Yet you keep bringing up the topic of explosives. Perhaps your subconcious is taking over there Prof:evilgrin:

As far as the reports of three lines goes, those calls did come from firefighters on the scene, inside both buildings. And I don't know about you, but looking at the films, with all of the black roiling smoke, with little evidence of flame, I don't see a raging inferno, I see a fire protection system doing its job. The fire retardant materials are slowing the fire, the sprinkler systems are also slowing and cooling it. I see a flame that is being smothered. Apparently the firefighters on the scene saw the same thing, since they were calling for only three hoses apiece.

As for melting points, I realize that you don't have to reach melting point to weaken steel. But tell me, how does a jet fuel fire(jet fuel burns at 800F) that is being smothered by the automatic systems(and also kept cool) reach the 1000-1100F temperature needed to weaken structural steel?

This all reminds me of Kennedy. Ridicule for anyone of questioning minds, but years later the government was forced to admit that yes indeed, it was a conspiracy. Let's hope that this doesn't go on as long.

[ProfessorGAC]

108. Like I Said

Kerosene burns at 800Degrees. Where did you get that factoid from? A matchbook cover?

That's the surface temperature burn in it's liquid state. It can and does burn MUCH hotter than that! In it's vapor state you had the heat of combustion to the sensible heat plus enthalpy. The overall burn temperature is MUCH higher.

Look up Eugene Mayer's book on the physical chemistry of combustion and explosives. (It's out of print, but most college libraries will have a copy. I got mine directly from Gene.) Maybe then, you will undestand a bit more why i think the conjectural reasoning you posit doesn't meet my understanding of physics and chemistry.
The Professor

[MadHound]

117. And yet kerosene doesn't burn in its vapor state friend

You know that as well as I do. It takes a wick, carpeting furntiture etc. It isn't gasoline, where it explodes. I can drown a match in liquid kerosene friend.

And you still aren't accounting for reports from the scene, and the opinions of the experts that were there.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

123. Oy!

carpeting furntiture etc

Certainly none of that in a 110 story office building.

[ProfessorGAC]

125. It Burns ONLY In Its Vapor State

You need a chemistry class, madhound. NOTHING excepting ethylene oxide burns in its liquid state. That's the nature of a flash point. You were a fireman, you MUST know what those are.

The flash point is the state at which the liquid has absorbed sufficient heat energy to create a vapor concentration above the liquid to create combustion.

This is VERY simple stuff. I'm glad you didn't work on my fire department. I would think a firefighter would know something this basic.

Your credibility just hit an all-time low, slick.

I'm out. You are not just being stubborn. You are incapable of learning the facts and thus incapable of changing your mind.
The Professor

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

50. Um...

4. How did two skyscapers, damaged on the side, defy all the laws of physics and collapse virtually straight down into their own footprint?

Gravity.

[MadHound]

73. Don't get it yet, now do you?

Buildings don't naturally collapse virtually straight down into their own footprint, especially if they we're damaged on one side or the other. To get a building to go straight down, it takes careful calculations, many man hours, and specially placed charges to achieve that. Yet we are told to believe that not just one, but two buildings, damaged in two entirely different areas, both defied the odds and went straight down. If you believe that, well have I got the land deal for you:eyes:

[The Gigmeister]

81. Buildings don't naturally collapse virtually straight down into their own"

Prove it.

And just for kicks, be sure to include examples of 110 story buildings getting hit by passenger jets that spew thousands of gallons of fule into approximately the 80th through 90th stories.

Thanks!!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

98. Jesus creeping shit this is getting ridiculous.

To get a building to go straight down, it takes careful calculations, many man hours, and specially placed charges to achieve that.

It also requires ripping the building apart from the inside, and occasionally from the outside. It's not something that can be done under cover of darkness or easily obscured. Jesus, why am I even talking to you? Do you know the first thing about controlled demolition? Controlled demolition is used to ensure that each and every piece of a building falls exactly where the demolitions experts want it to fall, primarily to avoid damage to adjascent structures. It's to avoid having, as you did at the WTC, vast bits of building material being blown into adjascent structures and damaging them. It's not as if the WTC could ever have been forced to tip over to the side. That's a fucking cartoon, not science.

[MadHound]

112. You know nothing of demolition do you?

When you are demolishing a building, you don't rip it up. You calculate where, and what shape you need your charges to be. Generally this is on a few key lower level supports. Minor explosions that then lets gravity do the work.

To have the same effect from two buildings that aren't so prepared is about the same odds of you getting a royal flush two hands in a row.

And yes, I've talked with a great many engineers about this matter, and yes, they too are baffled.

Look, if the Big Lie brings you comfort, fine. But don't expect the rest of us to stop questioning the matter when we detect BS.

[earth mom]

103. Exactly-the way the buildings went down was a little too perfect

wouldn't you say?! It was just like what they do with those casinos in Vegas-it was calculated and planned and so damn obvious it ain't funny!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

107. No

It was nothing like the casinos in Vegas.

For instance:

When demolishing a large structure, charges are placed at specific points all over the structure in order to weaken key structural elements that allow the building to disintegrate as a whole.

When demolishing a large structure, you end up with a very neat pile of rubble, which leaves all surrounding buildings unaffected. Have you seen the pictures of the WTC rubble? I'm sorry, but that looks like anything but a controlled demolition.

When demolishing a large structure, teams of engineers spend weeks or months removing large chunks of the interior of the building to get at the structure to place charges.

When demolishing a large structure, you do not first ram it with a passenger jet at exactly the location you've supposedly placed your charges. This would destroy the charges and make controlled demolition of the building unnecessary and irrelevant.

[aaronnyc]

57. Answers to #3 and #4

They are clearly explained (along with other questions about the scientific aspects of 9/11) in the March '05 issue of Popular Mechanics.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

64. What? How can you quote that right-wing rag? n/t

[The Gigmeister]

75. Popular Mechanics is a "Right-Wing Rag"??

WOW!! Didn't know that!!

Wonder if all those hard working union Democrats who like working on cars and reading popular mechanics know that??

And I suppose Detroit is Puke Central??

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

76. 'twas sarcasm

check my other posts in this thread :)

[The Gigmeister]

86. Whoops!!!! Sorry!!!

I got lost in all the foolishness being spewed.

Again...Sorry. :)

[demodewd]

164. PM..owned by who?

Poplar Mechanics is owned by who...do you know?

[MadHound]

83. LOL, you're relying on that propaganda piece!

That's funny, because if you go beyond the surface, you would see that it is nothing but propaganda. Just one example:

"FACT: In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 1 hour and 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet"

On this little gem, what they are neglecting to tell you is that two F-15s made the intercept minutes after Stewart's plane went off course.

"An Air Force spokesman says two U.S. Air Force F-15s from Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, intercepted the plane shortly after it lost contact with aircraft controllers, and followed it to Missouri.

Pilots reported the plane's crew was "non-responsive" and that the cockpit windows were obscured by condensation or frost, an indication the aircraft may have lost cabin pressure.

Over Missouri, four F-16s from an Air National Guard unit based in Fargo, North Dakota, took over the escort mission, and stayed with the plane until it crashed."<http://www.cnn.com/US/9910/25/wayward.jet.07/>

Gee, you think that if PM would prevaricate on this little issue, that just might do even more so on everything else in that little propaganda piece artice? Sorry friend, but you're buying official government spin. Go out and do your own research, then get back to me.

[aaronnyc]

110. 9/11 commission report backs up PMs findings.

It is really hard on the eyes (small print) but I highlighted the important terms so that you can hopefully read it. Essentially, it says that there was no significant difference in NORAD's response time.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:nJ0U9YuTIuIJ:www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-476.html+norad+payne+stewart&hl=en

It would not be surprising if the article which you cited from CNN is misleading. They get their information from some anonymous "air force spokesman" who may well be trying to cover their ass in the immediate aftermath of Payne Stewart's death.

I would tend to trust the 9/11 commission's report as more of an authoritative source, than a small CNN article - but, I will admit that political biases certainly played a role in the commission's findings. Regardless, it does not seem clear that the Popular Mechanics article should necessarily be dismissed as a "propaganda piece."

[MadHound]

121. Ahh, the same 911 commission headed up by

Lee "what Iran Contra?" Hamilton?

OOOOOKAY, I wish you luck with that. That you put your faith in a man who is a known liar and fixer, with members of his commission and others saying that the report is a hackneyed whitewash is really telling, more of your need to believe than anything else.

The rest of us will follow where the evidence leads us, OK.

[aaronnyc]

133. I don't "put my faith" in Lee Hamilton

In my previous post I admitted that there are legitimate questions about the accuracy of the report's findings. While the report was not willing to directly place blame on the White House, they did admit that there were many flaws in the immediate response to 9/11. Thus, it seems likely that they would have agreed that NORAD was slower to react to 9/11 than they were to Payne Stewart - if there was clear-cut evidence of this.

I don't know whether the commission's findings are correct. The Report has flaws, but so does CNN, and you have been unwilling to question their article.
Is your unwillingness to question CNN a rule of principal, or does it only apply to when they agree with you?

[demodewd]

165. 911 Omission Report

The 911 Commission report didn't deal with War Games being conducted by the military that day or mention the collaose of WTC7. I wonder why?

[Make7]

171. Eastern Daylight Time vs. Central Daylight Time

From http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAB0001.htm :

... According to ATC radio transmissions, the flight departed MCO about 0919 EDT bound for DAL. At 0921:46 EDT, the flight contacted the Jacksonville Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) and reported climbing through an altitude of 9,500 feet to 14,000 feet.

At 0921:51 EDT, the controller instructed N47BA to climb and maintain FL 260. N47BA acknowledged the clearance by stating, "two six zero bravo alpha." At 0923:16 EDT, the controller cleared N47BA direct to Cross City and then direct to DAL. N47BA acknowledged the clearance. At 0926:48 EDT, N47BA was issued instructions to change radio frequency and contact another Jacksonville ARTCC controller. N47BA acknowledged the frequency change.

At 0927:10 EDT, N47BA called the Jacksonville ARTCC controller and stated that the flight was climbing through an altitude of FL 230. At 0927:13 EDT, the controller instructed N47BA to climb and maintain FL 390. At 0927:18 EDT, N47BA acknowledged the clearance by stating, "three nine zero bravo alpha." This was the last known radio transmission from the airplane. The sound of the cabin altitude aural warning was not heard on the ATC recording of this transmission.

At 0933:38 EDT (6 minutes and 20 seconds after N47BA acknowledged the previous clearance), the controller instructed N47BA to change radio frequencies and contact another Jacksonville ARTCC controller. The controller received no response from N47BA. The controller called the flight five more times over the next 4 1/2 minutes but received no response.

About 0952 CDT, a USAF F-16 test pilot from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at Eglin Air Force Base (AFB), Florida, was vectored to within 8 nm of N47BA. About 0954 CDT, at a range of 2,000 feet from the accident airplane and an altitude of about 46,400 feet, the test pilot made two radio calls to N47BA but did not receive a response. About 1000 CDT, the test pilot began a visual inspection of N47BA. There was no visible damage to the airplane, and he did not see ice accumulation on the exterior of the airplane. Both engines were running, and the rotating beacon was on. He stated that he could not see inside the passenger section of the airplane because the windows seemed to be dark. Further, he stated that the entire right cockpit windshield was opaque, as if condensation or ice covered the inside. He also indicated that the left cockpit windshield was opaque, although several sections of the center of the windshield seemed to be only thinly covered by condensation or ice; a small rectangular section of the windshield was clear, with only a small section of the glare shield visible through this area. He did not see any flight control movement. About 1012 CDT, he concluded his inspection of N47BA and proceeded to Scott AFB, Illinois.

About 1113 CDT, two Oklahoma ANG F-16s with the identification "TULSA 13 flight" were vectored to intercept the accident airplane by the Minneapolis ARTCC. The TULSA 13 lead pilot reported to the Minneapolis ARTCC controller that he could not see any movement in the cockpit. About 1125 CDT, the TULSA 13 lead pilot reported that the windshield was dark and that he could not tell if the windshield was iced.

About 1133 CDT, a TULSA 13 airplane maneuvered in front of the accident airplane, and the pilot reported, "we're not seeing anything inside, could be just a dark cockpit though...he is not reacting, moving or anything like that he should be able to have seen us by now."

About 1138 CDT, the TULSA 13 lead pilot stated, "my wingman is going to make a final pass and then we are going to head back to the tanker." The TULSA 13 wingman reported, "we did not get close enough to see any icing on the window due to our configuration...we did get up behind him but did not see anything." About 1139 CDT, TULSA 13 flight departed for the tanker.

About 1150 CDT, two North Dakota ANG F-16s with the identification "NODAK 32 flight" were vectored to intercept N47BA. (TULSA 13 flight had returned from refueling, and both TULSA 13 and NODAK 32 flights maneuvered in close proximity to N47BA.) About 1157 CDT, the TULSA 13 lead pilot reported, "we've got two visuals on it. It's looking like the cockpit window is iced over and there's no displacement in any of the control surfaces as far as the ailerons or trims." About 1201 CDT, TULSA 13 flight returned to the tanker again.

At 1210:41 CDT, the sound of an engine winding down, followed by sounds similar to a stickshaker and an autopilot disconnect, can be heard on N47BA's cockpit voice recorder (CVR), which recorded the final 30 minutes of cruise flight. The CVR also captured the continuous activation of the cabin altitude aural warning, which ceased at 1212:26 CDT. At 1211:01 CDT, ATC radar indicated that N47BA began a right turn and descent. One NODAK 32 airplane remained to the west, while one TULSA 13 airplane broke away from the tanker and followed N47BA down. At 1211:26 CDT, the NODAK 32 lead pilot reported, "the target is descending and he is doing multiple aileron rolls, looks like he's out of control...in a severe descent, request an emergency descent to follow target." The TULSA 13 pilot reported, "It's soon to impact the ground he is in a descending spiral." ...

[The Gigmeister]

72. Ummmmmmmmmmmmm.........

"4. How did two skyscapers, damaged on the side, defy all the laws of physics and collapse virtually straight down into their own footprint?"


What SHOULD they have done?

[MadHound]

85. Gee, according to the laws of physics

Since they were damaged on one side, they should have collapsed towards that side. Instead, we're being told to believe that somehow not one, but two skyscrapers defied the laws of physics, and without controlled charges or any other outside force, collapsed virtually straight down into their own footprint:eyes: Again, for those who believe this fairy tale, I've got land available:crazy:

[DistressedAmerican]

88. Only if they collapsed from impact damage. It was the fire and gravity!

I substitute my physics for your lopsided version...

[MadHound]

94. Fire and gravity could account for a building's collapse

What I'm asking is why they both defied the odds and collapsed virtually straight down into their own footprint. It takes many man hours, lots of planning, specially shaped and placed charges to achieve that kind of demolition. Yet we're being asked to believe the Big Lie and accept that both buildings did defy these astronomical odds, much like the American public has been asked to believe the Magic Bullet theory for lo these many years. You can keep your head in the sand and believe the BS if you want, but I prefer to keep a questioning attitude. After all, it was the same sort of questioning attitude, and the evidence that it produced that finally forced our government to acknoweledgle that the Kennedy assisnation was a conspircacy after all.

[The Gigmeister]

101. Do you breath air in your world too?

"After all, it was the same sort of questioning attitude, and the evidence that it produced that finally forced our government to acknoweledgle that the Kennedy assisnation was a conspircacy after all."


In WHAT world did this happen???

[MadHound]

106. 1979 House Committee on Assasinations

Go look it up!

[Frederik]

169. Anger management...

[The Gigmeister]

91. Where are these "Laws" printed?

Are you serious?? REALLY?? Do you REALLY believe what you type?? If so, PLEASE back away from the computer and seek professional help?

The buildings were hit high. They DID fall to the side slightly, down to the point of impact. But since that point was so high, they pancaked-down the rest of the way.

(And in case in matters...I'm not even CLOSE to any kind of Engineer or expert on any of this. I'm just some dumbass on a message board. What I just stated was off the cuff. Not something I've read...Just common sense. And if a dumbass like me can see all that, well...To avoid a flame-war, let's just leave it at that...)

[MadHound]

97. Gee, those laws are printed in most any college physics book

Or you could read Newton. Or gee, talk to some demolition consultants. You admit you are no engineer, well I speak with engineers every single day, and I've questioned many quite thouroughly. The fact that both buildings, being hit in different places, sustaining damage in different areas, and yet both defying the odds and collapsing into their own footprint baffles even the experts that I've talked with.

Tell you what, when you've got some equations that also defy these odds, get back to me. Cause I really want to drink the Kool-Aid and believe the Big Lie too.

[The Gigmeister]

113. Dude...Read the Popular Mechanics article...Stop being a KOOK!

Or don't. I really don't care, because you're entertaining.

The only thing I care about is that you represent yourself as a Democrat. Any chance you can become an Independent? Or at least put something in your signature so you don't do harm to the reputation of DemocraticUnderground??

PLEASE???

[RBHam]

115. That article is a pathetic whitewash...

The truth keeps getting fired...

UQ Wire: 9/11 Whistleblower Kevin Ryan Fired

For background see also...
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00177.htm
UQ Wire: Underwriter Speaks Out On WTC Study
According to Nic Levis, east coast director of 911truth.org, "David Ray Griffin has received confirmation that Kevin Ryan, site manager of the Environmental Health Laboratories (Underwriters Laboratories), was fired today by the parent company, Underwriters Laboratories, apparently for writing a letter questioning certain common theories of the Twin Towers collapses to the leader of the U.S. government NIST team researching the World Trade Center events..."

911truth.org, who followed up on a story by Emanuel Sfernos/Bill Douglas (911Visibility.org), is "working to get statements from the parties involved and in developing this story and a possible response..."

http://www.911Truth.org

[Media_Lies_Daily]

124. When backed into a corner, folks like you tend to resort to....

...name-calling. That usually indicates an inability to do real research and back it up with real facts.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

93. I just want to cherish this for a moment.

This is a watershed moment in crackpot 9/11 theories. You essentially just equated the physics of two 110-story steel girder skyscrapers falling down with the physics of a tree being cut down. This is priceless.

edit: clarity

[Media_Lies_Daily]

99. Responses to #3 and #4.....

#3. Why did not just one, but two buildings collapse, supposedly due to fire, yet the firefighters ON THE SCENE clearly stated that the fire was completely controlable, calling for only three lines to put out the fires(in case you don't know, if you're calling for only three lines, the fire is controlable)?

I'm not sure where you're getting this from, because thousands of firemen responded to the WTC fires.


#4. How did two skyscapers, damaged on the side, defy all the laws of physics and collapse virtually straight down into their own footprint?

The North Tower was struck first by AA Flight 11. Flight 11 smashed into the north face and severed most of the outer support columns on that side. The explosion of thousands of gallons of jet fuel produced enough heat to deform the horizontal beams running under the floors impacted by the airliner. That caused a collpase of the effected floors in a downward direction producing what is commonly known as pancaking. Jets of flame and smoke ejected from the floors immediately beneath the falling floors have been mistake by some as the result of "explosive devices".

The South Tower was actually hit on the western edge of the south face by UA Flight 175. This impact not only damaged the vertical support beams on the south face, but it also cut about 2/3 of the vertical support beams on the western face. If you watch any decent video of the collapse of the South Tower, you will see that the part of the South Tower above the impact area leans to the west before the floors below the impact area begin to pancake.

And finally, if you look at any photo of the WTC complex after the fires had been put out, you will see that the debris from the falling towers landed on every building in the complex, destroying most if not all of them. That doesn't fit your description of the two towers falling within their own footprint, does it?

[applegrove]

51. Because Bush lied to his people as president about war.. they no

longer believe in anything. Now what is the first thing a leader should do in a crisis? The first thing?

Lead his people out of the crisis. Bush purposely failed to do that. Bush is a monster.

[H2O Man]

56. I think it is clear that Usama bin Laden

attacked the United States of America on 9-11. I recommend anyone with an open mind read the book "Imperial Hubris." This book explains why bin Laden is at war with the United States.

I do not believe this because of anything the Bush administration says. What they say is of little significance. I do not think that because they say something, it is proof that it is not true. Nor do I believe that they are so all-powerful that they are in firm control over everything that happens in the world.

[RuleofLaw]

59. It might explain why he is at war with US

But you still have no proof of Osama or the supposedly 19 hijackers actually carrying out the attack.

How come that all the records from the Florida flight schools were confiscated by Jeb Bush and the FBI in the days after the attacks, and have not turned up since.

It would be interesting to see the amount of hours these hijackers logged in the planes and how they performed.

How come there has been no official story about Atta's girlfriend in Florida?

[H2O Man]

78. I would still

recommend that you read Imperial Hubris. In any major event in history, there are some unanswered questions, although I think the ones you mention are not all unanswered. However, I have no desire to convince you, or anyone else. I will say that for anyone to claim there is no evidence that bin Laden was behind 9-11 indicates they are either unfamiliar with a huge amount of evidence, or they simply have made up their minds with no regard to the facts.

[ProfessorGAC]

68. Well Said, Waterman

The Professor

[Media_Lies_Daily]

131. Let us know when the NeoCon Dictatorship supplies any facts to back...

...up their propaganda about 911.

Those people have lied about every single issue since they took power in December 2000. Why do you think they would be telling the truth about 911? Who stood to gain the most from 911?

[H2O Man]

137. It's sad that you

are not able to grasp that one doesn't have to believe a word from the neocons in order to recognize that Usama bin Laden was behind 9-11.

[Frederik]

168. I have read Imperial Hubris

It's an interesting book, written by a knowledgeable man, but it covers Afghanistan, which is what Schauer ("anonymous")is an authority on. Afghanistan is not the whole story, and Schauer's story is not the whole story on Afghanistan.

I recommend Paul Thompson's collection of mainstream press stories as an introduction to other connections:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

[sabra]

70. FBI doesn't seem too concerned about either

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3467278

[leesa]

80. I have read it and I am convinced OBL, if involved at all, was only a

tool used by BushCo and his own family. After all, he was a dead man anyway (from disease), what did it matter
If you are denying LIHOP, you are simply not awake.

[mopaul]

100. whoo hoo, i'm #100!

[RBHam]

104. From BBC News : Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

(snip)

FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt.

Here's a google page to peruse:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=hijackers+still+alive+bbc&meta=

[DistressedAmerican]

114. OMG! WHAT HAVE I DONE? I'VE UNLEASHED A FLAME WAR!!!

Well, Actually Mopaul did!
:grr: :nuke: :grr: :nuke: :grr: :nuke: :grr: :nuke: :grr: :nuke:

I could stand to update this. But, you get the point:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

119. You expected a reasoned discussion?

Damn, you really came to the wrong place!

[RBHam]

122. I don't know - there's plenty of well reasoned debate going on.

Lots of links provided, lots of research to explore...

Seems to me, this thread is very enlightening.

This is what makes DU great.

[mopaul]

130. hey don't blame me, this is your thread

hee hee

[RBHam]

127. The Hijackers were sure LUCKY in their timing...

They were JUST LUCKY to pick a day when the Pentagon, NORAD and the FAA were all involved monitoring WAR GAMES...in fact, one of these excercises simulated a plane crashing into the Pentagon...

WOW! What a COINCIDENCE!!!

Does anuyone get it yet?

Pentagon Acknowledges Four Wargames
In Progress on 9/11


" enhanced our ability to respond, given that NORAD didn't have the overall responsibility for responding to the attacks that day."
-- Pentagon Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Richard Myers, 3/11/05


March 17, 2005
Dear friends,
Cynthia McKinney is a brave congresswoman from Georgia who has had knowledge of the 9/11 cover-up almost since that tragic day. She is in close contact with 9/11 researcher and former Los Angeles cop Mike Ruppert. Ruppert's well-researched book Crossing the Rubicon goes into great detail about the four wargames which were in progress on 9/11 and how they hampered the military's ability to respond to the attacks. You may not have previously known that a significant part of the US military was involved in wargames at the very time of the 9/11 attacks. The media to this day has somehow failed to report this "detail."

In a Congressional hearing last week, Pentagon Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Richard Myers acknowledged the wargames, but claims the military did not have overall responsibility for responding to the attacks. If this is the case, one might ask what responsibility they did have. Why have these wargames and their impact on the 9/11 response not been discussed in the media and other public forums? For other important questions as yet unaddressed regarding 9/11, see http://www.WantToKnow.info/9-11cover-up10pg

Below is the transcript of Congresswoman McKinney's questioning of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and General Myers in a recorded House of Representatives Committee meeting. To watch video coverage of the questioning (free Real Player required), click on the link provided below and scroll down past the transcript of the hearing. The Pentagon's missing trillions are also acknowledged and discussed in this hearing.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/050317wargames911

[The Gigmeister]

134. Read the Popular Mechanics article. It explains it all.

And no, it's not "Propaganda" or "White Washing". Unless, of course, the all-knowing and all-powerful Bush Evil Empire (Headed by a "Moron", of course), is manipulating them too.

Sigh...So many contradictions, so little time.

[RBHam]

128. F.A.A. Official Scrapped Tape of 9/11 Controllers' Statements

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/06/national/06CND-TAPE.h...

Amazing how some things just "slip through the radar" eh????

excerpt:
The taping began before noon on Sept. 11 at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center, in Ronkonkoma, on Long Island, where about 16 people met in a basement conference room known as "the Bat Cave" and passed around a microphone, each recalling his or her version of the events a few hours earlier.

But officials at the center never told higher-ups of the tape's existence,
(yeah..riggghhhht!-my ed)

and it was later destroyed by an F.A.A. official described in the report as a quality-assurance manager there

(what was his name? what was his actual position? -my ed)

That manager crushed the cassette in his hand, shredded the tape and dropped the pieces into different trash cans around the building, according to a report made public today by the inspector general of the Transportation Department.

Move on! Move on! Nothing to see here!

christ almighty...

[The Gigmeister]

141. HEY EVERYONE!! READ THIS AND SHUT UP!!!!

A secret (Conspiracy theory) can be kept by a maximum of three people...

As long as two of them are DEAD!


End of debate!!

[tinanator]

148. wow

yeah, that really sews it up, thanks!

[The Gigmeister]

152. LOL!

No problem.


And honestly...I do think it's THAT simple!!

[Junkdrawer]

154. Ever hear of Rendition? See post #35 and replies....

When these guys do something that dirty, they outsource it to foreign friends for just the reason you mention.

[Frederik]

166. Bingo

MIHOP - I'm not espousing it, by the way, but not completely dismissing it either - doesn't have to involve a big conspiracy on the part of the WH/some faction of the govt/whoever. Outsourcing and subcontracting to Saudi and Pakistani friends and connections plus some conveniently scheduled anti-terror excercises and a "Russian bomber over Alaska" alert (which Rumsfeld or Myers said there was in Congress) to distract response systems, plus a "see no evil" back-off order to intelligence and law enforcement agencies (which Greg Palast has revealed) is all it would take (or took). Note that the alleged moneymaster Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed was in Washington and met with the Pentagon, the CIA, the SNC, and the joint intelligence committee the same week. It's a small stretch of the imagination to entertain at least the possibility that he could have been able to confirm that things were going according to plan and give the "go" order (he apparently instructed $100,000 to be wired to Muhammed Atta, but it is unclear when). I don't find it very likely, but I don't think it is completely outside the realm of the possible either.

[Frederik]

147. I disagree, to a degree

All is not said with Richard Clark's book I think. Sibel Edmonds is still under her national security gag-order I believe, but she's hinting at more than just incompetence, based on information that she discerned from FBI investigations of the American Turkish Council (in all probability, though she hasn't named the organization directly).
And does Clark cover ISI chief Mahmood Ahmed and the strange history of Omar Saed Sheikh? Does he explain how Hani Hanjour, who according to his flight school teacher couldn't fly a one-engine Cessna in january 2001, performed the nearly impossible maneouvres of Flight 77?

Anyway, if we're talking about Bin Laden, and I think he is more of a peripheral figure in 9/11 than the big mastermind, a convenient scapegoat more than anything, we should at least be talking about "the Bin Ladens". Like Omar and Abdullah Bin Laden's World Association of Muslim Youth, which was expelled from India for its role in financing Muslim guerrillas in Kashmir, investigated by the Phillipines for financing the Abu Sayyaf, investigated by Holland for links to terrorism etc. Omar and Abdullah lived right down the street from WAMY's headquarters in Fall's Church, Virginia, and a few blocks further down the road lived 4 of the 9/11 hijackers...

The Wall Street Journal's Glenn Simpson made public a report by the Bosnian govt. that concluded that a Bosnian charity with Abdullah Bin Laden on its board had financed terrorism in Chechnya.

The same charity financed muhahiddeen in Bosnia when they fought on America's side against the Serbs.

When Bush & co took office, they immidiately gave a "back off" order to the intelligence agencies, to not investigate Saudi links to terrorism. It was lifted sept 13, 2001, when Omar and Abdullah were in safety - out of the country.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm

"SPRINGMAN:
What I was protesting was, in reality, an effort to bring recruits, rounded up by Osama Bin Laden, to the US for terrorist training by the CIA. They would then be returned to Afghanistan to fight against the then-Soviets.

The attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 did not shake the State Department's faith in the Saudis, nor did the attack on American barracks at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia three years later, in which 19 Americans died. FBI agents began to feel their investigation was being obstructed. Would you be surprised to find out that FBI agents are a bit frustrated that they can't be looking into some Saudi connections?

MICHAEL WILDES, ( LAWYER)
I would never be surprised with that. They're cut off at the hip sometimes by supervisors or given shots that are being called from Washington at the highest levels."

----
So the rest of the Bin Laden family would appear to be in the same business as their "disowned" brother Osama allegedly is - terrorist fundraising. That didn't stop them from being among the select backers of the private, invitation-only Carlyle investment group, which was chosen by Saudi prince Al Waleed bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz as advisor when he bought up 10% of Citicorp's preferred stock. We know who the Bin Ladens' Carlyle buddies are - Poppy, James Baker, John Major etc. Then, of course, there's Salem Bin Laden's role in channelling money, through James Bath, to Dubya's Arbusto.

"On the morning of September 11, 2001 , “in the plush setting of the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Washington, DC, the Carlyle Group was holding its annual international investor conference. Frank Carlucci, James Baker III, David Rubenstein, William Conway, and Dan D’Aniellow were together, along with a host of former world leaders, former defense experts, wealthy Arabs from the Middle East, and major international investors as the terror played out on television. There with them, looking after the investments of his family was Shafiq bin Laden, Osama bin Laden’s estranged half-brother. George Bush Sr. was also at the conference, but Carlyle’s spokesperson says the former president left before the terror attacks, and was on an airplane over the Midwest when flights across the country were grounded on the morning of September 11. In any circumstance, a confluence of such politically complex and globally connected people would have been curious, even newsworthy. But in the context of the terrorist attacks being waged against the United States by a group of Saudi nationals led by Osama bin Laden, the group assembled at the Ritz-Carlton that day was a disconcerting and freakish coincidence."

-- Dan Briody, The Iron Triangle, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003, p. 139-140.

Talking of conspicuous congregations on the morning of september 11, 2001, I would include the breakfast meeting between Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, chief of Pakistan's ISI intelligence service and later pinpointed as the man who instructed ISI asset Omar Saed Sheikh to wire $100,000 to lead hijacker Mohammed Atta before the attack (according to Indian intelligence leaks to the Times of India and Agence France Press, later confirmed by the FBI. Indian intelligence officials told AFP that "what we have uncovered is much more serious than just one rogue general"). Ahmed had been meeting with George Tenet, Pentagon officials, and the National Security Council (Condi later denied she even remembered he had been in Washington), according to Pakistani daily Dawn. Dawn reported on all those meetings a couple of days before 9/11, they described the many meetings as "mysterious" and speculated if something significant was about to happen... What were they discussing? Does Clarke know?

There are way too many loose ends - the above are just a couple out of many - for me to be convinced of the "Bin Laden attacked and it came as a complete surprise" story. I don't know what happened and it bugs me.

[WoodrowFan]

151. hear hear!!!

:yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: :yourock: :toast: :hi: