http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/27302.htm

Of course there was a lot of monkey business behind 9/11.  If there's not quite sufficient evidence for a premeditated government plot, there's evidence galore of a mass coverup by the government afterwards.

My gut says, "Those amoral sunsofb!ches in the Bush Administration toyed with such an idea for years.  Guys as ruthless as Cheney and Rumsfeld would have noooo qualms about sacrificing three thousand (or six thousand, or twelve thousand) American citizens for the advancement of the corporate-national security state!"  Then my brain says, "Neeeahhh, I wouldn't be so hasty to pin it on the Bushies, too risky even for them, but there sure are a lot of funny phenomena in the aftermath...not funny as in 'ha ha!'"
:o

I'm sure of one thing: those buildings did not collapse controlled-demolition fashion because a couple of airliners slammed into them.  They've been talking about the 9/11 conspiracies on the Unexplained Mysteries forums for quite a while.  I only joined the fun over there a couple of weeks ago.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/

--MaxwellSmart
aka Pilgrim Shadow

Oh yes, and let's not forget the other claims, that there *was* no 9/11, it was all special effects and everybody had been evacuated prior to the events.

Then there is also the claim that Israel is behind it, not Osama.  And don't forget the 10,000 other claims, accusations, and conspiracies.  And of course Osama is innocent, even though he has stated many times that *he* was behind it.

I myself, I just look at the events through Occam's Razor.  It may not be as satisfying an answer for those convinced that the US is the ultimate evil in the world today, but it is the most likely.

Of course, I also do not believe in conspiracy theories.  Most of the time I consider them as little more then a form of mental masturbation for those who lack a firm grip on reality.

Oh yes, and let's not forget the other claims, that there *was* no 9/11, it was all special effects and everybody had been evacuated prior to the events.

Then there is also the claim that Israel is behind it, not Osama.  And don't forget the 10,000 other claims, accusations, and conspiracies.  And of course Osama is innocent, even though he has stated many times that *he* was behind it.

I myself, I just look at the events through Occam's Razor.  It may not be as satisfying an answer for those convinced that the US is the ultimate evil in the world today, but it is the most likely.

Of course, I also do not believe in conspiracy theories.  Most of the time I consider them as little more then a form of mental masturbation for those who lack a firm grip on reality.

I can only speculate on who was really involved in the 9/11 conspiracy.  Applying Occam's Razor to the the physics of the destruction, the official version that two jet planes caused three Trade Towers to collapse in planned demolition fashion doesn't make sense.  Heck, the steel girters split in convenient 30-foot lenghs for loading onto big trucks.  It is illegal to remove evidence from a crime scene before a thorough investigation, but off went all the steel and fragments of the buildings, loaded on ships, and sent to Asia for melting-down.
I'm not saying Osoma is innoncent, not at all.  I'm not suggesting Israel was behind it.  I'm just saying the evidence does not comport with the explanation.

I really don't think that this Administration had any part in the destruction of the WTC. BUT! I believe in every fiber of my being that they KNEW it was going to happen and did absolutely nothing to stop it because this was a good excuse to go to war with Iraq. It didn't matter if Iraq had nothing to do with it.




Cat

BUT! I believe in every fiber of my being that they KNEW it was going to happen and did absolutely nothing to stop it


Cat


THAT STATEMENT RIGHT THERE is what keeps me supporting Bush!  Cat, this statement I am going to make is not directed at you personally, but HELLO!! If he had done something, how many liberals would have been shouting "ILLEGAL WAR" and "WE HAVE NO RIGHT" and "THIS INTELLIGENCE YOU HAVE IS BOGUS" and "THEY DIDNT ATTACK US!" and so on and so on...

So they get intelligence on Saddam having WMD... and they know Saddam hates America. So Bush does something, and SURPRISE, SURPRISE...  "ILLEGAL WAR!"  "WE HAVE NO RIGHT!"

basically what I'm trying to say is in both cases he'd be dammed if he did and dammed if he didn't.

THAT STATEMENT RIGHT THERE is what keeps me supporting Bush!  Cat, this statement I am going to make is not directed at you personally, but HELLO!! If he had done something, how many liberals would have been shouting "ILLEGAL WAR" and "WE HAVE NO RIGHT" and "THIS INTELLIGENCE YOU HAVE IS BOGUS" and "THEY DIDNT ATTACK US!" and so on and so on...

So they get intelligence on Saddam having WMD... and they know Saddam hates America. So Bush does something, and SURPRISE, SURPRISE...  "ILLEGAL WAR!"  "WE HAVE NO RIGHT!"

basically what I'm trying to say is in both cases he'd be dammed if he did and dammed if he didn't.



There was intelligence reports about 9/11 that was ignored. And the intelligence reports stated that Saddam didn't have WMD. If what the Adminstration has been saying was true, I would have no problem with it. But Dubya was reading what he wanted to read and not what was there. It was all a bunch of falsehoods.  It really bothers me that the facts are there but there is no outrage or outcry about this. This Adminstration is bringing this country down into the sewer.




Cat

I can only speculate on who was really involved in the 9/11 conspiracy.  Applying Occam's Razor to the the physics of the destruction, the official version that two jet planes caused three Trade Towers to collapse in planned demolition fashion doesn't make sense.  Heck, the steel girters split in convenient 30-foot lenghs for loading onto big trucks.  It is illegal to remove evidence from a crime scene before a thorough investigation, but off went all the steel and fragments of the buildings, loaded on ships, and sent to Asia for melting-down.
I'm not saying Osoma is innoncent, not at all.  I'm not suggesting Israel was behind it.  I'm just saying the evidence does not comport with the explanation.


OK, how about this evidence.

I myself remember that day very well.  After 1 and 2 World Trade Center collapsed, the entire complex was evacuated.  The collapse of these buildings caused fires in #7.  I remember watching them burn for most of the day, until around 3pm West Coast time (if I remember right), when it finally collapsed.  I imagine that if it had been a planned conspiracy, they would have had ALL of them collapse within a short time of each other.  And I am sure that I am not the only one to remember the all-day fire, and that because of the loss of water (1 & 2 severed the water lines when they collapsed) and the structural damage preventing people from entering the other buildings, they collapsed also.

And I myself am experienced with disasters bringing down buildings.  I remember both the 1972 and the 1994 LA Earthquakes.  I also moved to San Francisco in 1990, a year after the 1989 earthquake.  I remember driving past Northridge Meadows (it was on my commute home).  I also drove by it after the quake, and what appeared to be a 2 story complex was really 2 stories.  The ground floor collapsed, causing the other 2 to fall on it.  I also remember the collapse of the parking structures in Northridge Mall and CSUN, leaving a neat pile of rubble where before were 3-6 level parking structures.

My friend worked for Packard-Bell as part of their technical staff.  Their headquarters building (5 floors) was also leveled into a fairly neat pule of rubble.  And I am sure many people remember the I-880 Nimitz Freeway in Oakland.  The 1989 quake neatly dropped the top level onto the lower level.  Yet structures of the same construction still stood across the bay in San Francisco.

And you are slightly mistaken in the facts as to the removal.  EVERYTHING removed was shipped across the bay to New Jersey, where it was catalogued and inspected.  Only after it was inspected was it removed for recycling, so it could make room for more incomming debris.  And what would you propose the people do, leave the rubble pile in place, burning, while possible survivors wwere trapped inside?

As for the "30 foot lengths", I asked a friend today who works construction.  He told me that the standard building girder is...  36 feet.  Amazing, that is almost the size of the debris you mentioned.  And have you ever seen the preperation needed for a "building implosion"?  It takes a great many months to prepare, and a lot of explosives.  The explosives are drilled into the concrete pilings inside, and the interior largely gutted.  Now how were they able to do that, with people comming in and out of the building on a daily basis (not to mention 24 hours a day)?  And even with building implosions, there is a lot that can go wrong.

Now I am supposed to believe that:

1.  The Government wanted to destroy the WTC
2.  They planned and executed this in less then 9 months
3.  Nobody who works in the towers noticed the demolition needed and the planting of the explosives
4.  The explosions were only noticeable on a few frames of video footage.  Compare that to *any* implosions footage.  In every one, the explosives are noticeable throughout the building.  But this was so exact, they were able to place them just perfectly, without any prior experiences.
5.  That they could somehow arrange the entry of Mohamed Atta into the US on 3 June 2000.  He started his flight school in July 2000.  Now there is a lot of evidence that Atta and the other identified hijackers are behind this.  And unless you claim that they did *not* crash the planes into the buildings, where are they?  And where are the other people who died?
6.  The planes would have had to crash into the exact spots above where these "explosives" were planted.  That is quite a trick all in itself.  To crash a plane into a building on the exact floors needed from the outside.

OK, now let me get this right.  In 2000 (before the election), they convinced the "hijackers" to enter the US and enroll in flight school.  Now how is that possible?  And they planted the explosives so perfectly that they avoided all detection.  And then they had almost totally inexperienced pilots crash into the buildings, severing all water and power, but not the detonators.  And the out of controll fire in the buildings did not set off or damage the explosives either.

And with all the fire and police personnel entering the building, *NONE* of them noticed these explosives.  Or were they part of the conspiracy also?  Or maybe they are, and none of them died, they are all safe in an "undisclosed location".

I have seen 3 "implosion demolitions", and none of them looked anything like the 9/11 collapse.  You simply have to watch a movie like "Enemy Of The State" or "Mars Attacks" to see real implosions.  The shock is often obvious on the face of the building.  Any glass remaining shatters from the explosions, and gas escaping is obvious everywhere before the building collapses.  There was none of in WTC until after the floors started to collapse.  

The more and more I study this, the more sure I am that there were no explosives.  There was no Government involvement.  Unless you believe that the originators of this conspiracy was the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration was able to finish it and pull it off.

I think it is time for some people to put their tin-foil hats back on, cause the UFOs are going to capture them at any time.

There was intelligence reports about 9/11 that was ignored. And the intelligence reports stated that Saddam didn't have WMD. If what the Adminstration has been saying was true, I would have no problem with it. But Dubya was reading what he wanted to read and not what was there. It was all a bunch of falsehoods.  It really bothers me that the facts are there but there is no outrage or outcry about this. This Adminstration is bringing this country down into the sewer.




Cat


There was no intelligence that Saddam had wmd before the war??  Hmm.. why did Kerry vote for the war then?

By the way I agree with you that there probably were intelligence reports about 9/11 that didn't get a reaction.  I agree that the Bush administration probably did not take it seriously enough.  If I'm correct, then the administration made a big mistake that cost many lives.  However, I wouldn't have supported Bush making the same mistake again by not reacting to threats of wmd from Saddam.  Maybe we stopped another attack.  We don't know.  Just like if 9/11 had never happened, the public would have no idea what we stopped from happening.

I really don't think that this Administration had any part in the destruction of the WTC. BUT! I believe in every fiber of my being that they KNEW it was going to happen and did absolutely nothing to stop it because this was a good excuse to go to war with Iraq. It didn't matter if Iraq had nothing to do with it.


I can accept that.  And it is in the same way that FDR "knew" that Japan was going to attack.  And in the same way what Stallin "knew" that Hitler was going to attack.

KNowing that something is going to happen is not the same as having exact information as to who, where, when, and how.  And in intelligence, there is also counter-intelligence.

Now this next is not an accusation, it is a simple fact.  Under the Clinton Administration, the "Operational Budget" of both the Military and CIA was drastically cut.  It was believed that most of the intelligence needed could be obtained from Satellites.  This is why the SR-71 was grounded, among many other things.  Field Operatives (spies) were reduced in numbers and active operations were cancelled.  Satellites are great, but they will not let you see inside the mind of a person.

A lot of us saw an increase on the way.  The "Millenium Plot" was prevented because of an alert INS agent.  This was in December 1999.  And going back further, to the USS Cole and the car bombing of the Air Force barracks in Saudi Arabia.

Now most people knew terrorism was on the increase.  And the use of suicide planes was not new either.  Simply look at the "Baka Bomb" in WWII.  Just like Japanese Soldiers and Sailors, these terrorists have shown a tendency to commit suicide to achieve their goals.

There had been alerts in the past for pilots doing these kinds of things.  But even if somebody a month prior handed Bush a message saying "3 planes are going to be hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon and WTC in September", it would have been almost impossible to prevent.

I believe that the Intelligence Service did have information warning of this event.  But it was not specific enough to have done any good.  Atta did not even buy the tickets until 29 August.  If our intelligence was so good that they could have found out and caught them in less then 2 weeks, then they should have been able to catch him long before that.

Remember, FDR "knew" that Japan was about to strike the US in December 1941.  But he had no idea where, when, or how.  The Philippines and Guam were expected, they were reinforced prior to 7 December.  Hawaii was being placed on higher alerts with increased equipment and manpower as well.  But having advanced warning does not nessicarily mean you can do anything about it.

And 9/11 has *nothing* to do with Saddam.  He was in trouble for harboring and aiding terrorists *after* 9/11.

And 9/11 has *nothing* to do with Saddam.  He was in trouble for harboring and aiding terrorists *after* 9/11.


I agree that 9/11 had nothing to do with Saddam.  What I'm saying is when we get intelligence of a threat, and we don't react, the liberals are screaming that we should have.

When we get intelligence of a threat and we DO react, the liberals are screaming that we shouldn't be.

There was no intelligence that Saddam had wmd before the war??  Hmm.. why did Kerry vote for the war then?

By the way I agree with you that there probably were intelligence reports about 9/11 that didn't get a reaction.  I agree that the Bush administration probably did not take it seriously enough.  If I'm correct, then the administration made a big mistake that cost many lives.  However, I wouldn't have supported Bush making the same mistake again by not reacting to threats of wmd from Saddam.  Maybe we stopped another attack.  We don't know.  Just like if 9/11 had never happened, the public would have no idea what we stopped from happening.



I have no idea why Kerry or anyone else in the Senate voted for it. It could have been that Bush LIED to them.




I can accept that.  And it is in the same way that FDR "knew" that Japan was going to attack.  And in the same way what Stallin "knew" that Hitler was going to attack.

KNowing that something is going to happen is not the same as having exact information as to who, where, when, and how.  And in intelligence, there is also counter-intelligence.

Now this next is not an accusation, it is a simple fact.  Under the Clinton Administration, the "Operational Budget" of both the Military and CIA was drastically cut.  It was believed that most of the intelligence needed could be obtained from Satellites.  This is why the SR-71 was grounded, among many other things.  Field Operatives (spies) were reduced in numbers and active operations were cancelled.  Satellites are great, but they will not let you see inside the mind of a person.

A lot of us saw an increase on the way.  The "Millenium Plot" was prevented because of an alert INS agent.  This was in December 1999.  And going back further, to the USS Cole and the car bombing of the Air Force barracks in Saudi Arabia.

Now most people knew terrorism was on the increase.  And the use of suicide planes was not new either.  Simply look at the "Baka Bomb" in WWII.  Just like Japanese Soldiers and Sailors, these terrorists have shown a tendency to commit suicide to achieve their goals.

There had been alerts in the past for pilots doing these kinds of things.  But even if somebody a month prior handed Bush a message saying "3 planes are going to be hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon and WTC in September", it would have been almost impossible to prevent.

I believe that the Intelligence Service did have information warning of this event.  But it was not specific enough to have done any good.  Atta did not even buy the tickets until 29 August.  If our intelligence was so good that they could have found out and caught them in less then 2 weeks, then they should have been able to catch him long before that.

Remember, FDR "knew" that Japan was about to strike the US in December 1941.  But he had no idea where, when, or how.  The Philippines and Guam were expected, they were reinforced prior to 7 December.  Hawaii was being placed on higher alerts with increased equipment and manpower as well.  But having advanced warning does not nessicarily mean you can do anything about it.

And 9/11 has *nothing* to do with Saddam. He was in trouble for harboring and aiding terrorists *after* 9/11.



I do under that sometimes it is hard to pinpoint exactly when and where things are going to happen, But what I would like to know is once those planes went off course, why didn't the AF interpect them? That was the procedure then as it is now. WHY??  And then Dubya sat there for about 20 minutes with a stupid look on his face rather then doing SOMETHING!!! ANYTHING!!! He could have excused himself from the classroom saying "duty calls" or something like that and then start asking questions about what was going on. But here we are under attack and he does absolutely NOTHING!!! When I heard about it, I ran to the t.v. I made phone calls, I wanted to know what was going on. I did SOMETHING! I bet you did, too.

And I do know that Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9/11-that is the another lie of Dubya's as an excuse to go to war.




Cat

I do under that sometimes it is hard to pinpoint exactly when and where things are going to happen, But what I would like to know is once those planes went off course, why didn't the AF interpect them? That was the procedure then as it is now. WHY??  And then Dubya sat there for about 20 minutes with a stupid look on his face rather then doing SOMETHING!!! ANYTHING!!! He could have excused himself from the classroom saying "duty calls" or something like that and then start asking questions about what was going on. But here we are under attack and he does absolutely NOTHING!!! When I heard about it, I ran to the t.v. I made phone calls, I wanted to know what was going on. I did SOMETHING! I bet you did, too.

And I do know that Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9/11-that is the another lie of Dubya's as an excuse to go to war.


Well, what would they do?  Unlike now, there were no fighters flying around large cities waiting to intercept planes like this.  And don't forget, until the second plane hit, everybody was treating it like an accident.

And even if there were fighters in the air, what would you have them do?  Shoot down an airliner full of civilians?  That is a "Lady Or The Tiger" disaster if I ever heard of one.

And by the time the invasion of Iraq began, nobody was talking about Saddam and 9/11 connections.  It was already obvious that he had no connection with AL-Queda in 2001.  But it was very obvious that he *did* have connections with them after 9/11, and with many other terrorists.  The list of terrorists that Saddam supported and sponsored is to long to list, but the fact that he gave both Al Zarqui and Abu Nidal.

And as part of his 1990 Cease Fire, Saddam agreed to stop all sponsorship of terrorists.  That alone was justification to invade.

There are numerouse conspiracy theoties refarding 9/11, and I am not convinced - with the proven exception that Lil' Georgie was warned, in advance, that Al Quida intended to strike us with civilian planes, and that the FBI knew that potential terrorsists were taking flight clases.  Was it just sheer idiocy that that our fearless leaders couldn't put 2 and 2 together, was in burearocratic incomprtance, was it complacency, or was it bravado?

Whatever it was, the aftermath was surely characterized by exagurations, manipulations, falsehoods, distortions, fabrications, and just outright lies.

OK, how about this evidence.

<snip>

I think it is time for some people to put their tin-foil hats back on, cause the UFOs are going to capture them at any time.


That's one of the best debunkings of a conspiracy theory I've ever read. Good on you, Mushroom.

PS: I still believe Bush planned to invade Iraq no matter what. The very fact his administration simply refused to believe the UN Weapons Inspectors on Iraq's chemical and bio-capabilities is enough to convince me of this.

That's one of the best debunkings of a conspiracy theory I've ever read. Good on you, Mushroom.

PS: I still believe Bush planned to invade Iraq no matter what. The very fact his administration simply refused to believe the UN Weapons Inspectors on Iraq's chemical and bio-capabilities is enough to convince me of this.


are you talking about the same UN Weapons Inspectors that Saddam refused to let in the country while he got rid of whatever he had?

Well, what would they do?  Unlike now, there were no fighters flying around large cities waiting to intercept planes like this.  And don't forget, until the second plane hit, everybody was treating it like an accident.



Knowing that there were threats involving aircraft,  they could have alerted airlines and required air marshalls on all flights.  Everyone without knowledge of the threats treated it like an accident.  I would
bet that in Washington there were many who knew what had happened, and by whom, the minute they
heard it.

What about when the planes started veering off course? I do understand the news media seeing the first plane hitting thinking it was an accident. There was no way of knowing if the plane was from LaGuarda, JFK, or Newark. But from LOGAN?? There were air traffic contollers who spotted these planes going off course-That was when action SHOULD have been taken but it wasn't. There were many things that could have been done but weren't. That is the major tragedy.





Cat

Oviosly, the air traffic controlers part of the conspiracy too.  It's only a matter of time before someone will dig up proof they were all on a top-level security call with the White House the night of September 10... 

are you talking about the same UN Weapons Inspectors that Saddam refused to let in the country while he got rid of whatever he had?


No, I'm talking about the ones he was forced to let into the country after he'd gotten rid of them as he was instructed. Even though he complied with the request to dismantle and dispose of his arsenal, his country was invaded anyway. 

It could be that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.  Several respectable  legal and forensic scholars have concluded the Warren Commission was absolutely correct.
It could be that the 9/11 Commission was correct in spite of all the dubious anomolies and many circumastances that don't add up.  But I doubt it.  I'm not convinced.
I didn't accuse the Bush Administration of being in on it.  Other people have.  I haven't.  What I said was there is plenty of compelling evidence out there to suggest the 9/11 Commission is not on the up and up, and the government might be hiding things from the people.
I see people like Mushroom bending over backwards to make sure the Bushies don't look suspicious.  Why?  What are you afraid of?

The air traffic controllers have no power to do much of anything except notify the necessary parties that planes are off track.  I know an ATC who was working on 9-11 at the Aurora ATC center and they DID notify the "powers that be" MULTIPLE TIMES  and the response they got?  Basically, nothing....."just keep track of them"  The best man at our wedding works for the US gov't and has been ORDERED to NOT talk about 9-11 or he can lose his job.


That was sarcastic.

Ok.  But man, if this is already controversial, can you imagine if the FAA & US military took out 3 commuter planes filled with civilians?  NOBODY would ever be convinced that a bigger tragedy was avoided.  Nobody.

Ok.  But man, if this is already controversial, can you imagine if the FAA & US military took out 3 commuter planes filled with civilians?  NOBODY would ever be convinced that a bigger tragedy was avoided.  Nobody.

Unless the U.S. government was behind the attacks in the first place.  I mean, it's the big, terrible possibility nobody in public life even dare mention as a hypothetical.  The Right tried to tar Howard Dean as a speech criminal merely for mentioning it in the context of calling it ridiculous.  Our government has an official version and wants everything else hush-hush.  The Bush Administration is the most secretive federal government in modern American history.  They're hiding lots of stuff!  We're talking about a government that only wants yes-men in the press corps, that goes after journalists who are only doing their jobs, who believes the public does not have the "right to know."

Isn't hard NOT to suspect such people of evil deeds the way the act?  Then you have the most terrible attack on U.S. soil since Pearl Harbor and a hundred unanswered questions.  Even if you believe the Bushies had know prior intelligence of 9/11, can you see why a citizen might be suspicious of them?

What I mean is whether 'The Government' did the attacks or not, for sure if US planes intercepted and destroyed civilians there would be uproar.  Oviosly if the government did the attacks, its covered up, so we are speculating, but if they shot down the planes,  it would not be in secret, so there definitely be public outrage, not just from conspiracy nuts and anti B--h people.

As Pat Buchanan said, we all know it caused by all those gays and lesbians.  ::)





Cat

And atheists, and unwed moms, and modern women who refuse stay home and take care of their man, and minorities, and greedy televangelists who screw their secretaries -- no wait a minute, not them.

And atheists, and unwed moms, and modern women who refuse stay home and take care of their man, and minorities, and greedy televangelists who screw their secretaries -- no wait a minute, not them.



Oh man, how could I have forgotten them?




Cat

And atheists, and unwed moms, and modern women who refuse stay home and take care of their man, and minorities, and greedy televangelists who screw their secretaries -- no wait a minute, not them.

Well wait a minute...Falwell and Robertson said 9/11 happened because America p*ssed God off, and God lifted His protective shield from the heretofore "blessed" United States of America.
If anybody has "free will" it's God (I mean He invented it!), so 9/11 is God's fault.  Blame God!
:-\\

What about when the planes started veering off course? I do understand the news media seeing the first plane hitting thinking it was an accident. There was no way of knowing if the plane was from LaGuarda, JFK, or Newark. But from LOGAN?? There were air traffic contollers who spotted these planes going off course-That was when action SHOULD have been taken but it wasn't. There were many things that could have been done but weren't. That is the major tragedy.


OK, now a quick lesson in the US Air Traffic Control system.  :)

The system is antique, about 20-40 years old.  Even though they have computers, most transfers from one controller to another is done "manually".

When a pilot leaves an airport (like LAX), he is controlled by LAX until he leaves their "airspace".  They are then either released from control (cross country), or turned over to another controller in another area.  There are huge areas of the US where there is no control at all.

And Airplane ID is sent from a "Transponder" in the plane.  This sends to the controller the flight number, the altitude, airspeed, and other information.  THIS is where the numbers come from that is on the controller's screen.  A large number of smaller private planes do not have transponders at all, other then the "Her I AM" type of transponder.  All information from these planes is entered manually by the controllers.

Now remember, the planes had all been released from local controllers before the hijackers struck.  They knew to do this from studying how the system works.  And immediately after taking control of the planes, they TURNED OFF THE TRANSPONDERS.  That means that when they entered airspace controlled by New York and Washington, the controllers had no idea who they were, just a "blip" on the radar screen.  They repeatedly tried to contact them, but there was no response.  And each controller in a large city like that watches over dozens of planes at the same time.

Here is a good timeline, to give an idea how small of a time we had to react:

http://www.patriotresource.com/wtc/timeline/sept11.html

At 8:43am, FAA notified NORAD of a possible hijacking.  At 8:45, the plane hit the first tower.  They had less then 2 minutes to react.

Now let's go down a bit more.  At 8:46am, fighters were launched from Otis Air National Guard Base in Fallmouth, Massachusetts.  At 9:03am, the second plane struck WTC #2.  The fighers could not have gotten "on scene" in less then 17 minutes.

This was a very fast attack.  The entire attack was done in less then 1 hour.  It is impossible for anybody to have reacted that fast.  And remember, our ATC system is designed to handle commercial and private flights.  Incidents of failures in transponders and off-course flights are not all that unusual.  They happen all the time.  Are we from now on to "shoot first and ask questions later" of every overflight or failed transponder?  Are we to keep armed fighters in orbit around every major city 24-7?  Because unless we do that, it is impossible to prevent this kind of disaster.

And remember, this is the first time a hijacking ended like this.  As we all know, a typical hijacking has the plane land somewhere, where a media circus ensues for hours or days.  This gives the hijackers free publicity for their cause.  This is the first where it became a suicide mission.

I see people like Mushroom bending over backwards to make sure the Bushies don't look suspicious.  Why?  What are you afraid of?


SImple, I do not believe in conspiracies.  To give an idea you may like, I believe that the Clinton's had nothing to do with the suicide of Vince Foster.  That is a conspiracy that the "Right Wing" loves, but I think it is a pile of coprolite.

Now, I do believe that they may have covered up some aspects of it.  But did they have him killed and then planted the body?  Hell no.  President Clinton may be many things, but I do not believe him to be a murderer.

But since I am so "Right Wing", maybe I should reconsider this a little more.  8)

But, there ARE people who believe that the ATC's "missed the ball" and that they DID have the power to order F-18's into the skies to "take care of the planes".  I was just clearing that up for them ;)


Check the timeline I gave again...  3 minutes to intercept the first plane, impossible.

17 minutes to intercept the 2nd plane, with planes from Mass.  Once again, impossible.

This was simply to fast to react to, which was the idea.  This is why they did 3 hijackings at the same time, did not hijack 3 planes on 3 different days.  Our system (equipment and people both) were simply overwhelemed with 3 disasters at the same time.

Check the timeline I gave again...  3 minutes to intercept the first plane, impossible.

17 minutes to intercept the 2nd plane, with planes from Mass.  Once again, impossible.

This was simply to fast to react to, which was the idea.  This is why they did 3 hijackings at the same time, did not hijack 3 planes on 3 different days.  Our system (equipment and people both) were simply overwhelemed with 3 disasters at the same time.


Interesting.  Certainly the ATC system is antiquated - at one point it "blacked out" at O'Hare, bringing on the 1980 strike,  but my recollection is that the planes vered off coures before leaving the respective take off air space.  My recollection is also that no military jets were scrambled, like those just miles from Washington that recently almost shot down a private plane off course (not a jet, so slower to be sure).  I'm not saying that I agree with the conspitacy theories, or that you are wrong in your assesment, I'm just not convinced. 

Let me further say that I do hope you are right.  I'm sure we would all find the idea that ANY politician would do this to his/our country intentionally, for political advantage, would be totally repugnant, and would bring out the lowest base impulses of our nature - get the rope!!!!

Interesting.  Certainly the ATC system is antiquated - at one point it "blacked out" at O'Hare, bringing on the 1980 strike,  but my recollection is that the planes vered off coures before leaving the respective take off air space.  My recollection is also that no military jets were scrambled, like those just miles from Washington that recently almost shot down a private plane off course (not a jet, so slower to be sure).  I'm not saying that I agree with the conspitacy theories, or that you are wrong in your assesment, I'm just not convinced. 


Most of the time, once a flight approaches "Cruising Altitude", it is passed off to controllers that specialize in cross-country traffic.  This allows the local controller to concentrate on incomming and outgoing flights.  These controllers normally handle a higher volume of flights (but less time-critical because of distance).  That is the perfect time to hijack a plane, because it will take quite a while to be noticed.  Even longer if that controller has already passed it off to "independent flight".

The hijackers did their homework.  Right after they did the hijacking, they turned off the transponders, refused to make any radio contact, and took evasive action (normally dropping to low altitude and making a radical turn 180 degrees).  Flight 11 was hijacked about 20 minutes into the flight, but it took another 20 minutes for the controllers to realize something was seriously wrong.  By that time, it was to late.

And now, we are on a mugh higher level of alert then we were on September 10, 2001.  We did not have fighters ready to go at all times in Washington DC and other major cities. 


Let me further say that I do hope you are right.  I'm sure we would all find the idea that ANY politician would do this to his/our country intentionally, for political advantage, would be totally repugnant, and would bring out the lowest base impulses of our nature - get the rope!!!!


Well, 99% of the people involved with the decision making leading up to the crashes were not politicians, but beaurocrats.  And the #1 rule in any beaurocracy is "cover your posterior".  Beaurocrats are safe from politics.  The decisions are often made "by committee", and questions are passed up the line.  Because of the consequences for making a wrong decision, they rely on policy and simply interpret it, they do not make it.

There were really no "politicians" involved in the decisions on that day.  Other then at the very top level, these are people who have made 20+ year careers, reguardless of which party was in power.  By the time the "questions" would have worked up through the various layers, it was to late.

Take Flight 11.  It was roughly 20 minutes from the time the flight was hijacked until it crashed into Tower #1.  It took most of that time for the FAA to realize something was wrong, and make the decision to pass word to NORAD.  Since NORAD "controls" the CONUS fighters, they had 5 minutes to do something before that flight crashed into the building.

And the Military has a simliar beaurocratic mindset when it comes to split-second decisions like this.  You have a chain of command to follow, before the fighter pilots even get word.  NORAD would have had to get authorization to release fighters for intercept.  Then word would have been passed down to a unit commander to scramble.  Pilots would have had to get a brief on the situation and target, then do the actual intercept.  With only a few exceptions, our military has not kept "round the clock combat air patrols" since the end of the Cold War.

I do not think "anybody blew it".  Sure, there were a lot of places that it could have been stopped.  Don't forget that beaurocrats refused to give permission for the FBI to search Zacarias Moussaoui's computer because of regulations then in place.  Because there was no "probable cause", they had no right to search his computer.  Of course after the attacks, it was checked and plans for the attacks were found.  In short, the FBI was following it's regulations (as passed down by Congress in 1978), and they could not be expected to do any less.

One good thing about part of the Patriot Act, is that it allows local agents to request a Judge to issue an order to search computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices.  This lets them cut through a lot of beaurocratic BS, but still requires approval of a judge.

Myself, I can't see anybody wanting to be responsible for this.  Remember after WWII, all the Nuremburg defendents responded "I was just following orders".  And of course, those orders can from a dead madman.  Who in 21's century USA would be willing to take responsibility for this?  Could you imagine Bush, or anybody else giving this order?  And almost 4 years later, it is simply not possible that nobody has "turned state evidence".  If it was intentional, that would have come out long ago.  This has had more attention then anything else in US history since Watergate.  And that was unraveled in just a few years.  Surely if this was the case, a "Deep Throat" would have come forward.

Mushroom,
Check out this forum,  you'd probably dig it!
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=44247

Mushroom,
Check out this forum,  you'd probably dig it!
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=44247


I have seen that site before, because it comes up a lot when I do Google searches for info on the attack.  I love that one though.  Gee, that is an awesome janitor, when he can identify explosives going off when he is in the basement.  Maybe the NYPD bomb squad should hire him.  ;D

But I simply do not accept 99.5% of "conspiracy theories".  And this is not anything that is political.  I reject 9/11 "Government Connections", just as I reject most of the favorite "Right Wing" conspiracy theories.

I do not accept a Vince Foster murder.  I do not accept a government conspiracy in reguards to either Ruby Ridge nor Waco Texas.  I think some local agents might have changed facts in an effort to "cover their ass", but no conspiracy in the Government (or Clinton Administration) to cover up facts or give an excuse to kill "Right Wingers".

I also reject UFO conspiracies and "Area 51".  I myself, I think they call it Area 51, because anybody who believe in it must be at least 1 card short of a full deck.  8)

There are very few "conspiracies" that I believe in.  "The Final Solution" and the dissapearance of Jimmy Hoffa are the only 2 that come immediately to mind.  And my basis in this disbelief has nothing to do with politics.  I reject both "Right Wing" and "Left Wing" conspiracy theories with equal disgust and disbelief.

But they are sometimes amuseing.  I often laughed whenever the "Weekly World News" printed pictures of Reagan (or Bush Sr, or Bill Clinton" meeting with aliens.  I es[ecially remember the pic with Clinton shaking hands with an alien with his left hand.  Classic  :D