See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
Source:
USA Today
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20 ... edatabaseofamericansphonecalls
Published: May 11, 2006
Author: Leslie Cauley
Post Date: 2006-05-11 09:50:46 by Eoghan
Ping List: *Israeli Espionage*
Keywords: None
Views: 2636
Comments: 179
The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY. The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans - most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: The NSA record collection program "It's the largest database ever assembled in the world," said one person, who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA's activities, declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency's goal is "to create a database of every call ever made" within the nation's borders, this person added. For the customers of these companies, it means that the government has detailed records of calls they made - across town or across the country - to family members, co-workers, business contacts and others. The three telecommunications companies are working under contract with the NSA, which launched the program in 2001 shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the sources said. The program is aimed at identifying and tracking suspected terrorists, they said. The sources would talk only under a guarantee of anonymity because the NSA program is secret. Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, nominated Monday by President Bush to become the director of the CIA, headed the NSA from March 1999 to April 2005. In that post, Hayden would have overseen the agency's domestic call-tracking program. Hayden declined to comment about the program. The NSA's domestic program, as described by sources, is far more expansive than what the White House has acknowledged. Last year, Bush said he had authorized the NSA to eavesdrop - without warrants - on international calls and international e-mails of people suspected of having links to terrorists when one party to the communication is in the USA. Warrants have also not been used in the NSA's efforts to create a national call database. In defending the previously disclosed program, Bush insisted that the NSA was focused exclusively on international calls. "In other words," Bush explained, "one end of the communication must be outside the United States." As a result, domestic call records - those of calls that originate and terminate within U.S. borders - were believed to be private. Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans. Customers' names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of NSA's domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information. Don Weber, a senior spokesman for the NSA, declined to discuss the agency's operations. "Given the nature of the work we do, it would be irresponsible to comment on actual or alleged operational issues; therefore, we have no information to provide," he said. "However, it is important to note that NSA takes its legal responsibilities seriously and operates within the law." The White House would not discuss the domestic call-tracking program. "There is no domestic surveillance without court approval," said Dana Perino, deputy press secretary, referring to actual eavesdropping. She added that all national intelligence activities undertaken by the federal government "are lawful, necessary and required for the pursuit of al-Qaeda and affiliated terrorists." All government-sponsored intelligence activities "are carefully reviewed and monitored," Perino said. She also noted that "all appropriate members of Congress have been briefed on the intelligence efforts of the United States." The government is collecting "external" data on domestic phone calls but is not intercepting "internals," a term for the actual content of the communication, according to a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the program. This kind of data collection from phone companies is not uncommon; it's been done before, though never on this large a scale, the official said. The data are used for "social network analysis," the official said, meaning to study how terrorist networks contact each other and how they are tied together. Carriers uniquely positioned AT&T recently merged with SBC and kept the AT&T name. Verizon, BellSouth and AT&T are the nation's three biggest telecommunications companies; they provide local and wireless phone service to more than 200 million customers. The three carriers control vast networks with the latest communications technologies. They provide an array of services: local and long-distance calling, wireless and high-speed broadband, including video. Their direct access to millions of homes and businesses has them uniquely positioned to help the government keep tabs on the calling habits of Americans. Among the big telecommunications companies, only Qwest has refused to help the NSA, the sources said. According to multiple sources, Qwest declined to participate because it was uneasy about the legal implications of handing over customer information to the government without warrants. Qwest's refusal to participate has left the NSA with a hole in its database. Based in Denver, Qwest provides local phone service to 14 million customers in 14 states in the West and Northwest. But AT&T and Verizon also provide some services - primarily long-distance and wireless - to people who live in Qwest's region. Therefore, they can provide the NSA with at least some access in that area. Created by President Truman in 1952, during the Korean War, the NSA is charged with protecting the United States from foreign security threats. The agency was considered so secret that for years the government refused to even confirm its existence. Government insiders used to joke that NSA stood for "No Such Agency." In 1975, a congressional investigation revealed that the NSA had been intercepting, without warrants, international communications for more than 20 years at the behest of the CIA and other agencies. The spy campaign, code-named "Shamrock," led to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was designed to protect Americans from illegal eavesdropping. Enacted in 1978, FISA lays out procedures that the U.S. government must follow to conduct electronic surveillance and physical searches of people believed to be engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the United States. A special court, which has 11 members, is responsible for adjudicating requests under FISA. Over the years, NSA code-cracking techniques have continued to improve along with technology. The agency today is considered expert in the practice of "data mining" - sifting through reams of information in search of patterns. Data mining is just one of many tools NSA analysts and mathematicians use to crack codes and track international communications. Paul Butler, a former U.S. prosecutor who specialized in terrorism crimes, said FISA approval generally isn't necessary for government data-mining operations. "FISA does not prohibit the government from doing data mining," said Butler, now a partner with the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, D.C. The caveat, he said, is that "personal identifiers" - such as names, Social Security numbers and street addresses - can't be included as part of the search. "That requires an additional level of probable cause," he said. The usefulness of the NSA's domestic phone-call database as a counterterrorism tool is unclear. Also unclear is whether the database has been used for other purposes. The NSA's domestic program raises legal questions. Historically, AT&T and the regional phone companies have required law enforcement agencies to present a court order before they would even consider turning over a customer's calling data. Part of that owed to the personality of the old Bell Telephone System, out of which those companies grew. Ma Bell's bedrock principle - protection of the customer - guided the company for decades, said Gene Kimmelman, senior public policy director of Consumers Union. "No court order, no customer information - period. That's how it was for decades," he said. The concern for the customer was also based on law: Under Section 222 of the Communications Act, first passed in 1934, telephone companies are prohibited from giving out information regarding their customers' calling habits: whom a person calls, how often and what routes those calls take to reach their final destination. Inbound calls, as well as wireless calls, also are covered. The financial penalties for violating Section 222, one of many privacy reinforcements that have been added to the law over the years, can be stiff. The Federal Communications Commission, the nation's top telecommunications regulatory agency, can levy fines of up to $130,000 per day per violation, with a cap of $1.325 million per violation. The FCC has no hard definition of "violation." In practice, that means a single "violation" could cover one customer or 1 million. In the case of the NSA's international call-tracking program, Bush signed an executive order allowing the NSA to engage in eavesdropping without a warrant. The president and his representatives have since argued that an executive order was sufficient for the agency to proceed. Some civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, disagree. Companies approached The NSA's domestic program began soon after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to the sources. Right around that time, they said, NSA representatives approached the nation's biggest telecommunications companies. The agency made an urgent pitch: National security is at risk, and we need your help to protect the country from attacks. The agency told the companies that it wanted them to turn over their "call-detail records," a complete listing of the calling histories of their millions of customers. In addition, the NSA wanted the carriers to provide updates, which would enable the agency to keep tabs on the nation's calling habits. The sources said the NSA made clear that it was willing to pay for the cooperation. AT&T, which at the time was headed by C. Michael Armstrong, agreed to help the NSA. So did BellSouth, headed by F. Duane Ackerman; SBC, headed by Ed Whitacre; and Verizon, headed by Ivan Seidenberg. With that, the NSA's domestic program began in earnest. AT&T, when asked about the program, replied with a comment prepared for USA TODAY: "We do not comment on matters of national security, except to say that we only assist law enforcement and government agencies charged with protecting national security in strict accordance with the law." In another prepared comment, BellSouth said: "BellSouth does not provide any confidential customer information to the NSA or any governmental agency without proper legal authority." Verizon, the USA's No. 2 telecommunications company behind AT&T, gave this statement: "We do not comment on national security matters, we act in full compliance with the law and we are committed to safeguarding our customers' privacy." Qwest spokesman Robert Charlton said: "We can't talk about this. It's a classified situation." In December, The New York Times revealed that Bush had authorized the NSA to wiretap, without warrants, international phone calls and e-mails that travel to or from the USA. The following month, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group, filed a class-action lawsuit against AT&T. The lawsuit accuses the company of helping the NSA spy on U.S. phone customers. Last month, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales alluded to that possibility. Appearing at a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Gonzales was asked whether he thought the White House has the legal authority to monitor domestic traffic without a warrant. Gonzales' reply: "I wouldn't rule it out." His comment marked the first time a Bush appointee publicly asserted that the White House might have that authority. Similarities in programs The domestic and international call-tracking programs have things in common, according to the sources. Both are being conducted without warrants and without the approval of the FISA court. The Bush administration has argued that FISA's procedures are too slow in some cases. Officials, including Gonzales, also make the case that the USA Patriot Act gives them broad authority to protect the safety of the nation's citizens. The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Pat Roberts (news, bio, voting record), R-Kan., would not confirm the existence of the program. In a statement, he said, "I can say generally, however, that our subcommittee has been fully briefed on all aspects of the Terrorist Surveillance Program. ... I remain convinced that the program authorized by the president is lawful and absolutely necessary to protect this nation from future attacks." The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., declined to comment. One company differs One major telecommunications company declined to participate in the program: Qwest. According to sources familiar with the events, Qwest's CEO at the time, Joe Nacchio, was deeply troubled by the NSA's assertion that Qwest didn't need a court order - or approval under FISA - to proceed. Adding to the tension, Qwest was unclear about who, exactly, would have access to its customers' information and how that information might be used. Financial implications were also a concern, the sources said. Carriers that illegally divulge calling information can be subjected to heavy fines. The NSA was asking Qwest to turn over millions of records. The fines, in the aggregate, could have been substantial. The NSA told Qwest that other government agencies, including the FBI, CIA and DEA, also might have access to the database, the sources said. As a matter of practice, the NSA regularly shares its information - known as "product" in intelligence circles - with other intelligence groups. Even so, Qwest's lawyers were troubled by the expansiveness of the NSA request, the sources said. The NSA, which needed Qwest's participation to completely cover the country, pushed back hard. Trying to put pressure on Qwest, NSA representatives pointedly told Qwest that it was the lone holdout among the big telecommunications companies. It also tried appealing to Qwest's patriotic side: In one meeting, an NSA representative suggested that Qwest's refusal to contribute to the database could compromise national security, one person recalled. In addition, the agency suggested that Qwest's foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government. Like other big telecommunications companies, Qwest already had classified contracts and hoped to get more. Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused. The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events. In June 2002, Nacchio resigned amid allegations that he had misled investors about Qwest's financial health. But Qwest's legal questions about the NSA request remained. Unable to reach agreement, Nacchio's successor, Richard Notebaert, finally pulled the plug on the NSA talks in late 2004, the sources said.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-97) not displayed.
.
.
.
#98. To: swarthyguy, Dead Corpse (#60)
same here. not to mention the one where the fella supposedly called his mother and said mom, this is whoever giving her his first and last name. then asking, you believe me, don't you, mom? come on...the least they could have done is concoct a believable conversation. DC, i can see your mind is made up and closed.
Quote is out of context and does not refer to demolition, but stopping efforts to try and save the building. Also, it takes a LOT of work to drop a building the size of WTC 7. Supports have to be cut, holes drilled, TONS of explosives would need to be brought in. Check out the TV show Master Blasters on the Discovery channel every now and then. Weeks worth of preperation go into even a simple demolition. It isn't as easy as strapping plastique to a few support columns and hitting the "bang" button. However, setting fire to it and hitting it with mega-tons of debris would more than do the job. Further, there is at least one website out there that shows the BACK side of WTC7 with only a few small fires showing. Those fires had burned THROUGH from tthe other side.
Not at all. You missed my point.
On this issue? Yes. Until I see something more concrete that proves otherwise.
Naw, I'd say they came off at your post #61. So your obnoxiousness was a reasoned response to "crap" conspiracy theories? Or was it just a "quid pro quo" for others' incivility? Haven't made a case either way for your behavior yet, guy. If you guys are this touchy about your set in stone meme's, then maybe you are right. Maybe this isn't a good forum for me to participate in. So it's us skeptics that get upset whenever someone questions our "memes," eh? Still holding on to that "straw man" argument, aren't you? Well, whatever takes you to this conclusion: "Maybe this isn't a good forum for me to participate in." Yeah, maybe not.
"Expect the government to lie to you."
Well, "pulled" means only one thing in the demolition arena. If LS meant something else, is there a better explanation available for us? I haven't seen it.
Deflect and Deny, Disparage and Distract. A rather familiar MO, by now. Mind madeup, won't research further, but hasn't seen anything to dislodge his "meme" either. ROFTLOL!
Pray you will never know, the hell where youth and laughter go - Siegfried Sassoon. Ypres, Autumn 1914.
outstanding post, mehitable.
Says who? Also, how much would it take to get you to carry EXPLOSIVES into a burning building that was just heavily damaged and attmpet to carry out a demo job on it? Occam is a Beyotch some times. Captain Chris Boyle: "After that, we headed to Vesey and Broadway. That57;s where (Deputy) Chief (Tom) Haring was. He was starting to put together a command post. Firehouse: Did that chief give an assignment to go to building 7? Boyle: He gave out an assignment. I didn57;t know exactly what it was, but he told the chief that we were heading down to the site. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn57;t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn57;t look good. But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we57;re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn57;t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn57;t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I57;m standing next to said, that building doesn57;t look straight. So I57;m standing there. I57;m looking at the building. It didn57;t look right, but, well, we57;ll go in, we57; ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody57;s going into 7, there57;s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned. Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side? Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it. Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many? Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we57;ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day. So we got water to 22, but then that57;s when they said all right, number 7 is coming down, shut everything down. I don57;t know what time that was. It was all just a blur. Firehouse: Did they shut the tower lines and remove them from there? Boyle: No, just left them. Everything was left where it was. Just shut everything down, moved everybody back. Firehouse: Could you see building 7 again from there? Boyle: Seven, no. You got a half block away, you couldn57;t see it, couldn57;t see a damn thing. All we heard was they were worried about it coming down, everybody back away." -Firehouse Magazine (08/02)
You know..here we can agree to disagree.. there are opinions on this, my own forum, that I disagree with but this is a free speech forum so.. we, christine and I, use a hands off approach in regard to moderating.. I at one time believed the official theory.. and at one time supported Bush wholeheartedly .. but I've drastically changed my ideas and my belief system.. so.. if you still are under the belief that 9/11 was as the administration says.. so be it.. one day you may change your thoughts on that .. who knows? We all were in that same boat at one time..
"The thing worse than rebellion is the thing that causes rebellion." Frederick Douglass
It needs to be noted that 9/11 was a crystal clear, beautiful blue sky day. Not a cloud anywhere near where I was living at the time in South Central PA. Visability would have been excellent. If conditions were more nominal with visibility less than 10-15 miles, I'd be more inclined to agree.
You miss understand, I think the Administration had foreknowledge. It is just that none, and I mean ZERO, or the conspiracy theories I have read about and research hold up to even a cursory glance at observable reality. Occam again. Jihadi's flew planes into the Towers damaging them enough to cause complete structural failure. Able Danger alone points out that forces in our own, corrupt, bloated government KNEW something was going to happen. I don't need to spin fancy fairy tales to make things any worse than they already are.
Here is a photo of the southeast wall of 7 taken after the collapse of the Twin
Towers on 9-11. Show us where the 20 story hole was that would bring down 7. I
can't even see one story gone---can you?Link to
photo
"Expect the government to lie to you."
If that's all there was to it, then why did those stock market spikes occur beforehand involving companies that would be affected by 9/11? That indicates definite foreknowledge by influential people in the stocks who are serious about moving money. As far as I know, there is no other explanation for the spikes. Perhaps one of the more diligent 9/11 posters might post some links to the financial articles :)
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told (Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of events. Bush signs an Executive Order and everyone is being quoted to the effect that their actions are lawful on that basis. They're not. Bush is not King. I sincerely hope there are class action lawsuits filed against all the carriers that so willingly complied with the NSA's request. And I hope the carriers get bankrupted by those lawsuits.
Er... what photo?
Ding, ding, ding, ding, you just might be starting to think here. Maybe there is hope for you yet. They didn't carry explosives into the burning building that day, it takes weeks of preparation to bring a building down in a controlled manner. That building did not, nor did the two towers come down due to anything other than thermite and explosives that day that were put in place weeks or months before 9/11. Which can only mean one thing, 9/11 was an inside job. God is always good! Source it. Here's the Ten-year chart for the DJIA off of CNN. DOW was trending downward, but no annomalies prior to the 9/11 attack. Sharp dip after followed by a rise.
I have no firm opinion on who's responsible for 911. There's no question that it was an operation pulled off by people heartless enough to kill thousands of people. The only question is who they are. For me, the collapse of WTC 7 is the most obvious question that needs answering. To have all 4 corners of the building collapse at the same instant is quite suspicious. Even the OKC Murrah building blast which took out 2 major building supports left half the building standing. Ditto for many buildings that have suffered car/truck bomb attacks. Do you have an explanation as to what made WTC 7 collapse like it did? Also, (not to change the subject) if you appreciate witnesses, what do you think of the missle theory of TWA 800? To me that's a case of the government discarding the word of many dozens of witnesses.
Or that those explosives were never there at all and it was just a couple of North America's largest buildings falling down on top of them... Any idea how much NOISE a jackhammer makes? Or a conrete drill? Did they hush up all those night time cleaning crews? Late shifters? Or did they do it all over Christmas break?
That's not what I've seen, DC. However, I'm not very good about keeping track of this info, so I'm not the best poster on the subject. Perhaps someone else who has kept track of this financial data might want to post?
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
WTC 7 was damaged the same way 5 and 6 were. By WTC 1 falling on it. There was even a gap between 5/6 that would have acted like a debris funnal slamming the whole front of WTC7 on the short side of it's trapazoid. As for TWA 800, that one I'm not so sure on. Knowing what I do about aircraft, I find the official story unlikely. Knowing the Jihadi's favoring small arms like Stingers, I find that a bit more plausible. Especially after seeing what the recovered reconstruction of the fuselage looked like. That looked like something exploded where there are no fuel tanks, just luggage.
No offense, but a 10 year chart is hardly adequate for showing spikes that may have occurred in a few stocks for a couple days in 2001.
Then CNN is in on it. As is the entire Stock Exchange. That is where I got that chart from.
Says Silverstein.
Occam again. Jihadi's flew planes into the Towers damaging them enough to cause complete structural failure. Able Danger alone points out that forces in our own, corrupt, bloated government KNEW something was going to happen. I don't need to spin fancy fairy tales to make things any worse than they already are. Well depicting what people believe to be true as 'fancy fairy tales' wont exactly win friends and influence people ;P I hadnt read all of your replies so I truly had no idea where you were coming from.. there is more than enough evidence to show there was complicity.. and IMO more than enough to believe it was far more than that..
"The thing worse than rebellion is the thing that causes rebellion." Frederick Douglass
A high volume of put option purchases[7], [8] and other unusual market activity [9] occurred in the days and weeks before 9/11, prompting international investigations into alleged insider trading following the attacks. Put options increased for, among others, United Air UAL Corp. (increased 40 percent), American Airline parent AMR Corp (increased 20 percent), and aircraft manufacturer Boeing Corp. (increased 37 percent). CNN stated: "Short-sellers with advance knowledge of the attack could have made millions."[10]. Former Security and Exchange Commission enforcement chief William McLucas told Bloomberg News that regulators would "certainly be able to track down every trade," however, no arrests have ever occurred. Although the 9/11 Commission considered that the trades might be initially suspicious - they stated in their Report that there was no terrorist connection - they did not provide citations or specifics for their investigations, such as how 'each trade' could have been explained, given that the events occurred worldwide. The Commission merely states: "Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation." From the (links omitted).
It's a ten year DAILY chart. Here's a five-year chart that shows the POST-9/11 drop and another one mid-2002 from Market Watch. Looks identical to the CNN chart. If you can find the daily DJIA from say 9-09-2001 to 9-13-2001, then post it.
That should have read: From the Wikipedia entry on the Aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
And as I already posted, and numerous other interviews and recordings from 9/11 show, they were talking about pulling back the fire companies. What are the odds that firemen and a relestate businessmen are going to know insider demolition slang? Also, there is no verification, nor sources I can find, that "pull it" is demolition slang to begin with.
You want the link?
"Expect the government to lie to you."
I have to admit I don't know much at all about building 5 or 6. But given the movie clips, I've seen no damage to it that would explain the collapse, much less a highly uniform one. Even if one side of the building was damaged, would that make the entire building drop so evenly? I can't answer "yes" to that given what I've seen. I think stingers don't quite have the altitude reach to have gotten to 800, but for me it doesn't rule out some similar weapon launched from a small boat. I remember hearing an FBI agent interviewed on TV saying that the reason for seizing tapes that might show a missle was to prevent public hysteria. Seeing the FBI operate based on crowd control rather than "Investigation" made me suspicious. That and the vile prosecution of an independent investigative reporter who had a 2 inch piece of seat cushion removed from the site for chemical analysis made it easy for me to conclude that at minimum, a government cover-up was involved in 800.
What are the odds that firemen and a relestate businessmen are going to know insider demolition slang? Silverstein wouldn't know demolition terms but would know precisely what firemen mean by "pull it"? Typical of the circular logic of the government version defenders.
"Expect the government to lie to you."
You can still think this after hearing LS in his own words, and in the exact context?
For someone who claims not to have studied the matter because you are convinced the government is telling the truth, you sure seem to be pulling up a lot of information very quickly.
I have a personality like the ugly side of a battle axe. Always have. Despite that, I'm a rather contented and happy beast. I just don't deal well with what I see as a lack of critical thought. Either the government spent billions of dollars and thousands of man hours covertly pulling off the biggest coup in history, while not being able to so much as hide it's own incompetance every where else, or it happened exactly as it appeared. Occam again.
Especially when a composite chart doesn't hint at the puts/calls placed upon specific airline stocks. No aggregate compilation would show that.
Pray you will never know, the hell where youth and laughter go - Siegfried Sassoon. Ypres, Autumn 1914.
If they were discussing pulling back the fire crews? Yeah. Wouldn't you?
That link goes to a conspiracy website. img src the photo...
LS is a builder. He knows these terms.
Thanks, that's an interesting collection.
Comments (139 - 179) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestEvery time I've looked at mine after take off, it has a msg like "Service unavailable" - there is no dial tone.
#99. To: Jethro Tull (#92)
That said, Larry Silverstein "pulled" down Bld. 7.
#100. To: swarthyguy (#95)
OK, you're convinced the Govt is all upfront about 911 and telling the truth.
#101. To: christine (#98)
DC, i can see your mind is made up and closed.
#102. To: Dead Corpse (#94)
Obnoxious? The wheels started coming off this thread about post 56. All of my posts before that are on topic and well reasoned. It wasn't until I started gettign a ration of crap about these 9-11 conspiracy theories that I started getting "obnoxious" in return.
#103. To: Dead Corpse (#99)
Quote is out of context and does not refer to demolition, but stopping efforts to try and save the building.
#104. To: Peetie Wheatstraw (#102)
#105. To: mehitable (#72)
#106. To: Jethro Tull (#103)
Well, "pulled" means only one thing in the demolition arena.
#107. To: Dead Corpse (#106)
#108. To: BTP Holdings (#43)
The report seriously questions whether or not the suspect hijackers, supposedly trained on Cessna light aircraft, could have located a target dead-on 200 miles from take off point.
#109. To: Zipporah (#107)
#110. To: Dead Corpse (#106)
then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20
stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors.
#111. To: Dead Corpse (#109)
#112. To: Eoghan (#0)
... Qwest's lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused.
#113. To: Peetie Wheatstraw (#110)
#114. To: Dead Corpse (#106)
Also, how much would it take to get you to carry EXPLOSIVES into a burning building that was just heavily damaged and attmpet to carry out a demo job on it?
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02] More and more of our imports come from overseas. - George W. Bush
#115. To: mehitable (#111)
If that's all there was to it, then why did those stock market spikes occur beforehand involving companies that would be affected by 9/11?
#116. To: Dead Corpse (#89)
I don't have "faith" in anyones story. The evidence I have gone looking for, including government, eye witness, and new reports, all point to the same thing.
#117. To: RickyJ (#114)
That building did not, nor did the two towers come down due to anything other than thermite and explosives that day that were put in place weeks or months before 9/11. Which can only mean one thing, 9/11 was an inside job.
#118. To: Dead Corpse (#115)
#119. To: Neil McIver (#116)
#120. To: Dead Corpse (#115)
Here's the Ten-year chart for the DJIA off of CNN.
#121. To: mehitable (#118)
That's not what I've seen, DC.
#122. To: Dead Corpse (#106)
Says who?
#123. To: Dead Corpse (#109)
You miss understand, I think the Administration had foreknowledge. It is just that none, and I mean ZERO, or the conspiracy theories I have read about and research hold up to even a cursory glance at observable reality.
#124. To: mehitable (#111)
Market Activity Investigations
#125. To: Neil McIver (#120)
#126. To: All (#124)
#127. To: Jethro Tull (#122)
#128. To: Dead Corpse (#113)
Er... what photo?
#129. To: Dead Corpse (#119)
WTC 7 was damaged the same way 5 and 6 were. By WTC 1 falling on it. There was even a gap between 5/6 that would have acted like a debris funnal slamming the whole front of WTC7 on the short side of it's trapazoid.
As for TWA 800, that one I'm not so sure on. Knowing what I do about aircraft, I find the official story unlikely. Knowing the Jihadi's favoring small arms like Stingers, I find that a bit more plausible.
#130. To: Dead Corpse (#127)
And as I already posted, and numerous other interviews and recordings from 9/11 show, they were talking about pulling back the fire companies.
#131. To: Dead Corpse (#127)
they were talking about pulling back the fire companies.
#132. To: Dead Corpse (#127)
#133. To: Zipporah (#123)
Well depicting what people believe to be true as 'fancy fairy tales' wont exactly win friends and influence people ;P
#134. To: Neil McIver (#120)
#135. To: Peetie Wheatstraw (#130)
#136. To: Peetie Wheatstraw (#128)
#137. To: Dead Corpse (#127)
relestate businessmen
#138. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#54)
.
.
.
