[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Ethereum ETFs In 'Window-Dressing' Stage, Approval Within Weeks; Galaxy

Americans Are More Likely To Go To War With The Government Than Submit To The Draft

Rudy Giuliani has just been disbarred in New York

Israeli Generals Want Truce in Gaza,

Joe Biden's felon son Hunter is joining White House meetings

The only Democrat who could beat Trump

Ukraine is too CORRUPT to join NATO, US says, in major blow to Zelensky and boost for Putin

CNN Erin Burnett Admits Joe Biden knew the Debate questions..

Affirmative Action Suit Details How Law School Blackballed Accomplished White Men, Opted For Unqualified Black Women

Russia warns Israel over Ukraine missiles

Yemeni Houthis Vow USS Theodore Roosevelt 'Primary Target' Once it Enters Red Sea

3 Minutes Ago: Jim Rickards Shared Horrible WARNING

Horse is back at library

Crossdressing Luggage Snatcher and Ex-Biden Official Sam Brinton Gets Sweetheart Plea Deal

Music

The Ones That Didn't Make It Back Home [featuring Pacman @ 0:49 - 0:57 in his natural habitat]

Let’s Talk About Grief | Death Anniversary

Democrats Suddenly Change Slogan To 'Orange Man Good'

America in SHOCK as New Footage of Jill Biden's 'ELDER ABUSE' Emerges | Dems FURIOUS: 'Jill is EVIL'

Executions, reprisals and counter-executions - SS Polizei Regiment 19 versus the French Resistance

Paratrooper kills german soldier and returns wedding photos to his family after 68 years

AMeRiKaN GULaG...

'Christian Warrior Training' explodes as churches put faith in guns

Major insurer gives brutal ultimatum to entire state: Let us put up prices by 50 percent or we will leave

Biden Admin Issues Order Blocking Haitian Illegal Immigrants From Deportation

Murder Rate in Socialist Venezuela Falls to 22-Year Low

ISRAEL IS DESTROYING GAZA TO CONTROL THE WORLD'S MOST IMPORTANT SHIPPING LANE

Denmark to tax livestock farts and burps starting in 2030

Woman to serve longer prison time for offending migrant men who gang-raped a minor

IDF says murder is okay after statistics show that Israel killed 75% of all journalists who died in 2023


9/11
See other 9/11 Articles

Title: 9/11: Conspiracy of Incompetence
Source: http://www.opednews.com
URL Source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/op ... 61115_the_911_conspiracy_o.htm
Published: Nov 16, 2006
Author: R O Connor
Post Date: 2006-11-19 07:16:17 by Kamala
Ping List: *9-11*     Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: 911
Views: 889
Comments: 104

November 16, 2006 at 09:45:58

9/11: Conspiracy of Incompetence

by Rory OConnor

http://www.opednews.com

What if I told you that a member of Osama bin Laden's inner circle operated with impunity within the United States for years before September 11? That despite being an ardent and avowed jihadi, he managed to become a naturalized citizen, to join the US Army, to get posted to the Special Warfare Center where Green Berets and Delta Force train, and to work with both the CIA and the FBI? And all the while he was a top al Qaeda operative, hosting its second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri when he traveled to the US in the 1990's to raise money, and training both bin Laden's personal bodyguard and radical Muslims who would go on to assassinate Jewish militant Meir Kahane and detonate a truck bomb at the World Trade Center?

Would you take it as evidence that our so-called intelligence community was abjectly incompetent and dysfunctional in the months and years before 9/11? Or would you see it as further proof that the powers-that-be were the powers behind 9/11, either "making it happen on purpose?" Or alternately: "letting it happen on purpose?"

With time running out on the lame duck Bush Administration (now well on its way to becoming a "comma," as the President might phrase it), our chances of getting to the bottom of the signal event of the Bush years -- the unsolved murder of nearly three-thousand people, the worst terror attacks ever on US soil, the "day that changed everything," the iconic 9/11 -- are also rapidly fading.

Even as the misnamed "war on terror" continues to heat up, the crime that precipitated it has somehow become a cold case. The only federal prosecution directly associated with the attacks -- that of Zacarias Moussaoui -- ended in a plea bargain and with an FBI agent accusing his superiors of "criminal negligence." Meanwhile, in the absence of a truly unfettered investigation, amidst calls from victims' families for a reopened, non-partisan inquiry, and with many major questions still unanswered more than five years after the fact, it is unsurprising that faith-based theories continue to pour into the information vacuum and assume, at least for some, an aura of truth.

Numerous polls indicate that few Americans now believe they have been told the truth about 9/11. According to one poll conducted recently for the New York Times and CBS News, more than eighty percent think the Administration is either "mostly lying" or at least "hiding something." Before it becomes too late, and the case too cold, is it still possible to determine what happened on 9/11 -- and why?

Did some version of the MIHOP or LIHOP conspiracy theories actually take place? Or were our leaders and their minions in the intelligence community simply so incompetent that they missed dozens, if not hundreds, of pre-attack "threat assessments," warnings, signs and indications that, as the notorious PDB of August 6, 2001 bluntly informed the president, Osama Bin Laden was "Determined to Strike in US?" If so, did they then conspire to cover up their "criminally negligent" incompetence?

Count author Peter Lance, an Emmy-winning former reporter and producer for ABC News, among those who believe in the "9/11 Incompetence Conspiracy Theory." Lance's new book, "Triple Cross," tells the amazing story of an al-Qaeda superspy named Ali Mohamed. As Lance writes, "In the annals of espionage, few men have moved in and out of the deep black world between the hunters and the hunted with as much audacity as Ali Mohamed."

Mohamed's fundamentalist proclivities were no secret to US intelligence. As early as 1989, he turned up in FBI surveillance photos, conducting weapons training of followers of the Omar Abdel Rahman, the "blind sheikh" now imprisoned for his role in a plot to blow up the United Nations and several bridges and tunnels into Manhattan. The sheikh's followers would later be involved in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, but Ali Mohamed not only avoided arrest but managed to become an FBI informant, even while smuggling bin Laden in and out of Afghanistan, writing much of the al Qaeda terrorist manual and helping to plan attacks on American troops in Somalia and U.S. embassies in Africa.

''The FBI allowed the chief spy for al Qaeda to operate right under their noses,'' Lance says in amazement. ''They let him plan the bombings of the embassies in Africa right under their noses. Two hundred twenty-four people were killed and more than 4,000 wounded because of their negligence."

While some contend that Mohamed's intimate relations with the FBI and CIA are proof of government involvement in a 9/11 plot, Lance says that it was instead embarrassment and ass-covering on the part of Justice and Pentagon officials over the mishandling of Ali Mohammed that led first to a conspiracy of silence and then to a conspiracy to cover up their incompetence and deception. He believes that chagrin over the fact that bin Laden's spy stole top-secret intelligence (including, for example, the positions of all Green Beret and SEAL units worldwide) led to a decision on high to bury the entire Able Danger intelligence program, which identified the al Qaeda cell active in Brooklyn months before the 9/11 attacks, and also identified Ali Mohamed as a member of bin Laden's inner circle as early as March 2000. Lance further states that then-Assistant US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was "hopelessly outgunned by Mohamed," and covered up key al Qaeda intelligence as far back as 1996.

Although Fitzgerald called Mohamed "the most dangerous man I've ever met," he left him on the street for years, which allowed Mohamed time to help plan the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania on August 7th, 1998, in which 224 died and more than 4,000 were injured. Fitzgerald, who later became both U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois and Special Prosecutor in the Scooter Libby/Valerie Plame CIA leak probe, finally arrested Ali Mohamed after the bombings in 1998. But Fitzgerald then cut a deal that allowed Mohamed to avoid the death penalty and enter witness protection. Although Mohammed was kept in federal custody for three years, Fitzgerald and his FBI and Justice Department associates were unable to extract any information from him about the looming 9/11 plot.

Finally, in October 2000, after having tricked the US intelligence establishment for years, Mohammed admitted in federal court his involvement in plots to kill US soldiers in Somalia and Saudi Arabia, US ambassadors in Africa, and American civilians "anywhere in the world." Despite these admissions, he has never been sentenced, the details of his plea agreement remain secret, and his whereabouts today are unknown to all but a few.

Given the many mistakes and apparent government deception obvious from even a cursory examination of the Ali Mohamed case, along with related miscues involving the Central Intelligence Agency (see "The Looming Tower" by Lawrence Wright, and "State of Denial" by Bob Woodward), the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and high officials at Special Operations Command, Central Command, and yes, the White House. it's no wonder that conspiracists see evidence -- if not outright proof -- for their "loose change" theories of what happened on 9/11.

But in writing his brilliantly researched, highly detailed, exhaustive (and at nearly 500 pages, exhausting!) account of how Osama bin Laden's master spy "triple crossed" the CIA, the Green Berets and the FBI, Lance has actually done the 9/11 truth movement a distinct service. The media and the government's national security apparatus may have failed to "connect the dots," but Peter Lance certainly has in "Triple Cross."

Was there a government conspiracy behind the attacks of 9/11? Or did the true conspiracy begin only after the attacks, in a desperate but thus far successful attempt to avoid scandal and obscure the truth that our intelligence agencies had suppressed critical intelligence and bungled their jobs? Whatever your faith and belief, the Ali Mohamed story seems key to understanding the full truth of 9/11. "Could the attacks have been prevented?" Lance asks. "If so, who in our government should be blamed for the failure?" And finally, and most importantly, "have our intelligence agencies undergone sufficient reform to prevent future assaults on America?"

http://www.roryoconnor.org

Filmmaker and journalist Rory O'Connor writes the 'Media Is A Plural' blog, accessible at http://www.roryoconnor.org.

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Other Articles by Author


Poster Comment:

Peter Lance is a limited hangout writer. Throw out some truth, control the blame. He still contends 911 was just incompetence and bumbling, even though he has stated that WTC 7 was a demo job. You can't have it both ways. Subscribe to *9-11*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Kamala (#0)

You know- occassionly a fact or inconsistency comes up about 9/11 that is so glaringly obvious, that at a minimum, it should have raised media eyebrows. There are SO MANY of these sorts of "what a minute here" facts, inconsistencies, and alarm bells that it astounds me.

One such "alarm bell" was the amount of money spent on investigating 9/11- about a third the cost of looking into Clinton's BJs. Three thousand American civilians murdered in the biggest act of terrorism ever in this country and they spent what investigating it? 14 million dollars? That is just one. There are dozens of such things that should make one go "hmmmmmmm". Collectively- taken together- only a moron could come to conculsion that the government is telling the truth about 9/11.

Burkeman1  posted on  2006-11-19   11:38:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Burkeman1 (#1) (Edited)

One such "alarm bell" was the amount of money spent on investigating 9/11- about a third the cost of looking into Clinton's BJs. Three thousand American civilians murdered in the biggest act of terrorism ever in this country and they spent what investigating it? 14 million dollars? That is just one.

That's one. Another that is glaring to me, is Eliot Spitzer never convening a Grand Jury to investigate any aspect of 9/11 as far as I know. You would think having over 2500 foul play deaths ocurring in your jurisdiction would be cause to inquire into some aspect of it, whether it just be for negligence, criminal malfeasance, something more sinister or otherwise.

But not for AG Spitzer. This is a guy who will launch a massive investigation anytime some blue-haired pensioner loses a nickel in the stock market, but can't muster anything for a few thousand mass murdered.

He was rewarded for his loyalty to the Machine with the governor's mansion in NY this election with Pataki, the Republican, declining to seek re-election. I suppose this could all be a coincidence though.

SmokinOPs  posted on  2006-11-20   12:16:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Burkeman1 (#1)

You know- occassionly a fact or inconsistency comes up about 9/11 that is so glaringly obvious, that at a minimum, it should have raised media eyebrows. There are SO MANY of these sorts of "what a minute here" facts, inconsistencies, and alarm bells that it astounds me.

I've always been fairly confident with the notion that nineteen Arab hijackers hijacked three planes and flew them into the various buildings involved, and also with the notion that WTC 7 fell because of structural integrity problems created by the falling of WTC 1 & 2. I've seen what the impact was on the ground floors of other buildings that weren't as close, and many of them have cracked foundations, or huge pieces of marble that were split by the impact.

Along with Occam's Razor, which leads one to conclude that the simplest of solutions that meet your criteria tend to be the correct ones.

With that said, there's no hiding the fact that the Mujahideen were our puppet force against the USSR in Afghanistan, and that we've been very close with them and remain close with them to this day. Bin-Laden's family connections to the Bush family, the oil industry and the tight relationship with the CIA; the fact that AQ wouldn't even exist if not for a history of CIA support; that the CIA gets black ops money from Afghani opium, and now the opium spigot is going full bore...

I mean, would it be a stretch to suppose that the CIA would do the twin towers as a black op? Hardly. And the easiest way for them to do it would be to pay off OBL (up until the mid-nineties pretty openly their agent) to get some of his guys to do it? And then a promise that he'd be allowed to escape afterwards (a promise we've kept so far).

I have no problem with the notion that the CIA did 9-11, I just think they'd have used the easiest means possible, which didn't involve hitting the Pentagon with a cruise missile or forcibly deboarding the crew of that flight and shooting them in the head, or having actors record phone calls or any of that stuff. All they had to do was get their former agent to round up some of his nutter-buddies ..

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-20   12:33:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: bluedogtxn (#3)

have you ever seen in the history of any crash/crime the case being, oh so conveniently, solved the next day? with an, oh so neatly placed little passport of one of the supposed hijackers atop the pile of rubble? come on now. those two factoids alone should raise your eyebrows. everything the government claimed happened on that day is physically impossible.

christine  posted on  2006-11-20   13:53:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: christine (#4)

everything the government claimed happened on that day is physically impossible.

Uhhhhhhh......

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-20   14:01:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: christine (#4)

have you ever seen in the history of any crash/crime the case being, oh so conveniently, solved the next day? with an, oh so neatly placed little passport of one of the supposed hijackers atop the pile of rubble? come on now. those two factoids alone should raise your eyebrows. everything the government claimed happened on that day is physically impossible.

Well, I don't think the conspiracy people have come up with a plan that's any MORE plausible than the official version of events. I also don't think that the official version of events is in any way inconsistent with MIHOP or LIHOPing 9-11.

Just like the JFK lone gunman theory. Maybe it is a tight scenario, or maybe it isn't. That's arguable, and reams and reams of public debating space has been taken up with the arguments. But if the lone gunman theory is the truth, that still doesn't mean the CIA didn't whack Kennedy. All they had to do was find a lone gunman to do it, and what a weird coincidence that the lone gunman (who might have been a Patsy) happened to have a CIA connected past. Oddly, so did Timothy McVeigh. Weirdly, so did Osama Bin Ladin. Strangely, so did Jack Ruby. Unusually, so did Sirhan Sirhan...

You keep piling up these coincidences, and pretty soon they don't look like coincidences anymore. Like I said, I'm about half way to believing the CIA did 9-11. I'm certainly open to the possibility, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least. But you're not gonna get me there on the physical evidence, because physical evidence is of very limited persuasive value and can only tell you the "what".

The "what" of 9-11 is not important. What is important is the "who" and the "why".

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-20   16:20:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: bluedogtxn, Destro (#6) (Edited)

The "what" of 9-11 is not important. What is important is the "who" and the "why".

This is where I think some of the obsessions of certain 911 sites tend to obscure rather than illuminate.

The reticence of the American political system to investigate confirms a level of US culpability.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-20   16:22:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: swarthyguy (#7)

This is where I think some of obsession of certain 911 sites tend to obscure rather than illuminate.

I agree 100%. And not only that, but the out of the realm of plausibility schemes that some of the sites seem to come up with actually damage the credibility of legitimate inquirers. I want to know more about the confluence of actors involved in the anti-Soviet Afghan movements and the Mujahideen and Osama, and how closely he was tied to CIA apron strings. I want to know more about how he was spirited out of Afghanistan, and most of his fighters with him, by air, at a time when we supposedly controlled all Afghan airspace. I want to know why we were circulating fliers of him to agents in Somalia when he was supposedly hiding in a cave in the mountains of western Pakistan.

Spare me the "it was a cruise missile that hit the Pentagon and that proves Cheney ordered a strike...." stuff. While this might be possible, it is extremely, extremely unlikely. And it misses the point.

The first question should be: Cui bono? Who benefits? Then look for their links to the people involved.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-20   16:30:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: bluedogtxn (#8) (Edited)

I want to know more about the confluence of actors involved in the anti-Soviet Afghan movements and the Mujahideen and Osama, and how closely he was tied to CIA apron strings. I want to know more about how he was spirited out of Afghanistan, and most of his fighters with him, by air, at a time when we supposedly controlled all Afghan airspace.

I think plausible scenarios are out there; not only from the Indians, but also the Kupferberg and Chossudovsky article on global research and cooperative research web sites.

And I do think Hopsicker's reports do a great job on the US angles.

Pogo was right.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-20   16:33:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: swarthyguy (#7)

The reticence of the American political system to investigate confirms a level of US culpability.

I think the fact that the only people in the government who got fired after 9/11 were the ones in the trenches who tried to warn their superiors before the fact speaks volumes.

"First I'm gonna bother everybody I meet, and then I'll probably go home and get drunk."

orangedog  posted on  2006-11-20   16:35:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: swarthyguy, bluedogtxn, christine (#7)

I have stated my claims already. My fears are that just as the stories of UFOs were used to distract people away from investigating the black budget and X- Plane testing over our sky-ways that the 'powers that be' are using the 9/11 Truth movement as a 'honey trap' to present an outlandish version of that day and make it attractive to investigative minded people and thus discredit them as kooks because the kooky theory is usually more attractive than the real explanation and the kooks usually are the ones that get to wave the standard. 9/11 was already partly solved in the Indian press. Especially by B.Raman who is a semi-official spokesman for the Indian state.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-20   16:39:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Destro (#11)

B.Raman

The archives at SAAG.ORG are engrossing.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-20   16:40:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Destro (#11)

the 'powers that be' are using the 9/11 Truth movement as a 'honey trap' to present an outlandish version of that day and make it attractive to investigative minded people and thus discredit them as kooks

I agree with this. I'm leaning toward government involvement in 9-11; and the evidence I have for this has more to do with the actors involved in Afghanistan than it has to do with whether some I-beams got melted in the pile of rubble.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-20   16:43:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: bluedogtxn, swarthyguy (#13) (Edited)

The archives at SAAG.ORG are engrossing.

I wish Americans read outside sources.

The victims of America's CIA black ops alliance with jihadis like India and Serbia had long maintained files on America's al-CIAda.

I was aware of them because I was pimpin' for my Serbian hommies and doing some research on the web plus what sources on the ground were telling me. This made Serbs exchange info with Indians and so on.

This intel info is then filtered down to us lowly civilians by men with links to the Indian govt like B.Raman and others.

It is always the neutral parties in power politics that kind of let the cat out of the bag.

I do know that after JFK was killed a book came out of France - author unknown that pretty much proved the case and blamed Texas oil men, etc. Why France and what does that have to do with India of today? France was a neutral power of the 60s - trying to be independent of the USA and of the Soviets. Thus they had their own unique vested interests separate from America - sometimes in conflict with America - same as India of today.

The book written by French intel was John F. Kennedy assassination: Farewell America: click this link to read commentary on the conspiracy book reportedly written by French intelligence on the assassination of JFK.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-20   16:59:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Destro (#14)

a book came out of France

Farewell, America IIRC, derided and ignored in the US, but worth reading.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-20   17:01:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: swarthyguy, bluedogtxn (#15) (Edited)

'Farewell, America' was banned in America for a while. A trick of intel published works exposing the truth is to kind of get the truth wrong - instead of 2 gunmen make it 3 or 6 - something to make the work not so obvious.

B.Raman chooses to put the Indian intel gathered facts out there by asking questions he does not answer regarding the events of 9/11 rather than get the facts wrong slightly like the French did for JFK.

In the 60s such truths are released in book form by intel services which had their own publishing companies - in this era they use the web publishing through using authors like B.Raman.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-20   17:13:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Destro (#16)

lol you're right, some of his articles posting questions to America, Bush, Osama and Mush are priceless.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-20   17:15:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: swarthyguy (#17) (Edited)

B.Raman chooses to put the Indian intel gathered facts out there by asking questions he does not answer regarding the events of 9/11 rather than get the facts wrong slightly like the French did for JFK.

In the 60s such truths are released in book form by intel services which had their own publishing companies - in this era they use the web publishing through using authors like B.Raman.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-20   17:16:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Destro (#18)

Eureka! You're a shill for the Injuns.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-20   17:17:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: bluedogtxn (#6) (Edited)

The "what" of 9-11 is not important. What is important is the "who" and the "why".

i agree with you on this part.

i can't agree with you that physical evidence is of very limited persuasive value. physical evidence is everything, imo. the skeptics get sidetracked with their questions of what really happened (we'll never know because the criminals will never tell us) rather than what we know by virtue of the physical evidence, or lack thereof, didn't happen.

incidentally, 84% of the american people doubt the "official" version with 35% of those convinced that it absolutely was an inside job.

and, no offense, but i think the Occam's Razor maxim is absurd and simplistic. it's a dismissive philosophy. i doubt that as a defense attorney you'd try any of your cases based on it.

christine  posted on  2006-11-20   17:47:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: christine, bluedogtxn, swarthyguy (#20) (Edited)

i can't agree with you that physical evidence is of very limited persuasive value. physical evidence is everything, imo.

The physical evidence touted by the 9/11 truthers is based on an ignorance of science and what is even more scary - I see attempts to shoe horn evidence into a scenario and an unwillingness to throw out hypothesis if found to be in error.

That is dogmatic not scientific thinking.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-20   19:34:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Destro (#21)

The physical evidence touted by the 9/11 truthers is based on an ignorance of science and what is even more scary -

whatever.

christine  posted on  2006-11-20   19:37:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: christine (#22)

whatever indeeeeeed.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-20   19:41:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: swarthyguy (#19)

Eureka! You're a shill for the Injuns.

I am an agent of COBRA!

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-20   19:42:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: bluedogtxn (#3)

.....and also with the notion that WTC 7 fell because of structural integrity problems created by the falling of WTC 1 & 2. I've seen what the impact was on the ground floors of other buildings that weren't as close, and many of them have cracked foundations, or huge pieces of marble that were split by the impact......

Get back to me when you explain evaporated steel, and streams and pools of molten iron under wtc 7 and the other towers. WTC 7 was over 300 feet away from tower 1. Right across the street 40 feet away were banks and hotels that didn't collapse. WTC 5/6 had giant debris fall right on top of them, then burn for days and not collapse. The government story is a complete lie, Anyone who believes any of it, is in denial.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   20:03:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: christine (#4)

Forget the next day, it was solved that day.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   20:04:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Cynicom (#5)

Are you still with us in calling for a new investigation or not?

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   20:05:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: bluedogtxn (#6) (Edited)

Why don't you tell us here what the official story is on WTC 1,2 and 7?

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   20:06:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Kamala (#26)

Forget the next day, it was solved that day.

well, if we're gonna get technical, it was solved way back when they planned it. :P

christine  posted on  2006-11-20   20:07:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: bluedogtxn (#8)

....cruise missile that hit the Pentagon and that proves Cheney ordered a strike

Strawman argument. The real researchers and scientists involved in credible 911 findings, do not discuss this.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   20:09:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: bluedogtxn (#13)

What you are missing is you need all aspects of 911. Some have investigated the paper and people trails and others have gone the physical research route.

You want people and paper trails? Read Mike Ruppert, Naffeez Amed, Paul Thompson, Sander Hicks.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   20:14:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Kamala (#25)

Get back to me when you explain evaporated steel, and streams and pools of molten iron under wtc 7 and the other towers.

that remained at what temperature for how many weeks ????

christine  posted on  2006-11-20   20:16:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: christine (#32) (Edited)

3 weeks later there were spots still over 2000 degrees, but most had "cooled" to around 1300. It was still burning 3 months later. That is some fantastic jet fuel.

Jet fuel burns at a max of 1500-1800 ONLY if force fed continuously fuel and 02.

Vast majority of office fires burn at 900-1100 degrees. Some have burned hotter near 1850.

These are GAS temps not physical temps which lag way behind and never reach those numbers.

The gas temps seen at the towers were around 1100 and the physical temps were 480-600 degrees. These figures are in the FEMA/NIST reports.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   20:17:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Kamala (#27)

Are you still with us in calling for a new investigation or not?

No.....

The mechanics of 9/11 can be investigated and discussed til the end of time to no ones satisfaction.

The original concept and implementation by whom and for what goal of 9/11 would be far more interesting and satisfactory.

Whether the WTC buildings were blown down, burned down or fell down or whether termites did it really does not matter, the deed is done and over with. What matters is to expend energy to determine who originated the idea and who implemented it for what reason.

I suspect the culprits love to see people argue as to how it was done, when the real objective is to find out who and why.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-20   21:11:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Cynicom (#34)

911 Truth isn't just calling for an investigation of just PHYSICAL evidence but ALL evidence. Wether it be people, paper or scientific.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-20   21:49:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Kamala, bluedogtxn, swarthyguy, christine (#25) (Edited)

Get back to me when you explain evaporated steel, and streams and pools of molten iron under wtc 7 and the other towers.

Do you know anything about the steel business?

This is an example of people without any kind of scientific logic or common sense making the 9/11 truth movement look so foolish.

The statement above is used to claim that explosives were used to cut beams - in other words finding molten steel is a symptom high explosives were used to cut steel. The problem with this is that steel does not stay in a liquid state after an explosion - you don't get molten steel that stays molten after the explosion. The steel does not continue to melt and stay melted.

It is insanity this is being used as evidence of anything - a claim based on video footage of the excavation sight. If that was molten steel you could not get near it without a fire suit or all you skin would blister off.

Any evidence of pooled metal is probably of low melt pont metals in the building of that is what was seen. The buildings collapsed because the heated metal lost structural strength couples with the flawed design of the building.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   0:27:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Cynicom, swarthyguy, bluedogtxn, christine, Kamala (#34)

Whether the WTC buildings were blown down, burned down or fell down or whether termites did it really does not matter, the deed is done and over with. What matters is to expend energy to determine who originated the idea and who implemented it for what reason.

I suspect the culprits love to see people argue as to how it was done, when the real objective is to find out who and why.

Is that not what I said on this website a while ago? What I described as the 'honey trap'.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   0:30:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Destro (#21)

The physical evidence touted by the 9/11 truthers is based on an ignorance of science and what is even more scary - I see attempts to shoe horn evidence into a scenario and an unwillingness to throw out hypothesis if found to be in error.

That is dogmatic not scientific thinking.

I disagree about the ignorance of science part, but I agree with the dogmatic thinking. The ironic thing is that the 9-11 truthers have a fundamental point, which is a failure of the government to investigate and a lot of connections between the hijackers and our CIA. As far as the science part, as an attorney I can tell you that there is always a strong temptation to make the evidence say what you want it to say, and not to let the evidence take you where it logically goes; which is often a more compelling story.

I sometimes wonder if the "truth" movement itself is infiltrated with crackpots designed to discredit it.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   9:35:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Cynicom, Kamala (#34)

The original concept and implementation by whom and for what goal of 9/11 would be far more interesting and satisfactory.

This is where I come down. I have a real skepticism problem with the idea that a bunch of explosives were pre-planted in WTC7 or in either of the twin towers. Not saying it's not possible, but extremely unlikely, and that's coming out of a law enforcement, courthouse, physical evidence background. Even if that were the case (and I can't figure why it would be done that way), it doesn't answer the question of "who". "Who" and "why" are the critical questions here. This was our Reichstag Fire, not our Pearl Harbor, and I want to know if it was really "terrorists" or if it was "Nazis" who burned it down.

As long as we are bickering over pools of molten metals or what temperature things were at what time, we aren't looking at the basic fundamental things. Two planes flew into the WTC buildings. That much we know. Another plane hit the P-gone and another buried itself in a field in PA. What we should be trying to figure out is who hijacked the planes? Where were they from? Who did they know? Who paid for their trip? Where did they stay? Who did they talk to? Who did they live with in the ME? How were the attacks coordinated?

Many, many critical questions, and why are the investigators being stonewalled at certain places and fired at others, and why is nobody investigating the Saudi end, where Bush has his family connections and financial connections and where all of the hijackers supposedly were from (okay, we know why)?

The most likely thing in the world is that Bush I, who was a pal to the mujahideen, was a pal to Osama, who was the leader of the outfit (AQ) that was put together and funded by our CIA that he was the boss of. That's simple math, but nobody mentions it. Nobody mentions the fantastic wealth of the Bush family and the connection between Bush I's job in the CIA and that wealth. Who benefited the most from 9-11? His son and his business pals and his son's buddies, who happen to be buddies of the father...

Relationships are key. They point in key ways right back to the White House, the CIA, the Bush Family and the House of Saud/Bin Laden.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   9:51:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Kamala (#30)

Strawman argument. The real researchers and scientists involved in credible 911 findings, do not discuss this.

Really? Who decides who the "real" researchers and scientists are? How do you get your bona-fides? Do you have to be fired from your university so that you can then show that you are on the "right track" or you wouldn't have been fired? Do you have to have a website? I can tell you that there are 9-11 truthers who will argue all day with you that the Pgon was hit by a cruise missile. No amount of eyewitness testimony or physical evidence will convince them otherwise. If dedication to a theory is a measure of its validity, then this is one of the strongest theories out there, despite its being patently ridiculous.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   9:54:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: bluedogtxn (#39)

I have a real skepticism problem with the idea that a bunch of explosives were pre-planted in WTC7 or in either of the twin towers.

Please watch this video and tell me if you are still skeptical.

911 Mysteries: Demolitions

christine  posted on  2006-11-21   10:34:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: bluedogtxn (#38)

I sometimes wonder if the "truth" movement itself is infiltrated with crackpots designed to discredit it.

Yes. I think so. It was a tactic used to discredit the peace movement in the 60s as well.

What I do find encouraging is that those that slammed me for saying so before seem to have taken up almost the same position on the matter as I espoused.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   10:41:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: christine, bluedogtxn (#41)

Please watch this video and tell me if you are still skeptical.

How can a non expert on demolitions watch a video and make a conclusion?

The USA has thousand of people employed in demolitions. Around the world tens of thousands employed in the field.

Not one of those has come forth and said that the fall of any of those buildings on 9/11 looked like the work of explosive demolitions.

That is how a court works - you bring in your experts - you just don't show a video to the jury no matter how they do it on Law & Order or Matlock.

Where are is the testimony of the explosive experts that support your position of demolition charges?

As for Blue's point about arguing over where a circle begins and ends, arguing about how the Towers fell is like looking at a murder victim who was shot and then claiming he was poisoned as well because you don't think the gun shot wound would have been fatal so we argue about death by gunshot wound over poisoning and ignore who pulled the trigger.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   10:49:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Destro (#43)

As for Blue's point about arguing over where a circle begins and ends, arguing about how the Towers fell is like looking at a murder victim who was shot and then claiming he was poisoned as well because you don't think the gun shot wound would have been fatal so we argue about death by gunshot wound over poisoning and ignore who pulled the trigger.

This is my point precisely. And I also agree that I'm no expert on explosives, so I can't watch a video and come to a conclusion. I do note that in my field I've seen experts disagree on pivotal issues like whether a person is schizophrenic, and both experts made convincing cases that standing alone, an inexperienced juror would say, "yeah. Of course." When you put the experts side by side, however, you are stuck saying, "I don't know..."

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   11:03:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: Destro, christine (#43) (Edited)

oopsdupe.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   11:04:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Destro, bluedogtxn (#43)

As for Blue's point about arguing over where a circle begins and ends, arguing about how the Towers fell is like looking at a murder victim who was shot and then claiming he was poisoned as well because you don't think the gun shot wound would have been fatal so we argue about death by gunshot wound over poisoning and ignore who pulled the trigger.

i don't agree. if you can see with the evidence presented in that video as well as numerous others (plus numerous accounts from eyewitnesses) that explosives could have been or were planted in the buildings, then you can conclude that it was absolutely a pre-planned inside job. we then know the WHO at least as far as our own government's involvement.

regarding WTC7, larry silverstein himself informed the firefighters to "pull it" and within minutes the building was brought down with pre-planted demolitions.

christine  posted on  2006-11-21   11:47:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: christine, bluedogtxn (#46)

regarding WTC7, larry silverstein himself informed the firefighters to "pull it" and within minutes the building was brought down with pre-planted demolitions.

I don't understand - therefore it drives me crazy - why you all hang your hat on that statement?

You make it sound that some watchful citizen intercepted Larry Silverstein on some secret radio band talking to his sapper squad.

He mentioned that in an interview for a PBS program! So the FDNY are now involved in demolition work? He slipped and let the cat out of the bag?

Pure nonsense.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   11:57:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Destro (#47)

why you all hang your hat on that statement?

We don't. It's just one more nail in the coffin.

The symmetry and speed of the fall of all 3 buildings that just happened to all belong to Lucky Larry make powerful statements on their own.

The steel center core had no floors, so the pancake theory is just so much dough.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   12:00:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Destro (#47)

You make it sound that some watchful citizen intercepted Larry Silverstein on some secret radio band talking to his sapper squad.

He mentioned that in an interview for a PBS program! So the FDNY are now involved in demolition work? He slipped and let the cat out of the bag?

Pure nonsense.

ditto.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   12:00:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: bluedogtxn (#44)

What I find telling is no expert on demolitions is supporting this theory - either American or foreign.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   12:01:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: robin (#48)

It's just one more nail in the coffin.

What nail?

You make it sound that some watchful citizen intercepted Larry Silverstein on some secret radio band talking to his sapper squad. He mentioned that in an interview for a PBS program! So the FDNY are now involved in demolition work? He slipped and let the cat out of the bag?

Pure nonsense.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   12:02:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Destro, christine (#50)

What I find telling is no expert on demolitions is supporting this theory - either American or foreign.

What I saw, that morning, live, was an airplane hit the second tower right after I'd heard that an airplane had hit the first tower. I also watched the towers collapse, one after the other. I watched the towers burning before they collapsed, and I thought to myself, "Why haven't they just fallen in? I've seen arson investigations and the buildings always fall in, leaving (sometimes) a brick shell, but the cieling always falls in..." Then they fell in, and I said to myself, "Of course they fell in...."

When the planes hit it was like a game of Jenga, and you knock out a whole layer of wooden sticks at the level where the planes hit... The thing's gonna topple... I don't need to be convinced that airliners hitting the side of skyscrapers will knock them down. It doesn't seem odd at all to me. The buildings also didn't collapse "in their own footprint" as has been said. I watched the way they fell, and I know fire companies were buried in debris and rubble. That debris and rubble was in the street hundreds of feet from the edges of the buildings themselves.

It is a fascinating forensic puzzle, to be sure, but to what end? You indicate that "proving" explosives were planted will establish it to be an inside job. Really? You mean Al Qaida, the worldwide terra network with access to all kinds of goodies like Plastique and sophisticated IEDs and whatnot couldn't plant explosives? They'd already planted them in the WTC before.

Connecting AQ to the CIA establishes the "inside" nature of the job. Connecting agents to Osama will connect it, too.

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   12:14:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: bluedogtxn (#52) (Edited)

Connecting AQ to the CIA establishes the "inside" nature of the job. Connecting agents to Osama will connect it, too.

Some in this demolitions in the Towers movement will tell you that there were no Arabs or al-Qaeda nor any hijackers on the planes and it was the CIA with men dressed as janitors or contractors gained access to the buildings and long before planted - unseen- explosives on almost every floor.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   12:36:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: Destro (#53)

Some in this demolitions in the Towers movement will tell you that there were no Arabs or al-Qaeda nor any hijackers on the planes and it was the CIA with men dressed as janitors or contractors gained access to the buildings and long before planted - unseen- explosives on almost every floor.

Well that's just silly. Why go to all that expense when you've got a pet nutjob you paid to install, and he's got a bunch of lunatic followers fully willing to commit any crime in the name of Allah and die doing it?

When you have a cadre of Kamikazes, that's a hell of a lot cheaper, simpler and easier than trying to conduct some elaborate scheme, cover story and cover up...

the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-11-21   12:46:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: Destro (#51)

Have you read Larry's feeble attempts to rewrite and explain away what he said? He goofed-up, got caught and tried to wiggle out of it.

Then he sued and collected on TWO terrorist attacks for billions.

Anyone who wants to absolve Larry of anything is a fool.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   13:10:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: bluedogtxn, Destro, robin (#54)

Assume the entire demolition scenario is valid.

What it does is expand the scale of the setup, but it does not bring you closer to the motives - who and why. It distracts from the military exercises, the virtual 'stand-down', the cherry picking of info from the 119 commission and connections between the Bush family, the Saudis, the Jihad against Communism and all the rest.

And disputes about demolition focus attention away from so much info available - my pick for most ignored is the role of PTECH.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   13:16:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: swarthyguy, christine, Kamala, BTP Holdings, SKYDRIFTER (#56)

What it does is expand the scale of the setup, but it does not bring you closer to the motives - who and why.

I disagree.

PNAC's "new Pearl Harbor" event was planned years in advance. Whoever did this had access to all 3 buildings, and a great deal of technical coordination and sophistication.

Certainly al-CIA-duh employed some Saudis as window dressing (don't forget the Saudi passport that was found), but there's nothing new about that.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   13:24:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: robin (#57)

Nobody who expounds the demolition scenarion postulates any substantial info beyond the destruction of those buildings.

In fact, the noise drowns out other info and doesn't lead anywhere.

Who does that benefit?

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   13:28:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: swarthyguy (#58)

Nobody who expounds the demolition scenarion postulates any substantial info beyond the destruction of those buildings.

Some have been careful not to make statements beyond proving that the official govt version of 9/11 is laughable.

Others make an excellent case that the NeoCons, as described in the PNAC report, planned this "Pearl Harbor" event as one they very much wanted.

Who benefits by our presence in the ME that 9/11 led to? Ask the Five Dancing Israelis who were taping the fall of the towers and giving each other high-fives. So out-of-place was their behavior, they were arrested that day.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   13:47:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: robin, bluedogtxn (#55) (Edited)

Have you read Larry's feeble attempts to rewrite and explain away what he said? He goofed-up, got caught and tried to wiggle out of it.

The only feebleness is trying to link Silverstein's words used in a televised interview with proof that he was the demolitions mastermind team leader.

Some commando you guys picked out for your imagined sapper team leader.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:15:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: robin (#59)

Who benefits by our presence in the ME that 9/11 led to

America has. A strategic imperative since 1945, helping the US keep the Soviets out of that area and providing America with cheap oil that was partially responsible for the post World War Two boom; the entire car and highway culture.

We are there because it helped us. Whether it still does is another whole matter.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:18:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: robin, swarthyguy, bluedogtxn (#59)

Who benefits by our presence in the ME that 9/11 led to? Ask the Five Dancing Israelis who were taping the fall of the towers and giving each other high-fives. So out-of-place was their behavior, they were arrested that day.

Easy.

Every intel agency worth their salt knew of the plot. Putin even warned Bush personally beforehand. The Israelis probably learned of the plot and were waiting for events to play out. Maybe like like how Churchill may have danced when he heard Japan attack the USA? Would you suggest Britain carried out Pearl Harbor?

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:20:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: swarthyguy (#61)

Who else?

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:21:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: Destro (#62) (Edited)

Would you suggest Britain carried out Pearl Harbor?

The New Pearl Harbor Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 Updated Edition with a New Afterword by David Ray Griffin

The raid on Pearl Harbor took the U.S. Pacific Fleet by surprise, but back in Washington, the Roosevelt administration was fully aware of the coming onslaught.

Don't forget that before America entered WWI, there was discussion about which side we should support.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:24:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: robin (#63) (Edited)

You want to think of America as an impotent giant being manipulated by the wily clever Israelis, be my guest.

It is a psychologically beneficial scapegoat, a red herring that absolves America and her citizens of all responsibility for policies implemented by America, a useful pinata.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:27:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: swarthyguy (#65) (Edited)

It is psychologically beneficial scapegoat, a red herring that absolves America and her citizens of all responsibility for policies implemented by America.

Americans are the ones that are tired of having Israel raid our pockets each and every year.

If they want war in the ME, then so be it, just leave Americans out.

I can undersrtand how America haters would not agree.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:30:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: Cynicom (#66)

HAHAHA! So, now I'm an America hater because I don't buy that Israel rules America.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:34:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: swarthyguy (#65) (Edited)

You want to think of America as an impotent giant being manipulated by the wily clever Israelis, be my guest.

It is a psychologically beneficial scapegoat, a red herring that absolves America and her citizens of all responsibility for policies implemented by America, a useful pinata.

Come on - you know Larry Silverstien - an old Jew New York landlord went to Mossad commando school like all Jews and was personally leading sabotage brigades on 9/11 - though he is not all that clever and let the fact slip while being interviewed for television for PBS.

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:34:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: swarthyguy (#65)

You want to think of America as an impotent giant being manipulated by the wily clever Israelis, be my guest.

I see it as a very unhealthy symbiotic relationship betwixt Zionists (or ZioNazis) and the fascist NeoCommies; among whom are purely opportunistic thugs like Cheney who have eyes/heart/mind only for their private and rapidly (I just mistyped this "rabidly", that may be more correct) growing offshore bank accounts.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:35:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: Destro (#68)

old and arrogant, bound to have a "senior moment" or two

But his lawyer managed to sue for TWO terrorist attacks, Lucky Larry walked away with billions.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:37:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: swarthyguy (#67)

HAHAHA! So, now I'm an America hater because I don't buy that Israel rules America.

Read carefully. You included yourself in that group, not me.

Guilty conscience or poor comprehension?

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:38:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: robin (#70)

old and arrogant, bound to have a "senior moment" or two

But not on that night, eh?

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:38:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: Destro (#72) (Edited)

Post deleted by dummy.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:42:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: Cynicom (#71)

Oh, please, such silly semantic games.

The implication is clearly there.

Guilty conscience AND poor comprehension? Izzat better for you. My, you are so clever. Sure you're not Jewish, a little hanky panky in the family past?

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:42:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: swarthyguy (#74)

The implication is clearly there.

Sure was and you swallowed it hook line and sinker. Har T har har

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:43:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#76. To: Cynicom (#75)

Hard to believe nonjews are capable of such clever trickery.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   14:47:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#77. To: swarthyguy (#76)

Hard to believe nonjews are capable of such clever trickery.

Uh huh, right.

Allen was a non Jew until he was outed and it cost him the election, that is an indication of how Americans are finally awakening.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   14:49:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#78. To: Cynicom (#73)

Post deleted by dummy

What post and who is the dummy?

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   14:57:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#79. To: bluedogtxn (#38)

Not only were there ties to the CIA and the hijackers, but also the FBI, the State Dept and the military.

NIST and FEMA conducted some physical investigative science and research. Their own findings don't support what happened to the towers.

I also agree there are plenty of crackpots in the 911 movement, but the real solid credible science and research is beng done by engineers, chemists, mathematicians, pilots, doctorates, physicists.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   14:58:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#80. To: Destro (#72)

old and arrogant, bound to have a "senior moment" or two

But not on that night, eh?

what?

I suspect Larry isn't used to being televised, and that what he may have thought was said "off the record", was indeed on record.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   14:59:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#81. To: robin (#80)

something interesting

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230839,00.html

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   15:01:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#82. To: robin (#80)

I suspect Larry isn't used to being televised, and that what he may have thought was said "off the record", was indeed on record.

You suspect why?

"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom

Destro  posted on  2006-11-21   15:01:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#83. To: bluedogtxn (#39)

Physical evidence is just one part of the investigative aspect of 911. You can believe that these hijackers were manipulated by certain rogue elements in our government, but don't believe the towers and WTC could be rigged with explosives?

The exploding towers were part of the psyop. Watching the towers explode were to be mentally tramatic to our nation.

Solid research has been done on the people and paper trails. I guess you just haven't given the time to read it all.

Never in the history of structural steel highrises before 911, or after 911, or as a matter of fact on 911, has any kind of fire resulted in a total global gravity collapse of a building.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:09:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#84. To: bluedogtxn (#40)

I agree about the missile theory an the Pentagon and so do most other credible sources on 911.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:11:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#85. To: bluedogtxn (#3)

I've always been fairly confident with the notion that nineteen Arab hijackers hijacked three planes and flew them into the various buildings involved

The same lying turds in government and the media that pushed the "war on terror" are the same lying turds that were screaming about 19 "Arab hijackers" the day after the event.

Thus far, I've seen no proof of hijackers, only hearsay. There's not even one second of CCTV videotape from Logan that shows these supposed hijackers.

"...it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things or in a private house to murder a child; it should not be permitted any sect then to sacrifice children." -Thomas Jefferson

bluegrass  posted on  2006-11-21   15:13:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#86. To: bluedogtxn (#52)

Structural steel skyscrapers do not collapse from fire. Period. Even if there is no fireproofing.

The towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts and still stand. The outer perimeter collumns were able to withstand a 2000% increase load.

You are correct that some giant girders and debris was thrown and exploded 100's of feet away.

Ask yourself, where would the energy come from to do this? How could a progressive global gravity collapse propel and eject steel girders and sections that far?

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:23:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#87. To: bluedogtxn (#54)

These hijackers couldn't fly a single engine plane, let alone a complex airliner. Pilots have repeated this.

There were hijackers on the plane, but nothing was left to chance, which would include the towers having explosives and the planes having remote control.

911 was a terror/hijacking war game that went live. It was hidden/wrapped around the other wargames that day.

There were passengers and pilots and hijackers. All were playing a part of the wargame that went live.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:30:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#88. To: swarthyguy (#56)

I agree to the point it doesn't explain the motives. It only distracts if one is in denial over the physical evidence of explosives.

I've posted articles here about PTECH from Ruppert and Thompson and others.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:34:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#89. To: swarthyguy (#58)

I have posted numerous articles besides the demolition of the buildings.

Alot of researchers stay on one aspect, wether its people/paper trails or other research.

Debating the towers and explosives is much more engaging than discussing the movement and ties of the hijackers and our government officials.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:38:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#90. To: Kamala (#87)

a terror/hijacking war game that went live

Did it ever.

I'll just suggest one point to ponder in case of the pilot hijackers - consider that they were already trained jet pilots, even fighter types, who during the course of their careers, trained at US facilities.

Their pilot education here was a cover.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   15:39:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#91. To: swarthyguy (#65)

I agree here also. The Mossad and Israel knew and more than likely were tailing the patsy arabs, but this whole operation was a USA invention.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:41:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#92. To: swarthyguy (#90)

That could be, but according to the official theory, a couple of the named hijackers that were flying the airliners that day, had a past history of having horrible basic flying skills and knowledge.

This operation had to succeed. Thats why most believe in remote control. These planes had to strike the towers and the Pentagon. I believe the 4th plane might have been a back up in case of failure of one of the others.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   15:49:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#93. To: Kamala (#92)

the official theory

Now isn't that just what they'd want us to believe.

swarthyguy  posted on  2006-11-21   16:06:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#94. To: bluedogtxn (#40)

Did you know that scientific tests performed on the structural steel by NIST/FEMA showed that of the 98% of the steel from the fire zones only reached 480 degrees?

The other 2% showed nothing over 600 degrees.

In NISTs' own live scale floor models, none of the trusses, girders or couplings failed. Even after doubling the loads and reducing the fireproofing. This was at 2hrs at 2000 degrees.

According to FEMA, the steel in the impact zones looked great, and the impacts did very little to the towers.

NIST reports that around 14-15% of the primary girders saw damage.

According to John Skilling, the main designer and engineer of the towers, the towers could lose almost 30% of the girders and still stand hurricane winds.

One could start cutting collumns on one side of a corner, across the whole face and around the next corner, and this would be near the base where the loads would be even greater.

WTC 7 had areas of steel girders that were evaporated. That takes 5100 degrees. The girders at WTC 7 had eutectic, sulphadated, intragranular formations.

There are even photos showing molten slag hanging off girders at WTC 7 and blackish/blue burn marks of the steel.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   16:14:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#95. To: bluedogtxn (#38)

Contrary to what has been posted in this thread. There was no molten steel at WTC 1, 2 and 7. What was found and seen and reported by numerous people at the ground zero was molten iron.

Two independent samples of this molten metal were tested from 911 memorials and the findings were; iron, aluminum, potassium, zinc, sulphur, fluorine, barium, chlorine.

These are the traces and fingerprints of military thermate. These streams of iron flowed, and pools burned deep under the pile and basements at ground zero without 02.

These are chemical reactions and byproducts. There is no need for 02 because thermate creates and gives off 02.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-21   16:38:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#96. To: Kamala (#87)

These hijackers couldn't fly a single engine plane, let alone a complex airliner. Pilots have repeated this.

This link is to the trial transcript for Moussaoui.

If you have time to review, it is quite apparent that the instructor (Prevost) is firm in his opinion that had Moussaoui finished his simulator time he COULD have done what he was training to do.

What other pilots may or may not think is not really relevant, Prevost was the instructor and privy to everything, including Moussaoui.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/moussaoui/zmprevost.html

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-21   17:11:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#97. To: Kamala (#94)

Did you know that scientific tests performed on the structural steel by NIST/FEMA showed that of the 98% of the steel from the fire zones only reached 480 degrees?

The other 2% showed nothing over 600 degrees.

In NISTs' own live scale floor models, none of the trusses, girders or couplings failed. Even after doubling the loads and reducing the fireproofing. This was at 2hrs at 2000 degrees.

According to FEMA, the steel in the impact zones looked great, and the impacts did very little to the towers.

NIST reports that around 14-15% of the primary girders saw damage.

According to John Skilling, the main designer and engineer of the towers, the towers could lose almost 30% of the girders and still stand hurricane winds.

One could start cutting collumns on one side of a corner, across the whole face and around the next corner, and this would be near the base where the loads would be even greater.

WTC 7 had areas of steel girders that were evaporated. That takes 5100 degrees. The girders at WTC 7 had eutectic, sulphadated, intragranular formations.

There are even photos showing molten slag hanging off girders at WTC 7 and blackish/blue burn marks of the steel.

well done. i love when you get involved on these threads. ;)

“When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains – however improbable – must be the truth!" - Doyle

christine  posted on  2006-11-21   17:35:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#98. To: christine, Kamala, bluedogtxn (#97)

Excellent post Mark.

The physical evidence touted by the 9/11 truthers is based on an ignorance of science

Dr. Steven Jones, a physics prof lately of the Univesity of Utah is so ignorant of science.

Just like the way the towers fell, nearly at free fall and with such symmetry. The steel center core w/o any flooring was gone too. The testimony and audible and seismic recordings of explosions before the falls are all so lacking in science.

Yes, so ignorant of science.

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-21   17:47:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#99. To: robin (#98)

Aspects of demolition;

Sudden onset of collapse

Straight down symmetrically

Nearly free-fall speeds

Total collapse

Sliced steel girders

Pulverization of concrete

Expanding dust and debris clouds

Horizontal squib ejections

Demolition rings

Sounds of explosions

Pools of molten iron/metal

Scientific method states that to prove a phenomenon to exist, one must duplicate and prove the phenomenon in a scientific controlled experiment.

If one cannot duplicate and prove the phenomenon in a scientific controlled experiment, the claimed phenomenon does not exist.

The fires in the Twin Towers were not raging infernos. They gave off lots of black, sooty smoke, indicating an oxygen-poor fire. Oxygen- poor fires do not produce high temperatures.

The Boeings which allegedly hit the Twin Towers had both taken off with enough fuel for a transcontinental flight, but most of the jet fuel in the South Tower impact was consumed in the spectacular fireball, so presumably much more fuel was available for the fire in the North Tower.

If the fires were the cause of the collapse then we would expect the North Tower to have collapsed more quickly than the South Tower. But the opposite happened: the North Tower collapsed 104 minutes after impact whereas the South Tower collapsed after only 56 minutes.

Steel is an excellent conductor of heat, so when you apply heat to a steel structure the heat spreads quickly. So the heat from the fires would have spread through the entire steel structure of each tower. The Twin Towers contained 200,000 tons of steel.

Are we expected to believe that the fires from two loads of jet fuel provided sufficient heat to raise 200,000 tons of steel to the point where it became critically weak?

Based on data provided by Corus Construction Centre, and assuming that the WTC architects followed the usual safety margins for load- bearing steel structures, we may conclude that even if the fire had heated the steel to 1022° F (550°C) that would not have been sufficient to cause the towers to collapse.

Fire tests on other steel girder construction in four countries revealed that the maximum temperature steel reached in an hydrocarbon fire was 680°F (360°C), far below that needed to weaken significantly.

Never in the history of fires in steel highrises has a primary vertical steel girder failed and collapsed. Never. Not even a local collapse.

There has been localized failure of horizontal steel girders, but it has never resulted in a progressive total gravity collapse of the entire building.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-22   6:20:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#100. To: bluegrass (#85)

You are dead on. There at this time, no video of said hijackers boarding any of the flights.

There has never been any hijacker dna indentified and linked to any names.

Their names or any arab never appeared on the original and official flight manifests.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-22   6:25:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#101. To: Cynicom (#96)

If elephants could only fly too.

The instructors involved with the hijackers have stated they lacked all basic skills and knowledge, and the instructors were actually afraid to fly with them for insurance liability and personal safety.

There are so many details and evidence, small and large, left out of so many aspects of what really went on that day, it could fill a small library.

Mark

The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent

"At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."-http://www.911research.net

Kamala  posted on  2006-11-22   6:34:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#102. To: Kamala (#101)

If elephants could only fly too.

Prevost was more qualified to make such a judgement than most people.

Any pilot with 15,000 hours of flight time that was involved with one of the terrorists cannot be dismissed as an elephant trainer.

The lawyer at Moussaouis trial tried to pass Prevost off as "speculating" also, that his judgement did not count.

The judge would have none of that nonsense and the subject was never brought up again.

Anyone that reads the trial transcript of Prevosts testimoney objectively, will not consider elephants flying.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-11-22   8:17:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#103. To: Kamala, christine (#99)

more great and concise explanation

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."
---Henry Kissinger, New York Times, October 28, 1973

robin  posted on  2006-11-22   11:51:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#104. To: Kamala (#99)

Scientific method states that to prove a phenomenon to exist, one must duplicate and prove the phenomenon in a scientific controlled experiment.

If one cannot duplicate and prove the phenomenon in a scientific controlled experiment, the claimed phenomenon does not exist.

excellent. your entire post. so simple. i don't get why some can't see it.

“When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains – however improbable – must be the truth!" - Doyle

christine  posted on  2006-11-22   12:02:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]