Thanks, B! And everybody please add www.sgtreport.com to your surfing rotations.

After 9-11 happened I was investigating this pretty heavily and knew about the art students as well as the fact they were actually living in the world trade center. It made sense to me then just like it does right now that they were directly responsible for the destruction. It also seems that our own government has had a dirty hand in this as well and the worst part is the people will never have the attention span needed to piece it all together. It is a labyrinth of lies and secrecy that shroud the truth because to tell the truth would demoralize everyone who sacrificed for those lies.

I think in all honesty if the truth were told, we the people would be demanding the heads of everyone who played a part and then annihilate the country whose people did this.

then annihilate the country whose people did this

It is said by some that several of the hijackers were Saudis. Thee Madrassa's in Saudi Arabia are the source of radical Wahhabi Islam.

But we know those planes were remote controlled by the Flight Termination System which was installed in all commercial airliners in the 1990s. This System can be controlled from several hundred miles away. There were no hijackers on those planes and the pilots had zero control since the System over rides pilot controls. This System was installed to safely land aircraft that had been hijacked.

I knew a Bird Colonel in the Pentagon who was vying to be the world's leading arms merchant. He sold Saudi Arabia many hundreds of millions in U.S. weapons systems.

After the 2nd attempt on the life of Gerald Ford (Nelson Rockefeller was V.P.) Ford said, "It is getting so the President can no longer walk among the people."

The Colonel retired to his farm in Virginia and began looking into what was going on in this country. His first book about it was Barbarians Inside The Gates which is now out of print but can still be found online in either new or used condition. ;)

we know those planes were remote controlled by the Flight Termination System which was installed in all commercial airliners in the 1990s. This System can be controlled from several hundred miles away. There were no hijackers on those planes and the pilots had zero control since the System over rides pilot controls. This System was installed to safely land aircraft that had been hijacked.

I knew a Bird Colonel in the Pentagon who was vying to be the world's leading arms merchant. He sold Saudi Arabia many hundreds of millions in U.S. weapons systems.

Just because planes could be remote controlled doesn't mean they were that day. What is your theory for why none were remote controlled Militarily to a safe landing instead of the official story of all being crashed? Cheney was not our Military's Commander in Chief on 9/11. Vice Presidents aren't in their Chain of Command. Bush was reportedly in Florida for a school event during the first 3 alleged plane strikes. Assertions that the last alleged plane was ordered shot down don't explain why it wouldn't have been remote controllable by our Military to land at an airport. Boeing was charged with 94 violations of the Arms Control Act for selling the gyroscopic QRS-11 microchip illegally because it also functions as a dual-use weapons systems component for guided missles. More valuable on the black market than destroyed for 9/11 "optics".

State Department goes after Boeing | The Seattle Times

The State Department charges against Boeing relate to the export of jets that contain a gyroscopic microchip called QRS-11, used as a backup system in determining a plane’s orientation in the air.

Though a Boeing document refers to the chip as “relatively unsophisticated” technology, the gyrochip also has been used to help stabilize and steer guided missiles.

In the draft charging letter, the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls alleges that between 2000 and 2003 Boeing broke export control laws in shipping to China and other countries what was then classified as militarily significant technology.

Further, it claims the company did so deliberately and repeatedly even after it had been warned to stop.

“False statements”

Boeing “was aware that a [State] Department export license was required but chose to export without authorization by using false statements on documents,” the charging letter alleges.

Just because planes could be remote controlled doesn't mean they were that day. What is your theory for why none were remote controlled Militarily to a safe landing instead of the official story of all being crashed?

Recall the "dancing Israelis" who were filming the planes hitting the Twin Towers from New Jersey. They were dancing and giving each other "high fives".

The police picked them up. They were held for three months and refused to take lie tests. When they finally agreed to take them, they all failed miserably.

They were interviewed on Israeli TV after their release. They said, "We were there to document the events." How did they know there were going to be "events"?

When those planes hit the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, it was an administrative coup d'état and George W. Bush was handed his head.

Not to mention the untold billions of dollars made from short selling the stocks of the airline companies involved in the events of the day. ;)

BTW, W was in Florida reading a story to school children. They made sure he was well out of the way. The only problem was the book was UPSIDE DOWN. LOL

When those planes hit the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, it was an administrative coup d'état and George W. Bush was handed his head.

What do you mean by that? Cheney pretending to be Commander in Chief for a Military excercise that day and our Military "forgetting" that Bush was their actual Commander in Chief? Or are you asserting that the Military was part of what you describe as "an administrative coup d'état"?

Or are you asserting that the Military was part of what you describe as "an administrative coup d'état"?

They wanted W out of the way that day. When his aides came in and told him the planes hit the Twin Towers he should have excused himself, but he kept reading the story. How do you explain that unless he knew it was going to happen?

Remember, the remote control units can be used from several hundred miles away. ;)

If you're wiring a building with explosives, what's the point of fusing the circuit ?? Are you going to go back to check the fuse if it doesn't detonate ???

They wanted W out of the way that day. When his aides came in and told him the planes hit the Twin Towers he should have excused himself, but he kept reading the story. How do you explain that unless he knew it was going to happen?

Remember, the remote control units can be used from several hundred miles away. ;)

I wouldn't explain it as "an administrative coup d'état". More like complicit. Why weren't the remote control units used from several hundred miles away or otherwise to safely land at least the last allegedly hijacked plane?

Why weren't the remote control units used from several hundred miles away or otherwise to safely land at least the last allegedly hijacked plane?

That was NOT the plan. Remember what they said over at PNAC? They needed a new Pearl Harbor to invigorate the masses. ;)

You at #6: "W was in Florida reading a story to school children. They made sure he was well out of the way. The only problem was the book was UPSIDE DOWN. LOL"

You at #8: "When his aides came in and told him the planes hit the Twin Towers he should have excused himself, but he kept reading the story."

This is just a friendly reminder that the children were reading the story to him. He kept listening to it for a while after being officially informed that a 2nd plane had crashed into a Tower at the World Trade Center -- so likely indicating a coordinated attack rather than 2 wayward plane accidents there. Would have been difficult to read the story to the children with the book upside down, which indicates distraction or possibly a signal of some sort to one or more insiders.

which indicates distraction

I knew a guy in Chicago who joined the Marines. He was in Beirut when the barracks were bombed. After 10 years he got out and joined the DEA.

He told me they got the Bush brothers (Jeb and George) on video tape in Miami picking up a kilo of coke. It must have been a big party. That video is likely lost many moons ago.

That was back in the 90s. So how does it feel to know that our former POTUS is a coke head?

Oh, and Bill Clinton has a perforated septum. A hole in his nose from doing too much good coke. That is two counts now. ;)

Why weren't the remote control units used from several hundred miles away or otherwise to safely land at least the last allegedly hijacked plane?

That was NOT the plan. Remember what they said over at PNAC? They needed a new Pearl Harbor to invigorate the masses. ;)

A Presidential order would have been required to shoot down a hijacked plane, with or without passengers, but why would shooting it down even have been a consideration, much less ordered? It should have just been Standard Operating Procedure to land it safely by the Flight Termination System that you mentioned, if there really was a danger that such a plane might be used like a kamikaze WMD. Otherwise, it could have crossed our Northerly border soon into the foreign country of Canada and endangered their people too. Instead, we're told that "heroic" passengers killed everybody aboard before the hijackers did because those alleged "heroes" were psychic or something and proceeded to crash the plane themselves to potentially spare people on the ground somewhere unknown because: they supposedly believed intuitively that there was no Military rescue on the way by NORAD or any other Military branches of the USA. Baloney. PNAC is a pack of warmongering provocateurs but Canada likely has Flight Termination System capability, as well, through NORAD and can probably act to implement it in its own Defense without having to contact a US President for any orders before doing so.

It should have just been Standard Operating Procedure to land it safely by the Flight Termination System that you mentioned

As I said, that was not the plan. The plan was to fly the planes into the Twin Towers.

And bin Laden had nothing to do with any of it. He was the patsy.

The asbestos in the Twin Towers was never removed, but abated. When the Towers fell all of that went up into the atmosphere.

Larry Silverstein made a huge profit from a court ruling which said the attacks were two separate occurrences.

For more reading: 911truth.org/news-from-the-complete-911-timeline- historycommons-org/

It should have just been Standard Operating Procedure to land it safely by the Flight Termination System that you mentioned

As I said, that was not the plan. The plan was to fly the planes into the Twin Towers.

For all the talk of transponders being turned off by "hijackers" of the 4 alleged planes, still there are numerous media pics of precise flight path maps for every one of them, which means that being transponderless would not have made them "invisible" to being technologically tracked. At that time period, the Flight Termination System was mostly associated with rocket/missile technology to stop those from reaching a target. Reportedly, each of the first 3 targets were hit and the 4th either crashed into a mineshaft or evaporated on impact, except for some bits and pieces. If you don't think the PNACians had a plan for the last 2 alleged planes, I'm not sure why but our State Department did charge Boeing with selling jets before 9/11 with the dual-use QRS-11 chip that was classified as militarily significant. [Ref. the posted Seattle Times link above at post #5] So, while it's theoretically possible that the alleged planes or some number of them could plausibly have had remote control technology installed, that's not evidence it was installed and used to crash any of them. It's not likely, imo, that our Military and Canada's too could have been expected to "stand down" at any point that a plane was off course or that they wouldn't have been able to interrupt remote controlled flight paths without having to scramble fighter jets to do that.

It's not likely, imo, that our Military and Canada's too could have been expected to "stand down" at any point that a plane was off course or that they wouldn't have been able to interrupt remote controlled flight paths without having to scramble fighter jets to do that.

I believe there were military exercises being conducted that same day to confuse what was happening. The memories are a bit fuzzy because of the meningitis. But that is what I recall. ;)

Many questions are possible -- no hypothesis is consistent. Since it was a demolition, why no BANG-BANG-BANG-BANG-BANG-etc?

www.youtube.com/watch? v=aGc4jas5Qao

Do these occur with thermate, beamed energy or whatever?

www.drjudywood.com/wp/

Haha, a commenter on another demolition video sez "These idiots don't know how to get it cheaply done by setting a few floors on fire."

I believe there were military exercises being conducted that same day to confuse what was happening. The memories are a bit fuzzy because of the meningitis. But that is what I recall. ;)

Yes, you are correct that there were war games/drills/exercises on September 11, 2001 and an actual Military operation was also ongoing that day in Alaska and nearby. However, Military commanders have disputed the issue of confusion by asserting that it's a good thing they were already at those exercise battle stations because that helped them to respond quicker than usual. This is an excerpt from projectcensored.org:

Representative Cynthia McKinney (D-Altanta) attempted to bring some attention to the 9/11 war games during the House Hearing on FY06 Department of Defense Budget, on March 11th, 2005. She questioned Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld and Chairman of the Joint Chief[s] of Staff, [General] Richard Myers about the four war games that took place on September 11th. [The Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, General Myers,] claimed that war gaming was being held by several different departments [and] he felt the gaming actually provided “an easy transition from an exercise into a real world situation” and contributed to a quick response.

This is a 3-minute YouTube video clip of his statements in answer to Rep. McKinney's question at 0:50 about 4 war games in-process: Response - Cynthia Mckinney questions General Myers on 9 11 wargames - CSPAN coverage | Partial transcript:

@ 1:15, "The answer to the question is: No, it did not impair our response." ... @ 1:38, "there were two CPXs [Command Post Exercises]. There was one Department of Justice exercise that didn't have anything to do with the other three. And there was an actual operation ongoing because there was some Russian bomber activity up near Alaska." ... @ 2:15, "These are Command Post Exercises. What that means is: all the battle positions that are normally not filled are indeed filled. So, it was an easy transition from an exercise into a real world situation. It actually enhanced the response. Otherwise, it would take somewhere between 30 minutes and a couple of hours to fill those positions, those battle spaces, with the right staff officers."

This is a Wikipedia path map of Flight 93. Before turning in Ohio to go back towards Pennsylvania, it is shown as being very close to the Lake Erie border and could soon have been in Canada's airspace/territory if the trajectory wasn't changed fast. Just FYI re: Canada's self-Defense interests that day and readiness to respond to potential endangerment by scrambling their own jets, etc.