• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
DeathDart said:
The information on the voice recorder 93 is an example. I don't follow this story all the time. So when was a complete transcript released?

Forced out could mean that they need more information released because their story needs more support. The final NIST NCSTAR report took how long? Looks Like 2009-2010

It seems they kept fully corroborated information secret as long as they could to maintain as much confusion as possible. Neither side would have enough to silence the other but lots of time would pass.
Click to expand...
Sides? What are you talking about? We got verifiable information and "I don't get it. you must be hiding something".

What "side" are you on?


:rolleyes:
 
Sorry, I found a way of switching my keyboard to Chinese.

The side that says the official story of the cause and effect relationship that leads up to 9-11 and the events after it are distorted. The least amount of distortion is actually on 9-11, that is why it is made the bright and shiny thing that the official story promoters want you to talk about.

Keep them focused on bizarre theories.

They controlled the site and the investigations.

They destroyed the evidence to make sure that no other story would have support. >99% of the buildings no longer exist, to me that is destroyed.

The buildings falling down, the missile at the pentagon, are pretty much irrelevant. You can argue yourself blue. The official story has the only evidence when it comes to the WTC. When you look at the evidence, it is incredibly spotty. But with the majority of the evidence that could change that story destroyed, no alternate story is possible .

This technique was repeated in going to war with Iraq. Except in Iraq they could not destroy all the evidence. Valerie Plame was part of the Blow Back on that one.

The evidence will lead to the truth. Those who were blocking access (and I am not talking about this forum), are slowly being removed and replaced by Obama.

The day when, (not if), it cracks, will go down as one of the most important days in American history. Important, but not happy.

I don't think when the complete story is told, it will make anybody happy.
 
DeathDart said:
Sorry, I found a way of switching my keyboard to Chinese.

The side that says the official story of the cause and effect relationship that leads up to 9-11 and the events after it are distorted. The least amount of distortion is actually on 9-11, that is why it is made the bright and shiny thing that the official story promoters want you to talk about.

Keep them focused on bizarre theories.

They controlled the site and the investigations.

They destroyed the evidence to make sure that no other story would have support. >99% of the buildings no longer exist, to me that is destroyed.

The buildings falling down, the missile at the pentagon, are pretty much irrelevant. You can argue yourself blue. The official story has the only evidence when it comes to the WTC. When you look at the evidence, it is incredibly spotty. But with the majority of the evidence that could change that story destroyed, no alternate story is possible .

This technique was repeated in going to war with Iraq. Except in Iraq they could not destroy all the evidence. Valerie Plame was part of the Blow Back on that one.

The evidence will lead to the truth. Those who were blocking access (and I am not talking about this forum), are slowly being removed and replaced by Obama.

The day when, (not if), it cracks, will go down as one of the most important days in American history. Important, but not happy.

I don't think when the complete story is told, it will make anybody happy.
Click to expand...
Wow! And I bet you wonder why people don't pay any attention to you.

:rolleyes:
 
DeathDart said:
Sorry, I found a way of switching my keyboard to Chinese.

The side that says the official story of the cause and effect relationship that leads up to 9-11 and the events after it are distorted. The least amount of distortion is actually on 9-11, that is why it is made the bright and shiny thing that the official story promoters want you to talk about.

Keep them focused on bizarre theories.

They controlled the site and the investigations.

They destroyed the evidence to make sure that no other story would have support. >99% of the buildings no longer exist, to me that is destroyed.

The buildings falling down, the missile at the pentagon, are pretty much irrelevant. You can argue yourself blue. The official story has the only evidence when it comes to the WTC. When you look at the evidence, it is incredibly spotty. But with the majority of the evidence that could change that story destroyed, no alternate story is possible .

This technique was repeated in going to war with Iraq. Except in Iraq they could not destroy all the evidence. Valerie Plame was part of the Blow Back on that one.

The evidence will lead to the truth. Those who were blocking access (and I am not talking about this forum), are slowly being removed and replaced by Obama.

The day when, (not if), it cracks, will go down as one of the most important days in American history. Important, but not happy.

I don't think when the complete story is told, it will make anybody happy.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, just some of your comments seem so ill-informed they are beyond reply. You really need to do some research. Pertaining to some of your ideas about destroying evidence at ground zero you need to look over some of the clean up procedures. They were painstakingly through and the myth that the steel was shipped off to China within days of the collapse is just moronic and completely false. Everything from the site was examined, EVERYTHING!

I'll help you get started. Google "Fresh Kills Landfill 9/11". This should help you get the ball rolling in learning more. I think you owe it to yourself to learn more about the overall subject 9/11 instead of only reading the information which supports your dogmatic belief of conspiracy.
 
DeathDart said:
Sorry, I found a way of switching my keyboard to Chinese.

The side that says the official story of the cause and effect relationship that leads up to 9-11 and the events after it are distorted. The least amount of distortion is actually on 9-11, that is why it is made the bright and shiny thing that the official story promoters want you to talk about.

Keep them focused on bizarre theories.

They controlled the site and the investigations.

They destroyed the evidence to make sure that no other story would have support. >99% of the buildings no longer exist, to me that is destroyed.

The buildings falling down, the missile at the pentagon, are pretty much irrelevant. You can argue yourself blue. The official story has the only evidence when it comes to the WTC. When you look at the evidence, it is incredibly spotty. But with the majority of the evidence that could change that story destroyed, no alternate story is possible .

This technique was repeated in going to war with Iraq. Except in Iraq they could not destroy all the evidence. Valerie Plame was part of the Blow Back on that one.

The evidence will lead to the truth. Those who were blocking access (and I am not talking about this forum), are slowly being removed and replaced by Obama.

The day when, (not if), it cracks, will go down as one of the most important days in American history. Important, but not happy.

I don't think when the complete story is told, it will make anybody happy.
Click to expand...

One of the goals of the Patriot Act and one of the duties of Homeland Security is to protect the guilty when that day comes.
 
DeathDart said:
While they might have had more senior/experienced military people on hand, the purpose would be to get experience for the middle ranks, with the newbies watching.

If you had a bunch of bored military people sitting around on 9-11. They would have been able to watch TV and other independent sources of information. I also think they would have shown enough initiative to begin prepping the fighters for takeoff sooner.

By having the wargames occurring at 9-11 it contributed to confusion, and who would want to look like an idiot by scrambling a fighter for an exercise scenario.

I agree that referring to a maneuver as impossible is a poor way to make a point. If the plane did perform the maneuver, it is not impossible.
Click to expand...

Not without orders they wouldn't.

No SOP for the rules of engagement either.
 
I have to give you that one. Initiative in a combat environment can mean survival, acting without orders in a peace time environment is a request to be a civilian

Without a SOP there would not be a preset group of actions to follow, it would have to be made up on the fly. That drives another nail into the initiative corpse.
 
I seem to remember something about the military's testimony at some investigation saying that their present system was more than adequate. The reporter wrote that he thought at the time (Pre 9-11) that only 2 fighters were normally dedicated to intercept missions. This won't stop you from using anything available.

So confusion (at the military) may not have been significant. What they had at their disposal might have been.

Say that it was true that 2 fighters were dedicated. Would any other fighters have been pulled out of the area to support the exercise?
 
Would anyone like to speculate on the typical twoofers reaction if, prior to 9-11, Bush had proposed keeping armed fighters on alert across the country in order to shoot down civilian aircraft?
 
DeathDart said:
I seem to remember something about the military's testimony at some investigation saying that their present system was more than adequate. The reporter wrote that he thought at the time (Pre 9-11) that only 2 fighters were normally dedicated to intercept missions. This won't stop you from using anything available.
Click to expand...
Source.

So confusion (at the military) may not have been significant. What they had at their disposal might have been.

Say that it was true that 2 fighters were dedicated. Would any other fighters have been pulled out of the area to support the exercise?
Click to expand...
Nope. you're basing your hypothetical on a dimly-remembered article somewhere. Unless we can see or corroborate it, there's no point in continuing.
 
TjW said:
Would anyone like to speculate on the typical twoofers reaction if, prior to 9-11, Bush had proposed keeping armed fighters on alert across the country in order to shoot down civilian aircraft?
Click to expand...

Long before 9/11, there was a trial ballon floated (1980's) concerning the establishment of ROE for shooting down unidentified aircraft entering U.S. airspace from the southern hemisphere - drug flights.

The end result was the military didn't want any part of it - which didn't stop the D.E.A. and the C.I.A. from entering into compacts with foreign governments to shoot down designated unidentified aircraft - with predictable tragic results:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/04/video-of-missionaries-bei_n_449074.html

Remember the basic law - what goes up, must come down - and consider what a dry feet shoot down means in the real world over populated areas.
 
Last edited:
Were are preparation before 9-11 adequate?

If the preparations were insufficient who was responsible?

Don't use the excuse that they couldn't have predicted it.

It was predicted by different people, but wouldn't fly with management. I believe I remember this occurring at one of the Intelligence groups. The manager who shot it down was one of the people squawking the loudest, that they couldn't have predicted it. I think he got promoted. If someone could help me on this one, thanks
 
One theme I keep running into is incompetence and suppression of possibilities was a good way to get promoted.

I believe another poster referred to me as a useful idiot.

Bush was not smart enough, but Bush did have Rove, Rumsfield, Cheney, Pearl, and Feith +misc.

I will define a useful idiot a person who doesn't need to know what we are really using him for. A general lack of intelligence may not be as useful as a personally quirk that can be exploited.

Louis J. Freeh hated computers and directly from this flaw can be traced the FBI's inability to properly handle information. So when all the warnings came, the system had a lot of excuses for ignoring them.

I have no proof about Freeh, but he was in Bush the Elders stable when he was appointed by Clinton. Who had oversight over the FBI and why didn't they get wind of the dysfunctional situation unwinding in the FBI? About this time mid (1990's) oversight committees were also changing personnel.

I had a frightening thought several years ago (yes, thoughts frighten me), I began to suspect some very long term planning, and the existence of at least one mind more powerful and more cunning than mine.
 
DeathDart said:
Were are preparation before 9-11 adequate?

If the preparations were insufficient who was responsible?

Don't use the excuse that they couldn't have predicted it.

It was predicted by different people, but wouldn't fly with management. I believe I remember this occurring at one of the Intelligence groups. The manager who shot it down was one of the people squawking the loudest, that they couldn't have predicted it. I think he got promoted. If someone could help me on this one, thanks
Click to expand...
That's the second time in an hour you've expected the debunkers to provide evidence or believe in an article you vaguely remember.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom