Have These Points Been Debunked Yet?

[Alt+F4]

Several people have posted recently that there is little new left to debunk regarding September 11, 2001. If you have read any of my posts you know I am in NO WAY at CTer but here are a few points that still bug me. Any new insight is appreciated. If these points have been “debunked to death” already, please point me in that direction. Thanks in advance.

1. “Black Boxes” from AA11 and UA175 not being found. Yes, I know nothing is indestructible and they were subjected to fire and tons of debris. But aren’t they built to withstand the absolute worst (intense fire and water pressure) and don’t those things ping? After the initial search for victims there was a large scale effort to recover bodies using “bucket brigades”. That debris was picked over very carefully and still not one of the four was found.

2. How did the FBI get DNA profiles of the hijackers?

From USATODAY, (9/11/06): http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-11-sept11-remains_x.htm
“In New York City, medical examiners used DNA profiles furnished by the FBI to match body parts with three of the 10 hijackers who crashed there. In the Pentagon and Pennsylvania cases, nine genetic profiles that matched no known victims were presumed to be hijacker remains.”

Someone suggested that the FBI recovered DNA from their motel rooms and/or rented cars. Is their evidence to support this? In the Pentagon and Shankesville crashes it makes sense that the nine genetic profiles not the passengers were the hijackers, but did the FBI prove this?

3. The Money Trail. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, “The U.S. Government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks.” (Appendix A)

4. The Hijackers and the INS. 15 of the hijackers had visa applications that were incomplete in some way. For example, Wail and Waleed al Shehri applied together in October 2000. Under “occupation” Wail wrote “teater”, brother Waleed claimed “student”. The name and address of alleged employer and school was listed as “South City” and the U.S. destination named as “Wasantwn”. Visas approved.

5. 9/11 as an excuse for war. The CTers say that Bush & Co. needed something as awful 9/11 to get the country behind a war because just finding WMDs in Iraq wouldn’t be enough. Yeah, there turned out to be no WMDs in Iraq but today we know for certain that North Korea is very close to building a nuclear weapon and Iraq is on the same path. And what has the U.S. done about it? Nothing.

 

[R.Mackey]

“Black Boxes” from AA11 and UA175 not being found[/B]. Yes, I know nothing is indestructible and they were subjected to fire and tons of debris. But aren’t they built to withstand the absolute worst (intense fire and water pressure) and don’t those things ping?

Flight Data Recorders weigh about 16 pounds and are roughly the size of a lunchbox. Their protection is 1/4" armor steel. Anything thicker, and they become hazards in their own right, and much more difficult to recover in water.

This is much stronger than the average aircraft component, and they are mounted in the tailcone to maximize survival in a crash. However, given that they were probably captured within the WTC Towers and exposed to the fires, then crushed along with the rest of the building during the collapses, there is no expectation that they would survive, or even leave recognizable pieces. They are simply not as indestructible as most people believe.

Rather than simply blunt all impact, the housing is merely intended to keep the data recording media in one place. Said media can be "read" even after absorbing quite a bit of damage. But in something as complex as the WTC collapses, I doubt you'd ever even find the recording at all.

 

[Alt+F4]

But in something as complex as the WTC collapses, I doubt you'd ever even find the recording at all.

I agree that that the attacks against the WTC was a rarity in regards to a plane crash. I wonder though, has their been other more "conventional" plane crashes in which the "black boxes" were not recovered?

 

[The Silver Shadow]

Wasn't one of the black boxes from one of the flights that hit the WTC recovered or was that a myth?

 

[Alt+F4]

Wasn't one of the black boxes from one of the flights that hit the WTC recovered or was that a myth?

As far as I can tell that was more than a myth, it was an outright lie by some volunteer firefighter who said he found 3 of the 4 with the assistance of some mysterious MiB. Nothing more ever came of his statement.

 

[R.Mackey]

I agree that that the attacks against the WTC was a rarity in regards to a plane crash. I wonder though, has their been other more "conventional" plane crashes in which the "black boxes" were not recovered?

A huge amount of engineering has gone into maximizing recovery chances -- that's why the boxes are as tough as they are. Nonetheless, they aren't always recovered, and aren't always readable when they are. I don't have hard statistics, but here is a paper discussing strategies to improve recovery chances. From the paper:

In parallel with the deployable ELT development, at that time concerns were being expressed about the survivability and recoverability of existing fixed FDR and CVR systems, since many recorders were either totally destroyed or never recovered after an accident.

In many deep water accidents, even with an underwater acoustic locator beacon installed, location and recovery is complicated as well as expensive. There are many cases where tremendous effort and resources have been expended over many months to locate aircraft wreckage and recorders. In many instances, nothing was ever recovered.

He also includes a section on why the possibility of terrorism is a driver for recorder design. However, I note that "break away" recorders wouldn't have been able to go anywhere in the WTC events, and this approach wouldn't help in that situation.

 

[Yurebiz]

Ahh I'd like to add a couple if it's not inconvenient.. Pardon me if they've been debunked already, I've seen some debunking threads over these befpre, but failed to grasp how they've been debunked exactly.. so a summary would be alright.

6. ISI Connection (Mahmoud Ahmad in the WH)
7. This particular warning pre-911: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-24-moussaoui_x.htm

Hmm I had about 3 more, but I'll just leave these ones, I don't want to be harsh.

 

[Oliver]

Ahh I'd like to add a couple if it's not inconvenient.. Pardon me if they've been debunked already, I've seen some debunking threads over these befpre, but failed to grasp how they've been debunked exactly.. so a summary would be alright.

6. ISI Connection (Mahmoud Ahmad in the WH)
7. This particular warning pre-911: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-24-moussaoui_x.htm

Hmm I had about 3 more, but I'll just leave these ones, I don't want to be harsh.

The last time the ISI-Connection was discussed was two days
ago and let me take a look ... the link is here:

Mahmoud Ahmad ISI Chief (

1 2)

 

[Yurebiz]

The last time the ISI-Connection was discussed was two days
ago and let me take a look ... the link is here:

Mahmoud Ahmad ISI Chief http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72748http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/helloworld/misc/new_window.gif (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/helloworld/misc/multipage.gif 1 2)

Oh thanks, I missed that one.

 

[T.A.M.]

Ahh I'd like to add a couple if it's not inconvenient.. Pardon me if they've been debunked already, I've seen some debunking threads over these befpre, but failed to grasp how they've been debunked exactly.. so a summary would be alright.

6. ISI Connection (Mahmoud Ahmad in the WH)
7. This particular warning pre-911: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-24-moussaoui_x.htm

Hmm I had about 3 more, but I'll just leave these ones, I don't want to be harsh.

Regarding #6:
It has been done to death. In a nutshell:
1. Based on one report...from the times of INDIA (Pakistan arch enemy), which quoted ANONYMOUS Indian intelligence. All other media coverage of this was based on that single TOI article/source.
2. If it was true (of which the above anonymous sourcing is the only evidence) it indicates a connection to Mahmoud, not the ISI as a whole.

Regarding #7, read the second paragraph in the article...

"A Minneapolis FBI supervisor said in a pre-Sept. 11 conversation with headquarters that he wanted to prevent suspicious student pilot Zacarias Moussaoui from flying a plane into the World Trade Center, a congressional investigator testified Tuesday.

The supervisor said he had no reason to believe Moussaoui was planning such an attack, but made the remark in a frustrated attempt to convince headquarters that a special search warrant was needed to search Moussaoui's computer, investigator Eleanor Hill told a House-Senate committee investigating the Sept. 11 attacks. "

bolding mine. So the FBi guy did not think Moussaoui was going to run into the WTC, but made it up in order to get a search warrant.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Several people have posted recently that there is little new left to debunk regarding September 11, 2001. If you have read any of my posts you know I am in NO WAY at CTer but here are a few points that still bug me. Any new insight is appreciated. If these points have been “debunked to death” already, please point me in that direction. Thanks in advance.

1. “Black Boxes” from AA11 and UA175 not being found. Yes, I know nothing is indestructible and they were subjected to fire and tons of debris. But aren’t they built to withstand the absolute worst (intense fire and water pressure) and don’t those things ping? After the initial search for victims there was a large scale effort to recover bodies using “bucket brigades”. That debris was picked over very carefully and still not one of the four was found.

2. How did the FBI get DNA profiles of the hijackers?

From USATODAY, (9/11/06): http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-11-sept11-remains_x.htm
“In New York City, medical examiners used DNA profiles furnished by the FBI to match body parts with three of the 10 hijackers who crashed there. In the Pentagon and Pennsylvania cases, nine genetic profiles that matched no known victims were presumed to be hijacker remains.”

Someone suggested that the FBI recovered DNA from their motel rooms and/or rented cars. Is their evidence to support this? In the Pentagon and Shankesville crashes it makes sense that the nine genetic profiles not the passengers were the hijackers, but did the FBI prove this?

3. The Money Trail. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, “The U.S. Government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks.” (Appendix A)

4. The Hijackers and the INS. 15 of the hijackers had visa applications that were incomplete in some way. For example, Wail and Waleed al Shehri applied together in October 2000. Under “occupation” Wail wrote “teater”, brother Waleed claimed “student”. The name and address of alleged employer and school was listed as “South City” and the U.S. destination named as “Wasantwn”. Visas approved.

5. 9/11 as an excuse for war. The CTers say that Bush & Co. needed something as awful 9/11 to get the country behind a war because just finding WMDs in Iraq wouldn’t be enough. Yeah, there turned out to be no WMDs in Iraq but today we know for certain that North Korea is very close to building a nuclear weapon and Iraq is on the same path. And what has the U.S. done about it? Nothing.

1. black Boxes...I doubt the survived in any recognizable form, and were likely sent to landfills along with the rest of the debris.
2. DNA evidence. I believe their is a reference to them finding the DNA in the motel rooms/cars etc... but off top of my head I do not remember it.
3. Money trail. Likely came from Saudi Arabia, Taliban, Pakistan, and others.
4. Incomplete applications...plead ignorance on this one.
5. Using 9/11 as an excuse for war...not quite that simple, but I think they took advantage of the atmosphere created by the attacks.

TAM

 

[Alt+F4]

Money trail. Likely came from Saudi Arabia, Taliban, Pakistan, and others.

TAM

Agreed, but I wish there were more hard facts on this.

 

[Trifikas]

Regarding the black boxes, this is where I point people to:

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_001.html

the important quote:

"Investigators got useful data off one recorder that had been immersed in the ocean for seven years. But in another crash in Thailand the recorder landed in a pool of flaming fuel and basically got cooked."

Straightdope is always a fun read, too.

 

[T.A.M.]

Here is the first link on Google, with respect to "9/11 hijacker DNA"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2808599.stm

a quote from it is as follows:

The FBI had collected the DNA from tiny traces of skin on the steering wheels of vehicles hired by the hijackers and from hair samples recovered from their hotel rooms.

TAM

 

[Alt+F4]

Here is the first link on Google, with respect to "9/11 hijacker DNA"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2808599.stm

TAM

Thanks for the link TAM, certainly the BBC is a reliable source. I can believe the FBI obtained DNA from some of the hijackers from a rental car that probably remained parked and undisturbed for awhile after the attacks. I have a bit of a problem with getting DNA from a hotel room. The room would have been cleaned within a few hours after the hijackers checked out (well before the acutal attacks). Even if the FBI was able to collect a few hairs, they were probably just the hairs we all lose everyday in the sink, DNA can't be analyzed from those hairs. It has to be hair with shafts, yanked from the head.

 

[Mr.D]

4. The Hijackers and the INS. 15 of the hijackers had visa applications that were incomplete in some way. For example, Wail and Waleed al Shehri applied together in October 2000. Under “occupation” Wail wrote “teater”, brother Waleed claimed “student”. The name and address of alleged employer and school was listed as “South City” and the U.S. destination named as “Wasantwn”. Visas approved.

While this fact is suspicious, disturbing or curious (depending on one's point of view), there really isn't enough information to determine if the number 15 has any real meaning. Consider the following statement:

"Last Thursday, when John Doe was at work, 15 defective grommets were pulled off the Acme Grommet Inc's assembly line before they could get shipped to customers."
​

What can be concluded with regards to Mr. Doe and the grommets? Answer; Nothing really. Is 15 large, small or average number of defects compared to a comparable day when he wasn't working? Is 15 a significant percent of the daily output? How many (absolute and percentage) defective grommets end up in customer hands and what were the results of that? What does John's job have to do with grommets anyway?

Depending on the answers to those questions (and many others), Mr. Doe might be a teriffic grommet QA inspector, a sabateur working for the competitor, morally guilty of negilgent homicide or even (read the question carefully) working across town at the Burger King and his presence at his job had no possible affect whatsoever on the grommet output.

So, to interpret the 15 incomplete visa applications as some sort of evidence of INS involvement, complicity, innocence, competence or frankly anything else at all is nothing but a gigantic logical falacy. There isn't enough information presented here to determine much of anything at all.

(Some of the info critical to any analysis include: During the appropriate time frames, how many visa applications did the INS receive? What percent were incomplete? What percent of those were accepted? How many hijackers were rejected, and for what reasons? How many non-hijackers were inappropriately rejected? Did any of the hijackers who got through with incomplete information have communications with those who applied later?)

 

[Alt+F4]

Some of the info critical to any analysis include: During the appropriate time frames, how many visa applications did the INS receive? What percent were incomplete? What percent of those were accepted? How many hijackers were rejected, and for what reasons? How many non-hijackers were inappropriately rejected? Did any of the hijackers who got through with incomplete information have communications with those who applied later?

Excellent questions. I wonder if the answers are available, and accessable on a INS database.

 

[Brainster]

Thanks for the link TAM, certainly the BBC is a reliable source. I can believe the FBI obtained DNA from some of the hijackers from a rental car that probably remained parked and undisturbed for awhile after the attacks. I have a bit of a problem with getting DNA from a hotel room. The room would have been cleaned within a few hours after the hijackers checked out (well before the acutal attacks). Even if the FBI was able to collect a few hairs, they were probably just the hairs we all lose everyday in the sink, DNA can't be analyzed from those hairs. It has to be hair with shafts, yanked from the head.

Don't forget that at least some of the hijackers shaved their body hair as a kind of purification ritual; in fact United 93 opens with a scene of this.

 

[Alt+F4]

Don't forget that at least some of the hijackers shaved their body hair as a kind of purification ritual; in fact United 93 opens with a scene of this.

You're right, I do remember that from the movie. But DNA can't be detected from shaved hair.

 

[Loss Leader]

5. 9/11 as an excuse for war. The CTers say that Bush & Co. needed something as awful 9/11 to get the country behind a war because just finding WMDs in Iraq wouldn’t be enough. Yeah, there turned out to be no WMDs in Iraq but today we know for certain that North Korea is very close to building a nuclear weapon and Iraq is on the same path. And what has the U.S. done about it? Nothing. [/FONT]

9/11 was definitely cited in 2002 and 2003 by the Bush administration as a reason to invade Iraq, but that's a great deal different than saying that the Bush administration planned 9/11 in order to support its case for war in Iraq.

The main reason such a statement makes no sense is because the attacks of 9/11 were a very bad excuse for attacking Iraq:

1. None of the hijackers were Iraqi. If the hijackers didn't exist, the administration should have made up some nonexistent Iraqi terrorists instead of 15 Saudis and some Pakistanis. The the hijackers were patsies (that we us4ed who we had), the administration should have been able to find at least one Iraqi patsie.

2. No Iraqi money went towards 9/11. If the NWO is so powerful and they were shorting stocks, buying off witnesses, etc., they should have been able to fake one wire transfer from Sadam to somebody.

3. The 9/11 terrorists were political opposites of Sadam Hussein. You really can't get farther from Sadam than the 9/11 terrorists. Crazy as he was, he was a staunch secularist who despised the fundamentalism of Iran and Al Qaida. And they hated him. And this wasn't a secret; everybody knew it. He fought a 9 year war with Iran over almost nothing else.

If the NWO wanted to use 9/11 to set up the invasion of Iraq, they were playing a dangerous game. A slightly more interested populace, a free press with half a backbone, or a bad turnout for the Republicans in the 2002 midterm elections would have caused a rain of questions that may very well have ground the Iraq warplanning to a halt.

It is the height of "post hoc" reasoning to think that things that happened after 9/11 were the things the administration wanted to happen after 9/11.