I didn't know that about British juries. In the US jurors can make the round of talk shows after the case is over.don't get me started on some of the cretins I met when I was doing jury duty,
actually you couldn't, because it is illegal for me to talk about it.
well you have that whole "freedom of speech thing" don't you.
maybe they jumped to a conclusion, when first investigating a crime, it's not unusual for the police to look at who had "previous" relevant to the crime, OBL had attacked the WTC before, and in this case, the hunch played out, it happens.
The hard parts of flying a plane tend to be take off and landing, the 9/11 hijackers did neither.
and how exactly would shooting down a plane over a highly populated area be a better outcome? And how long would it take for the fighter jets to intercept the planes, especially as the are barred from traveling supersonic whilst on intercept missions.
The buildings fell nothing like a controlled demolition, if they fell "in free fall", how come we can clearly see the ejected debris falling faster than the buildings in the video footage?
I assumed that the second I heard of the attack. It is his MO, after all.
Did FDR give the FBI time to conclude it really was the Japanese that bombed Pearl Harbor?
That's why they took pilot training.
Maybe you didn't notice, but it never was US policy to shoot down civilian aircraft flying over US territory. There was no "defense system" in place for this sort of thing.
The FAA informed NORAD that Flight 77 had been hijacked at 9:24 AM. F-16's from Langley AFB were airborne at 9:30, Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at 9:37, the F-16's were 105 miles away at this time.
It did not fall in "controlled demolition style", it was heavily damaged by the collapse of the WTC and burning out of control for many hours. Firemen did not fight the fire in WTC 7 because of the damage and it was obviously unstable and in imminent danger of collapsing, which it subsequently did. There is a NIST report coming out soon on exactly how it collapsed.
The press were the ones that moved right to the accusation. The governemnt suspected, but did not actually state as fact, that OBL was behind the attacks. Al Queda also claimed responsibility for the attacks.
They attended pilot school, genius.
Have you ever been to either of the two airports near DC? Have you even been in DC and just looked up?
Why weren't the Oklahoma City bombings and the pizza I had last night included?
You've done research into the CT view of the 9/11 event. Have you done any research into the official, unfiltered by the CT perspective, version? If so, maybe you could show your analysis, and supporting evidencde, of where in the offical version you have problems.
What is this--a conspiracy to keep the thread going by asking the same stupid questions over and over?
The list of top suspects wasn't very long. Bin Laden's determination to attack the US on its own soil was well-known, and the FBI had information suggesting that there were al-Qaeda operatives attending flight schools. They didn't know where, when, or how an attack might take place, but they were fairly certain almost immediately once the attack took place. Once they obtained at the flight manifests and confirmed that some of the passengers on every plane were known to have ties to al-Qaeda, the suspicion was confirmed.
NORAD didn't start monitoring flights inside US borders until after 9/11:
Jets were in flight within minutes of learning that flight 77 was hijacked. They didn't make it in time.
The same reason the Marriott Hotel, which was completely obliterated by WTC 1 & 2, was not mentioned--it was collateral destruction, not a target of the attack. It was irrelevant to the scope of the report.
Hell, *I* took pilot training. I stopped short of getting my private license, but I could probably hit something the size of a WTC tower in a commercial jet. These terrorists not only got their private licenses, but also got their instrument ratings, and their commercial pilots licenses, plus had lots of simulator time in commercial jets. The only way someone could have asked this question is willful ignorance.
