1) A very clear precedent in Operation Northwoods.
By a completely different administration, and a completely different set on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, under a cold war scenario that is unrealted to the Mid East. It was also disapproved.
2) Previous false flag "terrorism" events in history documented to acceptable standards.
Such as the psyops government change in Guatemala? Cite a few examples, please, or are you referring to the German sandbagging of the Danzig incident?
3) A group of people promoting far in advance a Middle East policy that would benefit from a "new Pearl Harbor".
Also analyzable as a core understanding of how the American public's support for a war takes more than "because I said so" by a president, with the loss of support in Korea and Viet Nam being significant historical examples.
4) Those very same people acquiring multiple positions within our administration since the inception of the PNAC.
Check.
5) The Middle East policy being enacted 27 days after the Pearl Harbor like event and progressing to the implementation of the stated goals of establishing forward bases in Iraq irregardless of Saddam Hussein and posturing with Iran irregardless of an improvement in U.S. - Iranian relations.
There had been a contingency to fight again with Iraq almost as soon as Iraq War I, 1991, was over. If you read the book "On Point" by Col Fontenot et al, covering the combat operations, you will note that a 12 year logistic build up was undertaken in Kuwait, and elsewhere in the Persian Gulf area as a strategic enabling capability for that contingency plan. Please go to US Joint Doctrine to understand what a COntingency Operations Plan, and an Op Plan are before you proceed further with your theories.
6) The fact that Osama is still at large and really never was the single focus of post 9/11 activities.
The hunt for him in Afghanistan notwithstanding? The operations along the Pakistani border for the past 5 years notwithstanding?
7) That Intelligence never prevented the attacks despite NUMEROUS memos sent to the White House?
Intel and actionable intel are two different things.
8) The fact that 19 hijackers evaded security with bombs, knives, mace and box cutters on 4 separate flights at 3 different international airports.
Bloody good planning by the hijackers, don't you think, exploiting the weaknesses of the US public air transport system?
9) The fact that 3 of those airliners achieved their targets with military precision despite no actual time in the said aircraft and at least one of the pilots being reported to the FAA because CFI's thought his certification was fraudulent. He didn't even have the English skills to pass the examinations for those certifications? Followed by the FAA's denial to discuss where and when he acquired those certifications.
I am a pilot. It is not as hard to fly to intercept as you might think. It is a lot like bumper cars. Can you hit another car on a bumper cars ride? With slightly more skill, you can fly a plane into something. Of course, as a pilot, I can promise you that you train yourself to not fly into things, most pilots NOT being suicidal, except of course those famous Japanese Kamikazes in WW II who flew into moving ships that were a bit smaller than a large building.
10) The fact that 3 buildings within two blocks collapsed under circumstances that have not been fully explained in detail.
It has, see the various Loose Change Threads.
11) The fact that Flight 77 just happened to impact the only reinforced and least occupied portion of the Pentagon despite the casing of the building during the reinforcing construction? Then somehow chose not to hit the front of the building where the brass resided and was unobstructed.
The plane was coming in from the west, so it is rational that the plane hit the western face of the Pentagon. See the discussions in the Loose Change threads again, look for my name, and gumboot's.
12) The fact that members of the PNAC were able to predict details of the attack prior to and immediately after the attacks themselves.
Predict things after they happened? I am good at that too.
13) The suppression by the government of:
a) Video
b) Wreckage
c) Firefighter transcripts for some time
d) Truthful testimony from the Pentagon and FAA including the destruction of tapes
e) Verbatim accounts from the president and vice president individually
f) The positive identities of 5 bodies in their possession
g) And much, much more.
That is a bit troubling to me, though some of the supression is due to legal constraints, particularly regarding black boxes and such.
14) The fact that the president of the United States tried to prevent the formation of the 9/11 Commission.
Well, it was a politically motivated fault finding comission, and as you can see, a lot of people (like you fine CTer's) treat their finding with contempt. Maybe he was right.
15) The fact that the Pentagon BPS report was done with approximately 4 hours of on site inspection and did not include an inspection of aircraft debris, the collapse zone or the "exit hole".
I'll refer you to our good friend the Air Force LTC who was at the scene, and who posted here a couple of times for that. Beyond that, Russ, you are missing the forest for the trees.
16) The fact that column damage near the exit hole was not allowed to be inspected by the BPS team and was replaced with fraudulent column damage reports provided by the FBI.
WTF?
17) The fact that the FBI director Robert Mueller was appointed 7 days prior to 9/11 with is most successful accomplishment being the handling of Pan Am 103 for Bush senior. And then invoking 100% total control of ALL evidence.
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/evidence.html
FBI has the ball on internal terrorist bits, that is their job. That they have been less than forthcoming on public release bugs me too. The details of Mr Meuller's background highlights the FACT that directors of the FBI are political appointments. So too was Janet Reno's appointment as Attorney General, and James Woolsley's appointment as director of CIA.
18) The fact that the original reasons for invading the Middle east were false and keep changing over time.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061014...xocDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBhZDhxNDFzBHNlYwNtZW5ld3M
What does bad decision making have to do with the cover up of the Pentagon attack? Invading Afghanistan was done for a good reason, pure payback, blood vengeance. Iraq, on the other hand, was not strategically a smart move. I too am upset that Colin Powell dissembled at the UN.
19) The fact that NORAD had from 8:20 am when Flight 11's transponder was turned off to 10:06 (or 10:03 depending on which version you choose) to respond. So 1 hour and 43 minutes with fighters that can do up to 1288 mph and the distance to DC from NY is only 205 miles.
You don't know crap about air C2, I do. I have done it. You ignore the time delay, denial phase of FAA's loss of track of the various flights, and the lack of transponders (due to them being turned off.) Please see gumboot's thread on the NORAD matter.
20) That Larry Silverstein just happened to be out of the office that day.
I don't give a flying fig about NY billionaires, but what has this to do with the Pentagon, or the price of piss in Peking?
I'll stop at a nice round number.
Bless you for that.
With integrity you can disregard all of that and the other items that have been raised by researchers? And then take the extra step of ridiculing people who have questions under the guise of "no evidence"?
Why do you attribute to malice what in some cases is lack of capability or simple error?
With my integrity intact, I can say you are in for a lot more research.
My belief after my brief time here is that some are blindly supporting the people who did this. Those people you are defending are relentlessly working at demolishing all of the rights and values you believe in. Read the list of the laws passed since 9/11 carefully. Apply them to yourself. Then read from top to bottom Rebuilding America's Defenses to see its predictive abilities and to get a glimpse of what is yet to come.
I am quite familiar with PNAC's points. When it was written during the Clinton administration as a formal protest against Clinton's gutting of the US force structure, I tended to agree with some of it, being on active duty at the time.
The mind slammed shut is impervious to reason.
Look in the mirror when you say that, or at least, keep looking into the facts, rather than your speculations.
Reason and evidence are very different. I trust reason. I prefer both. The evidence for 9/11 not being a conspiracy is no more substantial than the evidence for it being one.
The evidence that it was a conspiracy by Al Qaeda operatives is reasonably strong. Evidence for a tie in to Mossad, CIA, Cheney's commandos, and others is slight. That does not mean there is no evidence of such links, which makes the details on that tough to pin down. The post hoc approach, that the US is diligently engaged with Israel's enemies at present is an understandable point of view, if not rigorously derived. The advocacy of AIPAC for the US to "do something" in the Mid East to help Israel is well documented by Mertheimer and Walsh. (The Israel Lobby piece)
It is time for me to heed this admonition, "I don't think you belong at a critical thinking forum for your lack of critical thinking ability". - Scientologist
If by that you mean to leave us, you have sold yourself short. The Loose change threads have a lot of good discussion of details that you might find enlightening. Don't let Sci scare you.
Well, thanks for your honesty, and please don't go away until you have taken the blinders off.
DR
