Split Thread The 9/11 Conspiracy Team

[DGM]

I said that the FAA has to notify NORAD.

This would be wrong. The incident was in the northeast sector so the FAA would contact NEADS (Northeast Air Defense Sector). This not NORAD. Time was actually saved by Boston center contacting the ANG directly (Otis).


ETA: NEADS is a part of NORAD. And they were involved.

 

[MikeW]

Now you say that we were not prepared for terrorists flying planes into buildings??? Let me point you to another document that was written in 1999... ""The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?" this report which was circulated through the government agencies states... "Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives...into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House...."

Mentioning this in a document doesn't magically make them prepared, nor does it mean they thought it was likely.

And it's the latter point that's relevant here. Not that we would know, as you've quoted only part of what they said. Here's a little more.

Al-Qaida’s expected retaliation for the U.S. cruise missile attack against al-Qaida’s training facilities in Afghanistan on August 20, 1998, could take several forms of terrorist attack in the nation’s capital. Al-Qaida could detonate a Chechen-type building-buster bomb at a federal building. Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida’s Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House. Ramzi Yousef had planned to do this against the CIA headquarters. In addition, both al-Qaida and Yousef were linked to a plot to assassinate President Clinton during his visit to the Philippines in early 1995. Following the August 1998 cruise missile attack, at least one Islamic religious leader called for Clinton’s assassination, and another stated that “the time is not far off” for when the White House will be destroyed by a nuclear bomb. A horrendous scenario consonant with al-Qaida’s mindset would be its use of a nuclear suitcase bomb against any number of targets in the nation’s capital. Bin Laden allegedly has already purchased a number of nuclear suitcase bombs from the Chechen Mafia. Al-Qaida’s retaliation, however, is more likely to take the lower-risk form of bombing one or more U.S. airliners with time-bombs. Yousef was planning simultaneous bombings of 11 U.S. airliners prior to his capture. Whatever form an attack may take, bin Laden will most likely retaliate in a spectacular way for the cruise missile attack against his Afghan camp in August 1998.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/pdf-files/Soc_Psych_of_Terrorism.pdf

 

[beachnut]

you completely mis-characterize what I stated. I never said there was an immediate procedure for intercept... I said that the FAA has to notify NORAD. You said that NORAD has no duty in conducting police work in our skies but you insist on changing the subject to fit your thoughts. ...?

I am right, the instruction you know by heart says so.

... this is interesting. Can you provide some citation about our defenses not geared to deal with threats inside its borders? thx

We were not geared to deal with threats inside our borders, as seen on 911. Exactly like a sneak attack on your house by bad guys, the police are not geared to deal with a sneak attack on your house to stop people from taking your house over. You presented the instruction which shows that was the case for hijacked aircraft. In fact most likely NORAD would not send an armed fighter, as seen with Payne Stewart in 1999, no armed aircraft were scrambled when his plane went off course and did not answer ATC. This is common sense.

... this is interesting. Can you provide some citation about our defenses not geared to deal with threats inside its borders? thx

defenses not geared to know the future... the truth

Now you are backing in nonsense. Cool, better start your nonsense thread or we will be AAH.

 

[ladmo]

I am right, the instruction you know by heart says so.

Look, you said that NORAD did not have jurisdiction in the USA air space. That is patently false, all the other stuff you provided does not pertain to your claim... plain and simple.

We were not geared to deal with threats inside our borders, as seen on 911. Exactly like a sneak attack on your house by bad guys, the police are not geared to deal with a sneak attack on your house to stop people from taking your house over. You presented the instruction which shows that was the case for hijacked aircraft. In fact most likely NORAD would not send an armed fighter, as seen with Payne Stewart in 1999, no armed aircraft were scrambled when his plane went off course and did not answer ATC. This is common sense.
defenses not geared to know the future... the truth

First the FAA has to notify NORAD... NORAD will not do this on their own without proper notification. This thing about Payne Stewart has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

Now you are backing in nonsense. Cool, better start your nonsense thread or we will be AAH.

I have no idea what you mean.

 

[ladmo]

Mentioning this in a document doesn't magically make them prepared, nor does it mean they thought it was likely.

Nobody has claimed that we were not prepared. Beachnut said...

there was We were not prepared to deal with threats like terrorists flying planes into buildings on 911.

he is clearly wrong. If people are going to hang their entire argument on "prepared" versus an "understanding" then we might as well parse all phrases.

And it's the latter point that's relevant here. Not that we would know, as you've quoted only part of what they said. Here's a little more.

I read the entire paper prior to your post but I am not sure what you are attempting to convey.

 

[ladmo]

This would be wrong. The incident was in the northeast sector so the FAA would contact NEADS (Northeast Air Defense Sector). This not NORAD. Time was actually saved by Boston center contacting the ANG directly (Otis).

NEADS reports to NORAD and is an integral part of the USA's air defense. In the context of what is being discussed NEADS and NORAD are interchangeable as NEADS is responsible for the north east corridor. So you support what I said... FAA contacted NORAD.

ETA: NEADS is a part of NORAD. And they were involved.

Yes, NEADS reports to NORAD in matters like this.

 

[MikeW]

Nobody has claimed that we were not prepared.

Beachnut said "We were not prepared to deal with threats like terrorists flying planes into buildings on 911".

Which you know, because you responded: "Now you say that we were not prepared for terrorists flying planes into buildings".

You then cited a report mentioning the possibility of crashing an aircraft into a landmark, apparently thinking this contradicted Beachnut.

And so I pointed out that it does nothing of the kind. A report mentioning the possibility doesn't in itself mean that a single preparation of any kind was made.

I read the entire paper prior to your post but I am not sure what you are attempting to convey.

The report said: "Al-Qaida’s retaliation, however, is more likely to take the lower-risk form of bombing one or more U.S. airliners with time-bombs".

In other words, even though it mentioned the possibility of crashing a plane into something, this wasn't considered the most likely course of action. So again, there's no particular reason to believe this report would have lead to preparations for 9/11-type attacks. Quite the contrary, it confirmed what others told the Commission: they believed the threat would come from another direction.

ETA: Sorry Gaspode! Best move this too.

 

[beachnut]

... this is interesting. Can you provide some citation about our defenses not geared to deal with threats inside its borders? thx

This is true, and you want to quibble about it. Cool

 

[DGM]

NEADS reports to NORAD and is an integral part of the USA's air defense. In the context of what is being discussed NEADS and NORAD are interchangeable as NEADS is responsible for the north east corridor. So you support what I said... FAA contacted NORAD.




Yes, NEADS reports to NORAD in matters like this.

Your're spinning your wheels. Yes. NEADS was contacted. Do you think they did not act quick enough (in your opinion). If so , what do you base your opinion on?

 

[ladmo]

Beachnut said "We were not prepared to deal with threats like terrorists flying planes into buildings on 911".

Which you know, because you responded: "Now you say that we were not prepared for terrorists flying planes into buildings".

You then cited a report mentioning the possibility of crashing an aircraft into a landmark, apparently thinking this contradicted Beachnut.

And so I pointed out that it does nothing of the kind. A report mentioning the possibility doesn't in itself mean that a single preparation of any kind was made.

Good job you got me!! A report generated that states the possibility of planes hitting various high level targets may not be taken seriously. Wow, how you were able to sift through all of this and come up with this level of reasoning is a true act of genius. Actually, this is laughable. If what you say and Beachnut says is true... then we would have Generals in a court martial. To be caught unprepared when ample warning was provided is a derelict of one's duties. But wait, nobody has ever been reprimanded for any short comings on 911! So this fantasy of being "unprepared" for planes flying into government buildings is nothing but a figment of your imagination facts and multiple generated reports confirm this...

The report said: "Al-Qaida’s retaliation, however, is more likely to take the lower-risk form of bombing one or more U.S. airliners with time-bombs".

In other words, even though it mentioned the possibility of crashing a plane into something, this wasn't considered the most likely course of action. So again, there's no particular reason to believe this report would have lead to preparations for 9/11-type attacks. Quite the contrary, it confirmed what others told the Commission: they believed the threat would come from another direction.

ETA: Sorry Gaspode! Best move this too.

This is strictly conjecture without a foundation.

 

[ladmo]

Your're spinning your wheels. Yes. NEADS was contacted.

Explain spinning wheels. You attempted to provide a difference with distinction between NEADS and NORAD... there is none.

Do you think they did not act quick enough (in your opinion). If so , what do you base your opinion on?

Where did I ever say that? Posing a question with a possible answer at the same time is baiting. There is no time for that and it is quite childish.

 

[beachnut]

Good job you got me!! A report generated that states the possibility of planes hitting various high level targets may not be taken seriously. Wow, how you were able to sift through all of this and come up with this level of reasoning is a true act of genius. Actually, this is laughable. If what you say and Beachnut says is true... then we would have Generals in a court martial. To be caught unprepared when ample warning was provided is a derelict of one's duties. But wait, nobody has ever been reprimanded for any short comings on 911! So this fantasy of being "unprepared" for planes flying into government buildings is nothing but a figment of your imagination facts and multiple generated reports confirm this...




This is strictly conjecture without a foundation.

Full blown truther, from 0 to full blown in one post, but you are not a truther?


Like locking up cops for not stopping murderers before they murder.

 

[DGM]

Explain spinning wheels. You attempted to provide a difference with distinction between NEADS and NORAD... there is none.



Where did I ever say that? Posing a question with a possible answer at the same time is baiting. There is no time for that and it is quite childish.

I now admit. I'm confused. You said "I said that the FAA has to notify NORAD."

(with a small distinction that Boston center broke protocol and contacted them first)
They were notified.

Why did you say this if you knew they were in-fact notified.

 

[NoahFence]

That was the point. No successful hijacking of a US passenger airliner in over 20 years.

...And the Red Sox haven't won the World Series since 1918 -- until they did.

 

[NoahFence]

Yes, The 9/11 Conspiracy Team had no right to kill these innocent, unarmed people on 9/11 for their agenda and profits. Bin Laden was just the fall guy, bumped off to protect The Team.

The 9/11 Conspiracy Team (according to a recent theory)
* Bin Laden provided the hijackers, and told them to hijack 4 planes, land, and demand the USA get out of Arabia in return for the hostages.
* Mueller made sure no FBI agents arrested the hijackers, taking pilot training in the USA (not in other countries with flight schools) to create a plausible cover story.
* Airline baggage men (agents) put the bags with remote controlled cyanide gas tanks in the planes, to knock out the crew, passengers, and hijackers (who were duped, and died too).
* Airline maintenance (agents) installed enhanced remote control in the passenger jets.
* ACE Elevator workers (agents) placed the nano-thermite and other explosives in the WTC elevators by day, and above ceilings panels by night
* Cheney made sure no fighter jets intercepted the planes
* Rumsfeld had workers strengthen the Pentagon Wing wall for the impact.
* Bremer arranged homing beacons installed in WTCs, and first blamed Bin Laden on TV
* Gen. Myers provided the NORAD stand down and timelines
* Bush leveraged the attacks into a reason to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.

Split from: Bin Laden Dead Truthers Mourn.

Posted By: Gaspode

^^
The most horrendously stupid collection of words ever assembled in one post.

 

[ladmo]

I now admit. I'm confused. You said "I said that the FAA has to notify NORAD."

(with a small distinction that Boston center broke protocol and contacted them first)
They were notified.

Why did you say this if you knew they were in-fact notified.

This was a response to Beachnut when he said that NORAD had no charter being within the USA airspace. I said they do as the FAA has to notify NORAD if the FAA wants to engage NORAD with various activities (this last part is a paraphrase).

 

[MikeW]

Good job you got me!! A report generated that states the possibility of planes hitting various high level targets may not be taken seriously. Wow, how you were able to sift through all of this and come up with this level of reasoning is a true act of genius. Actually, this is laughable. If what you say and Beachnut says is true... then we would have Generals in a court martial. To be caught unprepared when ample warning was provided is a derelict of one's duties. But wait, nobody has ever been reprimanded for any short comings on 911! So this fantasy of being "unprepared" for planes flying into government buildings is nothing but a figment of your imagination facts and multiple generated reports confirm this...

So just because the report mentioned the possibility of 9/11-type attacks, the US must therefore have prepared for them?

How totally and utterly absurd. Personal incredulity: that really is all you've got. Which also tells me something else relevant: talking to you will be an utter waste of time. So I think I'll stop, right now.

 

[ladmo]

So just because the report mentioned the possibility of 9/11-type attacks, the US must therefore have prepared for them?

How totally and utterly absurd. Personal incredulity: that really is all you've got. Which also tells me something else relevant: talking to you will be an utter waste of time. So I think I'll stop, right now.

Great retort... roll up in your shell. You fail miserably to understand how that report was generated and presented. It was not done in a vacuum but for you to feel that it is "OK" for this massive oversight to be dismissed with indifference shows that you are compliant with what others do and refuse to think for one's self. Good luck in life as you rely on others and not yourself... which in the long term may be good for you.

 

[beachnut]

This was a response to Beachnut when he said that NORAD had no charter being within the USA airspace. I said they do as the FAA has to notify NORAD if the FAA wants to engage NORAD with various activities (this last part is a paraphrase).

Why exacgerate. I said what was clear in CJCSI 3610.01A DISTRIBUTION: A, B, C, J, S, 1 June 2001. Good luck. Why make up stuff?

 

[ladmo]

Why exacgerate. I said what was clear in CJCSI 3610.01A DISTRIBUTION: A, B, C, J, S, 1 June 2001. Good luck. Why make up stuff?

What did I make up? I copied and pasted from the document...