Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon? by Fred Reed

[Petr]

I myself have never been too enthusiastic about more extreme 9/11 conspiracy theories - at the very most I would buy into some form of LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), in the Pearl Harbor way.

I also recall that Yggdrasil calculated on Stormfront (on the basis of victim names) that hundreds of Jews did indeed die in WTC.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed107.html


Plastic and Foam Only

by Fred Reed


Oh help. I am still getting nutcake email from the deranged telling me about various conspiracies involving those wretched buildings in New York. Stop sending them. My hard drive is not an asylum. I don’t know how to email Haldol. Try taking rat poison.

Two of these plots in particular might be exterminated to my inexpressible happiness. The first was that no Jews were in the towers when they were hit, the implication being that the attack was an Israeli plot and doubtless mediated by Mossad. The story enjoyed a brief vogue and still shows up occasionally, like tularemia.

Now, if you told me that Mossad, Bush, the CIA or the Republican National Committee blew up those buildings, I might wonder. Intelligence agencies are dirt. To judge by the current infestation of the White House, Republicans are too stupid to be dirt, but may be proto-dirt, and advance to true dirt-hood with careful coaching. Democracy is ever fascinating.

But…how many Jews do you suppose worked in the towers? New York being New York, and the towers being full of lawyers and commercial people, the answer has to be A Whole Bunch. Let’s think about this.

I picture Rachel Goldstein, a tower slave, in her apartment at night when the phone rings.

Rachel: “Hello.”

Voice: “Rachel. This is Mossad.”

Rachel: “Oh, hi! I’m Mahatma Gandhi.”

Voice: “No, Rachel. This really is Mossad.”

Rachel: “This really is Mahat….”

Voice: “Honest. Really, really. Cross my heart and hope….”

Rachel: “Take your medication.” Click.

It is hard enough to get a Jew to agree with himself, much less with several thousand others. To buy this theory, you have to believe (a) that Jews are interconnected by a surgically implanted wireless network and respond robotically to beamed instructions from a secret satellite beyond the orbit of Saturn, or (b) that they were all willing to stay home, knowing that their friends and colleagues were about to be killed. If you think either of these ideas makes the slightest sense, take your medication.

Here is a point I’ve noticed about most of the conspiracy theories: They either involve preposterously large numbers of conspirators, or just don’t make sense.

Another theory, very much alive, holds that the Pentagon was hit not by an airliner, but by (a) a fighter aircraft, or (b) a missile fired by a fighter aircraft, or (c) a cruise missile.

I was in Washington at the time and could have simply walked over to the Pentagon to see what had happened. I didn’t for several days. I figured a smoking hole was a smoking hole. So what? Maybe I’m jaded.

Anyway, my little contribution to the story:

Washington is an insider’s town. There are layers of insiderness, which is constructed on the plan of an artichoke: The closer to the center, the softer the brains get. (I don't mean that artichokes have....) (Though maybe.) Anyway, there is the Washington that the press writes about. There is the Washington the press knows about. Then you have the Pentagon war room and, higher yet, the conclaves of the highest White House staff. These are all the outer rings, for hoi polloi. A far more secret and closed group, esoteric, more powerful than Superman, and unknown even o the National Security Agency, is the Plastic and Foam Only Club.

If you turned right coming out of my condo at the time in Colonial Village, just across the river from Washington in Virginia, and followed down Wilson Boulevard and to the left, you came to the Virginia terminus of Key Bridge. Here the bike path picked up, running parallel to the GW Parkway, often in sight of the Potomac. It’s a pretty ride. You passed the Pentagon, and then National Airport, and finally came to the Washington Sailing Marina. It is perhaps a seven-mile ride each way. For years I did it several times a week in good weather.

Behind the restaurant of the Marina was a wooden deck with a snack bar that sold beer. A highly motley group of people foregathered there of an afternoon to ingest the elixir. We called ourselves the PFO Club (Plastic and Foam Only, which was written on the trashcans) or more casually, the Deckheads. There were Paul the Carpenter, a couple of working-stiff journalists, a retired general, a possibly legal Mexican, Hot Ticket Lisa the Blonde Bombshell, occasionally a Korean woman we called Ninja, some federal bureaucrats, a pathological liar who believed he held a major position in the stock market, an airline pilot, and so on. We chatted and had a hell of a good time. Every minute or so we stopped talking because an airliner taking off from National drowned out conversation.

In summer, from quitting time for office maggots until at least nine at night, revolving shifts of these kaleidoscopic reprobates showed up, got sozzled, argued about wildly variegated subjects, and left. You could hear Paul the Carpenter and a German employee of the government argue alternately about the price of nails and the future of the Deutschmark. There was even a resident schizophrenic. (Not me.)

One of the journalists (I was the other) we called Broadcast Dave, to distinguish him from other Daves among the Deckheads. He was Dave Winslow, then the voice of UPI Radio’s World Edition, or whatever it was called. He had worked somehow in the airplane business, maybe in air freight, knew all the airliners at a glance, and had an apartment near the Pentagon.

I knew Dave for at least a couple of years before 9/11. He was a good-humored cynic, as reporters are when they are not ill-tempered cynics. In Washington you are either an ideologue, and believe passionately in some reprehensible and improbable system of error, or you don’t believe anything. The latter has been the usual position of working-stiff newsmen, when sober. (At other times they believe they’ll have another drink.) Reporters these days tipple less than they once did, I grant. Broadcast Dave was never drunk that I saw him, but he didn’t believe in things easily either. I like that kind of folk.

A few days after Nine-Eleven, I got back to the deck after an absence. Broadcast was there. He told me that he was in his apartment at the time of the strike and heard an airplane coming in, way too low. Something wasn’t right. Looking out his window, he said, he saw the tail of an airliner pass by and then, kerwhoom! Being a reporter, he sprinted to the phone, and believed that he was the first journalist to report it. If he wasn’t, the other guy got it in less than ten seconds, I figure. These things matter to reporters.

Now, boys and girls, either Broadcast Dave was planted years in advance by The Conspiracy to mislead the Plastic and Foam Only Club (an entity I grant to be of high priority for penetration by international terrorists) or there was an airplane.


Deckheads, trying successfully to look as wretched as possible. Rare photo courtesy Smithsonian Insect Zoo. The credentials of some of these folk might surprise you.


September 6, 2006

[Atlas]

I think everyone remember that video ?

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main

[Petr]

I think everyone remember that video ?

http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main
What about it?


Petr

[IlluSionS667]

Watch it and find a logical explanation for the facts. Loose Change 2 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946593973848835726) also mentions some of these facts and many more, that have not been explained by those who support the official claims or the LIHOP theory.

[Petr]

The thread might be a good place to collect the best evidence the official story has on its side against conspiratologist claims. Any contributions?


Petr

[Count Eustace II]

Oh, I guess Fred Reed's word settles all the commotion about 9/11. I guess he knows better than anyone else, so let's all shut up about conspiracy theories and cheer on America's slaughter of Muslims who are trying to take away our "freedumb" and worship George Bush's fascist state. Thanks Fred, I can sleep better at night since you've now settled all the questions about 9/11.

[Petr]

Oh, I guess Fred Reed's word settles all the commotion about 9/11. I guess he knows better than anyone else, so let's all shut up about conspiracy theories and cheer on America's slaughter of Muslims who are trying to take away our "freedumb" and worship George Bush's fascist state.
Boo-ring...


Petr

[Burrhus]

There are two serious pieces of rhetorical ms-direction in Reed's essay.

Firts, he discredits 911 revisionisism in general by dismissing as unreasonable the contention that there were no jews in the buildings. I agree with him on that. The contention may or may not be true but is unsupported by evidence as far as I know.

The problem is that no serious 911 revisionists have that contention as an element of evidence in there argument for a 911 conspiracy. Those conspiracists who do are marginal figures in the 911 investigation community.

Dismissing the work of 97% of the researchers in on a subject because 3% put forward an unsubstantiated and unreasonable contention indicates a lack of either intellectual competence or integrity.

Reed: Now, boys and girls, either Broadcast Dave was planted years in advance by The Conspiracy to mislead the Plastic and Foam Only Club (an entity I grant to be of high priority for penetration by international terrorists) or there was an airplane.

Second, to assert that the only reason why his friend Dave would lie about an airliner hitting the pentagon is that he was planted years in advance by the mossad to fool Reed and his coffee club is almost malignantly specious. Either Reed is incapable of logical analysis or he has some hidden agenda. I know not which.

An alternative logical conclusion that could be reasonably drawn from the reporter's claim about the airliner if it is false (assuming that he made such a claim) is that he was threatened by agents of either the US or Israeli governments. I am not asserting that Dave was so threatened but Reed's conclusion is silly and intended only to mock 911 investigators by proposing that they believe such a silly conclusion. I have never read any 911 investigator making such an assertion about Dave Winslow.

I am not making any claim here about the truth or falsehood of the official government conspiracy theory concerning an airliner hitting the pentagon. That is an open question still to be resolved.

I am only saying that's Reed's essay ought not to convince anyone that the government's 'theory' is true or that the 911 revisionists are irrational or incompetent. The truth about 911 is far from a settled matter but Reed does nothing here to further that cause. On the contrary, he has deceitfully attempted to disrupt rational thinking on the issue.

[Rusty Mason]

Fred doesn't care about America, its dysfunctional government, or its incredibly stupid populace anymore. He's said as much many times, from his home in Mexico. He doesn't care about the White race per se (He's married to a nice "Mes'can" woman) nor does he try to keep up with American politics at any level. He's amusing and is a good source for stories about the good ol' days in America but he's a poor resource for current events.

[Trojan]

Watch it and find a logical explanation for the facts. Loose Change 2 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946593973848835726) also mentions some of these facts and many more, that have not been explained by those who support the official claims or the LIHOP theory.

So what happened to the passengers, did the Mossad just eliminate them?

[Starr]

Firts, he discredits 911 revisionisism in general by dismissing as unreasonable the contention that there were no jews in the buildings. I agree with him on that. The contention may or may not be true but is unsupported by evidence as far as I know.

yes, it is ridiculous claims like this one that go a long way to discredit anything other than the official story. Bizzarre rumors are sometimes started for that very purpose, I do believe. And then those people who might be headed in the right direction pick up on things like this, believe them and then guys like this get to say "look at what some of those nuts also believe"etc.

And this particular rumor will be jumped on as "anti-semitic" as well, which will then reflect not so well on the possibility of, for example, Mossad involvement.;)

[IlluSionS667]

So what happened to the passengers, did the Mossad just eliminate them?

Flight 93 Landed at Cleveland Airport on 9/11 and Flight 175 in Vicinity. Passengers were these moved to some other means of transportation. They have not been seen since. Most likely, they were indeed killed by the CIA or FBI. I don't see where Mossad comes in there.

Loose Change 2 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946593973848835726) does not explicitly state what happened to the passengers of these flights, but it does so implicitly. You would have known if you actually took the time to watch the footage. We all know, though, that you're too narrowminded for that.


On the morning of 9/11 a little known Cincinnati television station ran a story saying Flight 93 landed at Cleveland International Airport instead of crashing in Pennsylvania as claimed in the official government story.

Reporters at WCPO Channel 9 quoted then Cleveland Mayor Michael R. White as saying "a Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing due to a bomb threat," the airplane landing safely, moved to a secure location and evacuated.

The early morning report when on to say United Airlines verified the plane as Flight 93, but was also deeply concerned about another jetliner in the vicinity, Flight 175, flying from Boston to Los Angeles.

Also included in the little known news report was a comment from United CEO, James Goodwin, who said, "The thoughts of everyone at United are with the passengers and crew of these flights. Our prayers are also with everyone on the ground who may have been involved. United Airlines is working with all the relevant authorities, including the FBI, to obtain further information on these flights."

Former Mayor White, as well as United and WCPO, could not be reached for comment, but the evidence still remains, even though it was suspiciously removed from the television's web site in June 2004 in and around the time of the 9/11 Commission hearings.

With the evidence trail getting colder and colder, the obvious still must be asked: if Flight 175 was slamming into the South Tower and Flight 93 was downed over Pennsylvania like the government contends, why was Mayor White saying both planes were in or in the vicinity of Cleveland?

[Atlas]

What about it?

Well, watch it.

[leondegrance]

I live in the DC area. The airliner did a circle then flew directly over my office building (on the top 12th floor) and was witness by a quite a few there. I remember working at an account in Crystal City (defense contractors across from the Pentagon). The receptionist on the 15th floor had a wide window view of the Pentagon. I asked her if she was working that fateful morning. She told me she witnessed the plane plowing into the Pentagon.

Aside from this it would be impossible for anyone or entity fabricating an airliner crashing into the Pentagon.

[Atlas]

Fury as academics claim 9/11 was 'inside job' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403757&in_page_id=1770)

[funderbunked]

Originally Posted by Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom, 1913
Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

He shd gno. His "shadow-self" [the term President Wilson used] was House of Rothschild agent Edward Mandel House--and who established not only the Council on Foreign Relations, 1921, but also the League of Nations (which, after being shot down by Senate in 1917, became the United Nations under fellow commie Harry Truman) and the "graduated income tax" (Marx's 2nd "plank," I believe, of the Communist Manifesto).

FDR sucked shit through a straw. Dubya is a close second. But Woodrow Wilson & his "shadow self" Edward Mandel House did more damage to the United States than any single Presidency.

[Starr]

Iran says U.S., Israel ordered September 11 attacks

http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8512

[Spitfire]

The thread might be a good place to collect the best evidence the official story has on its side against conspiratologist claims. Any contributions?


Petr

You won't find many takers.

There's the 'it happened exactly like the TV said' or 'shut up if you disagree with the first statement' crowds.

They really can't present any evidence for their wild claims about the 19. It's like religion. Faith is believing in what you know isn't so. Jesus walked on water, Jesus loves you, Jesus came back from the dead. And you're going to a magical eternal kingdom when you die.

The 9-11 myths are of the same order. The others come from the bible and the shoutings of the preacher in the pulpit. TV is new altar at which the masses worship and the preachers are the talking heads with their fancy jobs talking on sets to lots of people watching at home.

Explain this Fred:
http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/images/pentagon-9-11.gif

Boeing 757? Right Fred?

Sure, you can see it plainly here after the dust settled:
http://www.wtc-terrorattack.com/pentagon_crash07.jpg

So much chrome, so many bodies, all the luggage and foam and plastic.

A thousand words more should do the trick Fred.

Ack, don't call me a conspiracy theorist, you might discredit me. I couldn't bear it. Us nutjobs have a word for those of you who swallow the official line, hook, and sinker:

Idiots. Much clearer and more to the point that "conspiracy theorist", which actually implies an intelligence or ability to discern that men do things in concert to achieve their own ends. Idiots simply implies "fucking morons".

[Kriger]

This is a film of a Fox broadcast done late 2001 or early 2002, don't know exactly when.
The interesting thing about it is that this film got "lost" in cyber space for awhile and has just recently resurfaced.
While no conclusions are reached or no explicit evidence was provided for anything due to "classified" status, an israeli connection to 911 was not the result of some "conspiracy nuts".
A connection was already established.
The connection got buried, although not completely so.
Of particular interest is the israeli owned communications corporation and its customers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAoe26MaTew

[IlluSionS667]

The airliner did a circle then flew directly over my office building (on the top 12th floor) and was witness by a quite a few there. I remember working at an account in Crystal City (defense contractors across from the Pentagon). The receptionist on the 15th floor had a wide window view of the Pentagon. I asked her if she was working that fateful morning. She told me she witnessed the plane plowing into the Pentagon.

Aside from this it would be impossible for anyone or entity fabricating an airliner crashing into the Pentagon.

It was obvious that something flew into the building. Are you saying that the people in your office building actually saw a large boeing circling around as others later saw that very same large boeing plow into the Pentagon? Are you sure about this?

He shd gno. His "shadow-self" [the term President Wilson used] was House of Rothschild agent Edward Mandel House--and who established not only the Council on Foreign Relations, 1921, but also the League of Nations (which, after being shot down by Senate in 1917, became the United Nations under fellow commie Harry Truman) and the "graduated income tax" (Marx's 2nd "plank," I believe, of the Communist Manifesto).

FDR sucked shit through a straw. Dubya is a close second. But Woodrow Wilson & his "shadow self" Edward Mandel House did more damage to the United States than any single Presidency.

The only thing I disagree with, is Dubya being a close second. Dubya is an idiot who has no authority whatsoever and is but a puppet on a string of his daddy and the PNAC (Project of the New American Century) boys. Reagan was little better, though he at least managed to come off as intelligent every now and then due him having been an actor.

I don't understand, though, why you feel the need to reply to a quote from my signature in this particular thread ;)

[Trojan]

It was obvious that something flew into the building. Are you saying that the people in your office building actually saw a large boeing circling around as others later saw that very same large boeing plow into the Pentagon? Are you sure about this?



If the answer to both questions is yes, does that mean they have been brainwashed or are they just CIA/Mossad operatives in deep cover assignments?

:bitchfight:

[Kriger]

It just means something other than a Boeing could have crashed into the Pentagon.
Brainwashed????
You conspiracy nuts believe anything, don't you?



:slap:

[Count Eustace II]

I live in the DC area. The airliner did a circle then flew directly over my office building (on the top 12th floor) and was witness by a quite a few there. I remember working at an account in Crystal City (defense contractors across from the Pentagon). The receptionist on the 15th floor had a wide window view of the Pentagon. I asked her if she was working that fateful morning. She told me she witnessed the plane plowing into the Pentagon.

Aside from this it would be impossible for anyone or entity fabricating an airliner crashing into the Pentagon.

It was reported that the FBI confiscated all surveillance tapes from gas stations and hotels in the area immediately surrounding the Pentagon on 9/11. Why?

If a 757 jet was doing loop-dee-loops around your office building at 1000 feet, you tell me not one single person took a photo or video of this event? No one on the highways around the Pentagon thought of taking a photo of a low flying airplane? Why wouldn't the government want people's pictures of the plane so the truth could be properly told?

The reason the conspiracies about what hit the Pentagon are still pursued to this day is because the government's explanation, and subsequent investigation, are so absurd.

[Rusty Mason]

:deadhorse:

It's the biggest government in history, of course they're lying. That's what politicians do -- they lie. Every educated man in America has known -- at least up until the commies took control of the education system in America -- that government is filled with most wicked men imaginable. Anyone who does not know this basic fact of the universe should not be allowed to vote, they're too ignorant.

The real questions are: What are the facts and Why are they being covered up?

[Starr]

If the answer to both questions is yes, does that mean they have been brainwashed or are they just CIA/Mossad operatives in deep cover assignments?

:bitchfight:


How many people have you run across that actually have said or might believe something this nutty, honestly?

I do believe a plane did fly into the pentagon and therefore this woman who works with Leon could have indeed seen exactly that. But the more logical explanation(as opposed to your attempt at humor:p) that could be given from someone who does not believe a plane did hit the pentagon is that witnesses can be unreliable. They might get caught up in the whole atmosphere of excitment and begin to believe they saw something they did not, or they may have seen certain things that are not exactly what they believe them to be, but are convinced because of what they are hearing and being told by everyone. Some people might also want to have a story to tell so they can be a part of all of the excitement.

Look at all of the completely diferent things some witnesses to the Kennedy assassination supposedly saw.

[Trojan]

How many people have you run across that actually have said or might believe something this nutty, honestly?

Visit Stormfront - you'll meet quite a few.

I do believe a plane did fly into the pentagon and therefore this woman who works with Leon could have indeed seen exactly that.

To which I agree:)

But the more logical explanation(as opposed to your attempt at humor:p) that could be given from someone who does not believe a plane did hit the pentagon is that witnesses can be unreliable.

The proponets of the story that a missle or fighter jet or what have you hit the pentagon feel that all witness testimony that contradicts their belief is unreliable.

They might get caught up in the whole atmosphere of excitment and begin to believe they saw something they did not, or they may have seen certain things that are not exactly what they believe them to be, but are convinced because of what they are hearing and being told by everyone. Some people might also want to have a story to tell so they can be a part of all of the excitement.

Not sure I follow your logic here.

Look at all of the completely diferent things some witnesses to the Kennedy assassination supposedly saw.

Yes, witness testimony alone is not always reliable, but that fact does not mean the witnesses that saw a passenger jet strike the Pentagon are wrong.

[Starr]

To which I agree

this is not to say I believe the official story.

The proponets of the story that a missle or fighter jet or what have you hit the pentagon feel that all witness testimony that contradicts their belief is unreliable.

This is how nearly everyone handles taking in information or debating in a topic like this. They believe what fits with what they think happened and the rest they overlook, say it is lies, or say the person or people saying it are nuts.

Yes, witness testimony alone is not always reliable, but that fact does not mean the witnesses that saw a passenger jet strike the Pentagon are wrong.

No, it just means there is a possibility.

[IlluSionS667]

Since we're dealing with the reliability of witnesses here, aren't there several witnesses who claim to have seen something other than a large passenger jet crash into the Pentagon? I'm pretty sure there are. This means that either set of witnesses is lying or remembers the facts incorrectly.

Nevertheless, why don't you supporters of the official theory try to explain why the airplane vanished after crashing into the Pentagon, why the Pentagon hasn't released any of the videos that could clear up what actually flew into the building, why a part of the building was hit that was opposite from the place the plane supposebly came from which just happened to have been under renovation, why the few pictures from the pentagon showing airplane debree show debree not matching that of a large boeing passenger jet, how it was possible that an airplane managed to fly trough restricted airspace into the headquarters of the most powerful army in the world without any fighter jets popping up (which is standard procedure), why the very same Pakistani intelligence officer who wired a large sum of money to Mohammed Atta was dining with the CIA in Washington that very morning, why a CIA-created organisation lead by the brother of a close business partner of GW Bush would attack the US, how the pancake theory is physically possible, what happened at Cleveland Hopkins Airport that day, why (and how) building 7 of the WTC was pulled, why Osama Bin Laden was treated in a US military hospital shortly before 9/11 (when he was already a wanted fugitive), ...

[Kodos]

People who think a missle hit the Pentagon aren't even kooks... they are just retarded.

[Starr]

A little off the exact topic, but funny, still
:nopity:
9/11 Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories Still Abound
http://www.adl.org/main_Anti_Semitism_Domestic/9_11_conspiracy_theories.htm
http://www.davidduke.com/

In 2003, when ADL released its report on anti-Semitic 9/11 conspiracy theories, far-right extremists and the Arab and Muslim press claimed that the Mossad trained or duped the 9/11 hijackers into carrying out the attacks or that an Israeli spying ring based in the U.S. knew what the attackers were up to and did nothing to stop them.

Not anti-semitic conspiracy theories, this might(Yes, might) be what happened.

[leondegrance]

It was obvious that something flew into the building. Are you saying that the people in your office building actually saw a large boeing circling around as others later saw that very same large boeing plow into the Pentagon? Are you sure about this?

Yes, and others that I know that were working in Old Town Alexandria saw it as well.

Anyone with a lick of common sense would know it would be impossible to fabricate an airliner crashing into the Pentagon. The whole FAA would have to be in on the conspiracy. Not possible.

[ScottishStalinist1]

The damage sustained to the Pentagon was not sufficient enough to of been a 747 Boeing commercial airliner. This has been known on the internet a few months after 9/11; I remember viewing a French website that proved a Boeing could not of hit the Pentagon.

[Kriger]

There was an obvious failure on the part of the FAA and the National Security system for something like this to be allowed to happen.
Yes, I say "allowed to happen".
The hijacked jets were flying for a good while before they all of a sudden crashed into the Twin Towers.
As for the Pentagon, I understand that there were many who saw an aircraft more the size of a shuttle jet.
There is also justified questions concerning the ability of any pilot to manuever a jet the size of the Boeing into the position it hit the Pentagon.
The wingspan itself doesn't fit the area of entry.
One can debate these points until hell itself freezes over, this does not change the fact that the offical version is filled with misrepresentations of the laws of physics, among other things.
The only reason so many people do not want to believe other than the official version is that they are afraid to.
The average American can handle the unpleasant thoughts of covert operations done against other countries/people.
To realize that the government could intitiate or allow such operations against their own country is just too scarey for them to think about for very long.

[IlluSionS667]

People who think a missle hit the Pentagon aren't even kooks... they are just retarded.

Well, I don't know what exactly hit the Pentagon, but it surely doesn't look like it was a large boeing passenger plane. If you know what besides a missile of a global hawk hit it, feel free to explain what is was and how it is consistent with the rubble.

Yes, and others that I know that were working in Old Town Alexandria saw it as well.

Are the all absolutely positive that what they was was a large boeing passenger jet and that that same boeing flew into the Pentagon?

Anyone with a lick of common sense would know it would be impossible to fabricate an airliner crashing into the Pentagon. The whole FAA would have to be in on the conspiracy.

How so? It's not like the whole FAA was in the control towers watching the boeing drop off the radar. It was not like the whole FAA was present at the Pentagon.

[ScottishStalinist1]

Here is one of my posts from another forum:


What is your point here? You assume that the gov had a contigency plan for such a thing to happen, that the government knew there was a second plance, and which one it was,

If it was any normal day (pre-Bush administration, at least) the plane would of been shot down in minutes through tracking from NOARD's radar and the vast air defences in the US. On the day of 9/11, there were multiple "war-game" scenarios, i.e. NORAD's radar was completely filled with planes not on their correct courses, and there was only, IIRC, four squads (two fighters in each squad), ready to be deployed to track down the rogue planes. The rest of the American air-borne defence was over Canada in another war-game simulating a Cold-War invasion scenario. Not only was this all happening, but NORAD was also simulating a WTC terrorist attack also having a security drill at the same time as the real attacks.

That the necessary figures were available to give authorisation to shoot down the plane

I have already covered this. Before the Bush administration changed it, NORAD generals had this authorisation. It became illegal a few months before 9/11.

[Trojan]

Just curious, is anyone aware of a controlled demolition that stared at the top of a building?

All controlled demotions that I have seen have started at the bottom if not the basement of the structure.

The WTC collapse started at the point of impact for the planes, consistent with the historical version.

[Petr]

Just curious, is anyone aware of a controlled demolition that stared at the top of a building?
Hey, good point.


Petr

[ScottishStalinist1]

Trojan, that is interesting. However, if you view the footage of the collapse again, there are clear explosions (two if I remember) below the impact site at the start.

[Trojan]

Trojan, that is interesting. However, if you view the footage of the collapse again, there are clear explosions (two if I remember) below the impact site at the start.

Are they explosions or are the supports buckling? Do you see flames? Could two charges be enough? When you watch a controled demolition, the entire structure is ringed with explosions - explosions on the same level, not one above the other.

[Kodos]

Are the all absolutely positive that what they was was a large boeing passenger jet and that that same boeing flew into the Pentagon?

Yeah obviously the military shot a missle at its own HQ and the pictures of the plane were shot in that same studio they( meaning the jews, freemasons, illuminati, bilderbergers, vatican, men in black, and Steve Allen) shot the moon landing in.

[Winston]

Just curious, is anyone aware of a controlled demolition that stared at the top of a building?

All controlled demotions that I have seen have started at the bottom if not the basement of the structure.

The WTC collapse started at the point of impact for the planes, consistent with the historical version.

You cannot compare the placement of explosives and sequence of detonation of a regular demolition to one which, if the skeptics are correct, was designed to appear as the result of burning jet fuel at the area of impact. Explosives could have been strategically placed with the upper-most grouping at the point where the plane was expected, or planned, to hit.
However, the top photo at this page might show a demolition from top down.

http://www.rense.com/general67/9118.htm

I found that while searching for the photo of the WTC column which appeared to be severed in a diagonal fashion, consistent with the placement of cutter charges. Anyone got that? They show examples from regular demolitions where the charges are placed diagonally on the column so that the severed upper half 'walks' down from atop the lower half.

[ScottishStalinist1]

Trojan, I am still searching for the video that I saw two clear explosions in. However, here (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4389019269529461803) is a video that shows "flames". A 'flame' appears in around the 14th second.



Here (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=9184329400593634920) is also what I believe the controlled demolition of WTC7.

Here (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=3249714675910247150&q=wtc+demolition) is another good video.

[Winston]

Explosions don't always result in visible flame. Certainly not in daylight.

[ScottishStalinist1]

Here (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=3249714675910247150&q=wtc+demolition) is another good video, where you can see an explosion blowing out a part of the building below the impact.

[Sulla the Dictator]

You know what the funniest part about all of this is?

That among Nazis, there are people who believe that the conspiracy theories about 9/11 are actually part of a conspiracy by Jews to make white nationalists seem retarded. :rofl:

[Kodos]

You know what the funniest part about all of this is?

That among Nazis, there are people who believe that the conspiracy theories about 9/11 are actually part of a conspiracy by Jews to make white nationalists seem retarded. :rofl:

I think the government encourages them to make its opponents seem retarded.

[ScottishStalinist1]

There are certainly government sponsored conspiracy theories on 9/11.

[Petyr Baelish]

You know what the funniest part about all of this is?

That among Nazis, there are people who believe that the conspiracy theories about 9/11 are actually part of a conspiracy by Jews to make white nationalists seem retarded. :rofl:

I believe that conspiracy theorists who believe that 9/11 conspiracy theories are part of a Jewish conspiracy to make conspiracy theorists seem retarded are part of a conspiracy to make conspirationalism more feasible, thereby taking the public eye away from more pressing matters, like the more far-fetched conspiracies, which are actually the ones with the largest element of truth to them.

:D

[Sulla the Dictator]

I think the government encourages them to make its opponents seem retarded.

It doesn't help when the opposition is, actually, retarded. :p

[Sulla the Dictator]

I mean, this is exactly the same as Holocaust Denial. We have ACTUAL footage of these attacks. There are four planes which are gone, along with everyone on board. There are three buildings damaged or destroyed.

There are admissions by the organization responsible, SEVERAL TIMES. An organization which has done similar things often, and has said that it will continue to do similar things in the future.

Its all just so absurd. I feel exhausted when I read stuff like this.

[Sulla the Dictator]

I believe that conspiracy theorists who believe that 9/11 conspiracy theories are part of a Jewish conspiracy to make conspiracy theorists seem retarded are part of a conspiracy to make conspirationalism more feasible, thereby taking the public eye away from more pressing matters, like the more far-fetched conspiracies, which are actually the ones with the largest element of truth to them.

:D

I think someone has conspired to force you to say that, and you don't really believe it. :p

[Petr]

You know what the funniest part about all of this is?

That among Nazis, there are people who believe that the conspiracy theories about 9/11 are actually part of a conspiracy by Jews to make white nationalists seem retarded. :rofl:
What's so funny about the suggested method itself? Planting people in the enemy camp to make obviously kooky, exaggerated statements would be just an application of the good ol' agent provocateur spook trick.


"They guard against this by seeding all kinds of X-files style "noise" into the ranks of conspiracy students - all intended to mislead and to muddy the waters so that one clear voice of discernment, one vision for decoding the story, can't be seen or heard amid the competing din. "

http://www.whale.to/b/hoffman1.html


I would say that the key to the true art of conspiratology (or Biblical interpretation for that matter) is a proper sense of moderation, knowing when one is getting too far and letting his imagination run too loose.

I refuse to turn this into a simple-minded all-or-nothing scheme.


Petr

[ScottishStalinist1]

We have ACTUAL footage of these attacks. There are four planes which are gone, along with everyone on board. There are three buildings damaged or destroyed.

I nor my kind deny this. We just do not believe the twin towers were brought down by the planes. Also there was three buildings destroyed (the towers and WTC7) and the pentagon was damaged.

There are admissions by the organization responsible, SEVERAL TIMES. An organization which has done similar things often, and has said that it will continue to do similar things in the future.

We believe the connections to the Bin-Laden crime family and the American administration as evidence of a conspiracy.

[Burrhus]

Originally Posted by Timothy Leary
I believe that conspiracy theorists who believe that 9/11 conspiracy theories are part of a Jewish conspiracy to make conspiracy theorists seem retarded are part of a conspiracy to make conspirationalism more feasible, thereby taking the public eye away from more pressing matters, like the more far-fetched conspiracies, which are actually the ones with the largest element of truth to them.

I think someone has conspired to force you to say that, and you don't really believe it. :p

Your response, Sulla, implies that you understood what Leary wrote. If that is the case, could you please translate his comment, quoted above, for those of us who are il-Leary-ate.

[Burrhus]

I mean, this is exactly the same as Holocaust Denial. We have ACTUAL footage of these attacks. There are four planes which are gone, along with everyone on board. There are three buildings damaged or destroyed.

There are admissions by the organization responsible, SEVERAL TIMES. An organization which has done similar things often, and has said that it will continue to do similar things in the future.

Its all just so absurd. I feel exhausted when I read stuff like this.

At long last, Sulla and I agree on something.

911 revisionism and 'holocaust' revisionism are the same (in character).

That is the case because the government/media 911 conspiracy theory and the jewish 'holocaust' conspiracy theory are the same (in character).

False.

[Starr]

That among Nazis, there are people who believe that the conspiracy theories about 9/11 are actually part of a conspiracy by Jews to make white nationalists seem retarded. :rofl:

I do believe there is a good possibility that false rumors are started at times for certain purposes, such as to distract and also you get the really far-out ones to make those who do not believe the official stories in a case like this look nuts by association. I hinted as this earlier.

Where have you heard what you said above, in particular, though? A lot of people, obviously do not believe the official 9/11 story(with a whole range of different variations of who is actually responsible. the Bush administration, the illuminati, the jews, the CIA, Mossad, a mixture of two or more,,etc.etc.etc) not just white nationalists.

[ScottishStalinist1]

Indeed the majority of New Yorkers do not believe the official story.

[Trojan]

You cannot compare the placement of explosives and sequence of detonation of a regular demolition to one which, if the skeptics are correct, was designed to appear as the result of burning jet fuel at the area of impact.

So all the posters that say that the collapse looked like a controlled demolition are full of shit since the explosives were placed so they would not look like a controlled demolitions?

Explosives could have been strategically placed with the upper-most grouping at the point where the plane was expected, or planned, to hit.
However, the top photo at this page might show a demolition from top down.

http://www.rense.com/general67/9118.htm

If you put the explosives where the plane was expected to hit, you better be damn accurate. Not to mention that the towers stood for a while after impact.

I found that while searching for the photo of the WTC column which appeared to be severed in a diagonal fashion, consistent with the placement of cutter charges. Anyone got that? They show examples from regular demolitions where the charges are placed diagonally on the column so that the severed upper half 'walks' down from atop the lower half.

How could anyone gain access to both towers in such a way as to place all the required charges and have NO ONE WITNESS the event? Carpenters can't even hang pictures and diplomas in my office building without a every security and building mnt worker knowing about it.

:deadhorse:

[Sulla the Dictator]

Your response, Sulla, implies that you understood what Leary wrote. If that is the case, could you please translate his comment, quoted above, for those of us who are il-Leary-ate.

He's saying that he believes that those people I described, ie, the Nazis who think that stupid conspiracy theories are Jewish plots (Stupid conspiracy theories like this one, regarding 9/11. And among more intelligent Nazis, holocaust denial I assume) are themselves part of a conspiracy, to delegitimize the notion of conspiracy, and allow for realistic long lasting ones to continue to exist. Presumably, real world stuff like corporate collusion, or government dealings with private business.

He was joking, I assume.

[Sulla the Dictator]

I do believe there is a good possibility that false rumors are started at times for certain purposes, such as to distract and also you get the really far-out ones to make those who do not believe the official stories in a case like this look nuts by association. I hinted as this earlier.


So you are a government agent?


Where have you heard what you said above, in particular, though?


That Chris2 guy said something to that effect when all this 9/11 conspiracy rubbish started to gain currency with you people.

[Starr]

That Chris2 guy said something to that effect when all this 9/11 conspiracy rubbish started to gain currency with you people.


1 person, is that all. LOL. you spoke as if this was a common theory among "us."

[Kriger]

I have friends who work with security systems.
Years ago they used to do demonstrations concerning real security risks.
One of these demonstrations involved "maintenance/repair" work needing to be done in a high security office building setting. Supposedly, the repair team was working on the networking system of the building. Due to the route of cables, etc, through walls and ceilings and closets throughout the building, the repair crew had access to areas of the building that no one thought anything about.
The security guards knew they were there, the security guards kept an eye on what they were doing in a routine fashion, and the bldg. maintenance workers did not pay any attention, other than to make comments to the effect "Better them than us".
Various tools, "parts", "components" were brought in, looked over by security and waved through.
The security guards did not have a clue what a "bomb" looked like unassembled.
The "repair men" assembled a device with a clock that was placed in a strategic area of the bldg. When it "went off", plumes of harmless smoke came from the rigged area.
It was duly noted that :
1. Upon inspecting the "work order" and verifying that an order had been indeed placed with Acme Security Services, the security guards no longer questioned the right of these ones to be there.
2. As the repairmen trudged in and out with tools, equipment, etc, the security guards became blase' with many times a simple hand-wave indicating go on through.
3. Anyone asking "Who's that and what are they doing in the walls/ceilings etc?" were told "Oh, somebody working on the networking". No one thought any more of it.
4. Everyone, security guards included, were so happy when all the dust/banging/clanging/traipsing crawling through ceilings etc by the repairmen was through, it was a collective sigh of relief that this distraction to the normal work day was at an end.
5. No one checked any of the areas after the repairmen left, other than a cursory and superficial "look around".
It is to be noted that the device went off as scheduled, after office hours.
It is also to be noted that this corporation had the security company reassess their security and revise it as necessary.
Does anyone really think this would be difficult for a covert operations team who is highly trained and skilled in this type of work?
Quite frankly, Americans are "easy pickings". Even in a "high security" area.

[Ahknaton]

That among Nazis, there are people who believe that the conspiracy theories about 9/11 are actually part of a conspiracy by Jews to make white nationalists seem retarded.
It's a well-known disinformation technique known as "poisoning the well". I don't have any evidence to suggest that is the case, but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand as being ridiculous. A disturbing number of conspiracy theorists are "ex" military men or former cops (for example Joe Vialls & Mike Ruppert). What is possible is that they are still working for the military, as disinformation agents.

[Sulla the Dictator]

1 person, is that all. LOL. you spoke as if this was a common theory among "us."

Do you think I'm taking notes on your madness? I remember Chris2 saying it. I'm sure others have. I know that Fade has said that they might as well have, because of how embarassing WN can be when it comes to this nonsense.

[Sulla the Dictator]

It's a well-known disinformation technique known as "poisoning the well".


Can you cite an example?


I don't have any evidence to suggest that is the case


Of course.


but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand as being ridiculous.


I do.

[Kriger]

Sulla,
You have specific ideas concerning "us evil White racists".
Where do these preconceived notions come from?
Certainly not from those of us who do not fit the "profile".
And just how many fit this "profile"?
Not many.
Did you ever think that perhaps the profile and the examples of this profile given by SPLC and other "hate watch" organizations may be a bit exaggerated when it comes to the norm?
Do you realize there are people who act out this profile because they too believe this is what a White racist is supposed to say and do?

[Winston]

How could anyone gain access to both towers in such a way as to place all the required charges and have NO ONE WITNESS the event? Carpenters can't even hang pictures and diplomas in my office building without a every security and building mnt worker knowing about it.

:deadhorse:

I'm still on the fence regarding this subject. I see all the potential problems with the conspiracy theory as well as you do.

So all the posters that say that the collapse looked like a controlled demolition are full of shit since the explosives were placed so they would not look like a controlled demolitions?

Well, it's not just posters. Many people have commented that it looked like a controlled demolition, including in the early days after the attack a man from the industry. It was the way the building fell which led to these observations. No other building has fallen in that way without explosives.

[Winston]

Can you cite an example?



If he doesn't do so, will you leave the thread believing that this very basic of tactics has never been used? Surely you must be aware of it.

[Ahknaton]

It's a well-known disinformation technique known as "poisoning the well".Can you cite an example?
One example is the "Uranium Yellowcake" documents, which were erroneously cited by the Bush administration to claim that Iraq was seeking material for nuclear weapons from Africa, and were later found to be a forgery. Italian intelligence agencies later claimed that the documents were actually concocted by French intelligence (France was of course against the invasion of Iraq) so that they would be picked up my American intelligence agencies, so that the revelation of a forgery would discredit the case for war against Iraq when the forgery was revealed:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/05/wuran05.xml/

See also: http://www.slate.com/id/2103795

Another possible example is the "Rathergate" memo, that was published by CBS news, which some people have speculated was actually created by Republican operatives with the intent of discrediting investigations into Bush's military service.

Note: I am not saying this is necessarily the case with the Rathergate memo or with September 11 conspiracy theories, however I think it's definately possible and reasonable to suspect that intelligence agencies have floated some bogus conspiracy theories in order to discredit conspiracy theorists.

[IlluSionS667]

but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand as being ridiculous.I do.

You are so good at illustrating your own narrowmindedness that you only need to say a few words to make you look like a fool :rofl:

[Trojan]

I have friends who work with security systems.
Years ago they used to do demonstrations concerning real security risks.
One of these demonstrations involved "maintenance/repair" work needing to be done in a high security office building setting. Supposedly, the repair team was working on the networking system of the building. Due to the route of cables, etc, through walls and ceilings and closets throughout the building, the repair crew had access to areas of the building that no one thought anything about.
The security guards knew they were there, the security guards kept an eye on what they were doing in a routine fashion, and the bldg. maintenance workers did not pay any attention, other than to make comments to the effect "Better them than us".
Various tools, "parts", "components" were brought in, looked over by security and waved through.
The security guards did not have a clue what a "bomb" looked like unassembled.
The "repair men" assembled a device with a clock that was placed in a strategic area of the bldg. When it "went off", plumes of harmless smoke came from the rigged area.
It was duly noted that :
1. Upon inspecting the "work order" and verifying that an order had been indeed placed with Acme Security Services, the security guards no longer questioned the right of these ones to be there.
2. As the repairmen trudged in and out with tools, equipment, etc, the security guards became blase' with many times a simple hand-wave indicating go on through.
3. Anyone asking "Who's that and what are they doing in the walls/ceilings etc?" were told "Oh, somebody working on the networking". No one thought any more of it.
4. Everyone, security guards included, were so happy when all the dust/banging/clanging/traipsing crawling through ceilings etc by the repairmen was through, it was a collective sigh of relief that this distraction to the normal work day was at an end.
5. No one checked any of the areas after the repairmen left, other than a cursory and superficial "look around".
It is to be noted that the device went off as scheduled, after office hours.
It is also to be noted that this corporation had the security company reassess their security and revise it as necessary.
Does anyone really think this would be difficult for a covert operations team who is highly trained and skilled in this type of work?
Quite frankly, Americans are "easy pickings". Even in a "high security" area.

But the security guards did see them and note their movements.

In our conspiracy based scenario, no one noted what must have been several days of destructive construction on mutliple floors in both towers and WTC 7 by many individuals.

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/Districts/Blasting/ThreeRivers/TRSMain.htm

When I watched the destrution of Three Rivers Stadium, it was obvious that thousands of man hours were put into the task - yet conspirators claim this work was done over the weekend, on all three buildings, with no witnesses.

:deadhorse:

[Kriger]

But the security guards did see them and note their movements.

In our conspiracy based scenario, no one noted what must have been several days of destructive construction on mutliple floors in both towers and WTC 7 by many individuals.

http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/minres/Districts/Blasting/ThreeRivers/TRSMain.htm

When I watched the destrution of Three Rivers Stadium, it was obvious that thousands of man hours were put into the task - yet conspirators claim this work was done over the weekend, on all three buildings, with no witnesses.

:deadhorse:

What conspirators are you speaking of?
I do not consider outlandish claims to be proof of anything other than outlandish claims.
Anyone can come up with any number of outlandish claims to "prove" the official version must be the "truth".
I would suggest that anyone interested read up on thermite, its uses, and what it looks like when used in demolitions.
I do know that the official version is a lot of bunk.
Offering bunk conspiracy theories does not refute the bunk of the official version.
What do you care what anyone else thinks, anyway?
Does it interfere with your Steelers games?
If people want to discuss this, I do not see why your refutations should interfere with those who would like to discuss it.
The official version is the dead horse.

[Sulla the Dictator]

Sulla,
You have specific ideas concerning "us evil White racists".


Through observation, I have a fairly accurate picture of you people.


Where do these preconceived notions come from?


Experience.


Certainly not from those of us who do not fit the "profile".


Everyone believes they're a unique snowflake.

Not so.

[Sulla the Dictator]

If he doesn't do so, will you leave the thread believing that this very basic of tactics has never been used? Surely you must be aware of it.

Its a little too convenient.

[Sulla the Dictator]

One example is the "Uranium Yellowcake" documents, which were erroneously cited by the Bush administration to claim that Iraq was seeking material for nuclear weapons from Africa, and were later found to be a forgery. Italian intelligence agencies later claimed that the documents were actually concocted by French intelligence (France was of course against the invasion of Iraq) so that they would be picked up my American intelligence agencies, so that the revelation of a forgery would discredit the case for war against Iraq when the forgery was revealed


But that isn't similar to what you're talking about. This is about governments with different aims sabotaging diplomatic efforts in the United Nations, more or less. What you referred to earlier was a government manipulating its own people with actual agents of the state spreading nonsense in order to make the opposition look like nutters.


Another possible example is the "Rathergate" memo, that was published by CBS news, which some people have speculated was actually created by Republican operatives with the intent of discrediting investigations into Bush's military service.


"Some people" being leftists who were a bit embarassed by the source, a guy who has been a harsh critic of Bush when he was still involved in local Texas politics, long before the Presidency.

[Sulla the Dictator]

You are so good at illustrating your own narrowmindedness that you only need to say a few words to make you look like a fool :rofl:

Tell us more about wizards.

[Ahknaton]

But that isn't similar to what you're talking about. This is about governments with different aims sabotaging diplomatic efforts in the United Nations, more or less. What you referred to earlier was a government manipulating its own people with actual agents of the state spreading nonsense in order to make the opposition look like nutters.
Both are examples of the "poisoning the well" disinformation technique.

[Petr]

Notice how Cockburn gives credence to Pearl Harbor LIHOP scenario - he's not merely parroting orthodox establishment anti-conspiracy line.

Btw, I didn't like the cliched anti-Christian tone of his voice, comparing the resurrection of Christ to conspiracy theories.


http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09092006.html


September 9/10 , 2006

How They Let the Guilty Parties of 9/11 Slip Off the Hook

The 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN


You trip over one fundamental idiocy of the 9/11 conspiracy nuts -- -- the ones who say Bush and Cheney masterminded the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon -- in the first paragraph of the opening page of the book by one of their high priests, David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor. “In many respects,” Griffin writes, “the strongest evidence provided by critics of the official account involves the events of 9/11 itself… In light of standard procedures for dealing with hijacked airplanes… not one of these planes should have reached its target, let alone all three of them.”

The operative word here is “should”. One characteristic of the nuts is that they have a devout, albeit preposterous belief in American efficiency, thus many of them start with the racist premise that “Arabs in caves” weren’t capable of the mission. They believe that military systems work the way Pentagon press flacks and aerospace salesmen say they should work. They believe that at 8.14 am, when AA flight 11 switched off its radio and transponder, an FAA flight controller should have called the National Military Command center and NORAD. They believe, citing reverently (this is from high priest Griffin) “the US Air Force’s own website”, that an F-15 could have intercepted AA flight 11 “by 8.24, and certainly no later than 8.30”.

They appear to have read no military history, which is too bad because if they did they’d know that minutely planned operations – let alone responses to an unprecedented emergency -- screw up with monotonous regularity, by reason of stupidity, cowardice, venality, weather and all the other whims of providence.

According to the minutely prepared plans of the Strategic Air Command, an impending Soviet attack would have prompted the missile silos in North Dakota to open, and the ICBMs to arc towards Moscow and kindred targets. The tiny number of test launches actually attempted all failed, whereupon SAC gave up testing. Was it badly designed equipment, human incompetence, defense contractor venality or… CONSPIRACY? (In that case, presumably, a Communist conspiracy, as outlined by ancestors of the present nuts, ever intent on identifying those who would stab America in the back.)

Did the British and French forces in 1940 break and flee a Wehrmacht capable of only one lunge, because of rotten leadership, terrible planning, epic cowardice, or … CONSPIRACY? Did the April 24, 1980 effort to rescue the hostages in the US embassy in Teheran fail because a sandstorm disabled three of the eight helicopters, because the helicopters were poorly made, because of a lousy plan or because of agents of William Casey and the Republican National Committee poured sugar into their gas tanks in yet another CONSPIRACY?

Have the US military’s varying attempts to explain why F-15s didn’t intercept and shoot down the hijacked planes stemmed from absolutely predictable attempts to cover up the usual screw-ups, or because of CONSPIRACY? Is Mr Cohen in his little store at the end of the block hiking his prices because he wants to make a buck, or because his rent just went up or because the Jews want to take over the world? August Bebel said anti-Semitism is the socialism of the fools. These days the 9/11 conspiracy fever threatens to become the “socialism” of the left, and the passe-partout of many libertarians.

It’s awful. My in-box overflows each day with fresh “proofs” of how the WTC buildings were actually demolished, often accompanied by harsh insults identifying me as a “gate-keeper” preventing the truth from getting out. I meet people who start quietly, asking me “what I think about 9/11”. What they are actually trying to find out is whether I’m part of the coven. I imagine it was like being a Stoic in the second century A.D. going for a stroll in the Forum and meeting some fellow asking, with seeming casualness, whether it’s possible to feed 5,000 people on five loaves of bread and a couple of fish.

Indeed, at my school in the 1950s the vicar used to urge on us Frank Morison’s book, Who Moved The Stone? It sought to demonstrate, with exhaustive citation from the Gospels, that since on these accounts no human had moved the stone from in front of Joseph of Arimathea’s tomb, it must beyond the shadow of a doubt have been an angel who rolled it aside and let Jesus out, so he could astonish the mourners and then Ascend. Of course Morison didn’t admit into his argument the possibility that angels don’t exist, or that the gospel writers were making it up.

It’s the same pattern with the 9/11 nuts, who proffer what they demurely call “disturbing questions”, though they disdain all answers but their own. They seize on coincidences and force them into sequences they deem to be logical and significant. Like mad Inquisitors, they pounce on imagined clues in documents and photos, torturing the data –- as the old joke goes about economists -- till the data confess. Their treatment of eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence is whimsical. Apparent anomalies that seem to nourish their theories are brandished excitedly; testimony that undermines their theories – like witnesses of a large plane hitting the Pentagon -- is contemptuously brushed aside.

Anyone familiar with criminal, particularly death penalty defense – I had such an opportunity for a number of years – will know that there are always anomalies the prosecution cannot account for and that the defense teams can exploit, in hopes of swaying a jury either in the guilt or penalty phase of a trial. Time and again I would see the defense team spend days and weeks, even months, back-checking on a possibly vulnerable link in the evidentiary chain that could be attacked, at least to the all-important level of creating “reasonable doubt” in the mind of a juror. Expert witnesses would be imported at great expense –- unlike states such as Texas, the justice system of California is generous in the provision of money for death penalty defense -- to challenge the prosecution’s forensic evidence. Such challenges weren’t hard to mount. Contrary to prosecutorial claims, there is far less instrinsic certainty in forensic evaluation than is commonly supposed, as regards fingerprints, landing marks on bullets and so forth.

But minute focus of a death penalty defense team on one such weak link often leads to a distorted view of the whole case. I remember more than one case where, after weeks of interviewing witnesses at one particular crime scene, the defense’s investigator had collected enough witness reports to mount a decent attack on this aspect of the prosecution’s overall case. At least this is what I thought, hearing the daily bulletins of the investigator. But when, in such instances, the camera pulled back, so to speak, and I saw the prosecution’s whole case – chain of evidence, cumulative witness statements, accused’s own movements and subsequent statements – it became clear enough to me and, in that case to the juries , that the accused were incontestably guilty. But even then, such cases had a vigorous afterlife, with the defense trying to muster up grounds for an appeal, on the basis of testimony and evidence withheld by the prosecution, faulty rulings by the judge, a prejudiced jury member and so on. A seemingly “cut and dried case” is very rarely beyond challenge, even though in essence it actually may well be just that, “cut and dried”.

Anyone who ever looked at the JFK assassination will know that there are endless anomalies and loose ends. Eyewitness testimony – as so often – is conflicting, forensic evidence possibly misconstrued, mishandled or just missing. But in my view, the Warren Commission, as confirmed in almost all essentials by the House Committee on Assassinations in the late 1970s, had it right and Oswald fired the fatal shots from the Schoolbook Depository. The evidentiary chain for his guilt is persuasive, and the cumulative scenarios of the conspiracy nuts entirely unconvincing. But of course – as the years roll by, and even though no death bed confession has ever buttressed those vast, CIA-related scenarios -- the nuts keep on toiling away, their obsessions as unflagging as ever.

Naturally, there are conspiracies. I think there is strong evidence that FDR did have knowledge that a Japanese naval force in the north Pacific was going to launch an attack on Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt thought it would be a relatively mild assault and thought it would be the final green light to get the US into the war.

Of course it’s very probable that the FBI or US military intelligence, even the CIA, had penetrated the Al Qaeda team planning the 9/11 attacks; that intelligence reports – some are already known – piled up in various Washington bureaucracies pointing to the impending onslaught and even the manner in which it might be carried out.

The history of intelligence operations is profuse with example of successful intelligence collection, but also fatal slowness to act on the intelligence, along with eagnerness not to compromise the security and future usefulness of the informant, who has to prove his own credentials by even pressing for prompt action by the plotters. Sometime an undercover agent will actually propose an action, either to deflect efforts away from some graver threat, or to put the plotters in a position where they can be caught red-handed. In their penetrations of environmental groups the FBI certainly did this.

Long before the Yom Kippur war, a CIA analyst noted Egyptian orders from a German engineering firm, and deduced from the type and size of equipment thus ordered that Egypt was planning an attack across the Suez canal. He worked out the probable size of the Egyptian force and the likely time window for the attack. His superiors at the CIA sat on the report. When the Egyptian army finally attacked on October 6, 1973 the CIA high command ordered up the long-buried report, dusted it off and sent it over to the White House, marked “current intelligence”. Was there a “conspiracy” by the CIA high command to allow Israel to be taken by surprise? I doubt it.

Bureaucratic inertia and caution prevailed, until the moment came for decisive CYA acitvity. The nuts make dizzying “deductive” leaps. There is a one particularly vigorous coven which has established to its own satisfaction that the original NASA moon landing was faked, and never took place. This “conspiracy” would have required the complicity of thousands of people , all of whom have kept their mouths shut. The proponents of the “fake moon landing” plot tend to overlap with the JFK and 9/11 nuts.

One notorious “deductive” leap involves flight 77, which on 9/11 ended up crashing into the Pentagon. There are photos of the impact of the “object” -- i.e., the Boeing 757, flight 77 -- that seem to show the sort of hole a missile might make. Ergo, the nuts assert, it WAS a missile and a 757 didn’t hit the Pentagon. As regards the hole, my brother Andrew -- writing a book about Rumsfeld and the DoD during his tenure -- has seen photos taken within 30 minutes of Pentagon impact clearly showing outline of entire plane including wings. This was visible momentarily when the smoke blew away

And if it was a missile, what happened to the 757? Did the conspirators shoot it down somewhere else, or force it down and then kill the passengers? Why plan to demolish the towers with pre-placed explosives if your conspiracy includes control of the two planes that hit them. Why bother with the planes at all. Why blame Osama if your fall guy is Saddam Hussein? Why involve the Israeli “art students”.

The nuts simultaneously credit their targets – the Bush-Cheney “conspirators” -- with superhuman ingenuity and grotesque carelessness. In Webster Griffin Tarpley’s book “9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA” he writes that “in an interview with Parade magazine, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld also referred to the object which hit the Pentagon as a ‘missile’. Was this a Freudian slip by the loquacious defense chief?” (And, a nut might add, is it mere coincidence that Webster Griffin Tarpley shares one of his names with David Ray Griffin?

The demolition scenario is classic who-moved-the-stonery. The WTC towers didn’t fall down because they were badly built as a consequence of corruption, incompetence, regulatory evasions by the Port Authority, and because they were struck by huge planes loaded with jet fuel. No, they fell because Dick Cheney’s agents methodically planted demolition charges in the preceding days. It was a conspiracy of thousands, all of whom –- party to mass murder –- have held their tongues ever since. The “conspiracy” is always open-ended as to the number of conspirators, widening steadily to include all the people involved in the execution and cover-up of the demolition of the Towers and the onsslaught on the Pentagon, from the teams acquiring the explosives and themissile, inserting the explosives in the relevant floors of three vast buildings, (moving day after day among the unsuspecting office workers), then on 9/11 activating the detonators.

Subsequently the conspiracy includes the disposers of the steel and rubble, the waste recyclers in Staten Island and perhaps even the Chinese who took the salvaged incriminating metal for use in the Three Gorges dam, where it will submerged in water and concretye for ever. Tens of thousands of people, all silent as the tomb to this day.

Of course the buildings didn’t suddenly fall at a speed inexplicable in terms of physics unless caused by carefully pre-placed explosives, detonated by the ruthless Bush-Cheney operatives. High grade steel can bend disastrously under extreme heat. People inside who survived the collapse didn’t hear a series of explosions. As discussed in Wayne Barrett and Dan Collin’s excellent book Grand Illusion, about Rudy Giuliani and 9/11, helicopter pilots radioed warnings nine minutes before the final collapse that the South Tower might well go down and, repeatedly, as much as 25 minutes before the North Tower’s fall.

What Barrett and Collins brilliantly show are the actual corrupt conspiracies on Giuliani’s watch: the favoritism to Motorola which saddled the firemen with radios that didn’t work; the ability of the Port Authority to skimp on fire protection, the mayor’s catastrophic failure in the years before 9/11/2001 to organize an effective unified emergency command that would have meant that cops and firemen could have communicated; that many firemen wouldn’t have unnecessarily entered the Towers; that people in the Towers wouldn’t have been told by 911 emergency operators to stay in place; and that firemen could have heard the helicopter warnings and the final Mayday messages that prompted most of the NYPD men to flee the Towers.

That’s the real political world, in which Giuliani and others have never been held accountable. The nuts disdain the real world because, like much of the left and liberal sectors, they have promoted Bush, Cheney and the Neo-Cons to an elevated status as the Arch Demons of American history, instead of being just one more team running the American empire, a team of more than usual stupidity and incompetence (characteristics I personally favor in imperial leaders.) The Conspiracy Nuts have combined to produce a huge distraction, just as Danny Sheehan did with his Complaint, that mesmerized and distracted much of the Nicaraguan Solidarity Movement in the 1980s, and which finally collapsed in a Florida courtroom almost as quickly as the Towers.


* Footnote: I should add that one particular conspiracy nut, seeing that Roosevelt’s grandson Ford – a schoolteacher in Los Angeles – was for a while, some years ago, on the board of CounterPunch’s parent non-profit, the Institute for the Advancement of Journalistic Clarity – wrote an enormous onslaught on CounterPunch a while ago, “proving” to his own satisfaction that CounterPunch was a pawn of the Democratic Party, the CIA and kindred darker forces. I suppose the fact that CounterPunch attacked the Democratic Party and the CIA on a weekly basis was just one more example of our cunning in deflecting suspicion away from our true sponsors. The fact that from time to time that we also quite regularly attacked FDR – and posited his foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor – should again be taken as evidence of our cunning in deflecting suspicion away from Ford’s supervisory roile in our affairs. In fact we’d put Ford on the board in the hopes (vain, as they turned out to be) that he would persuade film stars to give CounterPunch money.


A much shorter, earlier version of the column ran in the print edition of The Nation that went to press last Thursday.

[Blond Knight]

I mean, this is exactly the same as Holocaust Denial. We have ACTUAL footage of these attacks. There are four planes which are gone, along with everyone on board. There are three buildings damaged or destroyed.



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Too bad for the holocaust promoters that they don't have film footage of an actual gas chamber in operation. Can you imagine how many hours upon hours of "See it Now - The Holocaust - a ten hour special on the Hitler Channel" we would be subjected to each week?

Back to 9-11, Remember all the eye witnesses to TWA Flight 800 who thought they saw what could have been a missile streaking upwards to impact with Flight 800? No, no,no the fedgov said. These people are all mistaken, and what they saw was debris falling downwards from the stricken plane. Stupid frikin people, don't know the difference between up and down.

As to the possibility of false flag operations to discredit critics of the official story on 9-11, consider this article from whatreallyhappened.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Excerpt: The "Pod People" And The Plane
That Crashed Into the Pentagon

Right now, government shills are working hard to trick web sites into running the claim that a passenger jet did not really hit the Pentagon.

This is an old intelligence trick called "Poisoning the well", the intentional promotion of lies to blend with an embarrassing truth to discredit it. The government shills are trying to conceal real news stories such as the Israeli Spy Ring and its connections to the attacks on the World Trade Towers. So, we get hoax stories poured onto the net by government propagandists, to be used by the media to attack the credibility of anyone who dares doubt the official story.

At some point in the near future, photographs, or video will be "discovered" clearly showing the impact, and the mainstream media will have a field day ridiculing those "kooky Internet web sites" and their "silly conspiracy theories", all based on a silly theory the government is itself planting on the web

Link to story (with pictures) - http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ppfinal.html

[Trojan]

Does it interfere with your Steelers games?

Very little interferes with my ability to watch Steelers games.:D

[Kriger]

Very little interferes with my ability to watch Steelers games.:D

Good. You had me worried about you.

:)

[Sudaev]

So what happened to the passengers, did the Mossad just eliminate them?

Believe it or not, that's what those idiots think. :nuts: I've been round and round with them on another forum.

[Starr]

Believe it or not, that's what those idiots think. :nuts: I've been round and round with them on another forum.


That is because you are a kike or kike a like spreading lies and trying to distract and plant doubt in the minds of all those noble net warriors who know the truth, which they get from such reliable sites as these:

www.whatreallyhappened.com/

www.rense.com.

How dare you question their holy doctrine.:nono: Only a jew would do that.

[ScottishStalinist1]

So what happened to the passengers, did the Mossad just eliminate them?

They are probably next to the Titanic. That is completely irrelevant to the 9/11 alternative conspiracy theory.

[Trojan]

They are probably next to the Titanic. That is completely irrelevant to the 9/11 alternative conspiracy theory.

No its not irrelevant.

[Ahknaton]

New 9/11 video:

http://media.revver.com/broadcast/59686/video.mov

[Petr]

Justin Raimondo seems to be strongly hinting towards LIHOP possibility - US and Israeli intelligence knowing about the coming attack, like in Beirut 1983 - while deriding MIHOP schemes as ridiculous and distracting.


http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9683


September 11, 2006

The 9/11 Enigma, Revisited

Why do many Americans doubt the official narrative?

by Justin Raimondo


A thousand years from now, who will observe this doleful anniversary? From that perspective, will the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history seem like a blip on the wide screen of history, or a turning point in the saga of the rising American Imperium?

Although I'd be willing to bet on the latter, we can't know, but one thing we do know for sure: 9/11 looms large over the world of 2006. Its gigantic shadow cast a pall over the West, paralyzing rational thought and inaugurating a new age of perpetual war – a "clash of civilizations," in Samuel Huntington's phrase. In the five years since the twin towers fell, the clear victor in this epic battle is Osama bin Laden, still at large and threatening us with fresh attacks.

His trail long since grown "stone cold," as the Washington Post puts it, bin Laden is a hero to millions. I would venture to say he is the most popular Muslim leader, and certainly the preeminent Middle Eastern Arab leader. The inspirer and progenitor of 9/11 has attained the status of a living myth, and, as long as he remains at large, his mythic stature will only grow. And yet President Bush, after initially declaring he wanted the al-Qaeda leader "dead or alive," did not mention him by name for years. However, that kind of pretense is hard to keep up, and certainly this dark anniversary required the White House to suddenly recall Osama bin Forgotten.

One can see why they'd rather forget, because the mere mention of his name is enough to invoke the circumstances whereby he was allowed to get away. In what sense this result was "allowed" is for history to judge. All I can do is ruefully note what the Washington Post reported:

"Many factors have combined in the five years since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to make the pursuit more difficult. They include the lack of CIA access to people close to al-Qaeda's inner circle; Pakistan's unwillingness to pursue him; the reemergence of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan; the strength of the Iraqi insurgency, which has depleted U.S. military and intelligence resources; and the U.S. government's own disorganization."

The diversion of resources away from the fight against al-Qaeda and toward effecting "regime change" in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East has been a godsend to the Islamist radicals who burn with hatred for America and yearn to top the terror of 9/11. In an excellent CNN documentary on bin Laden shown the other night, Peter Bergen reported the post-9/11 judgment of many of bin Laden's comrades was that the whole thing was a mistake. Suddenly they had this unrelenting nemesis on their backs: a whole layer of the top leadership was lopped off, and those that survived were on the run.

The big news in the above-sourced Washington Post story, however, is that bin Laden's own flight from the mountains of Tora Bora was apparently captured on videotape, which has been obtained by the CIA. The tape shows bin Laden

"[C]onfidently instructing his party how to dig holes in the ground to lie in undetected at night. A bomb dropped by a U.S. aircraft can be seen exploding in the distance. 'We were there last night,' bin Laden says without much concern in his voice. He was in or headed toward Pakistan, counterterrorism officials think.

"That was December 2001. Only two months later, Bush decided to pull out most of the special operations troops and their CIA counterparts in the paramilitary division that were leading the hunt for bin Laden in Afghanistan to prepare for war in Iraq, said Flynt L. Leverett, then an expert on the Middle East at the National Security Council.

"'I was appalled when I learned about it,' said Leverett, who has become an outspoken critic of the administration's counterterrorism policy. 'I don't know of anyone who thought it was a good idea. It's very likely that bin Laden would be dead or in American custody if we hadn't done that.' Several officers confirmed that the number of special operations troops was reduced in March 2002."

Perhaps just as appalling is this eerie video, which makes one wonder just how closely we tracked bin Laden. Unless they just plucked it off the Internet – could it have been part of al-Qaeda's propaganda effort, posted on some jihadist Web site? – our government's possession of the tape indicates just how close they came to him, and how just a little more sustained effort might very well have nabbed him.

Given the above, we can say, with fair certainty – and a certain rectitude in our voice – that bin Laden was allowed to get away. Not inadvertently, as an unintended consequence of a mistaken policy, but as the result of a conscious decision that made the invasion of Iraq a higher priority than the capture of the terrorist leader. It was more important to carry out the neoconservative agenda in the Middle East – to raise the flag of the president's "global democratic revolution" – by force of arms. It was more vital to our interests to enable the Israelis in their campaign to build an impregnable Fortress Israel out of the broken lives and hopes of their Palestinian helots, to give a "green light" to the invasion of Lebanon, and to set up Syria and Iran for "regime change."

Bin Laden? 9/11? Forget it, buster – that was just a pretext, a catalyzing event that allowed a well-organized network with a preexisting agenda to move quickly and with determination to implement its plan. The recently issued "phase two" of the Senate Intelligence Committee report – see here – shows how this administration bent the facts and twisted the intelligence to lie us into war. It turns out the CIA warned the administration that there were no links to al-Qaeda, which we knew already, but the really devastating part of the report is the section dealing with the role of Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress.

That the INC was simultaneously an Iranian intelligence asset and an American client, and that we knew this and still sponsored Chalabi & Co., tells us all we need to know about this administration and its Bizarro World mindset. As the report notes, on March 3, 1995, "Chalabi made contact with Iranian intelligence officials to discuss Iran's positive support on the planned action [a coup against Saddam] and their support for possible action against Southern Iraq." He did so with American approval: our guy "was present outside the meeting space, was seen by the Iranians, and was aware that Chalabi intended for the Iranians to see him there as a signal of U.S. support."

Yesterday, we worked in tandem with the Iranians to overthrow Saddam Hussein, with our agent standing literally outside the door as Chalabi chatted with his Iranian handlers, and today we are ringing the alarm bells over the supposedly dire threat posed by Tehran. Our State Department routinely refers to Iran as the world's number-one exporter of terrorism, and yet here we have solid evidence of an American-INC-Iranian axis of convenience. We pride ourselves on never negotiating with purported terrorists, and yet we are apparently not above allying with them. If this is supposed to be some sort of Machiavellian deviousness, then it seems the Americans outwitted themselves: they are fighting a monster of their own creation.

Iran is yet another diversion away from al-Qaeda, and a conflict with Tehran is bound to help bin Laden with what is, perhaps, his biggest problem, and that is the big split in the Muslim "Ummah" between Shi'ite and Sunni doctrine. Instead of fighting each other in Iraq, the sectarian factions will turn their sights on a common enemy: the invading Crusaders, as bin Laden would put it, and their Israeli allies. Michael Scheuer, head of the CIA's bin Laden unit until 1999 and author of Imperial Hubris, says that the U.S. is bin Laden's "one indispensable ally," and it certainly seems that way, doesn't it? We couldn't be helping his cause more if we directly subsidized it: our Middle East policy, spelled out plainly as unconditional support for Israel and local despots, is a virtual recruiting poster for al-Qaeda. The Iraq war, the rape of Lebanon, the gathering threat to Syria and Iran – if bin Laden is telling the Muslim world that the Crusaders are moving to eliminate Islam from the face of the earth, then our actions confirm his prognosis on a daily basis.

There are those who deny the very existence of bin Laden and disdain al-Qaeda as a myth, the creation of the "real" perpetrators of the worst terrorist attack in American history – the U.S. government itself. You and I saw those two planes crash into the World Trade Center, and we saw the Pentagon hit – but who are you going to believe, those Alexander Cockburn calls the "9/11 conspiracy nuts" or your lying eyes? I agree with Cockburn's critique of the utterly daffy "controlled demolition" thesis, and the equally crackpot delusion that the Pentagon was hit by a missile instead of a jetliner. Yet there is more here than meets the eye…

A whole movement has grown up, apparently, the so-called "9/11 Truth" movement, which seeks to show… well, it isn't quite clear. Some 9/11-Truthers think an evil cabal within the U.S. government plotted the whole thing from beginning to end, although when it comes to naming names and drawing up a bill of indictment, the Truthers stumble on their lack of specifics. The jet fighters that might have intercepted the hijacked planes were delayed – deliberately, of course, since no government has ever been guilty of incompetence, heaven forfend! – and the rest is history. And if you think these people are just fringe nut-jobs, take a look at the polls. As the Seattle Times reports:

"A recent Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll of 1,010 Americans found that 36 percent suspect the U.S. government promoted the attacks or intentionally sat on its hands. Sixteen percent believe explosives brought down the towers. Twelve percent believe a cruise missile hit the Pentagon. Distrust percolates more strongly near Ground Zero. A Zogby International poll of New York City residents two years ago found 49.3 percent believed the government 'consciously failed to act.'"

These people are not crazy: they are smart enough to question the "accepted" narrative, and their skepticism of governmental beneficence is healthy and quintessentially American. The problem with the 9/11 Truthers is not that they question the conventional 9/11 narrative, but that their alternative explanations defy common sense – and divert attention away from the core mystery of 9/11, which is: how in the name of all that's holy did a conspiracy envisioned on such a large scale, and stretching over at least five years, go undetected?

Yes, governments are incompetent, but there were key people in government who were fully aware of the threat posed by bin Laden and his followers. In the months and weeks leading up to the attack, the president was presented with the evidence, including an Aug. 6 memo entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States." [.pdf]

It's not as if, prior to 9/11, the terrorist threat had never been raised: I seem to remember at least one New Year when the color code would have gone to a slightly reddish orange if we'd had color-coded terror alerts back then. Yet, in spite of the multi-billions spent on "anti-terrorist" measures, 19 hijackers managed to penetrate American society and carry out a synchronized terror assault on two major targets, twin symbols of U.S. financial and military power.

For all the scrutiny invited by bin Laden, it surpasses understanding how not even an inkling of his plan was picked up by any intelligence agency, anywhere. None of our allies picked up the scent: not the Brits, not the intelligence services of our local satraps, including the Pakistanis, with their links to the Taliban – not even the Mossad, with its legendary prowess as the most ruthlessly efficient of the lot.

Of course, if you believe Carl Cameron and Fox News, which reported that the Israelis did indeed know that something pretty awful was going to happen on Sept. 11, 2001, and somehow neglected to tell us all they knew, then this last does not apply. In mid-December 2001, Cameron told his viewers:

"Since Sept. 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, either under the new PATRIOT anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations. A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States.

"There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9/11 attacks, but investigators suspect that the Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are 'tie-ins.' But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, 'evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information.'"

So how come the 9/11 conspiracy nuts aren't demanding the immediate declassification of the evidence for these alleged "tie-ins"? After all, here is a source that can hardly be accused of being part of the Bush-bashing Left, and is not exactly hostile to Israel. On account of its pro-administration, pro-Israel orientation, Fox News' reporting on this subject is all the more credible. You'd think the conspiracy theorists would be all over it. But you'd be wrong. Instead, they prattle on about "controlled demolition," a missile striking the Pentagon, and other wild "theories" that only discredit all attempts to examine and revise the official 9/11 narrative. Like Bush going into Iraq, the "demolitionists" and their brethren divert scarce resources – and limited attention spans – away from the really baffling anomalies, like this, for example.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744&contrassID=/has%5C

The suspicions many Americans have about the official 9/11 narrative don't seem all that unreasonable to me. What does seem unreasonable is the attempt to deride any effort to put 9/11 in its full context as "conspiracy theory" and worse. The unsolved mysteries of 9/11 continue to haunt us, and will remain with us as long as the real history of that signal event is shrouded in murk and protected by taboos.

[Petr]

http://blog.lewrockwell.com/lewrw/archives/011324.html


9-11 conspiracies and the cult of the omnipotent state

Posted by Norman Singleton at September 11, 2006 07:08 PM

Charles I have thought for some time that a belief in the omnipotent state is the root cause of some people's instance that some in the government "were in on" 9-11. These people were likely taught at a very young age that the government had the power to make all things right and protect them from all evil. Thus, they cannot accept that the government could be so incompetent as to fail to stop something like the 9-11 attacks. Therefore, the only logical explanation is that those in charge of the state where somehow "in on" the events of 9-11. The logical result of this type of thinking is an emphasis on getting state power into the hands of good people, so we can all benefit from the all-mighty state. Libertarians should have no problem believing that the state is both evil and stupid.

[IlluSionS667]

No its not irrelevant.

Yes it is.

Flight 93 safely landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport where it was evacuated by government personnel into an unused NASA research center. Based on the number of passengers aboard, flight 93 is believed to have contained also the passengers of another plane. It is unclear what happened to the passengers after they were sent to the NASA research center or what happened to the passengers of the other planes involved.

It doesn't really matter what happened to them, though. Whether the government dumped them in concrete, sent them to the bottom of the ocean or started using them for wicked experiments, the fact remains that they disappeared and that there are dozens of anomalies that do not match the official story of what happened on September 11, 2001.

[Starr]

Oh my, where did you read that?(not that I haven't heard similar things from others before) I don't quite get why everyone believes this whole thing was so elaborate. It did not need to be and it would be better accomplished with less questions if it was not.

[IlluSionS667]

Oh my, where did you read that?

It's all over the net, however I first stumbled on the Cleveland Hopkins Airport issue in the Loose Change 2 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946593973848835726) vid.

If you detractors would actually watch this film (which is one of the most prominent video sources on 9/11), you wouldn't have to ask these silly questions.

I don't quite get why everyone believes this whole thing was so elaborate. It did not need to be and it would be better accomplished with less questions if it was not.

True. Nevertheless, the facts are clear and show that it was this elaborate. If you would actually have cared to check out any of the primary material available and compare it with the official story, you would have known that.

[Trojan]

Yes it is.

Flight 93 safely landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport where it was evacuated by government personnel into an unused NASA research center. Based on the number of passengers aboard, flight 93 is believed to have contained also the passengers of another plane. It is unclear what happened to the passengers after they were sent to the NASA research center or what happened to the passengers of the other planes involved.

It doesn't really matter what happened to them, though. Whether the government dumped them in concrete, sent them to the bottom of the ocean or started using them for wicked experiments, the fact remains that they disappeared and that there are dozens of anomalies that do not match the official story of what happened on September 11, 2001.

If its not irrelevant, then why are you addressing the issue?

Not that your post has anything to back it up other than "its all over the web" ...

[IlluSionS667]

If its not irrelevant, then why are you addressing the issue?

If it's not relevant, you mean? The only reason I'm addressing the issue, is because you mentionned it.

Not that your post has anything to back it up other than "its all over the web" ...

Oh, come on. Do some research, you <INSULT DELETED>. I'm not your teacher who's supposed to present you everything on a platter.

On the morning of 9/11 a little known Cincinnati television station ran a story saying Flight 93 landed at Cleveland International Airport instead of crashing in Pennsylvania as claimed in the official government story.

Reporters at WCPO Channel 9 quoted then Cleveland Mayor Michael R. White as saying "a Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing due to a bomb threat," the airplane landing safely, moved to a secure location and evacuated.

The early morning report went on to say United Airlines verified the plane as Flight 93, but was also deeply concerned about another jetliner in the vicinity, Flight 175, flying from Boston to Los Angeles.

Peter Jennings (ABC) reported at about 11 am on 9/11/01 that they had received a call from Michael White. That White told them that an unknown United Plane with a suspected bomb scare had just landed and was sitting on the runway. This airplane was certainly not Delta Flight 1989, the other alleged emergency landing.

Some more details can be found at the Cleveland Airport Mystery page (http://911review.org/inn.globalfreepress/Cleveland_Airport_Mystery.html).

[Sudaev]

Yes it is.

Flight 93 safely landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport where it was evacuated by government personnel into an unused NASA research center. Based on the number of passengers aboard, flight 93 is believed to have contained also the passengers of another plane. It is unclear what happened to the passengers after they were sent to the NASA research center or what happened to the passengers of the other planes involved.

It doesn't really matter what happened to them, though. Whether the government dumped them in concrete, sent them to the bottom of the ocean or started using them for wicked experiments, the fact remains that they disappeared and that there are dozens of anomalies that do not match the official story of what happened on September 11, 2001.

:rofl: :crazy: :lies:

[Rusty Mason]

911
I was home all day that day and the next. I remember seeing reports like these and many of the others that have since been spiked. I remember seeing Bldg 7 being demo-ed and wondered how they could have rigged it and demoed it so quickly. I remember wondering why they kept talking about a plane crash and showing an empty field, with town officials at the site insisting there was nothing there. I remember the small hole in the Pentagon left by the huge plane before the building collapsed, and the lack of plane wreckage left behind. I remember wondering where the air force was the whole time.

The official stories are so improbable that only a child would believe them. The air force just happened to be out on maneuvers practicing the same scenario at the same time? Ya, right. And these buildings fell because of fires and weakened structures? Maybe. But straight down into their own footprints at freefall speed, after being damaged on one side? Highly improbable.

OK CITY BOMBING
I have also seen the actual, original news stories from TV stations around the country covering the OK City bombing, complete with interviews of explosives experts, all of which flatly contradict the government's official stories. I have seen much proof --- from an Oklahoma congressman, no less -- which includes FBI statements and many official, sworn eye-witness statements which also contradict the government's version(s). Anyone who has seen and heard even a small fraction of the evidence will immediately see that the government is lying about the whole thing.

Anyone who believes the government's version of these two terrorist events is simply not interested in, or capable of processing, the truth, and shouldn't be allowed to vote. I imagine they are largely the same people who support the insultingly-named Patriot Act, the new dept of HD, the feckless Congress, and the new dictatorial powers of our new emporer and his gang of international thieves and murderers (a.k.a. Cabinet members and "advisors").

[Winston]

Anyone who believes the government's version of these two terrorist events is simply not interested in, or capable of processing, the truth, and shouldn't be allowed to vote.

I agree. A healthy mind should at the very least find serious problems with the official stories.

[OVERWATCH]

A flame by Trojan and two responses to a flame have been deleted.

I don't want the sort of cancer that has been infesting the revisionist forum, metastasizing to other fora here. Are we understood?

[Trojan]

A flame by Trojan and two responses to a flame have been deleted.

I don't want the sort of cancer that has been infesting the revisionist forum, metastasizing to other fora here. Are we understood?

But narrowminded moron is acceptable??

[OVERWATCH]

But narrowminded moron is acceptable??

I did not see any such comment. I rarely read every single post in any thread nor can I read every thread in the forum.

For the upteenth time, if you see a violation of the rules (e.g.. personal flame in highbrow (lyceum) fora) report that post using the exclamation point icon in the upper right hand of that post (on default skin).

Thanks,

-Steve

edit: the offending remark by Illusion has been edited out. Again, refer to my previous post.

[Sudaev]

Anyone who believes the government's version of these two terrorist events

Come on, OKC and September 11th are two different things.

is simply not interested in, or capable of processing, the truth and shouldn't be allowed to vote.

For Pete's sake. Anyone who believes that the government forced flight 89 to land and spirited them away never to be seen again, has zero critical thinking skills. If anything, those are the people who "shouldn't be allowed to votel." These same people see a conspiracy behind everything. This movement is filled with them. It rather strains my imagination that people can buy into nonsense like that. :crazy: That's fine, but what bothers me is when I'm told I'm "naive" or what have you because I don't believe that stuff.

Did you ever notice conspiracy theorists never question or attack each other? Two people can have theories that are at odds with each other, but they commiserate because...they've got a conspiracy theory.

The fact that there were some conflicting news stories rolling in on September 11th is to be expected. I remember at the time hearing that a car bomb went off somewhere.

This all reminds me of the confusion regarding the two stray weather balloons over L.A. back during WW II that caused everyone to think that we were being bombed by the Japs. People swore that they saw formations of planes.

[Starr]

These same people see a conspiracy behind everything

That is where it really becomes irrational. With all of the recent terrrorism the same people who believe that Arab muslims are not responsible for anything also will talk about these people being freedom fighters, which makes no sense. Even when certain incidents happen in Iraq(bombings,etc.)you will get these people that will see some dark conspiracy in that.

I do not believe everything that I am told and also do think that there are certain things that are not what they appear(9/11 is one of them for me) but I also do not believe that nearly every event that takes place is some big lie. Why do people so easily fall into the idea that everything is a big dark conspiracy? because it is more interesting to think that way? Because you need to use it to fit a particular ideology? I don't know. I also find it somewhat amusing that some would tell you, for instance, that you believe everything that you hear on foxnews(or whatever they throw at you:p )while they believe everything they read on a site like Rense as if that is the gospel. I am not talking about anyone on here or anywhere else in particular, I am talking about a certain kind of person in general.

when an event like 9/11 takes place there is going to be many different people with many different theories and they are always going to find something that happened or something someone said to fit with that theory. They will ignore anything else. there is also going to be witnesses and people coming forward to say they saw or heard something out of the ordinary, this is the way things always are.

[Petr]

For Pete's sake. Anyone who believes that the government forced flight 89 to land and spirited them away never to be seen again, has zero critical thinking skills.
I tend to agree.

Did you ever notice conspiracy theorists never question or attack each other? Two people can have theories that are at odds with each other, but they commiserate because...they've got a conspiracy theory.
This does seem to be a general rule. Out of false sense of solidarity, there's no proper "peer review" among conspiratologists.


Petr

[Trojan]

Just curious, but if the black ops government guys had the ability to fake the whole 9/11 thing, then why did they not plant chemical weapons in Iraq and provide evidence of a link between Iraq and Osama?

I mean, why do such a half-ass job? The WTC were the hard part, a few fake documents and a few mustard gas shells is all they would need to squash most debate about the war.

[Kriger]

Conspiracy theories are something interesting to talk about for some people.
Whoever is behind it and however it was really done does not change the fact that the major base for US World Trade was completely destroyed and the security of the core of the American military system was breeched leaving a gaping hole in its side.
Someone or someones conspired to have this happen.
And insurance claims hit the roof.
And the event is the reason George W. destroyed Iraq.
Whoever masterminded it took a ragtag team of suicidal fanatics and accomplished it, and either directly or indirectly caused the sequence of events that followed and continues to this day.
Did anyone ever think that maybe the third jet was not meant to reach the White House?

[Sudaev]

And the event is the reason George W. destroyed Iraq.


Oh for fucks sake; don't sit there and say that all of that carnage was perpetrated (under a huge monolith conspiracy no less) just so he could attack Iraq.

:nuts:

[Rusty Mason]

Come on, OKC and September 11th are two different things.
No, they're not. They are related. Investigate the players in the OKC bombing and you'll see a lot of overlap.

Did you ever notice conspiracy theorists never question or attack each other? Two people can have theories that are at odds with each other, but they commiserate because...they've got a conspiracy theory..

Yes. I've also noticed over the years that those who know the least tend to ridicule the most and the loudest. When I told people 20 years ago that the legal foundation was being laid for perverts to teach homosexuality and beastiality to our children in the public schools, I was ridiculed -- very loudly. No one's laughting now, but they are shaking their heads, wondering how it could have come to this. Most people just don't wanna know the truth, they won't take the time, they don't want to be bothered to actually dig through the conflicting arguments and find the truth. Perhaps they don't think they could handle it, I don't know.

[Rusty Mason]

Another thing that is simply amazing is that people scoff at any alternate explanations of the 9-11 incidents by labelling them "conspiracy theories." The implication is that conspiracies don't exist and anyone believing that a large group of people could conspire is nuts. Often these are the same people that claim that Democrats or Republicans or Big Businesses or Communists, etc., have conspired to do X.

Even more bizarre, especially coming from conservatives, is the fact that so many people become indignant when these "conspiracy kooks" imply or accuse our government of wrongdoing, gross homicidal negligence, or even murder. These are the same people who just six years ago were screaming that big government could not be trusted and that the CIA, FBI, ATF, et al, had run amok and was killing people all over the place.

Most people should not vote, they're too easily led around by the brain stem.

[Ahknaton]

Just curious, but if the black ops government guys had the ability to fake the whole 9/11 thing, then why did they not plant chemical weapons in Iraq and provide evidence of a link between Iraq and Osama? Just playing Devil's advocate here, but who says it was necessarily the same guys behind both? Perhaps there are several factions within the "shadow government", one of which wants an ideologically-driven war with radical Islam and allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen to facilitate this, and another that has more conventional geopolitical aims and pushed for war with Iraq.
I mean, why do such a half-ass job? The WTC were the hard part, a few fake documents and a few mustard gas shells is all they would need to squash most debate about the war.
Is there a need for concrete evidence against Iraq? Why expose yourself to the risk of being caught out if it's not necessary? It's not like all the dissent against the war has made a difference anyway. They still got their war. Bush still got voted back in. Perhaps they know they've rigged the voting system as well and they don't care about any level of dissent short of violent revolution.

Another quite plausible LIHOP theory is that the CIA had operatives deep inside Al Quaeda and got wind of the 9/11 attack, but couldn't stop it without compromising their operatives, who they would have to pull out in advance before busting up the cells that were going to carry out the attacks. They may have had intelligence suggesting that a nuclear attack was being planned for the future, and that allowing the 9/11 attacks to occur was the lesser of two evils compared to sacrificing intelligence sources that might help prevent a much larger attack in the future with hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions of casualties. There is evidence that British government made these kinds of decisions in Northern Ireland where terrorist attacks were allowed to go ahead that could have been prevented, because doing so would have exposed who their agents were.

Also, if the 9/11 attacks had been stopped, there wouldn't have been the public outrage sufficient to motivate a strong response. Look at the reaction towards the plot to blow up trans-Atlantic airlines that was recently stopped in the nick of time. The level of public outrage is nothing like it would have been if the attacks had gone ahead. Perhaps they reasoned it would be better to just allow one attack to happen to motivate the public to support major operations against Al Quaeda sooner rather than later, instead of allowing things to progress to the stage where 10 years down the track they are breaking up plots to detonate nuclear devices instead of merely blowing up airlines.

[Kriger]

Oh for fucks sake; don't sit there and say that all of that carnage was perpetrated (under a huge monolith conspiracy no less) just so he could attack Iraq.

:nuts:

I didn't say that, you did.
I said George W. uses it as his excuse for destroying Iraq.
He just told us again his version of the connection between 911 and the destruction of Iraq.
Do you ever pay atention to anything?

[Starr]

He just told us again his version of the connection between 911 and the destruction of Iraq.
Do you ever pay atention to anything?

I didn't even bother to listen to his 9/11 speech, but I heard that he did nothing but talk about his little war in iraq.:rolleyes:

I also turned on O'reilly a couple of nights ago and heard that there now was some kind of connection being drawn between 9/11 and Iraq(O'reilly was in complete "I told you so" mode:whip:) I didn't even bother to listen to the crap, though.

Whether there was any larger conspiracy here, one thing is for certain, they certainly jumped on it quick and used it well to their advantage. A war that was said to have been in planning for some time before 9/11 happened. Coincidence?

[Sudaev]

I didn't say that, you did.
I said George W. uses it as his excuse for destroying Iraq.
He just told us again his version of the connection between 911 and the destruction of Iraq.
Do you ever pay atention to anything?

OK here we go with the sophistry and the verbal jiu-jitsu again. Nice to see you here btw; I thought I had left you guys at VNN.

Anyway, why even mention that Bush used this as his excuse to invade? If he might not have had knowledge than why even bring it up?

[Kriger]

OK here we go with the sophistry and the verbal jiu-jitsu again. Nice to see you here btw; I thought I had left you guys at VNN.

Anyway, why even mention that Bush used this as his excuse to invade? If he might not have had knowledge than why even bring it up?

You did not leave anyone at VNN, Hate Dept., you are still posting there.
I am not going around in your endless circles with you like Momus and others did.
Believe what you will.
I got tired of the endless circle jerks at VNN.
Circle jerk with yourself.

[Trojan]

Just playing Devil's advocate here, but who says it was necessarily the same guys behind both? Perhaps there are several factions within the "shadow government", one of which wants an ideologically-driven war with radical Islam and allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen to facilitate this, and another that has more conventional geopolitical aims and pushed for war with Iraq.


Just playing at conspiracy theorist here - all black ops guys work for the same puppet masters, its the same group that faked the holocaust, shot Kennedy, instigated Vietnam and faked the moon landings. Didn't you see the memo? :dance2:


Is there a need for concrete evidence against Iraq? Why expose yourself to the risk of being caught out if it's not necessary? It's not like all the dissent against the war has made a difference anyway. They still got their war. Bush still got voted back in. Perhaps they know they've rigged the voting system as well and they don't care about any level of dissent short of violent revolution.


If they could wire two 110 story office buildings to implode over a weekend, without any witnesses, how hard would it have been to plant chemical weapons in Iraq (or even use them on advancing US troops, since life means nothing to these folks)? And since they are experienced at torture (having practiced 60 years ago on the SS), they could certainly get some poor Iraqi to say he was there when Sadam was handing over the checks to Osama.

:rofl:

[Sudaev]

You did not leave anyone at VNN, Hate Dept., you are still posting there.
I am not going around in your endless circles with you like Momus and others did.
Believe what you will.
I got tired of the endless circle jerks at VNN.
Circle jerk with yourself.

I should say "left you guys from VNN".

Circle jerk is when you and those others sit around and agree with each other, and jerk each other off.

Daisy Chains....?

[Ahknaton]

You did not leave anyone at VNN, Hate Dept., you are still posting there.
I am not going around in your endless circles with you like Momus and others did.
Believe what you will.
I got tired of the endless circle jerks at VNN.
Circle jerk with yourself.
I should say "left you guys from VNN".

Circle jerk is when you and those others sit around and agree with each other, and jerk each other off.

Daisy Chains....?
Please do not transplant grudges/rivalries from VNN to the Phora. You've both said your piece, so knock it off with the flaming.