Unmasking the Grand Deception

[Volunteer_Kirby]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I will do my best to present nothing but the factual information, so you feel I have provided dis-info, point it out and I'll search for the source.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]First, I hope you understand that my intent is merely to inform you all of the available information. Before I go on, I feel that I need to remind you all of the lies surrounding this current administration. We all know by this point in time that members of the Bush admin in the White House, and the omissions commission deliberately lied about about: Bush connection to the bin Laden family, escorting dozens of members of the bin Laden family out of the US after 9/11, Patriot Act having been written decades before 9/11, call for a “New Pearl Harbor” by the neocons, toxic air quality at Ground Zero after 9/11, the 'junk science' of Global Warming and it's effects around the world, plans for wars w/ Iraq/Afghanistan that were made before 9/11, Hussein's possession of WMD, Hussein's connection to Al Quaeda, Hussein's involvement in 9/11, Hussein's threat to the US or his neighbors, the staged toppling of Saddam's statue, the staged rescue of Jessica Lynch, illegal warrantless spying on US citizens, torture at Abu Ghraib, outing Valerie Plame as a CIA operative, etc. You get the idea.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]If your spouse, your doctor, or your neighbor lied to you over and over about issues that were relevant to your well being, would you ever again believe anything that person said to you? After becoming more aware of the lies surrounding the Bush regime, why would anyone in his or her right mind fully embrace the official story of what happened on 9/11 without a single question? Why would anyone in the United States of American conclude that the official version of the most important event in recent American history as told by proven liars is true?[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

The point to be made is this: sometimes, the more outrageous an action, the easier it is to get away with. Sometimes, there is no way that people can connect the criminal with the crime: the very idea of guilt is so far out of the norm as to be unthinkable.

[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Very simply, it is possible to escape blame if you do something that nobody in the world believes you could do. If the deed is egregious enough, even if some proof of your culpability surfaces, you’ll be on safe ground. If people cannot imagine your involvement in an unthinkable action, they will simply not believe you could possible be complicit in its commission. Think about it. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Now I should officially state that it is not imperative for all of the evidence to stand up, given the nature of the argument. Some arguments are, as they say, are “only as strong as the weakest link”. These are deductive arguments, in which each step in the arguments depends on the the truth of the previous step. If a single premise is found to be false, the arguments fails. However, the argument for official complicity in 9/11 is a cumulative argument. This kind of argument is a argument consisting of several particular arguments that are independent from each other. As such, each particular arguments provides support for all the others.

[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Conspiracy Theory[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Encarta World English Dictionary[/FONT]

1. [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]plan to commit illegal act together: a plan or agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal or subversive action.[/FONT]
2. [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]agreement among conspirators: the making of an agreement or plot to commit an illegal or subversive action.[/FONT]
3. [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]group of conspirators: a group of conspirators.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I'm under the impression that you all feel that those who proffer conspiracy theories are misguided, anti-Semitic, lonely, paranoid, prone to delusions and flights of fancy, and other such colorful language. Is that an accurate assessment of what you all perceive a “conspiracy theorist” to be? In the case of 9/11 the situation is clouded by the existence of contradictory theories, only one of which is supported by the mainstream media. The phrase “conspiracy theory” is widely used to ridicule those who dispute the official explanation, but logically the official account is also a conspiracy theory.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]According to Collins Sociological Dictionary, a ‘conspiracy’ theory is only to be considered suspect or reprehensible, if it is:[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Delivered in an outlandish, irrational manner.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Delivered without decent evidence.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif] If something is documented, provable, and supported by verifiable evidence; it goes from “theory” to “fact.” Conspiracy Theory (Hypothesis) + Documentation of provable and verifiable facts = Proof of a conspiracy.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]For those who are still trying to maintain deniability concerning true and verifiable conspiracies; here are seven conspiracies that have been proven to involve all three clauses of the definition.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*COINTELPRO[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Operation Northwoods memo is send to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, by General Lemnitzer.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Watergate leads to Nixon resignation.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Dark Alliance; Gary Webb's exposé on the crack cocaine epidemic in the inner city of Los Angeles. It was proven that the origin of this cocaine was the CIA. On December 10, 2004, Gary Webb was 'suicided' by agents of the new world order.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Jonestown mass suicide kills 900 in Guyana.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*INSLAW / PROMIS theft of intellectual property valued at $3 billion dollars, from Bill and Nancy Hamilton.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*Iran-Contra scandal.

[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Manipulation[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I’d like to touch up on the history of manipulated public beliefs, especially the ones in matter of war. Historians are in increasing agreement that the following “facts” were manipulated:

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*The explosion of the USS Maine to justify the start of the Spanish-American War in 1898.
*With respect to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to justify the previously unpopular entry into World War II.
*Gulf of Tonkin incident of 1964, used by the White House to justify the dramatic extension of the Vietnam War to North Vietnam .
*And the most recent was to portray Iraq as harboring a fierce arsenal of weaponry of mass destruction.

[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Government Scam – Impact[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]*The Federal Reserve System—Private control of U.S. currency * Pearl Harbor—U.S. forced into WWII
* The Warren Commission—Rise of Rogue Federal Government * The Gulf of Tonkin Incident—Escalation of the Vietnam War
* The War on Drugs—Mass Incarcerations
* The 9/11 attacks—“Homeland” Security
* War on Terror—Impending Fiscal and Military Ruin

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]9/11 – Pearl Harbor[/FONT]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Often times, the comparison of 9/11 is made to Pearl Harbor . CBS even reported that before going to bed on 9/11, President Bush wrote in his diary: “The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today.” Henry Kissinger, on 9/11, wrote an online article which said: “The government should be charged with a systematic response that, one hopes, will end the way that the attack on Pearl Harbor ended--with the destruction of the system that is responsible for it.” An article in Time magazine appeared right after the attacks which stated: “For once, let’s have no fatuous rhetoric about ‘healing’… A day cannot live in infamy without the nourishment of rage. Let’s have rage. What’s needed is a unified, unifying Pearl Harbor sort of purple American fury.” A prediction made in September 2000 by the soon-to-be top officials in the Bush regime stated: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor."[/FONT]

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

Media

On the 1st anniversery of the attacks, the New York Times wrote: “One year later, the public knows less about the circumstances of 2,801 deaths at the foot of Manhattan in broad daylight than people in 1912 knew within weeks about the Titanic.” That was in part the case because the Bush regime argued that an investigation would be a distraction from the “war on terrororism”, so they resisted the call for a special investigation. On Sept. 11, 2003 a writer for the Philadelphia Daily News asked: “why after 730 days do we know so little about what really happened that day?”

The mass media has not provided the public with any comprehensive overviews that lay out all the distrubing questions of which they are aware, that’s one of the major problems. However, there is the internationally known, award winning journalist Greg Palast and Canada’s award-winning Barrie Zwicker who have written comprehensive pieces on 9/11 (if you’re interested). But the mainstream media has still failed to do it’s job with regard to 9/11, even though, if the official account of 9/11 were to be found false, the consequences would be enourmous—much more so than ever before in American history. An example of this misconduct can be summarized in the words of Rena Golden, the executive vice-president and general manager of CNN International. She stated, “Anyone who claims the US media didn’t censor itself is kidding you. And this isn’t just a CNN issue—every journalist who was in any way involved in 9/11 is partly responsible.” As to why this is the case, the CBS anchorman Dan Rather stated: “There was a time in South Africa that people would put flaming tires around people’s necks if they dissented. And in some ways the fear is that you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tire of lack of patriotism put around your neck. Now it is that fear that keeps journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions.” His quote can at least partly explain why the the mass media has failed to question the official account, especially since journalists perceived as unpatriotic are in danger of losing their job.

U.S. Media Control / Mockingbird

The past decade's wave of media mergers has produced a complex web of business relationships that now defines America's media and popular culture. These relationships offer a massive opportunity for cross promotion and selling of talent and products among different companies owned by the same powerful parent corporation.

Examine the charts breaking down what each of the five U.S. media giants now control (as of February 2001). Also included on this list is Bertelsmann AG, which in globalizing has bought up several large American media divisions.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/giants/

30+ years ago, hundreds of companies controlled the media. Today the number has decreased to 7. This, too, plays a particularly large role in the suppression of vital / controversial information. Silence extends from 9/11 to the Bush family history. Viacom is an example that accurately shows the lack-of “balance” in modern media. The following are owned, operated, and controlled by Viacom:

Radio
Networks: Infinity Broadcasting (manages Westwood One Radio Network), Metro Networks
Stations: Infinity Broadcasting (owns and operates over 180 stations)

TV
Networks: CBS, UPN, MTV Network, MTV, Nickelodeon, Nick at Nite, TV Land, CMT, TNN, VH1, Noggin (joint venture with Children's Television Workshop), Showtime Networks, Showtime, The Movie Channel, Sundance Channel (joint venture with Robert Redford and Universal
Studios), FLIX, SET Pay-Per-View (sporting and entertainment events), BET,
Comedy Central (joint venture with AOL Time Warner)

Production and Distribution
Paramount, Spelling Entertainment Group (80%), Big Ticket Television, Viacom Productions, King World Productions

Stations
16 CBS-affiliated stations
19 UPN-affiliated stations

Internet
MTVi Group, CBS Internet Group, Nickelodeon Online, BET.com, Contentville.com (35%)

Film
Production and Distribution: Paramount Pictures, MTV Films, Nickelodeon Movies

Theater Operations
United Cinemas International (joint venture with Vivendi Universal), Paramount Theaters, Famous Players (Canada)

Video
Blockbuster Video

Publishing
Books: The Free Press, MTV Books, Nickelodeon Books, Simon & Schuster, Pocket Books, Scribner, Touchstone

Other
Famous Music Publishing (copyright owners), Theme Parks, Paramount Parks, Infinity Outdoor/TDI Worldwide -- the largest outdoor advertising group in the U.S., Star Trek franchise

This is only covers 1 of 7.

Operation Mockingbird
Allen Dulles, and others before him, in charge of Operation Mockingbird, usurped the US media for the express intention of subverting it;

from wiki:

After 1953, the network was overseen by Allen W. Dulles, director of the Central Intelligence Agency. By this time Operation Mockingbird had a major influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. These organizations were run by people with well-known right-wing views such as William Paley (CBS), Henry Luce (Time Magazine and Life Magazine), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (New York Times), Alfred Friendly (managing editor of the Washington Post), Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham, Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal), James Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (Christian Science Monitor). [5]

The Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) was funded by siphoning of funds intended for the Marshall Plan. Some of this money was used to bribe journalists and publishers. Frank Wisner was constantly looking for ways to help convince the public of the dangers of communism. In 1954, Wisner arranged for the funding the Hollywood production of Animal Farm, the animated allegory based on the book written by George Orwell. [7]

According to Alex Constantine (Mockingbird: The Subversion Of The Free Press By The CIA), in the 1950s, "some 3,000 salaried and contract CIA employees were eventually engaged in propaganda efforts". Wisner was also able to restrict newspapers from reporting about certain events. For example, the CIA plots to overthrow the governments of Iran (See: Operation Ajax) and Guatemala (See: Operation PBSUCCESS). [8] [/quote]

Surely now one can grasp why the mainsteam media has failed to accurately report 9/11 issues. It is not because of lack-of credible evidence / proof, but rather because MSM is subverted and compromised.

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

Flight 11 & Flight 175 + NORAD


1st plane hijacked was AA Flight 11. The flight left Boston at 7:59 AM. At 8:14, besides failing to repond to an order from FAA, it's radio and transponder went off, suggesting that it had possibly been hi-jacked. At 8:20, the plane went radically off course, leading ground control to conclude that it had probably been hi-jacked. At 8:21, flight attendents reported via phone that the plane had definitely been taken over by hi-jackers, who had already killed people. At 8:28, the plane headed towards New York. At 8:44, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld was in the Pentagon (talking about terrorism, coincidentally) with Rep. Chris Cox. “Let me tell ya,” the AP quoted Rumsfeld as saying, “I've been around the block a few times. There will be another Tere will be another event.” Indeed, Rummy was spot on with peculiar precision. Two minutes later, at 8:46, Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower. This was 32 mins after evidence of a possible hi-jacking and 25 minutes after knowledge that it had definitely been hi-jacked.


Skeptics of the official account believe that Flight 11 should have been intercepted by figher jets within 10 minutes of any sign of a hi-jacking. Had standard procedures been followed for that type of situation, Flight 11 would have been intercepted before it reached the North Tower.


FAA regulations instruct air traffic controllers to:

Consider that an aircract emergency exists...when:...There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft.... If... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency.

Accordingly, at 8:14, the loss of radio would have led the flight control to begin emergency procedures. The loss of radio alone would have increased the awareness of the ground flight controllers. After the flight controller found out that he could not re-establish radio, he would have hastily contacted NMCC @ the Pentagon / NORAD. NORAD would then scramble some fighter jets from the nearest airfield to guide / command the strayed airplane to ground. Account to a NORAD spokesperson when FFA senses something wrong, “it takes about one minute” to contact NORAD, then NORAD scrambles jets “within a matter of minutes to anywhere in the United States.” “According to the US Air foce's own website,” says Nafeez Ahmed, an f-15 routinely “goes from 'scramble order' to 29,000 ft in only 2.5 minutes” and then can fly upwards of 1,850 nmph.

If normal procedures were followed accordingly, Flight 11 would have been intercepted @ approx. 8:24. Surely this would happen no nater than 8:30. That's 16 minutes before it crashed into the North Tower. And to add onto that, even if radio contact / signal had not been lost, the fact that the plane went radically off course should have been enough to leed the FAA to notify the military. Every plan follows a flight plan. These plans consists of points, or “fixes”, and according to MSNBC:

Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 154 degreees, or two miles form that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They'll call the plane, saying A'merican 11, you're deviating from course.” It's considered a real emergeency.

If FAA waited until the plane went off course at 8:20, the plane should have been intercepted by 8:30, or 8:35 at the latest, again in the plenty of time to prevent it from crashing into the tower. As to what would occur on interception, Ahmed explains by quoting FAA manual:

The interceptor military craft communicates by Rocking wings from a positition slightly above and ahead of, and normally to the left of, the intercepted aircraft.... This action conveys the message: “You have been intercepted.” The commercial jet is then supposed to respoind by rocking it's wing to indicate compliance, upon which the interceptor performs a “slow level turn, normally to the left, on the desired heading [direction].” The commericial plane then responds by following the escort.

If Flight 11 had been intercepted, but did not respoind, it would, according to procedures, have been shot down. After telling the Boston Globe that NORAD's “Fighters routinely intercept aircraft,” Major Mike Snyder, a spokesman for NORAD, continued on:

When planes are intercepted, they typically are handled with graduated respoinse. The approaching fighter may rock its wingtips to attract the pilot's attention, or make a pass in front of the aircraft. Eventually, it can fire tracer rounds in the airplane's path, or, under certain circumstances, down it with a missle.”

Why was this not the case? Why was the plane not even intercepted?

Finally, there is some more confusion to the matter. In an interview with “Meet the Press on Sept. 16Th, Cheney suggested that “the question of whether or not we would intercept a commercial aircraft, as well as the the question of whether it would be shot down was “a presidential-level decision.” General Richard Myers, then Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, added to the haze by saying, in testimony: “After the second tower was hit, I spoke to the commander of NORAD, General Eberhart. And at that point, I think the decision was at that point to start lahnching aircraft.” Like Cheney's statement, this implies that fighter would be sent up to intercept, only if ordered to by commanders at the highest level. Interception occurs at least 100 times a year, so even it was “a presidential-level decision”, like Cheney and Myers implied, why was normal procedure still not followed? Some accept the view that a hijacked plane requires “a presidential-level decision” in order to be shot down, but Thierry Meyssan point out that the military regulations seem to say otherwise. Accordingly...

In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expedititions means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of requests neeeding an immediate response...forward requests for DoD assisstance to the Secretary of Defense for approval.

Meyssan concludes that these regulations give the Secretary of Defense the responsibility for shooting down hijacked planes. It says “with the exception”, so this shows that if the SoD cannot be contacted in time, the responsibilites will be passed onto the next person in line of command. According to a DoD document cited by Meyssan:

It is possible to formulate to any element in the chain of command “Requests needing Immediate Response.” These arise from imminently serious conditions where only an immediate action taken by an official of the Department of Defense or a military commander can prevent loss of lives, or mitigate human suffering and great property damage.

Many people in the line of command would have the authority to prevent this “loss of lives, or mitigate human suffering and great property damage” to save lives when Flight 11 slammed into the North Tower.
One could argue that at the time, no one would have known Flight 11 was going to hit the North Tower. But, surely that argument would not apply to the second plane crash into the WTC.

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

Flight 175
United Airlines Flight 175 left Boston at 8:14. At that time, FAA was learning that Flight 11 may have been hi-jacked. At 8:42, the radio and transponder went off and the plane flew off course. By then, FAA knew Flight 11 had definitely been hi-jacked, so FFA would have be ready to contact the military immediately. They did, in fact, notify NORAD at 8:43. There is no excuse for no interception between a fighter jet and the airliner. Am I supposed to believe that NORAD simply suffered from gross incompetence? Perhaps it was just “shocke and awe”. This would have been 7 minutes after the first plane crashed the North Tower, so, fighter jets would have been quick to intercept Flight 175. Accordingly, if this plane did not follow the orders of jet, the plane would have likely been shot down before it reached the WTC. However, this was not the case. Nothing intercepted Flight 175 and @ 9:03 it crashed into the South Tower.

Another disturbing feature of 9/11 is the fact that at 8:55 a public announcement was reportedly broadcast inside the South tower, saying that the building was secure, so that people could return to their officies. These announcements reportedly continued on until a few minutes before the crash. The announcements alone may have contributed to the deaths of hundreds. Paul Thomson asks: “Given that at 8:43 NORAD was notified flight 175 was hijacked and headed toward New York City, why weren't people in the building warned? Again, this is beyond the realm of “incompetence”. Perhaps someone other than the hi-jackers was seeking to ensure that a significant number of lives were lost? That might just be too hard to believe, but I cannot simply all of these problems were mere coincidences.

Furthermore, Flight 175 hit the WTC 17 minutes after the first crash. How do you explain why standard procedures broken down with regard to the first plane—such as inattentive air traffic controllers, pilots at military bases not on full alter, or just the assumption that the plane's behavior did not mean that it had been hijacked—Ccould be used to explain why Flight 175 was not shot down or even intercepted.

Another disturbing feature is that NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector “had their headsets linked to the FAA in Boston to hear about Flight 11,” so NORAD must have been fully aware of the seriousness of the situation. Even more disconcerting is the fact that 35 minutes afterwards, at 9:38, the Pentagon was hit. I'll discuss the Pentagon later on. The task I'm giving you all is to consider the official account of the first two flights and the response of the critics.

NORAD's “Failure”
General Myers, in his the previously mentioned testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committe on Sept. 13, said: “When it became clear what the threat was, we did scramble fighter aircraft.” When asked if the order was given “before or after the Pentagon was struck,” Mayers replied: “That order, to the best of my knowledge, was after the Pentagon was struck.” An obvious problem exists. At minimum, the “threat” would have become clear at 8:46, which was the plane hit WTC and the other was headed in it's direction. Then, of course, is that officials at NORAD did not need to fully understand “what the threat was” in order for there to be jets up in the air, to intercept the aircraft.

Then, a story by Boston Globe appears on Sept. 15, where Major Mike Snyder, speaking for NORAD says that no fighters were scrambled until after the Pentagon was hit. On Sept. 16, when Tim Russert, during his interview with Cheney [“Meet the Press”], expressed suprised that although we knew about the first hi-jacking by 8:20, “it seems we were not able to scramble fighter jets in time to protect the Pentagon,” Cheney did not dispute the statement. Afterwards, NORAD began saying that it did have planes scrambled, but they arrived too late. This version is just as unbelievable as the prior.There are some obvious problems with the official account now, as you can plainly see. The major one being that the military behavior seemed to completely contradict standard procedures. It has been pointed out, though, that an order for them not to be scrambled is what would require a command from on high. Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel, commenting on the NORAD failure, say: “This could only happen if individuals in high positions worked ina coordinated way to make them fail.”


According to this version, NORAD was not notified by the FAA of Flight 11 until 8:40. That would be 26 minutes after the plane's radio / transponder went off and 20 minutes after it had gone off course. Allan Wood and Paul Thompson write:

Is NORAD's claim credible? If so, the air traffic controllers should have been fired and subject to possible criminal charges for their inaction. To date, howere there has been no word of any person being disciplined.... If NORAD's claim is false, and it was indeed informaed withing the time frame outlined in the FAAA regulations...,that would mean NORAD did absolutely nothing for almost thirty minutes while a hijacked commercial airliner flew off cours through some of the most congested airspace in the world. Presumably, that would warrant some very serious charges. Again, no one associated with NORAD or the FAA has been punished.

This bears the question: If no disciplinary action was followed, does this suggest that the official account is simply false or does it imply that FAA/NORAD did what they were instructed to do? Also, take into consideration the fact that some were actually promoted.

Now to add onto the histeria. The official account provides more anomalous features. It's been told that the scramble order was not given until 8:46. This is six minutes after it had been notified. Furthermore, NORAD inexpliciably gave this order to Otis Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod, which is approx. 180 miles away. This again, begs another disturbing question. Why was this order not given to McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey, which is only 70 miles from NYC?

NORAD, however, said that it recieved notication at 8:43 from the FAA of Flight 175's hijacking, so the two F-15s that were given the scramble order at 8:46, were sent after this flight instead. However, the F-15s are said not to have taken off until 8:52.

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

An even bigger hole arises in regard to the official account, is the failure to explain, even with all those delays,l why did the planes not arrive in time to stop the second atack on the WTC. At 8:52, there were still 11 minutes until 9:03 when Flight 175 would hit the second tower. Lt. Colonel Tim Duffy, a pilot said to have flown one of the F-15s, has been quoted as stating that he “was in full-blower all the way,” which would mean that he was going over 1875nmph. Allowing the standard 2.5 minutes for them to get airborne and up to speed, they should have reached Manhattan in about 8 minutes, having a full 3 minutes left to shoot down the hi-jacked airliner.

Still, the madness continues, as the official account claims the F-15s were still 70 miles away when Flight 175 crashed inot the South Tower. Really, now ponder this. According to NORAD's timeline, it took them 19 minutes to reach the city. So, if the story about jets from Otis is true, one can aptly conclude that the jets were flying at an unsually low and dubious mph. If NORAD's timeline is accepted, that speed is more like 700 mph. Now I don't have to point out to you all how incredible of a claim it is. I just hope you start to realize just how implausible the official account is.

Also, as a sidenote... Ahmed says an 1,850 nmph “would cover the ground from New Jersey's Air Force Base to New York in under 3 minutes, and thus could have easily intercepted Flight 175.” Even if the second story is accepted, the WTC's second tower should not have been hit. Still, we are left with no explanation as to why procedures were not followed in regard to the first attack.

Critics profess, including some with military experience, think that the second version was fabricated. Stan Goff, a retired Master Sergeant who taught Military Science at West Point concludes that no Air Force jets were scrambled until after the Pentagon was hit. Andreas von Bulow, former State Secretary in the German Defense Ministry, said: “For 60 decisive minutes, the military and intelligence agencies let the fighter planes stay on the ground.” Antaoli Kornukov, the commander in chief of the Russian Air Force, who was quoted the day after 9/11 as saying: “Generally, it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday.... As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up.” Ahmed comments on the statement: “It is, of course, well known that the US Air Force is far superior to Russia's,” adding that rational infernces can be drawn from these facts. Particularly the attacks on the Twin Towers, which could have happened only if standard operating procedures were suspended.

Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) were completely and inexplicably dorpped on 11th September—something that had never occured before. The question then remain as to who was responsible for ensuring that routine emergency response rules were not adhered to.

Bykov and Israel feel they know who that was:

The sabotage of routine protective systems, controlled by strict hierarchies, would never have been contemplated let alone attempted absent the involvment of the supreme US military command. This includes at least US President George Bush, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumself and the then-Acting Head of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Genereal Richard B. Myers.

Now we are left with a question to ask. Could a plan to hi-jack airliners and crash them into the WTC have been successful without giving NORAD “stand down” orders? Could these orders have been approved by Rummy / Myers / Cheney / Bush?

Even more problematic are the questions which have been raised by the collapse of the buildings of the World Trade Center. I will need a bit more time to finish that up. I'll put it up when I'm finished.

 

[MG1968]

what a bunch of hooey...

nice copy and paste though, VK. The fancy serifed font makes it look official.

 

[volsforever27]

I skipped all that crap, heard it a million times. You ever notice these guys fail to point out all the chances we had in the 90's to stop terrorism? Clinton had Osama handed to him on a siver platter and didn't take it? I could make a list like him, but what's the point? They need to believe in this, cause America sucks to them.

These guys need girlfriends... badly.

 

[myrobbins7]

Wow VK, That's a bunch of stuff there bro. Do you go to bed dreaming about G. Bush or something?

 

[volinasheville]

It was actually a coalition of the freemasons and the Trilateral Commission who were frustrated that fluoridation hadn't worked. My source is General Ripper.

 

[volsforever27]

It was actually a coalition of the freemasons and the Trilateral Commission who were frustrated that fluoridation hadn't worked. My source is General Ripper.

Where do the aliens fit into this?

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

Guys, the WTC collapse will have pictures... After all, a lot of people are visual learners... :crazy:

 

[CSpindizzy]

opcorn:

 

[MG1968]

Guys, the WTC collapse will have pictures... After all, a lot of people are visual learners... :crazy:

the irony here is that despite all of the verbal clues you've been given, you haven't figured out that you're not convincing anybody.

 

[volinbham]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif] Before I go on, I feel that I need to remind you all of the lies surrounding this current administration. We all know by this point in time that members of the Bush admin in the White House, and the omissions commission deliberately lied about about: Bush connection to the bin Laden family, escorting dozens of members of the bin Laden family out of the US after 9/11, Patriot Act having been written decades before 9/11, call for a “New Pearl Harbor” by the neocons, toxic air quality at Ground Zero after 9/11, the 'junk science' of Global Warming and it's effects around the world, plans for wars w/ Iraq/Afghanistan that were made before 9/11, Hussein's possession of WMD, Hussein's connection to Al Quaeda, Hussein's involvement in 9/11, Hussein's threat to the US or his neighbors, the staged toppling of Saddam's statue, the staged rescue of Jessica Lynch, illegal warrantless spying on US citizens, torture at Abu Ghraib, outing Valerie Plame as a CIA operative, etc. You get the idea.[/FONT]

You forgot to add:

Causing Katrina and the tsunami with his neo-con weather machine.

Causing Global Warming with the same machine (then denying Global Warming - brilliant!)

Fixing the vote on American Idol so Sanjaya made it in to the finals.

Secretly rewriting all the code on the world's computers so Y2K was a big nothing.

Injecting Barry Bonds with steroids.

Introducing Brittany to K-fed.

Starting the San Diego wild fires.

Supplying Ahmadenijad with an endless supply of the same jacket.

Turning the GEICO commercial into a sit-com.

Designing the Pontiac Aztec.

Teaching Imus the words "Nappy-headed" and "Ho".

Killing Natalie Holloway, Lacy Peterson, Stacy Peterson, Nicole Brown Simpson, Ron Goldman and Robert Blake's wife.

Putting fat in doughnuts.

Taking the bones out of the McRib but making it look like they're still there.

Droughts.

Floods.

Earthquakes.

Locusts.

Killer Bees.

Fingers in Wendy's chili.

Non-alcoholic beer.

Childhood obesity.

Anoerxia.

Erectile Dysfunction.

You get the idea...

 

[TXA&M07]

Dear Kirby,

Your wrong again.

Regards,
Everyone with common sense.

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

the irony here is that despite all of the verbal clues you've been given, you haven't figured out that you're not convincing anybody.

I can't help that you all aren't willing to read further into this. I can only give you the information and hope you take it for what it's valued at. This information is worth a lot more attention than it deserves. Claims that contradict each other are obviously not of importance to you. At least the pic made me laugh.

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

You forgot to add:

Causing Katrina and the tsunami with his neo-con weather machine.
.......
You get the idea...

Do you believe any I listed are false?

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

Dear Kirby,

Your wrong again.

Regards,
Everyone with common sense.

You're* wrong. :lolabove:

 

[volinbham]

This information is worth a lot more attention than it deserves.

Claims that contradict each other are obviously not of importance to you.

I assume the underlined part above is one such claim?

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

I assume the underlined part above is one such claim?

lol

should've read:"worth alot more attn than it's getting"

 

[volsforever27]

You forgot to add:

Causing Katrina and the tsunami with his neo-con weather machine.

Causing Global Warming with the same machine (then denying Global Warming - brilliant!)

Fixing the vote on American Idol so Sanjaya made it in to the finals.

Secretly rewriting all the code on the world's computers so Y2K was a big nothing.

Injecting Barry Bonds with steroids.

Introducing Brittany to K-fed.

Starting the San Diego wild fires.

Supplying Ahmadenijad with an endless supply of the same jacket.

Turning the GEICO commercial into a sit-com.

Designing the Pontiac Aztec.

Teaching Imus the words "Nappy-headed" and "Ho".

Killing Natalie Holloway, Lacy Peterson, Stacy Peterson, Nicole Brown Simpson, Ron Goldman and Robert Blake's wife.

Putting fat in doughnuts.

Taking the bones out of the McRib but making it look like they're still there.

Droughts.

Floods.

Earthquakes.

Locusts.

Killer Bees.

Fingers in Wendy's chili.

Non-alcoholic beer.

Childhood obesity.

Anoerxia.

Erectile Dysfunction.

You get the idea...

You left out hangnails.

 

[TXA&M07]

whAle I gueeesss U got mE thar KirBiEEE. nO T ONLY aRE YoU an annoyin LibreaL WIt urrr WiTTie PolItiCal Veiwz, bUt you 'RE a GreeeeeaaaaaaaTTTTTT eDITor 2.

Have fun with that one over achiever.

 

[Volunteer_Kirby]

libreal

 

[OrangeEmpire]

We (Air Force) shot down flight 93.

Navy Seals demolished the WTC.

 

[volsforever27]

We (Air Force) shot down flight 93.

Navy Seals demolished the WTC.

Actuakky the whole Flight 93 thing never surprised me, but the NAvy? You're just messing with us right?