Who is responsible for the 9/11 attacks?

Who is responsible for the 9/11 attacks?


  • Total voters
    48
In fact in one of the more ludicrous scenes Bush refused to go before the inquiry alone.

he had to have Cheyney with him to pull his strings in case he said something that let the cat out of the bag.

Oh dear.
 
Werbung:
In fact in one of the more ludicrous scenes Bush refused to go before the inquiry alone.

he had to have Cheyney with him to pull his strings in case he said something that let the cat out of the bag.

Oh dear.

You accuse others of being moronic for basing their opinions about Indians and Cowboys on Hollywood movies... YET.... you base your opinions about 9/11 from movies, which come from the likes of Hollywood.

Take a look at your hypocrisy.
 
but then again, CT'ers never bother to do any real research, they just sit around in their tin-foil hats, smoking their dope, and inventing all kinds of non-sensical bovine excrement that only proves one thing, that they have absoluetly NO idea WHAT they're talking about.



If we are going to discuss ( and maybe we should) CT'ers and their character flaws, how about setting up a thread just for that. The question posed as the title for THIS thread continues to be valid.....as the "g" and its "report" (no matter how many times it is read , analysed and othewised dissected, does not cover all the issues raised.

A question is NOT a "theory". It is a question. Just because some are so willing to blindly, accept the "explanations' their LYING Gov't says ....does not make them "right" either. And just because a report is gov't based and looks like it is "factual".... does not make it accurate either. We have in office the most deceitful , arrogant and vicious regime the US has ever known. One CANNOT rule out their "involvement" completely as they had the MOST to GAIN from such an event. Remember the addage:

WHO BENEFITS??? The bush regime befitted a lot more than any silly malcontent terrorist gang. Terrorist gangs come and go. and have been a reality of society since man started walking upright. But the critical question remains: WHO BENEFITS.????


there remain too many unanswered questions. The reality is that we the population will NEVER know the whole truth behind the event ........ so the speculation will continue. That is human nature. The human mind is a curious being , as it should be. (of course there are those that just accept what they are told and don't bother to question . They fit very well in an autocracy , which the US has become ~ but they will vehemently DENY that ,claiming their freedoms .........)
 
If we are going to discuss ( and maybe we should) CT'ers and their character flaws, how about setting up a thread just for that. The question posed as the title for THIS thread continues to be valid.....as the "g" and its "report" (no matter how many times it is read , analysed and othewised dissected, does not cover all the issues raised.

It may not cover "all" of the questions, but it, along with NIST and other subsequent reports do address the vast majority of them, and sufficiently debunk all of the CT'ers theories.

A question is NOT a "theory". It is a question. Just because some are so willing to blindly, accept the "explanations' their LYING Gov't says ....does not make them "right" either.

And your assertion that the government has "lied", demands that you present sufficient facts and evidence to support your assertion lest you be considered yet another in a long line of mental 10 watts, and appropriately dismissed as such.

And just because a report is gov't based and looks like it is "factual".... does not make it accurate either.

No it doesn't, but when coupled with the mountains of evidence from independent engineers, photographic and video in support of what you call the "official version" makes it as accurate as possible.

We have in office the most deceitful , arrogant and vicious regime the US has ever known.

That statement alone reveals quite nicely that your knowledge of your own nations history is woefully and sorely lacking.

One CANNOT rule out their "involvement" completely as they had the MOST to GAIN from such an event. Remember the addage:

WHO BENEFITS??? The bush regime befitted a lot more than any silly malcontent terrorist gang. Terrorist gangs come and go. and have been a reality of society since man started walking upright. But the critical question remains: WHO BENEFITS.????

The terrorist group Al Qaeda and their associates benefitted by disrupting our nations economy, initially for over a year following the attacks, and because they knew that we would respond militarily, by disrupting our economy by compelling us to spend billions of dollars in order TO respond to the attacks. Disrupting our national "status quo" was their aim, and they succeeded in that aim. They knew that they would likely die as a result, and actually looked forward to it, but what they failed to account for is the fact that out of EVERY war in our nations history, we have become stronger as a result.

there remain too many unanswered questions. The reality is that we the population will NEVER know the whole truth behind the event ........ so the speculation will continue. That is human nature. It is a curious being , as it should be.

There's not problem with asking honest questions, but if you are going to ask these questions, then it is incumbent upon the questioner to first do their own THOUROUGH research, including the "official version", to see if the questions have already been "asked and answered", otherwise you come off sounding like a spoiled child who presists in asking "why is the sky blue" even after the question has been answered repeatedly. A lack of comprehension of the answer is not the fault of the person who answered it.
 
There's not problem with asking honest questions, but if you are going to ask these questions, then it is incumbent upon the questioner to first do their own THOUROUGH research, including the "official version", to see if the questions have already been "asked and answered", otherwise you come off sounding like a spoiled child who presists in asking "why is the sky blue" even after the question has been answered repeatedly. A lack of comprehension of the answer is not the fault of the person who answered it.

Amen.

CT's have NO interest in getting answer, only asking and finding MORE questions... THEY NEVER LISTEN TO THE ANSWERS! They just toss out more questions like it never happened.

From the list of things Conspiracy Theorists will NEVER say:

19) "Maybe I should look further by studying the science and not just reading what fellow conspiracy theorists tell me."

11) "Now that you have defeated one of my arguments, I will be sure to not use that argument again as though nothing ever happened."

4) "Before I post this conspiracy question on an Internet forum, maybe I should do a web search to see if it's been addressed already."
 
Sorry to deflate your bubble, but obviously your research into NORAD stopped at September 11, 2001, for if you had researched NORAD before September 11, 2001 you would have found quite a lot of articles from the news media and the government on NORAD's true capabilities on 9/11, which included monitoring and controlling the territorial airspace of America and Canada. This is what NORAD calls "Air Sovereignty". Let's take a little trip down memory lane (from the 1990s) and see what NORAD's mission was on 9/11:

The article NORAD: Air National Guard manning stations across the country (National Guard Association of the United States, Sep. 1997) explains how NORAD’s six battle management and command centers identify commercial aircraft as these aircraft are being monitored flying through our air space, "Aircraft flying over our air space are monitored seven days a week, 24hours a day. Much of the identifying process is done by hand.

Flight plans from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are compiled in logs and have to be manually searched to identify aircraft.

Unlike current operating procedures, the new system will mean fewer manual inquiries and phone contact with FAA officials about commercial aircraft. The FAA flight plan is now hooked up via computer with the new R/SAOCs so operators can easily track friendly aircraft through our air space without having to get someone on the phone or thumb through written log books of flight plans." --(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3731/is_199709/ai_n8766326.).

The above quote shows that NORAD radar operators are NOT passive, they actually contact FAA ATC operators to ask "what's going on" in the air. By the way, hijacked aircraft can't hide from NORAD nor FAA ATC! Let's continue with the pre-9/11 documents:

"The NORAD mission is threefold. NORAD's first responsibility is to provide SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL [emphasis mine] of the airspace covering North America, specifically the airspace of Canada and the United States. This mission is based on agreements between the two governments…

The second part of NORAD's mission is to provide the NCAs with tactical warning and attack assessment of an aerospace attack against North America. This information is essential to providing those in command with information to aid them in making decisions on how to respond to an attack against North America.

NORAD's third responsibility is to provide an appropriate response TO ANY FORM OF AN AIR ATTACK [emphasis mine]. NORAD was created to provide a defense against the threat from air-breathing aircraft, specifically the threat from long-range bombers. However, over the years the threat has changed. Now NORAD must provide an appropriate response to a multitude of threats, to include the air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) and the sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM)." -- NORAD AIR DEFENSE OVERVIEW; Northeast Parallel Architectures Center, Syracuse University, pre-1995(http://www.npac.syr.edu/projects/civ/vanguard/C2Demo/OPRef.html).

"One ongoing mission of the Battle Management Center is to coordinate "air sovereignty" efforts, MONITORING EVERY AIRCRAFT THAT ENTERS [emphasis mine] U.S. or Canadian airspace -- some 2.5 million a year. NORAD is asked to INVESTIGATE [emphasis mine] aircraft that do not file flight plans, contact ground controllers or identify themselves with TRANSPONDERS [emphasis mine]." -- Cheyenne Mountain: America's underground watchtower; CNN Interactive, 1999 (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/experience/the.bomb/route/01.cheyenne/).

"NORAD defines "sovereign airspace" as: the airspace over a nation's territory, internal waters, and territorial seas. NORAD's territorial seas extend 12 miles from the continental United States, Alaska, and Canada. Sovereign airspace above a nation's territory is unlimited." -- NORAD AIR DEFENSE OVERVIEW; Northeast Parallel Architectures Center, Syracuse University, pre-1995 (http://www.npac.syr.edu/projects/civ/vanguard/C2Demo/OPRef.html).

"The Air Operations Center (AOC) (also known as the Air Defense Operations Center – ADOC) maintains CONSTANT SURVEILLANCE OF NORTH AMERICAN AIRSPACE TO PREVENT OVERFLIGHT [emphasis mine] by hostile aircraft. It TRACKS [emphasis mine] over 2.5 million aircraft annually. The ADOC collects and consolidates surveillance information on suspected drug-carrying aircraft entering or operating WITHIN [emphasis mine] North America, and provides this information to counternarcotics agencies." -- Cheyenne Mountain Complex; Federation of American Scientists, 1999 (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/c3i/cmc.htm); Cheyenne Mountain Trivia; NORAD, April, 1997 (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usspc-fs/cmoctrivia.htm).

"In 1998, Canada posses the ability to detect, identify, and if necessary intercept aircraft over Canadian territory. The "Canadianisation" of NORAD operations over Canada is complete. Though we still rely heavily on the Americans for the Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment and mutual defense, we have successfully transitioned on at least one of the three core functions of NORAD [surveillance and control of the airspace covering Canada]." -- Canadian Aerospace Sovereignty: In Pursuit of a Comprehensive Capability, by Maj François Malo; Department of National Defence (Canada), 1998 (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/canada/0056.htm).

What does the United States government say about NORAD's capabilities within America? As reported by the General Accounting Office in 1994(GAO/NSIAD-94-76 ), "NORAD defines air sovereignty as providing surveillance and control of the territorial airspace, which includes:

1. intercepting and destroying uncontrollable air objects;

2. tracking hijacked aircraft;

3. assisting aircraft in distress;

4. escorting Communist civil aircraft; and

5. intercepting suspect aircraft, including counterdrug operations and peacetime military intercepts."

The above documents from the 1990s amply demonstrates that the official accounts of NORAD's capabilities on 9/11 were an absurd lie.

For more information on NORAD before 9/11, go to www.DNotice.org and read the three articles there on NORAD.
 
Wow! Dean, I applaud you in your ability to provide something of substance to the discussion. I hesitate to call you a Conspiracy Theorist for that reason...

However, are you pointing to this information as proof of a conspiracy or as proof of incompetence? There is a big difference between the two and I will readily admit to incompetence on many levels... But incompetence does not a conspiracy make.

The most recent example of when NORAD and the Civil Defense infrastructure was able to intercept a jet aircraft IN America was Pain Stewarts jet. It took nearly an hour and twenty minutes to find it and get an escort aircraft in position.

Also, you seemed to GLOSS OVER the fact that there were just 16 aircraft in the entire United States available for interception on 9/11... The closest pair being over an hour away from where the flights were hijacked.

MONITORING EVERY AIRCRAFT THAT ENTERS
As opposed to the ones that do not enter, like the ones that were hijacked over US territory.

The ADOC collects and consolidates surveillance information on suspected drug-carrying aircraft entering or operating WITHIN [emphasis mine] North America
And you think they had reason to believe the hijacked commercial aircraft were carrying drugs?

The above documents from the 1990s amply demonstrates that the official accounts of NORAD's capabilities on 9/11 were an absurd lie.
Please, share your source for the "official accounts of NORAD's capabilities on 9/11", I doubt whatever you think the "official account" is came from somewhere other than a Conspiracy site.... Prove me wrong, provide a link to the "official account" from somewhere thats recognized as an actual "official" source.

BTW, Welcome to the forum! Glad to have you with us, happy posting! :)
 
If we are going to discuss ( and maybe we should) CT'ers and their character flaws, how about setting up a thread just for that. The question posed as the title for THIS thread continues to be valid.....as the "g" and its "report" (no matter how many times it is read , analysed and othewised dissected, does not cover all the issues raised.

Ultimately, I suppose it's not pertinent to the discussion. Conspiracy theories (and those who support them) have a number of inherrent flaws, none of which prohibit them entirely from being correct every now and again.

WHO BENEFITS??? The bush regime befitted a lot more than any silly malcontent terrorist gang. Terrorist gangs come and go. and have been a reality of society since man started walking upright. But the critical question remains: WHO BENEFITS.????

You're looking at the problem too broadly. Just because, from your point of view after the fact, the Bush Administration "benefited" more from the 9/11 attacks, does not mean that, from someone like Osama Bin Laden's point of view prior to the attacks, the benefits would all have belonged to Al Qaida. When asking "Who benefits?" you attempt to establish motive by examining results, which is an imperfect practice since motive precedes results and is based on what could be a highly faulty perception of what the action in question will do.

there remain too many unanswered questions. The reality is that we the population will NEVER know the whole truth behind the event ........ so the speculation will continue. That is human nature. The human mind is a curious being , as it should be. (of course there are those that just accept what they are told and don't bother to question . They fit very well in an autocracy , which the US has become ~ but they will vehemently DENY that ,claiming their freedoms .........)

No one will ever know the whole, literal truth - about anything important, from JFK's assassination to 9/11. It isn't as though the people who planned it kept meticulous records before and during the attack - and it isn't as though modern science is miraculous enough to explain every detail of something as big, complex, and unique as the events of 9/11. Look at how many decades it took before a clear understanding of what happened to the "unsinkable" Titantic emerged - and there's still debate on that. The basics - ship hits iceberg, ship sinks - were understood, but the details were fuzzy. In the case of 9/11, the basics are understood - planes hit buildings, buildings fell. The details remain, in some cases, a little fuzzy. This doesn't necessarily mean a vast conspiracy is at work - it just means there are still things we need to learn.
 
Hey GenSeneca,

Go to www.DNotice.org for the web links to the three articles on NORAD. All the citations that the NORAD articles use are dated from the 1990s, so they have nothing to do with conspiracy sites or theorists. I found the documents myself doing research on NORAD. As you will see the articles come from Syracuse University, Canadian National Defense, General Accounting Office, NORAD (!), National Guard Association (whose members include the Air National Guard, the very persons that monitor NORAD's radar stations and fly the intercept fighters), Airman (the official magazine of the Air Force), etc.

All the articles repeat the same thing...that NORAD monitored aircraft within the United States and controlled the airspace within the United States.

As you will see "Air Sovereignty" is composed of various missions, such as monitoring aircraft that enter our borders (approximately 2.5 million aircraft in 1997), drug interdiction, monitoring hijacked aircraft, monitoring suspect aircraft, monitoring aircraft in need of assistance, etc. You see, if you can't monitor and control the airspace within the nation, you have no "Air Sovereignty". NORAD monitored all aircraft within the territory of the United States and Canada as the articles reveal.


I'll allow you to determine what to believe. As for me, the conclusion is obvious: Treason within the government.

Regards,

Dean Jackson
Washington, DC
 
Dean, you seemed to have missed my request:
The above documents from the 1990s amply demonstrates that the official accounts of NORAD's capabilities on 9/11 were an absurd lie. --Dean
Please, share your source for the "official accounts of NORAD's capabilities on 9/11"

The 1990 documents DO NOT have the "official accounts of NORAD's capabilities on 9/11"... So I ask again... please share your source for the "official accounts" as its very pertinant to the discussion.
-----------------------

Vyo,

Great post. :)
 
All the articles repeat the same thing...that NORAD monitored aircraft within the United States and controlled the airspace within the United States.

Which has NOTHING to do with the response time required, once a known incident has been identified, air crews are alerted, aircraft are "warmed up", armed, launched, and their ToT (Time on target). The fact of the matter is that from the time the IFF's had been disabled on the aircraft, and they were again picked up on conventional radar, the Twin Towers had already been hit, and Flight 77 was only 5 minutes away from hitting the Pentagon.

I'll allow you to determine what to believe. As for me, the conclusion is obvious: Treason within the government.

Regards,

Dean Jackson
Washington, DC

Of course, and that TREASON is on the part of CT'ers who belong to the "hate America first" crowd, and who continually attempt to foist this blathering nonsense, and outright LIES, onto the American people.
 
Can anyone help me out here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T2_nedORjw&NR=1

at the beginning of this video, there is a man standing at a podium and my question is: who is this man and are there any other presentations by this man?

What are you...12?? That's Ed Begley Jr. He's an ACTOR who doesn't know DICK about Engineering, and neither does that narrator in the video.
 
I am not impressed by comments like "he is only an ACTOR...."
Really now, any living breathing human being on this planet
has some power of observation and tends to form opinions of
whatever they see. However I'll give you this ...

Thank You for the info, I have sent an email to his fan site and requested a pointer to the full presentation.


If you where traveling on a highway and there where two SUVs on the side of the road badly damaged, you would naturaly speculate as to what may have happened, was one or more of the vehicles going too fast (or?)

Bottom line here is we have a PRESIDENT who makes statements like
"let us not tollerate outragious conspiracy theroys" when in fact the most outragious conspiracy theroy of all is the one about 19 radical Arabs hijacking 4 airliners and crashing 3 of them into buildings.

The entire story as told by the OFFICIAL reports on the subject, is a CROCK!

There are so many things that are highly improbable and when we start stacking up highly improbable events (as in one improbable event could not have happened if not for other improbable events that happened first)
The odds of things happening exactly the way that they did are VERY slim.

The WTC buildings for example, for a building to "collapse" in the way that the three buildings did on that day, would take TENS OF THOUSANDS of welds and connections to fail right on Q to get that effect.
it happened by accident? or? It had to be a planned event and the "NEW WORLD ORDER" had a hand in it.

Ya, its only the crazie paranoid weird person who is not credible,
HOWEVER - do this, when ever you get the oportunity, just think about it, meditate on it....
what hits your gut about this scene? does it look un-natural?

Truly
the emperor is NAKED!
 
Werbung:
HOWEVER - do this, when ever you get the oportunity, just think about it, meditate on it....
what hits your gut about this scene? does it look un-natural?
Gut feeling is no substitute for thought and careful analysis... Unless you're a CT.

Base rate fallacy: using weak evidence to make a probability judgment without taking into account known empirical statistics about the probability.
Conjunction fallacy: assumption that specific conditions are more probable than a single general one.
Existential fallacy: an argument has two universal premises and a particular conclusion, but the premises do not establish the truth of the conclusion
Historian's fallacy: a logical fallacy that occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision.

There are no shortage of fallacies that go into such a belief. Your statement that 19 hijackers is LESS probable than a MASSIVE government conspiracy and cover up stands out as ridiculous to anyone basing their opinions on provable empirical data.

Texas sharpshooter fallacy: a logical fallacy in which information that has no relationship is interpreted or manipulated until it appears to have meaning.
 
Back
Top