Hmmmm… I think we’re tin-foil hat territorry here. A single witness, has completely uncarroberated statement that he worked for a sectret government program 25 years ago. He has no documentary evidence to support this or other carroberating witnesses.
As other posters have pointed out there was plenty stuff that should have raised warning signals prior to 9/11 (remeber “Bin laden determined to attack america”). But there is not evidence that that was anything other incompetence (IF it WAS a conspiracy WHY leave so much fake evidence that does nothing that make the PTB INCOMPETENT).
For those who are interested in what NIST is actually discovering about the WTC attacks, an interesting presentation is found at Reliving 9/11, With Fire as Teacher.
Including:
(Regarding computer simulations):
Yes, the most holy of holies, the president. In some people’s minds, these decisions are justified for the “greater good”. For others, it is a matter of what they can get away with and what is best for them personally. Do all of you here really subscribe to a school-book version of history? You don’t know history unless you are focusing your attention on declassifed information…the non-whitewashed version. What access do you have to still-classified information that the rest of us don’t, so that you are in a greater position of competence?
So? The WTC was a natural subject for such speculation being (I believe at the time) the tallest buildings in the U.S. and an easy-to-spot target for a suicidal pilot. The military comes up with all kinds of seemingly off-the-wall scenarios, including invading friendly nations or repelling invasions from same. In this particular case, one such concept happened to come tragically true.
Had you come across plans about a less prominent New York building (say, the Flatiron) and said building ended up being destroyed under circumstances far murkier than the WTC… well, even then, that wouldn’t comprise evidence.
As a side note, my nation’s military routinely stages exercises in which we are fighting the fictional nation of “Orangeland”, whose territory covers parts of what is real-life southern Quebec and northern New York state (at least, that’s how we play it in my Montreal-based unit - units out west presumably adjust Orangeland’s borders to conform to their available training space). That doesn’t actually mean we are planning attacks against the U.S.
I’m certainly not holding mine for the various questions I’ve asked and still received no answer too. The discussion is really getting wild if we are off into the la la land of the FDR CT. I’m sensing we’ll be hitting the moon landing hoax soon at this rate…
Well that’s the beauty of it, for someone who actually does want to carry out a real attack. Under various innocent pretexts, including preparing for possible terrorists attacks, you can actually plan and refine plans for your own terrorist attacks. Who even among those in relatively high positions would be the wiser? You can even plan drills for the very thing you are planning to do on the very day you are planning to do it to confuse your people to the extent they are unable to defend against it. I have a much higher regard for U.S. military personnel than the rest of you apparently do, I don’t think they are at all incompetent in what they do, and they would have done the very thing they are trained to do that day had they not been intentionally prevented from doing it.
Another good way to help things work smoothly if you are planning to assist and direct a large-scale terrorist attack against your own nation is to prepare a memo directing unprecendented transfer of control of air defenses over to yourself in the event of a hijacking like Dick Cheney did in this June 1, 2001 Document.
Oh that’s right, I forgot. :smack:
There are no conspiracies, oops, shame on me and my incompetence.
Honestly, you all should do a little investigative research instead of buying what you are told so easily. Critical thought is a good thing.
I’ve said it once, I’ve said it twice, I’ll say it again. There are at least 15 reasons why the 9/11 conspiracy is absurd. Do you, Sent, bigpoppadiaz or any other CT still following this debate, have any response?
Here is my theory. The 9/11 conspiracy proponents are doing such a poor job that they must be planted by the real conspirators to make the idea seem preposterous. Unless of course, they want us to think that the proponents are plants just to throw us off course. It just gets deeper and deeper the more you look at it.
Only two posters in this thread are buying what they’re told so easily. Have you not noticed that it’s the conspiracy theorists who are touting unbelieveable stuff and relying on certain people to “buy what you are told so easily”?
And your suggestion that others do investigative researching is quite funny.
You are aware that your “plot” involves planning an attack under the administration of Gerald Ford, then passing it along to the Carter administration to the Reagan administration to the Bush administration to the Clinton administration to the Bush administration and not one person in 25 years saw fit to blow the whistle except a single soldier involved in some routine drills, right? And all those groups–from both parties–were simply waiting for the appropriate day to launch an attack so as to secure the rights to a pipeline that they have never bothered to build.
That is not what I have been saying. And I doubt others said that as well.
Because it takes time to heat a column of steel. NISt experiments showed that it took about an hour.
Have you heard of the Meridian Fire in Philadelphia? Or the Madrid Windsor? The former had firefighting efforts abandoned because the PFD feared a pancake collapse. The latter’s steel structure did collapse, fortunately the majority of the building was based on a concrete structure, which was much more resistant to fire damage.
Look, Sent, no one doubts that plane attacks against buildings were considered by various defense sub-groups at various times. That is not at all in question here. Yes, on 9/12/2001, the administration’s surprise was over-acted. We know this.
But let’s look at the quality of the “evidence” that you’ve posted here. Some guy, who claims to be an “enlistedman” 30 years ago, and claims that he took part in some kind of military consideration of plane/building attacks, is coming out with the info because he was given “Non-Resindable Orders that I was given to get this information to the American People if the World Trade Center Twin Towers was ever Attacked in the Manner in which we discussed in the Study.”
So… atrocious writing skills, poor logic in extrapolating some drills 30 years ago with attacks 25 years later, can’t get someone to edit his writing for him, and he brings as evidence…
… wait for it…
… that he passed a polygraph.
Isn’t that just … typical. Not of him, but of you for even bringing this up as some kind of point.
The quotes are a bit out of order, but I’m rearranging them solely to point out a contradiction:
Is Dick Cheney in a sufficiently high position to be the wiser, or not?
It’s becoming unclear to me what role you think the U.S. military played in all of this? Were they planning the attack, or prevented from defending against it? The Cheney memo you cite clearly puts control of “law enforcement activity” concerning hijacked aircraft (military and civil) under the FAA, with the military directed to provide assistance. Is senior military authority involved in this at all?
Don’t beat yourself up. There was a conspiracy, of 19 men and several dozen others, mostly of Arab descent, to hijack and crash American commercial jets.