My question to those that accept the governments account of 911.

[screembloodymurder]

How was a hijacked jetliner, known to be hostile and essentially a missle, allowed to have an unimpeded 48-minute joyride in US airspace before slamming into the headquarters of the US military?

[Make7]

1. Why don't you just read the 9/11 Commission Report?

Edited to add link

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

- Make7

[screembloodymurder]

2. I have.

It's a lie.

[Make7]

3. Why are you asking for people that accept it to tell you what it says? nt.

[planeman]

5. If it is a lie.Prove it n/t.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[planeman]

9. You met one of the pilots of one of the 4 planes?Which one?n/t

[screembloodymurder]

22. Sunset Strip

and he was wearing his Naval Academy jacket.

[planeman]

36. You saw Tom McGuiness in 2002?

Are you seriously claiming that you saw Tom McGuiness in 2002 on SunSet strip?
He was supposed to have been killed when his plane,American Airlines Flight 11, flew into the North Tower at 8:46am on 9-11.

[John Q. Citizen]

46. Is that the report where you claim they are in error about the

time of impact of planes into the towers because they forgot to calibrate the time of radar sites, where the co-chairs say that the Pentagon, FAA and NORAD lied to them repeatedly and changed their stories repeatedly, and where the federal government wouldn't provide them with the information needed to do their work?

Great source for accurate information, apparently

[Make7]

51. Did you not understand the question that you just responded to?

Edited to change something

screembloodymurder opened the discussion with the following statement: "My question to those that accept the governments account of 911."

So - if the question is directed to people that accept the government account and the government account is contained in the 911 Commission Report, why not just read the government account to find out how the people that accept the government account would answer the question?

The accuracy, or inaccuracy of the government account is not relevant to how people that accept that account would answer the question. If they believe the government account, they would answer the question by stating what they believe - which is the government account. So why not just read the government account instead asking people what it says?

Or was the expected response from people that accept the government account something other than the government account?

John Q. Citizen wrote:

Is that the report where you claim they are in error about the time of impact of planes into the towers because they forgot to calibrate the time of radar sites, where the co-chairs say that the Pentagon, FAA and NORAD lied to them repeatedly and changed their stories repeatedly, and where the federal government wouldn't provide them with the information needed to do their work?

I think it has been demonstrated that their impact times were not accurate to the second. The times in the 911 Commission Report were off by 12 seconds or less - I advanced some possible reasons for the discrepancy in the thread to which you are referring. Did you find it odd in that thread that I was the one questioning the 911 Commission Report times and you started out by saying that you had no reason to doubt that those times were accurate?
I have never claimed that the government account is the full truth or 100% accurate.
I'm sorry if my revelation has shattered your previous confidence in the accuracy of the 911 Commission Report. However, I should point out that all of the information in this latest post of yours has been available for quite some time.

The actual impact times were contained in the final NIST report. The information about the different versions and inaccurate accounts concerning the air defense given to the 911 Commission by the military were outlined in the very first chapter of the 911 Commission Report itself, and there were numerous articles in the press concerning the difficulty the commission was having in obtaining information from various government agencies. There are still press releases and transcripts of press briefings available on the 911 Commission website that refer to those very issues.

Therefore I find your previous statement regarding having no reason to doubt the accuracy of the impact times contained in the 911 Commission Report to be somewhat puzzling. One can only guess as to why you would make such a statement in the first place.

- Make7

BTW - regarding your request for a link in post #258 of that other thread, here is where I found that information:

http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm

[savemefromdumbya]

4. There were exercises going on that day that messed everyone up

however, for the stronghold of the US military to not have prevented a non-friendly object breaking up the walls of the Pentagon is a mystery? This nonsense about 'oh airliners are flying into National airport every day so they can't fire anything in the vicinity of the Pentagon' makes one think it was arranged?

[screembloodymurder]

7. They knew a hijacked airliner was coming.

They knew it was hostile. They have a $500,000,000,000.00 dollar/year budget but couldn't protect their headquarters. No one got fired or demoted. The only explanation is that they were told to stand down.

[BootinUp]

12. "No one got fired or demoted"

Just buried.


nice theory. Not.

[petgoat]

14. Who got buried? Of 125 killed on the ground at the Pentagon, 100 were

civilian construction workers.

I haven't checked out the allegations on the identitities of the dead military
folks. Some say they were Naval Intelligence (hmmm, Delmart Vreeland's gang?).
Some say they were the budget people who knew about rhe missing $2.3 trillion.

Maybe you could do something useful and check it out.

[BootinUp]

17. here

look at this page if your interested. Not sure what your point is though. Americans in the pentagon died. I guess some here subscribe to the theory that Rumsfeld or that fucker Cheney would purposely sacrificed 125 at the Pentagon in addition to those on plane of course.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/lists/by-location/page88.html

[DoYouEverWonder]

41. Rumsfeld and Wolfie both were in the Pentagon that morning

watching the attack at the WTC on CNN and according to Paul Wolfowitz, they didn't there was anything they could do about it so they just continued with their meeting.

The two TOP CIVILIANS at the DOD watched the WTC being attacked and did nothing about it.

Funny, General Myers, the Acting Chief of Staff that day, had almost the same reaction. He was heading into a meeting at Senator Cleland's office when he saw the broadcast of the attack at the WTC on a TV is the front office. He asked the secretary not to disturb them for their meeting and didn't come out until after the Pentagon was hit. At that point, he finally thought that maybe he should get back over to the Pentagon.

All three knew that this was a catastrophe with a massive lose of life on US soil in progress, yet none of them thought there was anything they should do? Oh gosh.

[savemefromdumbya]

19. they got promoted and given medals

[savemefromdumbya]

18. where are the records or are they classified or shredded

[mirandapriestly]

8. good question screem

I don't believe the gov version. I do not think you will get much of a response from it's supporters. Just semantics and intimidation games as you can see. People consider the Bush administration to be credible , I guess.

[SheilaT]

10. Check out this video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7501020220921158523&q=9%2F11&hl=en

Keep in mind that 48 minutes isn't all that long, especially when there's a lot of confusion about what's happening, how many planes are involved, and so on.

What puzzles me is that people would prefer to believe in convoluted hypotheses (theory is simply not the correct word here0 that usually involve dozens, maybe hundreds of people to be involved in some ludicrous conspiracy, rather than the simple truth: a small group of men learned how to fly airplanes well enough to aim them at large, visible targets and had the nerve to fly those planes directly into those targets.

[mirandapriestly]

11. Yes, the gov't version IS convoluted, isn't it?

over 80% of DUers think so. ( "Penn & Teller- bwahaha)

[AZCat]

34. Not true.

You are extrapolating from a small sample size, and the data does not support your certainty.

Perhaps you'd like a little lesson in statistics?

[petgoat]

15. The hundreds of people were involved in a "conspiracy" called

classified war games. They are not permitted to talk about
classified war games.

There were six simultaneous classified war games on 9/11.

The question is, who told al Qaeda when the war games were happening?

Your simple truth of 19 hijackers does not answer the question of why
they weren't stopped.

BTW, welcome to the dungeon! :hi:

[savemefromdumbya]

21. there were no men

[rman]

23. Private planes going astray are usually intercepted with 15 minutes

48 minutes IS long.

[Make7]

30. Really? Can you cite two pre-911 examples? ( n/t )

[Marnieworld]

37. 1- Payne Stewart

golfer's plane was intercepted that quickly.

[planeman]

39. Could you provide a source for that please.

9-11 was an unprecedented event with full-on commercial airliners being the subject of unforseen hijackings.
It is only to be expectd that the response by our airdefense was erratic and not coherent.They have subsequently tried to cover up this lack of coherence

[rman]

42. "unforseen hijackings" - LOL. May i redirect you to

DATA DUMP: "9/11 was Clinton's fault" - by William Pitt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1975019

<snip>

In 1993, a $150,000 study was undertaken by the Pentagon to investigate the possibility of airplanes being used as bombs. A draft document of this was circulated throughout the Pentagon, the Justice Department, and to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

In 1994, a disgruntled Federal Express employee invaded the cockpit of a DC10 with the intention of crashing it into a company building.

Again in 1994, a pilot crashed a small airplane into a tree on the White House grounds, narrowly missing the building itself.

Also in 1994, an Air France flight was hijacked by members of a terrorist organization called the Armed Islamic Group, who intended to crash the plane into the Eiffel Tower.

The 1993 Pentagon report was followed up in September 1999 by a report titled "The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism." This report was prepared for the American intelligence community by the Federal Research Division, an adjunct of the Library of Congress. The report stated, "Suicide bombers belonging to Al Qaida's martyrdom battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the CIA, or the White House."

Ramzi Yousef was one of the planners and participants in the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. Yousef's right-hand man, Abdul Hakim Murad, was captured and interrogated in 1995. During that interrogation, Murad described a detailed plot to hijack airplanes and use them as weapons of terrorism. The primary plan was to commandeer eleven commercial planes and blow them up over the Pacific Ocean. The secondary plan was to hijack several planes, which would be flown into CIA headquarters, the World Trade Center, the Sears Tower, the White House and a variety of other targets.

Abdul Hakim Murad described plans to use hijacked commercial airplanes as weapons in 1995. Ramzi Yousef's trial further exposed the existence of these plans in 1997. Two reports prepared by the American government, one from 1993 and another from 1999, further detailed again the existence and danger of these plots. The Federal Express employee's hijacking attempt in 1994, the attempted airplane attack on the White House in 1994, and the hijacking of the Air France flight in 1994 by terrorists intending to fly the plane into the Eiffel Tower, provided a glaring underscore to the data.

FBI agents in Phoenix issued a warning in the summer of 2001 about suspicious Arab men receiving aviation training in American flight schools. The warning was never followed up. An agent in the Arizona field office commented in his case notes that Zacarias Moussaoui, arrested in August after suspicious activity at one of these flight schools, seemed like a man capable of flying airplanes into the World Trade Center.

Newspapers in Germany, France, Russia and London reported in the months before September 11th a blizzard of warnings delivered to the Bush administration from all points on the compass. The German intelligence service, BND, warned American and Israeli agencies that terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft and use them as weapons to attack important American targets. Egypt warned of a similar plot to use airplanes to attack Bush during the G-8 summit in Genoa in June of 2001. This warning was taken so seriously that anti-aircraft missiles were deployed around Columbus Airport in Italy.

<more>

--------

The "we could not have known" claim is possibly the most obvious and blatent of all the lies told by the Bush administration.
Unforeseen my ass.

[Make7]

40. Actually, that took over an hour.

The following post is part of a discussion we had recently regarding that very issue:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=109200&mesg_id=109677

I selected that post because it has the relevant information from the NTSB report. Please note the different time zone references within the report. If you open up the link to the actual report, be sure to scroll down and read note 7 which states: "About 1010 EDT, the accident airplane crossed from the EDT zone to the CDT zone in the vicinity of Eufaula, Alabama."

Also of interest is this post with a preliminary Air Force timeline of the incident:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=109200&mesg_id=109702

So I guess there isn't even one example then.

- Make7

[hack89]

49. It took over an hour to intercept his plane.

from loss of communications to intercept

At 0933:38 EDT (6 minutes and 20 seconds after N47BA acknowledged the previous clearance), the controller instructed N47BA to change radio frequencies and contact another Jacksonville ARTCC controller. The controller received no response from N47BA. The controller called the flight five more times over the next 4 1/2 minutes but received no response.

About 0952 CDT <1052 EDT>,7 a USAF F-16 test pilot from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at Eglin Air Force Base (AFB), Florida, was vectored to within 8 nm of N47BA.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAB0001.htm

[screembloodymurder]

24. I've heard one world class pilot

say he could not make the maneuver required to hit the Pentagon. If he couldn't do it, it wasn't routine.

[AZCat]

33. The opinion of your "world class pilot"...

does not jive with either my experience or the experience of other posters in this forum. Perhaps a perusal of the extensive archives here would provide insight - it's been discussed quite a few times.

[mhatrw]

27. What puzzles me is how people could think it so easy for

Osama and his 19 to pull off 9/11 with no help from any powerful and well-placed insiders but so inconceivable for Osama and his 19 to pull off 9/11 with some help from a few powerful and well-placed insiders.

Does that make any sense to you?

[screembloodymurder]

32. I think the government's explanation is impossible.

The evidence found at the scene was the equivalent of three miracles. The entire FBI should be up for Sainthood.

[whistle]

38. You say 48 minutes? The video at the link is just over 9 minutes...

...narrated by a foul mouthed "Alex Jones" sound alike, providing a stream of Josef Goebbels style propaganda filled with verbal and visual ridicule and innuendo. What right-wing PR outfit churned out this video? They did not even have the courtesy to provide rolling credits at the end.

[BootinUp]

13. How come you didn't call them that morning

and straighten them out? There was plenty of time after all.

[petgoat]

16. According to the official account, after three hijacked planes

had been flown into buildings, FAA officials confronted with news of a fourth plane
had to stand around and debate whether to inform NORAD of the fourth, and in
fact did NOT notify NORAD until four minutes after it had crashed.

And yet nobody was fired. You want to buy my shares in the Chesapeake Tunnel, cheap?

[BootinUp]

20. the Court tv show indicated

the interceptors went the wrong way. I don't remember the exact timing. More than likely they FAA lost track of the plane and didn't know what to do. Dumb fucks. How do you know no one was fired?

[petgoat]

25. You are inventing assumptions favorable to the official case.

That's what I did: Assumed that the air war was over so fast (20 minutes)
that NORAD never had a chance. My assumption was wrong.

The Langley planes got the DC soon after 77 allegedly hit the Pentagon, so they
could have got out to Shanksville by 10:03.

As to no one getting fired, in the absence of any evidence that anyone got fired,
I'll suppose no one got fired.

[Brainster]

26. Read the Vanity Fair Article

Michael Bronner makes it clear that Flight 77 (the plane that crashed into the Pentagon) was only reported to NORAD at 9:34, approximately 225 seconds before impact.

9:34:01WASHINGTON CENTER: Now, let me tell you this. I—I'll—we've been looking. We're—also lost American 77—
WATSON: American 77?

[BootinUp]

28. darn inconvenient facts

stop that.

[screembloodymurder]

31. I read it.

And that's not how I understood it. They knew it was headed to DC long before that.

[BootinUp]

35. please quote the section of the article

you are referring to.

[RedSock]

50. this is hilarious

Four days after 9/11, it was widely reported, including in the New York Times, that military people in the Pentagon knew about Flight 77 at 8:45 am -- and they were talking about what to do about it -- almost an hour before it crashed into the very building those people were in.

So the Pentagon clearly knew. Did they have the authority to send up fighters?

*****

I found the Times quote. It's from September 15, 2001:

"During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do."

If the Pentagon was struck at 9:37, then the military at the Pentagon knew about hijacked Flight 77 at approximately 8:37 -- about ten minutes before the first Tower was hit.

[greyl]

53. No, it's very sad.

Show me just one of the widely reported reports that the Pentagon knew that Flight 77 was hijacked and heading towards the Pentagon.

The Times quote does not say what you want it to be saying, period.

[TheWraith]

29. The victory of inititive.

There's a simple truth about strategic engagements: generally, whoever has the inititive wins. In this case, the attackers had a simple, clear plan that they carried out. The defenders were taken by surprise, confused, the leadership trying to figure out what was happening, what they were supposed to do, what they were allowed to do, the people under their command confused and waiting for instructions, and everybody trying to catch up with the last thing that happened, rather than moving to head off the next thing to happen. You can break it down to specific events, but the core is that they were constantly reacting to things after the fact, never acting, so they lost. That's why the controllers failed to report the hijackings properly; it's why NORAD only got the word about the plane four minutes before impact; it's why there wasn't already a defensive CAP over every major city.

[BootinUp]

43. Read the recent article at Vanity Fair. n/t

[Norrin Radd]

44. That article answers nothing. It only raises more questions.

Perhaps those snippets from the NEADS tapes would be relevant if the public were allowed to examine the entirety of the recordings.

And Bronner isn't exactly an impartial source.

[BootinUp]

45. Who would be impartial to you?

And why is he not impartial.

[Norrin Radd]

47. Someone who was studying and subsequently releasing the tapes

without an agenda--merely as a document of evidence and history. Preferably, though, they would be released to the public, and not through a filter.

Clearly, he wrote this to counter questions regarding the official story, because he mentions the word "conspiracy" six times throughout the article.

[salvorhardin]

48. So by your criteria

without an agenda--merely as a document of evidence and history. Preferably, though, they would be released to the public, and not through a filter.

Clearly, he wrote this to counter questions regarding the official story, because he mentions the word "conspiracy" six times throughout the article.

So by this same criteria you reject the entire 9-11 Truth movement too, right? After all, they're only trying to counter the "OCT". They have an "agenda". One that I dare say is more invidious than anything I've seen come out of NIST or any other non-PCT scientist, but then I suppose it's not "TRUTH!!!111" if you can't promote your latest book or DVD.

[Norrin Radd]

52. "OCT?" I don't believe I've ever posted that epithet in this forum,

nor have I ever expressed any opinions about what you refer to as the "9-11 Truth movement," so I have no idea from whom you are quoting. I try to assemble my own interpretations and beliefs regarding any given matter without an organization dictating them to me, so I'd appreciate you not trying to put words into my mouth. I can speak for myself, thank you very much.

[mirandapriestly]

54. Bronner is biased, here is an example

He was on NPR and someone called and asked if flight 93 was shot down. His response was no he saw the radar screen and the "plane fell straight down" it didn't break up. Now, I don't think that a shot down plane on a radar screen is going to get broken up into tiny pieces, I think they just show the transponder number moving along or stopping. It was shocking that he was giving these opinions important issues and he has no background or authority to do so.