I suppose it is time for me to do my own finger pointing here and my fingers point at those whom I believe knew EVERYTHING: Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Richard Armitage, Dov Zackheim, Donald Rumsfeld...perhaps a few more...Those mentioned are the main players though.
I believe that these above people, not only planned but also were in some way part of the actual orchestration of intentionally allowing aircraft to ram into US buildings, killing thousands, all with the intention to fulfill specific goals/ agenda.
The above mentioned people all were and many are still part of PNAC.
PNAC was established in 1997 and funded largely by the energy and arms industries, the Project for the New American Century was founded as the neoconservative think tank whose stated goal was to usher in a “new American century�. Having won the cold war and no military threat to speak of, this group of ideologues created a blueprint for the future whose agenda was to capitalise upon surplus of military forces and funds (at the time) and forcing American hegemony and corporate privatisation throughout the world. In their statement of principles they outline the following agenda:
1.Toppling of regimes resistant to their (US) corporate interests
2. Forcing democracy at the barrel of a gun in regions that have no history of the democratic process
3. Replacing the UN’s role of preserving and extending international order
The full agenda can be read at
www.newamericancentury.org
This is also the group who put out there the idea to invade Afghanistan for starters, get a geo-political "position" and continue from there. The ball started rolling on this plan to invade Afghanistan, which is evident by the reports from Janes Defense (march 2001) and the others, prior to 911 I mentioned and also US and "coalition" troops in neighbouring countries to Afghanistan in August 2001. This is the "thinktank" group who stated their goals would never be realised “absent some catastrophic catalysing event –like a new Pearl Harbor�. ie: attack on US soil.
Can you tell me cnorman, how or why, either the UN or the US people would agree TO an invasion of Afghanistan without the events of 911 having happened?
As I stated earlier, interestingly a majority of these people "coincidently" became part of the Bush Admin. Interestingly as well, Dov Zackheim and also Richard Armitage were heirachy at Raytheon. as to the rest, I will include your questions.
And are we to assume that he "just did his job" and followed the scenario of the drill to the point of actually flying the plane into the building?
As it has already been established, it was not and more than likely probably still isn't unusual for NORAD, FAA and other US agencies to run live drills, especially to do with hijacking scenarios. IN these LIVE scenarios it is also not unusual for autonomous flight to kick in, disabling ANY control the live pilot(in the case of fl77 - Burlingame) has over the craft. It is a well known fact that Raytheon had been testing this actual device in civil airliners and it is also a well known fact that BOEING 757 and 767's were equiped with this anti-hijacking technology. It is also interesting to know that on all flights 11, 77 and 175, Raytheon Execs were there, and my assumption as to why was to sus out how it worked for themselves...just doing their job, just as Burlingame was, just as John Ogonowski(fl11) and just as Victor Saracini(fl 175) was. I don't believe that Burlingame, Saracini, Ogonowski OR the Raytheon blokes on the aircraft had ANY idea that they were going to die and take hundreds(from the aircraft alone) with them. They were just joing their job, testing equipment, ironically there to make things safer.
A former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, obtained an on-the-record confirmation from NORAD that ON 9/11, NORAD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack exercise which involved government-operated aircraft POSING AS HIJACKED AIRLINERS.
So, all of these "several thousand ordinary Americans(convinced) to participate in the mass murder of thousands of innocents", would have needed no convincing, to be party to what they assumed at the time was "just another drill" so again, they were just doing their job. What is it you don't GET about that?
cnorman wrote:
The connection? Some semblance of an actual scenario?
I left my above quote this time, but actually underlined a very specific and important detail. Perhaps I should put it to you this way cnorman. On 911, these LIVE anti hijacking drills were taking place. These drills were to run through yet again, the procedures of what to do and the actions to take when aircraft is hijacked. IF one is to believe the "official story", it would mean that these 19 muslim hijackers were able to hijack these aircraft successfully, DESPITE the live drills being done at the time with blow by blow instructions AT HAND to STOP IT FROM HAPPENING! Now do you believe these agencies, there to "protect your skies" are so damned incompetant, they cannot protect the US people OR the skies, even with the instructions of EXACTLY what to do in this LIVE scenario there?
Now again, going by the official story, these obviously savvy muslim hijackers, (hey they would have HAD to have been to foil all these agencies doing the live drills at the time intentionally being done at the time to "stop those meddling muslims"), but apparently not savvy enough to either bring forth or push back said 'plot" so it would not fit into the well known of, already planned, prepped and posted October 2001 invasion of Afghanistan by the US and it's coalition forces. WOW lucky break for the US huh?
You speak as if all this stuff explains everything. Okay; if it does, what HAPPENED?
Do I need to write it again?
This, however, is not credible. That no one - repeat, NO ONE - has come forward with testimony saying, "I was told to ignore this and do that and now I realize I was being used to make this mass murder happen" makes these scenarios incredible to me.
The thing is cnorman, you are just assuming no one has tried.
Sorry. I just don't believe that everyone in all of these supposed categories of "dupes" is entirely devoid of balls. I would come forward instantly, and I'm just an ordinary guy. Wouldn't you?
Hypothetically, I say I would come forth instantly as well, however our "imagine if" answers rarely mirror what we actually do when faced with the reality of a situation.
"STFU"? The proper response is "F. you!" Threaten to kill me? Kill me, but I'll be calling CNN and the NYT before I tell you I'm going to do it and therefore before you get the chance.
And they could possibly kill you before you can even pick up the phone to blab.
If this had happened as you speculate, there would be direct testimony and direct evidence, not just speculation, coincidence, innuendo, hints and possibilities. I have seen none.
I find it amusing that anyone believing even part of the "official story", apart from the bit where they mention planes smashed into buildings, has the audacity to even make such claims.
You have achieved the level of vague suspicion. No more. But you act as if the case is clear, detailed and proven beyond doubt. I don't call that "logical."
Well I have given you a brief rundown as to what I reckon happened and why, who and how it all fits.
There have been however a multitude of whistleblowers since, and I will mention Sibel Edmonds again by name, as well as William Rodrigeus, Scott Forbes, Fillipe David and Anthony Saltamachia, as well as many, many others.
Where can I learn more about these people and their testimony? What exactly did they say? Who did they implicate? If their testimony is bombshell material, why wasn't it on the front page of the New York Times every day for more than a month? Abu Ghraib was.[/quote]
Googling their names would be a good start for you, if of course you are earnestly interested. I don't actually like leading people to "opinion only" sites if I can help it, especially those extremely skeptical, hence my only putting up the official PNAC site for your perusal. In reference to your example re Abu Ghraib, I have not seen the daily's making any reference to the goings on at GITMO for some years now and even when it was reported, it rarely if ever hit the front pages. Ironically too those issues to do with Abu Ghraib, it was not actually those giving the orders who were held responsible and if anything the whole torture "scandal" was, like 911 handled in a whitewashed manner. FYI as well, the fact that there were 14 prisons like Abu Ghraib in Iraq, where the same things were happening and with some STILL continue to happen. What do you know of these places, cnorman? I know a lot as I was in Iraq for 18 months (my job took me there) and witnessed things that never rated a mention on page 20, let alone page 1.
In other words, no one knows what they said. And this proves what? What do the controllers themselves say they said? Again, if this is evidence of such enormous importance, why, etc.?
Well the bloke who confiscated the tape after listening to it knew what they all had to say and all I can say is, IF it was supportive of the official story, I have no doubt it would have been broadcast morning to night for months as an alleged "proof". If you had damning evidence to aid in proving a case, would YOU destroy it? Also they are mentioned briefly in the 911 Commission Report.
You realize, of course, that you are implying that the mass media - not just in America, but in the UK and the entire English-speaking world, including your own country - have no interest in investigating or reporting one of the most enormous scandals and most heinous crimes in human history.
Do you think THAT is credible? I don't.
Quite the contrary. There are two tv channels here (one being the Australian Broadcasting Network - govt owned) which has had MANY an expose as to the BS happening and SBS too.(Special Broadcasting Services) goes even further. Especially in regard to 911 and Iraq, there have been HEAPS, the goings on with GITMO the same. Don't gauge the lack of info you get as to what others actually DO.
Sorry, but all the "unanswered questions ' I have seen or read anywhere, including in your post, pale into insignificance next to that one.
Well you can hear squat while you are "la la laing" with fingers in your ears, cnorman18.
[/quote]
I don't find that an explicit claim that my disagreeing with your opinion makes me a deliberately ignorant moron is an answer; nor do I find that it inclines me to consider it more deeply. Those are the words and the attitude of a fanatic and a True Believer, and have nothing to do with civil debate.
The words deliberately ignorant moron are your words not mine, I was not alluding to that. I do realise however that sometime we can see things in front of us and choose not to recognise them as they will destroy what we have previously believed.
I went through the same thing when I finally realised that Australias intentions towards East Timor were not of a benevolent nature at all, but actually, completely self serving and heinous. I also appreciate that members of the Aust Govt could also have been privvy to the ACTUAL goings on as to 911 as they were certainly there, warts and all as to Iraq, where the lies were OBVIOUS but they still continued on regardless.
.
I never said I swallowed the 'official version" whole. There are some questions about that,
But you believe it in part so what parts DO you actually believe?
This controversy strikes me as so silly on the face of it that I haven't given that a lot of thought,
I find it disturbing that in one post you claim it was the (paraphrased) the most preposterous and heinous act in history, but now you say the controversy as to it, strikes you as so silly that you couldn't be bothered giving it much thought.
but I think it's pretty certain that the planes were hijacked by extremist Muslim fanatics
And this alleged certainty is based on exactly WHAT compelling, credible evidence?
(which, in spite of claims to the contrary, in no way reflects on ordinary Muslims - a point which was made clear by very many commentators and authorities, including President Bush himself).
Uh hu, so it in no way supposedly reflects on "ordinary muslims", however they are the ones years later still daily suffering the fallout?
BTW, what allegedly constitutes an "ordinary muslim" in the eyes of these commentators, authorities and dubya?
cnorman wrote:
I am aware of all the drills and exercises and so on that were allegedly taking place on that day. I have seen no proof of any direct connection, or even any detailed guess at what that connection might be. I doubt very much that any pilot taking part in an "exercise" would carry it to the point of actually flying into a building, and given that, what specific scenario would explain these events if Al Qaeda was NOT involved?
WHAT HAPPENED? If there was a conspiracy, how did it work? How, exactly, did this happen? Long lists of "relevant facts" are all very well, but how do they connect?
Who flew the damn planes into the buildings, and why?
ANSWERED.
Past incidents are irrelevant War plans that have been in place since the Clinton Administration are irrelevant.
Why to you are the common practices of the US governments throughout time irrelvant in your eyes?
Because (a) they are none of them any more proven than the allegations you post here, (b) they are the products of wildly different Administrations even if true, and (c) the analysis you offer here based on those ideas betrays some extremely broad and extremely negative assumptions about my country that I do not think are warranted. That does not make me a rabid flag-waver, whatever you think.
The rather poorly hidden assumption that anyone who does not instantly accept your speculations as proven fact, and does not assume
a priori that every statement from the US government as a blatant and obvious lie, is necessarily a Bush-worshipping jingoist is an attitude and approach that I do not find credible or persuasive. It is characteristic of fanatics that they regard their own approach as the only sane or permissible one, and assume that everyone who disagrees is either sticking their fingers in their ears and singing or is a willing supporter of the regime.
JUST FYI, the scenarios I mentioned as comparison to previously done LIH's MIH's etc, HAVE been shown to have quite literally been US conspiracy jobs. All you have to do is check the US National Security Archives and check the declassified documents relating to ALL the ones mentioned, even to having PDF copies OF the declassified docs there and I only mentioned the bettter known ones. IF you end up sussing out the site, just be prepared as it is obvious by your replies, you will not like one little bit what you see.
I am not going to reply to the continuous who why and what happened questions as I reckon I have answered it adequately above..
but I wil respond to these:
This is the kind of thing that I find incredibly bigoted and annoying, The assumption that all Americans are ignorant and easily manipulated yahoos who believe in cartoons and superheroes is rather common in other nations. It's a load of stereotype, prejudice and politically correct crap. Perhaps you noticed that we just elected a notably leftist black man as our next President, and by a considerable margin. How does that track with your anti-American stereotype?
No I assume that some Americans are ignorant and easily manipulated. And yes I have noticed that there is a new president elect, but I hardly think your show of supposed "growth" works when you go out of your way to point out that he is black and a leftist.
Perhaps you pay more attention to our popular media than we do, and only to selected parts of it. Rambo and Die Hard both came out more than a decade ago. We have produced a few other movies, too, including Fahrenheit 911, JFK, An Inconvenient Truth, Bowling for Columbine, Nixon, All The President's Men, Platoon, Apocalypse Now, and, oh, a couple of hundred more of that kind. Perhaps those weren't in wide release in Australia. They were megahits here.
yes and the majority you mentioned had the hollywood spin attached. Even Michael Moore in my opinion is a schill for the most part. Admittedly though SICKO was ok.
If you want to criticize my country, don't traffic in silly, hateful stereotypes and ignore the other side entirely.
I lived in the US for a time a few years back and was able to witness first hand the very insular "life" there. That is what I am going on.
Not even all Texans are Bush supporters. I voted for Obama.
Well bully for you and congrats on your candidate becoming president-elect. However it does have to be said that the majority of Texans voted for McCain.
How do you feel about the stereotype of Australians as unwashed, semiliterate, provincial happy drunks who are indifferent to the plight of the native peoples they murdered, abused and still discriminate against? Does that annoy you just a bit?
No it doesn't bother me at all, because I realise full well that some aussies DO fit that stereotype. I personally don't, so the comment has no affect on me personally.
Do I need to bother replying to the rest? I don't think so as I have answered specifically your questions as to WHO, WHY and HOW as to 911.
------------------------
BETO,
I will have to reply to you tomorrow as it is getting late here. Thank you though for your reply.
As for the Pentagon, yes. I do believe it was an aircraft(as in Boeing) which hit it, however I cannot believe that the alleged "hijacker" pilot assumed to have taken over that aircraft could have flown it with the expertise attributed to "him" considering he flunked cessna 101! lol Something I have always wondered about was the tapes from the hotel and also the gas station confiscated immediately, never to surface.
I do however take the manifest into account, but then again FL93 was not even scheduled for that day and those supposedly on it were again supposedly overflow from a not FULL earlier flight. ( I have more info as to all that (fl93) in my "favs" and will go into it even more if you are interested ) So with fl93..... my opinion is ????????? undecided at this point.
