page 14

2/13/2004 1:17:19 PM

well, i really don't think it's asinine, but i do want to know how you can justify complaining about other people who "blindly believe the lies the government and mass media has [sic] brainwashed us to believe" and then follow that by going by evidenct that includes reports from local news channels. just a thought...

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 1:21 PM. Reason : typo]

2/13/2004 1:21:02 PM

Quote :

"Are common criminals and conspirators not guilty because they were not successful in covering their tracks? Of course no"

The problem is not there being some evidence, the fact is the claims you're making make these people EXTREMELY STUPID. Simple things like using planes + explosives instead of just using a giant explosive would have worked much better. The fact is, you're painting a grand conspiracy scheme, but the more you paint, the dumber these people look, which leads me to believe there is no conspiracy. Oh, and by the way:

common criminal != multinational multi century conspiracy group.

Quote :

"Any more asinine questions you want answered?"

yes

HOW DO YOU KNOW THE BATF KNEW THERE WOULD BE A BOMBING, BUT YOU CAN"T TELL ME WHY THE GREAT CONSPIRACY LETS DISENTERS LIVE AND IS TOO STUPID TO PROPERLY COVER THEIR TRACKS?

Why don't you present the original articles and interviews? Why do you use this selectively edited shit? What are you hiding?

why the multinational conspiracy group has failed Conspiracy 101.

Isn't it convenient how you can tell us what the people in the government knew and didn't know. You can tell us how a building is supposed to fall (even though you aren't an engineer). You can tell us who was involved in this consiracy. You can tell us "facts" about 9/11 that know one can really know. You can tell us what the conspiracy is trying to do, who they're run by, what methods they're using, when they've struck, why they've struck and who they're after and for what reasons, but you can't tell us why they haven't learned the lesson every single dictator in history has learned. That's mighty convenient.


So not only did they fail Conspiracies 101 but they failed history as well?

2/13/2004 1:22:57 PM

Note: I reserve the right to not waste my time answering asinine questions such as those above, but may exercise my right to respond to asinine qeustions when I see fit.

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 1:29 PM. Reason : ..]

2/13/2004 1:28:53 PM

Quote :

"Yeah, you refuse to want to look at the evidence and find out the truth. You would rather stick your head in the sand and go along with the crowd believe the lies of the mass media and government. of the conspiracy theorists who believe that 9/11 was orchestrated by the Elder Gods We get it. That's your choice."

2/13/2004 1:51:21 PM

Immitation is the highest form of flattery.

Also, mocking me is not going to shut me up. But keep trying.

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 1:53 PM. Reason : ..]

2/13/2004 1:52:58 PM

by you not answering any of those valid questions 1337 poses, you are admitting you're full of shit and you dont know what you're talking about.

2/13/2004 1:54:49 PM

His questions are asinine. And not only that, he keeps asking the same asinine questions over and over as if I haven't addressed them....apparantly to make other fools believe that I haven't addressed them.

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 1:58 PM. Reason : ..]

2/13/2004 1:55:40 PM

no they are not. they are justifiable questions that deserve to be answered. actually you havent addressed them directly. you have indirectly, sayin all kinds of bull, side-stepping the actual question.

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 1:57 PM. Reason : .]

2/13/2004 1:56:59 PM

They aren't asinine.
You claim omnipotence in knowing who in the government knew what when.
You claim omnipotence in knowing the goals and strategies of these groups
but for some reason, you can't explain why they have failed the simplest of lessons for conspiracies and dictators

this calls into serious question anything you claim to know about what other people knew or think.

Furthermore, it is perfectly justified in asking you why you don't use original sources, because as we all know, information can be edited and manipulated to show anything. I can manipulate information to make people think I have a net worth of millions of dollars, but that doesn't make it true.

I want original sources, not edited sources.

2/13/2004 2:02:10 PM

Quote :

"You claim omnipotence... [blah, blah, blah] ---1337 b4k4 "

I never said I had omnipotence. You are a liar....and you persist in asking me stupid questions..apparantly to distract me.

ON THE MASS MEDIA:

"There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it… The business of the Journalist is to destroy truth; To lie outright; To pervert; To vilify; To fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals for rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and or lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."

– John Swinton, former Chief of Staff, The New York Times, circa 1880

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 2:21 PM. Reason : ..]

2/13/2004 2:11:58 PM

"That there are men in all countries who get their living by war, and by keeping up the quarrels of nations, is as shocking as it is true; but when those who are concerned in the government of a country, make it their study to sow discord, and cultivate prejudices between nations, it becomes the more unpardonable."

--Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", circa 1792

2/13/2004 2:20:39 PM

Quote :

"I want original sources, not edited sources."

the man wants sources, not quotes from before modern times. geez.

2/13/2004 2:22:46 PM

He doesn't want the truth...he wants to ask me silly questions and distract me.

2/13/2004 2:23:35 PM

his questions are not silly in the least bit. and the fact you STILL havent answered them shows you either dont know the answers, or you're too afraid to tell the REAL truth.

2/13/2004 2:26:12 PM

Quote :

"What I do know is that the government was complicit in 9/11 and the official story is not the truth. That is a fact. THE BATF KNEW THERE WAS GOING TO BE A BOMBING THAT MORNING. THEY KNEW. I'm not the kind of person they typically go after. They go after more prominent and "important" people and people that are about to testify in court and expose the truth. The globalist elite have accomplished nearly all of their goals. Once again, this is a cover-up. On 9/11, the Feds finished the job, so to speak. The U.S. was behind the attack on the WTC in 1993 too. "

Those are some pretty self assured statements for someone not claiming omnipotence in those areas, especialy when one has no facts to back them up

Regardless though, you claim to know all these things, but can't answer simple questions. Likewise, that still doesn't change the fact that you can't seem to provide original sources. I want original sources, not this edited shit from geocities and alex jones

2/13/2004 2:32:27 PM

Quote :

"December 11, 2003 100 PDT (FTW) -- Ever wonder why the markets are doing so well? As FTW has documented for years, with almost $600 billion in drug money being laundered through Wall Street and US banks, the markets should be improving. According to CNN, opium production in Afghanistan is 36 times higher than at the end of Taliban rule. Not every US policy overseas is a failure. Hamid Karzai controls a few square blocks of Kabul. But CIA-controlled warlords control the real estate that really matters. http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/121103_afghan_poppy.html"

Quote :

"U.S. : Afghan poppy production doubles Friday, November 28, 2003 Poppy cultivation in Afghanistan doubled between 2002 and 2003 to a level 36 times higher than in the last year of rule by the Taliban, according to White House figures released Friday. http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/11/28/afghanistan.drugs.reut/index.html"

2/13/2004 2:35:18 PM

little bit about the wings thing on the pentagon... every plane doesn't crash wings level....

2/13/2004 2:48:09 PM

There is no visible damage to the Pentagon from any wings of a Boeing 757...nor is there any evidence of damage to the lawn in front of the Pentagon from any wing...nor is there any real evidence of wreckage of the wings (or any other part) of a Boeing 757.

2/13/2004 2:50:53 PM

you're a physics moron aren't you, IT'S a PLANE it can come down at ANY ANGLE, such as a 60 degree above plain rotated 90 degrees from vertical

2/13/2004 3:00:17 PM

musta been a cruise missile, one of those new cellular encased laser guided ones, that people saw flying into the Pentagon then. i mean afterall, there is no "real evidence of wreckage of the wings (or any other part) of a Boeing 757." right Salis?

2/13/2004 3:48:21 PM

LOOK THERE'S ONLY A SMALL HOLE IN TEH PENTAGON. IT MUST HAVE BEEN A CRUISE MISSILE THAT HIT AS ORDERED BY TEH EVIL SHRUB

Quote :

" "This central region within the photo is considered by most researchers to have been the exact point of "ground zero"impact. Note how there is still glass in the windows above, covered in foam spray. Although impact from a large passenger plane is utterly out of the question, there is possible evidence that an open section of the bottom story was struck by a small unmanned drone aircraft or a missile that got in under the building. There was renovation work going on in this region of the Pentagon and sections of the bottom story were exposed and open. http://www.nzaif.com/pentagon/pentagon911.html""

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 4:21 PM. Reason : adsfasga]

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 4:22 PM. Reason : adfasdf]

2/13/2004 4:21:15 PM

^ damn. That was the best ownage i've seen in days. GG

Of course, it was against salisbury, so it's like condoms, everyone has owned them before.

2/13/2004 4:24:27 PM

lol, is that from the outer ring? or a shot from one of the inner ones? just wondering

2/13/2004 6:19:14 PM

Quote :

"Kristen Breitweiser, whose husband Ron was vice president of Fiduciary Trust and died in the World Trade Center, asked the agents, “I don’t understand, with all the warnings about the possibilities of Al Qaeda using planes as weapons, and the Phoenix Memo from one of your own agents warning that Osama bin Laden was sending operatives to this country for flight school training, why didn’t you check out flight schools before September 11?” A senior FBI agent objected, “Do you know how many flight schools there are in the U.S.? Thousands. We couldn’t have investigated them all and found these few guys.” Tired of being lied to, Mrs. Breitweiser countered, “Wait. You just told me there were too many flight schools and that prohibited you from investigating them before 9/11. How is that a few hours after the attacks, the nation is brought to its knees, and miraculously FBI agents showed up at Embry-Riddle flight school in Florida where some of the terrorists trained?” Here was the FBI agent’s response: “We got lucky!” Yes, I kid you not. That’s what he told this woman – they got LUCKY! Can you believe their audacity? But it gets worse. Mrs. Breitweiser asked this same agent how the FBI knew EXACTLY which ATM in Portland, Maine would give them a videotape of Mohammed Atta, the purported brains behind the attacks, especially when they claimed NO awareness of these individuals before 9-11. The lawman stumbled and fumbled with his answers, got a few facts wrong, then angrily protested after he couldn’t sidestep her any longer, “What are you getting at?” As Gail Sheehy reports, the woman told this agent, “I think you had open investigations before September 11 on some of the people responsible for the terrorist attacks.” Think about this situation for a moment. How many ATM machines do you think there are in the United States? I did a quick Google search and found that there are over 200,000 of them in the U.S., and over 600,000 worldwide (source: Pawnbroker Financial Services). Now, of all these machines, how did these investigators come across Atta’s videotape almost immediately after the terrorist attacks so they could prove his involvement? The odds against this are infinitesimal. I suppose it’s another case of LUCK! Or how about this question: after explosive charges were detonated inside the WTC to bring down the Twin Towers, and there were fires, explosions, mayhem in the streets, a blinding amount of smoke and a 70 foot deep pit in the earth with people fleeing for their lives – how did our government miraculously find Mohammed Atta’s passport – in pristine condition – resting atop the WTC’s smoldering rubble? Yep, you guessed it – LUCK! I’ll tell ya, there seems to be a lot of luck associated with this catastrophic event – the same LUCK that befell San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown when someone (probably from Condoleezza Rice’s office) contacted him the night before 9-11 and told him not to fly the next day. I suppose it’s the same LUCK that told John Ashcroft and other high-ranking Pentagon figures to only fly on leased jets in the months before 9-11. Maybe it was the same LUCK that graced certain BATF agents a few years earlier by telling them not to show up for work at the Murrah Federal Building when another act of State-sponsored terrorism took place in Oklahoma City. Heck, this is probably the same LUCK that prompted counter-terrorism czar Richard Clark to let the entire bin Laden family and 140 other high-ranking Saudi Arabians leave the country during the hours immediately following the 9-11 terrorist acts (when America’s airspace was restricted to every other flight). This flight was organized by Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and stopped in TEN different American cities to pick up various Arab passengers and bin Laden family members! How’s that for LUCK! http://www.babelmagazine.com/issue115/nwox115.html"

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 10:04 PM. Reason : ..]

2/13/2004 10:02:11 PM

Alex Jones discusses Skull & Bones (aslo known as "The Order of Death") in the video at the site below. Jones also shows clips from a video he filmed upon secretly infiltrating the Bohemian Grove, where the elite, including past U.S. Presidents and other world leaders, go and participate in bizzarre occult rituals. This is the first time that someone has captured film of the event. The British media used Jones' film in a documentary they made on the Bohemian Grove, and Bohemian Grove members have admitted that the film is accurate and that they do in fact conduct rituals in the Bohemian Grove (only they suggest it is no big deal...they just dress up in costumes and have some "fun"). In the film, you can see the participants worshipping the god Molech. The Washington Times has reported that male and female prostitutes are shipped into the Bohemian Grove when the elite conduct their rituals.

http://www.infowars.com/print/Secret_societies/alex_vid_kbsab.htm

[Edited on February 13, 2004 at 10:41 PM. Reason : ..]

2/13/2004 10:17:51 PM

New York Press article on the stand down of U.S. military interceptors:

Quote :

"There remains one question to ask about Sept. 11. What happened? We know the story. Terrorists hijacked four passenger jets. At 8:45 a.m., American Airlines Flight 11 from Boston smashes into the World Trade Center’s north tower. At 9:03 a.m., United Airlines Flight 175 from Boston smashes into the south tower. At 9:40 a.m., AA Flight 77 from Dulles hits the Pentagon. At 10:10 a.m., United Flight 93 from Newark crashes in Shanksville, PA. Yet the most amazing feature of the U.S. government’s response to these events was the almost complete absence of it. Jared Israel on his website http://www.tenc.net has blazed a trail with fascinating and meticulous research. Initial reports suggested that no aircraft were scrambled to intercept or shoot down the hijacked jets. Two days later Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, current chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told the Senate Armed Services Committee: "When it became clear what the threat was, we did scramble fighter aircraft, AWACs, radar aircraft and tanker aircraft to begin to establish orbits in case other aircraft showed up in the FAA system that were hijacked... That order, to the best of my knowledge, was after the Pentagon was struck." Marine Corps Maj. Mike Snyder, a spokesman for NORAD, echoed Myers in a Sept. 15 Boston Globe story, which stated: "[T]he command did not immediately scramble any fighters even though it was alerted to a hijacking 10 minutes before the first plane…slammed into the first World Trade Center tower... The spokesman said the fighters remained on the ground until after the Pentagon was hit..." U.S. inaction was all the more astonishing because the same story had Snyder admitting that "fighters routinely intercept aircraft." http://www.nypress.com/14/50/taki/bunker.cfm"

[Edited on February 14, 2004 at 2:57 PM. Reason : ..]

2/14/2004 2:36:19 PM

Quote :

"You would rather stick your head in the sand and go along with the crowd believe the lies of the mass media and government"

-- salisburyboy

Quote :

" Here is the transcript from CNN's website The transcript is also available at the following source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011204-17.html Bush's comments are confirmed here as well: http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,11209,612354,00.html Here is something interesting that Donald Rumsfeld said in an interview with Parade magazine: ... http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html" Ponder what Bush said to the UN. ... http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/11/10/ret.bush.un.transcript/ The Chicago Sun-Times reports The American Free Press reported http://9news.com/newsroom/13294.html -Chicago Tribune (11/09/01) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011026-9.html http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/t09142001_t914irby.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/graphics/attack/hijackers.html BBC transcript, quoted portion is at very bottom of linked BBC webpag http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm This is an ABC News.com May/2001 story: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html Dan Rather: "Tom Kennedy, a rescue worker with the National Urban Search and Rescue which is part of FEMA..." Tom Kennedy: "We are currently one of the first teams that was deployed to support the city of New York for this disaster. We arrived on late Monday night and went into action on Tuesday morning. And not until today did we get a full opportunity to work the entire site....." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/medsearch/FocusAreas/depleted_uranium.shtml http://science.howstuffworks.com/bunker-buster3.htm AP Nov11/03; CNN June20/02 http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.america.under.attack/ Sydney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/25/1040511092926.html http://infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV [the video is from PBS] in the PBS film. Eyewitness testimony suggests bombs were in the WTC towers (BBC news): http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537500.stm http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html http://sashimi.cs.berkeley.edu/wtc/pld/worldtrade_plane2.wmv http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/world/02/september_11/where_were_you_when/html/11.stm Tony Blair also claims to have seen the first plane that hit the WTC on television the day of the attacks (BBC News article American Free Press seismographs at Columbia University BBC News article on the collapse of the WTC towers: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1579092.stm http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/warningmemo020516.html from the U.S. Army Military District of Washington Web site): http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/Contingency_Planning.html Condi Rice said http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1537500.stm http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/12/1211_wirepentagon.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/world/02/september_11/where_were_you_when/html/11.stm http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0112/04/se.04.html N.Y. Daily News, 4/16/02 http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,819931,00.html New York Press article: http://www.nypress.com/16/53/news&columns/feature.cfm CBS News article: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/17/eveningnews/main589137.shtml http://observer.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,8224,718311,00.html This can be seen from news reports from local news channels in Oklahoma City. Interviewed eyewitnesses reported John Swinton, former Chief of Staff, The New York Times, circa 1880 http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/11/28/afghanistan.drugs.reut/index.html New York Press article http://www.nypress.com/14/50/taki/bunker.cfm"

-- salisburyboy


REMEMBER FOLKS, DON'T BELIEVE THE LIES AND FALSEHOODS THE MASS MEDIA AND THE GOVERNMENT TELL YOU. IT'S ALL BRAINWASHING!





























unless it supports your position

2/14/2004 7:52:21 PM

^
As you may notice from the first quote in your post above, I did not say that every single thing the mass media puts out is a lie. Of course they report the truth some of the time. What I suggested in that quote (and what I have been saying) is that the media spreads falsehoods and deception (like the deception that the twin towers fell due to fire or that WTC 7 fell due to fire) and that they are silent about the truth oftentimes (ie, leaving out important information).

The articles you referenced above are examples of some of the truth being reported. But all of the truth has not been reported by the mass media. Numerous important facts about 9/11 have been ignored and not reported in the mass media. Furthermore, in regard to 9/11, the media has only reported facts that do not support the official story (such as eyewitness accounts of bombs going off in the building) on rare and few occasions. These facts are mentioned a few times and then hardly ever mentioned again....the net effect of that being that most people forget about those facts. Overall, the media is supporting the official government story. That is what they are reporting and therefore that is what most people believe.



[Edited on February 15, 2004 at 1:03 AM. Reason : ..]

2/15/2004 12:53:29 AM

An amazingly convenient answer. The media is lying except when it's telling the truth. A perfect non answer. So tell me, how do you know that the stuff that you believe from the media (even though you have no evidence one way or the other) is the truth? How do you know those aren't the lies? I like how you can conveniently choose which parts of the media are truthful and which parts are lies. Like I said:


Don't trust the media

Quote :

"unless it supports your position"

2/15/2004 3:24:56 PM

^^You do realize you pretty much just confirmed what 1337 b4k4 was accusing you of, right? The media is lying unless it's supporting your view (oops, sorry..."the truth"). I suggest you take some time from finding more things to copy and paste and masturbating your ego, and take a gander at how many votes you're getting in the "Dumbest person in SB" thread.



As for ^^^ and ^, very nice pwnage.

2/15/2004 3:30:29 PM

Ahh....I'd been wondering how salis justified the "mass media brainwashing" while he cited news sources....

Now it seems that not everything in the papers, on tv, and in what are generally considered to be "reliable sources" aren't lies. Good to know

2/15/2004 3:31:41 PM

9/11 timeline:

Quote :

"8:13: Boston Ground control loses contact with Flight 11. First red flag for Flight 11 8:20: Flight 11 reaches the Hudson River in NY and stops transmitting its IFF signal. Second Red flag for flight 11. 8:24: Hijackers on Flight 11 accidentally broadcasts warning to the passengers over its radio: "Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet." Third Red Flag for flight 11 8:25: Boston air traffic controllers notify other air traffic control centers of hijacking. Why wasn't NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) notified at this time? 8:27: Flight 11 heads south toward Manhattan; flight attendant Betty Ong calls American Airlines reservations and reports that two flight attendants had been stabbed and a passenger had had his throat slashed. She identifies the seat numbers of the hijackers. Fourth red flag for flight 11 - this one a BLOODY RED and wildly waving, yet it will be about 10 minutes AFTER THIS before NORAD is notified. 8:33: Last transmission from Flight 11: Hijacker is heard telling passengers not to move. 8:38: Boston Air Traffic control notifies NORAD that Flight 11 has been hijacked 8:42: Flight 175 is hijacked. It begins to make a U-turn over New Jersey, reading for its northward assault on Manhattan. 8:42: Flight 93 takes off from Newark International Airport, headed for San Francisco 8:43: FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 175 has been hijacked. 8:44: Two F-15 eagles are ordered scrambled out of Otis Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod. If NORAD had been notified (or was it??) at 8:27, when the plane was obviously hijacked and heading to NYC, an F-16 from Otis or Griffis would have been about 10 minutes from Manhattan at this point. 8:45: Flight 11 strikes WTC's north tower at the 80th floor 8:46: Flight 175 stops transmitting beacon signal 8:52: Two F-15 eagles take off from Otis If F-15s had been scrambled from Otis at 8:27, they would now be in a position to engage the hijacked flight 175 headed for the WTC. 8:56: Flight 77's transponder is cut. If F-15s had been scrambled from Otis at 8:27, they would now be in a position to engage the hijacked flight 175 headed for the WTC. 9:00: United Airlines learns that Flight 93 flying over western PA may be in process of being hijacked. 9:00: Flight 77 makes U turn and heads back for Washington This is when the FAA should have notified NORAD, and NORAD should have ordered F-16s into the air FROM ANDREWS. If they had, by 9:15, F-16s may have been in a position to deflect Flight 77 AWAY from D.C. altogether. 9:02: Flight 175 strikes the WTC at the 60th floor. 9:16: FAA informs NORAD that Flight 93 may have been hijacked 9:17 : Federal Aviation Administration closes all airports 9:24: FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 77 is hijacked 9:24: NORAD orders three F-16s scrambled from Langley The timing here is absolutely diabolical. It is EXACTLY not enough time for either a jet from Langley, which will be 10 minutes too late, or one from Andrews, which would have had just about 3 minutes between reaching the airspace over D.C. and dealing with the incoming Boeing 757. That Langley was chosen indicates a FEAR that in that 3 minutes a good pilot from Andrews just might have succeeded in aborting the disaster, despite the split second time frame. 9:25: Air traffic controllers notify Secret Service as Flight 77 makes dramatic maneuver just south of the Pentagon 9:29: Bush, at Booker Elementary school says an "apparent terrorist attack" under way. No orders are give to evacuate any buildings in D.C., or to even urge residents and workers to seek shelter. 9:40: Three F-16 fighting falcons take off from Langley. They reach Washington by 9:55, moving at what works out to about 550 mph. - the trip takes 14 minutes. Not only is this a tragedy for the victims of the Pentagon, it was unspeakably cruel to those pilots, who, thanks to their delayed orders, have to live with the crushing feeling of having been 15 minutes too late. Here is a description of Andrews from its website: "Training for air combat and operational airlift for national defense is the 113th?s primary mission. However, as part of its dual mission, the 113th provides capable and ready response forces for the District of Columbia in the event of a natural disaster or civil emergency." Yet Bush chooses Langley. 9:43: Plane crashes into Pentagon - a full 40 minutes after being reported hijacked and the likelihood of its being used as a weapon of mass destruction obvious. You will notice that now, everything seems to start happening -- it seems as if everything were put on hold until the Pentagon was struck. http://www.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=7706"

2/17/2004 10:42:52 AM

I dont know the answer to this, nor have I read the other 14 pages of this thread, but I would like to know how much experience we actually have in dealing with hijackings in our own country?

2/17/2004 11:14:45 AM

I don't know exactly how many times U.S. aircraft have been hijacked or aircraft have been hijacked in U.S. airspace, but it has clearly occured before and it is a serious enough possibility that the FAA, NORAD, and our military had well-defined and standard procedures to follow in the event of a hijacking of an aircraft in U.S. airspace.

2/17/2004 11:37:41 AM

THE MYSTERIOUS EXPLOSION IN THE VICINITY OF WTC 6.:



http://www.lebensaspekte.de/

Note that both of the twin towers are still standing. This is evidence of an explosion, not of dust clouds from the collapse of either of the towers.

[Edited on February 17, 2004 at 11:45 AM. Reason : ..]

2/17/2004 11:44:40 AM

granted.
but is not the usual procedure to let the hijackers land and then deal with them? there was no way of knowing that this hijacker would crash into the WTC, nor was there any way of knowing that these hijackers were working in unison. It is a lot easier to say that we fucked up big time looking back on it, but honestly, there really wasn't much we could do about it. Think about the chain of command that would have to be navigated to be able to shoot down a plane carrying upwards of a hundred American citizens. There really just wasn't enough time to react to this threat effectively, if at all.

2/17/2004 11:45:34 AM

I don't se the second tower.

Oh and save your breath dizzle. He's delusioned beyond belief. Let him live out his life of paranoia to its fullest content.

2/17/2004 11:52:10 AM

yea, its unfortunate, but i guess you're ^ right.

2/17/2004 11:54:39 AM

Quote :

"I don't se the second tower. ---msb2ncsu"

You must be blind, because both towers are CLEARLY visible and standing in the clip above.

2/17/2004 11:57:25 AM

^^^

Nope only one is there.

2/17/2004 11:58:56 AM

^
Do we have another blind person?

....nah...

I think it's just two people who refuse to acknowledge the truth.

[Edited on February 17, 2004 at 12:50 PM. Reason : ..]

2/17/2004 12:50:12 PM

Quote :

"9:24: NORAD orders three F-16s scrambled from Langley The timing here is absolutely diabolical. It is EXACTLY not enough time for either a jet from Langley, which will be 10 minutes too late, or one from Andrews, which would have had just about 3 minutes between reaching the airspace over D.C. and dealing with the incoming Boeing 757. That Langley was chosen indicates a FEAR that in that 3 minutes a good pilot from Andrews just might have succeeded in aborting the disaster, despite the split second time frame. "

So I've been doing some research into this, and I've found an explination for you. As far as I can see ANDREWS AFB DOES NOT HAVE A FIGHTER WING AND AS SUCH WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO LAUNCH F16s TO INTERCEPT

Quote :

"but is not the usual procedure to let the hijackers land and then deal with them? there was no way of knowing that this hijacker would crash into the WTC"

Yes, that is policy, it was considered last resort to shoot down a passenger plane (remember, most hijackings are hostage situations). IIRC the order to shoot it down has to either come from the joint cheifs or from the president.

And I don't see the tower either.

2/17/2004 12:53:32 PM

no actually we only have 1 blind person here and that is u, salis. the 2nd tower is not CLEARLY standing and if it is, would u be so kind to point it out to all of us blind folk? how bout a different angle? o wait, a different angle would prove that u r wrong and that there was no explosion. i love how u use a video clip that suits ur theory of explosives being used but it it clearly doesnt show the other tower standing. and by the way, all those dust-clouds are from the tower behind collapsing, but maybe ur too blind to that fact cause it is disproving your conspiracy bull.

and also, if u look behind the first tower at the dust clouds, you will see that the dust clouds are eminating up and out, away from the buildings. that is clear proof that a building is in the process of falling. watch controlled demolitions of skyscrapers on video and you will see that dust clouds eminate up and out away from the site.

[Edited on February 17, 2004 at 1:01 PM. Reason : .]

2/17/2004 12:55:48 PM

I also find it very suspicious that salisbury boy's video loop here is missing the time stamp that appears in ALL CNN broadcasts. hmmmm..... what is salisburyboy hiding?

2/17/2004 1:06:48 PM

Yeah salisbury doesn't realize I salivated over those buildings for 2 years, and know the skyline. Clearly there is only one building standing.

But why are we even concerned??? He's obviously trolling...

[Edited on February 17, 2004 at 1:10 PM. Reason : a]

2/17/2004 1:08:38 PM

not to jump behind sali or anything.. but this did happen before either tower fell

and no.. it's not CLEARLY visible in this video at all

2/17/2004 1:10:05 PM

All the picture shows is the south tower (it was the tower that got hit higher up and you see the entrance and exit "wounds").

The cloud you see is the result of the North tower collapse.

Here you can see an angle to the left (west I think) of the sali clip (use the other buildings to orient yourself). THere is clearly no big puff of smoke showing an explosion


Here you see what it looked like when the North tower had collapsed. Notice the big puff of white smoke in the left side of the towers.. the same location as what is seen in the video clip (relative to the view).


Quit making shit up.

2/17/2004 1:32:58 PM

Salisburyboy spotted in california

http://homepage.mac.com/evancm/brain-terminal/video/frank-chu/frank-chu-hq.mov

http://homepage.mac.com/evancm/brain-terminal/video/frank-chu/frank-chu-hq.wmv

2/17/2004 1:37:55 PM

haha, good stuff

2/17/2004 1:44:30 PM