Quote :

"so wait, correct me if i'm wrong. u think that the events of 9/11/01 were perpetrated by the US government to justify the patriot act being used after those events? "

Yes...but not only the Patriot Act...also as a pretext for the war in Afghanistan (which is giving the U.S. control of an oil pipeline) and perhaps this war in Iraq (once again, strategic oil interests)

Watch Alex Jones' video "9/11: The Road to Tyranny" and judge for yourself:

A portion of the video is located here for download: http://www.infowars.com/videos.html (click on the text entitled "Watch 40 minutes of the 144 minute film" in the yellow "box" about 1/3 down the linked page)

[Edited on January 16, 2004 at 4:01 PM. Reason : .]

1/16/2004 3:50:15 PM

i'm sorry, i cant watch this. i do not believe 9/11/01 was a massive government operation. witnessing it first hand i guess will cause you to not think it was a governement op. but you are more then welcome to voice your opinion and everything. that is what is great about this country. i just do not go along with any of this.

1/16/2004 4:01:27 PM

Why not watch the video at least listen to what the evidence they offer? What good does it do to put you head in the sand? If the video is telling lies, then you can disregard it. But if it tells the truth, then you need to see it. There is nothing to lose. This is not a trivial matter here. It at least deserves some investigating and looking into.

I would also like to believe that the U.S. government was looking out for our best interests. But the simple truth is that they aren't. Facts are facts and truth is truth...you have to deal with the truth and reality whether you want to or not.


[Edited on January 16, 2004 at 4:10 PM. Reason : ..]

1/16/2004 4:04:19 PM

dont talk to me about reality bro

1/17/2004 11:01:57 AM

Quote :

"dont talk to me about reality bro ---Josh8315"

That post was not directed specifically to you. If you don't want to listen to me, then don't read this thread, but don't try to tell me what I can post and what I can't.

[Edited on January 17, 2004 at 1:09 PM. Reason : ..]

1/17/2004 1:09:16 PM

Sure, and I am free to say that this thread is 99.99% BS.

1/17/2004 3:55:38 PM

On the nose of a Boeing 757...

Quote :

"Let us imagine for a moment that we had not been told that the aircraft had disintegrated, melted and evaporated. The question then is: Is it possible for the nose of an airliner to penetrate three buildings and, as it leaves the third, produce a perfectly circular hole, 2 ½ yards wide ? The nose of an aircraft, the radome, contains its electronic navigation equipment. To enable the transmission of signals, the nose is not made of metal but carbon. Its shape has been designed to be aerodynamic but is not crash resistant. The inside casing, as well as its contents, are extremely fragile. The nose would crush on impact with an obstacle, not penetrate it. ...It is not actually possible to find the nose of an aircraft after such an impact. So it is not an aircraft nose that could have produced the hole visible in the third ring of the building. http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero14/missile/missile_en.htm"

[Edited on January 17, 2004 at 6:56 PM. Reason : ..]

1/17/2004 6:56:08 PM

How fast was the plane going when it struck the building? The speed of the aircraft could have contributed to the force of the crash, allowing the nose to penetrate the building.

Also, saying something like the nose of commercial airliner is "fragile" needs some justification. Fragile compared to what? I can imagine the nose is not designed for a crash of that magnitude, but they are constructed to be resistant to a number of things, so its not like the thing is made of paper.

Also, carbon fibers have a high resistance to temperature and its pretty strong stuff. I've seen components created from carbon fibers, its pretty stiff. That's just carbon fibers on its own though. Carbon-fiber composites are pretty varied, but I imagine any component of an aircraft has a good level of strength and rigidity. Just because its aerodynamic doesn't mean its weak. That applies more to its shape than its strength or materials.

Also, in the end I don't understand how you can argue what happened to those planes. From what I can tell, every bit of evidence you've quoted, be it a reasonable source or not, is still based on what a plane or material does under normal circumstances, correct? Those crashes were hardly normal; no plane could have been designed to withstand such an act.

1/18/2004 11:22:47 AM

Quote :

"Also, in the end I don't understand how you can argue what happened to those planes. --methos "

But I'm assuming that you can, right?

1/18/2004 11:32:59 AM

Quote :

"Also, saying something like the nose of commercial airliner is "fragile" needs some justification. Fragile compared to what? --methos"

Quote :

"The fragility of aircraft noses can be seen in numerous photographs from much (less) violent crashes than the Pentagon one. Take for example...the Philippine Airlines Airbus A320-211 in March 1998 (http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/phl137/photo.shtml) or the American Airlines McDonnell Douglas MD-82 in June 1999 (http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/aa1420/2.shtml) http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero14/missile/missile_en.htm "

Note that I changed the text from the website from "more" violent to "less" violent. I think the author made a typo. These crases are obviously less violent than a hypothetical crash of a 757 into a building. Furthermore, it would make no sense in regard to the argument. Since the author is trying to show the fragility of the nose, he would want to show that it can be destroyed/damaged even in crashes less violent than the one that supposedly happened at the Pentagon. If the nose is virtually destroyed in a crash landing, how possible is the proposition that the nose of a 757 penetrated 3 rings of the Pentagon (including numerous reinforced concrete walls)?

[Edited on January 18, 2004 at 11:52 AM. Reason : ..]

1/18/2004 11:45:05 AM

Quote :

" [quote]Also, in the end I don't understand how you can argue what happened to those planes. --methos "

But I'm assuming that you can, right?
[/quote]

No reason to get snippy. I didn't mean for that remark to be directly at you. No, I can't argue it either, because as I said, any evidence would be based on what happens under normal circumstances.

Plus, I'm not an engineer, or a pilot, or a god, and I wasn't at the crash either. So I don't really know what happened.

Quote :

" Since the author is trying to show the fragility of the nose, he would want to show that it can be destroyed/damaged even in crashes less violent than the one that supposedly happened at the Pentagon. If the nose is virtually destroyed in a crash landing, how possible is the proposition that the nose of a 757 penetrated 3 rings of the Pentagon (including numerous reinforced concrete walls)? "

Damned if I know. Again, the only argument I can put against that is the speed of the aircraft as it struck the Pentagon. Objects at very high speeds can do some damn strange things. I've heard stories of hurricane-force winds driving straw through trees.

1/19/2004 2:57:44 PM

Quote :

"dude, DU is not a flammable material. We use DU in things like the CIWS to penetrate missiles. There is absolutely no flammable properties in that metal. --goalielax"

Despite what you say, other sources say that Depleted Uranium DOES burn:

Quote :

"It is not just the density that makes it possible for DU to penetrate armour but also the pyrophoricity (the fact that it burns upon impact) and the speed (veolocity) at which the rounds are fired. The missiles and guided bomb units are rocket driven at very high speeds and carry explosive charges to ignite them. The amount of uranium or DU in a penetrator that burns depends upon what it hits and how. If it hits rock and shatters, splinters (shrapnel) may fly off without burning although whatever is left of the round may burn. Similarly, in hitting an armoured tank, a round may also shatter to some extent. If it hits the ground, it probably will not ignite at all. The numerous rounds that Dr Siegwart-Horst Gunther found the children of southern Iraq playing with and which he brought back to Germany with him for analysis were still intact, and there are numerous accounts of people visiting the area who have found others. The estimates of how much burns overall that I have seen vary from twenty percent to eighty percent. Because the missiles and guided bomb units have an explosive charge, their DU will generally -- and reliably -- burn at one hundred percent. http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/du-global-spread2.html"

[Edited on January 19, 2004 at 3:09 PM. Reason : ..]

1/19/2004 3:04:11 PM

Osama bin Ladin was supposedly "wanted" by the U.S. government long before George W. Bush came into office.

Yet, the Bush Administration forced the FBI to back off investigating the Bin Ladins months before 9-11. (BBC transcript, quoted portion is at very bottom of linked BBC webpage):

Quote :

"I received a phone call from a high-placed member of a US intelligence agency. He tells me that while there's always been constraints on investigating Saudis, under George Bush it's gotten much worse. After the elections, the agencies were told to "back off" investigating the Bin Ladens and Saudi royals, and that angered agents. I'm told that since September 11th the policy has been reversed. FBI headquarters told us they could not comment on our findings. A spokesman said: "There are lots of things that only the intelligence community knows and that no-one else ought to know. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm "

http://www.tpromo.com/gk/files1/031202.htm

[Edited on January 20, 2004 at 10:32 PM. Reason : ..]

1/20/2004 10:26:56 PM

On Operation Northwoods (a plan by the U.S. government to attack U.S. citizens to cause a frenzy among the U.S. public to enable the U.S. to go to war against Cuba). This is an ABC News.com May/2001 story:

Quote :

"In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba. Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities. The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro. America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation." http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html"

[Edited on January 22, 2004 at 12:51 PM. Reason : ..]

1/22/2004 12:49:43 PM

Get some new material, we already discussed this topic in a few other threads. Its just a drafted plan that was rejected, emphatically if I'm not mistaken. So what. Its not like we tried to actually do it. It would be like someone on here going "Well, what if we just killed salisburyboy to put an end to his asinine threads?" Its not like anyone seriously would consider doing it but it was proposd none the less. Just covering every angle.

1/22/2004 1:25:03 PM

Here's a really good website on 9/11:

http://www.911dossier.co.uk/

Quote :

"...we have collected work on the 911 attacks from the best independent investigators and analysts. We also have our own overview of the 911 investigation, official and unofficial, and analysis of the ongoing war. "

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 11:22 AM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 11:08:45 AM

Quote :

"the Bush regime"

Credibility == gone

1/23/2004 11:24:55 AM

More evidence of prior knowledge. FEMA arrived in New York City on Monday,
September 10, 2001. Tom Kennedy, a member of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) "National Urban Search and Rescue Team", made these comments in an
interview on national TV with CBS News anchor Dan Rather.

Quote :

"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://www.tpromo.com/gk/jun02/062602.htm"

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 11:30 AM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 11:29:06 AM

“Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.”

— Julius Caesar


“Today, Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true, if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond – whether real or promulgated – that threatened our very existence. It is then that all the peoples of the world will pledge with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing that every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished with the guarantee of their well-being, granted to them by their world government.”

— Henry Kissinger, at the Bilderberg Conference in Evians, France, 1991

1/23/2004 11:35:50 AM

"A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present-day totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors, and school teachers. ....[such propagandists] accomplish their greatest triumphs, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects... totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals."

---Aldous Huxley, preface to Brave New World

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 11:54 AM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 11:52:28 AM

"People who quote others all day long have nothing intelligent to say."

-- Me

1/23/2004 12:04:42 PM

About this quote...

Quote :

"“Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.” — Julius Caesar "

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/caesar.htm

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl-caesar-quote.htm

1/23/2004 12:23:58 PM

What Really happened to Flight 93?:

Quote :

"Why did other witnesses see smoke and flames trailing from Flight 93 as it fell from the sky, indicating a possible explosion aboard? ...At least SIX witnesses, including Susan Mcelwain saw a small military type plane flying around shortly BEFORE UA93 crashed. The FBI denies its existence. ...The US Government insists the plane exploded on impact yet a one-ton section of the engine was found over a mile away and other light debris was found scattered over eight miles away. ...Sources claim the last thing heard on the cockpit voice recorder is the sound of wind - suggesting the plane had been holed. http://www.thepowerhour.com/postings-three/flight-93-shot-down.htm"

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 12:57 PM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 12:45:58 PM

We are told by the U.S. government that the war in Afghanistan was in response to the September 11, 2001 attacks. If that is so, why was the U.S. planning a war against the Taliban months before the attack?

Quote :

"Tuesday, 18 September, 2001 A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks. Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm"

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 12:59 PM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 12:57:02 PM

Quote :

""People who quote others all day long have nothing intelligent to say." -- Me"

I couldn't agree more, hell, I've said the same thing to other people. Seriously salisburyboy, could you just give it up? No one is really even bothering to respond to the crap you put up anymore.

Just go make your own conspiracy website and stop posting this stuff on TWW.

1/23/2004 2:04:05 PM

http://www.brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=47279&page=1#1044414

Quote :

"man..i got some more shit to say about this...hell, i could go on for hours but you people will never change...more power to nchsref....anyways....youre an idiot if you think for one second that the majority of these low life immigrants do anything good for the country except for take my fucking money and pollute the country with their faggot ass cultures...shit if it was up to me i wouldnt let any of those fuckers in. it just pisses me off so bad when all you liberals try and change america from the ways it has been framed. examples: no gun rights, taking freedom of speech with campaigns, and downing good institutions like the Boy Scouts...im sure bitches like sarah80 and her sister are on that boat..anyways..im done for now. you people are pathetic"

Quote :

"yep timmy...youre just getting hit up by all sorts of good ole conseratives..not used to that shit on here are you, you liberal fuck"

1/23/2004 2:39:08 PM

^
Those quotes are from when someone else (not me) was posting using my screenname. I did not post that. Those are some of the first posts ever used by my screenname. Someone else created my account for me and posted the first several posts using the screenname I now use. You can probably tell that that the structure and tone of those quotes are not the way I normally write or talk.

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 2:52 PM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 2:49:08 PM

you can't seriously expect someone who is a professional ordnance officer, who has worked with DU and numerous other weapons over the past 5 years, to believe some guy writing on a "free-for-all" web-hosting server in the neatherlands over my official, experienced knowledge.

the fact that you use something like this post on a board instead of believing someone who has made a profession out of the subject matter furthers your horrible judgement of what if fact and what is fiction.

1/23/2004 2:49:59 PM

It is not just the source you refer to that claims that DU burns. Many, many other sources say so as well.

Depleted Uranium burns. That is just a fact. It is used in missiles and bombs because it ignites when it hits the target. It is a high-density material and that property makes it useful for penetrating tank armor and other armor, but the fact that DU burns at such a high temperature further enhances the ability of a DU missile or munition to penetrate armor. The DU burns a hole throught the armor, allowing the missile or munition to penetrate it.

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 3:11 PM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 2:53:52 PM

Here's is what "Wikipedia", an online encyclopedia says:

Quote :

"A major use of DU is as the head of a kinetic projectile fired to penetrate armour, so it is used by tanks and other military platforms. Depleted uranium is very dense: at 19.05 g/cm³ it is 70% denser than lead, allowing it to penetrate most conventional armor. A DU projectile burns and melts as it penetrates steel, becoming 'sharper' rather than blunting. As the projectile passes through armor, the heat build-up causes it to catch fire and disintegrate into fine particles on re-encountering air. DU is also used as a form of vehicular armour. http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium"

Here is text from a report on the website by the Office of the Special Assistant
for Gulf War Illnesses:

Quote :

"When a DU round strikes a hard target, some of the metal burns or is oxidized http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/medsearch/FocusAreas/depleted_uranium.shtml"

[Edited on January 23, 2004 at 3:31 PM. Reason : ..]

1/23/2004 3:15:58 PM

Another...

Quote :

"Incendiary properties - Depleted uranium burns. It is something like magnesium in this regard. If you heat uranium up in an oxygen environment (normal air), it will ignite and burn with an extremely intense flame. Once inside the target, burning uranium is another part of the bomb's destructive power. http://science.howstuffworks.com/bunker-buster3.htm"

1/23/2004 3:49:35 PM

On the Bush Administration's obstruction of a true investigation into the events of 9.11:

Quote :

"But the final 911 act never happened. In contrast to, say, the Kennedy assassination, there has been no comprehensive enquiry into the facts of the attacks, the background or indeed the remedy. Even the secret 2002 Congressional Intelligence enquiry was bitterly opposed by the White House with complaints from congressmen of obstruction and warnings of more bombshells to come. The current 911 Commission has been circumscribed with a budget said to be smaller than the average aircraft accident, security controls which have denied commission members access even to documents one of them helped write, the failure to question anyone on oath, a tight timetable set down by statute, government officials only appearing with minders, and a voting system that gives republican loyalists a veto. In any case the commission has acted so far on the presumption that the official story is true. http://www.911dossier.co.uk/"

1/23/2004 11:56:25 PM

The government's explanation for the failure to scramble fighter jets:

Quote :

"The Commission has suggested reasons for the astonishing hour-long failure of any planes to be scrambled to intercept the attack on the Pentagon: no planes were available, the NORAD radar was pointing the wrong way (sic). But the more likely explanation is even more damaging. In June 2001 NORAD, charged with protecting the skies over America, changed its rules in a critical way. Instead of interception of potentially hostile planes being automatic, interception now required the approval of the Pentagon. Where was Rumsfeld on the morning of the attacks? According to the official story he was in the Pentagon, taking calls, blissfully unaware of anything happening at all until the plane hit... http://www.911dossier.co.uk/"

[Edited on January 24, 2004 at 12:13 AM. Reason : ..]

1/24/2004 12:13:00 AM

On the stand-down of the U.S. Air Force on 9/11:

Quote :

"It happens all the time. When a small private plane recently entered the 23-mile restricted ring around the U.S. Capitol, two F-16 interceptors were immediately launched from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away. In a similar episode, a pair of F-16 "Fighting Falcons" on 15-minute strip alert was airborne from Andrews just 11 minutes after being notified by the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) of a Cessna straying towards the White House. [AP Nov11/03; CNN June20/02] ...But on Sept 11, 2001, NORAD and the FAA ignored routine procedures and strict regulations. In response to a national emergency involving hijacked airliners as dangerous as cruise missiles, interceptors launched late from distant bases flew to defend their nation at a fraction of their top speeds. ..."The F-15 pilots flew ''like a scalded ape, topping 500 mph but were unable to catch up to the airliner," Maj. Gen. Paul Weaver later told reporters. [St. Augustine Times Sept16/01] Scalded apes? Airliners fly at 500 mph. An F-15 can fly almost four-times faster. ...Sitting on the Andrews ramp just 10 miles away, were two fully armed and fueled supersonic interceptors tasked with protecting the capitol from airborne terrorist threats on 15 minutes' notice! Isn't it about time someone asked why those routinely launched Andrews interceptors were "stood down" as Flight 77 bored in toward the headquarters they were supposed to protect? http://www.rense.com/general45/911.htm"

1/26/2004 1:24:48 PM

sigh. Look I don't know the specifics behind the F-15 but the reason they fly below their top speed is because at a certain point, you are less fuel efficient. If these planes were going to need to patrol an area or escort the boeing, they need all the fuel they can get, therefore you don't waste fuel.

1/26/2004 2:04:21 PM

On the "Patriot Act" and the coming police state:

Quote :

"We have an ever more intrusive government, rushing at high speed to become a high-tech police state. We already have Homeland Security, a federal agency that has been given unlimited powers to spy on Americans, trample all over the First and Fourth Amendments, ignore the privacy of anyone it chooses and violate the rights of every man, woman and child who used to live in the Land of the Free. Our own paranoia has accomplished what Osama bin Laden and his minions could not with hijacked airplanes and vague threats about future attacks. These fears have forced America to abandon its principles and create a police state. Homeland Security has the power to wiretap any American it wants, without a court order, without cause and without justification to any higher authority. Homeland Security goon squads will have the power to enter any American home, without a search warrant, without probable cause, simply because someone somewhere says “hey, this guy might be a threat." No checks and balances, no due process. Nothing. Video cameras at ATMs, convenience stores, department stores and office building lobbies already record Americans living in urban areas 75-100 times on any given day but that isn’t enough for the new American Gestapo. They plan to erect video cameras on streets, along public highways, in neighborhoods and deploy them on helicopters and police cars to record everything you and I do every day of the year. “We are entering a new era of domestic surveillance, says retired FBI agent Franklin Postel. “One where the constitution is secondary to the cause. The new department has the power to document the day-to-day actions of any American it chooses. Look closely at the powers granted under the "Patriot Act" and you will find things that would make Hitler proud. Under the new law, an agent of the Department of Homeland Security can walk into your bank, flash a badge and demand to see your checking and saving account records. No court order. All they need is the “presumption of guilt." They can stop you in your car without cause and search it and you. They can hold you in jail for 30 days or more without filing any charges or allowing you to make any phone calls. They can call up America Online and put a trace on all your Internet activity without a court order. They can require Visa to turn over all your credit card activity records without notice. http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/PAY.html"

[Edited on January 26, 2004 at 3:32 PM. Reason : ..]

1/26/2004 3:27:52 PM

Suspicious stock trading before 9-11-01 points to prior knowledge:

Quote :

"In the days leading up to the 9-11 attacks, a record number of stocks, hundreds of millions of dollars worth, from the companies that would be devastated on September 11, such as United and American airlines, were sold off. A jump in UAL put options were 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal between Sept. 6 and Sept.10, and 285 times higher than average on the Thursday before the attack. A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent) above normal on the day before the attacks. No similar trading occurred on any other airlines. This was a big news story for a couple of days after 9-11, but it suddenly and mysteriously dissappeared. Obviously, they dropped the pursuit of this story, for one reason only, because it would lead right to the people that control the media and shadow government. http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/WAR.html"

[Edited on January 26, 2004 at 3:37 PM. Reason : ..]

1/26/2004 3:36:32 PM

Quote :

"sigh. Look I don't know the specifics behind the F-15 but the reason they fly below their top speed is because at a certain point, you are less fuel efficient. If these planes were going to need to patrol an area or escort the boeing, they need all the fuel they can get, therefore you don't waste fuel. ---1337 b4k4"

Oh, so we were in the midst of a national emergency, a supposed "foreign" attack on Americans on American soil....AND the U.S. military is CONCERNED ABOUT FUEL ECONOMY?!!!!



These interceptor jets are designed to protect the Capitol from planes, not merely to escort them. The U.S. military has known for years that planes could be used as weapons (ie, crashing planes into buildings). These interceptor jets should have flown as fast as they could to intercept and shoot down the "hijacked" planes.

Quote :

"The truth of what happened on September 11, 2001 would certainly be difficult for most people to accept. They apparently would rather go on living in ignorant bliss, waiting for the next big lie. http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/WAR.html"

[Edited on January 26, 2004 at 3:50 PM. Reason : ..]

1/26/2004 3:46:11 PM

Question: What good is having fighter escorts to figure out what's going on if by the time they get there, they can only stay in the air 15 minutes?

1/26/2004 3:50:24 PM

CONCENTRATION CAMPS IN AMERICA:

Quote :

"There over 600 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States. http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/CAMPS.html"

[Edited on January 27, 2004 at 11:13 AM. Reason : ..]

1/27/2004 11:13:23 AM

FBI agents knew of the 9/11 attacks months before they happened, but the FBI told them to stop their investigations and remain silent under threat of prosecution.

Quote :

"David Schippers, Chief Council for the House Judiciary Committee and head prosecutor responsible for conducting the impeachment against former President Clinton, has now gone public revealing that in the months BEFORE the 9-11 attacks, many FBI agents had come to him informing him about the impending attacks. These agents knew the names of the hijackers, the targets of their attacks, the proposed dates, and the sources of the terrorists' funding, etc., many months in advance of the 9/11 attacks. The FBI command pulled them off of their investigations into these terrorists and threatened them with the National Security Act. They told them that if they talked about any of the information pertaining to their investigations that they would be prosecuted. http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/LEVY.html"

[Edited on January 27, 2004 at 12:12 PM. Reason : ..]

1/27/2004 12:11:24 PM

On the "Patriot Act":

Quote :

"Q: Just who is a terrorist? A: Anyone (non-U.S. citizen or U.S. citizen alike) Attorney General Ashcroft designates as one. Q: On what evidence can Ashcroft designate someone as a terrorist? A: Mere suspicion and hearsay. Q: What legal rights and Constitutional protections does someone detained on the grounds of being a suspected terrorist have? A: Next to none. It may be difficult for some hard-core, patriotic Americans to believe the veracity of the preceding question and answer series, but the answers to the questions are based upon the implications and dangerous ramifications of the USA PATRIOT Act... ...Under sections 411 and 802 in the USAPA, a terrorist is loosely defined as anyone being "a representative of a foreign terrorist organization, as designated by the Secretary of State," and domestically, anyone engaging in "activities that - involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any state; APPEAR to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; TO INFLUENCE THE POLICY OF A GOVERNMENT BY INTIMIDATION OR COERCION..." [capitals mine] The inclusion of the word "appear" leaves interpretation of the law wide open to subjectivity and personal whim, as anyone can rightfully claim something "appears" to be intended for a particular purpose. Note also that our first amendment right to gather in protest against what we may see as unjust government policies could easily fall under the concept of "influencing" government policy by "intimidation or coercion." http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=444"

[Edited on January 28, 2004 at 12:19 PM. Reason : ..]

1/28/2004 12:16:23 PM

More:

Quote :

"The USA Patriot Act absolutely shreds to bits the fourth amendment. Section 213 permits so-called "sneak and peek" searches. Translated, that means the government has the right to go into your home while you are away, copy your hard drive, files, or whatever, gather and take any information or items they please without ever serving you notice since "the execution of a warrant may have adverse effect." They can then delay serving you notice for up to 90 days after the fact. These newfangled warrants can now be issued for a flimsy "reasonable cause," further undermining the much more difficult to achieve "probable cause" stipulation of the fourth amendment. Sections 216, 217 and 218 allow for unrestricted wiretapping, the tracing and spying on email messages and internet activities of anyone anywhere in the USA without the need to obtain a court order as long as "the information likely to be obtained... is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation." How nebulous can that get? A lawyer of any worth would be able to argue the "relevance" of anything to an unspecified "ongoing criminal investigation." Kiss your protection from "unreasonable searches" good-bye and say hello to Big Brother USA. http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=444"

1/28/2004 12:19:08 PM

what is your stance on israel since your new-found liberalism?

1/28/2004 12:22:04 PM

You know I'm not a "liberal", so why do you keep calling me one? Perhaps you wish I was? If I am a "liberal", why am I strongly opposed to abortion, "gun control", "affirmative action", homosexuality, "gay marriage", redistribution of wealth, bigger government, and higher taxes? I must be a new kind of liberal, if I am one. But, as is clear, I am not a liberal.

Israel is a separate issue. We can start another thread on that if you like.

[Edited on January 28, 2004 at 2:36 PM. Reason : ..]

1/28/2004 2:34:37 PM

Quote :

"In New York, several blocks from the ruins of the World Trade Center, a passport authorities said belonged to one of the hijackers was discovered a few days ago, according to city Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik. That has prompted the FBI and police to widen the search area beyond the immediate crash site. A second person whom authorities were seeking as a material witness in the attacks was arrested Saturday and held in FBI custody in New York, a Justice Department official said. http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.america.under.attack/"

So, this "passport" survived the explosion and fire after the plane hit the WTC? Seems laughable to me.

Also, why would the "hijackers" have passports for DOMESTIC flights??

[Edited on January 28, 2004 at 3:47 PM. Reason : ..]

1/28/2004 3:45:17 PM

Why do you keep quoteing Geocities like its fact? It is not a reliable source of information. Has anybody believing in a consperacy theory read or watched anything about 911, besides consperacy shows.

The order was given to shoot down the last plane. The gov'n admits to it. It was the VP that gave the order. The pilots were interviewed and they talked about the order to shoot the planes down. I was a firm believer that the plan was shot down before I watched the interview. The pilot says the plane went down before it was necessary to shoot it down. Everybody is intitled to their own opinion. Try to read factual material to base it on.

[Edited on January 28, 2004 at 6:11 PM. Reason : more info]

1/28/2004 6:09:45 PM

Yes, I too have seen these interviews.
Here are a few other random responses:
In the new smithsonian museum there is a part of one of the airplanes from the WTC.
Also, george bush saw the SECOND plane hit the WTC on television. I was alive that day, CNN was showing footage of the second plane hitting over and over and was only speculating that two planes must have hit the towers. For the longest time, it seemed as if CNN only had footage of the crash, but knew nothing about anything. Also, the plane that quote "Hit the pentagon" did not actually hit the pentagon directly. it actually slammed into the ground far in front of the pentagon. (I saw this on CNN from a security camera that filmed the entire crash) So, all that hit the building was debris that slid from the crash site into the building, hence the relatively little damage. It is also why they were actually able to put the fire out, because most of the fuel was left burning in the front lawn.

This thread is stupid. If you people want to argue this... stuff, do it in public where someone can punch you. Sometimes I start to think people are simply lazy and not inherently stupid, but then I am always reminded that people are actually stupid enough to seek lies and not simply too lazy to find the truth.

1/28/2004 7:51:22 PM

Quote :

"Also, the plane that quote "Hit the pentagon" did not actually hit the pentagon directly. it actually slammed into the ground far in front of the pentagon. (I saw this on CNN from a security camera that filmed the entire crash) So, all that hit the building was debris that slid from the crash site into the building, hence the relatively little damage. It is also why they were actually able to put the fire out, because most of the fuel was left burning in the front lawn. --LoneSnark"

This is all "news" to me...the "explanations" "supporting" the official government/media story get funnier as the days go by...

I think I know the security camera footage you speak of, and the security camera does not show a plane hitting the ground.



I don't see any plane hitting the ground.

Where is any evidence of fuel having burned in the lawn?



[Edited on January 28, 2004 at 11:11 PM. Reason : ..]

1/28/2004 10:45:35 PM

[Edited on January 29, 2004 at 12:48 AM. Reason : damn top cutoff...]

1/29/2004 12:47:02 AM