Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChrisJP who wrote (312)	4/26/2003 7:52:32 PM
From: Don Earl	Respond to of 20039

Chris, I'm not sure if you're for real or not, but for the time being I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. There's a standard operating procedure for passenger planes which go off course and/or stop transmitting. Not only was that procedure not followed, the reasons why are classified. From the time the first plane hit, every Air Force base in America should have been on full alert, with pilots ready to take off from the nearest base on an instants notice. That's what they do. That's what they're there for. The money's been spent and it doesn't cost a dime extra to put a prepared response into effect even if it turns out to be a false alarm. Experts who spent their entire careers specialized in quick response to air attacks have stated in no uncertain terms 9/11 shouldn't have played out the way it did. What happened on 9/11 would be about like if you were talking on a cell phone, to a close family member, who got in a wreck in the middle of the conversation. The family member tells you they need help right away and gives you their location. Your car is parked out front, you're dressed, have the keys in your pocket, and the speed limit is 40 on the route you need to take. For some reason you take 6 minutes to pull out of the driveway and proceed at 10 MPH. Your family member is dead by the time you arrive. When asked about why you did it that way, you refuse to answer. Now perhaps all that sounds reasonable to you. I respectfully suggest anyone who has a mind able to conceive of this as being reasonable - to a degree they would argue the point with those who don't - should take time out for a reality check. As for your on going rationalization about preferred methods and goals of a terrorist attack, your reasoning strikes me as being equally fuzzy. If 9/11 was conducted by terrorists with a big enough grudge against America they were willing to die, and were well financed, but were limited in terms of personnel, the exact case you make for alternative methods is exactly what you would have seen. The Pentagon was engineered to withstand bombs. The WTC was engineered to withstand jet accidents. The majority of government seats in this country were engineered to be pretty; nice big bubble domed buildings that mostly don't even meet current earthquake specifications. The pilots would have been trained to fly small planes before entering the country, without the need to create records establishing their ability to fly jumbo jets. They would likely have been using papers identifying them as Israelis to explain their Mid Eastern appearance, and because Israel is supposedly the least opposed country to US policy in the area. They would have picked their 19 softest targets in advance and headed straight for those areas rather than cause suspicions by congregating in groups. At the appointed time they would have acquired private planes for harmless reasons, and hit their targets as close to the same minute as they could get. And if they had the ability to produce weaponized anthrax, it would have been done in far larger quantities than enough for 4 letters, and would have been mailed the day before. As a terrorist act, it would have been far more effective, with a lot less risk of something going wrong. As propaganda, it would have been far less effective. Most Americans don't ride in private planes or spend much time at seats of government. The emotional connection of, "It could have been me on that flight, or in that building.", would have been totally absent. There are so many holes big enough to drive a bus through it isn't funny, but the cover up has been so effective persons such as yourself don't bother to question what happened. That alone should give you some kind of clue that whoever was responsible had a high level of confidence they were in a position to control popular opinion. Unwashed cave dwellers with pipe bombs and AK 47s doesn't fit the MO.

To: ChrisJP who wrote (312)	4/27/2003 3:52:38 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

Chris, Re: Is the Bush administration a bunch of evil geniuses or village idiots ? My understanding is a combination of the two. They haven't done a very convincing job of covering their tracks and have really pissed a lot of us off with their high handed and cavalier attempts to suppress any investigations into the events surrounding Operation 911. Since you are the greatest proponent of the "official line" on this thread and seem to be very desirous of ridiculing those of us who are certain that there is cause for alarm concerning the Bushies involvement in the 911 attacks, I'd like to have you offer us up your best answers to this series of questions that have been posed by some of us who have been investigating this tragedy for a year and an half and have become increasingly alarmed by the stonewalling of the Bushistas, and the subsequent events (seizure of pipeline right-of-way in Afghanistan, seizure of Iraqi oil fields, USA PATRIOT Act, etc.) which have been justified on the basis of the purported threat of future events like the attacks of 9/11. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS: Source: scoop.co.nz Unanswered Questions from 9/11 (Presented at 9/11 CitizensWatch Press Conference; Customs House, NYC, March 31) 1) Why in the months before 9/11 did FBI headquarters consistently obstruct field agent investigations of potential terrorists or terrorist financiers? 2) Why were many detailed warnings from the intelligence services of Britain, Germany, Israel, Egypt, Russia, Italy, and other foreign governments ignored? 3) Why were some prominent travelers warned not to fly on 9/11? 4) Why in the days immediately before 9/11 were there massive spikes in the number of "puts" on the stocks of airline and insurance companies? 5) Why did the chief of Pakistani Intelligence, Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, approve over $100,000 in wire transfers to Mohammed Atta prior to the attacks? 6) Why in the 1 hour and 20 minutes after the onset of a multiple hijacking, with hundreds dead or dying in the Twin Towers, and a third jet hurtling to our nationís capitol did no USAF, Navy or Air National Guard fighter defend the Pentagon? 7) From investigator and former NBC reporter/producer Daniel Hopsicker's Florida investigation: Why do eyewitness accounts of the behavior and movements of lead hijacker Mohammed Atta conflict with the findings of the government investigation? 8) Why in the wake of the most cataclysmic intelligence and air defense failures in American history have no government officials or Pentagon brass been held accountable for the September 11 tragedy? 9) Why, in the wake of the most cataclysmic intelligence and air defense failures in American history, have responsible government officials and Pentagon brass been rewarded with promotions? 10) Why did the Bush/Cheney Administration for over a year stonewall victims' family members demands for a full independent investigation? I would sincerely like to have you try to settle these questions for us. I'm just as unhappy as you are with the crazy propeller-headed theories that keep popping up. It would be nice to put this story to bed. Can you help? Best, Ray