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: Doug R who wrote (560)	5/5/2003 2:20:53 AM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

Doug, At the very least, hijacking involves the taking of hostages. To a certain extent most crimes involve some degree of cooperation on the part of the victims. Living in fear, and refusing to protect oneself from criminals out of fear, is no way to live as far as I'm concerned. Morals are the rules each individual chooses to live by. If you know who you are, you know what you have to do if it becomes necessary. If a particular person's view is it's moral to sit quietly while being taken hostage, that's a choice they have a right to make. For myself, I'd prefer not to ride on airplanes with that sort of person.

To: Doug R who wrote (560)	5/5/2003 7:11:09 AM
From: ChrisJP	Respond to of 20039

Hi Doug, First I'll hope you noticed that Don can't concede even the simplest truth, such as up until 9/11, the best chances for passenger survival of a hi-jacking was to lay low until the plane landed and negotiators/swat teams dealt with the problem. As for 9/11 -- some sad facts to ponder: 1. Did our intelligence agencies get some warnings ? Sure. They got hundred of them, maybe more. They get them all the time -- which should be apparent from the yo-yo terror alert status the keep announcing. Out of the thousands of possible threats that are percieved every year, most are false leads, a few are sucessfully thwarted. 9/11 turned out to be one in ten thousand that was real and wasn't thwarted. Why don't the conspiracy theorists list all the reports sent to "higher ups" that turned out to be false leads ? 2. Our air defenses -- jets were scrambled from Otis AFB as soon as they were notified there was a hi-jacking (they were airborne about 5 minutes later). So they weren't passively idle, "letting this happen", although the conspiracy theorists continue to twist the truth on this fact. But no matter how much anyone rants and raves, our air defenses were not designed to prevent a suicide hi-jacking -- especially one in which the suicide happens 30 minutes after the hi-jacking takes place. If someone can't accept that -- that's just too bad. But the proof is that the only way to defend against that sort of attack would be to have 24 hour air patrols and anti-aircraft implacements -- which of course before 9/11 we only have during war time. The delayed response to AA Flt 77 was definitely a screw up. This was reported by the Washington Post and TV news stations here the following day. But an intercept of AA 77 would have been unsuccessful at best and actually could have cause more deaths on the ground if it had been successful. 3. The FBI -- is a strange place for sure. Their culture is to investigate crimes THAT HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED. Or investigate organizations already known or linked to criminal activity. They are not a bunch of "James Bond agents". This pretty much keeps everyone busy all the time. Sending a memo that says "Hey, something fishy is going on here ...." rarely gets attention. This is America. Something fishy is ALWAYS going on here. The FBI can't investigate every fishy thing they suspect. 4. As I've posted before, this attack was planned and initiated in early 2000 maybe even earlier -- before the Bush administration took office. Take care, Chris