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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (20557)	3/31/2004 3:29:57 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 80908

> because the planes fly at the height and speed they do, no cellphone communications are actually possible when they are in flight. fourwinds10.com >>> “To the extent that the cellphones used in this experiment represent types in general use, it may be concluded that from this particular type of aircraft, cellphones become useless very quickly with increasing altitude. In particular, two of the cellphone types, the Mike and the Nokia, became useless above 2000 feet. Of the remaining two, the Audiovox worked intermittently up to 6000 feet but failed thereafter, while the BM analog cellphone worked once just over 7000 feet but failed consistently thereafter. We therefore conclude that ordinary cellphones, digital or analog, will fail to get through at or above 8000 feet abga.” Dewdney’s experiment suggests that if cellphone calls from ‘hijacked’ airplanes on 9/11 happened at all, they must all have occurred at very low altitude. This is inconsistent with the ‘official version’ of events. The implications that 9/11 was a spectacular hoax are, of course, staggering. Many journalists and commentators may be reticent to dissect the official version of events, because to do so opens a veritable Pandora’s Box. If 9/11 was not carried out by Arab terrorists, the perpetrators clearly must have influence within the highest levels of the US Administration. Key elements of the mass media must also have been complicit in perpetrating the fraud. <<<

To: sea_urchin who wrote (20557)	3/31/2004 4:08:46 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 80908

> the Bush administration did whatever it could to ignore/obfuscate any information purporting to come from bin Laden/Al Qaeda even though serious intelligence from many agencies throughout the world informed them that a terrorist attack was to be expected xymphora.blogspot.com >>>Wednesday, March 31, 2004 On June 28, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice received an intelligence summary warning that a significant al Qaeda attack in the near future was "highly likely." On July 3, Tenet made an urgent special request to 20 friendly intelligence services, asking for the arrest of a list of known al Qaeda operatives. A meeting of commanders of all federal counter-terrorism agencies was held in the White House Situation Room on July 5. At that meeting Richard Clarke said: "Something really spectacular is going to happen here, and it's going to happen soon." The Bush Administration's attempts to blame their complete failure to prevent 9-11 on Clinton or on unfortunate negligence won't wash. There was active malfeasance, in the Pentagon and probably the FBI and possibly the Bush White House, to relax the usual defenses to allow the terrorist attacks to succeed.<<< I go further than this. In my opinion, not only did they "allow the terrorist attacks to succeed", they did them.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (20557)	4/8/2004 4:32:40 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 80908

> as I see it, that's the way the pieces fit together Same as respected philosopher of religion at the Claremont School of Theology since the 1970s and longtime Santa Barbara resident, David Ray Griffin. independent.com >>>According to Griffin, a case can be made that the Bush administration arranged the attack, or allowed it to happen. He is aware that he may be dismissed as a conspiracy nut, but given the “transcendent importance” of the issue, Griffin is willing to assume that risk and has taken to repeating Michael Moore’s line on the subject: “Personally, I’m not into conspiracy theories except those that are true.” Q. Is there a smoking gun that shows the Bush administration knew 9/11 was likely to happen and did nothing about it? A. I think there are four<<< And I can think of at least ten.