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: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (7772)	8/16/2004 12:12:05 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 20039

Gus > I totally concur with the article And with certain "modifications", so do I. These concern particularly whether aircraft were actually used on 9-11 and, if so, their deployment. From the Webfairy site: >>From What really happened to American Airlines Flights 11 and 77 on Sept 11, 2001 by Gerard Homgren First lets recap on the official story of what happened to four planes that morning. AA 11 left Boston for LA at about 8 am, was reported as hijacked about 8.25, and hit the Nth Tower at about 8.46. UA 175 left Boston for LA at about the same time, was reported hijacked at about 8.55 and hit the Sth Tower at about 9.03 AA 77 left Dulles for LA about the same time , was reported hijacked at about 8.55 and hit the Pentagon at about 9.45 UA 93 left Newark for SF at about the same time, was reported hijacked about 9.45 and crashed in PA at about 10.10. Searches for Sept 11 2001 reveal that the flights AA 11 and AA 77 did not exist. They were not scheduled that day. Here are the search results which I encourage everyone to check for themselves. A search for UA flights from Newark on Sept 11, 2001 shows 0093 to SF was scheduled at 8.00 and actually departed at 8.01. It is listed as "diverted" and did not arrive at its destination. A search for UA from Boston on that day shows 0175 to LA was scheduled for 8.00 and actually departed at 7.58. Also listed as "diverted" and did not arrive at its destination. The term "diverted" does not specify any differentiation between legally diverted, hijacked or crashed, so the data gives no indication one way or the other as to truth of the official story about what happened to them, but it does confirm that they departed as per the official story and did not arrive at their destinations. A search for AA flights from Boston that day does not list 0011. The earliest scheduled AA flight to LA that day was 0181 at 11.00 A search for AA flights from Dulles that day does not list 0077. The earliest scheduled AA flight to LA was 0135 at 11.15. Here's a different search method. By returning to the search page URL listed earlier, and clicking on summary statistics, one can find the historical reliability and punctuality of specific flights over a period of time, by specifying the airline and flight number and defining the time period. The search then returns figures on average delays in departure and arrival times and percentages of cancelled or diverted flights. If one searches specifically for UA 175 or UA 93 narrowed down to Sept 11 only, the search returns the result of "diverted" for each flight. A similar search for either AA 11 or AA 77 on that date returns "no data found". If you search for AA 11 or AA 77 on different days, you will find that they were regularly scheduled flights right up to Sept 10. AA 11 was scheduled daily from Logan to LA at 8.00, and AA 77 from Dulles to LA at 7.45. On Sept 11, they were not scheduled. Not cancelled. Just not scheduled. On Sept 12, they re-appear in the schedule (obviously as cancelled for the next few days) up until Sept 20 when both flights change their numbers. Thus the official figures from the Bureau of Transportation statistics indicate that neither AA 11 nor AA 77 flew on Sept, 11 2001. This solves the question of what happened to them. Nothing. Because the flights did not exist. This is consistent with other evidence which shows that they were not the objects responsible for the Pentagon and Nth WTC tower incidents.<< In my opinion, the fact that the official flights AA11 and AA77 did not exist on 9-11 does not rule out the use of aircraft, certainly in the case of "AA11", which struck the North Tower. Indeed, I would agree that the plane which struck the South Tower (? Flight 93) need not have been a passenger aircraft although it makes no difference to the outcome if it was the actual Flight 93. Anyway, and in accord with my theory, both planes which hit the WTC were radio-controlled. There is certainly enough evidence that the Pentagon was struck by a cruise missile, or similar. There is also evidence that the plane which crashed in Pennsylvania (which could have been the real Flight 175) was shot down by an interceptor.

To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (7772)	8/18/2004 4:59:15 PM
From: Sidney Reilly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Interesting article, thanks for posting it. I also have to wonder about the hologram idea. But if there were no planes then that would account for the reason the military did not respond. Also I wonder if the air traffic controllers on duty that day are still alive or if they have had "accidents" like the witnesses who said shots definitely came from the grassy knoll. It's interesting that these controllers have not been sought out by the media for extensive interviews. That's the usual tack of any media frenzy. But these guys have not uttered a peep.