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: LPS5 who wrote (9293)	12/14/2004 3:41:06 PM
From: Rock_nj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Paine Stewart's plane was intercepted in twenty minutes according to published reports I've read. I've also read that it is routine for the FAA to contact NORAD upon losing contact with an airplane and that military jets are routinely scrambled. There is a published figure for the months preceeding 9/11/01, in which the military scrambled jets over 100 times in 2001 to intercept commercial aircraft. I'm not sure what the typical response time is. But, I'm sure we can pretty much figure that out based on reasonable assumptions, such as: how long it take a plane to scramble (from the scramble order to the air, I believe 3 minutes is the time I've read), how fast these planes are able to fly (up to 1,700 MPH), their distance to the targets, etc. We all know the Northeast has plenty of military bases, some of which were still on 24 hour alert status. Now, the NE isn't that large of a region, why planes on stand by couldn't be scramble to at least defend Washington, DC a full hour after the WTC was struck (more than an hour after the planes veered off coarse) raises serious questions. OK, a skeptic could say that perhaps intercepting the planes that hit the WTC would be impossible given the lead time (although even then, New Jersey has air force bases that run routine training flights that could easily reach the WTC in minutes), but not having planes in the air over DC an hour later really raises some questions? I mean, we couldn't even defend our military nerve center with over an hour lead time, something really doesn't add up in that scenario. If not, why not? Why are our defenses so poorly designed? Andrews AFB is only minutes from DC, like they couldn't send up a few planes to defend the Capitol? That version of the official story has major holes in it. As far as explosives and the WTC, that is a whole other ball of wax, and would require a much more intensive conspiracy. Not sure why someone would go to the trouble, since they could have been detected and just the impact of the planes hitting the WTC was enough to acheive any sort of goal to put fear in the general public over terrorism. I think what people have a problem with regarding the collapse of the WTC is: if the fires were actually hot enough to cause a structural collapse in a steel building, if seimsmographs actually detected some sort of disturbance before the buildings collapsed, and why the buildings would fall at the rate that gravity tells us they should and not be slowed by friction with the standing parts of the building. Those questions need to be put to rest to end the talk of bombs taking down the WTC.

To: LPS5 who wrote (9293)	12/15/2004 3:30:13 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Re: ...as we all saw the year before when Paine Stewart's plane lost contact, that the military routinely intercepts planes that have lost contact and are off course in a matter of minutes. I don't know that the military "routinely" intercepts planes, or that it's necessarily "a matter of minutes" before they scramble aircraft. Stop mixing apples and oranges! It's one thing for the USAF to intercept --and eventually shoot down-- a small aircraft like a Cessna or a Gulfstream that flies astray with two or three people on board but it's a whole another ball-game to shoot down a airliner with fifty passengers on board!! Besides, how come Rock_nj doesn't mention the Pennsylvania crash?!? That clearly reveals that USAF jetfighters were scrambled "in a timely manner".... Gus

To: LPS5 who wrote (9293)	12/15/2004 3:48:12 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20039

Re: why would the conspirators (!) have rigged the buildings with explosives and undertaken the time, effort, and indeed risk - of being discovered, as each additional node of the conspiracy exposes one to more potential randomness - to fly planes into the buildings in addition to, as the theory has it, using explosive charges? That's really elementary and you understand it completely though you continue malevolently to play the sinister devil's advocate here. It was crucial to create "a New Pearl Harbor" in order to get the American public to go along with the destruction of their Bill of Rights and to agree to be the chumps paying for vast military operations abroad. In order to create the patsies for the operation, the military needed to create a diversion and an attractant for eyeballs. The plane crashes at the WTC towers were just such an attractant. By the time that the South Tower was demolished, about 1 Billion people people across the planet were well aware of or watching the events unfold in New York. The interest of the perpetrators was to "shock and awe" the general populace. Merely blowing up the buildings would have not done that. And it would have led to a lot of questions about how the explosives could have been placed. By providing a diversion, the perpetrators hoped to distract the general public, and with the successful conclusion of the ridiculously lame "investigation" by the Kean Commission (recall they don't even mention the collapse of WTC 7!) they have gotten the American public to forget their skepticism and to trust authority, i.e. the government and the corporate media. Both of whom are lying like banshees (and Nigerian scam artists) to the public. *** OT OT OT Regarding credibility: So far on SI you've been Ahhaha, LPS5 and now e. Why are you so interested in being a serial imposter? Who are you, really? What do you hope to gain by lying? How can you possibly think your long-winded and silly arguments make up for the fact that you are lying and dissembling for the most part these days?