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: Don Earl who wrote (10357)	3/13/2005 11:44:34 AM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 20039

Don > if you wanted to have control over the situation, the last thing in the world you would want is to let the flights leave, then try to figure out some way to make them land Why should one want them to land? To make them "vanish" is far simpler. > Whatever theory a person may have about the second plane, whether it was a 767, or a 737, or a 737 cargo plane, it certainly was not a small fighter jet No question about that. My point is, whatever the plane was, it would have had to be both a special plane and specially prepared for the mission. > Flying a plane by remote control is hardly new technology. That's when you can see it flying around you. But consider what took place and the accuracy of the controls needed. It wasn't just take-off in the US and land in Australia or a fly around the park. > the claim is the ability to take external control of a passenger jet is something built in at the factory as an anti hijacking measure. I understand that. But in the situation of a "normal" hijacking the transponder would have been working and air-traffic control fully operative. None of that happened on 9/11. > Considering at least 2 members of PNAC had intimate knowledge of remote control technology, it was certainly within their means to use it on 9/11. I'm not arguing about that. I'm arguing about what actually took place not what might have. > All of the black boxes went missing. What if all of them recorded desperate pilots trying to figure out why their planes were flying themselves? What those black boxes recorded is anyone's guess? But, we'll never know, not while the present administration is in place. > There just plain isn't enough information in the public domain to nail down any of the theories about the planes. While I appreciate the concern of 9/11 researchers and pundits to be "respectable" and not the focus of scorn because of half-baked ideas, I have to say in defence of the so-called "fantasists" that all theories are not necessarily in the realms of fantasy. > About all I can say is even the goofiest of the theories make more sense than the one about how 19 wingnuts from the Middle East, who didn't know how to fly, are impossible to identify, and who were not listed as passengers on the flights, somehow managed to go heads up against a half trillion dollar a year military machine and win. You've said it.

To: Don Earl who wrote (10357)	3/14/2005 10:20:34 AM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Don > Considering at least 2 members of PNAC had intimate knowledge of remote control technology, it was certainly within their means to use it on 9/11. Here's a brief resume of Dov Zackheim, the one whom some regard as the mastermind behind 9/11. judicial-inc.biz And some discussion canadiancontent.net >>The possibility of nefarious use of these brilliant technologies developed and deployed by Systems Planning Corporation certainly deserves careful consideration in any full and impartial investigation of what actually took place on 9/11. In the context of 9/11 it also needs to be pointed out that Rabbi Dov Zakheim was Chief Executive Officer of System Planning Corporation's International Division until President George W. Bush appointed him Undersecretary of Defense and Comptroller of the Pentagon. Not long before Rabbi Zakheim rose to power over the Pentagon's labyrinthine, bottomless accounts, he co-authored an article entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century" which was published by The Project for a New American Century in September 2000, exactly a year before 9/11; in this article, on page 51, it is stated that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor"! Voila! 9/11! Well, there you have it! Motive, means and opportunity all rolled into one and existing between Rabbi Dov Zakheim's ears. The motive was that a false flag intelligence operation would trigger a response by the USA that would be good for the Zionist state. The means consisted of the aforementioned remote control of airborne vehicle technologies as well as the nurturing, creative accounting at the Pentagon to pay for such an operation. The opportunity was Zakheim's closeness to the Command/Control/Communications in our nation's capital and its interwoven cousin network of psychopathic Zionist Neo-Cons all hell-bent on provoking a war with Saddam Hussein. Unfortunately, it seems that the 9/11 commission is not looking in this direction when it ought to be.<< Also a lot more further down the page.