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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (16316)	3/31/2005 8:42:14 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

TP, Re: This reminds me of when you claimed that flight 93 was kidnapped and hidden away in area 51 or something so that the cia could shoot missles at the pentagon. I'm impressed. You've managed to misrepresent what I wrote in three separate ways. That takes a lot of talent. <grin> 1) It was Flight 77 at the Pentagon. Flight 93 fell out of the sky at Shanksville, PA. 2) The completely plausible landing of Flight 77 that I speculated about was on a nearly secret island that the DEA had confiscated in the Atlantic from drug-runners. The notion being that Flight 77 would have been in the vicinity of the Pentagon when it was struck by a second aircraft or missile, just as a magician is able to fool an audience with distraction: channel4.com [Aside: As Sun Tzu states in "The Art of War", All warfare is based on deception. ] However, that somewhat misses a couple bigger points. Which is that we really must ask how in the hell Flight 77 could possibly have flown from near Cleveland, OH down to Washington, D.C. without interception, and if we are to believe the Kean-Zelikow Commission report, without even having radar contact for most of its flight. That is an absurd thing to believe. And most importantly, if the attack upon the Pentagon were actually carried out by Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, would it not have been in their best interest to strike at the command center of the Pentagon, the area housing the Secretary and the Joint Chiefs? Instead, what we find is that the Pentagon was struck at exactly the location that would do the very least damage to the military's command and control structure, and if we are to believe Philip Zelikow, with extraordinary piloting skills displayed by one Hani Hanjour, who couldn't even rent a Cessna a couple weeks earlier! Isn't that curiouser and curiouser? How credulous do the perpetrators think the American media and public to be? Credulous enough, apparently. 3) The Air Force, rather than the CIA, would be in charge of the missiles. And if we were to be more specific, I'd think that we would want to investigate (and more than likely prosecute) the U.S. Space Command which had the means, the motives and the ability to cover-up its tracks in the attack on the Pentagon. Have you noticed that the U.S. Space Command has enjoyed tremendous appropriations in the past 3 years in spite of the overwhelming failure of its equipment to meet stated goals? Why has the Kean-Zelikow Report provided a third "official story" about the interaction of the FAA-NORAD-NEADS-NMCC for the morning of 9/11? Why does each iteration lay more blame on an apparently incompetent FAA while holding the military harmless? Why did the Kean-Zelikow Report utterly fail to mention the several "war games" that were going on on the morning of 9/11, at least one of which required that the usual air defenses of the Northeast Corridor be sent to Northern Alaska and the Arctic Ocean region? How in the world could JCS Chief Gen. Richard Myers claim, under oath, that this "enhanced" the NORAD response on 9/11?