9/11

[Canadian Blue]

How do you explain Larry Silversteins "pull the building" phrase ?

Are you sure he didn't mean pull the firefighters out of the building. If you base you're case on a three word phrase that's a shitty case.

How do you explain Donald Rumsfeld admitting that the Pennslyvania flight was shot down ?

A slip of the tongue perhaps, since the evidence doesn't show the plane was shot down, I'm more inclined to believe that it wasn't shot down.

How do you explain three buildings collapsing perfectly straight down in one day when its never ever happened before except in controlled demolition ?

They didn't the debris damaged building's all around the area. Especially WTC 7.

How do you explain the fact that it was alomost 2 hours since the start of the hijackings and the last attack. but the entire US defences couldn't be called even after the second wtc hit. You would think they would launch those fighters from Andrews - why didn't they ?

Because of the chaos during the day. It takes time to fully brief, prepare, arm, and handle any situation. This isn't an action movie, which I'm sure is what you're basing that off of.

Originally many people believed the first plane was an accident, their was massive chaos on sept 11, it's not that hard to comprehend. I remember a news report saying that 6 jets had been hijacked.

[PolyNewbie]

Canadian Blue:Not really, its stupid believing Ceasar was killed due to monetary reform. Obviously shows you're absolute lack of knowledge on history.

It has to do with the differing gold / silver ratios and the people that were exploiting that and his monetary reform in Rome.

War is always about money because international bankers run the planet. War is a way to enslave and control us.

[Black Dog]

How do you explain the plane hitting the Pentagon at the exact spot where all kinds of suspicious financial transactions were being investigated ?

I'm sure someone else has adressed this. Me, I ain't got the time.

How do you explain Larry Silversteins "pull the building" phrase ?

As Silverstein himself said: he was referring to pulling the firefighters out.

How do you explain Donald Rumsfeld admitting that the Pennslyvania flight was shot down ?

Rumsfeld's not very bright and he misspoke.

How do you explain three buildings collapsing perfectly straight down in one day when its never ever happened before except in controlled demolition ?

Been over this already. Suffice it to say, that was not the only unprecedented even that day: others included the crash of large jumbo jets into the side of the WTC had high speeds.

How do you explain the perfect symmetrical conventional controlled demolition of wtc 7 ?

I'll grant you this much and only this much: WTC 7 does appear to look like a CD, but that doesn't mean it was.

How do you explain the fact that it was alomost 2 hours since the start of the hijackings and the last attack. but the entire US defences couldn't be called even after the second wtc hit. You would think they would launch those fighters from Andrews - why didn't they ?

Because there are no fighter squadrons based at Andrews.

Sleepy now. Back to my Santa worshiping.

One last thing: is Mark Bingham's mom in on it too?

[Jenna]

How do you explain Larry Silversteins "pull the building" phrase ?

Are you sure he didn't mean pull the firefighters out of the building. If you base you're case on a three word phrase that's a shitty case.

How do you explain Donald Rumsfeld admitting that the Pennslyvania flight was shot down ?

A slip of the tongue perhaps, since the evidence doesn't show the plane was shot down, I'm more inclined to believe that it wasn't shot down.

How do you explain three buildings collapsing perfectly straight down in one day when its never ever happened before except in controlled demolition ?

They didn't the debris damaged building's all around the area. Especially WTC 7.

How do you explain the fact that it was alomost 2 hours since the start of the hijackings and the last attack. but the entire US defences couldn't be called even after the second wtc hit. You would think they would launch those fighters from Andrews - why didn't they ?

Because of the chaos during the day. It takes time to fully brief, prepare, arm, and handle any situation. This isn't an action movie, which I'm sure is what you're basing that off of.

Originally many people believed the first plane was an accident, their was massive chaos on sept 11, it's not that hard to comprehend. I remember a news report saying that 6 jets had been hijacked.

Oh for crying out loud.

"pull it" had nothing to do with fire fighters

as if.

I'll give you a link to Silverstein, saying it himself.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=awcqSy_UsXs

lol canadian blue, you have issues.

[Black Dog]

Oh for crying out loud.

"pull it" had nothing to do with fire fighters

as if.

I'll give you a link to Silverstein, saying it himself.

Silverstein has said that's exactly what he meant. But then he's in on it too. Which bring sme back to this:

...in PNs world, since the "truth" is self-evident, any evidence of another conclusion is ipso facto false and therefore inadmissable. The only evidence that PN will accept as not being falsified is that which supports his conclusion.

That's the beauty of these things. They're like perpetual motion machines made out of crazy that run on stupid. Like this thread. And yes, I refer to myself in that as well for being dumb enough to wade into it again. I guess I thought maybe there'd be something new in the 30 pages since I last posted or looked in. Boy was I wrong.

[Canadian Blue]

lol canadian blue, you have issues.

Yes, but what keeps me going is basic logic, common sense and rational thinking. I usually have issues with people who are so stupid and innane that they'll believe anything on the internet.

This thread is the same thing over and over, polynewbie gives his video's, then the wacko triangle comes in making all kinds of crazy claims.

Black Dog, don't you know, everyone who doesn't believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by either the Jews, the Rockefellers, Bush, Cheney, Freemasons, the Illuminati, aliens, Mossad, or the Bankers, are all in on 9/11.

[Jenna]

lol canadian blue, you have issues.

Yes, but what keeps me going is basic logic, common sense and rational thinking. I usually have issues with people who are so stupid and innane that they'll believe anything on the internet.

This thread is the same thing over and over, polynewbie gives his video's, then the wacko triangle comes in making all kinds of crazy claims.

Black Dog, don't you know, everyone who doesn't believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by either the Jews, the Rockefellers, Bush, Cheney, Freemasons, the Illuminati, aliens, Mossad, or the Bankers, are all in on 9/11.

so....

What's your interpretation of Silverstein in that video?

[Jenna]

And what does this have to do with the internet?

Are you saying that if I send a news clip link from youtube, that all of a sudden it isn't true anymore?

It's so funny when people use that one.

"oh you got that off the internet"

and?

I guess what you're saying is, that since you're talking on the net, you must be a completely unreliable source as well.

[PolyNewbie]

Black Dog:Because there are no fighter squadrons based at Andrews.

But there were is 2001. Google / 911 Research links.

[PolyNewbie]

CanadianBlue:Black Dog, don't you know, everyone who doesn't believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by either the Jews, the Rockefellers, Bush, Cheney, Freemasons, the Illuminati, aliens, Mossad, or the Bankers, are all in on 9/11.

Thats basically it - at least for intelligent people. Its pretty hard to think Osama did 911 when the whole story does't have any supporting evidence and even sounds rediculous or at least impossible. I can imagine that some people actually believe it but most people arguing for it don't actually believe it.

Some people are suffering from cognitive dissance. I can imagine that - I think that if you are already skeptical about the US government given its past behaviour. We live very controlled and sanitary environments, I can imagine some people not even thinking this kind of evil even exists. People sometimes think they and everyone else are the same. In reality 4 % of people out there are psychopaths and this kind of behaviour is entirely possible.

There are people that like to call themselves nihilists that are a part of the establishment and welcomed. Machevelians are welcome. This is what is being taught in universities. This elitism is nothing more than a divide and conquer strategy - make people that have money think that is all that matters and people that don't have money are in a separate class. Even if you have IQ 40 points better than anyone else, you can still be brainwashed.

[Catchme]

Jenna, you're failing to realize what the purpose of all those attackes was for, and that was to make the page flip over and into the next one, thereby removing the FACTS and information, concerning 911, from those just tunnning in. The page flip also serves for those who want to deflect away from the facts, then be able to say to say: "you have proven nothing" because of course you cannot now repost the same exact information from the same source, as there are rules against double posting information. The best you can do to combat this type of thing is link to the page that it was on like this when a couple of pages pass:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....ic=7482&st=1035

As that page has a valuable link, to other valuable links, with even more information.

Or you can have several sources for the information available, and post only 1 at a time over the course of the dialogue when they are doing this type of thing. I usually start with the lighter weight links and then build up to government records over the course of the propaganda attacks against what facts you post. Though be prepared for those types, when cornered, to start personal attacks on either yourself, the place where the infor was located at, or indeed attack the character of who originaly wrote about the facts. When they do this it is best not to respond to their personal attacks and simply address another poster about the topic at hand.

The propaganda machine for 911 deflection away from the truth, are a well oiled machine, they have had 5 years of practise. Of course, by saying such a thing, one has to be prepared for the tin foil hat comments, or the old "conspiracy theory" rhetoric, again another propaganda ploy. Or I suppose with some, it may well just be operant conditioning at play.

[Canadian Blue]

Thats basically it - at least for intelligent people. Its pretty hard to think Osama did 911 when the whole story does't have any supporting evidence and even sounds rediculous or at least impossible. I can imagine that some people actually believe it but most people arguing for it don't actually believe it.

Do intelligent people also believe that Caesar was killed due to economic reform's, well everyone but those Jew loving, Rockefeller, Freemason group known as historians.

Some people are suffering from cognitive dissance. I can imagine that - I think that if you are already skeptical about the US government given its past behaviour. We live very controlled and sanitary environments, I can imagine some people not even thinking this kind of evil even exists. People sometimes think they and everyone else are the same. In reality 4 % of people out there are psychopaths and this kind of behaviour is entirely possible.

Jared Taylor and David Duke said something like that as well, but as on here I simply discount them as nutjobs.

The propaganda machine for 911 deflection away from the truth, are a well oiled machine, they have had 5 years of practise. Of course, by saying such a thing, one has to be prepared for the tin foil hat comments, or the old "conspiracy theory" rhetoric, again another propaganda ploy. Or I suppose with some, it may well just be operant conditioning at play.

Same with that whole holocaust thing, never happened according to David Irving. It was all a conspiracy to create a zionist state.

Basically similar thinking in reference to 9/11.

Jenna, you're failing to realize what the purpose of all those attackes was for, and that was to make the page flip over and into the next one, thereby removing the FACTS and information, concerning 911, from those just tunnning in. The page flip also serves for those who want to deflect away from the facts, then be able to say to say: "you have proven nothing" because of course you cannot now repost the same exact information from the same source, as there are rules against double posting information. The best you can do to combat this type of thing is link to the page that it was on like this when a couple of pages pass:

Hold on, Bush was smart enough to pull an inside job, get the vast majority of the mainstream engineering community to conclude the attacks were not CD and a missile, yet still is completely incompetent in Iraq and has approval ratings in the 30's.

And what does this have to do with the internet?

Are you saying that if I send a news clip link from youtube, that all of a sudden it isn't true anymore?

It's so funny when people use that one.

"oh you got that off the internet"

and?

I guess what you're saying is, that since you're talking on the net, you must be a completely unreliable source as well.

No Silverstein himself said he wasn't referring to a demolition, he was in fact referring to the firefighters. By the way if this was an inside job, why would Silverstein talk about a demolition on TV, and wouldn't that also mean the NYFD was in on 9/11 as well.

Um, it's actually your, not you're.

Look at you talking about love triangles and stupid nonsense.

I've been on here for what, 2 weeks maybe, and seen at least 5 other people who agree with us.

And those who disagree, are the same 4 or 5 people as well.

How are news casts and government websites "conspiracy websites"

I knew you didn't look at any of those links.

Typical.

Every village needs it's idiot's. Personally I think you're one of Polynewbies multiple personalities, however that's just me. It seems like most conspiracy nuts like Lyndon Larouche, Ernst Zundel, Paul Fromm, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot. Each one has some paranoia about a certain group of people. It's nothing new.

Which is why the 9/11 conspiracy theories are so popular with people on the radical ends of both spectrum. The vast majority of nazis and neo-fascists believe that the official version isn't correct and blame the Jews, on the radical left people blame the corporations and the banks. The people who push these theories are radical, and on the extremes of the political spectrum.

And for christ sake, try making your posts a bit more readable, its like some retarded chimpanzee got a hold of a computer.

[PolyNewbie]

Canadian Blue:Hold on, Bush was smart enough to pull an inside job, get the vast majority of the mainstream engineering community to conclude the attacks were not CD and a missile, yet still is completely incompetent in Iraq and has approval ratings in the 30's.

How many memebres of the mainstream engineering community actually say they believe the official version ? Are any actually open to a public discussion on matters of concern ? How about a question and answer period ?

Then we wouldn't be here typing conspiracy theories in on our computers. We would be watching Jack Bauer and imagining ourselves just like him and buying all kinds of crap that is adverstised while we are hypnotised.

[PolyNewbie]

Canadian Blue:No Silverstein himself said he wasn't referring to a demolition, he was in fact referring to the firefighters. By the way if this was an inside job, why would Silverstein talk about a demolition on TV, and wouldn't that also mean the NYFD was in on 9/11 as well.

I would say it shows that there was a lot of confusion and that many players did not know they were players - or how to play it. But "pull it" means only one thing. To imagine he meant "pull the firefighters" is just too much of a stretch. It essentially proves wtc 7 was demolished. The NYFD and NYPD both have gag orders.

[Canadian Blue]

How many memebres of the mainstream engineering community actually say they believe the official version ? Are any actually open to a public discussion on matters of concern ? How about a question and answer period ?

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story...ng_conspiracy/1

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/...adecenter.shtml

http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/org/c/civenv/wtc/

http://progressive.org/mag_wx091106

From a left leaning site as well.

The entire ASCE, as well as the vast majority of the engineering community is in on it.

But I'm sure this will all be discounted due to the massive conspiracy, and the Rockefellers/Jewish/Republican/Freemason's control of the media.

I’m amazed at how many people give credence to these theories. Everyone’s an engineer. People who never even took one college science course can now hold forth at great length on how the buildings at the World Trade Center could not possibly have collapsed in the way they did and why the Pentagon could not have been struck by that American Airlines jet.

Problem is, some of the best engineers in the country have studied these questions and come up with perfectly logical, scientific explanations for what happened.

As for the pull it remark.

In Pearl Harbor, Griffin quotes Silverstein in a 2002 PBS documentary recalling a conversation from the fire department commander on September 11 “telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.” Griffin, who writes that Silverstein “made almost $500 million in profit from the collapse of Building 7,” says by “pull it” Silverstein was recommending that the building be demolished by explosives. Silverstein has flat-out denied that. By “pulling it,” he has said that he meant giving up on the firefighters’ efforts to save the building.

[jbg]

Um, do you really believe that all of those people were incompetent, but us as civilians are not?

Do you really believe that hundreds of people would knowingly participate in the murder of 3000 Americans and not say a word? Never presume conspiracy when incompetence is more likely.

Looks like Polynewbie's got company. How romantic.

[PolyNewbie]

jbg:Looks like Polynewbie's got company. How romantic.

jbg is a lawyer. Despite the amount of money they make, many of them really do not have a lot of intelligent things to say.

[PolyNewbie]

Canadian Blue:The entire ASCE, as well as the vast majority of the engineering community is in on it.

No, they just do not talk about it.

But I'm sure this will all be discounted due to the massive conspiracy, and the Rockefellers/Jewish/Republican/Freemason's control of the media.

Right - but you have the English Monarchy, European Monarchy, Corporate monarchy, etc that are all in on it. They are not building the detention centers and setting up a police state to protect us from terrorists - we know that is rediculous because the Mexican/US border is left open and Osama could sneak up and attack everybody.

Why do you think they are building all these detention centers ?

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:Do you really believe that hundreds of people would knowingly participate in the murder of 3000 Americans and not say a word? Never presume conspiracy when incompetence is more likely.

You think the government would be dumb enough to let these attacks happen like this spaced apart that much in time ? Do you really think the military is that stupid because Bush is stupid ? Don't you think it is odd that the command and control of the air defences got turned over to Cheney just before 911 and for the first time in history of modern weapons ? Isn't it odd that this is true and Cheney had actually never even been in the military ? Why no planes from Andrews ? Strange - Cheney gave a stand down order.

[Canadian Blue]

Okay so 99.9% of the scientific community is in agreement or doesn't have an opinion, so how can that 0.01% be able disprove the theory.

jbg is a lawyer. Despite the amount of money they make, many of them really do not have a lot of intelligent things to say.

Are you kidding, I'm looking at getting into Law School depending on what I do if I get into university, and from what I've seen its no cakewalk.

Right - but you have the English Monarchy, European Monarchy, Corporate monarchy, etc that are all in on it. They are not building the detention centers and setting up a police state to protect us from terrorists - we know that is rediculous because the Mexican/US border is left open and Osama could sneak up and attack everybody.

What about that fence they are erecting and all of the Border Patrol agents stationed there.

What does Queen Elizabeth have to do with this, she's more of a symbol than a powerbroker.

You think the government would be dumb enough to let these attacks happen like this spaced apart that much in time ? Do you really think the military is that stupid because Bush is stupid ? Don't you think it is odd that the command and control of the air defences got turned over to Cheney just before 911 and for the first time in history of modern weapons ? Isn't it odd that this is true and Cheney had actually never even been in the military ? Why no planes from Andrews ? Strange - Cheney gave a stand down order.

I can't comment on most of that, since you haven't provided anything for me to look at.

I'm not sure how good this link is, but it explain's the situation at Andrews in detail.

(After 9:03 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Secret Service Wants Fighters Scrambled from Andrews; None Are Ready to FlyA few minutes after 9:03 a.m., a squadron pilot at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland (just ten miles from Washington), hears that two planes have crashed into the WTC. He calls a friend in the Secret Service to see what’s going on. The Secret Service calls back, and asks whether Andrews can scramble fighters. According to weapons officer, Major Dan Caine, who takes this call, the Secret Service agent then tells them “to stand by and that somebody else [will] call.” Apparently anticipating the need, one commander has already started preparing weapons for the fighters. However, the weapons are located in a bunker on the other side of The Base, and the process takes time. The fighters don’t take off for about another hour and a half (see (10:42 a.m.) September 11, 2001). Apparently anticipating the need to launch fighters, one commander has already started preparing weapons for the fighters. However, the weapons are located in a bunker on the other side of the base, and the process takes time. Senior Master Sergeant David Bowman, 113th Wing munitions supervisor, says, “We were doing it as fast as we could, because for all we knew the terrorists were getting ready to hit us.” It normally takes three hours to get weapons from the storage sheds and load them onto the fighters. However, on this occasion, it is later claimed, it only takes 45 minutes. The fighters don’t take off though for about another hour and a half (10:42 a.m.). Whilst the crew at Andrews are unloading missiles onto a flatbed trailer, Dan Caine answers another phone call from someone in the White House, requesting armed fighters over Washington. Caine says: “I could hear plain as day the vice president talking in the background. That’s basically where we got the execute order. It was ‘VFR (Visual Flight Rules) direct.’” Meanwhile, there are also three unarmed F-16 fighters assigned to the Andrews base on a training mission 207 miles to the south in North Carolina. These are not recalled until much later, and don’t reach Washington until 10:45 a.m. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002; Filson, 2004, pp. 78,84] NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold has said, “We [didn’t] have any aircraft on alert at Andrews.” [MSNBC, 9/23/2001] However, prior to 9/11, the District of Columbia Air National Guard [DCANG] based at Andrews had a publicly stated mission “to provide combat units in the highest possible state of readiness.” Prior to 9/11, the mission statement was posted on the D.C. National Guard’s public website. Shortly after 9/11, this mission statement is removed and replaced by a DCANG “vision” to “provide peacetime command and control and administrative mission oversight to support customers, DCANG units, and NGB in achieving the highest levels of readiness.” [District of Columbia Air National Guard, n.d.]

Entity Tags: Andrews Air Force Base, Secret Service, District of Columbia Air National Guard, Larry Arnold

Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline

(After 9:37 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Andrews Pilots Aware of Crisis but Still on GroundAfter the Pentagon is hit, fighters at nearby Andrews Air Force Base are still preparing to launch. At some unknown point, flight squad commander Lieutenant Colonel Marc Sasseville assembles three F-16 pilots and gives them a curt briefing. He recalls saying, “I have no idea what’s going on, but we’re flying. Here’s our frequency. We’ll split up the area as we have to. Just defend as required. We’ll talk about the rest in the air.” All four of them dress up and get ready. One officer at Andrews recalls, “After the Pentagon was hit, we were told there were more [airliners] coming. Not ‘might be’—they were coming.” Meanwhile, a “flood” of calls from the Secret Service and local FAA flight control centers pour into Andrews, as the fighter response is coordinated. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002] However, the loading of missiles onto the fighters is very time consuming, and when these fighters finally take off nearly an hour later, they will launch without the missiles installed.

Entity Tags: Andrews Air Force Base, Federal Aviation Administration, Secret Service, Marc Sasseville

Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline

(Before 10:36 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Andrews Fighters Ordered to Shoot Down Threatening Planes Over Washington

General David Wherley. [source: US Air Force]A Secret Service agent again contacts Andrews Air Force Base and commands, “Get in the air now!” It’s not clear if this is treated as an official scramble order, or how quickly fighters respond to it. According to fighter pilot Lt. Col. Marc Sasseville, almost simultaneously, a call from someone else in the White House declares the Washington area “a free-fire zone. That meant we were given authority to use force, if the situation required it, in defense of the nation’s capital, its property, and people.” [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002] Apparently, this second call is made to General David Wherley, flight commander of the Air National Guard at Andrews, who has made several phone calls this morning, seeking airborne authorization for his fighters. Wherley had contacted the Secret Service after hearing reports that it wanted fighters airborne. One Secret Service agent, using two telephones at once, relays instructions to Wherley from another Secret Service agent in the White House who has been given the instructions from Vice President Cheney. Wherley’s fighters are to protect the White House and shoot down any planes that threaten Washington. Wherley gives lead pilot Lt. Col. Marc Sasseville the authority to decide whether to execute a shootdown. According to a different account, during this call Wherley is speaking with a woman in the Secret Service’s command and control center at the White House. Wherley says, “She was standing next to the vice president (Dick Cheney) and she said, ‘They want you to put a CAP up.’ Basically what they told me, and this is another one of those things that’s clear in my mind ... ‘We want you to intercept any airplane that attempts to fly closer than 20 miles around any airport around the Washington area. ... Attempt to turn them away, do whatever you can to turn them away and if they won’t turn away use whatever force is necessary ... to keep them from hitting a building downtown.’” President Bush and Vice President Cheney later claim they were not aware that any fighters had scrambled from Andrews at the request of the Secret Service. [Filson, 2004, pp. 79; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Sasseville and the Capt. Heather Penney Garcia will take off at 10:42 a.m. (see (10:42 a.m.) September 11, 2001)

Entity Tags: George W. Bush, Secret Service, David Wherley, Richard ("Dick") Cheney, Andrews Air Force Base, Marc Sasseville

Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline

(10:38 a.m.): Fighters Training in North Carolina Relaunch from AndrewsThe 9/11 Commission claims that the first fighters from Andrews Air Force Base scramble at this time and are flying patrol over Washington by 10:45 a.m. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] The three F-16s flying on a training mission in North Carolina, 200 miles away have finally been recalled to their home base at Andrews. As soon as lead pilot Major Billy Hutchison lands and checks in via radio, he is told to take off again immediately. His fighter apparently has no weapons whatsoever. The two other fighters only have training rounds for their guns, and very little fuel. “Hutchison was probably airborne shortly after the alert F-16s from Langley arrive over Washington, although [the] pilots admit their timeline-recall ‘is fuzzy.’” The officer who sent Hutchison off “told him to ‘do exactly what ATC asks you to do.’ Primarily, he was to go ID [identify] that unknown [aircraft] that everybody was so excited about [Flight 93]. He blasted off and flew a standard departure route, which took him over the Pentagon.” Flight 93 crashed half an hour before this; it is unclear how the Andrews base could still not know it crashed by this time. The pilots later say that, had all else failed, they would have rammed into Flight 93, had they reached it in time. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002]

Entity Tags: Andrews Air Force Base, Billy Hutchison

Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline

(10:42 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Andrews Fighters Finally Take Off, but Without Missiles

Capt. Heather Penney Garcia. [source: ABC]Two F-16s take off from Andrews Air Force Base lightly armed with nothing more than “hot” guns and non-explosive training rounds. Lead pilot Lt. Col. Marc Sasseville flies one; the other pilot is Capt. Heather Penney Garcia, also known by the codename Lucky. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002] These fighters had been at another base that morning, waiting to be armed with AIM-9 missiles, a process that takes about an hour. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/2002] Since they took off without the missiles, presumably they could have taken off unarmed much earlier. (The first call for them to scramble came not long after 9:00 a.m.). Two more F-16s, armed with AIM-9 missiles, take off twenty-seven minutes later, at 11:09 a.m. These are apparently piloted by Major Dan Caine and Captain Brandon Rasmussen. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] F-16s from Richmond, Virginia, and Atlantic City, New Jersey, arrive over Washington a short time later. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/2002] The Andrews fighters are apparently the only fighters in the US scrambled before 11:00 with official shootdown authorization, but the first Andrews fighters into the air have no missiles. It is unclear if the Andrews fighters relaunching a few minutes earlier had shootdown orders, but they had no weapons either. It appears the Andrews fighters launching at 11:09 a.m. are the first fighters in the US with both shootdown orders and missiles to use.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity...._air_force_base

[newbie]

How do you explain Donald Rumsfeld admitting that the Pennslyvania flight was shot down ?

A slip of the tongue perhaps, since the evidence doesn't show the plane was shot down, I'm more inclined to believe that it wasn't shot down.

What about Rummy's comment that a "missle" hit the pentagon?

[Canadian Blue]

I read the so called missile comment, and once again it proved to be nothing more then a load of BS.

If the 9/11 Revisionists can only refer to a slip of the tongue to argue their case they don't have much of a case.

But as long as you find someone with either a Philosophy Degree who says 9/11 was an inside job, then that disproves what every engineer on the face of the planet earth has said.

[Catchme]

Every village needs it's idiot's. Personally I think you're one of Polynewbies multiple personalities, however that's just me. It seems like most conspiracy nuts like Lyndon Larouche, Ernst Zundel, Paul Fromm, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot. Each one has some paranoia about a certain group of people. It's nothing new.

Which is why the 9/11 conspiracy theories are so popular with people on the radical ends of both spectrum. The vast majority of nazis and neo-fascists believe that the official version isn't correct and blame the Jews, on the radical left people blame the corporations and the banks. The people who push these theories are radical, and on the extremes of the political spectrum.

And for christ sake, try making your posts a bit more readable, its like some retarded chimpanzee got a hold of a computer.

reported

[Black Dog]

How many memebres of the mainstream engineering community actually say they believe the official version ? Are any actually open to a public discussion on matters of concern ? How about a question and answer period ?

Does it matter? Is there any evidence you would accept? If Osdama bin Laden was caught and confessed to planning 9-11 on national TV, you still wouldn't accept it (you know, 'cause TV, is, like, bad, or something). You'd write it off as a double, a computer hologram, or something. I mean, you make it pretty clear that everything ever is the fault of some conspiracy stretching back thousands and thousands of years: what evidence can possibly make a dent in that? You've made up your mind, nothing anyone will say can sway you, you have absolute, religious faith in your rightness: so what the hell are you doing here? Is it the attention? The feeling of superiority you get for being in the know while all us benighted morons toil away in darkness? What, as they say, is your deal?

So hey, alright, whatever: you win, buddy. It's all a big fuckin' conspiracy. Everything ever. Would you like a cookie, now?

[kimmy]

It may even be a reasonable explanation. How do you explain the plane hitting the Pentagon at the exact spot where all kinds of suspicious financial transactions were being investigated ?

The missing $2.3 trillion? That thing?

Here's the actual speech where Rumsfeld mentions the $2.3 trillion:

http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s...910-secdef.html

The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.

He never said there's $2.3 trillion "missing" or unaccounted for. He says that they can't track those transactions because of outdated record keeping technology.

The whole thing is a rather boring speech about modernizing the Department of Defense's book-keeping and bureaucracy.

Bombs didn't target the section of the Pentagon where they were investigating the stolen $2.3 trillion, because there was no investigation into the stolen $2.3 trillion, because there was no stolen $2.3 trillion.

Even if you believe the US government planned and executed 9/11, it's ridiculous to think Rumsfeld's speech on Sept 10, 2001 reveals the reason why. Seriously: why would he tell the world about all this "missing" money, if they were planning a massive cover-up operation for the very next day?

If the whole thing was to cover up this supposed $2.3 trillion, why would Rumsfeld give that speech the day before? Why wouldn't he phone in sick and postpone that speech until Sept 12? And if they were supposedly trying to cover up all this missing money, why didn't they even bother to take Rumsfeld's speech off of the Department of Defense website?

You have to admit, even if you believe the US gov't was behind 9/11, the supposed $2.3 trillion just doesn't add up as a motive.

And, for you in particular, the "missing" $2.3 trillion would be a weak motivation. After all, you believe that the whole thing was planned and executed by bankers, and you believe that bankers can create money at will. Given your beliefs, what reason would bankers have to steal money, or do anything like this to cover up the paper trail?

-k