To Those For, and Against, MIHOP, Please Kindly Help

[DETERMINEDPROGRESIVE]

I only recently started investigating, and am absolutely shocked at how many unresolved questions there are to 9-11. I couldn't believe how ignorant I was for just outright accepting the original explanations without second thought. Now it has become apparent to me that the most absurd explanation of all of them is the widely accepted initial explanation.

What my problem is, though, is that there is soooooo much stuff out there and so many theories, the ones with credibility get lost so easily. There is such a dissent among those that do not believe the original explanation as to what really did happen. And that's expected. But MIHOP DU'rs and dissenters, help me out. Post below your MOST POWERFUL (just a few each please) arguments for and against MIHOP. But be civil. I ask from the bottom of my heart, and for the benefit of lurkers trying to learn, to not attack each other. Don't respond to posts you don't agree with to the poster of them. Instead in a civil manner say something like 'though some believe the towers were rigged, I don't believe they were because of etc..." This will help maintain a civil, intellectual discussion without having it break down into a thread that is no longer useful to read. I'm asking for conciseness, intellectual prowess, and links to corroborating info where applicable. I WANT TO LEARN WHAT REALLY HAPPENED! But there is too much out there to sort through. Post what in your hearts you believe to me the best arguments for or against MIHOP.

To give some background, here are the biggest things that made me question everything:

1. Carr whispering in bush's ear, yet doesn't wait for a reply.
2. All the supposed evidence that turned up so quickly, that now just seems completely illogical. (Passport on the streets of NYC? Korans left everywhere? Two pieces of luggage so conveniently not loaded?)
3. Engineering studies refuting the WTC collapse by fuel. Can't argue with factual physics.
4. Complete utter lack of ANY videotaped Pentagon footage. This one glares out to me the most. What are they hiding? They must've had at least 10 cameras that recorded it. It's the fucking Pentagon for christs sake! And don't tell me bout that 5 frame video. I've seen it, dissected it. I see the 757. But who cares. It could've been edited. It isn't even a video. It is 5 still frames. It is useless to me.
5. We are america. No damn jet could intercept one friggin hijacked plane even hours after notification? Still hard to buy that one...
6. Sorry, PA crash was hit with a missle. Seems irrefutable.
7. Why all the wargames?
8. Was there really already a solid war plan for afghanistan i.e. pipeline?
9. Not one video of ANY hijacker in ANY of the final airports?

Ok. That's just for starters. Please reply with links and details of your best stuff. This issue could be the biggest issue of the next century and needs to be exposed one way or the other. I NEED TO KNOW THE TRUTH!

[mikelewis]

1. There are a great many good sites but this one's my favorite

http://911research.wtc7.net/

The guys have put together a lot of information and are willing to respond to questions. It's a bit tough to navigate though but if you're looking for serious information, they have it in spades.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

2. Thank you very much for your sincere request. I am relatively new on this

board although I've done a lot of my own research now for the last 3 years and posted on AOL boards. I don't have the time right now, but I do wish to answer number 8 right off the bat.

There were plans in action to invade Afghanistan prior to 9/11.

September 1-10, 2001 - 25,000 British troops and the largest British Armada since the Falkland Islands War, part of Operation "Essential Harvest," are pre-positioned in Oman, the closest point on the Arabian Peninsula to Pakistan. At the same time two U.S. carrier battle groups arrive on station in the Gulf of Arabia just off the Pakistani coast. Also at the same time, some 17,000 U.S. troops join more than 23,000 NATO troops in Egypt for Operation "Bright Star." All of these forces are in place before the first plane hits the World Trade Center.

[vincent_vega_lives]

34. Kidding right?

Operation "Essential Harvest" was officially launched on 22 August and effectively started on 27 August. This 30-day mission involved the sending of approximately 3500 NATO troops, with logistical support, to disarm ethnic Albanian groups and destroy their weapons.

You mean Operation "Swift Sword II" in Oman.

Operation Bright Star exercises have been conducted every other year in conjunction with the Egyptian government since 1981.

[WoodrowFan]

3. as for your questions

1. Carr whispering in bush's ear, yet doesn't wait for a reply.
So? Bush can't get up and leave without asking Carr first?

2. All the supposed evidence that turned up so quickly, that now just seems completely illogical. (Passport on the streets of NYC? Korans left everywhere? Two pieces of luggage so conveniently not loaded?) With thoudands of investigators and cops in the FBI and police all over the US having but 1 priority "FIND WHAT HAPPENED" it's "odd" that they turned up evidence quickly??? It'd be odd if they didn't. Besides, the hijackers were PROUD of what they did, why would they hide what they left behind?

3. Engineering studies refuting the WTC collapse by fuel. Can't argue with factual physics. Um, not any more that studies have "proven" evolution untrue. One study by a scientist or engineer with an agenda does not outweigh the others studies without an agenda except to understand what happened.


4. Complete utter lack of ANY videotaped Pentagon footage. This one glares out to me the most. What are they hiding? They must've had at least 10 cameras that recorded it. It's the fucking Pentagon for christs sake! And don't tell me bout that 5 frame video. I've seen it, dissected it. I see the 757. But who cares. It could've been edited. It isn't even a video. It is 5 still frames. It is useless to me.
The Hotel workers video was watched by their staff numerous times and noen of them have said anything except that Flt 77 hit the Pentagon. As for the Pentagon, you know the location and direction of every Pentagon camera/ no? thought not. It seems to me that any close enough to get a good shot of the plane would have been destroyed when it hit the Pentagon. I have an idea, why don't we have photos from inside the planes? Surely all those passengers had cameras and took photos! .......oh, wait...



5. We are america. No damn jet could intercept one friggin hijacked plane even hours after notification? Still hard to buy that one...
BOL!! Yes, we have a military that never fucks up. oh wait, that's in the MOVIES. This is real life.


6. Sorry, PA crash was hit with a missle. Seems irrefutable.
It does? news to me and the 9-11 commission. Even if they are hiding the fact that the shot down that plane that hardly proves a conspiracy for the whole event.

7. Why all the wargames? Gee the military holding wargames, golly. As has been pointed out numerous times the exerices did not use real forces.



8. Was there really already a solid war plan for afghanistan i.e. pipeline? Probably, so what. I'm sure there are military plans still on file for attcking Mexico, that doesn't mean we're dropping paratroopers into Mexico City anytime soon.



9. Not one video of ANY hijacker in ANY of the final airports?
Unture, there are several.


Why do I think MIHOP is idiocy? becuase it treats evidence the same way as Creationism does: invent "facts", deny real facts, ask irrelevant questions and maintain that minor unanswered questions call the whole structure into question. All in all it's intellectually dishonest.

bye bye

[DETERMINEDPROGRESIVE]

4. I hope other posts will have more that can be substantiated

I thank you for your attempts, but you really didn't provide anything useful for me to go on. I am open to all sides but I need more then just dismissive statements to make a case. Links are helpful, evidence is helpful, scientific studies are helpful, but just saying statements with tones of arrogance don't win over anybody.

If you truly have something of value to add, which you may, please post links to back things up, such as an engineering study showing that fuel that can't reach temperatures that could corrupt steel, was able to. Or evidence that so many wargames that seemed so related to the days events in such number have occurred in the past. Or past pre 9-11 reports that show there have been at other times such a lack of fighters to protect our nation, or that they have such slow response time to aircraft that go astray. Everything I've found shows otherwise, that they can intercept under normal conditions within 15 minutes, always, period. Any studies to the contrary would be welcomed by me, as I'm open to all evidence. But you didn't supply evidence, or even anything worth considering. I ask you to try again, if you care to. Hey, post a link to video of any hijackers in the airports. Not the one on their connecting flight, one showing them at Newark Or Boston. Show links to anything. I truly want to get to the bottom of this, but need Real evidence and data for and against.

Thanks for your efforts though.

[RedSock]

5. a book you need

welcome to DU!

Get Paul Thompson's "The Terror Timeline" book -- and check out the timeline website:

http://complete911timeline.org/
or
http://cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/

which for some reason are down now.

[DETERMINEDPROGRESIVE]

6. I've actually read one of those huge timelines before

Almost regretted it. It burned up my whole evening LOL Talk about a ton of info! :)

The timeline appeared to be very damning. What I was curious about is whether the timeline is 100% factual? Or is it kinda a gaps filled in kinda thing at some parts with best guesses or time stamps that people on the other side can refute? Is it 100% verifiable without being able to be debunked by others opposed to MIHOP or LIHOP? Just curious cause if that timeline I read was totally confirmed and accepted as truth, well then that is one damn damaging piece of information.

Also to further add to my original request above, posters can feel free to even provide what they feel are real factual questions not yet answered. The most compelling part of the 9-11 mystery is how many LEGITIMATE questions exist. I don't feel the need to prove with every detail that 9-11 was MIHOP. I think it's enough at times to just show there are definitely enough open questions that do not have real answers yet to blow away the original theory shoved down our throats. All proof either way is still appreciated though :)

[spooked911]

7. The best part about Thompson's timeline is that it is all drawn from

mainstream sources, so the info is very legitimate.

[meppie-meppie not]

13. ITA :-) n/t

[spooked911]

18. What does ITA mean?

[meppie-meppie not]

23. I agree that his timeline is very legit , I think it's as accurate as

anything out there.

[LARED]

20. mainstream sources

There are many in the LIHOP/MIHOP mindset that reject mainstream sources.

I do not believe in LIHOP or MIHOP, so how do those that reject mainstream sources reconcile Thompson's use of them and those on the LIHOP/MIHOP that use them?

[DulceDecorum]

27. RE: mainstream sources

Several researchers have difficulty with mainstream sources NOT because they are mainstream sources but because they do not always compute.

For example,
Cheney has been steadfast in his claim that Saddam and Osama are pals and that Iraq was behind September 11.
Bush has flip-flopped on this and has lately taken up the position that Iraq had nothing to do with September 11.

Now, you can go to the White House website and get accounts of both of these claims, but how do you reconcile them?
Who are you to believe?
Especially when you have previously caught both Bush and Cheney lying.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

THIS is the reason why many researchers have difficulty in accepting mainstream sources.
And that is without looking at the crap promoted by paid PR shills such as Judith Miller and Armstrong Williams.

In other words,
when it comes to the events of September 11, 2001,
if you are confused,
it is because you have been paying attention.

This theme is explored in detail in the collection of Pentathreads on this forum.
Here is the most recent.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=3550&mesg_id=3550

[spooked911]

30. Good point. But mainstream sources are more liklely to convince "newbies"

of various 9/11 oddities.

IMO.

[DulceDecorum]

76. True, one good hard look

and the story starts to fall apart all on its own.
For example, take this article:

BEYOND LUCK
For one employee with Wedge One's mechanical subcontractor John J. Kirlin Inc., Rockville MD, "lucky" is an understatement. "We had one guy who was standing, looking out the window and saw the plane when it was coming in. He was in front of one of the blast-resistant windows," says Kirlin President Wayne T. Day, who believes the window structure saved the man's life.

According to Matt Hahr, Kirlin's senior project manager at the Pentagon, the employee "was thrown about 80 ft down the hall through the air. As he was traveling through the air, he says the ceiling was coming down from the concussion. He got thrown into a closet, the door slammed shut and the fireball went past him," recounts Hahr. "Jet fuel was on him and it irritated his eyes, but he didn't get burned. Then the fireball blew over and the sprinklers came on, and he was able to crawl out of the closet and get out of the building through the courtyard."
http://www.construction.com/NewsCenter/Headlines/DB/20011015h.asp

Please tell me which way the closet door opened.
Remember that the door was slammed shut.

Seriously,
get a piece of paper and a pencil
and draw the plane
and the corridor
and the man
and then put in the closet.
You can put that closet ANYWHERE you want to.
Feel free.
Be creative.
And if you come up with anything that won't get you laughed at,
post it here on the DU.

[spooked911]

31. I think the better question is how can YOU reject LIHOP or MIHOP

when evidence for them is clearly there on his timeline?

As far as your question, mainstream sources ARE useful for me, and I believe in MIHOP. You just have to recognize the limits of mainstream sources-- they will only go so far in presenting certain information.

[LARED]

36. how can YOU reject LIHOP or MIHOP

I attribute it to a keen mind and rational thought.

That's my excuse and I'm sticking with it.

[spooked911]

37. how about HIHOP, then?

HELP It Happen On Purpose.

;-)

[LARED]

40. HIHOP

seems to imply MIHOP. Helping sure sounds like an active role.

My position is best described as NLIH

Negligence let it happen.

[spooked911]

41. So you think they simply ignored the warnings due to negligence

and had no idea what was coming? Or they thought someone else was taking care of dealing with it, but no one did?

Do you think they NEVER thought how useful a terrorist attack might be for their purposes? Clearly, they wanted to invade Iraq from day one.

[vincent_vega_lives]

43. MIHOP and even LIHOP

only work if you belive a large portion of your government are sociopaths. Many are wrongheaded, but they aint homicidal maniacs.

Or do you think that behavior is borderline accepted for elected/appointed officials?

[Democrat Dragon]

44. Read PNAC

and say that again. You can easily tell that the Neocons are sociopaths by looking at what they believe as well as the carnage in Iraq.

[vincent_vega_lives]

46. PNAC says nothing about mass mudering their own citizens for

dubious political or financial gain. The risk/benifit ratio is just off the chart. You would have to include much of the house, the Senate, intelligence services, law enfocement, and the military as sociopaths, not just the Neocons.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

47. You are talking about the same people who lied through their teeth

to bring us to war in Iraq. How many dead from this debacle now? Over 100,000 Iraqis and over 1300 of our military. There is also a little thing called Operation Northwoods to think about too. Same concept as 9/11,right from people in our own government. Bush is a sociopath btw.

[vincent_vega_lives]

50. You mean like

John Kerry? Is he a neocon? Is he a sociopath too? He saw the same intel Bush did. All these folks too.

http://intelligence.senate.gov/

John D. Rockefeller IV
West Virginia, Vice Chairman
Carl Levin, Michigan
Dianne Feinstein, California
Ron Wyden, Oregon
Evan Bayh, Indiana
Barbara A. Mikulski, Maryland
Jon S. Corzine, New Jersey


http://intelligence.house.gov/

Jane Harman Democrat California
Alcee L. Hastings Democrat Florida
Silvestre Reyes Democrat Texas
Leonard L. Boswell Democrat Iowa
Robert E. (Bud) Cramer, Jr Democrat Alabama
Anna G. Eshoo Democrat California
Rush D. Holt Democrat New Jersey
C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger Democrat Maryland
John Tierney Democrat Massachusetts

http://armed-services.senate.gov/members.htm

Carl Levin (Michigan) Ranking Member
Edward M. Kennedy (Massachusetts)
Robert C. Byrd (West Virginia)
Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut)
Jack Reed (Rhode Island)
Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii)
Bill Nelson (Florida)
E. Benjamin Nelson (Nebraska)
Mark Dayton (Minnesota)
Evan Bayh (Indiana)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (New York)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

How bout Tom Daschle, another neocon, another sociopath.

Daschle, D-South Dakota, said the threat of Iraq's weapons programs "may not be imminent. But it is real. It is growing. And it cannot be ignored."

Have to include Gephardt too.

"I believe we have an obligation to protect the United States by preventing him from getting these weapons and either using them himself or passing them or their components on to terrorists who share his destructive intent," said Gephardt, who helped draft the measure.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/

The so called "Northwoods MEMO" (never operational) was a piece of paper circulated by a small group of people and then derided as ludicrous. Even as ridiculous as it was it was tame compared to 9-11, as it did not involve killing anyone.

It has been reported that John F. Kennedy personally rejected the proposal, but no official record of this exists. What is known for certain is that Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara examined and rejected the proposal, and that the President removed General Lyman Lemnitzer as Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff shortly afterward.

Are you a psychiatrist btw?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

51. They did not see the same Intelligence, and the Intelligence

that was manipulated by Dick Cheney's Office of Special Plans. There were two NIEs. One that was handed to the White House with CAVEATS. The other was handed to the Senators and Congress. The CAVEATS were removed.

As to Northwoods. The fact that there were people that even imagined doing that within our government at that time, is damning enough. Kennedy was sane and rejected it. Bush is insane.

[vincent_vega_lives]

55. Not true

The Intel committees saw the classified NIE including the caveats.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20194-2004Feb6.html

It was the media that didn't' see them.

"The probability of him initiating an attack . . . in the foreseeable future . . . I think would be low," a senior CIA official told the Senate intelligence committee during a classified briefing on the estimate on Oct. 2, 2002. The CIA released a partial transcript five days later after committee Democrats complained that a published "white paper" on Iraq's weapons had not given the public a fair reading of what the classified NIE contained.

Tenant, hardly a neocon stated: "Such absolute certainty, however, did not appear in the estimate. Tenet said Thursday that the controversy has yet to be cleared up." This is the estimate Congress saw.



BTW ever hear of the Bay of Pigs? How 'bout Robert Kennedy's plot to kill Castro with a cigar? Those were actually attempted, Norhtwoods was not.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

56. Then those Democrats are just as guilty for not trying to convince

their collegues how misguided it was to contemplate going to war without conclusive evidence.

BTW...two things.. where did I ever say NEOCONS were soley responsible, and where did I say that I was a Kerry loyalist? I voted for him because he was ABB.

[meppie-meppie not]

62. BTW, Kerry et al DID NOT see the same intelligence reports as

the pResident and his minions did. Media Matters long ago dealt with this issue.

[vincent_vega_lives]

63. Source it

Show me where he claims that.

[meppie-meppie not]

69. get acquainted with Google :-) n/t

[vincent_vega_lives]

72. I am

May I suggest you get aquainted with the facts.

[meppie-meppie not]

73. I am ! :-) n/t

[vincent_vega_lives]

65. you didn't say "solely"

But now we are getting to common ground. The Administration, and congress did go to war without conclusive evidence of WMD.

I never assumed you were anything. But your premise was centered around your claim that the Bush administration went to war because he was a sociopath. By that reasoning then half the house and the Senate must be equally deranged.

[Democrat Dragon]

77. The Dems were TRICKED, just like a large chunk of America at the time

CTers say that to blame it on BushCo. is tinfoilhatish and crazy.

MIHOP, HIHOP, and LIHOPers say to believe that BushCo. isn't evil enough to do it is very very naive.

there you go.

BTW "Conspiracy Theorists" is merely a stupid label, such as "Commie" and "Terrorist"

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

78. BTW

BTW "Conspiracy Theorists" is merely a stupid label, such as "Commie" and "Terroist"

Ain't that the truth! Thank you! :)

As to the Dems being tricked. Were they all, really? Boxer didn't vote to give authorization, and during the Rice confirmation hearings she was very clear that she felt that there wasn't enough evidence to justify a pre-emptive strike. I knew the WMD mantra was bull. I emailed my republican light senators furiously telling them not to give authorization. At that time there was already enough information out there to know that WMDs was a ruse. Ir I knew, why didn't they?

One of the most telling documents was the transcript of Hussein Kamel, Hussein's son-in-law who defected from Iraq. He was in charge of WMDs in Iraq, and in and his 1996 transcript gave testimony that all of the weapons had been destroyed. There was Scott Ritter who had been a weapons inspector, and he was shouting out loud and clear there were no more WMDs. The AIEA had a report saying that there wasn't a nuclear program anymore. Rice and Powell were on record then about Hussein being contained. And so forth and so on.........

[Democrat Dragon]

79. Think about it, weren't 60-80% of Americans at the time

for the war? They may have clogged the Senator's phone lines, e-mail, and mail boxes with requests. Although I'm not sure how many pro-war people lived in Massachusets. But I still feel some of the sentors were tricked into drinking kool-aid made by the MSM. As for Boxer she probably has more willpower than Kerry.

BTW "Conspiracy Theorists" happens to be a line commonly said by presstitutes about those who believe the 2004 presidential election was stolen and by Rethug Representatives and Senators during the Jan 6th election challenge.

[spooked911]

70. Large portion of the goverment? How do you figure that?

[Make7]

42. IHOP.

I sure could go for some strawberry pancakes right now. yum.

:) Make7

[fujiyama]

80. Thompson's timeline

is a valuable resource. It's very comprehensive, but ultimately it is inconclusive.

It proves neither LIHOP or MIHOP, but does prove an extreme incompetance and unwillingness of this administration to confront terrorism before 9/11 (or even after for that matter).

[meppie-meppie not]

17. this timeline is actually a great resource tool while you're reading

other materials along the way. It's great for referring back to as you're going along other lines of inquiry. I find it really helps in keeping track of dates, times, people etc along the way. It also shows all of the inconsistencies and holes within the "official" story, IMO :-) n/t

[John Doe II]

28. Intellectually dishonest

1. Carr whispering in bush's ear, yet doesn't wait for a reply.
So? Bush can't get up and leave without asking Carr first?

The question is more why didn't Card wait for any answer or question from Bush.

2. All the supposed evidence that turned up so quickly, that now just seems completely illogical. (Passport on the streets of NYC? Korans left everywhere? Two pieces of luggage so conveniently not loaded?) With thoudands of investigators and cops in the FBI and police all over the US having but 1 priority "FIND WHAT HAPPENED" it's "odd" that they turned up evidence quickly??? It'd be odd if they didn't. Besides, the hijackers were PROUD of what they did, why would they hide what they left behind?

If the hijackers were so proud to leave proofs behind certainly they wouldn't have placed them into luggage that was supposed to be aboard of AA 11 and would have been completely destroyed.
And do you mind to explain to me the first FBI findings: the believe that Adnan and Ameer Bukhari, Abdul Rahman Al Omari and Ameer Kamfar had been hijackers on 911?
And do you mind to explain to me as well why the FBI looks through the garbage bins in New York? Doesn't seem likely to find proofs. Moreover what exactly does the passport of Al Suqami that was found in the streets of New York prove?? Care to explain how we are supposed to believe that this passport survived the WTC crash and was found a few blocks away??

The Hotel workers video was watched by their staff numerous times and noen of them have said anything except that Flt 77 hit the Pentagon.

Please give me source that says the hotel staff saw "Flt 77 hit the Pentagon".

5. We are america. No damn jet could intercept one friggin hijacked plane even hours after notification? Still hard to buy that one...
BOL!! Yes, we have a military that never fucks up. oh wait, that's in the MOVIES. This is real life.

Please explain why NORAD changed several times the timetable of the air defense on 911.


6. Sorry, PA crash was hit with a missle. Seems irrefutable.
It does? news to me and the 9-11 commission. Even if they are hiding the fact that the shot down that plane that hardly proves a conspiracy for the whole event.

If a plane was shot down around Shanksville then it was east of the crash site (there where also the debris was found). It is impossible that a shoot down could have happened west of the crash site as numerous eyewitnesses saw the official UA 93 descending but they neither saw a second plane nor a shoot down. Therefore if there was a shoot down as the strange debris and the presence of the white plane in the east might indicate then it wasn't the official UA 93 coming from the west but a differen plane. Sorry, a shoot down scenario in any case proves a conspiracy.

7. Why all the wargames? Gee the military holding wargames, golly. As has been pointed out numerous times the exerices did not use real forces.

What do you mean with "real forces"? the blips that have been on ATC's screens before 9:00 that were part of the ongoing wargame were very real.
Moreover do you care to explain which planes were expected to land in Pittsburgh Airport in the afternoon of 911?
Could you please explain how it is possible that seven further planes were considered hijacked on 911 if they weren't part of an excercise?

9. Not one video of ANY hijacker in ANY of the final airports?
Unture, there are several.

Please show us SEVERAL videos of hijackers in any of the final airports. I'm very curious. And if you are talking about the video from Dulles that was released three years later please also explain the anatomical transformation of Hani Hanjour we're supposed to see on the video.


All in all it's intellectually dishonest.


Thanks a lot for your compliment!
Now, go ahead. Show us your honesty and reply to ALL questions please.

Bye bye

[Abe Linkman]

29. KaBOOM! Well done. Extremely well-done. n/t

n/t

[John Doe II]

58. Dear Mr. Woodrowfan,

after calling me and others intellectually dishonest I think it's rather fair if you could provide some answers, don't you think?

[spooked911]

32. I'd like an explaantion for why the Dulles airport video doesn't have a

time or date stamp. Are we really supposed to believe shit like that is real?

As far as the wargames, there was a live-fly hijacking exercise on 9/11, as confirmed by NORAD. In a live-fly exercise, they use REAL PLANES.

And aren't you a wee bit disturbed as to why Washington DC was left completely defenseless right after the WTC was attacked by two different planes and at least one hijacked plane was known to be heading to DC? Does this seem like a normal fuck-up to you?

I could go on and on, but I'm sure you have enough to chew on between my questions and John Doe II's.

[LARED]

48. Huh?

there was a live-fly hijacking exercise on 9/11, as confirmed by NORAD

Show me where you got that?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

49. Live-Fly

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=436

On June 5th, 2004, Mike Ruppert announced, that he "obtained an on-the-record statement from someone in NORAD, which confirmed that on the day of 9/11 The Joint Chiefs (Myers) and NORAD were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack Field Training Exercise (FTX) which involved at least one (and almost certainly many more) aircraft under US control that was posing as a hijacked airliner."

There were two Wargames going on relating to that. Operation Vigilant Guardian and called Operation Vigilant Warrior.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

52. Interesting article from USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm

Posted 4/18/2004 10:22 PM Updated 4/19/2004 3:08 PM

NORAD had drills of jets as weapons
By Steven Komarow and Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY

[LARED]

54. Yes, it was interesting

But there is no indication in the article that there were drills on 9/11.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

57. Are you stating that there weren't drills on September 11th?

Perhaps you should search the 9/11 Commission Report, because they are mentioned.

http://www.911research.com/mirrors/911commission/notes.htm

[LARED]

60. You mean this

116. On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise,Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union. We investigated whether military preparations for the large-scale exercise compromised the military's response to the real-world terrorist attack on 9/11. According to General Eber-hart,"it took about 30 seconds" to make the adjustment to the real-world situation. Ralph Eberhart testimony, June 17, 2004.We found that the response was, if anything, expedited by the increased number of staff at the sectors and at NORAD because of the scheduled exercise. See Robert Marr interview (Jan. 23, 2004).

Yes I am aware of it. My response was to the article you provided. In the article it said nothing about drills on 9/11. It said nothing about "live" flying.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

61. http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011805_simplify_case.shtml

We know multiple Air Force war games were running on the morning of 9/11, as documented extensively in the mainstream press. 16 What Crossing the Rubicon has documented conclusively is that there was a live-fly drill taking place on 9/11 titled Vigilant Warrior. Richard Clarke disclosed the name of this drill on page 4 of his book, but it was Major Don Arias of NORAD who confirmed the definition of the title "Warrior" to Mike Ruppert via email.

Warrior = JCS/HQ NORAD sponsored FTX, or field training exercise (live-fly). 17

[LARED]

64. Ok

It was a FTX exercise. I think the names may be screwed up.

See here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/ex-northcom.htm

Now what?

I have asked many a CTer what evidence there is that one there were multiple war games on 9/11 and how this exercise was used for evil purposes on 9/11. I am still waiting for an answer that is rational.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

67. The rationale is that it provides smoke and mirrors.

Like a magician, you are drawn to what you are meant to see, while the magician is actually carrying out his trick. NORAD and FAA were in a state of confusion. There were multiple blips on the radar screens. They had no idea which were the actually hijacked planes and which ones were in the wargames. This allowed the attacks to be executed.

My question to you is why you believe in the OCT? To believe so, after all I have read would be to believe that the Easter Bunny really exists. On one day, to have the perfect storm of mishaps, miscues, countless coincidences occur and all come together to bring about the greatest tragedy in the history of our country is just not logical.

There are reams of circumstantial evidence in the hands of Elliot Spitzer (my AG) right now, and I hope to the heavens that he investigates 9/11 as the mass murder that it really is.

Don't you know that I am amongst the majority here in NY? Have you seen the Zogby Poll?

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855
Released: August 30, 2004
Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals



On the eve of a Republican National Convention invoking 9/11 symbols, sound bytes and imagery, half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," according to the poll conducted by Zogby International. The poll of New York residents was conducted from Tuesday August 24 through Thursday August 26, 2004. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/-3.5.

continued at above link

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

75. Names screwed up?

It was a FTX exercise. I think the names may be screwed up.

Presented to the 9/11 Commission incorrectly and Richard Clarke was mistaken?

The fact is that Ruppert was told by a Major of Norad that Warrior meant that it was a live-fly exercise.

[vincent_vega_lives]

66. OPERATION VIGILANT WARRIOR

Did include aircraft but held in Kuwait/Iraq in 1994.

In late September 1994, Iraq began moving significant numbers of ground forces south of the 32nd parallel towards Kuwait. In response, USCINCCENT deployed forces to the Central Region for Operation VIGILANT WARRIOR. On 15 October 1994, the UN Security Council passed UNSCR 949 condemning Iraqi aggression and demanding Iraq withdraw its forces to their 20 September positions and prohibiting further enhancement of military capabilities in southern Iraq. On 20 October, the U.S. Government presented a demarche to Iraq outlining U.S. policy concerning enforcement of UNSCR 949. By late October, USCENTCOM had deployed over 28,000 U.S. troops and over 200 additional aircraft into the region. The Iraqi regime backed away from this determined response. Based upon confirmation of the withdrawal of Iraqi forces north of the 32nd parallel, the SECDEF authorized redeployment of U.S. forces in early November.

VIGILANT GUARDIAN is a Command Post Exercise, not an FTX, and include NO live-fly exercises

The VIGILANT GUARDIAN (VG) is a VIGILANT OVERVIEW (VO) Command Post Exercise (CPX) conducted in conjunction with USCINCSTRAT-sponsored GLOBAL GUARDIAN and USCINCSPACE-sponsored APOLLO GUARDIAN exercises. The exercise involves all HQ NORAD levels of command and is designed to exercise most aspects of the NORAD mission. One VG is scheduled each year and the length will vary depending on the exercise scenario and objectives.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

68. Argue with the 9/11 Commission. They cite both

Guardian and Warrior.

[LARED]

53. Well, gee whiz

If Mike Ruppert said it, it must be gospel.

Also it seems that if he had a "obtained an on-the-record statement from someone in NORAD" he would produce it for someoneto see.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

59. See post #57. n/t

[spooked911]

71. See Ruppert's book "Crossing the Rubicon"

In his book, Mike Ruppert has a memo from Major Arias of NORAD saying that "Warrior" exercises are live-fly exercises run by the Joint Chiefs. Vigilant Warrior was run on 9/11/01-- it's in Richard Clarke's book "Against All Enemies". Vigilant Warrior was run in conjunction with Vigilant Guardian which was a hijacking exercise being run on 9/11.

Put Vigilant Guardian and Vigilant Warrior together and you have a live-fly hijacking exercise run by NORAD on 9/11/01.

(sorry for the repeat info-- I reading this as a view-all thread and didn't see the responses right away)

[ScaRBama]

8. Here is a good read....

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/011405Schwarz/011405schwarz.html

[meppie-meppie not]

14. great link thanks! :-) n/t

[spooked911]

9. Welcome to the club! I had the shift you had a few months back.

There are too many unanswered questions and too many oddities about 9/11. It is a big problem there are so many conflicting theories. But I think that is because so many strange things happened on 9/11 that the government can't explain.

In any case-- I personally for a couple of years thought Bush let 9/11 happen on purpose (LIHOP). There were just too many indications that they knew attacks were coming for them to claim ignorance. Several things set me off: the things you mentioned, two of the hijackers living with an FBI informant in San Diego, a non-Arab buying a hijackers ticket for one of the 9/11 planes in Oklahoma City, the lack of urgency in capturing bin Laden and the inability to prosecute any terror suspects (making me think a lot of Al Qaeda is a sham).

In any case, the big problem with LIHOP is the unpredictability. How could the Bush admin. let loose such a destructive act that they didn't have control over? This is why I switched to MIHOP.

The wargames-- and in particular, the hijacking exercise-- gave the perfect approach for MIHOP.

There's a lot still unexplained, but I am about 95% convinced it was MIHOP.

[LARED]

10. Can you expand on this question

Engineering studies refuting the WTC collapse by fuel. Can't argue with factual physics.

What engineering studies are you referring to? And what does "collapse by fuel" mean?

Thank you in advance.

[DETERMINEDPROGRESIVE]

22. Collapse By Fuel i.e. Burning Fuel Weakened Structure etc

The official engineering explanation I believe is that the burning fuel made its way to the basement and got hot enough to soften the steel supports. It has been noted in several studies that kerosene, or jet fuel, could not possibly combust at a temperature nearly hot enough to do that, based on the melting point of steel and/or the temperature at which it becomes malleable.

[AZCat]

25. Here's the current (official) hypothesis for the collapse of WTC 1

This is copied from the NIST Report from the October 19 and 20, 2004, Meeting titled Status of World Trade Center Investigation and Discussion (warning - pdf).

Leading Hypothesis for Collapse of WTC 1

The following chronological sequence of major events led to the eventual collapse of WTC 1; specific load redistribution paths and damage scenarios are being refined to determine the probable collapse sequence:

Aircraft impact damage to perimeter columns, mainly on the North face, resulted in redistribution of column loads, mostly to the adjacent perimeter columns and to a lesser extent to the core columns.

After breaching the building’s perimeter, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the building, damaging floor framing, core columns, and fireproofing. Loads on the damaged columns were redistributed to other intact core and perimeter columns mostly via the floor systems and to a lesser extent via the hat truss.

The subsequent fires, influenced by the impact damaged fireproofing condition:
•Softened and buckled the core columns and caused them to shorten, resulting in a downward displacement of the core relative to the perimeter which led to the floors (1) pulling the perimeter columns inward, and (2) transferring vertical loads to the perimeter columns.
•Softened the perimeter columns on the South face and also caused perimeter column loads to increase significantly due to restrained thermal expansion.

Due to the combined effects of heating on the core and perimeter columns, the South perimeter wall bowed inwards, and highly stressed sections buckled.

The section of the building above the impact zone began tilting to the South as the bowed South perimeter columns buckled, and instability rapidly progressed horizontally across the entire South face and then across the adjacent East and West faces.

The change in potential energy due to downward movement of building mass above the buckled columns exceeded the strain energy that could be absorbed by the structure. Global collapse then ensued.
</quote>


The hypothesis for WTC 2 is also available in the same pdf.

[spooked911]

33. As AZCat says, the official theory is that the fuel heated the columns

near where the planes crashed, softening the steel, causing buckling of the structure, and then eventual systemic collapse as the weight of the top portion of the structure shifted. This makes some sense except for the fact that the fires really should not have been hot enough to melt the steel to any significant degree.

This is why many people suspect bombs or planted explosives were used to help bring down the structures.

[LARED]

35. Fire are hot enough to degrade steel

Why do you think the steel is fireproofed? Because temperatures found in ordinary office fires are hot enough to weaken the steel below an acceptable level.

[spooked911]

38. Assuming that is true, that's a good point. But are all steel beams in

large buildings fireproofed?

[LARED]

39. I am not an expert in building codes, so

I can't tell you if ALL steel is fireproofed. I know most of it will be fireproofed.

One function of building codes is to protect the public from substandard buildings. It is likely a safe assumption that the intent of the building codes is to insulate all steel that is critical to its safety in a fire.

For a discussion about the fire proofing's role in the collapse see here.

http://www.skyscrapersafety.org/html/article_02052003_ns.html

[k-robjoe]

11. Some pieces

The many warnings, that were completely ignored.
http://members.shaw.ca/ecorpse/911Timeline.htm

The insider trading.

Whistleblower Coleen Rowley.

http://www.hermes-press.com/keys9_11.htm

Whistleblower Robert Wright.

Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds:

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2005/01/do-you-know-this-woman.html

Whistleblower Indira Singh.

Findings of Daniel Hopsicker.

Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar.

On and on.

( The lies about no black boxes being found at the WTC. )

( One would think that half an hour after Flight 175 had crashed into the second tower, and it was clear to all that this was a concerted(?) act of terrorism, that jets would have been scrambled to patrol over Washington D.C.
( in case another jet were to be hijacked. )
But apparently none were. Does this make any sense at all?

( "That former lead counsel for the House David Schippers says he’d taken to John Ashcroft’s office specific warnings he’d learned from FBI agents in New York of an impending attack – even naming the proposed dates, names of the hijackers and the targets – and that the investigations had been stymied and the agents threatened, proves nothing but David Schipper’s pathetic need for attention." http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html )

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

12. Please don't forget the valiant FBI Agent Robert Wright.

C-Span used to have on archive a press conference of his (it had me in tears)which seems to be no longer available.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0206/S00001.htm

FBI Whistleblower Blows Lid Off 911
Saturday, 1 June 2002, 2:49 pm
Article: The Scoop Editor

Yesterday, Thursday US EST, Friday NZT, a press conference was held at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. by US based NGO Judicial Watch with FBI agent Robert Wright. Prior to the Press Conference Wright was threatened with criminal prosecution if he shared his views with the public.

----------------------snip-------------------

Robert Wright, an agent for 10 years, was a member of an FBI counter- terrorism taskforce. He alleges that active agents were threatened and impeded in anti-terrorism investigations.

---------------------snip--------------------------
See also a facsimile of a letter to the FBI on behalf of Wright by Wright’s lawyer…



For initial coverage in the US media of Robert Wright’s press conference see the following links..


Continued at http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0206/S00001.htm

[meppie-meppie not]

16. this is the first time I'm hearing about him thanks OSOmm! :-) n/t

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

19. Your welcome. I really wish his press conference was still available.

This man while giving it was in his own hell. He KNEW that an attack was immeninent and they tied his hands up. At the conference he is crying, apologizing to the victims of 9/11 and their familes. Gut wrenching stuff.

[meppie-meppie not]

21. ya, they have a link for the video of it but it doesn't work. I would have

very much been interested in that. Going to see if I can hunt down some backgrounder on him and what he had to say. Looks like the poor chap was/is getting silenced in the same way as others who have tried to speak out about the truth. After watching these 9/11 discussions for the past few weeks I certainly understand how some people are becoming defensive because there are some that go out of their way to make us feel like we are obtuse ninnies for questioning things. :shrug:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

24. My guess is that there is a transcript at Judicial Watch. They held

the press conference for him.

Last I heard, he was still under gag order.

[meppie-meppie not]

26. "still under gag order" now why am I not surprised! It's stuff like this

that leads us to doubt the "official "story. What have they got to hide and why?

[meppie-meppie not]

15. great stuff!! :-) n/t

[Democrat Dragon]

45. U.S wanted to invade Afganistan BEFORE 9/11

http://americaforsale.org/mt/archives/cat_afghanistan.php

This link also has some freaky PNAC info.

oh there is also this glow stuff:

http://thewebfairy.com/911/glow/index.htm

[spooked911]

74. Of course everyone HAS to read the Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html#comments

Jeff Well used to post a lot on the September 11th board here, and this Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11 was initially a DU thread, from what I understand. Now Jeff runs an excellent blog, "Rigorous Intuition".