Were hijackers flying the 9/11 planes?

[veracity]

No...not another 'conspiracy theory' - but reasonable suspicion. Now that Bush, Cheney, and Condy don't have to testify in public or under oath.. the truth will never be known, but, - people are still coming out with really challenging information.

And...considering that, - despite the enormous heat from the crash into the Towers, - that could bring down THREE buildings (even one not hit by anything)....an unscathed, unsinged, unburned passport belonging to Mohammed Atta just happened to float to an easily discoverable location amid all the debris. Just asking.

Here's some information you might want to read.....It's the second story on TVNL 9/11 news page today.

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/news.html#911NEWS

[colonel odis]

1. atta's unsinged passport has always made me chuckle

same with the crash in the pennsylvania field. among all the carnage and damage there, they happened to find one of the hijackers' card with mousaui zakariah's (sorry for misspelling) phone number on the back.

what amazing investigators we had on the case!

[evil_orange_cat]

2. I suspect the pilots were Saudi military... there no way[...]

<...> that a few weeks of flight training on prop planes prepares someone for handling a massive passenger airliner. They had to have intense professional (probably military) training. There are two possibilities:

1. The Saudis were behind the attacks.

2. OBL purposely chose Saudis to get Bushy to attack Saudi Arabia.

I'm not in the "Bush made it happen" crowd. I don't think he's that intelligent. And I do think that too many people would have had to have known about it... meaning it would be difficult to keep secret.

[Drifter]

4. Agreed ... but

Yes it is very unlikely that a person with a few weeks of prop plane experience can manage to put an airliner on target where they did.

BUT ...

These planes are also equiped with very sophisticated auto-pilot features. It is quite possible that all they had to do is learn how to use the AP and GPS capabilities. Punch in the numbers, sit back, and wait for the 72 vergins (which due to an error in translation refers to a bunch of dates).

Cheers
Drifter

[Az]

7. Yes, it takes years

to learn to turn a wheel.

[mac2]

27. Nope...no proof of it.

Saudis? Or no pilots at all?

[Woody Box]

31. Ask Google

http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22vero+beach%22%2B%22saudi+airlines%22&btnG=Google+Suche&meta=

[DulceDecorum]

36. The Saudis

had little or nothing to do with this thing.
When the Saudis got pissed at Bush, they went over to Crawford in August 2001 and told him that they were going to pull their money out of the US if he didn't shape up pronto.
He sneered.
Next thing you know, the US economy is free fall
and on the very day that it looks like the US is about to default....
OH NO
the WTC FAW DOWN GO BOOM!!!

If you look closely at the persons who keep pushing the Saudi line, you find that they have their own agenda.
Take, for example, Steve Emerson.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+site:www.fair.org+Steve+Emerson

Steven Emerson is an internationally recognized expert on terrorism and national security, a correspondent, and an author who also serves as the Executive Director of The Investigative Project, the nation’s largest archival data and intelligence on Islamic and Middle Eastern terrorist groups. He is most recently the author of the national best seller, American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us (Free Press). Mr. Emerson is widely recognized as one of the foremost experts in the world on militant Islamic terrorism. Since September 11, 2001, Mr. Emerson has appeared frequently on network television and has been quoted or cited hundreds of times in the nation’s top newspapers. Mr. Emerson and his institute have also given numerous briefings to Congress, the White House, the Justice Department and other federal agencies.
http://www.harrywalker.com/speakers_template.cfm?Spea_ID=262

"This lawsuit did not have any merit, and I believe it was filed in bad faith to deter us and others from telling the truth about Emerson. I think that 'pseudo-journalist' is a perfect description for Steven Emerson," said Sugg, currently senior editor of Creative Loafing in Atlanta, Ga. Sugg added: "We reported the truth. In four years of litigation, Emerson has been unwilling or unable to come up with any evidence that what we reported was false. Now that we were close to forcing him to back up his claims, he has run away."
http://www.counterpunch.org/emerson05192003.html

The role Emerson played may at first seem perplexing. He presents himself as a journalist, yet he handed off what appeared to be a major story to rivals. A closer look at Emerson's career suggests his priority is not so much news as it is an unrelenting attack against Arabs and Muslims. From this perspective, his gambit with Khan seems easier to understand: Pakistan is a Muslim nation, while India's nuclear program has long been linked to Israel. As the Indian Express noted (6/29/98), Pakistani politicians were "convinced that they were about to be attacked by India, possibly with Israeli assistance."
Emerson's willingness to push an extremely thin story--with potentially explosive consequences--is also consistent with the lengthy list of mistakes and distortions that mar his credentials as an expert on terrorism.
Those blemishes had, for a time, seemed to drive Emerson from major news outlets. He has had to resort to new tactics to maintain his anti-Muslim crusade--an "anti-terrorism" journal that he uses as a soapbox, associates whose reputations aren't as damaged as his, and, as in the Khan episode, staying behind the curtains.
http://www.fair.org/extra/9901/emerson.html

The man is doing his darnedest to cause a war of global proportions.
He openly hates the citizens of almost every single nation in the Middle East, and he is not shy in demanding genocide now.

Nine of the Saudis who are alleged to have hijacked those planes are STILL ALIVE
and one other Saudi "hijacker'
DIED TWO YEARS BEFORE September 11, 2001.
So the story about Saudi involvement has been proved to be a crock of ****.

[Woody Box]

44. I don't agree, Dulce...

but I won't say more at the moment. Sorry... :-)

[DulceDecorum]

47. That's OK

I think I know what you are referring to.......

[Sterling]

108. Could be right.

nt

[Old and In the Way]

117. " OBL purposely chose Saudis to get Bushy to attack Saudi Arabia."

Well, if that was his intentions, he failed miserably. Saudi Arabia's punishment for 15/19 citizens who have been fingered with the attack has been:

* US exiting the airbases in their country.
* Taking out Saudi's #1 secular threat and next door neighbor, Saddam Hussein
* Crippling of Iraq's oil infrastructure, making SA product worth a lot more on the market.
* US now the lightening rod for Islamic fuundies while Kingdom Princes keep making money hand over fist.

Let's suppose for the sake of argument that 175, 11, 93, and 11 were all part of Vigilant Warrior/Vigilant Guardian exercises underway on 9/11. Let's also suppose that some of these Saudi's, who seem to have had connections to the US military, were playing roles of terrorists that day.

Given the fact that we now know planning for the Iraq invasion started almost immediately upon this administration taking office in Jan. 01, could the Saud's have been in on the "Pearl Harbor" event? Sacraficing a few of their fellow citizens to further their strategic interests in the ME....is that out of the rhelm of possibility?

[BeFree]

3. No proof of who the pilots were

All we have is theories.

The main theory of "Wacky Cavemen Did It" says that the flight crews of all four planes were killed as soon as the hijackings ocurred and that Cessna-trained pilots then became experts at flying those craft.

Another theory the "Insider/Black Ops" holds that the four airplanes were landed at military bases and replaced by remote controlled planes which then were used as missiles.

As there are few facts being released to the public, it only furthers speculation that something very sinister did occur that day and fuels the "Insider/Black Ops" theorists.

[mopaul]

5. anyone who believes the 'official story' is a moron

bush got caught in a lie. remember when Clinton got caught in a lie? the whole fucking government shut down and he was IMPEACHED.
so, if a president tells ONE lie, he's a congenital liar, who cannot be believed about anything.

the official story? from THIS white house? if they told me the sky was blue i wouldn't believe it. and it's glaringly odd how the official story, with all the hijackers names and faces, was on t.v. the very next day. and the stonewalling of any investigations tells you something doesn't it? if not, you're wearing blinders.

it IS possible to control an airliner by remote control. to this day, no one can decide if it was iranians, saudis, or afghanistans on the plane driving it. where are the black boxes? did they all three vansish? what are the odds. and why did that third wwtrade center building collapse into itself just like the first two? it wasn't hit by a plane, but maybe it was supposed to have been.

and people shouldn't get hysterical just because people like me want it investigated and solved, instead of blindly accepting shit as the official story

[mobuto]

12. They can't?

The planes weren't flown by Afghanis or Iranians. They were flown by a Saudi, an Egyptian, an Emiratee and a Lebanese.

[mac2]

28. How do you know that?

There is no proof of this at all.

[mobuto]

29. No proof

but they were the hijackers who received pilot training, so it seems a reasonable enough assumption.

[DulceDecorum]

42. And they got that training

at US bases.

Three days after the WTC disaster, Newsweek, the Washington Post and the Knight Ridder newspapers reported claims that five of the terrorist hijackers in the Sept 11 attacks received training at secure U.S. military installations during the 1990s. The reports also claimed three of the terrorists had listed their address as the Naval Air Station in Pensacola, Fla., and had participated in military exchange programs for foreign officers at the Pensacola Naval Air Station in Florida.
http://www.madcowprod.com/issue06.html

Was the CIA running a covert, or black, operation out of the Venice, Florida Airport? Might they have been training pilots for Bin Laden in an effort to penetrate his organization that went horrifically awry?
http://www.madcowprod.com/issue07.html

Far from merely being negligent or asleep at the switch—the thrust so far of allegations expected to be aired at joint Senate and House Select Committee hearings next month—the accumulating evidence suggests the CIA was not just aware of the thousands of Arab student pilots who began pouring into this country several years ago to attend flight training, but was running the operation, for still-unexplained reasons.
http://www.madcowprod.com/issue17.html
http://www.madcowprod.com/archive.html

[mobuto]

43. So which is it?

Were the hijackers trained by the US? Or are they still alive? Or were there no hijackers to begin with, the whole thing being done with remote controls? Or were the hijackers Saudi military officers?

You guys can't even get your story straight!

[DulceDecorum]

52. Blame that on Wayne Stroup.

They should have hired Agnes Nixon.

[Abe Linkman]

97. It's a lot easier if you just "buy" the "Wacky Cave Man Dit It " theory

Is that what you're trying to say with the "you guys" stuff. What's up with the "you guys" phrase?

[Woody Box]

46. Flight maneuvers UA 175 / AA 77

Many people have wondered how these pilots were able to make their last flight maneuvers. They must be splendid experienced pilots to hit the buildings while flying a curve.

But noone seems to realize the question behind: Why didn't the pilot of UA 175 f.i. choose a more straight flight path on his last meters (i.e why didn't he approach the South Tower in a straight line)? It would have been way easier to hit the tower. Did he want to show the world what an excellent pilot he is?

Same for AA 77.

[mobuto]

48. Why didn't the pilot take a straighter path?

I don't know, why don't you ask him?

[Woody Box]

50. Bruhahahaha! The best joke I've heard since years, thanx (nT)

[mobuto]

53. That's what you get when you ask a stupid question

Nobody knows what the hijackers were doing in the seconds before their deaths. What matters is they hit their target.

[DulceDecorum]

62. We have been told

the names of the pilots of those planes.
We have also been assured that they did indeed take off.

We know for a fact that the men identified by the FBI as hijackers COULD NOT HAVE COMMITTED THAT CRIME because they are STILL ALIVE.
This has been confirmed by running the N-numbers (registration numbers) or the serial numbers of the aircraft through the FAA database.
http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm

So perhaps we should look VERY CLOSELY at those original pilots.
Apart from them, we have NOTHING.

Run their names through the Social Security Death Index.
http://ssdi.genealogy.rootsweb.com/

Run their names through the FAA Airman registry.
http://162.58.35.241/aadatabase/login.asp
See what comes up.
And keep it.

[mobuto]

65. Bwahahah

Ok, find me a hijacker who's still alive.

So perhaps we should look VERY CLOSELY at those original pilots.
Apart from them, we have NOTHING.


Bwahahaha.

[DulceDecorum]

73. On the contrary

YOU GO DO SOME WORK.
Find me one who is dead.

[mobuto]

76. One who is dead? I can do better than that.

Abdulaziz Alomari
Waleed Alshehri
Wail Alshehri
Satam Al Suqami
Mohammed Atta
Nawaf Al Hamzi
Salem Al Hamzi
Khalid Al-Midhar
Hani Hanjour
Majed Moqed
Saeed Alghamdi
Ahmed Al-Haznawi
Ahmed Alnami
Ziad Samir Jarrah
Fayez Ahmed
Ahmed Alghamdi
Hamza Alghamdi
Mohald Alshehri
Marwan Al-Shehhi

[DulceDecorum]

79. Phooey

Go type the words
HIJACKERS STILL ALIVE
into the search engine of your choice.

Oh,
so sorry.
I forgot.
You don't bother to check the facts.

[mobuto]

80. LOL

And there is still not one shred of evidence that any hijackers are still alive. The only story you could be referring to is a BBC story published three days after 9/11, which reported on an Arab News story was reporting on stories from Arab-language newspapers, which were using only the names of the hijackers and not their photos - which are totally different. The fact that you're rehashing long-abandoned theories does not reflect well upon you.

[DulceDecorum]

85. Spoken like one who has never heard

of GOOGLE.

I KNEW that you would not dare to actually seek out a FACT.
And that is neither the only source,
nor it it a theory,
nor is it long-abandoned.

And as for that ARAB reference,
this is the first we have heard of ARABS running the BBC.
Furthermore,
the photos of said hijackers are up on the FBI website for all to see and a few of the persons so identified have come forward and have stated that their passports had been stolen at some point in time. The FBI caved but did not remove their erroneous info because
THEY GOT NOTHING.

Remember the Pakistani jeweler?
THEY HAD NOTHING THERE EITHER.

There is not one shred of evidence that the "hijackers" are dead.

[mobuto]

89. Arabs running the Beeb?

WTF? You're just making this shit up as you go along. Let me repeat this for your benefit.

1. There is a BBC story that I'm aware of from three days after 9/11 that contains the unfortunate claim you cited..

2. As the BBC reporter indicated long ago, that story was picked up from Arab News, a Saudi newspaper.

3. The editor of Arab News has declined responsibility, saying that his story in turn repeated what had been printed in a couple of Arab-language newspapers.

4. Those newspapers looked up persons with the same names as the hijackers, but they were not the same persons. When the FBI later released photos of the hijackers it became clear that those alleged survivors were simply people with the same names. There are seventeen Americans with my name, which is pretty rare, so I don't find this unplausible in the slightest.

Now what part don't you get?

[DulceDecorum]

93. The part where you

did NOT actually go and type the words
HIJACKERS STILL ALIVE
into the search engine of your choice.

[number6]

99. still alive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

[Woody Box]

96. ? We know what they were doing

They didn't choose the optimal pre-impact line.
So they didn't maximize the probability to hit the building.

So, on a technical level, the pilot was excellent to hit the building while flying a curve.

But on an operational level, he was really dumb.

So we have a hijacker, say Marwan Al-Sheehi, with zero experience in flying big aircrafts and no feeling for their behaviour in curves. But Marwan thinks for himself: "I will be better than Atta, this arrogant wannabe ringleader; I'll show it to him, I will hit the WTC with a 'circular approach' , not a boring straight line. Allah will help me."

Hm.

[DulceDecorum]

56. Circular Approach

let us see what the FAA has to say on
the pilot and copilot of Flight 175.


Victor John Saracini
Med First 4/2001 Must have available glasses for near vision
DOI 2/15/94 ATP multi eng land commercial single eng Private single eng
A/A320 A/B747-4 A/B757 A/B767 A/CA-212
DOI 5/20/1992 Flight instructor airplane single multi land instrument airplane
DOI 4/14/1986 Flight engineer turbojet powered
DOI 1/30/1984 Ground instructor advanced instrument
DOI 10/22/1983 Mechanic airframe power plant

Michael Robert Horrocks
Med First 8/2001
DOI 9/26/1999 ATP Commercial privileges
A/B757 A/B767
B757 CIR APPCH VMC ONLY
B767 CIR APPCH VMC ONLY


All right then,
let us now have a look at what the FAA says about
the pilot and copilot of Flight 77.


Charles Frank Burlingame III
Med First 3/2001 Must wear corrective lenses
DOI 9/11/1996 ATP multi eng land
A/B 727 A/B757 A/B767
DOI 9/11/1996 Flight engineer turbojet powered
OBTAINED TWO CERTIFICATES ON THE SAME DAY
DID HE TRANSFER FOREIGN CREDENTIALS?

David Michael Charlebois
1448 Swann St NW
Washington, DC 20009-3904
Med First 11/2000 Must wear corrective lenses
DOI 6/28/1999 ATP multi Comm privileges single eng land
A/B 757 A/B 767 A/CE500 A/HS125
757 CIR APPCH VMC ONLY
767 CIR APPCH VMC ONLY
DOI 5/28/1991 Flight instructor airplane single and multi eng instrument airplane
Valid only when accompanied by Pilot cert no
Expires 31 May 1993
DOI 10/23/1989 Flight engineer turbojet powered
DOI 11/14/1985 Mechanic
MED CERT EXPIRED BEFORE 9:11.


So what have learned?
Both lead pilots desperately need corrective lenses.
Both copilots are only permitted to use CIR APPCH VMC ONLY.
Can you see any reason for those high-jinks?

[mobuto]

59. Any reason?

Both lead pilots desperately need corrective lenses.
Both copilots are only permitted to use CIR APPCH VMC ONLY.
Can you see any reason for those high-jinks?


Yes I can. After consulting with numerous experts, I have come to the conclusion that both pilots were probably nearsighted. Experts tell me that certain glass lenses can cancel out the effects of nearsightedness.

[DulceDecorum]

67. Tell me,

what happens to your glasses when you are exposed to high G forces.
And then tell me how the cornea responds to contacts at the same G force.

And then take another good look at the dates on those certs.
Some of our boys were getting a little long in the tooth.
And I am assuming,
for arguments sake,
that our boys were the ones at the helm.

[mobuto]

70. ???

What the hell are you talking about? Why would the UA pilots have been flying at high G's?

[DulceDecorum]

Why don't you go

and ask them.

See I know how to answer stupid questions too.

[mobuto]

75. But its your argument

you brought up high G's for some inexplicable reason and I see absolutely no reason why G-forces should have anything to do with the UA pilots. You might as well have stated that nuclear explosions are bad for eyeglasses - its an equally irrelevent point until you argue its less-than-obvious relevency.

[DulceDecorum]

81. Humor me

and answer my question.
I asked it first.

What happens to glasses sitting on the nose of a pilot,
when high G turns are made?
What happens to the eyes of a pilot who is wearing contacts,
when high g turns are made?

After you tell me what happens,
maybe then I will explain the significance of high G turns.

[Make7]

114. I would love to know the significance of high G turns.

"What happens to glasses sitting on the nose of a pilot,
when high G turns are made?
What happens to the eyes of a pilot who is wearing contacts,
when high g turns are made?" - DulceDecorum
__________

I wear glasses and when I ride roller coasters my glasses always stay on. Although I must admit, every once in a while they slip a little bit and I need to reposition them slightly, which I do immediately while still riding the roller coaster. Even through loops and turns.

I don't wear contacts, so I don't personally know what happens to the eyes of someone wearing contacts in high g situations. I'd love to know the answer to that as well. Please let me know.
__________

"After you tell me what happens, maybe then I will explain the significance of high G turns." - DulceDecorum

I realize that I didn't answer the second question, but I hope you'll at least tell me the significance of high g turns on persons wearing glasses since I did answer that one.

Thanks,
Make7

[DulceDecorum]

45. The planes ALL survived 9:11

so says the FAA.

The two American Airlines planes,
Flight 11 and Flight 77
had their registrations both cancelled on 1/14/2002
at the request of the owner
whose identity remains hidden by the Wilmington Trust.

Both United Airlines planes,
Flight 175 and Flight 93
are still registered
and appear to still be capable of flight despite the report concerning the

Accident/Incident Occurred on: 2001-09-11
(-23) AIRPORT SCREENING SECURITY.

It also appears that the majority of 9:11 victims
either did not die OR did not have US social security numbers
since they mostly fail to appear on the Social Security Death Index.

[mobuto]

49. Huh?

I suppose the objects that hit the three buildings and that field in Pennsylvania were large cardboard cutouts?

Both United Airlines planes,
Flight 175 and Flight 93
are still registered
and appear to still be capable of flight despite the report concerning the


Appear to still be capable of flight? LMAO.

It also appears that the majority of 9:11 victims
either did not die OR did not have US social security numbers


Ok then, where are they?

[DulceDecorum]

51. Ask the FAA

and the SSA.

THEY are the ones who maintain the databases.
Go check for yourself.
http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm
http://ssdi.genealogy.rootsweb.com/

Someone has been lying to us all.
I want to know WHERE Commando Solo was on September 11,2001
and WHAT THE HELL THEY WERE DOING THERE.

When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
Monday, Feb. 1, 1999
But the "strategic" PSYOPS scheming didn't die. What if the U.S. projected a holographic image of Allah floating over Baghdad urging the Iraqi people and Army to rise up against Saddam, a senior Air Force officer asked in 1990?
According to a military physicist given the task of looking into the hologram idea, the feasibility had been established of projecting large, three-dimensional objects that appeared to float in the air.
But doing so over the skies of Iraq? To project such a hologram over Baghdad on the order of several hundred feet, they calculated, would take a mirror more than a mile square in space, as well as huge projectors and power sources.
And besides, investigators came back, what does Allah look like?
The Gulf War hologram story might be dismissed were it not the case that washingtonpost.com has learned that a super secret program was established in 1994 to pursue the very technology for PSYOPS application. The "Holographic Projector" is described in a classified Air Force document as a system to "project information power from space ... for special operations deception missions."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dotmil/arkin020199.htm

Commando Solo
When psyops "products" are ready for deployment, they are often delivered by one of six EC-130E Commando Solo aircraft flown by the 193rd Special Operations Wing, Pennsylvania Air National Guard. The EC-130E is a converted cargo plane that is a broadcast studio in the sky, equipped with multi-directional transmitters, several antenna and a live microphone. It can broadcast radio or television, live or on tape, in the standard AM, FM, HF, TV, and military communications bands. Equipment on board also allows the communications crew to jam or manipulate outside broadcasts, enticing frustrated listeners to switch over to psyops programs that can be heard clearly.
http://www.cbsnews.com/elements/2003/01/29/iraq/whoswho538410_0_2_person.shtml

[mobuto]

55. Um

So you think that the 9/11 planes were holograms? Really?

[DulceDecorum]

57. I do not know what happened

and it does not matter what I think.

I see you have come round to the idea that the UA planes are still around though.
That is a good beginning.

[mobuto]

64. For once, you are correct.

and it does not matter what I think.

I couldn't have said it better myself.


I see you have come round to the idea that the UA planes are still around though. That is a good beginning.

Where do you get that idea from? And if you don't think you know what happened, why on earth did you post the hologram stuff? Inquiring minds wish to know.

[DulceDecorum]

72. I bet

that you did not even bother to run anything through the databases.

And since you don't care what I think,
why the heck are you STILL asking me questions?

Go look at the FACTS.

[mobuto]

74. You don't care what you think

You said so yourself. I didn't bother to plug numbers through the database, because I don't care if its been updated or not. The evidence that planes hit the World Trade Center is so obvious, to state otherwise boggles the mind. There is no alternate explanation.

[DulceDecorum]

78. NOT TRUE

Please do not turn this into a full-spin-zone in the manner of Bill O'Reilly.

I said that it does not matter what I think.
That is a fact.
If I think that the moon is made of green cheese,
THAT
has no effect on the facts.
Unless of course,
I am the pResident and decide to do something really foolish based on a general lack of intelligence.

I, myself care about what I think.
That is the reason why I seek out FACTS and run names through databases.
Some here on the other hand,
appear to follow the example of Mr. Bush
and avoid factual reading material and coherent analysis.

And there is NO evidence whatsoever,
that a plane hit the World trade Center.
No plane debris was ever found and THAT is the main reason why the National Transportation Safety Board was unable to conduct an investigation.

Mobuto, if you believe that strongly in video clips,
then what do you have to say about Godzilla
and the terrible pain he has inflicted upon the good people of New York?

[mobuto]

83. You might as well think the moon is made of cheese

you have as much evidence to support that as you do your other assertions.

And there is NO evidence whatsoever,
that a plane hit the World trade Center.


Bwahahahaa. This is the most absurd statement I have ever read in my life. No two plane crashes were ever so documented.

Mobuto, if you believe that strongly in video clips,
then what do you have to say about Godzilla
and the terrible pain he has inflicted upon the good people of New York?

Godzilla was created on a computer. Thousands (tens of thousands?) of people saw the planes hit with their own eyes. There's a difference.

No plane debris was ever found and THAT is the main reason why the National Transportation Safety Board was unable to conduct an investigation.

I'm sorry to inform you that you're wrong. Literally tons of wreckage were found. The black boxes were destroyed, and those maybe what you were referring to.


(part of Flight 11)

[DulceDecorum]

91. Yeah Baby

That is why you are avoiding the databases like the plague.

Seeing as how those plane crashes are so well documented,
can you tell us why someone neglected to inform United Airlines that their planes cannot continue to be able fly to this very day
after experiencing such an event?
Can you hazard a guess into the rationale behind the owners of the leased American Airlines planes informing the FAA that their planes were destroyed on January 14 2002 and NOT September 11, 2001?

As for that hit,
I know many many people in New York City.
Several saw the burning building with their own eyes,
BUT
not one of them,
not one single person whom I have been able to trace,
actually saw anything hit a building.
All the ones who claim to have done so all saw it on TV.
They are all
without exception
TV-witnesses and every bit as credible as President Bush
who saw the first hit from Florida.

[mobuto]

95. You've got to be kidding me

not one of them,
not one single person whom I have been able to trace,
actually saw anything hit a building.

If you believe that then this discussion is over. Everybody in Lower Manhattan on the morning of September 11 saw the second plane hit. Your argument is so completely bogus it beggars description. My girlfriend even saw the damn plane.

Good bye - you are just wasting my time.

[DulceDecorum]

100. Everyone in Manhattan

who was watching TV.

Talk to your friends people.
Even the fellow endowed with four girlfriends and a thumb
saw the action on TV
and NOT in the flesh.

Mobuto has made a lot of noise,
but HE did NOT actually see the crash HIMSELF.

WHO did?
And I am NOT talking about the collapse or the burning building.
I am asking for witnesses to ANY plane actually hitting ANY building. NO TIVO
NO TV

However,
as a reasonable humane being,
I am willing to settle for this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3514867.stm
http://doonesbury.msn.com/strip/bush_guard.html
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/27/elec04.bush.doonesbury.reut/

[Az]

102. And this is why

Grand Conspiracy theories do so much damage to the hunt for real conspiracy. Just think for a second the degree to which control would have to be exerted for this level of Conspiracy to take place. You would have to have the consent and cooperation of countless individuals. You would have to have the consent of officials who would have to order their own men to death. You would have to have a gaslight operation on a scale beyond imagination. Sorry. This is just indicitive of your own trama. It has nothing to do with reality. You have my sympathy.

[DulceDecorum]

104. Lots of lime green paint on the INSIDE fuselage of Flight 77

I wonder how it came to be
that what appears to be low VOC paint,
that was qualified for use as a primer in July 2000,
found itself on the INSIDE fuselage of a plane built in 1987.
That must have been some major overhaul!!
I wonder why American Airlines never ever recorded such an overhaul.
Sit back folks and look again at the
Lime-green lies.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=125&topic_id=20583

[MercutioATC]

105. So anybody who misreprents facts (lies) can't be trusted at all?

...I just want to get that statement clarified.

[The Magistrate]

106. Just Popped In To See Who Disturbed The Grave, Sir

This thing is nigh on a year old....

"There is nothing new under the sun."

[MercutioATC]

107. I just thought it was an interesting statement in light of the VonKleist

issues.

Personally, I don't agree with mopaul's statement...I was just hoping for a clarification (granted he may not still even be here).

[mobuto]

11. ??? Wacky Cavemen???

The main theory of "Wacky Cavemen Did It" says that the flight crews of all four planes were killed as soon as the hijackings ocurred and that Cessna-trained pilots then became experts at flying those craft.

Nothing like a little racism, is there? Your wacky cavemen were college and graduate-school educated fundamentalists who had Boeing flight manuals.

Another theory the "Insider/Black Ops" holds that the four airplanes were landed at military bases and replaced by remote controlled planes which then were used as missiles.

Despite the fact that there's no evidence for this, nor is there a credible explanation for where all those passengers went.

As there are few facts being released to the public, it only furthers speculation that something very sinister did occur that day and fuels the "Insider/Black Ops" theorists.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that something very sinister happened on September 11. And it was perpetrated by Mohammed Atta and his merry band of suicidal lunatics.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mobuto]

19. I'm very sorry

Mohammed Atta was an Arab, but he was not a caveman. And yes, it is certainly racist to call Arabs cavemen.

But by all means, carry on with the infantile name calling.

[BeFree]

21. Infantile name calling

Only repeating what the POTUS and the majority of America thinks of those supposed hi-jackers. Are you claiming Americans are "infantile"? That's radical. Didn't know you were so radical.

[mobuto]

23. Don't project your silly strawmen onto me

Mohammed Atta was no caveman. He was a highly educated guy, very bright, who was perfectly capable of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. As for your previous question, yes, it is perfectly possible for someone with a basic knowledge of flying to learn to steer a Boeing, especially when they have the manual. That you have such a low opinion of the abilities and intelligence of those 19 Arabs suggests that you yourself have racial issues you need to resolve.

[BeFree]

35. Don't project your racism onto me.

I have a pretty good idea what it takes to fly, or 'steer', a Boeing. It takes hours and hours of great effort and education. Your attack on me as a racist is unfounded and slanderous. There are many people of many races who are quite capable of flying these types of airplanes. They learned how to do so after many hours of education. Not by reading a manual.

But you miss the point: I don't have the belief, as you do, that Atta was the pilot. Besides, the flight manual was in the car, not in the cockpit!

[mobuto]

40. You do?

I have a pretty good idea what it takes to fly, or 'steer', a Boeing.

I take it you're a commercial pilot, then?

Your attack on me as a racist is unfounded and slanderous.

Slanderous? LOL. You might want to look words up in the dictionary before you use them.

I don't have the belief, as you do, that Atta was the pilot. Besides, the flight manual was in the car, not in the cockpit!

So?

[BeFree]

60. Are you a commercial pilot?

because you have said that "it's esay to steer an airplane". I, however, take the common sense approach that flying one of those airliners is a task requiring great skill, just as any pilot will tell you.

[mobuto]

63. Any pilot will tell you?

The Airline Pilots Association doesn't seem to have any problem with the universally accepted scenario. Neither do any of the commercial pilots I know (I know three), or a good friend of mine who is an air safety expert.

[BeFree]

68. Any pilot will tell you...

It took an expert to fly those planes.

[mobuto]

71. Nope

Because I've talked to pilots who said that that's not true. So, no, any pilot will not tell you that.


Next?

[BeFree]

77. A pilot told you

anyone with a flight manual could fly those planes? I'd like to see that quote. Surely, somewhere on the net you can find a quote like that, right?. The numerous quotes I have read said they had to be expert.

Show me the proof. It shouldn't be too hard.

[mobuto]

84. Anyone with a flight manual?

No, not anyone with a flight manual. But anyone who knew how to fly and had studied the manual. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Show me the proof. It shouldn't be too hard.

You want a telephone number?

[BeFree]

88. Online will be fine

Just a quote, online, from an experienced airline pilot, saying that someone who is not an expert could have flown any one of those planes that day. Just one quote.

[mobuto]

90. You sir, are daft

I don't have online quotes because 9/11 conspiracy theories are not my hobby and I don't normally spend my days engaged in this kind of mental masturbation. You have failed to prove YOUR point that keeping an aircraft in the air is so complicated and I feel you are simply being obstinant. I have been more than charitable, but now I feel I have to ask you either to put up or shut up.

[BeFree]

94. Ask any commercial pilot

They will tell you it is complicated to fly one of those big airliners. Hell, it's just plain common sense. Ask one. Then get back to us, eh? But a quote online will be just fine.

And, ya know, it's taken years and years to figure out how to fly one by remote control.

[Sterling]

109. You lose.

ha ha.

[Az]

82. I have asked pilots as well

The only real difficulty is navigating. Once the plane is in flight it really is not that difficult. A few basic instructions. Some training on specific nav equipment. And there you are heading for NY.

[mobuto]

86. No navigation equipment

the 9/11 hijackers followed the Hudson river into NYC. The Flight 93 hijackers followed the Pennsylvania Turnpike, iirc. I don't remember what landmark the Pentagon hijackers used, but I could look it up.

[Az]

87. Even easier then

Not much to it at that point. Turn the wheel the plane goes thataway. As long as they were taught not to stall ... it no problems. Er other than the big boom at the end which unfortunately was the point.

[BeFree]

92. Turn the wheel plane goes thataway?!?!?

HAhahahah

I love it... In order to fly an airliner at 500 mph, just turn the wheel thataway.

How in the world did they ever do those big turns that expert pilots have said..."would take an expert pilot to turn those planes that way"

Or...could ya'll be taking flying lessons for GWB..."I was a pilot once"?

[Az]

98. It would take an expert pilot

To what? Decide whether to turn the plane to the left or right? Please explain what measure of expertise is required to turn a plane. Can this expertise not be learned in a class? Are there no Islamic pilots willing to talk to the planners and explain any difficulties they should prepare for?

Sorry. But planes have steering wheels for a reason. They kind of are instruments that the pilots use to make the planes go thataway. Its really that simple. Turn the wheel turn the plane. There are no mystical rites that must be performed to turn the plane. There is no secret compartment that must be accessed to turn the plane. There are no complex codes that need to be entered. Its a wheel. You turn it. The plane turns.

[TrogL]

103. It's not quite as simple as that

You have to coordinate turning the control column with pulling it back with maybe a bit of foot rudder thrown in.

It's something beginner pilots learn in the first hour in their little Cessnas. This knowledge is transferrable to big plane. Flying a plane isn't difficult (landing is). What takes all those hours of instruction is learning what all the gazillions of buttons knobs and switches do, and then be able to do it in the dark.

[BeFree]

38. No racism here

You are the one pointing out the Arabic names. You are the one labeling them as fundamentalists. All I said was cavemen. As in what * called OBL. As in what OBL is supposedly hiding. Nothing racist in my use of terms. But your uses are quite convincing.

[mobuto]

41. Pointing out the Arabic names?

Huh? Mohammed Atta was the lead perp. It is not racist to say that Mohammed Atta was the perp, because that's exactly what he was. It is, however, to say that Mohammed Atta couldn't have been the perp because flying a plane is too complicated for a "caveman" - and that's precisely what you've said again and again and again.

As in what * called OBL.

Really? Please give a citation for that assertion.

As in what OBL is supposedly hiding.

Nobody knows where OBL is hiding now. But do you deny that he did hide in caves? He filmed himself IN FRONT of caves. But that FACT hardly makes him a "caveman."

[BeFree]

58. Yer right

But calling OBL a caveman is not as wrong as calling someone who has a flight manual a pilot.


Ya know.... ya just gotta love the way some people say "it's easy to fly a big airliner." Many a pilot has said "Whoever flew those planes was an expert."

[mobuto]

61. No, but it is racist

But calling OBL a caveman is not as wrong as calling someone who has a flight manual a pilot.

Ah yes, but Mohammed Atta and the rest had, in addition, gone to flight school. So your point is moot. They clearly had enough familiarity with the planes to be able to keep them in the air. And what's my incontrivertable evidence? Three of four planes reached their targets.

Many a pilot has said "Whoever flew those planes was an expert."

Are you a commercial pilot?

[BeFree]

66. Caveman= Racist?

Flight schools....they were all kicked out of flight schools because they couldn't fly? All flight schools that is, except the one with CIA connections.

"Whoever flew those planes was an expert."

[mobuto]

69. They didn't need to take off or land

and they were quite bad at it. I have a friend who rented a plane to one of the hijackers in Maryland. The man couldn't fly very well so he stopped renting to him. But he could fly. And that's all that was necessary.

[Az]

6. Phone calls were pretty explicit

People from the jets were calling loved ones and officials. They seem pretty convinced the Hijackers were in charge and flying the jets.

As to a third building going down. Lets review. 2 planes with full tanks of fuel slam into the two tallest buildings in the world. It is amazing that the towers do not collapse immediately. Fire and continuing structural damage eventually cause the 2 tallest buildings in the world to fall down. The 2 tallest buildings in the world hit the ground. Fire and shrapnel have already hit the surrounding buildings weakening their infrastructure. Then the impact from the 2 tallest buildings in the world striking the ground cause substantial damage to the ground setting of seismic detecters far away. This impact from the 2 tallest buildings in the world cause enough damage to the surrounding buildings that many of them have to be torn down later. One of the other buildings in the area has already suffered fire and shrapnel damage and the added structural damage from the impact of the 2 tallest buildings in the world destabalize it enough for it to collapse.

When you seek to strike terror in people you focus on major targets. There is no need to focus on smaller targets if you have already hit the 2 tallest buildings in the world. There is no need for the increased risk to plant charges and explosives in a building that will not even matter in time. People do not talk about the Trade Center, Pentagon, and tower 7. It doesn't even show up on peoples personal radars. It is pointless.

[mac2]

8. No they weren't .......most were second hand.

Ted Olson really lied. I can find the research if you wait.

You seem to accept what you are told by this lying government. What's up?

[eek]

9. why did olsen not care if his wife died?

?

[hang a left]

15. I don't know, I didn't like her either.

He is getting married again, did you hear? MIHOP

[Timefortruth]

16. Who knows.

But the story that Barbara was able to call the switchboard at DOJ while the country was under attack and be put through to the Solicitor General was very hard to swallow.

Since that story was so far over the top, it's hard to know what is truth and what is fiction.

[alittlelark]

17. If I'm not mistaken, she was his 2nd or 3rd

younger, blonde trophy wife - and she was gettin' a bit old.....:shrug:

[Az]

10. Hardly

I just do not buy into the grand conspiracy theory. I am in the lihop category. The need for complete control of the scenario is more an indication of the psychology on the part of the theorist than the actual conspiracy.

[mac2]

24. Here's some links about the phone calls from the planes on 9/11

There are lots of links about the 9/11 phone calls etc. here's a sample...

Here's what the media said about the calls from Flight 77.

Link: http://www.911review.org/Wget/www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A14365-2001Sep11

About Barbara's call...to Ted.

Link: http://www.geocities.com/subliminalsuggestion/olson.html
What I found strange is, Ted knowing Barbara was going to die never told her, he loved her. What woman goes on plane without her purse? Ted didn't appear broken about it at all even appearing on TV,etc. He is about to re-marry.

Many of the calls were second hand. Could they have been planted or stories not true from witnesses? What happened to these people if they weren't on those planes? ETC.

If you don't have lots of questions about these phone calls after reading this...why not?

[DulceDecorum]

101. NONE of the planes

were supposed to have an operating ATG telephone system.
They had been outlawed earlier that year
(by the FAA on Feb 23, 2001 and published in the March 2 2001 Federal Register)
because they were a fire hazard.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_register&docid=01-4940-filed
See also
http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a010302c.html
http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/frcont01.html Fed Reg 2001 contents

Almost ALL the companies who supplied air-to-ground telephone service have been forced out of business.

In-Flight Phone Corporation was sued by several of its clients
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/1998/10/12/story2.html
before the FAA ordered In-Flight Phone equipment removed from any and all planes that wish to use US airspace.
In-Flight Phone Corporation still exists, but only as an entity pursuing lucrative litigation against several parties.
http://www.thestreet.com/tech/georgemannes/10121135_2.html

GTE Airfone surrendered almost all of its FAA authorized STCs on 10/17/2002.

Claircom appears to provide air-to-ground services only because it is being forced to do so.
http://twincities.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2002/04/15/story3.html

Since 1998, the airplane-phone and in-flight entertainment business has been in trouble and has been known to cause fires and fatal accidents in aircraft.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-07-08-plane-cover_x.htm
Service has frequently been unavailable or very very poor despite the expense.
This is what makes those calls SO VERY AMAZING.

[theorist]

13. One thing people tend to overlook.

Did the hijackers actually have bombs on the planes? This would be a very embarassing fact for the airlines, and may be the real fact that we have large "sniffing" machines for all checked baggage.

Something fatal happened to Flight 93 (the one that crashed in PA) while it was still in flight. Here's a snip from the 9/11 timeline:

Residents outside Shanksville reported "discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene.

It may have been a Sidewinder from an F-16, as the site hypothesizes, but we know that the President didn't give the order in time, and that the passengers were attempting to rush the cockpit. Also, the last 2 minutes, or so, from the inflight recorder are "missing". (I think the official report was an electrical failure.)

I stand towards the belief that the leadership of this country has done everything in their power to make a new generation sceptical of the government's intentions. They gave me my own JFK-MLK-RFK assassinations all rolled into one to mull over for the rest of my life. They know I'll never find out, even if I risked my life to find out.

[Az]

18. No need for bombs

Impact achieves the goal. The threat of a bomb is enough to keep people pacified. The knives provide immediate control of the situation. Once they gain control of the cockpit assumptions of normal hijack demands are expected. Flying a jet into the Trade Towers is enough of a statement. Even OBL's statements seem to suggest that their collapse was a bonus. They did not need them to fall to make their point.

[BeFree]

20. AZ

You should get yerself over to the 9/11 forum. You seem to, above all others, have ALL the answers. Maybe you can teach us a few things?

But it is doubtful. All you have is what you have been told by those who are hiding something. And, you seem to be playing their game. But hey, come over to the 9/11 forum and see if you can score. I'll bet you don't last long there, but that's just my opinion.

[Az]

25. Sorry

I choose to focus my energy on issues I believe are relevant. I respect your belief that there must be more to this issue but I have too long argued matters of belief. The one thing I have learned is that no amount of logic, rational thought, arguing, or supplication will change a person's mind on a matter they have established a belief in. It will take an emotional event to shake the belief from their mind.

I agree. I would not last a second in such an environment. I have witnessed the effect in religious debates I have engaged in. In group dynamics a skeptic is at an extreme disadvantage. The group will already have established a series of pet arguments that they will challenge the skeptic with. In order to answer these issues they will typically have to resort to complex discussions in order to properly answer the issue. But during this discussion the group will toss in other issues and begin to muddy the discussion. Add this and the fact that even if the skeptic refutes an issue the group will not accept the refutation unless the entirety of their belief structure is dismantled at once. Thus when the skeptic moves on to a different focus the orignal refutatoin reseats itself in the minds of the believer.

The skeptic will find themself constantly rearguing a point that was settled previously. The beleivers not having let go of it will repeatedly bring it up. Thus the best a skeptic can do is provide their view on the matter in a forthright fashion. Stay open to new evidence. And wait for the believer to find a flaw within their own belief set. At that point it is possible that a real dialog is possible. Till then it is pretty much fruitless to discuss. Beliefs are tricky things to change.

[BeFree]

34. Look at that...here we are..in the 9/11 forum

Stick around... ya might learn something. Like what you believe has no grounds. Like these are the things that have bearings on what ocurred that day.

But, hey, if ya don't really want to discuss or become more educated, then, by all means stay away.

[Az]

37. You could continue

trying to goad me into sticking around or you could supply some evidence that would demonstrate the validity of your claim. Sorry but emotional appeals will not work on me on this matter.

Suffice to say my current position is as follows.

George and crew pull back security and observation on OBL and the Saudi's.

They apply pressure on OBL via a variety of means.

They ignore intelligence that something big is brewing.

The hijackers recieve enough training to guide the jets to their targets. It is not that difficult. The real difficulty in flying planes is the take off and landing. They had no intentions of either.

They gain access to the flights with simple weapons on their person.

They assault the passengers and claim to have a bomb thus gaining control of the cockpit.

They allow the passengers to make phone calls because they want the event noticed. The terror prolonged.

The guide the plances to their targets.

Jets are not scrambled because George and Dick see this as their expected attack.

The Jets impact the towers. Mission accomplished. Terror is caused. Both Ossama and PNAC are satisfied at this point.

The towers burn and fall. The structural damage from the impact and the heat from the fire is enough to bring down the buildings.

The fire caused by the initial impact spread to the surrounding area. Debry rains down from the sky causing damage to most buildings in the area.

The towers collapse causes significant damage in the area. Further weakening the foundation of Tower 7 bringing it down. All buildings in the immediate area have suffered too much damage to be allowed to remain standing. The thread of their immenent fall forces demolition teams to have to bring them down as well.

George Bush calls for all patriotic citizens to stand behind his pumping up the military and the begining of PNACs plans to place the USA as the dominant military force in the world never to be challenged again.

[BeFree]

39. Whatever

You can read the posts in this forum or you can ignore them. Whatever.

You are at least half informed, I'll grant you that. Peace.

[theorist]

22. I agree that the bombs would be entirely unnecessary

in achieving their goals, but something caused the engine of Flight 93 to be removed from the plane to be found some six miles away. What did it? I don't know, and I doubt anyone at DU knows, although every now and again someone tries the ol' :tinfoilhat: on the rest of us. I'm not trying to do that.

It's important that we maintain that their is a reasonable doubt to the official story.

[Az]

26. I do doubt the official story

Doesn't mean I am on board for the whole MIHOP argument. It is to complex. Conspiracy hates complex. It is incompatible.

[mac2]

30. Not according to structural engineers and high rise...

building contractors. Even Donald Trump thought not.

No high rise has ever fallen from impact period. The WTO was built withstand that and high winds.

It was bombed from the inside. The NY police and firemen said, so.

[Az]

32. Answer the one question then

Why? Why go to the risk when the impact is all you need?

[mobuto]

33. Nobody said it was felled by impact

The structural engineering reports have all indicated that the first tower that fell did so because the heat of the fire caused the steel to buckle. The force of the fall of the first caused the second, which had been burning longer, to fall as well.

Even Donald Trump thought not.

Not only does not Donald Trump not believe that there were bombs in the twin towers, but even if he did, his opinion would be totally worthless. He's a real estate developer, not a structural engineer.

[veracity]

54. Bottom line....

...is that we'll never know. Those people who have "reasonable suspicion" based on specific evidence or lack of evidence, are called 'conspiracy nuts' - when the real conspiracy involves those who witthold evidence, stonewall investigations, and refuse to testify under oath. That's where the outrage should be, and is not.

[ashmanonar]

110. some interesting info...

MIHOP?

anyone here think for a second that the gov't (the same gov't that's basically bought out every msm outlet, and makes "conspiracy theory" cracks when confronted with evidence, and lots more...) isn't capable of engineering a fake terrorist attack?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

111. You're link isn't working. n/t

[ashmanonar]

112. hmmm....

MIHOP?

try again. sorry about that.

me no post so good.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

113. Thank you for correcting the link. I have known about Hilton now

for a couple of years, and have heard this interview and another at Prisonplanet. I have also heard him interviewed by Meria Heller. He is exceptionally credible, and has himself been under duress. His office has been broken into twice.

The case that he filed was recently rejected and he is appealing. The reason for the dismissal is outrageous. "Sovereign Immunity". Please read.

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/january2005/180105suitdismissed.htm
Stanley Hilton's 9/11 Suit Dismissed, Appeal Pending

SueTheTerrorist.net | January 18 2005

The $7 billion federal class action lawsuit against top Bush Administration officials for, among other things, their roles in engineering and orchestrating the 911 attacks has been dismissed by Judge Illston. Attorney for the plaintiffs, Stanley Hilton is preparing an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and hopes to reverse the judge's ruling.

Mr. Hilton will be making the fifteen page ruling dismissing the suit available to the public. As soon as SueTheTerrorists.Net webmaster, Abel Ashes (Hull Simmons) receives the document it will be online for all to read and understand the judge's given reasons for dismissing the suit.

Mr. Ashes spoke with Stanley Hilton earlier today and Mr. Hilton informed him that the judge's ruling was based on the "Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity". In other words, the suit was not dismissed because of lack of evidence, but rather because the judge reasoned that U.S. Citizens do not have the right to hold a sitting President accountable for anything, even if the charges include premeditated mass murder and premeditated acts of high treason. Mr. Hilton and his plaintiffs disagree and so are filing an appeal.

If the Ninth Circuit reverses the U.S. District Court of Northern California's decision, the suit will be amended and new plaintiffs and allegations will be added.

[shadowlight]

116. I have to point out

that this man has contradicted himself. In the interview you link to Hilton says
"I represented more than 400 plaintiffs" in another interview at
http://suetheterrorists.net/page6.html he says he never said this...
As you can see I have already pointed this out to the interviewer.

[DulceDecorum]

115. HUSH

The Sisters will hear you.