Comments | alephomega: Want the proof that 9/11 was an inside job?

alephomega

Want the proof that 9/11 was an inside job?

Jun 08, 2006 02:50

Do you think it's possible our government could have aided, or even carried out the attacks of September 11th? Do you think that any suggestion of such a thing is ridiculous "conspiracy theory?" If so, I welcome you to read on, and even more, feel free to question me or raise any doubts you might have, or evidence you've found which contradicts ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

continued a_priori June 8 2006, 18:42:03 UTC

Now, to return to your assumption. It is wrong. Here is the meat of your argument:
If they would have occured on any other day, there would be no confusion as to whether the hijackings were real or not, and there would have been plenty of fighter jets ready to scramble to defend our skies.

You assume that the attacks only succeeded because there was "confusion as to whether [they] were real or not" and because there were not "plenty of fighter jets ready to scramble". Both of these are wrong.
Start with the second. How many fighter planes does it take to shoot down a defenseless lumbering commercial jet? Exactly 1. Unless your claim is that every last fighter jet stationed on the eastern seaboard was away in Alaska, then your argument fails. And if that is your claim, you are lying, so your argument also fails.
As to the alleged confusion. Look at the timeline here. Flight 11, the first plane taken over, was highjacked at 8:13am. By 8:24, Boston flight controllers had heard terrorists speaking over the radio. There is no suggestion ( ... )

Re: continued alephomega June 8 2006, 19:40:37 UTC

"unless your claim is that every last fighter jet stationed on the eastern seaboard was away in Alaska, then your argument fails. And if that is your claim, you are lying, so your argument also fails ( ... )

Re: continued a_priori June 8 2006, 20:17:51 UTC

They just had to have not enough planes in the right locations (i.e. locations where they could have intercepted the hijacked planes in a more timely manner) for my argument to be correct.

Of course, "the right locations" are entirely dependent upon the highjacked planes' targets, which no one knew. Even if every last Air Force fight had been waiting in its assigned position, they couldn't possibly have done anything until after being given authorization to shoot down the planes, which wasn't possible in the first 50 minutes.

Why would they have to "divert?" at all, both planes were going to the same place

Draw a triangle. Any two points share a line (a heading). Yet, coming from the third point, one must draw different lines to each of the other two points.

"This, of course, has nothing to do with training exercises."
Oh, OF COURSE. How could I have been so stupid. ...And you are basing this expert opinion on what, now?I'm basing it upon inordinately simple logic. Three planes had been confirmed highjacked. Two had already hit ( ... )

Re: continued alephomega June 8 2006, 20:31:19 UTC

"At 9:30, fighters from Langley were scrambled, but given confusing orders that resulted in them flying out over the Atlantic rather than to Washington, and in any event they had not been given shoot-down orders."

Yes, WHY? And again, WHY? When it is clear that they should have been given shoot down orders by that point. These questions remain completely unanswered - not even addressed.

"At 9:37, Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. So, only 13 minutes passed between the time anyone realized a plane was headed for Washington and the time of impact. And in that time, still, no one had given shoot-down orders."

We're talking about possibly the most controlled airspace in the entire country. WHY was it not protected that morning when two attacks on high profile targets had already occured, and would have been obvious to anyone so much as watching the news, well before hand? I guess they just weren't being "pro-active" enough...

Re: continued a_priori June 9 2006, 14:06:42 UTC

The only person with the undisputed authority to give a shoot-down order was George Bush. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and a couple military people have since claimed that they could have given such orders, but 10 minutes after the first attack no one was going to go out on a limb and shoot down a commercial jet without first consulting the president ( ... )

Re: continued alephomega June 10 2006, 08:18:12 UTC

"But even if you're right, note that you've completely given up your original assumption that the ongoing wargames interfered with air defense, and now assert a deliberate and sinister order to mislead defensive measures ( ... )

Re: continued alephomega June 8 2006, 19:40:48 UTC

"were not even notified that terrorist activities were underway until after the second plane had hit"

Where are you getting this information? Because to my knowledge, it is wrong. In fact, Bush has even claimed that he saw the first plane hit the tower (which is impossible as no footage of that was recovered until later). Now granted, he may have miss-spoke in saying he saw the first plane hit, but clearly he admitted that he saw one of the planes hit (which still doesn't make much sense). The time period he gives for this is before his meeting with the school children. So he admitted that he heard about the first plane hitting, before his little PR stunt (he claimed at that time, he thought it must have been an accident). The famous footage of the person coming up and whispering in his ear, is of when he was told that the second plane hit. All this is beside the point, as there should have been no lack of suspicion, considering THE GOVERNMENT KNEW OF THE POSSIBILTY OF USING PLANES AS WEAPONS AND IN FACT PLANNED FOR IT. Not to ( ... )

Re: continued a_priori June 8 2006, 20:47:56 UTC

Apparently Bush was told about the first plane hitting the Trade Center before going in for his photo op. However, at that time he was told only that it was an accident involving a two-engine plane. He was not told of the second crash (and therefore the inference that this was a planned attack) until 9:06. Stupidly, he kept on with his photo op for more than 10 minutes. He didn't even begin discussing a shoot-down order until 10am or so, after being rushed to Air force One (and long after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon). Without question, Bush and others reacted incompetently. But that's not exactly surprising, and it doesn't prove a conspiracy.

It is quite obvious that SOMEONE knew that attacks were imminent and was warning GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.That's not obvious at all. Some officials had speculated about the possibility that Al Qaeda would do something involving aircraft. Apparently George Tenet's first thought on hearing of the second Trade Center hit was to wonder if the recent reports of terrorists seeking flight training might be ( ... )

Re: continued alephomega June 10 2006, 07:50:05 UTC

People like you are kept blind by your belief that our government is incompetent... when in fact that is simply a false image they wish to project upon us. In some sense you're right, our government is incompetant - but the real powers behind the scenes are not. The circus you see on CNN is just a big shell game, to keep us all misdirected and distracted from the truth. Until people realize this, they are doomed to fall for the false left-right paradigm which very effectively locks blinders around their vision.

Back to all threads