9/11 conspiracy- Don't know what to think.

I should have said 100% success rate, when they want success... I am all for debate, but at some point you have to concede to the point that all this "conspiracy" stuff could in fact be true... I'm not saying it IS, but that it could be... Keep your mind open to all possiblities; otherwise your just a mindless zombie... Hence the word "sheeple" and "lemmings"...

Anyway, do your research and think what you want... I've only been researching this stuff for a couple of months... Before that, I just believed what I saw on TV and didn't think much of it... That's pretty mind blowing if you think about it... Millions of people watching these events unfold on "TV" and taking every word the "reporters" say to be true, without even questioning it...

There is something not right in this world of ours... Everyone knows it, and yet we can't stop it... Something is fishy and it stinks... Follow the stink trail and you will find your skunk... And it aint some fucking arab living in a cave...

NORAD, responsible for intercepting errant aircraft over the U.S., has a standard operating procedure for scrambling planes for interception which takes less than 15 minutes

They did this successfully (on time) 129 times in 2000 and and 67 times between September 2000 and June 2001.

Yet, on September 11th, they failed to do their job 4 times in a single day:

* NORAD, once notified of the off-course aircraft, failed to scramble jets from the nearest bases

* Once airborne, interceptors failed to reach their targets because they flew at small fractions of their top speeds

* Fighters that were airborne and within interception range of the deviating aircraft were not redeployed to pursue them

You might think that the military couldn't find the hijacked planes because the hijackers turned off the transponders. However, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off (also, listen to this interview).

As a former senior air force colonel said:

"If our government had merely [done] nothing, and I say that as an old interceptor pilot—I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were, and I know what they’ve changed them to—if our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason!"

Norad's stand down on 9/11 was so blatant that Norad has been forced to give 3 entirely different versions of what happened that day, as each previous version has been exposed as false. When someone repeatedly changes his testimony after being caught in lies, how believable is he? The falsity of Norad's explanations were so severe that even the 9/11 Commission considered recommending criminal charges for the making of false statements.

In addition, Dick Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon -- one of the most heavily-defended buildings in the world -- and yet ordered that the airplane not be intercepted (confirmed here). Given that Cheney was in charge of all of the war games and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks on 9/11 -- apparently including Norad (see this Department of State announcement, this CNN article, and this essay) -- Cheney's orders regarding flight 77 seem to be part and parcel of the Norad stand down.

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2008/03/norad-stand-down-in-2-minutes.html

 

For all its successes, the U.S. anti-terror war was conceived in sin, the sin of U.S. government negligence. As much post-9/11 journalism has pointed out, there was the foreign-policy error of abandoning post-Soviet Afghanistan after having infused it with weapons, the CIA's failure to act more forcefully on tips and intercepts regarding al-Qaida operatives overseas, and the FBI's and INS's similar failings regarding suspicious characters already in the United States. And the FAA's (and the airlines', the airports', and security firms') breakdown on airport security. However, there has been a good deal less focus on another federal fubar, that perpetrated by the Air Force's North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).

The NORAD home page declares its mission to include "the detection, validation, and warning of attack against North America whether by aircraft, missiles, or space vehicles." It may seem ungallant to say the obvious, but since no one else has, I will: At the aircraft part of this mission, NORAD sucks.

How does NORAD explain its failure to intercept any of the hijacked airliners on 9/11? Its commander, Gen. Ed Eberhart, pointed out in congressional testimony that the FAA has the primary responsibility for hijackings in U.S. airspace, that NORAD can only help respond once the FAA notifies it, and that on 9/11 the FAA delayed precious minutes before doing so. Eberhart has also said that while before 9/11, NORAD had practiced responding to a hijacked plane trying to slam into a target in the United States, the exercises assumed that the flight had originated overseas, giving intercepting jet fighters more time. More important, he also said that even if his aircraft had practiced the domestic scenario, it wouldn't have mattered. Why? "I really think that, for sure in the first two instances, and probably in the third, the time and distance would not have allowed us to get an airplane to the right place at the right time."

It's certainly true that the FAA didn't give the Air Force the speediest heads up: Newsday reported that the FAA delayed 29 minutes (!) before telling the military about the third (!) suspicious plane, the one that ultimately hit the Pentagon. And before 9/11, a domestic-hijacked-airliner-suicide attack was admittedly not the most probable of worries. But it's simply wrong to say that therefore, there probably wasn't anything NORAD could have done to change history.

According to NORAD's official 9/11 time line, the FAA notified NORAD at 8:40 a.m. Eastern time that there was something peculiar going on with American Flight 11. But NORAD didn't issue an order for fighters to scramble until 8:46 a.m., the time when American Flight 11 hit the first WTC tower. Six minutes later, at 8:52 a.m., two F-15 fighters responded to the order by launching from a base 153 miles from New York City. They still were not on the scene at 9:02 a.m. when the second airliner, United Flight 175, hit the second WTC tower. They wouldn't get there for another eight minutes, at 9:10 a.m. A NORAD senior officer, Major Gen. Larry Arnold, told NBC that when the fighters took off, they were flying straight to New York City. He also said that they were going "about 1.5 Mach, which is, you know, somewhere—11- or 1,200 miles an hour." But note that the F-15 fighters took 18 minutes to cover those 153 miles, which comes out to more like 510 mph. Yet, according to the Air Force, the F-15 has a top speed of 1,875 mph. So, you have to wonder, why were they flying at less than a third of what they're capable of?

According to NORAD, the FAA notified it at 9:24 a.m. that there was something suspicious with American Flight 77. Two F-16 fighters were immediately ordered launched, and they got airborne at 9:30 a.m. The New York Times reports that at first, they were headed to New York at "top speed" reaching "600 mph within two minutes," before vectoring toward Washington instead. These planes didn't arrive in the vicinity of the Pentagon until 9:49 a.m., 12 minutes after American Flight 77 hit it. (They then stayed in the skies above Washington to protect against the fourth errant airliner, United Flight 93, with orders to shoot it down if necessary, a command mooted by an apparent passenger insurrection that caused that plane to crash in a Pennsylvania field.) The F-16s covered the 130 miles of their journey in 19 minutes, which would be an average speed of about 410 mph. Now, that's artificially low because these fighters spent several minutes flying toward New York, but even allowing for this, you don't come up with anything like what the Air Force (which may know better than the New York Times) says is the plane's top speed of 1,500 mph. So, again, why didn't NORAD feel the need for speed? It wasn't because of FAA regulations prohibiting supersonic flight over land in U.S. civil airspace. A NORAD spokesman told me that fighters violate that speed restriction "when circumstances warrant."

That is, in both cases where NORAD launched fighters, a closer look suggests that it's just false that there was nothing they could have done. For one thing, they could have flown faster.

But the flawed time/distance argument isn't NORAD's only excuse. Gen. Arnold told NBC that even if U.S. jets had intercepted the airliners, "No one would have known the intent of the hijackers. And without that, I don't think anyone would have been able to order them to shoot down that—that aircraft."

That may be true, but it's misleading. Arnold leaves out other tactics the jet fighters could've tried. According to a Boston Globe article, when intercepting aircraft, NORAD practices a graduated response. The approaching fighter doesn't immediately shoot down the bogey: It can first rock its wingtips to attract attention, or make a pass in front of the plane, or fire tracer rounds in its path. So even though on 9/11, the NORAD pilots working the first three airliners didn't have shootdown authority (they got it only after the Pentagon was hit), they would or should have been ready to try these other techniques, which might well have spooked or forced the hijackers into turning, which might have given the fighters a chance to force them out to sea. And even if the hijackers decided instead to fly right into a fighter in their way, wouldn't an airburst have killed fewer people than two collapsed flaming skyscrapers did?

 

First of all, if you are going to copy and paste something, provide a link.

How many of these were over the continental United States? Zero. Not a single one. And you are also mistaking "scrambles" for "intercepts".

All of this is detailed here.

Not true.

Pentagon Crash Highlights a Radar Gap.

 

The NORAD tapes are available and contradict what you copy and pasted in several ways. Moreover, it shows the confusion and scrambling to chase the wrong planes..

Heres a page from the book Debunking 9/11 myths I've somewhat painstakingly transcribed which contradicts what you've just posted.

So that's the answer to that. Conspiracy theorists were confused over airforce nomenclature.

A more detailed account of that chapter is available on google books for you on page 24 here.

http://books.google.com/books?id=3C...=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPA24,M1

And for the record 'A fucking Arab in a cave' sounds racist as shit. I'm not calling you a racist, but please refrain from that and let's keep it civil.

 

Dude, It's cool... Believe what you want to believe...

I actually think this conspiracy goes way beyond just 9/11... There is something big going on... I suggest you "open your mind"... Because this "reality" we live in is just a "curtain" to blind us all...

Check out the videos I posted in the Syncromysticism thread:

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=308975

 

It's only racist if you perceive it to be racist;therefore, you, in fact, are a racist

yea, I just made that up... LOL... :hat:

 

Its not "believe what you want to believe", its what can you back up, what can you prove, which in your case is nothing. Like most conspiracy theorists, you come here to copy and paste your theories only to abandon them at the drop of a hat, and then just replace them with more conspiracy theories.

I wish you had posted this at the beginning so I would have known not to bother.

 

Well again, I think when I started here two pages ago, I said posting in this thread would be useless, because I didn't think I'd be changing anyone in a conspiracy forum's mind. I don't think anything could convince most of the people here that it wasn't an attack by the government.

However, I do understand that the government is sinister. I do.I'm aware of a lot of sinister activities of the government which do happen which many of the conspiracy theorists probably aren't aware of.

I don't trust the government. It's absurd to do so. But neither do I automatically assume that they are involved in every bad thing that happens in the world.

It's on a malevolent event by malevolent event basis.

I don't think the government was responsible for 9/11. I have seen a lot of evidence furnished by the 'truthers' and it all seems dubious to me.

 

You believe all that?

That's kinda awesome RabbitHole.

I'm declaring stalemate on this debate. I don't think I'm convincing you. :biggrin:

 

Do you mind if I post that link elsewhere RabbitHole?

I find it cool.

 

Go for it... That's why I posted them... Because they are very interesting to me and I thought others might find it interesting also... LOL...

Every single one will blow you away... Like WHAT THE FUCK?!? :hat:

The second post of videos are way better... The author "soundlessdawn" is very talented to say the least...

Anyway, I'm going swimming, going to drink a few brews and have a good day...

You guys should do the same... Have a good day that is...

 

YAWN! Anyone else drift off after 4 words in? I know it did.

 

Well said Hiptastic.

I actually enjoy the fact these freaks exist in such a paranoid state of mind. Not enough sex and too much drugs I say.

Go out and socialize morons, there is more to life than your 'caged, desperate world'

 

Not quite the 4 word, but I did stop early on.
It is easy to see things better, with hindsight.
Which is what I think that article benefits from.

 

I work in huge US company with educated people. I tell you what... All intelligence (I'm not talking about CIA devils) knows already that everything in TV are lies, government of United States are criminals that more less near history will show in proper light.

Well. Who done attacks on WTC? Bush's brother! - the same family that gave NAZIs fighting with my grampas money for war. Germany had no money, they were in deep crisis. Prescot Bush send money to support the war.

Not true? Why there is silence about bombs in WTC?
No bombs? Is well known that metal buildings DO NOT FALL without explosives.

Guys, we NEED TO UNITE!! WE NEED TO KNOW THE TRUE!! BE AWARE OF IT!!

Please take example from Poland, please. Wałęsa - our Nobel price old president is currently attacked by current government rulled by people supporting republicans in US.

ALL WORLD IS IN GREAT DANGER! We need to move back to calm simple live. Do not buy gasoline! Natural sources. And...


AWARNESS!!!! Our hippie brothers and sisters.eace:

We need to start educate people and stop empty discussions. Truth speaks by itself...

Does who not done already so - OPEN YOUR EYES! READ ABOUT A FACTS AS GOOD AS YOU CAN. If you are professor of physics for example - read documentation on internet - there is already proof - calculations and simulations.

 

Any more cliches you wish to throw around?

 

Well, at least it's good to know that you have the ability to digest a lot of information...

 

http://www.realitysandwich.com/comprehensive_911_resource_and_research_list
http://physics911.net/stevenjones
Remind yourself that 2 years ago there was no global warming in USA. Just in 2006 (20 after Europa) USA officially agreed with global warming. This is the strength of lies and propaganda in USA.
99% of my colleges physicians see the facts clearly. What is impossible is taken as impossible. Otherwise you're poor physician.

Read article. This is no more conspiracy theory - this is naked fact!

 

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-82026.html
http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/physics_1.html

here boys and girls. Very simple, easy to understand calculations made with quality and clarity that are good example for children in secondary school if you are a teacher:
http://ebtx.com/wtc/wtcfall.htm

Damn!! We all had a physic in secondary school!! So, please make simple recognition and study that example! Please. I love that example. It is so easy to understand :cheers2:

"My conclusion is that the fall of the towers is inconsistent with the pancake model. The floors beneath the point of initial collapse must have given way prior to the arrival of the top floors, i.e. by explosive demolition. Understand that I haven't attempted to include resistance of the steel in the towers to the collapse which would have further retarded the progress of the fall. With that in place a fall of 20 or more seconds is not unreasonable. 11 seconds is definitely unreasonable."

See the calculations. If you think that somewhere you found mistake, we may discuss:
http://ebtx.com/wtc/wtcfall.htm