A Senator says 9/11 events “Had Support from Within the US” !!!

a reply to: Informer1958

NORAD never intercepted anything for just going off course unless the FAA requested them to. The only thing they intercept without a request is if they see aircraft coming in to the ADIZ that appear to be foreign military aircraft that don't have permission.

Ever read the TFR for nuclear power plants? The restricted airspace imposed after 9/11 only went to 18,000 feet. Anything over that could fly over them all they wanted to.

As in the Saudis...or to be more precise Saudi Wahhabists. Big money was flown into Vegas, probably a frequent high roller that met Attah there. The boys had a party, maybe made up some spiked letters (Attah showed up with inflamed hands at a pharmacy, possibly from a latex allergy after wearing gloves). Of course, during a national grounding of all aircraft by the FAA, the Bin Laden family is flown out of the country. The fix was in. a reply to: Blue_Jay33

As regards nuclear plants, I noticed that during the Brussels unpleasantness, it was announced only once that a nuclear power plant was being evacuated... Then the lid came down on that story. In the States, spent fuel rods are stored on-site until we come up with a "National Re(Su)ppository". In the meantime, every domestic nuke plant is like a Home Depot for apocalyptic nuts looking for the "bad of the bad". Hope they have "A Teams" at all of these plants. Frankly, I think they ought to park an M1 Abrams in front of every one of them. a reply to: Zaphod58

It was a bit hard for NORAD to do anything on that day because if I recall correctly, the entire airspace of the U.S. was protected by a mere 16 Air Force reserve aircraft (F-16s and at least two F-15s). The rest were on "maneuvers" in Canada or elsewhere. Smacks a bit too much of "Seven Days in May". And more "exercises" have gone live since, amazingly enough. It's like in the 60's where the "lone nut" theory was sold to the American people not just once, but 3 times. a reply to: Zaphod58

a reply to: AvroVulcan

The entire alert force consisted of between 14 and 28 aircraft, depending on how many aircraft each alert base decided to put on alert that particular day. That was the total size of the alert force from sometime in the early 90s, after the Soviet threat was considered over. Only a few others were involved in exercises and training, but from a cold start it takes 90 minutes to three hours to fully arm aircraft and get them launched, depending on how long it takes to pull the weapons from the magazines and get them to the aircraft, and how many aircraft you're trying to launch at once.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
What? Controlled demolitions are quite obvious by now.

They are? There is zero evidence for the use of any controlled demolitions on 9/11.

He said obvious and it is to anyone with half a brain. There is no evidence because it was never investigated and the only ones that put forth any report on any "investigation" were not sworn in, under oath or in possession of the half a brain necessary to realize the towers were obviously blown up. The only ones that argue that are the ones that demand proof and back a theory that is deamed "official" absent of truth, proof or common sense.

Bob Graham is the only mainstream politician who has tried to make known the Saudi US complicity in 911


For years he’s been trying to tell the mainstream about Saudi complicity and warn against the evils of Wahhabism.

a reply to: hellobruce

They are? There is zero evidence for the use of any controlled demolitions on 9/11.

That is because the government covered it up. The fact is, there was "no investigation done" to find out if demolition was used to bring down the WTC.

NIST was the government mouth piece to tell how the WTC just fell down. However it was proven a long time ago that NIST just lied in their report, and their report was proven to be all pseudo science. What a joke!

So since NIST lied in their pseudo report, it opens the door to other speculation doesn't it?

This will be brushed under the rug...and forgotten about and probably will get little mainstream attention.

60 minutes was on tonight. right?


Where’s this bombshell in the MSM news?

I don’t see any news headlines in any major msm outlet about this

I WONDER WHY

Everybody’s got the same crap stories about this silly election and other nonsense.

I would just raise this thought.

If it should be discovered conclusively that the Saudi government or elements therein had financial or other ties to those who carried out the attacks (that much is of course already suspected, but...) or even simply that they tacitly allowed the plot or associates of those who carried out the plot to continue to exist despite foreknowledge of the strong possibility of such a plot, because - let's say - the continued existence of such individuals had potential long term uses and benefits to the stability of their domestic rule... and that individuals within the United States government knew this but looked the other way... even if they hypothetically didn't specifically know the attack was incoming or the form it would take...

... that all by itself, without any further conspiracy required, should be a huge, damning, enormous deal that would lead the American public to demand that heads roll. Especially if that same sort of tacit approval by the Saudis allows current ostensible adversaries such as ISIS and others to continue to flourish, directly or indirectly. Even if it's not a world shattering conspiracy to establish WW3 or the NWO or something, and is just a product of domestic Saudi politics and an unintentional consequence of our perceived-by-TPTB-as-necessary alliance with the Saudis (lesser of several evils in their minds,) then that should STILL be an enormously acrimonious scandal everyone feels compelled to scream from the rooftops, if it were true... right?

However, because that's not the same as the buildings being demolished, remote controlled planes, or an outright mustache twirling conspiracy carried out directly by members of the government or a shadowy cabal plotting to take over the world... because it doesn't provide the same movie-like epic clash between good and evil... that's not nearly sensational or interesting enough to promote serious inquiry or demands for transparency seemingly. Is it?

So in a sense... who benefits - potentially, hypothetically - from more fanciful 9-11 conspiracy theories? Not saying this is the case but if it were... wouldn't such a hyperbolic and titillating conspiracy story be the perfect distraction from a far more mundane, yet no less deadly ultimately, series of events? Just saying.

Peace.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: Blue_Jay33


. . . The fact is there was a transfer of power giving to Rumsfeld before 911 happened, The changes that were made was NORAD couldn't intersect any aircraft that had flown off it's given course without permission from Rumsfeld.

The fact is, on 911 Donald Rumsfeld did not react until all four alleged planes had crashed. My understanding is NORAD was trying their best to reach Rumsfeld that morning while the hijackings were still going on, but with no luck, they couldn't reach Rumsfeld that morning.

So yes, our government was complicit in the attacks by not following protocol such as Rumsfeld making himself unavailable to NORAD by not answering his phone calls.

I believe a few very powerful men in Washington, the Pentagon and the Saudis plotted, planned 911 and carried it out for

The Project for the New American Century
September 2000

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Without 911 happening, the government could not get the American people support for their illegal wars.

I think your interpretation is absolutely correct. The additional information you provide about Rumsfeld is news to me, however. These people must be exposed and tried for their crimes. What will it take to make that happen? We're indebted to Bob Graham for bringing this forward again.

a reply to: Constance

Actually, he's wrong. As I said in a post above, NORAD didn't intercept any aircraft that flew off course. They didn't have enough aircraft on alert to do it. They only had aircraft ready to intercept anything on the coasts, and in the South. They were more concerned with incoming aircraft, than they were with aircraft flying from within the US. They only intercepted aircraft if the FAA requested it. And if they did, unless it was near one of the very small number of bases with armed aircraft, the aircraft intercepting them couldn't do anything as they'd be unarmed.

We forget that the truther theory is based on the lack of evidence that the buildings fell down through the attacks.


The fact is, even without any skullduggery over the way the buildings fell we still can have a conspiracy that could have perfectly been done by the usual suspects without any thought one way or the other over the way the buildings fall.

Usual suspects:

US/CIA/ARMY/INTEL/ ISI/PAKISTAN/MOSSAD/ISREALI/SAUDI/WAHHABIS


It appears that the way these conspirators took the buildings down may have been a perfect distraction to isolate “crazy truthers” from “legitimate" enquiries.


Think about it. Even if the buildings went down legit THEY STILL COULD HAVE DONE IT and scapegoating the very stupid jihadis to think they did it.

a reply to: firerescue

You know I watch that video of Bush in that elementary class on 9/11 after the guy comes in and whispers in his ear, I wonder if he is thinking, he just got burned and screwed over by all these different groups. We don't even know how much Bush was beholding to TPTB for his election steal. Just how big of a puppet Bush really was, we may never know.

originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

We've seen way more riskier released documents.

Yes...and those that released it are now facing treason charges or are on the run.

Truth would be cool...but people like to stay alive much more then tell the truth.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Actually, he's wrong. As I said in a post above, NORAD didn't intercept any aircraft that flew off course. They didn't have enough aircraft on alert to do it. They only had aircraft ready to intercept anything on the coasts, and in the South. They were more concerned with incoming aircraft, than they were with aircraft flying from within the US. They only intercepted aircraft if the FAA requested it. And if they did, unless it was near one of the very small number of bases with armed aircraft, the aircraft intercepting them couldn't do anything as they'd be unarmed.

Actually I am right, and you are wrong.

NORAD Stand-Down

The Prevention of Interceptions of the Commandeered Planes

It is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost. Between September 2000 and June 2001, interceptors were scrambled 67 times. In the year 2000 jets were scrambled 129 times.

There are several elements involved in domestic air defense. The air traffic control system continuously monitors air traffic and notifies NORAD of any deviations of any aircraft from their flight-paths or loss of radio contact. NORAD monitors air and space traffic continuously and is prepared to react immediately to threats and emergencies. It has the authority to order units from the Air National Guard, the Air Force, or other armed services to scramble fighters in pursuit of jetliners in trouble.

Routine interception procedures were not followed on September 11th, 2001.

Layered Failures

The air defense network had, on September 11th, predictable and effective procedures for dealing with just such an attack. Yet it failed to respond in a timely manner until after the attack was over, more than an hour and a half after it had started. The official timeline describes a series of events and mode of response in which the delays are spread out into a number of areas. There are failures upon failures, in what might be described as a strategy of layered failures, or failure in depth. The failures can be divided into four types.

Failures to report: Based on the official timeline, the FAA response times for reporting the deviating aircraft were many times longer than the prescribed times.

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

Failures to intercept: Once airborne, interceptors failed to reach their targets because they flew at small fractions of their top speeds and/or in the wrong directions.

Failures to redeploy: Fighters that were airborne and within interception range of the deviating aircraft were not redeployed to pursue them.

Had not there been multiple failures of each type, one or more parts of the attack could have been thwarted. NORAD had time to protect the World Trade Center even given the unbelievably late time, 8:40, when it claims to have first been notified. It had time to protect the South Tower and Washington even given its bizarre choice of bases from which to scramble planes. And it still had ample opportunity to protect both New York City and Washington even if it insisted that all interceptors fly subsonic, simply by redeploying airborne fighters.

Failures to Report

911research.wtc7.net...

There's more to read in the above source.

The hard core fact is, all our military and FAA sat on their thumbs and sip coffee and watched all of these alleged hijacked planes on their screens carry out their missions as planed.

There is no excuse for ALL the departments to fail. Not one! Everyone of these people who were in charged from the FAA and NORAD should all been prosecuted.

All we got from the government was BS and a masses cover up. Such as the FAA destroying ALL their tapes on the morning of 911.

Which I might add was criminal to begin with. I do not buy into the government stories and all their lies. All We The People got were lying excuses that there were failures in ALL the departments, how %^# convenient for them.

For the first time in America history we have four alleged commercial airlines all hijacked around the same time and were flying off their given flight course FOR A WHOLE HOUR and for the very first time in US history not one single plane was tasked to intercept any of these planes.

EXCUSES is all we got, and we all know EXCUSES are not truths.

a reply to: AvroVulcan

OH, THE US had a terrorist penetration in the 70s they shut up .
These were environmentalists that got further in than authorities thought .

a reply to: Zaphod58

They were about about to vector a Kamikaze mission weren't they?
Female F16 pilot?

a reply to: Zaphod58

The Case Against Ralph Eberhart, NORAD’s 9/11 Commander

In a 2004 U.S. Senate hearing, Senator Mark Dayton remarked that “this country and its citizens were completely undefended” for “109 minutes” on 9/11.[1] Dayton went on to clarify that officials within the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) had covered up the facts about the lack of air defenses by lying to the 9/11 Commission, to Congress and to the American people. And they were not held accountable.

One man was most responsible for both the air defense failures and the lying that covered it up. U.S. Air Force General Ralph Edward Eberhart had taken over command of NORAD from General Richard Myers in February 2000.

The position included leadership of all air defense operations in North America and, also, the U.S. Space Command. Therefore, on 9/11, Eberhart was the man most responsible for failure to intercept the four hijacked aircraft over a period of nearly two hours.

The military’s explanations began with a short description of the response to the hijackings. Two days after the attacks, General Richard Myers gave this account to the Senate Armed Services Committee, in an official hearing for his confirmation as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS). He said that no fighter jets were scrambled to intercept any of the hijacked 9/11 flights until after the Pentagon was hit.[5]

Although Myers was not in command of NORAD on 9/11, he should have known two days later if normal procedures had been followed. As Acting CJCS on 9/11, and as Vice Chairman otherwise, his role was to ensure the president and secretary of defense were informed of critical military matters.

A second story was given a week after the attacks, when NORAD provided a partial timeline of the notifications it had received from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the responses that followed. General Eberhart reiterated this timeline in testimony to the U.S. Senate a few weeks later and for over two years it stood as the official account.[6] This timeline said that NORAD had received notification about three of the hijacked planes with plenty of time left to ensure interception and had scrambled jets from multiple bases as the attacks proceeded.

911blogger.com...

There's plenty more to read in the above source.

The lies, the excuses, are not the facts, if anything they allowed these planes to carry out their mission as intended.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Annonymous is on the run? Do they know this?