It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Al-Qaeda' Controlled By Intelligence Agencies

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   
so the premise of this thread is that hard core islamic martyrs take their orders from the great satan ?

does anyone here believe there are people out there with the brains, resources, and hatred in their hearts to strike out at western nations ?

or does it always have to be an inside job ?

are they too stupid to attack us ?
too poor ?
too nice ?

no,no and no for me.


I think there are groups of people out there with the brains, resources, and hatred to want to attack us.




posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
Not saying the information is wrong, but it could be less reputable than say any other site. I checked the site out, reading the books will take me a bit longer. However the inclination of mine to go with the government info, is more so than wiki.



government info? u mean this?----->www.house.gov...

because im sure thats more of an opinion than providing info. im sure he is a great congressman. but he is still a congressman. he may be related to the govt but dat dont mean he is exactly right. Al Gore was VP and says he invented the internet but i know u dont believe that right? right?



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 09:22 PM
link   
I would thoroughly enjoy seeing Seekerof, or anyone else try to detract this article as it does bring out some praticularities that make one think, very very hardly about western intervention in situations as such. What was the FBI doing in Indonesia? Such a simple question, such a simple answer.

Luxifero



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
AL gore did not say he invented the internet, though he actually did have a part in making it. but if you can find a place that quotes him saying such a thing, or an audio clip which would be even better would be great.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 09:45 PM
link   
But which agencies???!!!!!
"who benefits"



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Sure sure, I get your point completely. But unless someone on wiki is privy to sources a congressman isn't...

Alright, just did a search. I know this little tiff is slightly off topic, but felt relevent.

Has the CIA ever provided funding, training, or other support to Usama Bin Laden?


Figured it might help to check with the people them selves, notice the question "Does the CIA ever lie", isn't in there however. lol

In my opinion they are, no help from them since they do admit to financing the Mujahideen. Since you brought wiki into this, here is info on Controversies & Support for foreign dictators, for you. I insist that much be read if nothing else is. Particularly the sentence after this one;

Often cited as one of the American intelligence community's biggest blunders is the CIA involvement in equipping and training Mujahedeen fighters in Afghanistan in response to the Soviet invasion of the country.


Binny boy being one of those Muja leaders, he was financed and trained by CIA. Ok, enough on this from me I will contribute inthis thread jacking no more. But I have to leave this last note;


No one expected the mujahedeen to beat the Russians in Afghanistan. It came as a surprise to everyone. What do you see as the future of American involvement in the Middle East, in taking on groups like this?

... Allah has granted the Muslim people and the Afghani mujahedeen, and those with them, the opportunity to fight the Russians and the Soviet Union. ... They were defeated by Allah and were wiped out. There is a lesson here. The Soviet Union entered Afghanistan late in December of '79. The flag of the Soviet Union was folded once and for all on the 25th of December just 10 years later. It was thrown in the waste basket. Gone was the Soviet union forever. We are certain that we shall - with the grace of Allah - prevail over the Americans and over the Jews, as the Messenger of Allah promised us in an authentic prophetic tradition when He said the Hour of Resurrection shall not come before Muslims fight Jews and before Jews hide behind trees and behind rocks.

We are certain - with the grace of Allah - that we shall prevail over the Jews and over those fighting with them. Today however, our battle against the Americans is far greater than our battle was against the Russians. Americans have committed unprecedented stupidity. They have attacked Islam and its most significant sacrosanct symbols ... . We anticipate a black future for America. Instead of remaining United States, it shall end up separated states and shall have to carry the bodies of its sons back to America.

Interview: Osama bin Laden, May 1998

Back to the topic, is al Qaeda controlled by intelligence agencies. A very open arguement, one that will have as many opinions as there are interpretations.

[edit on 18-10-2005 by ADVISOR]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Luxifero
I would thoroughly enjoy seeing Seekerof, or anyone else try to detract this article....


You apparently did not read this entire topic?
I posted on page one. Hello?!






seekerof



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   
You countered with your subjective opinion and absolutely no emperical facts; it's the same avenue you critize others of traversing. A bit hypocritical, don't you think?

What I would like you to answer is why the FBI and other non-Indonesian authorities swiftly, and detrimentaly to Indonesian authorities, took over all investigative responsibilites at Bali; and, why were the explosives found perfunctory to those made by the American Military?

You seem to be deplete of common sense, or have no purpose on this site to deny ignorance, you're just here to perpetuate it and hide the skeletons back in the closet.

Luxifero.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
apparently did not read this entire topic?


No kidding right, every thing I posted was supported by the links provided, yet replies came in oblivious to the fact.

I feel your irritation brother, even if we might argue opposite sides.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Advisor, I have seen those links to ATS related topics before.
Thanks for linking them and taking the time in doing so.


Because the CIA once supported/controlled the Mujahedeen, during the Cold War, in Afghanistan, does not imply or infer that the CIA is still supporting/controlling them or Al-Qaeda, does it, despite those links and what they indicate?

Given the stretch of imagination that would conclude "yes," bear in mind that that would be like me implying that because Saddam once used WMDs on his own people and against Iran, that Saddam still had WMDs when the Coalition invaded and removed him from power, correct?

I will openly assert, as I have before, numerous times in the past, that there is no concrete, empirical evidences thus far presented, including this prisonplanet article presented by Twitchy, that proves beyond doubt that Al-Qaeda is still being supported or controlled by the CIA or any other international intelligence service, including Pakistan. There have been nothing but conjecture and subjective based assertions presented thus far having little evidences or proofs, and definately nothing remotely conclusive.

As you have mentioned, this topic is an open topic, and open in more ways than one.
Speculation, assertions, and half-facts only lead to more speculation, assertions, and half-facts. As can be noticed, I am quite skeptical of all the so-called evidences and proofs given thus far or to date. Again, nothing has been provided conclusively shown to support the notion of "Al-Qaeda controlled by Intelligence Agencies."






seekerof

[edit on 18-10-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   
I know he posted, i'm not that ignorant; however, I was hoping for a subtaniated detraction, not: " The validity of this article is obviously dubious due to the biased source, um, k?"

Luxifero



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
No kidding right, every thing I posted was supported by the links provided, yet replies came in oblivious to the fact.

I feel your irritation brother, even if we might argue opposite sides.


If you noticed, Advisor, the quote you have answered to was directed to Luxifero.
You were answering/responding on behalf of Luxifero?





seekerof

[edit on 18-10-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I think there are groups of people out there with the brains, resources, and hatred to want to attack us.


Well of course. Especially considering how we have treated the rest of the world. But in evaluating who attacked the US on 9-11 I think any good investigator would look first to who had motivation. Did bin Laden have motivation? They say his motivation was his hatred of US troops on Saudi soil. Really? Is that the best they can do? The US was directly responsible for the success the mujahadeen had evicting the Soviets from Afg. So now he hates us? If it's troops on Saudi soil that bugs him why not bomb the troops on Saudi soil?

The only reason to bomb the NYC, etc. , was to rile up the citizenry. Who benefits from that? I'll tell you who benefits, the same people who called for a new Pearl Harbor. And also the very people who want the US to hate the Arabs as much as they do - the Zionists. If bin Laden was smart enough to plan and carry out 9-11 he was smart enough to know that it would be politial and literal suicide for him and his little group. Unless the powers that be wanted him (or someone else) to succeed that is.

I read that bin Laden was visited weeks before 9-11 in hospital in Dubai where he was having dialysis at least 3 years ago and that he was then visited by his CIA handler. This is nothing new.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:33 PM
link   


Because the CIA once supported the Mujahadeen, during the Cold War, in Afghanistan does not imply or infer that the CIA is still supporting them or Al-Qaeda, does it, despite those links and what they indicate?


Those links do, in your case, adivse of us happenings between these two groups afore the current situational crisis, however, it does reimburse those members of society that believe that under virtue of humanism that the U.S is so vehement in expounding upon the rest of the world, the United States mad a mistake in starting a war quelling 'communism' as it was deliterious to them through means of dangerous persons and fundamentalists. This, of course, can be found rampant in historicity of the CIA and the United States government; they're quite fond of funding death squads, and the like.

You have no basis to state otherwise through any virtue, basis, or emperical findings; however, we on the other side of this argument are working through a priori judgements of afore CIA and the United States history of interventionism.




Given the stretch of imagination that would conclude "yes," bear in mind that that would be like me implying that because Saddam once used WMDs on his own people and against Iran, that Saddam still had WMDs when the Coalition invaded and removed him from power, correct?


Not neccessarily; Saddam's weapons programs was defunct years ago, and this was publicly known and strictly advised of before the war started; and more importantly, those weapons were provided by who exactly again, and under what premise and to what end? Once agian, we see U.S and CIA intervention for thier own ends, socio-poltical, economic, or whatever, the fact remains that those citizens of Iraq were murdered under U.S supervision -- yes, the lexicon is quite bold of me, is it not?




I will openly assert, as I have before, numerous times in the past, that there is no concrete, empirical evidences thus far presented that prove that Al-Qaeda is still being supported by the CIA or any other international intelligence service, including Pakistan. There have been nothing but conjecture and subjective based assertions presented thus far having little evidences or proofs, nothing remotely conclusive.


We have a priori judgments to base our argumentation upon, where as you have your own personal conjecture and subjective opinion embowered in haste resolve and virture of patrioism.

Luxifero



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:35 PM
link   
No just agreeing, I feel your pain man...


If only things were read from the beginning.

[edit on 18-10-2005 by ADVISOR]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   
No, things were read from the begining; resolve of this debate was made before it started.

Luxifero



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Luxifero
Not neccessarily; Saddam's weapons programs was defunct years ago, and this was publicly known and strictly advised of before the war started; and more importantly, those weapons were provided by who exactly again, and under what premise and to what end? Once agian, we see U.S and CIA intervention for thier own ends, socio-poltical, economic, or whatever, the fact remains that those citizens of Iraq were murdered under U.S supervision -- yes, the lexicon is quite bold of me, is it not?



"Not necessarily"?
"Saddam's weapons programs were defunct years ago"?

Luxifero, would that be like me asserting that the Afghanistan war is defunct, that the Cold War is currently defunct, and that the relationship between Al-Qaeda and the CIA became defunct when Osama Bin Laden issued his fatwa, declaration of war, against the US---that would include the CIA, unless of course, the CIA is also at war with the US?

Next?






seekerof

[edit on 18-10-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR



No one expected the mujahedeen to beat the Russians in Afghanistan. It came as a surprise to everyone. What do you see as the future of American involvement in the Middle East, in taking on groups like this?

... Allah has granted the Muslim people and the Afghani mujahedeen, and those with them, the opportunity to fight the Russians and the Soviet Union. ... They were defeated by Allah and were wiped out. There is a lesson here. The Soviet Union entered Afghanistan late in December of '79. The flag of the Soviet Union was folded once and for all on the 25th of December just 10 years later. It was thrown in the waste basket. Gone was the Soviet union forever. We are certain that we shall - with the grace of Allah - prevail over the Americans and over the Jews, as the Messenger of Allah promised us in an authentic prophetic tradition when He said the Hour of Resurrection shall not come before Muslims fight Jews and before Jews hide behind trees and behind rocks.

We are certain - with the grace of Allah - that we shall prevail over the Jews and over those fighting with them. Today however, our battle against the Americans is far greater than our battle was against the Russians. Americans have committed unprecedented stupidity. They have attacked Islam and its most significant sacrosanct symbols ... . We anticipate a black future for America. Instead of remaining United States, it shall end up separated states and shall have to carry the bodies of its sons back to America.

Interview: Osama bin Laden, May 1998



this interview mentions nothing about the CIA but about Allah that helped defeat the Soviet infidels in Osama's view. he makes no mention of the contribution of the CIA's help. makes u wonder.....



posted on Oct, 19 2005 @ 05:22 PM
link   
My apologies if I seem to stray slightly off-topic, but I find some peculiarities that, until thoroughly explained, continue to feel like a thorn in the heart:

Just a day before:
The timely 9/10/01 assassination of Ahmad Shah Masood: The Lion of Panjshir


Monday, 10 September, 2001, 10:50 GMT 11:50 UK
By Afghanistan correspondent Kate Clark
Ahmed Shah Masood, who has been injured in an assassination attempt, is easily the most important leader in the anti-Taleban alliance in Afghanistan.

Commander Masood was wounded in a suicide bomb attack at his headquarters in a garrison town in the northern province of Takhar.


news.bbc.co.uk...

Masood later died that day (9/10/01) due to those injuries.

General Mahmud/ISI - Mohammed Atta connection

top sources confirmed here on tuesday, that the general lost his job because of the "evidence" india produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the world trade centre. the us authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to wtc hijacker mohammed atta from pakistan by ahmad umar sheikh at the instance of gen mahumd. senior government sources have confirmed that india contributed significantly to establishing the link between the money transfer and the role played by the dismissed isi chief. while they did not provide details, they said that indian inputs, including sheikh's mobile phone number, helped the fbi in tracing and establishing the link. a direct link between the isi and the wtc attack could have enormous repercussions. the us cannot but suspect whether or not there were other senior pakistani army commanders who were in the know of things. evidence of a larger conspiracy could shake us confidence in pakistan's ability to participate in the anti-terrorism coalition.


www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com:80...

Saudi Princess Haifa Al-Faisal - 9/11 Hijackers connection

In the aftermath of that day of infamy, the U.S. government has raided and/or shut- down several Saudi charities on suspicion that they have been used to funnel funds to al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Then, over the weekend, Newsweek reported that the congressional inquiry into the September 11th attacks has concluded that a pair of Saudi "students" who had ties to two of the hijackers appear to have received tens of thousands of dollars from a bank account in the name of Princess Haifa Al-Faisal. In addition to being a daughter of the former Saudi king, Princess Haifa happens to be the wife of the long-serving Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan.


www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org...

Saudi/Bin Laden Family Authorized Post-911 Fast Getaway

The report contains many redactions that the Justice Department claims were made in the privacy interests of the Saudi subjects identified in the report. It is not clear how the Justice Department concluded that the alleged privacy privileges of non-US persons trump the public’s interest in obtaining full information about the government’s investigative response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Additional redactions are claimed for law enforcement investigative purposes even though the report claims that “no information of investigative value” was learned from interviews of Bin Laden family members and Saudi royals.

New information detailing flights of Saudis out of the U.S. from Las Vegas, and Providence, RI are in the report. FBI procedures in processing the Saudi flights are also revealed. It is apparent from the report that Bin Laden family members and Saudi royals were subject to only cursory, pro forma questioning by the FBI. Experienced investigators suggest detailed counterterrorism interviews would have taken a minimum of two hours per passenger. There is no evidence offered that any such efforts were made by the FBI.



160 Saudis were allowed to leave on 55 commercial flights from airports around the country between Sept. 11 and Sept. 15, 2001.

Correspondence between FBI personnel concerning the report indicates agents and analysts referred to it as “VANITYBOM.” E-mails show the FBI employees referred to themselves as “fellow VANITYBOM victims.” One e-mail from an unnamed FBI intelligence analyst coordinating a draft of the report notes “. . . snide remarks encouraged.”

“The FBI’s heavily redacted Saudi flight report is self-serving and raises more questions than it answers. The report shows a lackadaisical investigation.


www.judicialwatch.org...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

With laserbeam focus I watched the testimony of Richard Clarke when Tim Roehmer specifically asked "the question" regarding the Saudi/Bin Laden family fast getaway flights authorized by the top eschelon. The question was treated extremely delicately with some commission members visibly shuffling in their seats and you could almost cut the air. Clarke's answer was intentionally vague and Roehmer refused to explore as many eyes were closely watching the second-hand of the clock.

Able Danger

According to Rep. Weldon, two weeks after 9/11 he was provided with data from Able Danger that included "an extensive analysis chart of Al Qaeda, which I immediately took to the White House and personally delivered to then-Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley. Mr. Hadley was extremely interested in the chart and said that he would take it to the President."

During his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 21, Rep. Weldon said: "And I can tell you this — I talked to Mr. Hadley three months ago when I briefed him on another issue, and I said, remember that chart that I gave you? And he said, yes, I remember it." However, Mr. Hadley, who has since been promoted to national security adviser, has been mum on the issue of that meeting.

One of the peripheral issues that has become a main bone of contention in the whole matter is whether or not the chart provided to Hadley actually included a photo of Mohammed Atta. According to Lt. Col. Schaffer and other Able Danger team members, the chart (roughly four-and-a-half feet by five feet) included a photo of Atta and showed his linkage to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the blind sheik Omar Abdul-Rahman, who was convicted and sent to prison on bombing conspiracy charges.

The Pentagon's story on the chart evolved through several stages. Initially, Defense Department officials claimed that there was no evidence that a chart ever existed. Then the chart's existence was acknowledged, but it was alleged that the data on it was non-specific. Then it was asserted that the chart had not included a photo of Atta. But on September 2, Rep. Weldon announced that on the previous day he had been to a Pentagon briefing in which officials "confirmed that five credible witnesses did see the 9/11 ringleader, Mohammad Atta, in data produced by Able Danger prior to the 9/11 attacks."

That "official" line could change again, of course, if an investigation proceeds. But Lt. Col. Schaffer and other Able Danger members are being pressured to drop the matter.

Likely as a penalty for not keeping silent, Schaffer's security clearance has been revoked. In October 2003, while stationed in Afghanistan, Schaffer briefed Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, and other Commission staff members on Able Danger. According to Schaffer, Zelikow stated that this was very important information, gave Schaffer his card, and told him to get back in touch when he returned to Washington, D.C. However, Schaffer says that when he called Zelikow's office in January 2004 to set up an appointment, he was given the brush off. When he called again, he was told Dr. Zelikow had all the information he needed on Able Danger and there was no need for a meeting. Shortly thereafter he was hit out of the blue with charges that he had run up unauthorized telephone charges, to the tune of $67. According to Schaffer, the Pentagon spent "in our estimation $400,000 to investigate all these issues simply to drum up this information." That fits a pattern of retaliation against other government whistleblowers who have been faced with similar charges.

Many additional examples could be cited to amplify this pattern. It is a pattern that reflects not incompetence or "lack of coordination" but something much worse. It is a pattern of conscious, purposeful action aimed at thwarting those who are tasked with defending America in the "war on terror." It is a pattern that is being carried out by policymakers at the highest levels of our government, and it is time to ask why.


www.thenewamerican.com...

I detect something rotten here.
Able Danger ignored by 9/11 commission: Why?Kean's NED/Saudi ties?, At 9/11 Commission Executive Director/Rice Deputy Zelikow's request? Hamilton? Other?

The WTC recovered hard drives sent to CONVAR- Where's the follow-up?


Citing client privacy, Henschel declined to say which companies Convar is working for, or provide details about the data retrieved so far. But he said the raw material, up to 40 gigabytes per computer hard drive, is sent immediately by satellite or courier back to New York.

Money trail

Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert at the company, said illegal transfers of more than $100 million might have been made immediately before and during the disaster.

"There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million," Wagner said. "They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed."

The companies are paying between $20,000 and $30,000 for each computer recovered, Henschel said.

The high recovery costs are one reason why only a limited number of hard drives are being examined.



Henschel said the companies in the United States were working together with the FBI to piece together what happened on September 11 and that he was confident the destination of the dubious transactions would one day be tracked down.

"We have been quite surprised that so many of the hard drives were in good enough shape to retrieve the data," he said.

"The contamination rate is high. The fine dust that was everywhere in the area got pressed under high pressure into the drives. But we've still been able to retrieve 100 percent of the data on most of the drives we've received.

"We're helping them find out what happened to the computers on September 11 as quickly as possible. I'm sure that one day they will know what happened to the money."


bold & italics added

www.rediff.com...

Although a possible Buzz Krongard AB Brown/Deutsche Bank link to the mysterious "put options" was hinted at, hardly any media coverage followed, no Henschel interviews pursued regarding the recovered data,

Then Years Later We Get This:

Given all of this, at a minimum the CBOE and government regulators who are conducting the secret investigations have known for some time who made the options puts on a total of 38 stocks that might reasonably be anticipated to have a sharp drop in value because of an attack similar to the 9/11 episode. The silence from the investigating camps could mean several things: Either terrorists are responsible for the puts on the listed stocks or others besides terrorists had foreknowledge of the attack and used this knowledge to reap a nice financial harvest from the tragedy.


portland.indymedia.org...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also the Bank of Nova Scotia's 'unguarded' $160 Billion in gold left unattended in a tunnel below WTC?
www.sierratimes.com...

and the mysterious Norad 9/11 stand-down even though just 2 years earlier an F-16 was able to intercept Payne Stewart's doomed Lear 35 WITHIN JUST 20 minutes after ground controllers lost contact.


It is a matter of routine procedure for fighter-jets to "intercept" commercial airliners in order to regain contact with the pilot.

If that weren't protection enough, on September 11th, NEADS (or the North East Air Defense System dept of NORAD) was several days into a semiannual exercise known as "Vigilant Guardian". This meant that our North East Air Defense system was fully staffed. In short, key officers were manning the operation battle center, "fighter jets were cocked, loaded, and carrying extra gas on board."



American Airline Flight 11 departed from Boston Logan Airport at 7:45 a.m. The last routine communication between ground control and the plane occurred at 8:13 a.m. Between 8:13 and 8:20 a.m. Flight 11 became unresponsive to ground control. Additionally, radar indicated that the plane had deviated from its assigned path of flight. Soon thereafter, transponder contact was lost - (although planes can still be seen on radar - even without their transponders).

Two Flight 11 airline attendants had separately called American Airlines reporting a hijacking, the presence of weapons, and the infliction of injuries on passengers and crew. At this point, it would seem abundantly clear that Flight 11 was an emergency.

Yet, according to NORAD's official timeline, NORAD was not contacted until 20 minutes later at 8:40 a.m. Tragically the fighter jets were not deployed until 8:52 a.m. -- a full 32 minutes after the loss of contact with flight 11.

Why was there a delay in the FAA notifying NORAD? Why was there a delay in NORAD scrambling fighter jets? How is this possible when NEADS was fully staffed with planes at the ready and monitoring our Northeast airspace?

Flight's 175, 77 and 93 all had this same repeat pattern of delays in notification and delays in scrambling fighter jets. Delays that are unimaginable considering a plane had, by this time, already hit the WTC

Even more baffling for us is the fact that the fighter jets were not scrambled from the closest air force bases. For example, for the flight that hit the Pentagon, the jets were scrambled from Langley Air Force in Hampton, Virginia rather than Andrews Air Force Base right outside D.C. As a result, Washington skies remained wholly unprotected on the morning of September 11th. At 9:41 a.m. one hour and 11 minutes after the first plane was hijack confirmed by NORAD, Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. The fighter jets were still miles away. Why?

So the hijackers luck had continued. On September 11th both the FAA and NORAD deviated from standard emergency operating procedures .Who were the people that delayed the notification? Have they been questioned? In addition, the interceptor planes or fighter jets did not fly at their maximum speed.


www.9-11commission.gov...

Although just 2 years earlier when dealing with Payne Stewart's doomed Lear jet on October 26, 1999

There was some speculation Monday that the military jets were prepared to shoot down the Lear if it threatened to crash in a heavily populated area. But officials at the Pentagon strongly denied that possibility.

Shooting down the plane "was never an option," Air Force spokesman Capt. Joe Della Vedova said. "I don't know where that came from."

Instead, according to an Air Force timeline, a series of military planes provided an emergency escort to the stricken Lear, beginning with a pair of F-16 Falcons from the Air National Guard at Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., about 20 minutes after ground controllers lost contact.

An F-16 and an A-10 Warthog attack plane from Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., took up the chase a few minutes later and were trailing the Lear when it climbed abruptly from 39,000 to 44,000 feet at 9:52 a.m. CDT.

Fifteen minutes later, the F-16 intercepted the Lear, the pilot reporting no movement in the cockpit.

At 10:44 a.m., the fighters from Eglin diverted to St. Louis for fuel. Fifteen minutes later, four Air National Guard F-16s from Tulsa, Okla., took up the chase, accompanied by a KC-135 refueling tanker.

F-16s from Fargo, N.D., later scrambled to intercept the Lear jet, too. At noon Dallas time, the Fargo F-16s reported that the windows of the jet were fogged with ice and there was no evidence anyone was piloting the plane.

At 12:14, the Lear jet began to spiral. It crashed about six minutes later.


www.wanttoknow.info...

Still more questions like: Zacarias Moussaoui finally pleaded guilty this past April, so why is it taking over 3 1/2 years and counting to bring accused dirty bomber Padilla to trial?

Or is there another disguised agenda going on here?

The latest 'serve' in this very dangerous precedent-setting legal ping-pong game:


Without ruling on the Bush administration's staggering executive power claims, Judge Luttig held that the use-of-force resolution Congress passed prior to the war in Afghanistan was broad enough to authorize the seizure and prolonged detention of American citizens here in the United States.

That resolution reads, in relevant part:

The president is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.

Judge Luttig's assertion that quasi-permanent imprisonment in a military brig constitutes "necessary and appropriate force" is an exercise in question-begging. If Congress intended to give the president the power to declare an American citizen a constitutional "unperson" and hold him without charges or a trial, the least our courts could require is a clear statement from Congress to that effect.


pittsburghlive.com...

May be a matter of protecting national security for some, but until these lingering questions are honestly answered I don't think we will ever be secure as a Nation.
















[edit on 19-10-2005 by Vajrayana]



posted on Oct, 21 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
You guys would love to read a book by 60 minutes produder George Criles.
Congressman Wilson and Congressman Murtha created
AL Qaeda. Gust Avrakotos and Charlie Schnabel were the bagmen.
After the afghan/russian war ended, they got their hands on 40 suitcase nukes from ussr.
9/11 was silent coup from inside. Anthrax and suitcases kept the bad guys from being exposed.
NO, I DON'T WORK FOR OSI. I'M NOT ON A MISSION TO LIE TO YOU. ALTHO, YOU PEOPLE NEVER SEEM TO QUESTION THOSE PEOPLE ON A MISSION TO LIE TO YOU. WEIRD HUH?



new topics




 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join