It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


It's as much about what DIDN'T happen, as what DID.

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 28 2009 @ 03:42 PM
I think that the evidence for a 911 conspiracy is not just a matter of proving what did happen, but of what didn't happen. So here's a few I can think of, feel free to add if you wish.

Why didn't they scramble jets sooner?


In the report it is easy to see that there was confusion, conflicting reports and a lack of leadership within the FAA and the Military.

I read the entire account of events and it all seemed plausible. How they scrambled the jets after flight 11 crashed, but too late for flight 175. How the Military didn't get enough forewarning of flights 77 and 93. I was just about to let it go when I read this:

Inside the National Military Command Center, the deputy director of operations and his assistant began notifying senior Pentagon officials of the incident. At about 9:00, the senior NMCC operations officer reached out to the FAA operations center for information. Although the NMCC was advised of the hijacking of American 11, the scrambling of jets was not discussed.182

Huh? they didn't discuss scrambling jets? Are you kidding? By 0900 remember there was already one crash into the WTC, and we are told in the report that New York Centre was suspecting more. And the head of the military didn't discuss scrambling jets at all?

Why didn't Giuliani use the Office of Emergency Management headquarters?

In my opinion, the only reason not to use these offices would be if he knew the towers were going to come down. In the Naudet brothers film one of the FDNY chiefs is clearly heard saying "I wanna use the lobby of 7 as a triage". So the FDNY didn't think the WTC7 was at risk. What did Giuliani know that they didn't? If he did know, then it was an inside job.

Why didn't the 911 commision report mention Building 7?

we have an implicit lie when(...)it fails to mention that buliding 7 of the World Trade Centre collapsed

Source Dr David Ray Griffin, 911 visibility project May 2005.

Never has silence been louder in my opinion.

Why didn't the President of the United States, and the Secretary for Defence reach secure locations when it was clear the country was under attack?

On the morning of September 11, Secretary Rumsfeld was having breakfast at the Pentagon with a group of members of Congress. He then returned to his office for his daily intelligence briefing. The Secretary was informed of the second strike in New York during the briefing; he resumed the briefing while awaiting more information. After the Pentagon was struck, Secretary Rumsfeld went to the parking lot to assist with rescue efforts.193

When they learned a second plane had struck the World Trade Center, nearly everyone in the White House told us, they immediately knew it was not an accident. The Secret Service initiated a number of security enhancements around the White House complex. The officials who issued these orders did not know that there were additional hijacked aircraft, or that one such aircraft was en route to Washington. These measures were precautionary steps taken because of the strikes in New York.187

So why not Bush too? It doesn't make any sense.

So can anybody else come up with some "Why didn't"s?

[edit on 28-5-2009 by kiwifoot]

posted on May, 28 2009 @ 04:10 PM
Police helicopter rescuers said that they could have gotten people off the roofs of the WTC towers, but were order not to attempt it.

Why? I think the planners of the event thought it would look suspicious if a helicopter hovering over the roof of one of the towers was accidentally shot down when the "collapsing" building exploded.

posted on May, 28 2009 @ 04:37 PM
if you watch the video of the morning of before the bulletins came in, before they goto commercial at like 8:00 they show the towers, a live shot. wheres that video of the 1st plane hitting?

edit for time fix.

[edit on 28-5-2009 by Myendica]

posted on May, 28 2009 @ 04:42 PM
My biggest "why didn't":
Why didn't the symbolically-most-secure building in the United Stated capture ANY video of a the crash? The only frames of footage released for the longest time were 3 simple frames from a security checkpoint.

Why didnt they release more?

posted on May, 28 2009 @ 04:46 PM
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic

Good one! And very true, it insults my inelligence to say that those 2 cameras were the only ones that caught the event!

new topics

top topics

log in