reply to post by mark-in-dallas
Since this thread is about FACTS..."what we know"...(and what we don't know), there are a few things that MUST be addressed, in this post.
Incorrect things that, unfortunately, keep being presented as "facts", and clouding the entire issue. AND, perpetuating the mistaken "conspiracy"
nonsense, and interferring with the REAL search, for the incompetents involved. This is disinformation
spewed from a variety of
There were military exercises taking place on 9/10 and 9/11 including Operation Vigilant Guardian, which simulated airplanes being hijacked
by terrorists, which confused Air Traffic Controllers.
NO, the ATC were not "confused". NOT by Operation Vigilant Guardian.
Source for the above, and snippet below:
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States investigated the possibility that Vigilant Guardian preparations compromised
the military's response to the attacks on September 11. They concluded that the exercise may have had, in fact, the effect of expediting
the response to the attacks.
"On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union.
We investigated whether military preparations for the large-scale exercise compromised the military's response to the real-world terrorist attack on
9/11. According to General Eberhart, "it took about 30 seconds" to make the adjustment to the real-world situation. Ralph Eberhart testimony, June
17, 2004. We found that the response was, if anything, expedited by the increased number of staff at the sectors and at NORAD because of the scheduled
exercise. See Robert Marr interview (Jan. 23, 2004)."
This next statement?? It is so wrong, it causes one to wonder just WHY any website would ever put out such incorrect information, in view of hte fact
that a simple bit of research shows it to be false:
Not a single fighter aircraft was scrambled to find out why the planes had flown off course, turned off their transponders and cut
AS TO the bit about Cheney, in the "bunker"? Another (intentional) misinformation from the "conspiracy" websites, but for what reason?? No one
It is well established that Cheney's orders were to "protect the House at all costs". This, of course, refers to the White House. It indicates
that he had authorized (although not yet gone up the military chain of command, as little time had yet elapsed, and uncertainty still reigned) the
shoot-down of airliners that seemed intent on impacting the WH.
Also, the timing of those remarks by Cheney, are uncertain....in some cases it seems that AAL 77 had already
impacted the Pentagon, and
the concern was regarding UAL 93, still 'inbound'...PLUS any others that may have been still out there, but as yet undetected!!!
...Dick Cheney was sitting in the PEOC being advised of another hijacked plane flying toward Washington and being continually updated as the
plane closed in, but refused to do or allow anything to be done to stop the aircraft from flying within 1 mile of the White House at a very low
altitude and slamming into the Pentagon.
So, the actual sequence of events, there, seem to be inaccurate as well....the way the ATS member posted them (likely just repeating from what he/she
Unfortunately for the "truth" search, too many seekers neglect to do a FULL search, relying instead on the many "conspiracy" sites, and not
looking more deeply into other sources....sources far more reliable, in most cases.
THAT sort of research involves stepping OUTSIDE, and away from the Web. There are vast amounts of information out there that may not/doesn't exist
on the Internet.
Finally, this red herring as already been addressed, up above:
Washington D.C. is the most heavily protected airspace on the planet....
...and is yet another example of the "conspiracy" sites' misinformation, as mentioned before.
The OP's efforts are
....change to "extensive", (**edit in --- after taking another look, less hurriedly at the OP, I am
revising my initial assessment. I see a few factual misunderstandings/errors, and I attribute those to, as usual, the "conspiracy" websites, and
their false information that is prevalent there...HOWEVER, notwithstanding a few wild goose chases, much of what's provided in the OP comports with
many of MY impressions, especially regarding the complicity of he Bush Administration to use
those heinous events to their advantage,
regarding their 'goals' in the ME) --- still
, hopefully will help to cut through all the BS that has infested this subject since September
12th, 2001. Glad to see the most outrageous "theories" omitted...(except, as mentioned, "nano-thermxte". Doesn't fit into any of the observed
patterns, nor is it logical/practical, when examined more closely, in effectiveness as "claimed").
Still combing through the OP, so those are initial impressions...but I have confidence it is presented in a logical manner, to allow a reasoned
discourse. (** As edited above, it is a reasoned and nicely presented OP, but it appears to be flawed, as flowing from incorrect premises, in many
[edit on 31 July 2010 by weedwhacker]