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.

 

Help!! Could 9/11 experts please explain these comments by Norman Minetta

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   
My first thread here......so go easy on me if I screw up.

Just finished watching a two part video about 9/11, containing many of the coincedences a lot of people here, and many other places have a hard time believing they were just "coincedences".

Please at least watch the second video of the two....and go to 5:30......to.....7:45.

This is Transportation Secretary, Norman Minetta stating what was said by Vice President Cheney in the minutes before the plane hit the Pentagon.

OK...This is where I am confused....In another video I saw Norman Minetta say the young man that reported to the Vice President...as to how many miles away the plane was from DC.....till the point where the plane was 10 miles away..and the young man asked The Vice President...."Does the stand down order still stand?".....and VP said yes....why would'nt
it?

OK....In this video......He says "Does the order still stand?" not stand down order.

So what was the order??? To stand down........or was the order....to shoot down? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Also, I do not know how to imbed a video...(old semi-senile computer illiterate).....so if any could that would be great.

Thanks......I know there are two camps in this debate........but one thing I will say about ATS.....there are some very intelligent.......truth seeking people here.....both sides....and even those that haven't taken a side.

www.youtube.com...




posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Judging by the fact that the transportation secretary's video transcript has been removed, there's something there that shouldn't be known publicly. Judge for yourselves.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
What's there to explain? The order still stands or stand down... meaning don't down the plane (missle).
The Pentagon has it's own defense and security system located on and around the building. I've seen it with my own eyes! There had to be an order given to not intercept or shoot down. Four planes in American airspace and we couldn't intercept one of them?



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Watch this video, it details everything that led up to 9/11.

www.911missinglinks.com...



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Welcome! We many be many things here, but we're rarely dull.

This quote is coming from Mineta's testimony to the 9/11 commission, and it's been heavily edited and cherry picked by those self serving 9/11 conspiracy web sites peddling their books and CDs. The full testimony transcript reveals that Mineta subsequently found out it referred to the grounding of all civilian traffic.

Here's another fact the 9/11 web sites neglect to mention- the 9/11 commission report likewise confirms that Bush did authorize a shoot down order for flight 93 (as well as any other hijacked plane that might materialize), and NORAD officials testified they would have destroyed it if they had found it. Most of the questions you have are already answered, it's just that you're not going to get the answers from Dylan Avery or Alex Jones.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
What's there to explain? The order still stands or stand down... meaning don't down the plane (missle).
The Pentagon has it's own defense and security system located on and around the building. I've seen it with my own eyes! There had to be an order given to not intercept or shoot down. Four planes in American airspace and we couldn't intercept one of them?


Don't make things up. The air defenses around the Pentagon were't there until a year after the 9/11 attack, and that's specifically because of the 9/11 attack. There are enough pre-9/11 photos floating around showing what was there- and what wasn't- to show that right away.

The 9/11 commission report specifically stated Bush authorized a shoot down order on flight 93, so the rest of your casual speculation is entirely moot.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Welcome! We many be many things here, but we're rarely dull.

This quote is coming from Mineta's testimony to the 9/11 commission, and it's been heavily edited and cherry picked by those self serving 9/11 conspiracy web sites peddling their books and CDs. The full testimony transcript reveals that Mineta subsequently found out it referred to the grounding of all civilian traffic.

Here's another fact the 9/11 web sites neglect to mention- the 9/11 commission report likewise confirms that Bush did authorize a shoot down order for flight 93 (as well as any other hijacked plane that might materialize), and NORAD officials testified they would have destroyed it if they had found it. Most of the questions you have are already answered, it's just that you're not going to get the answers from Dylan Avery or Alex Jones.


Gee great news Dave...
So I assume you are going to post the vid unedited so we can hear him mention grounding all civilian traffic..

Personaly I've seen the clip and could never really work out what he was talking about..
I try not to assume..Although I thought the call to ground all civilian traffic didn't come till later..

But I will know when YOU post that unedited video..



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

I beg to differ with you friend. Not all defense perimeters are viewable from photos. There are defense enclosures on that building that can not be detected. I saw this during Regan's administration. I had a VIP tour of a number of government buildings in DC. The Pentagon being one of them. Of course I didn't see everything, but one of the enclosures was pointed out to me during my tour and was suggested that the building was well fortified. I don't make things up, I'm too old for that. I just call it the way I see them. The Pentagon holds an enormous amount of classified and top secret information. Do you really think they wouldn't fortify a building that held so many secrets? What makes me laugh is just because you can't see it from photos doesn't mean it's not there. That's being gullible. Our government is always thinking 1 step ahead of the rest of us and our enemies.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Thanks for the welcome....Dave

To tell you the truth.........the only time I've heard Alex Jones....was when he was on Ventura's program.

I am not easily fooled.....by anyone. I take what makes sense...or does'nt make sense...and I try to look at both sides..and come to a conclusion if possible.

OK....I can see where you say Minetta's testimony was cherry picked.......and a video was spliced together to make it appear he said something that maybe he didn't. That may explain why in one video....he said stand down order....which to me would mean...no Military interference....and the last one where he says....does the Order still stand.....which could mean anything.....but if he did say it when Minetta said he did....right after the young gentleman came in and said....it's 10 miles away.....does the (blank) still stand? If he was talking about the order to ground all air traffic.......then that was another one of those....magical coincedences. Or as you say, it was spliced together to make it appear that way???

Hell....I am more confused than ever now. There are some who say the 9/11 Truth movement is headed by the Mossad.....Alex Jones....is a puppet of theirs.......Je--s......Everything and anything can be suspect........unless one sees it for themself.

CGI.....tape splicing....on and on......maybe I better just go back to living my normal life.......if I can just figure out what this low rumbling sound in my head is. Just kidding!! Or am I?????????



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
My guess is stand down, means do not react (to the treath) you would have to ask an expert or look up the glossary, as I am no military man.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
just ask norm




posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

I beg to differ with you friend. Not all defense perimeters are viewable from photos. There are defense enclosures on that building that can not be detected. I saw this during Regan's administration. I had a VIP tour of a number of government buildings in DC. The Pentagon being one of them. Of course I didn't see everything, but one of the enclosures was pointed out to me during my tour and was suggested that the building was well fortified. I don't make things up, I'm too old for that. I just call it the way I see them. The Pentagon holds an enormous amount of classified and top secret information. Do you really think they wouldn't fortify a building that held so many secrets? What makes me laugh is just because you can't see it from photos doesn't mean it's not there. That's being gullible. Our government is always thinking 1 step ahead of the rest of us and our enemies.


No, what's being gullible is reading some paranoid drivel on some damned fool conspiracy web site run by a bunch of college kids out of their dorm room and thinking it's true. Here's the article I was referring to reporting they were setting up anti-aircraft batteries around Washington on the anniversary of 9/11. Tell me, just WHY do they need to deploys anti-aircraft batteries around the Pentagon if, as you try to claim, anti-aircraft batteries were already there?

US deploys anti-aircraft missiles around Washington on 9/11 anniversary

I think the outright phoniness of the 9/11 movevent is becoming self-evident. They latch onto the news tidbit that anti-aircraft batteries are around the Pentagon, deliberately snip off the detail that they were installed *after* 9/11, and then use it to drop innuendo of impropriety by asking "where were the anti-aircraft batteries". It's the same with inventively reinterpreting "does the order still stand" with "stand down order". There's no way this misrepresentation can happen accidentally. They're lying like this on purpose to manufacture false credibility for their conspiracy claims becuase they know they don't have even a microbe of tangible proof otherwise.

I'm not here to insult you or to make you feel bad. I'm here to show how these damned fool conspiracy web sites are lying through their teeth to sucker unsuspecting people into swallowing these absurd conspiracy stories. Let's face it, Bush didn't even have the intelligence to pick his nose without poking himself in the eye, let alone being the mastermind of some insanely complex conspiracy orchestrated with the sheer perfection of a supernatural act.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


"Let's face it, Bush didn't even have the intelligence to pick his nose without poking himself in the eye, let alone being the mastermind of some insanely complex conspiracy orchestrated with the sheer perfection of a supernatural act"


You should google the differnce between mastermind ,accomplice , and puppet .

supernatural act ? What was supernatural about 9/11?

Why don't you atleast try and understand the conspiracy theories before trying to poke at them ? Its really an insult of such ignorance and you being a member of ATS

Start here rookie

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by seedofchucky
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


"Let's face it, Bush didn't even have the intelligence to pick his nose without poking himself in the eye, let alone being the mastermind of some insanely complex conspiracy orchestrated with the sheer perfection of a supernatural act"


You should google the differnce between mastermind ,accomplice , and puppet .


Oh, I get it. When it's not really a conspiracy (I.E. Bush staged 9/11) it only means it really IS a conspiracy (I.E. some evil shadowy unnamed force staged 9/11 and Bush was a puppet). This is even more intellectually bankrupt than the prior claim becuase it not only means Bush was actively involved, it also means Obama is actively involved becuase he'd have to be actively assisting in covering up the conspiracy too..which means the Clintons are involved becuase Hillary would be up to her neck in the coverup too.

Just how many people are involved in this supposedly "secret plot", anyway?


supernatural act ? What was supernatural about 9/11?


Come on now, how can you ask this? Invisible controlled demolitions magically appearing in not one, not two, but THREE huge buildings in a matter of minutes without anyone noticing and without leaving any explosives damage? Aircraft wreckage magically appearing all over the Pentagon lawn in broad daylight? All the engineers in NIST and FEMA being unable to discover anything unusual? Out of the thousands and thousands of people required to pull this off, not one person left even so much as a candy bar wrapper of evidence behind, coming forward to spill the beans, or blurting it out accidentally to the wrong person? That doesn't even count the magical ability to get all the other countries to not only mindlessly swallow the conspiracy but contribute to it, like England, Germany, and Saudi Arabia.

These conspiracy stories are so burdened with so many convoluted details and pointless schemes that it would be a heck of a lot easier just to get terrorists to crash airplanes into the towers.


Why don't you atleast try and understand the conspiracy theories before trying to poke at them ? Its really an insult of such ignorance and you being a member of ATS

Start here rookie


Nice attempt at at ad hominim attack, chum, but you should know I've been talking to you conspiracy characters for a long, LONG time on other boards, and if you don't believe anything else I tell you, then at least believe this- I know all your conspiracy claims better than you do.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


Well, lets consider this now. The young man says to the VP "does the order still stand"? Is "standing down", that is to say, not to do anything, an order? Do we know that the order has anything to do with the planes? Could the young man be refering to some order regarding something completely apart from the planes? Maybe something to do with notification? A military aircraft is not going to fire on a civilian passenger plane without direct orders, so where is the sense in ordering the military craft to "stand down" since "standing down" is all it would do unless order to do otherwise?



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by zeta55
My first thread here......so go easy on me if I screw up.

Just finished watching a two part video about 9/11, containing many of the coincedences a lot of people here, and many other places have a hard time believing they were just "coincedences".

Please at least watch the second video of the two....and go to 5:30......to.....7:45.

This is Transportation Secretary, Norman Minetta stating what was said by Vice President Cheney in the minutes before the plane hit the Pentagon.

OK...This is where I am confused....In another video I saw Norman Minetta say the young man that reported to the Vice President...as to how many miles away the plane was from DC.....till the point where the plane was 10 miles away..and the young man asked The Vice President...."Does the stand down order still stand?".....and VP said yes....why would'nt
it?

OK....In this video......He says "Does the order still stand?" not stand down order.

So what was the order??? To stand down........or was the order....to shoot down? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Also, I do not know how to imbed a video...(old semi-senile computer illiterate).....so if any could that would be great.

Thanks......I know there are two camps in this debate........but one thing I will say about ATS.....there are some very intelligent.......truth seeking people here.....both sides....and even those that haven't taken a side.

www.youtube.com...


unfortunately there is no definative answer there is no answer for so many questions to 9/11 thats why the truth movement want a new independent investigation

so you will have to make your own mind up but for me its defo a stand down order according to minetta the vp was infromed how far the plane was from the pentagon if the order was to shoot it down then it wouldnt of hit the dam building (what ever it was)



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Norman Mineta's testimony before the 9/11 Commission.

www.9-11commission.gov...

You might want to read the transcript, rather than relying on edited youtube videos.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Intercepting does not necessarily mean to shoot down. Airplanes are intercepted all the time when they stray off course. Also a video has been posted where the man himself is asked. He can just watch that.
edit on 17-1-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 



Come on now, how can you ask this? Invisible controlled demolitions magically appearing in not one, not two, but THREE huge buildings in a matter of minutes without anyone noticing and without leaving any explosives damage? Aircraft wreckage magically appearing all over the Pentagon lawn in broad daylight? All the engineers in NIST and FEMA being unable to discover anything unusual? Out of the thousands and thousands of people required to pull this off, not one person left even so much as a candy bar wrapper of evidence behind, coming forward to spill the beans, or blurting it out accidentally to the wrong person? That doesn't even count the magical ability to get all the other countries to not only mindlessly swallow the conspiracy but contribute to it, like England, Germany, and Saudi Arabia.


So, you are saying there is no conspiracy? We should all accept the OS as fact because you accept it?


Out of the thousands and thousands of people required to pull this off,


Fact is your opinion is an overstatement, and not proven true. Most Truthers do not support such dogmas that many of you debunkers like to embellish.

911 Was the greatest terror attack ever done on American soil.
Fact: The United States Government did not investigate the events of 911.
Fact: After 18 months the Bush administration was force to put together a 911 Commission thanks to the Jersey Girls, other than that, the Bush administration and the Pentagon did not allow any inquiries to their cross negligent of not responding to these attracts, and you want everyone to believe there is no conspiracy?
Fact: when you have secrecy, and all inquiries are being blocked “you have conspiracy.”

Fact: The bush administration lied to the American people to get their illegal wars
Fact: The Bush administration and Pentagon never told the American people what happened on 911.
Fact: there is no real evidence that’s supports the OS. If anything was magical on 911 it was the OS told by the media, 911 commission report, and the NIST report.

The OP asked a simple question:


OK....In this video......He says "Does the order still stand?" not stand down order.

So what was the order??? To stand down........or was the order....to shoot down? Any help would be greatly appreciated.


The fact is, no one knows what those orders were. Norman Minetta stated he “thought” they were stand down orders, and later retracted to saying it was not stand down orders.
Norman Minetta says in this interview that seedofchucky was nice enough to find for us on this video, that there were no shoot down orders given and after hearing back from the DOD around 12:30 they said they did not shoot down any airplane.

Now the question is, was the DOD telling the truth? We don’t know.
So whatever those orders were, we will probably never know. It’s one of the hundreds of unsolved mysteries in the search for 911Truths.

The fact is, proof of the Bush administration lying to the American people to get their illegal wars was a conspiracy.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDaveTell me, just WHY do they need to deploys anti-aircraft batteries around the Pentagon if, as you try to claim, anti-aircraft batteries were already there?


1. Because AA batteries have a range and they want to be able to shoot things down before its too late.
2. So it looks like they are being productive in stopping it happen again.

Do you really think the Pentagon would have been built with no air defense whatsoever? I don't need to be a military person to know that would not be the case. Even if they were relying on NORAD that's more than enough resources to shoot down an aircraft...well assuming they weren't busy dealing with fake hi-jackings from the excercises that just happened to be on that day >_<


It's the same with inventively reinterpreting "does the order still stand" with "stand down order". There's no way this misrepresentation can happen accidentally.


"Does the order still stand?" means "Am I still to carry out the previous order you've given me?". Now logically if that order was to shoot down the plane, then it would have been shot down rather than crashing into the Pentagon. Why? Because NORAD was specifically designed to locate, track and intercept hostile aircraft. Now if you are going to try to argue that they couldn't find the plane even though they knew how far out from the Pentagon it was...well...that's gullible


As for the order being to ground all civilian aircraft - its possible, but the way that the conversation was described makes this highly unlikely. Why would the young man wait till the very last check-in when he is reporting the plane to be only a few minutes away to ask wether they should keep other aircraft grounded? Why would he have not asked the first time or the second when it would have been relevant? Its possible this was the case but very unlikely and as another poster said it would have to be an insanely massive coincidence.

You are right in that we don't know what that order was specifically, but considering they knew where the plane was but did NOT shoot it down, even though they could be almost certain that it was on a collision course, a fair assumption was that the order was to leave it be.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join