Why I Doubt the Official "Story"

Originally posted by kidtwist

who exactly do you think you are

Hint:

He's the good looking J.F.

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by 911files
reply to post by maxella1

 

I'm running out of patience with you. You said there were drills related to terrorist attacks using planes at the Pentagon and WTC. I'm still awaiting that documentation. There are plenty of drills involving aircraft crashes. Darn, the NRO office near Dulles was about to have one just as AAL77 flew over it that morning. Now back up your claim or retract it.

I certainly would not doubt such drills happened, but I'm asking for documentation, not some stupid media story. Just because it is in the media, does not make it so.

Are you under impression that I have documentation on what the government does ?

You're running out of patience with me..

should I care about that?

Well now, why don't i just quote this?

You made a ridiculous claim that you can't back up.

That makes you and your fellow "truthers" look incompetent. The only reasonable explanation as to WHY you would make a ridiculous claim is that you are a shill, here to make "truthers" look ridiculous.

You have succeeded. See you at the Xmas party....

Wow dude what are you tripping on?

Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by kidtwist

 

You know full well that maxella is not a shill! Is this the new tactic by you lot now, to stop people thinking you are a shill call everyone else a shill!

That must be something new they came up with. Pretty funny actually.

edit on 20-6-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)

Actually it was the "truthers" that started calling people "shills" "paid shills: and so forth. So it was something that you guys came up with ago a long time ago.

Pretty hypocritical actually.

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by 911files
reply to post by maxella1

 

I'm running out of patience with you. You said there were drills related to terrorist attacks using planes at the Pentagon and WTC. I'm still awaiting that documentation. There are plenty of drills involving aircraft crashes. Darn, the NRO office near Dulles was about to have one just as AAL77 flew over it that morning. Now back up your claim or retract it.

I certainly would not doubt such drills happened, but I'm asking for documentation, not some stupid media story. Just because it is in the media, does not make it so.

Are you under impression that I have documentation on what the government does ?

You're running out of patience with me..

should I care about that?

Well now, why don't i just quote this?

You made a ridiculous claim that you can't back up.

That makes you and your fellow "truthers" look incompetent. The only reasonable explanation as to WHY you would make a ridiculous claim is that you are a shill, here to make "truthers" look ridiculous.

You have succeeded. See you at the Xmas party....

Wow dude what are you tripping on?

Nothing brah....

You have made truthers out to be incompetents by making claims that you cannot back up.

Congratulations shill

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by 911files
reply to post by maxella1

 

I'm running out of patience with you. You said there were drills related to terrorist attacks using planes at the Pentagon and WTC. I'm still awaiting that documentation. There are plenty of drills involving aircraft crashes. Darn, the NRO office near Dulles was about to have one just as AAL77 flew over it that morning. Now back up your claim or retract it.

I certainly would not doubt such drills happened, but I'm asking for documentation, not some stupid media story. Just because it is in the media, does not make it so.

Are you under impression that I have documentation on what the government does ?

You're running out of patience with me..

should I care about that?

Well now, why don't i just quote this?

You made a ridiculous claim that you can't back up.

That makes you and your fellow "truthers" look incompetent. The only reasonable explanation as to WHY you would make a ridiculous claim is that you are a shill, here to make "truthers" look ridiculous.

You have succeeded. See you at the Xmas party....

Wow dude what are you tripping on?

Nothing brah....

You have made truthers out to be incompetents by making claims that you cannot back up.

Congratulations shill

If I'm a shill, what are you then?

Originally posted by maxella1
I provided enough links to prove my point that they knew and didn't even try to stop it. And then played stupid and lied that nobody could have imagined it. Do you disagree with what I'm saying, if so can you provide proof why I'm wrong ?

Now wait a minute. You made a specific claim. In good faith I acknowledged that I was unaware of that information and asked you for documentation of it so that I could increase my knowledge. You then start throwing out walls of text on something we all are quite familiar with, disaster drills relating to airplane accidents. Now you want me to prove you wrong? That is like a child asking me to prove them wrong when they claim Santa Claus lives at the north pole. You made the claim and I never said you were wrong, just asked you to back up the claim. If you can't, then don't make the claim.

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by maxella1
I provided enough links to prove my point that they knew and didn't even try to stop it. And then played stupid and lied that nobody could have imagined it. Do you disagree with what I'm saying, if so can you provide proof why I'm wrong ?

Now wait a minute. You made a specific claim. In good faith I acknowledged that I was unaware of that information and asked you for documentation of it so that I could increase my knowledge. You then start throwing out walls of text on something we all are quite familiar with, disaster drills relating to airplane accidents. Now you want me to prove you wrong? That is like a child asking me to prove them wrong when they claim Santa Claus lives at the north pole. You made the claim and I never said you were wrong, just asked you to back up the claim. If you can't, then don't make the claim.

I provided enough examples which completely destroys the "we had no idea" excuse. And I expressed my opinion here :

I know that this exercise was for a rescue operation but the point is that in the last 30 years they knew very well that there were many scenarios that included civilian aircraft used as a weapon. 9/11: THREATS ABOUT AIRPLANES AS WEAPONS PRIOR TO 9/11 You may choose to believe whatever you want but it doesn't change the fact that they did imagine planes used as weapons, and lied about it. I personally don't believe liars, and they had no excuse for screwing up on 9/11 and should be held accountable

So what is your opinion? Did they really fail to imagine such tactics used to attack? Were they really surprised that it happened?
Or are you just here demand documentation? Did I not explain how I formed my opinion that they could have and should have prevented 9/11 but didn't ?

Originally posted by maxella1
Did I not explain how I formed my opinion that they could have and should have prevented 9/11 but didn't ?

Who cares about your opinion.

You canot back the claim that they had drills regarding attacks (not accidents) with planes.

You lied. That makes truthers look foolish.

Thanks for the assistance.

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1
Did I not explain how I formed my opinion that they could have and should have prevented 9/11 but didn't ?

Who cares about your opinion.

You canot back the claim that they had drills regarding attacks (not accidents) with planes.

You lied. That makes truthers look foolish.

Thanks for the assistance.

I got one word for you fluffy *****LITHIUM*****

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1
Did I not explain how I formed my opinion that they could have and should have prevented 9/11 but didn't ?

Who cares about your opinion.

You canot back the claim that they had drills regarding attacks (not accidents) with planes.

You lied. That makes truthers look foolish.

Thanks for the assistance.

I got one word for you fluffy *****LITHIUM*****

Funny that you STILL cannot back your claim.

Some would call that uber-fail.

I just call it typical for a truther.

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous

Originally posted by maxella1
Did I not explain how I formed my opinion that they could have and should have prevented 9/11 but didn't ?

Who cares about your opinion.

You canot back the claim that they had drills regarding attacks (not accidents) with planes.

You lied. That makes truthers look foolish.

Thanks for the assistance.

I got one word for you fluffy *****LITHIUM*****

Funny that you STILL cannot back your claim.

Some would call that uber-fail.

I just call it typical for a truther.

Don't forget to ask your doctor if Lithium is right for you..

Originally posted by maxella1I provided enough examples which completely destroys the "we had no idea" excuse. And I expressed my opinion here :

That is not what I asked you for. I even told you that I was fully aware that they were aware of the concept of planes being used as weapons/missiles. I cited examples for you, so that is not what I requested. I requested information to support your particular claim that there had been terrorism drills related to plane attacks by terrorists at the Pentagon and WTC.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion if that is all it is. I do not pretend to know everything about 9/11, so I ask questions. I do threads when I find something new to me, or that I don't understand for others to educate me. But instead of backing up your assertion, you have gone off into this never-ending litany.

Yes, Bush and his administration lied about the extent of their knowledge. Imagine that, politicians and government officials lied to the American people. Well, so did Clinton and so has Obama since he took over. Nothing new about that. I personally do not trust the government to be forthcoming, that is why I began researching the subject for myself. However, there are many reasons for lying. Politics, cya, national security, incompetence, the next election, and on-and-on the list goes. Sometimes the reason is wrong-doing. But to make that determination, there has to be evidence, not opinion.

reply to post by 911files


Not sure if this is relevant to your conversations...but it is interesting....Vanity Fair....will go into Vanity fair shortly...Is this mis information...I think so.

9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes




How did the U.S. Air Force respond on 9/11? Could it have shot down United 93, as conspiracy theorists claim? Obtaining 30 hours of never-before-released tapes from the control room of NORAD's Northeast head-quarters, the author reconstructs the chaotic military history of that day—and the Pentagon's apparent attempt to cover it up.

VANITY

but we know who owns Vanity fair....one Ronald Lauder.

So what can we say on this diversion from the truth...

Ronald Lauder - Billionaire Estée Lauder Cosmetics magnate. He was the chairman of NY Governor George Pataki's commission on privatization. He is the key individual who lobbied for the privatization of the WTC (Source, 9th pp) -- but he also got the former Stewart Air Force Base to become privatized. Oddly, the flight paths of flight 175 and flight 11 converged directly over this airport.

but why would he Do this....why would he have editorials conflicting with the operations of the day...

Dear President Obama:
I write today as a proud American and a proud Jew.
Jews around the world are concerned today. We are concerned about the nuclear ambitions of an Iranian regime that brags about its genocidal intentions against Israel. We are concerned that the Jewish state is being isolated and delegitimized.
Mr. President, we are concerned about the dramatic deterioration of diplomatic relations between the United States and Israel.

apparently have docements stating what senarios that NORAD was acting on leading upto the day....but not on the day.

The US military conducted a training exercise in the five days before the September 11 attacks that included simulated aircraft hijackings by terrorists, according to a 9/11 Commission document recently found in the US National Archives. In one of the scenarios, implemented on September 9, terrorists hijacked a London to New York flight, planning to blow it up with explosives over New York

SOURCE

the original details are sourced from here at scribd Scribd

and the document here NORAD HIJACK SUMMARY

Haven't personally found anything on Pentegon exercises...but i do recall there was discussions of plane senarios before the strike.

I can't find it right now...but i will when i get the chance....I am a truther all the way...but it is only the truth i do seek....because I know the OS is so full of lies.....Working on a simulation for the building collapses....As i know that three steels structures suffering global collapse the way they did is not even in the realm of possible...those are the smoking guns....but I dont think it will make a deifference as the Media has done such a fantastic job on the psy ops....just as was shown in the Vanity fair article......You just have to look at the people behind the news to find the truth.

reply to post by plube


Those types of exercises were common, and a hijacking scenario was scheduled for that day. A few days before 9/11 NEADS had just completed a terrorist plane attack exercise.

In Rome, New York Major Kevin J. Nasypany was beginning his day as the Alpha Flight Mission Crew Commander (MCC) for the North Eastern Air Defense Sector (NEADS). His command was fully staffed as they were preparing for another day of scheduled exercises (Vigilant Guardian), overseen by Base Commander Colonel Robert Marr in the battle cab. At least one of the Vigilant Guardian exercises was to include a simulated commercial aircraft hijacking. Just two days before on September 9th, NEADS practiced a hijack scenario involving a plane out of London headed for NYC. In that scenario, a DC-10 commercial aircraft was taken over by terrorists armed with explosives. The hijackers aim was to set off the explosives over the city and bring the plane down into the densely populated urban area. NEADS successfully diverted the aircraft, but when the terrorists realized that the rural landscape below them was nowhere close to NYC, they detonated their device in the air, killing all on-board.[8] However, those types of exercises were fairly routine affairs and for the most part, September 11th was shaping up to be a fairly routine operational day.

So the use of planes as weapons, preparations for such attacks and exercises designed to deal with them was definitely more common that we were led to believe. Darn, Murad (the guy who came up with the idea of crashing planes into buildings) told investigators in 1995 that they had been planning such attacks.

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by maxella1I provided enough examples which completely destroys the "we had no idea" excuse. And I expressed my opinion here :

That is not what I asked you for. I even told you that I was fully aware that they were aware of the concept of planes being used as weapons/missiles. I cited examples for you, so that is not what I requested. I requested information to support your particular claim that there had been terrorism drills related to plane attacks by terrorists at the Pentagon and WTC.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion if that is all it is. I do not pretend to know everything about 9/11, so I ask questions. I do threads when I find something new to me, or that I don't understand for others to educate me. But instead of backing up your assertion, you have gone off into this never-ending litany.

Yes, Bush and his administration lied about the extent of their knowledge. Imagine that, politicians and government officials lied to the American people. Well, so did Clinton and so has Obama since he took over. Nothing new about that. I personally do not trust the government to be forthcoming, that is why I began researching the subject for myself. However, there are many reasons for lying. Politics, cya, national security, incompetence, the next election, and on-and-on the list goes. Sometimes the reason is wrong-doing. But to make that determination, there has to be evidence, not opinion.

edit on 21-6-2012 by 911files because: (no reason given)

So what is your take on 9/11?

Originally posted by maxella1
So what is your take on 9/11?

That is not something that I could answer in a post on an internet forum. Also, I try to avoid giving my "opinion" any more than absolutely necessary because I don't want to bias the evidence. But, I will say this. 9/11 did not happen in a vacuum, and to focus solely on that event misses the big picture. To understand 9/11, a person has to go back to the early 1950's and the Cold War. Most people do not realize that the Muslim Brotherhood is alive today because the CIA kept it alive to suit it's own ends. There is a whole history of our intelligence operations hidden in the shadows and we may never know the full story.

I get a laugh when I hear the talking heads on TV talking about the evil terrorists. Yet over the years, we have used the same tactics using our own brand of Islamic terrorist. We fight them in Afghanistan, while we use them in Libya and Syria. So none of this began on 9/11, and it did not end there.

So for me, that is my interest in 9/11. It is one small part of a much larger picture. But hey, that is just my opinion.

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by maxella1
So what is your take on 9/11?

That is not something that I could answer in a post on an internet forum. Also, I try to avoid giving my "opinion" any more than absolutely necessary because I don't want to bias the evidence. But, I will say this. 9/11 did not happen in a vacuum, and to focus solely on that event misses the big picture. To understand 9/11, a person has to go back to the early 1950's and the Cold War. Most people do not realize that the Muslim Brotherhood is alive today because the CIA kept it alive to suit it's own ends. There is a whole history of our intelligence operations hidden in the shadows and we may never know the full story.

I get a laugh when I hear the talking heads on TV talking about the evil terrorists. Yet over the years, we have used the same tactics using our own brand of Islamic terrorist. We fight them in Afghanistan, while we use them in Libya and Syria. So none of this began on 9/11, and it did not end there.

So for me, that is my interest in 9/11. It is one small part of a much larger picture. But hey, that is just my opinion.

I agree with your opinion

reply to post by 911files


I agree with trying to stay focused...i did a opinion thread on who i think has insider knowledge(911 signature)...Dov Zakheim....he is one i would question thoroughly....maybe even subject him to a bit of good ole waterboarding...but that might just be my own nefarious emotions wanting to be let loose....but this is a big picture and in runs deep into some very interesting circles...That is why i try to stay focussed on the issue of the collapse itself...but i can wander....I am a truther because that is the label apllied to me by people whoi do not agree with my views....am i a no planer,nukes,miro blue beam disillusional being who thinks these are valid....not personally....Do i think there would have to be thousands in on the plot....heck no...how about Mr Jerome Hauer.....A man with insider knowledge...not only on aspects of demolition ...but also on Anthrax....interesting he had access to such things and it was bandied about after 911.....was that to create yet another disturbance in the force.

I saw this earlier and have been itching to respond for days now, but just have not had a block of time to do so adequately. I'll take these comments in reverse order.

Originally posted by Logical one
The 9/11 conspiracies have been debated to death..........and pretty much all the conspiracy theorist arguments have been debunked.

Yes, they have been debated to death. But they have not been "debunked" entirely. Some of the more exotic ones have been, and they needed to be. My personal pet peeve is the NoC/Fly-over nonsense surrounding the Pentagon event. Yet, some still have survived, and in some cases continue to have some merit. Perhaps merit is not the right word, but rather unresolved issues/questions outstanding. I don't care to debate them at this point, but suffice it to say that some of the assertions by the government still don't wash with me either.

Originally posted by Logical one
Well actually they didn't........in fact the US Air Defense wasn't involved in blocking the planes.......because they were civilian planes......generally and certainly before 9/11 the US Air defense doesn't target civilan jets.

Yeah, that is what they keep telling us. Part of the terrorist-related defenses planned for the 1996 Atlanta Olympics.

I also asked if they would move in some of their Blackhawk helicopters and place Secret Service snipers with .50 caliber rifles on board to warn off, or take out, aircraft threatening the Olympics - Richard Clarke, Against All Enemies, page 108

That provision in itself says two things. First, the US government DID ANTICIPATE THE USE OF PLANES AS WEAPONS. Second, a contingency plan was in place to shoot down "civilian jets" if they were in the hands of terrorists and targeting the Olympics. I know, you are going to say that he said "aircraft", not "civilian jets". Well "aircraft" is a broad term and with the history of terrorist activity around planes, where do you think they would get "aircraft"?

Hint:

The French police said that, after the four hijackers were killed and 171 hostages were freed, 20 sticks of dynamite were found on board the Airbus A300. "Their objective was a suicide operation over Paris with the plane," Interior Minister Charles Pasqua said, "so we couldn't let it leave." - NY Times, December 28, 1994

That was 1994, and just two days before 9/11, NORAD had a drill involving just that type of scenario over NYC. So clearly, this type of attack was in the minds of planners during the 1996 Olympics. There is at least one historical statement that indicates a Park Police Helicopter may have been dispatched on exactly that type of mission on 9/11 in regards to the Pentagon. Whether it actually was or not is still a matter of speculation of course, but it does go to your comments regarding shooting down civilian aircraft and all CT's being debunked. So, I respectfully disagree with you.

Update:

Just because I know someone will want to argue the point.



In 1998, one NORAD exercise involved, "Terrorists plan on using plane to commit suicide run into metropolitan area of SF".

"Shoot or not shoot" that is the question that needs to be answered. Either way, the alc will be shot down or explode over water. AlC will never reach land.

Originally posted by 911files
That was 1994, and just two days before 9/11, NORAD had a drill involving just that type of scenario over NYC.

I need to correct this slightly. NORAD (NEADS actually) had the drill described scheduled (see attachment in previous post). Whether this drill was actually completed or not is something I am continuing to research. The NEADS audios indicate that the actual drill involved a plane headed for the Boston area, not NYC which exploded upon landing. For what actually transpired at NEADS on the 9th and 10th, visit the links below.

NEADS September 9, 2001
NEADS September 10, 2001