Talk Radio:
Bill Bennett
Mike Gallagher
Dennis Prager
Michael Medved
Hugh Hewitt
BREAKING NEWS
Register
|
Sign In
Search
SIGN UP NOW!
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login
|
What's Hot
Townhall Daily Alert
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
White House & Capitol Report
Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
Daily Conservative Cartoon
Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Columnists
|
News
|
Video
|
Podcasts
|
Photos
|
Cartoons
|
Blog
|
Your Blogs
|
Issues
|
Get Magazine
|
Finance
What’s Hot
|
Your Blogs Directory
|
Create Your Own Blog
|
Featured Talk Radio Calls
Comment on:
A Conservative Man
Showdown
87 Comments
Friday, February, 27, 2009 10:45 AM
clyde
writes:
jevica
The media silence on this crew stomping the Constitution is sickening. They DARED to bring this up with Bush,but nothing for their boy? No wonder the dead tree media is about gone. The role of media today seems to be a mouthpiece FOR the gov't,not a check ON it.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, February, 27, 2009 2:01 PM
jevica
writes:
clyde
Right on. This issue is 100% unconstitutional. Their media friends just let it slide.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Wednesday, April, 15, 2009 7:26 PM
moshe
writes:
Put On Your Tin Foil Hat!
Ok, Jevica.
What would you like to know about the government conspiracy to fool the American public into believing 9-11 was the work of those evil Muslims?
Are you telling me that we could find Saddam Hussein in a hole in the ground, but that we STILL haven't located OBL??
Let's start there.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Wednesday, April, 15, 2009 10:53 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Except for the fact your first paragraph is 100% wrong [it was the work of the Muslim hijackers & OBL mastermind] and BTW finding Saddam in Iraq and OBL where ever he is are different things.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 12:36 PM
moshe
writes:
KO
"Except for the fact your first paragraph is 100% wrong [it was the work of the Muslim hijackers & OBL mastermind]..."
You've convinced me. It was Muslim hijackers and OBL.
Darn! What will I do with all those tin foil hats now?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 1:06 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
You are the one who believes the government did it, against all available evidence.
So I might think that it's up to you to convince me.
I don't know if you believe that the 3 flights had the passengers taken off at secret airport then flown into the towers and Pentagon by remote, or rocket into the Pentagon. Or planes and controlled demolition for the Towers, WTC 7, passengers put on another flight and flown into the Ocean or what?
You have to present your points. I do have information but not knowing what level or theory of 9/11 truth you subscribe to I can't present the information to refute it.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 1:40 PM
moshe
writes:
OK
Fair enough.
Do I know exactly what happened on that day?
No, of course not. And yes, there is a lot of rubbish out there.
But I have no doubt that those buildings didn't fall because.... an airplane hit them... and then there was a fire.... and the fire was really, really hot.. and then.... and then 3 buildings collapsed straight down very quickly.
How do I know?
All you have to do is watch the video footage. One of the towers(the first, I think) begins to collapse at the point of impact. The top portion begins to topple over, which makes sense, as you would not expect it to go straight down into the path of most resistance.
Then, when the top 20-30(or whatever is was) stories is at about a 45 degree angle... this whole block of concrete and steel just disappears. This is very clearly visible.
Those buildings did not collapse. They were practically vaporized.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 2:03 PM
moshe
writes:
You Wrote:
"You are the one who believes the government did it, against all available evidence."
What evidence? Was there any attempt to reconstruct even one of the four planes? Isn't that standard procedure after a crash? The 9-11 whitewash...I mean, commission... wasn't even commissioned until AFTER we were already at war.
Wait. Don't you investigate and try to collect all available evidence BEFORE committing to war?
Nope. Sorry. The official story doesn't even begin to make sense. And when I say the "government" did it, I'm not talking about elected officials. I agree, they would be too incompetent. It was probably people we've never heard of before.
P.S. Thanks for allowing me this forum without insulting me.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 3:43 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe your second comment
Just to give you a taste of the sheer magnitude;
The inner circle of conspirators. Depending on who you're talking to. [How many people?]
The engineers who were either trained on the building's blueprints or recruited from the original crew that designed the building. The military brass who coordinated the actual plane crashes and who ordered the Air Force to not to respond to the hijackings. (30-60 people)
The actual hijackers. but let's even assume that was fabricated and maybe only the pilots themselves had to be in on it. (4-20 people)
The people who delivered, unloaded and then set the explosives on 220 floors of the Twin Towers and 47 floors of Seven World Trade Center. If you figure it takes an hour per floor for a team of 10 people (20-60 people)
The security apparatuses at all three towers. In order for these demolition crews to wire the buildings they would need access to every floor in every tower. This could not be accomplished without the complicity of the security organizations for all three towers. These towers also housed the NY/NJ Port Authority mind you, which includes its own police and security force. Then there are cleaning crews who would have noticed this strange work at all hours of the night along with anyone else who happened along these crews. (150-1,000 people)
The people who trained the demolition crews, hijackers and structural engineers to commit an act of mass murder aimed at destroying thousands if not tens of of thousands of innocent civilians. (10-30 people)
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 3:43 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe your second comment continued
. . . this is probably the tamest of all the 9/11 scenarios I've ever heard. Many if not most of the "9/11 truthers" believe there were no passengers on the planes, no pilots, there was no Flight 93 uprising, no phone calls, nothing. That no plane hit the Pentagon, rather it was a missile. And on and on. This expands the conspiracy to thousands of if not 10's of thousands of people.
The fact that no one spoke up before this happened would be shocking but not impossible as it's likely the masterminds would keep the worker bees in the dark. However, in the 7.5 years since 9/11/01 not even ONE of them has gone public with this information? No one has leaked a word of this to the media? No one confessed/gloated to their wife, husband, girlfriend, mistress that they were part of the biggest scam in the history of the world?!?! When Bill Clinton can't even have an affair or Richard Nixon can't record the opposing campaign without it being on television every day for YEARS???? Impossible!
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 4:54 PM
moshe
writes:
Valid Points
I agree. The sheer magnitude of the operation must have been awesome. Again, I don't claim to have all the details. But it's sheer speculation, and proves nothing. Just because it must have been hard to pull off, doesn't mean it couldn't have been pulled off.
Why have there been no whistle blowers? I don't know. Maybe the culprits were foreigners.(And not who you think.)
I do know that many respected, accomplished and decorated senior military officials, architects and engineers have expressed doubts similar to mine.
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com
Also, you never responded to my first comment.
Here. View this - it's short. Please tell me what you see.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A
What do you see?
Osama bin Laden is free. Are you?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 5:07 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
WTC 7;
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
"Structure Magazine explains one probable cause of the WTC 7 collapse. "Single Point of Failure: How the Loss of One Column May Have Led to the Collapse of WTC 7"
http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsan z-Nov07.pdf
"Conspiracy theorists say World Trade Center 7 is the best proof for controlled demolition because it wasn't hit by airliners and only had a few fires. They also claim that there was a confession from the building owner who said he "pulled" it. But this is deceptive because while building 7 wasn't hit by an airliner, it was hit by the large perimeter columns of the Tower collapse. It was 400 ft away but the towers were more than 1300 ft tall. As the tower peeled open, it easily tilted over to reach building 7. Below is evidence showing that conspiracy theorists are wrong."
"As you can see from the graphic below, all the buildings just as far away from both towers as WTC7 were hit. The others were either very short buildings which didn't have to support a massive load above or had no fire. Only Building 7 had unfought fires and the massive load of 40 stories above them."
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 5:14 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Collapse of the Towers: Construction
http://www.debunking911.com/towers.htm
Massive Conspiracy; All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...
http://www.debunking911.com/massivect.htm
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 5:16 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Why use a plane at all . Why crash your own airline industry and every other countries { Swissair etc}, damage your financial markets { just when you are going to need some war funds} destroy very very valuable property, panic the WORLD, kill your own citizens etc. Could all this not be achieved by a ‘foiled’ plot. Terrorists were 15 minutes from the murder of thousands… a president would certainly come out better having stopped an attack than permitted one. Or if you needed a big attack why not just the anthrax that came after. Everyone panicking over any white powder. Far far easier to plant Anthrax or similar in the towers or Disneyland, have a panic, then capture your suspects who blow themselves up or whatever you want.
If you were going to do this, would you do it this way?’ There are cheaper, better, easier and safer ways to get into a war.. Also why pick Osama as the fall guy if the target is Hussein. Why not just pick Saddam and ‘plant’ evidence to show it was him all along, thereby never needing to go to Afghanistan at all .After all if you can plan the attack why not the culprit.. no need to go scratching for evidence of a link to Iraq AFTER the attack , set it up before.
Funny how the authorities are both all powerful, all seeing, all knowing, and completely incompetent at the same time...
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 6:40 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
The towers did not fall at or below free fall speeds…
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm
"Squibs"
So what is this then? Why would debris jet out of windows far below the collapse?
It could be a number of things, by themselves or in combination. One reasonable explanation is a buildup of pressure caused by the compression of air between the floors as they pancaked, (Please read the link to explain the NIST / Pancaking issue) pushed debris out of the already broken windows and/or open vents. Another is falling debris like elevators or elevator parts/motors and/or columns free falling down the elevator shafts and slamming into lower floors creating debris. In a sense the floors are large plungers and the towers are just one big Syringe during the collapse.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 6:46 PM
moshe
writes:
Jevica
Give me time to review your links and form an opinion. I'll get back to you. Thanks.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 6:48 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Good hunting, welcome anytime.
BTW feel free to comment on anything else.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 16, 2009 10:57 PM
moshe
writes:
Jevica
I've tentatively concluded that it was possible for those three buildings to collapse in the manner they did for structural and engineering reasons.
Jevica, you have proven Fritz wrong. Do you know how rare that is?
Kudos!
It would make more sense - and be a lot easier, I agree - for the shadow government to groom and train the hijackers, and then pilot the jet liners to their destinations(since the hijackers were very poor pilots) via remote control.
That would also explain the lack of an immediate investigation, and also how we knew - almost instantly - precisely who the hijackers were. And why we still don't have bin Laden, for that matter.
The government is behind this, but not in the way I had imagined.
Seriously - Am I still wearing a tin foil hat? I am always open to learning and growing.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 2:20 AM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Is this your belief;
"It would make more sense - and be a lot easier, I agree - for the shadow government to groom and train the hijackers, and then pilot the jet liners to their destinations(since the hijackers were very poor pilots) via remote control."
On 9/11 they did not have to be highly skilled pilots. They did not have to take off, land, or fly in bad weather.
They were certified pilots, and equipment in cockpits was similar to the simulators they had trained on. The planes were in flight when they took over they just had to point. They had purchased GPS units and visited the WTC for a GPS reading. They had to punch in the destination into the flight system, as they had done in training. The hijackers reached 3 of 4 targets. The flying skills were not top.
In the clear weather they were able to fly by sight [3 of 4 had instrument flight rules certification] the WTC were easy to see from a distance.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 12:15 PM
moshe
writes:
Jev
Well, yes, that's my working theory for now.
Numerous foreign governments warned about the attacks.(How could the administration plead ignorance?)
One of the first things Bush did after taking office was curtail the FBI's investigation of Al Qaeda.
There is also the issue of the 9-11 war games, in which Norad was simulating... get this... planes flying into buildings. That same morning. That's why there was so much confusion that morning.
P.S. Al qaeda in colloquial Arabic means "the toilet". No self-respecting terrorist group would give themselves that name.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 12:55 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
So you do believe it was the planes that brought down the WTC? Or is it [IYO] planes and hidden bombs {controlled demolition?} To correct answer I have to get where you are at. I don't want to gather info if you don't follow that path.
How about United flight 93, and the Pentagon? Plane in Pentagon, or rocket.
So some shadow govt did this [train pilots, etc to get us into fight against Islamic terrorists?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 1:15 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Much of my answers are from other material which I have looked up while in previous searchs, my brother-in-law is a 9/11 truther, so I do have information on file.
Check this link about the "New Pearl Harbor" book;
http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/Post911/dubious_claims.ht ml
"In every major event, there are coincidences, false, poor record keeping and unconfirmed news reports which make it to the public. Conspiracy theorists live for this. They create a web of logical fallacies which are not based on research, logic or evidence. Their assumptions are based on a string of misinformation hand picked for mass consumption. There are others dealing with those stories which I have on the links page. It's a logical fallacy to suggest that just because I don't care to deal with these myths that they must be true. For instance, the evidence for explosives or incendiaries doesn't increase with the time Bush spent in the classroom that day. That's just absurd. Yet many use his time in the classroom as some sort of proof. It may only prove how incompetent the Bush administration was that historic day."
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 1:25 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe some forknowledge
Could you give me which govts and what the warnings were?
"Numerous foreign governments warned about the attacks.(How could the administration plead ignorance?)" Was it just "attacks" or specific planes into the WTC?
For many people, the most suspicious area of 9/11 is the way many people seemed to know about it in advance, and yet reportedly all these warnings were ignored. Or even deliberately buried. Is this proof that the US Government wanted the attacks to take place? Let’s take a closer look.
http://www.911myths.com/html/foreknowledge.html
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 1:25 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe some forknowledge continued
* Israeli intelligence operatives spied on the alleged 9/11 hijackers for months prior to the attacks
* John Ashcroft stopped flying commercial flights in July 2001
* Insider trading on American Airlines and United Airlines stocks prove foreknowledge of 9/11
* Jeb Bush declared martial law in Florida, 4 days before 9/11
* One day before 9/11 Rumsfeld announces $2.3 trillion missing from Pentagon funds, suspiciously perfect timing that kept the story out of the headlines
* 4000 Israelis failed to turn up for work on 9/11
* Israeli company ZIM Shipping left the WTC only two weeks before the attacks
* Bush was warned al Qaeda were taking part in activities “consistent with preparation for hijackings” only weeks before 9/11
* Odigo employees told of 9/11 a few hours in advance
* San Francisco mayor Willie Brown was warned not to fly on 9/11
* Top Pentagon officials cancelled their flight plans on September 10th
* Ariel Sharon cancelled a plan to speak in New York on 9/11
* Anne Tatlock of Fiduciary missed 9/11 by attending a small meeting of WTC business leaders at Offutt Air Force Base
* The five “dancing Israelis” set up a camera to film the WTC before the attacks occurred
* Why wasn’t Bush immediately removed from the Florida school on 9/11, after the second impact? Was it because they knew he was in no danger?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 3:06 PM
moshe
writes:
Jev
Summer 2001: Bin Laden Speech Mentions 20 Martyrs in Upcoming Attack; Other Hints of Attack Spread Widely [9/11 Commission Report, 6/16/04] At a recorded speech at the al Faruq training camp in Afghanistan, bin Laden specifically urges trainees to pray for the success of an upcoming attack involving 20 martyrs.
*
June 2001: US Intelligence Warns of Spectacular Attacks by al-Qaeda Associates [9/11 Congressional Inquiry, 9/18/02]
*
June 4, 2001: Illegal Afghans Overheard Discussing New York City Hijacking Attack [Miami Herald, 9/20/01]
*
June 13, 2001: Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak claims Bin Laden Wants to Assassinate Bush with an Explosives-Filled Airplane [New York Times, 9/26/01]
*
June 20, 2001: Time Magazine Mentions al-Qaeda Using Planes as Weapons [Time, 6/20/01]
.....and much, much more.
http://www.americanhiroshima.com/911warnings.htm
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 3:07 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Seems to be some dispute about this; "Al qaeda in colloquial Arabic means "the toilet". No self-respecting terrorist group would give themselves that name."
In Arabic, al-Qaeda has four syllables. However, since two of the Arabic consonants in the name (the voiceless uvular plosive [q] and the voiced pharyngeal fricative [?]) are not phones found in the English language, the closest naturalized English pronunciation is IPA: /æl'k??i?d?//. More commonly, /æl'ka?d?/ and /æl'ke?d?/ are heard. Al-Qaeda's name can also be transliterated as al-Qaida, al-Qa'ida, el-Qaida, or al Qaeda.
The name of the organization comes from the Arabic noun qa'idah, which means foundation or basis and can also refer to a military base. The initial al- is the Arabic definite article the, hence the base.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9126/
What is al-Qaeda?
Al-Qaeda is an international terrorist network led by Osama bin Laden. It seeks to rid Muslim countries of what it sees as the profane influence of the West and replace their governments with fundamentalist Islamic regimes. After al-Qaeda’s September 11, 2001, attacks on America, the United States launched a war in Afghanistan to destroy al-Qaeda’s bases there and overthrow the Taliban, the country’s Muslim fundamentalist rulers who harbored bin Laden and his followers. “Al-Qaeda” is Arabic for “The Base.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1670089.stm
Al-Qaeda, meaning "the base", was created in 1989 as Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden and his colleagues began looking for new jihads.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 3:46 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Much of this is not actionable intelligence.
After the fact much of it would not lead you to hijackers who were going to fly into buildings.
After the fact you could say well if we thought this way about that it could be thought of like this, it's quite easy after the fact.
Would any of the listed lead you to the 19 hijackers and be able to stop them?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 3:49 PM
moshe
writes:
Jev
"The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the 'devil' only in order to drive the 'TV watcher' to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money."
Former French Military Intelligence official Pierre Henry Bunel
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2006/061006alqa edacrap.htm
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Friday, April, 17, 2009 4:04 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
So it's "You have heard before that "Al-Qaeda" roughly translates into "the base," but were you aware that "Ana raicha Al Qaeda" is arabic colloquial for "I'm going to the toilet"?"
So there is no Al Qaeda it's all "An organization by the name of "Al-Qaeda" does not exist and has never existed outside a falsely coined collective term for offshoot loose knit terror cells, the majority of which are guided by the Pakistani ISI, Mossad, the Saudis, MI6 and the CIA, that were created in response to America's actions after 9/11 - as the recent NIE report shows."
Western intelligence organizations do it all? So the Muslim ISI, works with the Jewish Mossad? Or they both use the name of a non existent group?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 1:48 PM
moshe
writes:
Jev
So it's "You have heard before that "Al-Qaeda" roughly translates into "the base," but were you aware that "Ana raicha Al Qaeda" is arabic colloquial for "I'm going to the toilet"?"
...And your point is?
I've confirmed with a native Arabic speaker that it is indeed colloquial for "toilet". This is problematic.
____________________
So there is no Al Qaeda it's all "An organization by the name of "Al-Qaeda" does not exist and has never existed outside a falsely coined collective term for offshoot loose knit terror cells, the majority of which are guided by the Pakistani ISI, Mossad, the Saudis, MI6 and the CIA, that were created in response to America's actions after 9/11 - as the recent NIE report shows."
You wrote this, not me.
__________________
Western intelligence organizations do it all? So the Muslim ISI, works with the Jewish Mossad? Or they both use the name of a non existent group?I
It cannot be inferred from the above that they work together.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 2:18 PM
moshe
writes:
Jev
Top CIA officials openly admit al-qaeda is a total and complete fabrication.
http://www.daily.pk/world/worldnews/84-worldnews/4803-al-qa eda-made-in-usa-by-cia-fabrication.html
"A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but can’t afford an air force." William Blum
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 3:09 PM
moshe
writes:
Unglaublich!
Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a false-flag conspiracy plan, proposed within the United States government in 1962. The plan called for CIA or other operatives to commit apparent acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Castro-led Cuba. One plan was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".
*************This operation is especially notable in that it included plans for hijackings and bombings followed by the use of phony evidence that would blame the terrorist acts on a foreign government, namely Cuba.******************
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 3:10 PM
moshe
writes:
HERMAN GOERING
"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in
Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
*************That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."***************
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 3:24 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
You have confirmed that "Ana raicha Al Qaeda" is "colloquial" for toilet. Please supply with the translation for the words.
There was this second sentence, "Or they both use the name of a non existent group?" They work on their own with a name of a group that does not really exist?
According to the link about AQ, Those intelligence officers that believe about AQ are not "informed" or are in on the fact that, "there is no . . . terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this"
BTW is this information confined to only "conspiracy" sites or are there any mainstream sites that mention that AQ is not a real terrorist group that it's a "propaganda campaign"
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 3:32 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Read this comment, April, 18, 2009 2:18 PM, that mentioned "Al Qaeda Made In USA by CIA Fabrication"
It mentions "In 2004 the BBC showed a documentary titled The Power of Nightmares" which I wager is some anti-American [West] video, I read the article, I would suggest you coming up with something better then this.
According to this version and the last comment], the entire intelligence apparatus of the US [and the West] is in on the fact that AQ does not exist or are incompetent, the same can be said for the MSM.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 4:16 PM
moshe
writes:
??????
Maybe my reading comprehension is lacking, but your last two posts were largely incoherent.(I'm not sure what you're asking of me.)
Self-contradictory, too. You ask if any of this information is on mainstream sites, and then you say that the MSM is incompetent.
But if the MSM is incompetent, how could you rely on them to present you the truth?
And if they are incompetent, how can you believe their version of what happened on 9-11? Why would you?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 4:16 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
"While "Operation Northwoods" has provided the raw material for an entire cottage industry of 9/11 conspiracy theories, to my knowledge no one has demonstrated the slightest connection to 9/11 itself."
". . . no one was to be killed in the fake plane scheme. We know about this idea because the document has been declassified. The idea was rejected, of course."
What I have read on the loose change [conspiracy] site there was no mention of hijacking, with Northwoods.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 4:35 PM
moshe
writes:
Jev
..."which I wager is some anti-American [West] video," = I don't like what they have to say. It's a cop-out. As if the West is perfect!
That's like a legitimate muslim terrorist(and there are some, I agree) saying "The Israeli's want to kill me because I blew up a school bus. They're just anti-east."
As for the literal translation of "Ana raicha al qaeda", it is, I believe, a female stating:
I(Ana)- am going to(raicha) - the(al) - qaeda (place where one sits)- viz., the toilet.
Oh, that's right - those people just dig a hole in the ground and don't even use toilet paper. They're animals! Let's kill them all!
No wonder some are anti-American.
"Early in life I had noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper." - George Orwell
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 5:27 PM
moshe
writes:
1
Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Retired commercial pilot. Flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years. Aircraft flown: Boeing 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777. 30,000+ total hours flown. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines aircraft that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC). Former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 5:28 PM
moshe
writes:
2
# Video interview 9/11 Ripple Effect 8/07: "I flew the two actual aircraft which were involved in 9/11; the Fight number 175 and Flight 93, the 757 that allegedly went down in Shanksville and Flight 175 is the aircraft that's alleged to have hit the South Tower. I don't believe it's possible for, like I said, for a terrorist, a so-called terrorist to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding it's design limit speed by well over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding -- pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G's. And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky. I couldn't do it and I'm absolutely positive they couldn't do it." http://americanbuddhist.net
# Article 7/17/05: "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple." … Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 280 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn."…
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 5:29 PM
moshe
writes:
3
"For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand," said Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying." http://www.arcticbeacon.com
Audio Interview 9/16/04: Regarding Flight 77, which allegedly hit the Pentagon. "The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous...
http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 9:33 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
They did not fly like an "ace"
"They were certified pilots, and equipment in cockpits was similar to the simulators they had trained on. The planes were in flight when they took over they just had to point. They had purchased GPS units and visited the WTC for a GPS reading. They had to punch in the destination into the flight system, as they had done in training. The hijackers reached 3 of 4 targets. The flying skills were not top."
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 9:36 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
"Yes, Wittenburg is a pilot. He is also a conspiracy theorist who does not believe that ANY aircraft hit the Pentagon, which makes him stupid or insane. Too bad, because his former co-workers were on that plane. I wonder what he thinks happened to them. He believes a missile hit the Pentagon. He has not produced a single piece of evidence to back that belief. He has not attempted to account for the dozens of eyewitnesses who saw the crash. He also believes that the other 3 flights were not piloted by Arabs, because they wouldn't have the skills."
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 9:40 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
"Hanjour did have a commercial instrument-rated pilot license."
""Hello, my name is Marcel Bernard and I'm the chief flight instructor here at Freeway. Hani Hanjour, well basically what happened with him is... he showed at the airport and wanted to get checked out in the aircraft you see, he was already certified, he didn't come to us for flight training. Yeah, he already had a pilot's license."
"From the Greenbelt (Maryland) Gazette:
The standard evaluation consists of one-to-one-and-a-half-hour flights east over the Chesapeake Bay area. Hanjour paid $400 cash and provided a valid pilot's license from Arizona, Bernard said. He failed because he showed problems landing the airplane and the flight instructor had to help him, Bernard said. But Hanjour's problems were nothing unusual, Bernard said. "There's no doubt in my mind that once (Flight 77) got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it.""
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 9:45 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Flight 77?
WHAT??? There is much wreckage outside the Pentagon and a huge amount inside, including the remains of passengers & crew.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 9:47 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Is your point about AQ being made up by Western intelligence agencies [or whatever] that they [AQ] did not /could not have done it [9/11] because they don't exist?
Except only conspiracy theorists have brought that up.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 10:03 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Conspiracy theorists deny eyewitnesses who saw planes and crews take off, the radar that tracked them, the passengers that called from all the airplanes [not only on cell phones but on air phones on the aircraft], eyewitnesses that saw the planes hit, including many who saw the impact at the Pentagon. Allowing for the time in which radar and the "black boxes" could track the aircraft there was no time to land, take the people off take off again and acquire the target.
The planes can be identified as the ones that took off before the attack by the wreckage and some by photos.
Barbara Olson called her husband twice to alert him to Flight 77's path and it's intended target
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 18, 2009 11:04 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Read about the video in the article, if they don't like us [the West] they are going to come up with some ideas.
I have not heard this about AQ not really existing except it was made up by intelligence organizations. No mainstream group has mentioned this.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 3:53 AM
jevica
writes:
moshe
That last comment.
The only place I have ever heard that AQ does not exist is from you and links you sent. Have any mainstream sites or MSM said the same?
The West is a hell of a lot better then most of the countries that brand us a evil, or Satan.
Do you want to get into the entire US foreign policy? Or keep it at the WTC coming down or just the 9/11 attacks?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:18 PM
moshe
writes:
1
I will respond, point by point.
They did not fly like an "ace"
"They were certified pilots, and equipment in cockpits was similar to the simulators they had trained on. The planes were in flight when they took over they just had to point. They had purchased GPS units and visited the WTC for a GPS reading. They had to punch in the destination into the flight system, as they had done in training. The hijackers reached 3 of 4 targets. The flying skills were not top."
____________
It doesn't matter. The maneuver the apocryphal plane that hit the pentagon made was impossible, whether on autopilot or otherwise.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:21 PM
moshe
writes:
2.
"Yes, Wittenburg is a pilot. He is also a conspiracy theorist who does not believe that ANY aircraft hit the Pentagon, which makes him stupid or insane. Too bad, because his former co-workers were on that plane. I wonder what he thinks happened to them. He believes a missile hit the Pentagon. He has not produced a single piece of evidence to back that belief. He has not attempted to account for the dozens of eyewitnesses who saw the crash. He also believes that the other 3 flights were not piloted by Arabs, because they wouldn't have the skills."
That's an irrelevant appeal, a fallacy of relevance. Of course he's a "conspiracy theorist", and he just got done telling you why.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:25 PM
moshe
writes:
2a.
He also believes that the other 3 flights were not piloted by Arabs, because they wouldn't have the skills.
______________
Ob, boy. Now he's a racist too, in addition to being stupid and/or insane?
Another logical fallacy. His point is that NO ONE could have piloted those planes in that matter.
(And now you're sticking up for those filthy Arabs all of a sudden?)
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:29 PM
moshe
writes:
3.
"Hanjour did have a commercial instrument-rated pilot license."
""Hello, my name is Marcel Bernard and I'm the chief flight instructor here at Freeway. Hani Hanjour, well basically what happened with him is... he showed at the airport and wanted to get checked out in the aircraft you see, he was already certified, he didn't come to us for flight training. Yeah, he already had a pilot's license."
"From the Greenbelt (Maryland) Gazette:
The standard evaluation consists of one-to-one-and-a-half-hour flights east over the Chesapeake Bay area. Hanjour paid $400 cash and provided a valid pilot's license from Arizona, Bernard said. He failed because he showed problems landing the airplane and the flight instructor had to help him, Bernard said. But Hanjour's problems were nothing unusual, Bernard said. "There's no doubt in my mind that once (Flight 77) got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it.""
________
Not bad, but no links.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:33 PM
moshe
writes:
4
Flight 77?
WHAT??? There is much wreckage outside the Pentagon and a huge amount inside, including the remains of passengers & crew.
______________
That contradicts all visual evidence. And what of the titanium engines? Did they just vanish into thin air? Why was there no attempt to ever reconstruct the plane, as in every other crash investigation?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:37 PM
moshe
writes:
5.
Is your point about AQ being made up by Western intelligence agencies [or whatever] that they [AQ] did not /could not have done it [9/11] because they don't exist?
Except only conspiracy theorists have brought that up.
______________
My point is that AQ was originally a dataBASE of mujahadeen fighters working for/with the CIA against the Russians in Afghanistan. So yes, they exist in that sense. But the threat that they pose to these united States of America is waaaay overblown in my estimation.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:40 PM
moshe
writes:
6.
Conspiracy theorists deny eyewitnesses who saw planes and crews take off, the radar that tracked them, the passengers that called from all the airplanes [not only on cell phones but on air phones on the aircraft], eyewitnesses that saw the planes hit, including many who saw the impact at the Pentagon. Allowing for the time in which radar and the "black boxes" could track the aircraft there was no time to land, take the people off take off again and acquire the target.
The planes can be identified as the ones that took off before the attack by the wreckage and some by photos.
Barbara Olson called her husband twice to alert him to Flight 77's path and it's intended target
_______________
You're not talking to "conspiracy theorists". You're talking to me. The need you have to lump them all together into a single group I find disturbing.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:42 PM
moshe
writes:
7.
Read about the video in the article, if they don't like us [the West] they are going to come up with some ideas.
________________
Yep, just like we come up with ideas about them.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:48 PM
moshe
writes:
8.
The West is a hell of a lot better then most of the countries that brand us a evil, or Satan.
Do you want to get into the entire US foreign policy? Or keep it at the WTC coming down or just the 9/11 attacks?
_____________
I agree, in a lot of respects the West is better. So tell you what. You wanna go over there and spread democracy and freedom or whatever you wanna do, fine - you're free to do so. But you have no right to demand that the sons and daughters of others join you.
Well, foreign policy and 9-11 are inextricably linked. But no, I really don't care to discuss foreign policy. What for? Our foreign policy = kill, kill, bomb and kill. What's to discuss?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:49 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
So you say it was not a plane that hit the Pentagon. So this maneuver was made by what a missile?
Do you dismiss all eyewitnesses? Do you dismiss all wreckage found?
The turn occurred before Flight 77 reached the Pentagon. The pilot didn’t fly around it, in an apparent effort to hit a particular area: he simply aimed for the side he was approaching. To hit another wedge would have required an extra turn, and perhaps some thought to avoid tall buildings, planes landing at the airport near the Pentagon, and other obstacles (the wedge hit on 9/11 is the rightmost visible side in this picture).
Why make the turn, though? Might the pilot have realized he was too high? Perhaps so, as the document also tells us that Flight 77 was as high as 8,000 feet around the beginning of the turn, and 2,000 feet by the end of it. Being forced to make such a maneuver is perhaps further confirmation of an inexperienced pilot.
Once the turn had been completed, the pilot may then have been able to use landmarks to assist in the final approach. We’re currently looking for photographs that might help with that, but one obvious candidate is the position of the Washington Monument.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:50 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 757 wreckage at the Pentagon.
http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 6:53 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
"You're not talking to "conspiracy theorists". You're talking to me. The need you have to lump them all together into a single group I find disturbing."
OK you get disturbed instead of answer.
Do you dismiss "eyewitnesses who saw planes and crews take off, the radar that tracked them, the passengers that called from all the airplanes [not only on cell phones but on air phones on the aircraft], eyewitnesses that saw the planes hit, including many who saw the impact at the Pentagon. Allowing for the time in which radar and the "black boxes" could track the aircraft there was no time to land, take the people off take off again and acquire the target.
The planes can be identified as the ones that took off before the attack by the wreckage and some by photos.
Barbara Olson called her husband twice to alert him to Flight 77's path and it's intended target"
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 7:05 PM
moshe
writes:
One last point
Let me clarify something, before I leave for a few rounds of golf.
"Conspiracy theory" is misleading. Conspiracies are a fact, and in fact occur every day. A conspiracy is what?... two or more people conspiring to do something illegal, right?
Well, on 9-11, 19 evil, evil, evil, evil, evil, evil Moooooooooslims conspired to commit a criminal act, according to the government you trust so much.
I believe, on the other hand, that it was others who conspired.(Yes, there were 19 hijackers... I suppose... but they were puppets.)
Either way, a conspiracy was committed on that day. And that ain't no theory.
_____________
Remember that the patriot is the dupe of statesmen and the tool of conquerors.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 7:15 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
THIS IS LEAVING OUT THE FACT THAT DOZENS OF PEOPLE
http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm
SAW THE 757 HIT THE PENTAGON, MUCH OF THE PLANE WAS RECOVERED ON THE SCENE, AND ALL BUT FIVE OF 189 PEOPLE WHO DIED ON THE AIRCRAFT AND IN THE PENTAGON WERE IDENTIFIED THROUGH DNA TESTING.
All of the hijackers we identified. Was all this planted?
An airplane striking a reinforced concrete building at over 500 mph is going to break into small pieces?
There is much wreckage outside the Pentagon and a huge amount inside, including the remains of passengers & crew.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 7:27 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
Conspiracy theory used to denote those who believe in so many different angles of what happened on 9/11 that it's almost impossible to answer them all.
There were hijackers "I believe, on the other hand, that it was others who conspired.(Yes, there were 19 hijackers... I suppose... but they were puppets.)" Who were involved can't say, how many, don't know. The amount of people who had to be involved in this secret [depending on which one you buy into/or believe] and never any break in the "wall of silence"
You did not mention that Wittenburg was a 9/11 truth believer, it seemed that he was just a pilot that questioned the findings.
"And now you're sticking up for those filthy Arabs all of a sudden?" no I'm saying the Arabs were hijackers and they flew the planes into the WTC, and Pentagon and United 93 into the field.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 7:35 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
BTW that is not only what our foreign policy is made up of.
If your reference to spreading democracy is a ref. to the Iraq war then you are way off base on the reason for the war. After the Commander in Chief [President] and decision makers decide, then the policy is carried out [by the military if necessary].
We now have a new President who will carry out his policies, I may not agree with him but he is the President and has the authority.
But this gets off the issue I will try to stay on the 9/11 issue
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 19, 2009 7:38 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
From the Popular Mechanics 9/11 myth debunking article:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.htm l
"Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C.
"I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:48 AM
moshe
writes:
1.
"I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
____________________
Why would he hold body parts in his hands? That's gross! He's a blast expert, not a forensics guy. Also, maybe the body parts were of pentagon employees.
That article, BTW, was written by a relative of Michael Chertoff(son of the devil in Russian), and has zero credibility in my mind.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:48 AM
moshe
writes:
2.
We now have a new President who will carry out his policies, I may not agree with him but he is the President and has the authority.
________________
This is the scariest thing I've heard in a loooooong time, Jev. I though that type of mentality was declared criminal at Nuremburg. You're just following orders, are you Mr. good German?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:49 AM
moshe
writes:
3.
BTW that is not only what our foreign policy is made up of.
_____________
You are correct. I forgot - we give billions to brutal dictators.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:51 AM
moshe
writes:
4.
Doesn't the pentagon have its own missile defense system? What happened? I would imagine that a jet liner(as compared with a Russian Su-27, for example) would be a rather easy target.
And what of the video tape? Isn't the entire area under full surveillance at all times? That tape they released(of the "plane" hitting the pentagon) was a joke!!!!!!!!!!!
I remember listening to the dolts on talk radio at the time, and to them bleating: "There it is! Do you see it?! Don't you?! There it is!! The airplane!! Da plane! Da plane!"
So I watched it for myself. I didn't see nothin'! Nothing! But they wanted so bad to see an airplane. This is an example of cognitive dissonance, Jev.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:53 AM
moshe
writes:
5.
THIS IS LEAVING OUT THE FACT THAT DOZENS OF PEOPLE
http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm
SAW THE 757 HIT THE PENTAGON, MUCH OF THE PLANE WAS RECOVERED ON THE SCENE, AND ALL BUT FIVE OF 189 PEOPLE WHO DIED ON THE AIRCRAFT AND IN THE PENTAGON WERE IDENTIFIED THROUGH DNA TESTING.
All of the hijackers we identified. Was all this planted?
_____________
Thanks for the link! A few thoughts:
a) Your link does not verify that all but five of the 189 on board were dna-identified
b) Your link does not verify that all(or any) of the hijackers were identified.
As for the eyewitness testimonials. Very interesting. I read them, I really did. And half seem to contradict the other half. And judging by cadence and language used, I would say that many "testimonials" were written by the same person. And "eyewitness testimonials" are notoriously unreliable, as proven by scientific experiment.
Those "testimonials" were actually laughable, if you ask me.
Jev, there are thousands of people who've seen UFO's. Using your logic, I have to conclude that you believe in UFO's. You never struck me as the type!
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:54 AM
moshe
writes:
6.
"You're not talking to "conspiracy theorists". You're talking to me. The need you have to lump them all together into a single group I find disturbing."
OK you get disturbed instead of answer.
_____________
Yes I am disturbed, because you are seeing not an individual, but rather a group of people, which is the hallmark of a liberal, and I think that you, as a good conservative, are better than that, and sorry for the run-on sentence.
And yes, I do realize I am guilty of precisely that which I just condemned(groups, liberal vs. conservative). I wish I could expand on that, but I'm really not that smart.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:56 AM
moshe
writes:
7.
moshe 757 wreckage at the Pentagon.
http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html
_______________
You are kidding, right? I could pick that "wreckage" up and put it in my POCKET.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 11:59 AM
moshe
writes:
Jev
It's a beautiful day out here in Northern California. Umm, Commifornia. Where you be at, J?
And thanks again for debating me, even though I know you consider me a raving lunatic. But that's fine.
Maybe I am! Or.... maybe I'm not.
But really, where are we going with this? Nowhere but in circles. I've proven nothing, it's true, but hopefully have planted a few seeds of doubt, whereas you've not convinced me that the official 9-11 "theory" is anything but bunk.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.
Because remember: power corrupts, and absolute power... is really cool!
LOL!
Good luck.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 12:29 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
"By the way, Ben Chertoff, Editor of Popular Mechanics says that as far as he knows he is not related to Michael Chertoff of Homeland Security, which is a claim CTists have been making to attempt to discredit Popular Mechanics.)"
If you can offer actual evidence to discredit the editor as in proof that he is a relative let's see it.
"has zero credibility in my mind." Because you say he is a relative.
You don't answer the point of seeing marks of the wings on building, picking up parts of the plane and uniforms, just oblique point as to why he would pick up body parts. But then you don't accept this because you believe the editor is a relative of someone.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 12:34 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 2
The fact that BHO is the new President who will carry out HIS OWN policies.
Or that I DON'T agree with his policies but he has the authority [to carry out his own policies]
Which scares you?
A President carrying out his own policies was "declared criminal at Nuremburg" Or that he has the authority was "declared criminal at Nuremburg"
I better check this out.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 12:39 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 3
If I'm wrong in this comment let me know I mean nothing wrong, but
I feel that you did not like President Bush [43], You seem to feel that America has been off base in it's foreign policy and actions around the world.
Was this your feeling just since 2000 or before.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 1:09 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 4
"Our first problem with this idea is that we've never, ever, at any point seen a reference to show that these missile batteries exist. Why no photos, no stories about them? Plainly they wouldn’t want to give away some details, but it makes little sense to keep them entirely secret, because surely the whole point of such batteries would be to act as a deterrent?
Second, if they did exist then wouldn’t you have expected Pentagon employees to also have raised this question? Or are we supposed to believe they’re all “in on it”, even those whose friends were killed in the attack?"
". . . the Pentagon is located very close to the approach for Washington's Ronald Reagan airport,. . ."
". . . even the fallback position of manually operated batteries wouldn't really help. Because at what point would you make the shootdown decision? At an average of 400 mph, any plane approaching the Pentagon would cover the final mile in around 9 seconds. A plane could divert from a normal approach path to the airport in an even shorter period, a major problem because it takes time for missiles to launch, detect and move in on an attacker. If you can’t launch before the target is inside your minimum range (which could be half a mile or more) then you have no chance of hitting it."
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 1:14 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 4 continue
Pentagon did use armed missile batteries in Washington during September 2002, and reports at the time made it clear that this was an exceptional event.
Pentagon arms missile batteries around D.C.
For the first time since the Cuban missile crisis almost 40 years ago, armed missile launchers will be protecting the nation's capital by day's end Tuesday -- a precaution that comes amid a heightened alert status on the eve of the one-year anniversary of the September 11 attacks.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/09/10/ar911.air.defense/
No mention of any earlier Pentagon missile batteries here.
What continues to be missed is how those are supposed to work in such cluttered airspace without accidentally shooting down legitimate air traffic; Reagan International is very close by, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the normal landing approaches of those airliners comes rather close to the Pentagon anyway, and any deviations that did occur would not be obvious until it was too late to do anything. So (ignoring the lack of physical evidence for such emplacements) given the practical problems with such a deployment, it's a wonder that fantasists continue to insist on their presence pre-9/11; they seem to ignore that procedure is every bit as important as material existence (at least in my dealings with governmental bureaucracies), and the lack of a practical procedure for identifying deviant aircraft in time to do anything about it would preclude the emplacement of the defenses to begin with.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 1:16 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 4 continue
There are two things readily available on the internet that blow the whole notion of missile batteries outta the sky. The published approach procedure for runway 15, which shows an extended runway centerline right over the Pentagon, with no restrictions - and the low altitude chart for the DC area, which depicts no prohibited airspace above or around the Pentagon.
If they did exist then wouldn’t you have expected Pentagon employees to also have raised this question?
An automatic shoot-down of anything that violated the Pentagon airspace is not possible. The Pentagon is located very close to the approach for Washington's Ronald Reagan airport.
There has not been any reports of an existence of any missile batteries before 9/11.
What comes to restricted airspace over Pentagon, the low altitude chart for the DC area depicts no prohibited airspace above or around the Pentagon.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 1:20 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe
I do believe in UFOs and that there is intelligent life on other planets and they may have visited this planet. Does that disqualify me from anything?
moshe you never struck me as the 9/11 truth US bad type. so what does that mean?
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 1:41 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 5 part
You looked at all the pictures and can just dismiss all of them?
Another link,
http://rense.com/general32/phot.htm
Reading and photos at the end, links with reading might be out of date at this time. Hope your pockets are big enough for all this.
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/DNA_identification
The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology at Walter Reed was involved in identifying victims at the Pentagon. Identification took place at a lab at Dover Air Force Base, as well as another lab in Rockville, Maryland.[3]
Many of the remains were badly burned, but remains for all but five of the victims were identified. Remains were also found belonging to the five hijackers.[1] Over 50 forensic specialists and other personnel were involved in identifying the remains.[3]
This is link to [3];
http://www.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/11290 1/12279-1.shtml
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 1:53 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe 6
YOU deny this;
deny eyewitnesses who saw planes and crews take off, the radar that tracked them, the passengers that called from all the airplanes [not only on cell phones but on air phones on the aircraft], eyewitnesses that saw the planes hit, including many who saw the impact at the Pentagon. Allowing for the time in which radar and the "black boxes" could track the aircraft there was no time to land, take the people off take off again and acquire the target.
The planes can be identified as the ones that took off before the attack by the wreckage and some by photos.
Barbara Olson called her husband twice to alert him to Flight 77's path and it's intended target
You get disturbed.
Is there any evidence you will accept? Bodies at the Pentagon identified, plane parts identified, from flight 77.
Testimony you don't like because it seems to be "written" by same person, did you follow any of the links that show where it came from? Some not still active but others are.
Also,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/11/washscene.ht m
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Monday, April, 20, 2009 2:08 PM
jevica
writes:
moshe hijackers
http://debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers
Were all those ID as hijackers dupes [because AQ does not exist as a terrorist organization] or what other reason.
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Wednesday, May, 06, 2009 5:19 PM
moshe
writes:
Makes Watergate Look Small
A video from the families who fought to create The 9/11 Commission -- and succeeded.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3979568779414136481& ei=lNYBSpPnKYH4-wGfz9GtDA&q=911+press+for+truth&hl=en
Watch it!
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Wednesday, May, 06, 2009 5:21 PM
moshe
writes:
Makes Watergate Look Small
A video from the families who fought to create The 9/11 Commission -- and succeeded.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3979568779414136481& ei=lNYBSpPnKYH4-wGfz9GtDA&q=911+press+for+truth&hl=en
Watch it!
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Wednesday, May, 06, 2009 5:22 PM
moshe
writes:
Makes Watergate Look Small
A video from the families who fought to create The 9/11 Commission -- and succeeded.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=3979568779414136481& ei=lNYBSpPnKYH4-wGfz9GtDA&q=911+press+for+truth&hl=en
Watch it!
Email It
|
Print It
|
Flag as Offensive
Sign Up to Post Your Comments
Sign Up to Post Your Comments
Please take a few seconds to sign up, then you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, create your own blog and more! If you are already registered,
click here
.
Need an account?
Login
Login
Your Email:
Password:
Get Your Password
|
Register
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (
*
) are required.
Salutation:
Mr.
Mrs.
Ms.
Miss.
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
AE
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
*
Zip:
*
Townhall Daily Alert
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
Townhall.com Spotlight
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.