I don’t like wild speculations without any background, but I think everyone will have to admit that there are a lot of questions awaiting an answer - from several US government-related institutions. The denial of those answers will only help conspiracy theories, not prevent them.
Unfortunately, if you watch the whole thing from some distance, one will notice a lot of very strange things having happened, events that under other circumstances might never have been accepted, but that were swallowed without a question under the shock of 9-11.
Need some examples? A flight recorder has to withstand extremely harsh conditions (temperature, water, pressure, acceleration,…) or it would be useless. In almost every airplane accident the flight recorder can be recovered and analysed. Then why is only one out of eight flight recorders not completely destroyed, but still its information can not be made available to the public? And strangely, while four flight recorders (WTC) are all ashes, a passport (these are usually made of paper and other nicely burning material) - and especially a passport from one of the hijackers - can sail out of the plane and be found a few blocks away unharmed.
There are more strange things awaiting answers, but as long as the US government does not show the slightest interest to clear up such irregularities, they will make themselves a target of further speculations…
I’m not one for ooh’s and aah’s but here you go … Bush knew - FACT !
And then your Typical Propoganda … --> Prior Archives …
Oh … for the record … I didn’t read most of it, since I don’t give a flying f@ck … I just thought I’ll add fuel to fire 
Then why is only one out of eight flight recorders not completely destroyed, but still its information can not be made available to the public? And strangely, while four flight recorders (WTC) are all ashes, a passport (these are usually made of paper and other nicely burning material) - and especially a passport from one of the hijackers - can sail out of the plane and be found a few blocks away unharmed.
It’s all coincidence and theory, but why should a small item not get blasted away while the fligth recorder, fixed to the planes body, can’t and thus has to withstand the extremes (heat in this case) which destroys it?
There will always be arguments and counterarguments in favour of and against it, but somewhere I think people should use a bit more common sense.
And since most information provided in those cases is either hear-say or just speculation you can’t convince me of that “conspiracy theory”.
man, people must really hate the us a lot in order to believe that the government went out and killed all those people who died in the pentagon for propaganda purposes.
i mean, talking about a fake moon landing is one thing. it’s not like anyone died. trying to convince yourself that the us government killed a bunch of military officers(of all people) for good pr…that’s just sick.
let me guess, the cia gathered up all the people who died on the planes and tortured them to get them to make the last minute phone calls? people who are so desperate for reasons to hate the us have problems.
quote:Maybe because the flight recorder is designed (otherwise it would be useless to install such a crap) to withstand temperatures _higher_ than kerosin can produce - for half an hour, afaik. Maybe because the passport (Are all terrorists usually travelling on their real passports?) usually should be somewhere in a pocket inside a jacket or in a bag and maybe because the corpses are said to be burned so severly that even a DNA analysis is impossible. But talking of coincidences: Is it another coincidence or rather a theory that the US government did not provide any proof that Bin Laden was the mastermind behind 9-11? AFAIR, the Taliban asked the US government for such proof as the US demanded his extradition. Such proof was denied and bomber sent instead - to bomb a whole country just because terrorists were supposed there... I didn't say the US government would have planned the 9-11 attack, I said there are lots of unanswered questions about things that would have been questioned in all media under other circumstances. And the denial of those answers will not help to stop speculations. Because among others, of course it is coincidence that 9-11 actually was of great benefit to a number of people and companies...
Originally posted by Rascal: It's all coincidence and theory, but why should a small item not get blasted away while the fligth recorder, fixed to the planes body, can't and thus has to withstand the extremes (heat in this case) which destroys it?
quote:
Originally posted by Ryan P.: Well maybe you should look harder then, because they (close-up photos of the Pennsylvania crash site) are everywhere.
If they are everywhere, as you suggest, perhaps you could help us out by supplying a URL or two.
@Olaf: Agree, lot’s of unanswered questions and I never agreed with the actions the US government took. Not to mention they changed their intention from ‘getting Bin Laden’ to ‘wipe out terrorism’ (anybody still talking about him actually?).
Didn’t know the passport was supposed to be one of the terrorists though, however enough flight recorders have been damaged/lost in commercial accidents before, so that isn’t a good argument.
But like I always say: too many coincidences are no coincidence. Rather “convenient” in this particuar case …
I have all the AP and Reuters photos from that day. The second strike on the towers shows a huge fireball. Immediately after the explosion, I see no large pieces falling from the towers… It is said that the fuel explosion vaporized the plane immediately. Isn’t it true that when planes hit the ground, there are often large pieces of the plane which slowly burn away after the crash? So the fuel must have created a huge fireball that vaporized even the tail of the plane, but the fireball was not hot enough to vaporized that entire floor and make the tower collapse immediately.
One very close aftermath photo of the Pentagon shows the hole. It looks very narrow: 6-10 windows wide, but absolutely no plane debris is evident. Wouldn’t the wings be wider than the whole I am describing? Also, there are very very few shots of the Pentgon fire.
I am pretty sure planes hit the towers, but the Pentagon does not look like it was hit by a plane.
Now I ask: What does it look like when a plane hits a building? Lack of Black boxes is really annoying, too.
One thing nags me the most … Those “bin Laden tapes” were so… convienient… They seemed timed exactly at about the time Americans might question attacking Afghanistan.
These are just observations. I am not drawing conslusions, but may be leading the witnesses.
I can tell you what a plane hitting a building looks like, because I saw the WTC attacks happen outside my window. It was the most horrible thing I’ve ever seen and a couple thousand other New Yorkers who saw it would probably tell you the same thing. How are you even having this conversation? I guess it’s easy for people who weren’t there to make up whatever bs they want to explain unanswered questions - and I’m not saying there aren’t any. I’m pretty skeptical about a lot of what the media is telling us myself. But to imply that everyone who saw planes that day must have been on some kind of hallucinogen - ?
The U.S. may do a lot of insidious things, but to accuse our government of something like this is not only ridiculous but beyond offensive. By the way, I thought it was kinda funny that more people got offended at that little swipe at the French than about what this thread is implying…talk about a different perspective…
quote:
Originally posted by Flywheel1: But to imply that everyone who saw planes that day must have been on some kind of hallucinogen...
Oh dear. Nobody is saying that the WTC buildings weren’t hit by planes. You were part of that traumatic experience so we can forgive you for having clouded vision when you read about it. However, some people are saying that the first plane to hit the WTC was not an airliner, but a smaller plane. Presumably hundreds, probably thousands of people must have seen the plane before it hit the building (the first plane, that is - even more would have been watching the second.) Could you please tell us whether you saw the first plane hit the building, and was it an airliner or wasn’t it? Your eyewitness account would be much more convincing than all those internet rumours.
Hmm…I’m pretty sure I remember reading some posts from people who weren’t convinced that planes had hit the WTC; they seem to have disappeared, maybe I hallucinated them too Anyway, I was addressing that, not trying to imply that you’re all flaming idiots. To answer your question, no, I didn’t actually see the first plane hit, only the explosion it caused. But I do remember that on the NY news right after the attacks, that there were a number of people interviewed who did see the first plane fly in, and I’m also pretty sure that someone had caught it on camera and that was on TV also (not getting the constant play of the second plane because the explosion wasn’t as dramatic and the angle not as good, I’d assumed). Nobody’s eyewitness account contradicted the accepted story. Nobody ANYWHERE said Hey, that wasn’t an airliner! A lot of people who heard “a plane just hit the WTC” THOUGHT that it must have been a commuter plane, because the idea of an airliner was just too incomprehensible. I don’t know, a dedicated conspiracy theorist would probably say that those people they interviewed were plants, and that everyone who actually saw the commuter jet full of explosives has been locked up so they can’t spread the story? Jeez. Even if our government were going to try and pull off something like that, how could they be so stupid as to try and pull it off in such a densely populated area as New York City where there would be plenty of people around to see what really happened?
Or am I still misunderstanding what you’re saying?
Regardless, I still think the whole concept of the U.S. intentionally killing thousands of their own citizens just to get people psyched about their underhanded oil interests is really pushing it, to say the least.
quote:
Originally posted by Flywheel1: Nobody's eyewitness account contradicted the accepted story. Nobody ANYWHERE said Hey, that wasn't an airliner! A lot of people who heard "a plane just hit the WTC" THOUGHT that it must have been a commuter plane, because the idea of an airliner was just too incomprehensible.
OK. I saw on TV the second strike. It was an airliner. The first strike must have been an airliner, since there is record of that airliner missing and tracked to New York City.
So now I am looking at pix of the first hole. It’s about the same size and it looks like it was made by an airliner: a round hole and on both sides a long piece for wings.
I think that a lot of the doubt in my mind and in others is to address the greatest fear of democrats (those who are believers in democracy): that the people give our vote get drunk with power and think they can get more power in office by any means possible. Thank god we in the media have access to these photos to check these things.
Sometimes conspiracies are easier to believe than reality because reality is HARD and unforgiving.
I am reading Time Asia’s cover story today about Saddam Hussein and his reign of terror. It is pretty incredible. Those who have escaped tell the tale of his evil ways. It would seem his grip on power was seriously depleted (The U.S.-led force put out of commission hundreds of thousands: 200,000 reserves and 580,000 troops, according to The Military Balance) from the Gulf War, but he is able to keep his power. And the Allies are able to keep him contained with the exception of the occasional loss of a few thousand people here and there as what happened on September 11. Welcome to reality.
Still, the cowed Iraqi masses are “disillusioned” according to the Time report.
If we don’t want to believe our leaders, then we have to believe Time… or should we go on a fact-finding mission to the Iraq? We can’t, can we?
So then U.S. citizens can ask themselves some simple questions. “Are we happy enough with our lives and freedoms to keep from voting for someone else? If we can’t trust in the democracy that we have, do we rebel?”
I think every liberal arts major was confronted with these issues in college and decided sex and drugs were more rewarding. Ah, freedom!
There was a small news report on BBC, without dark conspiracy, just an announcement:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1961000/1961476.stm
“US intelligence officials have admitted they failed to unearth any sort of paper trail leading to the 11 September attacks.”
As I understand it, this article admits the FBI has actually no clue about who was behind the attacks or who did it at all. This is a little bit different from the announcements right after the attack (“It was Bin Laden!”) and leads to the question how the US government could start a whole war without any knowledge (If the FBI as a US government intelligence institution has nothing in their hands, what “proof” did the US government then use to convince other governments into their war?) about the people responsible for the attack?
By the way, there is an argument speaking FOR Bush not knowing about the attacks: If he knew, he wouldn’t have had to run and hide for a few days, instead he could have given a great show of a bold fearless president. Well, he did not…
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf: ...there are lots of unanswered questions about things that would have been questioned in all media under other circumstances. And the denial of those answers will not help to stop speculations. Because among others, of course it is coincidence that 9-11 actually was of great benefit to a number of people and companies...
Bush must be happy that crude oil prices are up.
quote:
Originally posted by Quirky: Bush must be happy that crude oil prices are up.
Have you considered seeking psychological help?
quote[quote](If the FBI as a US government intelligence institution....[/QB][/quote]The FBI is not in the intelligence business. That’s the job of the CIA, DIA, etc.
The FBI’s job is bankrobberies, kidnappings and way down on the list, domestic counter-intelligence.The US had enough evidence to convince virtually every government in the world of who planned and carried out the attacks. Simply because it hasn’t been released to the BBC yet doesn’t mean anything. The BBC still doesn’t know who Jack the Ripper or Deep Throat were…does this mean they didn’t exist?
Going back to the plane crashes: I watched it live on TV (CNN) and surely they were two planes.
If I remember correctly the first plane was taped on the same footage as the fireman and that was IMHO a commercial airliner.
Why there is no plane debris falling down? I doubt it would vaporize instantly but due the “force” went into the building entirely, most on-land crashes will rip the body apart resulting in big chunks. Not all catch fire and thus are left for everybody to see.
Everything what went into the WTC tower probably got stuck and melted in the fire, then came down with the rubble. Nothing much I would expect to find which can be identified as part of a plane (at least nothing which you could see on TV).
Which brings me to the Pentagon crash: no place debris whatsoever: Even assuming the wings would have been cut of or gotten stuck in the earth there should be some “leftovers”, parts of the engine, the tail or wings etc. But nothing instead.
Indeed very weird to say the least.
I am French (half baked).
A such I am eternally grateful to American History’s great beliefs and fights for freedom, democracy, individuality, chewing gum and Hollywood movies.
As such I distrust any piece of information thrown at the media (Time-Warner-AOL, Fox-MediaCorp etc) by such clowns as Clinton or Bush, Rumsfeld or Blair. We in France like to hit on the Americans because they’re so sweet, naive and yet so gungho. But we know not to trust our own leaders (Chirac’s the first guy to drop his pants for the Chinese while denouncing violations of Human Rights), which led to the recent electoral humiliation, proving how corrupted our current democratic system is.
It’s sad that the American people, so prompt in the days to decry abuse of power and arrogant patronizing (Bush: “you are either with or against us”), play so easily in the hands of emotional warfare. America’s hand in South/Central America or in the Middle East is as power driven as France’s in Africa or in the Far East, or even the UN’s in Yugoslavia. It’s Kissinger’s realpolitics, let’s not delude ourselves (he sponsored a border skirmish in Afghanistan in ‘79 or so, to give the Russians their own Vietnam shit, and later helped the proud Taliban “students” topple the craggy moudjahidins - too bad about the statues!). Now the US is raging its own war on Afghanistan without giving the slightest proof on BinLaden’s involvement (oldfriend of the Bush family within the Carlyle Group). Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are forced to play along, muting their own sponsorship of Islamic terrorism. My friends there are very ashamed of their own governments’ hypocrisy!
Anyone trusting the American administration’s prevalence of “state secret” to later disclose the whys and whos for such obvious strategic yet horrific manoeuvering, must be as little informed on the Vietnam war as we French are on the Algerian War.
Time for a Chuck Norris revival?
All we can do is double filter every news item from CNN, the BBC, and keep arguing. In France we’re the kings of parlance and cafe finger pointing. Perhaps we need to mature and kick some ass too, but preferably our own first! Our mediocracies in France, Italy, the UK, the US, have propelled a huge self-renewing political system where media circus and lobbying have become the main tools for economic power.
We give a bad show of democracy to Asian autocratic “economic realism”: our elected elites are better groomed and mannered than in Taiwan, but the puppet show remains essentially the same. Keep them laughing and crying, they won’t feel a thing.