9/11: What really happened on that day?

[LA RAM FAN]

so in translation you know you cant counter any of those good points knowing I am right so you wont address them so same as this OP here,you ALSO are content to waste your time on these shills like agent sayit. okay I see.

Well, if anyone would know how to translate that retarded phrase, I suppose it'd be the guy who's used it tens of thousands of times!

evade mode from you again. post#73 still stands,you just dont have any answers for a point you know to be true..

the fart jokes i indeed have used tens of thousands of times because thats the ONLY reply any of these shills such as sayit should EVER receive the fact their lies have been addressed,exposed and debunked tens of thousands of times over the years.

you cant even answer a couple of simple questions.what are you going to do about it and why are you so worried about the past instead of whats going on now?

why not worry about SOLUTIONS instead of what happened YEARS ago?
HARDLY anything complicated there in those few questions to answer.


I dont know,maybe I am just nutty to be concerned about the future and whats going on NOW rather than worry about the past.

 

[Capstone]

^

 

[LA RAM FAN]

yep evade mode.

 

[phoenyx]

and in this case the physical evidence clearly shows that two planes flew into the WTC and one into the Pentagon.

We clearly don't agree on that point...

Yes, the government lies to us and yes, the government does do things that are detrimental to the country,

I'm glad we can agree on that part atleast.

but that does not mean that a government conspiracy is responsible for everything that happens.

Certainly. But in this case, I strongly believe that a faction within the government orchestrated the attacks.

It certainly does not mean that the Jews are once again taking over the world.

Personally, I think the main force behind the attack was American, though I do believe there was some Israeli involvement, particularly when it came to the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7.

Sometimes people manage to pull off something so monstrous, so devastating that it seems inconceivable that they could do it without a massive government conspiracy to help them.

Indeed.

Sometimes a sniper's bullet finds a president's head,

Or multiple sniper's bullets finds a president's head...

sometimes a group of terrorists fly planes into buildings.

Or atleast that's what people are led to believe...

We don't like to think that so few people can do so much damage so easily,

It all depends on the "few people" you're talking about...

 

[hadit]

and in this case the physical evidence clearly shows that two planes flew into the WTC and one into the Pentagon.

We clearly don't agree on that point...

Yes, the government lies to us and yes, the government does do things that are detrimental to the country,

I'm glad we can agree on that part atleast.

but that does not mean that a government conspiracy is responsible for everything that happens.

Certainly. But in this case, I strongly believe that a faction within the government orchestrated the attacks.

It certainly does not mean that the Jews are once again taking over the world.

Personally, I think the main force behind the attack was American, though I do believe there was some Israeli involvement, particularly when it came to the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7.

Sometimes people manage to pull off something so monstrous, so devastating that it seems inconceivable that they could do it without a massive government conspiracy to help them.

Indeed.

Sometimes a sniper's bullet finds a president's head,

Or multiple sniper's bullets finds a president's head...

sometimes a group of terrorists fly planes into buildings.

Or atleast that's what people are led to believe...

We don't like to think that so few people can do so much damage so easily,

It all depends on the "few people" you're talking about...

In this case we're talking about people who understand how a low tech attack can take by surprise a people who rely on high tech defenses. Sure, if they had launched an ICBM at the US, we'd probably have shot it down or at the least turned the place it came from into a parking lot, but they knew our policy on highjackers was to give them whatever they demanded in the hope that we could get the hostages back. That means they knew there was no way any of the airliners would be shot down, which in turn meant they knew they had a clear shot at their chosen targets. They won't do it that way again because we would stop them before they could hit their targets, so they use other methods.

 

[phoenyx]

We don't like to think that so few people can do so much damage so easily,

It all depends on the "few people" you're talking about...

In this case we're talking about people who understand how a low tech attack can take by surprise a people who rely on high tech defenses. Sure, if they had launched an ICBM at the US, we'd probably have shot it down or at the least turned the place it came from into a parking lot, but they knew our policy on highjackers was to give them whatever they demanded in the hope that we could get the hostages back. That means they knew there was no way any of the airliners would be shot down, which in turn meant they knew they had a clear shot at their chosen targets. They won't do it that way again because we would stop them before they could hit their targets, so they use other methods.

Actually, the planes could have been shot down up until around June 2001, and once again shortly after September 11, 2001. The rules were changed in between those time periods, though, making America's air defense terribly vulnerable:
**
"The decades-old procedure for a quick response by the nation's air defense had been changed in June of 2001. Now, instead of NORAD's military commanders being able to issue the command to launch fighter jets, approval had to be sought from the civilian Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld. This change is extremely significant, because Mr. Rumsfeld claims to have been "out of the loop" nearly the entire morning of 9/11. ... The families of the vanished bodies and unsettled souls of 9/11 are still waiting to have the dots connected."

June 21, 2004, New York Observer, '9/11 Tapes Reveal Ground Personnel Muffled Attacks'
**

Source: The Failure to Intercept: Questions for Bush, Rumsfeld, FAA about 911 activities

Below is an excerpt from an interview with a former Air Traffic Controller, Robin Hordon:
**
After eleven eventful years as an ATC, Hordon naturally reacted with shock when he first heard that fifty years of tried and true in-flight emergency protocol was abruptly altered in June of 2001, just two months before the attacks.

“Rumsfeld put a third party in between the ATC and the Air Defense Controller responsible for scrambling interceptors —the Pentagon.”

He speculates that “the phone calls went from the FAA to the Pentagon and were not answered. Therefore the Pentagon never reached down to the ADC base to release the aircraft. The Boston Center’s ATCs got so frustrated with the non-answer from the military that they finally said, ‘get these guys going anyways.’ That’s the way it’s been for fifty years. We scramble aircraft. We don’t wait for OK’s from third or fourth parties.”

The no-show status of the U.S. military on the morning of September 11th, 2001, has understandably become the single most compelling point that 9/11 researchers, writers and activists use to support their claims of complicity on the part of the U.S government (and its military and intelligence apparatus) in the attacks. When even those who condemn “conspiracy theory” in regard to 9/11 have questioned the military’s conduct that morning, it’s clear that this anomaly is worthy of intense concern and diligent investigation. Whatever the case may be, there are no doubts that history’s largest and most technologically advanced military was apparently caught completely off guard by four huge hijacked passenger jets that were in the air for almost two hours on the crystal clear morning of 9/11.**

Source: The First Fifteen Minutes of September 11th

The procedure was changed back to normal shortly after 9/11.

 

[hadit]

We don't like to think that so few people can do so much damage so easily,

It all depends on the "few people" you're talking about...

In this case we're talking about people who understand how a low tech attack can take by surprise a people who rely on high tech defenses. Sure, if they had launched an ICBM at the US, we'd probably have shot it down or at the least turned the place it came from into a parking lot, but they knew our policy on highjackers was to give them whatever they demanded in the hope that we could get the hostages back. That means they knew there was no way any of the airliners would be shot down, which in turn meant they knew they had a clear shot at their chosen targets. They won't do it that way again because we would stop them before they could hit their targets, so they use other methods.

Actually, the planes could have been shot down up until around June 2001, and once again shortly after September 11, 2001. The rules were changed in between those time periods, though, making America's air defense terribly vulnerable:
**
"The decades-old procedure for a quick response by the nation's air defense had been changed in June of 2001. Now, instead of NORAD's military commanders being able to issue the command to launch fighter jets, approval had to be sought from the civilian Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld. This change is extremely significant, because Mr. Rumsfeld claims to have been "out of the loop" nearly the entire morning of 9/11. ... The families of the vanished bodies and unsettled souls of 9/11 are still waiting to have the dots connected."

June 21, 2004, New York Observer, '9/11 Tapes Reveal Ground Personnel Muffled Attacks'
**

Source: The Failure to Intercept: Questions for Bush, Rumsfeld, FAA about 911 activities

Below is an excerpt from an interview with a former Air Traffic Controller, Robin Hordon:
**
After eleven eventful years as an ATC, Hordon naturally reacted with shock when he first heard that fifty years of tried and true in-flight emergency protocol was abruptly altered in June of 2001, just two months before the attacks.

“Rumsfeld put a third party in between the ATC and the Air Defense Controller responsible for scrambling interceptors —the Pentagon.”

He speculates that “the phone calls went from the FAA to the Pentagon and were not answered. Therefore the Pentagon never reached down to the ADC base to release the aircraft. The Boston Center’s ATCs got so frustrated with the non-answer from the military that they finally said, ‘get these guys going anyways.’ That’s the way it’s been for fifty years. We scramble aircraft. We don’t wait for OK’s from third or fourth parties.”

The no-show status of the U.S. military on the morning of September 11th, 2001, has understandably become the single most compelling point that 9/11 researchers, writers and activists use to support their claims of complicity on the part of the U.S government (and its military and intelligence apparatus) in the attacks. When even those who condemn “conspiracy theory” in regard to 9/11 have questioned the military’s conduct that morning, it’s clear that this anomaly is worthy of intense concern and diligent investigation. Whatever the case may be, there are no doubts that history’s largest and most technologically advanced military was apparently caught completely off guard by four huge hijacked passenger jets that were in the air for almost two hours on the crystal clear morning of 9/11.**

Source: The First Fifteen Minutes of September 11th

The procedure was changed back to normal shortly after 9/11.

And if the planes had been foreign fighter jets or bombers, aka a clear threat, there would have been no question. Remember, we were dealing with unknowns. We didn't know where the planes were going to be flown, what was going to be done with them, if there were going to be ransom demands, anything. At that point, we couldn't risk shooting them down because of the passengers.

 

[Skylar]

There have been threads in this forum that address the general issue of what happened on 9/11. That being said, I have found that a lot of them are not neutral in their title- their titles imply that they are either for or against an official narrative. I started a thread with the same title as this one in another forum and after over 1000 posts, I think it's been fairly successful. Not sure if it'll work out here, but I thought I'd give it a go. I'll start by responding to someone who asked me to outline my view of what happened on 9/11 and who was behind it...

I've heard many theories as to what happened at the World Trade Center. As to the general outline of what happened on 9/11, I think I'll start with the general outline of both the official narrative of events, as well as the generally accepted outline of what those who disagree with it is, as outlined in a documentary film called Zeitgeist...

***
19 hijackers, directed by Osama Bin Laden, took over 4 commercial jets
with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit
75% of their targets. In turn, World Trade Towers 1, 2 & 7 collapsed due
to structural failure through fire in a "pancake" fashion, while the
plane that hit the Pentagon vaporized upon impact, as did the plane
that crashed in Shanksville. The 911 Commission found that there were
no warnings for this act of terrorism, while multiple government
failures prevented adequate defense.
***

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative.

As to what I believe, this is exemplified by the concluding statement of Zeitgeist in its 9/11 section:
***
Criminal Elements within the US government staged a "false flag" rerror
attack on its own citizens, in order to manipulate public perception
into supporting its agenda.

They have been doing these for years.

9/11 was an Inside Job.
***

For anyone considering responding to this thread for the first time, I ask that you consider briefly pointing out what you think happened on 9/11; it can be as simple as stating that you believe in one of the 2 summaries outlined above, or it can be more detailed. At that point, I will endeavour to comment on your entry, and explain why I agree or disagree with your point of view.

ADIZ were designed to track planes coming into the US from outside the US. Not to track commercial airliners within the US. For domestic air travel transponders are used. NORAD didn't know about the hijacking of any of the planes until someone at a civilian air traffic control tower called and told them.

Which in the case of 2 of the planes was after the planes had already impacted. Making your 'evading ADIZ' claims disingenuous at best. And startlingly misinformed at worst.

 

[Skylar]

...I agree that the plane that approached the Pentagon was smaller then a 757, but I think that's about as far as we agree on that point. ...

Corroborated eyewitness testimonies that were gathered and recorded for posterity on the day of the incident cannot be ignored or discounted, particularly when what they "corroborated" flew in the face of the official narrative from the get-go. That's true, because we can reasonably preclude such accounts from the list of likely fabrications.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I strongly believe that atleast one of the alleged eyewitnesses that day was a plant: Lloyd England. CIT actually made an entire documentary of him, which can be seen here:

Lloyd England's account may well have been coerced, but it almost certainly wasn't fabricated with the intention of fatally contradicting the official storyline.

I have responded to this post of yours in the new thread I have created that specifically deals with the Pentagon Flyover Theory, which can be seen here:
9/11: The Pentaplane Flyover Theory

A theory, which as we've discussed, is pointlessly elaborate and contradicted by overwhelming evidence. The transponders from Flight 77 was pulled from the pentagon, as were the bodies of the passengers on the plane. Engine parts matching the model of plane ordered by American Airlines were found inside the Pentagon. Not simply the type of plane, but the exact variant that American Airlines order; the RB211. Records both within the plane and tracking the plane confirm that Flight 77 impacted with the Pentagon.

You ignore it all. A rational person wouldn't.

Worse, your theory is wildly illogical. As the attackers on 911 clearly had no problem crashing planes into buildings. Why then would they risk being discovered, add the complication of having to get rid of the plane, plant mountains of evidence, fold in hundreds of improptu co-conspirators, fake records, fake all the DNA records and autopsies of the passengers, fold in news crews and first responders,......

.....when they could just crash the plane into the pentagon and get the exact same results?

You have no credible explanation for this. You have no credible explanation for the mountains of physical and eye witness evidence that contradicts you. Your theory is irrational, poorly thought through, contradicted by evidence, and quite simply a terrible explanation of events.

 

[phoenyx]

I have responded to this post of yours in the new thread I have created that specifically deals with the Pentagon Flyover Theory, which can be seen here:
9/11: The Pentaplane Flyover Theory

A theory, which as we've discussed...

...and can continue discussing, in the thread I made to specifically discuss the Pentagon Flyover theory. I've responded to your post here.

 

[phoenyx]

We don't like to think that so few people can do so much damage so easily,

It all depends on the "few people" you're talking about...

In this case we're talking about people who understand how a low tech attack can take by surprise a people who rely on high tech defenses. Sure, if they had launched an ICBM at the US, we'd probably have shot it down or at the least turned the place it came from into a parking lot, but they knew our policy on highjackers was to give them whatever they demanded in the hope that we could get the hostages back. That means they knew there was no way any of the airliners would be shot down, which in turn meant they knew they had a clear shot at their chosen targets. They won't do it that way again because we would stop them before they could hit their targets, so they use other methods.

Actually, the planes could have been shot down up until around June 2001, and once again shortly after September 11, 2001. The rules were changed in between those time periods, though, making America's air defense terribly vulnerable:
**
"The decades-old procedure for a quick response by the nation's air defense had been changed in June of 2001. Now, instead of NORAD's military commanders being able to issue the command to launch fighter jets, approval had to be sought from the civilian Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld. This change is extremely significant, because Mr. Rumsfeld claims to have been "out of the loop" nearly the entire morning of 9/11. ... The families of the vanished bodies and unsettled souls of 9/11 are still waiting to have the dots connected."

June 21, 2004, New York Observer, '9/11 Tapes Reveal Ground Personnel Muffled Attacks'
**

Source: The Failure to Intercept: Questions for Bush, Rumsfeld, FAA about 911 activities

Below is an excerpt from an interview with a former Air Traffic Controller, Robin Hordon:
**
After eleven eventful years as an ATC, Hordon naturally reacted with shock when he first heard that fifty years of tried and true in-flight emergency protocol was abruptly altered in June of 2001, just two months before the attacks.

“Rumsfeld put a third party in between the ATC and the Air Defense Controller responsible for scrambling interceptors —the Pentagon.”

He speculates that “the phone calls went from the FAA to the Pentagon and were not answered. Therefore the Pentagon never reached down to the ADC base to release the aircraft. The Boston Center’s ATCs got so frustrated with the non-answer from the military that they finally said, ‘get these guys going anyways.’ That’s the way it’s been for fifty years. We scramble aircraft. We don’t wait for OK’s from third or fourth parties.”

The no-show status of the U.S. military on the morning of September 11th, 2001, has understandably become the single most compelling point that 9/11 researchers, writers and activists use to support their claims of complicity on the part of the U.S government (and its military and intelligence apparatus) in the attacks. When even those who condemn “conspiracy theory” in regard to 9/11 have questioned the military’s conduct that morning, it’s clear that this anomaly is worthy of intense concern and diligent investigation. Whatever the case may be, there are no doubts that history’s largest and most technologically advanced military was apparently caught completely off guard by four huge hijacked passenger jets that were in the air for almost two hours on the crystal clear morning of 9/11.**

Source: The First Fifteen Minutes of September 11th

The procedure was changed back to normal shortly after 9/11.

And if the planes had been foreign fighter jets or bombers, aka a clear threat, there would have been no question.

No question of what?

Remember, we were dealing with unknowns.

ATC were dealing with known hijackings. Up until July 31, 1997, commanders in the field could have done anything, up to shoot down planes, without the need to get approval from the Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld at the time of 9/11). This order was modified slightly in June 2001, so that commanders in the field could now intercept, but they still couldn't shoot down a plane without Rumsfeld's permission. There was more blocking the U.S.'s air defense on 9/11, however:
**If it is true that the standing orders would have required approval by the Secretary of Defense for intercepts on 9/11/01, then, in theory, a defacto stand-down could have been implemented by the secretary simply failing to act during the crisis. However, it is doubtful that insiders planning the attack would have relied on the orders alone to assure that there was no effective military response to the attack. It was likely one of a number of "fixes" that included multiple war games planned on the day of the attack. Thus, even if commanders violated standing orders and ordered intercepts of the commandeered jetliners, they would face depleted interceptor resources and corrupted flight data.**

Source: 9-11 Review: The 'Stand-Down Order'

We didn't know where the planes were going to be flown

Irrelevant. If the planes were truly passenger airplanes, they were much slower then military jets. The jets had plenty of time to intercept them, and would have, if they had been sent to the actual planes. Instead, we get reports like the following:
**DID NAVY CONTROLLERS SEND THE JETS THE WRONG WAY?
After being delayed during takeoff, things got significantly worse for the Langley jets. Major Kevin Nasypany, the NEADS mission crew commander, had ordered them to fly north, toward the Baltimore area. [21] But at around 9:34 a.m., William Huckabone noticed that instead they were going east over the ocean, toward a military training airspace called Whiskey 386. [22] As a result, when the Pentagon was hit at 9:37 a.m., the Langley fighters were about 150 miles from there--further away from the Pentagon than they had been when they took off. [23]

The 9/11 Commission put forward rather elaborate reasons why the jets headed in the wrong direction, such as that the scramble order had not conveyed complete instructions for the pilots to follow, and that "a 'generic' flight plan--prepared to get the aircraft airborne and out of local airspace quickly--incorrectly led the Langley fighters to believe they were ordered to fly due east ... for 60 miles." [24]

However, evidence shows that the question of why the jets went so drastically off course requires further investigation. For example, a Navy facility was responsible for handling the F-16s while they were out over the ocean. The Fleet Area Control and Surveillance Facility in Virginia Beach, Virginia, is the Navy air traffic control agency that handles all over-water military operations. It is known by the call sign "Giant Killer." [25] When Nasypany asked Major James Fox--the leader of the NEADS weapons team--why the Langley jets had flown out over the ocean, Fox replied, "Giant Killer sent them out there." [26] Certainly, what little has been reported about the actions of this facility appears quite bizarre and suspicious.**

Source: Shoestring 9/11: The F-16s That Failed to Protect Washington on 9/11: Was the Langley Jets' Emergency Response Sabotaged?

 

[phoenyx]

There have been threads in this forum that address the general issue of what happened on 9/11. That being said, I have found that a lot of them are not neutral in their title- their titles imply that they are either for or against an official narrative. I started a thread with the same title as this one in another forum and after over 1000 posts, I think it's been fairly successful. Not sure if it'll work out here, but I thought I'd give it a go. I'll start by responding to someone who asked me to outline my view of what happened on 9/11 and who was behind it...

I've heard many theories as to what happened at the World Trade Center. As to the general outline of what happened on 9/11, I think I'll start with the general outline of both the official narrative of events, as well as the generally accepted outline of what those who disagree with it is, as outlined in a documentary film called Zeitgeist...

***
19 hijackers, directed by Osama Bin Laden, took over 4 commercial jets
with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit
75% of their targets. In turn, World Trade Towers 1, 2 & 7 collapsed due
to structural failure through fire in a "pancake" fashion, while the
plane that hit the Pentagon vaporized upon impact, as did the plane
that crashed in Shanksville. The 911 Commission found that there were
no warnings for this act of terrorism, while multiple government
failures prevented adequate defense.
***

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative.

As to what I believe, this is exemplified by the concluding statement of Zeitgeist in its 9/11 section:
***
Criminal Elements within the US government staged a "false flag" rerror
attack on its own citizens, in order to manipulate public perception
into supporting its agenda.

They have been doing these for years.

9/11 was an Inside Job.
***

For anyone considering responding to this thread for the first time, I ask that you consider briefly pointing out what you think happened on 9/11; it can be as simple as stating that you believe in one of the 2 summaries outlined above, or it can be more detailed. At that point, I will endeavour to comment on your entry, and explain why I agree or disagree with your point of view.

ADIZ were designed to track planes coming into the US from outside the US. Not to track commercial airliners within the US.

For those in the audience who don't know what ADIZ means:
**The Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) is an area surrounding much of North America – namely airspace surrounding the United States andCanada – in which the ready identification, location, and control of civil aircraft over land or water is required in the interest of national security.[1] This ADIZ is jointly administered by the civilian air traffic control authorities and the militaries of both nations, under the auspices of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) handles the requests of international aircraft and Transport Canada handles Canadian requests. Any aircraft flying in these zones without authorization may be identified as a threat and treated as an enemy aircraft, potentially leading to interception by fighter aircraft.

An aircraft entering an ADIZ is required to radio its planned course, destination, and any additional details about its trip through the ADIZ to a higher authority, typically an air traffic controller. The aircraft must also be equipped with a radar transponder.**

Source: Air Defense Identification Zone (North America) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For domestic air travel transponders are used. NORAD didn't know about the hijacking of any of the planes until someone at a civilian air traffic control tower called and told them.

Which in the case of 2 of the planes was after the planes had already impacted. Making your 'evading ADIZ' claims disingenuous at best. And startlingly misinformed at worst.

I think you're overlooking something here. Namely the war games that were going on during 9/11:
**
WAR GAMES ON SEPTEMBER 11TH
On the very morning of 9/11/01, five war games and terror drills were being conducted by several U.S. defense agencies, including one "live fly" exercise using REAL planes. Then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers, admitted to 4 of the war games in congressional testimony -- see transcript here or video here (6 minutes and 12 seconds into the video).
Norad had run drills for several years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, and "numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft". In other words, drills using REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers, were run. See also official military website showing 2000 military drill, using miniatures, involving a plane crashing into the Pentagon.
Indeed, a former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, claims that he obtained an on-the-record confirmation from NORAD that ON 9/11, NORAD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack exercise which involved government-operated aircraft POSING AS HIJACKED AIRLINERS.
On September 11th, the government also happened to be running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building.
In addition, a December 9, 2001 Toronto Star article (pay-per-view; reprinted here), stated that "Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what's known as an 'inject,' is purged from the screens". This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers' screens as part of the war game exercises.
Moreover, there are indications that some of the major war games previously scheduled for October 2001 were MOVED UP to September 11th by persons unknown.
Interestingly, Vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL of the war games and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks. See this Department of State announcement; this CNN article; and this previously-cited essay.
And while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck, this short video clip of the Secretary of Transportation's testimony before the 9/11 Commission shows that Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon. How could one of the most heavily-defended buildings in the world have been successfully attacked, when the Vice President of the United States, in charge of counter-terrorism on 9/11, watched it approach from many miles away?
Moreover, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says that that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off, and that Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon tracked three of the four flights from the point of their hijacking to hitting their targets (also, listen to this interview).
Additionally, this diagram shows that the hijacked planes flew over numerous military bases on 9/11 before crashing. See also this essay regarding the stand down of the military; and see this war game proposal created before 9/11 revolving around Bin Laden and including "live-fly exercises" involving real planes, later confirmed by this official Department of Defense website.
Which scenario is more likely from a strictly logistical perspective:
(1) An outsider sitting in a cave defeating the air defense system of the sole military superpower; or
(2) Someone like Cheney -- who on 9/11 apparently had full control over all defense, war game and counter-terrorism powers -- rigging and gaming the system?
Remember that for the attacks to have succeeded, it was necessary that actions be taken in the middle of the war games and the actual attacks which would thwart the normal military response. For example, Cheney watched flight 77 approach the Pentagon from many miles out, but instructed the military to do nothing (as shown in the testimony of the Secretary of Transportation, linked above). Could Bin Laden have done that?
Fighter jets were also sent far off-course over the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the attacks (testimony of Senator Mark Dayton), so as to neutralize their ability to intercept the hijacked airliners. Could Osama Bin Laden and his sent-from-the-cave band of followers have exercised this degree of control over the military? Obviously not.
And air traffic controllers claim they were still tracking what they thought were hijacked planes long after all 4 of the real planes had crashed. This implies that false radar blips remained on their screens after all 4 planes went down, long after the military claims they purged the phantom war-game-related radar signals. Could Bin Laden have interfered with the full purging of false radar blips inserted as part of the war games? In other words, could Bin Laden have overridden the purging process so that some false blips remained and confused air traffic controllers? The answer is clear.
Therefore, it is statistically much more likely that Cheney and/or other high-level U.S. government and military officials pulled the 9/11 trigger than that Bin Laden did it. At the very least, they took affirmative steps to guarantee that the hijackers' attacks succeeded.
As discussed previously, a former air force colonel and director of the Star Wars program stated "If our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing, and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason" **

Source: 911 Proof

 

[Skylar]

There have been threads in this forum that address the general issue of what happened on 9/11. That being said, I have found that a lot of them are not neutral in their title- their titles imply that they are either for or against an official narrative. I started a thread with the same title as this one in another forum and after over 1000 posts, I think it's been fairly successful. Not sure if it'll work out here, but I thought I'd give it a go. I'll start by responding to someone who asked me to outline my view of what happened on 9/11 and who was behind it...

I've heard many theories as to what happened at the World Trade Center. As to the general outline of what happened on 9/11, I think I'll start with the general outline of both the official narrative of events, as well as the generally accepted outline of what those who disagree with it is, as outlined in a documentary film called Zeitgeist...

***
19 hijackers, directed by Osama Bin Laden, took over 4 commercial jets
with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit
75% of their targets. In turn, World Trade Towers 1, 2 & 7 collapsed due
to structural failure through fire in a "pancake" fashion, while the
plane that hit the Pentagon vaporized upon impact, as did the plane
that crashed in Shanksville. The 911 Commission found that there were
no warnings for this act of terrorism, while multiple government
failures prevented adequate defense.
***

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative.

As to what I believe, this is exemplified by the concluding statement of Zeitgeist in its 9/11 section:
***
Criminal Elements within the US government staged a "false flag" rerror
attack on its own citizens, in order to manipulate public perception
into supporting its agenda.

They have been doing these for years.

9/11 was an Inside Job.
***

For anyone considering responding to this thread for the first time, I ask that you consider briefly pointing out what you think happened on 9/11; it can be as simple as stating that you believe in one of the 2 summaries outlined above, or it can be more detailed. At that point, I will endeavour to comment on your entry, and explain why I agree or disagree with your point of view.

ADIZ were designed to track planes coming into the US from outside the US. Not to track commercial airliners within the US.

For those in the audience who don't know what ADIZ means:
**The Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) is an area surrounding much of North America – namely airspace surrounding the United States andCanada – in which the ready identification, location, and control of civil aircraft over land or water is required in the interest of national security.[1] This ADIZ is jointly administered by the civilian air traffic control authorities and the militaries of both nations, under the auspices of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) handles the requests of international aircraft and Transport Canada handles Canadian requests. Any aircraft flying in these zones without authorization may be identified as a threat and treated as an enemy aircraft, potentially leading to interception by fighter aircraft.

An aircraft entering an ADIZ is required to radio its planned course, destination, and any additional details about its trip through the ADIZ to a higher authority, typically an air traffic controller. The aircraft must also be equipped with a radar transponder.**

Source: Air Defense Identification Zone (North America) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For domestic air travel transponders are used. NORAD didn't know about the hijacking of any of the planes until someone at a civilian air traffic control tower called and told them.

Which in the case of 2 of the planes was after the planes had already impacted. Making your 'evading ADIZ' claims disingenuous at best. And startlingly misinformed at worst.

I think you're overlooking something here. Namely the war games that were going on during 9/11:
**
WAR GAMES ON SEPTEMBER 11TH
On the very morning of 9/11/01, five war games and terror drills were being conducted by several U.S. defense agencies, including one "live fly" exercise using REAL planes. Then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers, admitted to 4 of the war games in congressional testimony -- see transcript here or video here (6 minutes and 12 seconds into the video).
Norad had run drills for several years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, and "numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft". In other words, drills using REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers, were run. See also official military website showing 2000 military drill, using miniatures, involving a plane crashing into the Pentagon.
Indeed, a former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, claims that he obtained an on-the-record confirmation from NORAD that ON 9/11, NORAD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack exercise which involved government-operated aircraft POSING AS HIJACKED AIRLINERS.
On September 11th, the government also happened to be running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building.
In addition, a December 9, 2001 Toronto Star article (pay-per-view; reprinted here), stated that "Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what's known as an 'inject,' is purged from the screens". This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers' screens as part of the war game exercises.
Moreover, there are indications that some of the major war games previously scheduled for October 2001 were MOVED UP to September 11th by persons unknown.
Interestingly, Vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL of the war games and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks. See this Department of State announcement; this CNN article; and this previously-cited essay.
And while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck, this short video clip of the Secretary of Transportation's testimony before the 9/11 Commission shows that Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon. How could one of the most heavily-defended buildings in the world have been successfully attacked, when the Vice President of the United States, in charge of counter-terrorism on 9/11, watched it approach from many miles away?
Moreover, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says that that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off, and that Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon tracked three of the four flights from the point of their hijacking to hitting their targets (also, listen to this interview).
Additionally, this diagram shows that the hijacked planes flew over numerous military bases on 9/11 before crashing. See also this essay regarding the stand down of the military; and see this war game proposal created before 9/11 revolving around Bin Laden and including "live-fly exercises" involving real planes, later confirmed by this official Department of Defense website.
Which scenario is more likely from a strictly logistical perspective:
(1) An outsider sitting in a cave defeating the air defense system of the sole military superpower; or
(2) Someone like Cheney -- who on 9/11 apparently had full control over all defense, war game and counter-terrorism powers -- rigging and gaming the system?
Remember that for the attacks to have succeeded, it was necessary that actions be taken in the middle of the war games and the actual attacks which would thwart the normal military response. For example, Cheney watched flight 77 approach the Pentagon from many miles out, but instructed the military to do nothing (as shown in the testimony of the Secretary of Transportation, linked above). Could Bin Laden have done that?
Fighter jets were also sent far off-course over the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the attacks (testimony of Senator Mark Dayton), so as to neutralize their ability to intercept the hijacked airliners. Could Osama Bin Laden and his sent-from-the-cave band of followers have exercised this degree of control over the military? Obviously not.
And air traffic controllers claim they were still tracking what they thought were hijacked planes long after all 4 of the real planes had crashed. This implies that false radar blips remained on their screens after all 4 planes went down, long after the military claims they purged the phantom war-game-related radar signals. Could Bin Laden have interfered with the full purging of false radar blips inserted as part of the war games? In other words, could Bin Laden have overridden the purging process so that some false blips remained and confused air traffic controllers? The answer is clear.
Therefore, it is statistically much more likely that Cheney and/or other high-level U.S. government and military officials pulled the 9/11 trigger than that Bin Laden did it. At the very least, they took affirmative steps to guarantee that the hijackers' attacks succeeded.
As discussed previously, a former air force colonel and director of the Star Wars program stated "If our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing, and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason" **

Source: 911 Proof

And for those who want to know how ADIZ work in this country, its illustrated simply by this photo:

ADIZ are pointed outward, surrounding the US. They were not used for tracking civilian aircraft within the US until AFTER the 911.

The first ADIZ was established by the United States on December 27, 1950, shortly after President Truman had proclaimed a national emergency during the Korean War. [4] Following the September 11 attacks in 2001, when civilian commercial aircraft were utilized for mass destruction, ADIZ became prominent as a tool by which to monitor and control foreign aircraft entering a given national airspace.

Air Defense Identification Zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Instead, the monitoring of US airspace on 911 was delegated to the Air Route Traffic Control Centers. Which is a civilian network that wasn't directly connected to NORAD or the ADIZ on 911.

All of which phoenyx knows. But *really* hopes you don't. He wants you to believe that ADIZ and ARTCC are the same thing, despite knowing full well that they weren't.

And his 'evading the ADIZ' claims were a load of steaming horseshit. An over the US mainland ADIZ didn't exist until 2003, limited explicitly to Washington DC.

 

[Divine Wind]

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative..

Yes, I do. Evade NORAD? Do you even know what NORAD does and how the US air traffic control system works? It's not like they flew those planes from Russia.

As for conspiracy theories, the problem with them is that most not only take hundreds, if not thousands of people to carry out, but for all of those people to never, ever speak of it.

How many Americans would keep their mouths shut about an operation which killed thousands of other Americans? 10%? 50%? 90%? Someone would talk and, from my experiences with both the military and our government, I know a lot of them would talk. In fact, I doubt the operation could be done for lack of cooperation.

 

[Skylar]

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative..

Yes, I do. Evade NORAD? Do you even know what NORAD does and how the US air traffic control system works? It's not like they flew those planes from Russia.

As for conspiracy theories, the problem with them is that most not only take hundreds, if not thousands of people to carry out, but for all of those people to never, ever speak of it.

How many Americans would keep their mouths shut about an operation which killed thousands of other Americans? 10%? 50%? 90%? Someone would talk and, from my experiences with both the military and our government, I know a lot of them would talk. In fact, I doubt the operation could be done for lack of cooperation.

P knows full well how ADIZ work.The picture I pulled of ADIZ was from the very same webpage that he drew his quote. P knew that the ADIZ surrounded the US mainland on 911. He knew that his 'evading ADIZ' horseshit was a profound misrepresentation and deeply dishonest.

But as is so common among conspiracy theorists, their arguments require an ignorant audience. As his argument is dependent on his readers NOT knowing what ADIZ are, how they work, or what they do.

 

[phoenyx]

There have been threads in this forum that address the general issue of what happened on 9/11. That being said, I have found that a lot of them are not neutral in their title- their titles imply that they are either for or against an official narrative. I started a thread with the same title as this one in another forum and after over 1000 posts, I think it's been fairly successful. Not sure if it'll work out here, but I thought I'd give it a go. I'll start by responding to someone who asked me to outline my view of what happened on 9/11 and who was behind it...

I've heard many theories as to what happened at the World Trade Center. As to the general outline of what happened on 9/11, I think I'll start with the general outline of both the official narrative of events, as well as the generally accepted outline of what those who disagree with it is, as outlined in a documentary film called Zeitgeist...

***
19 hijackers, directed by Osama Bin Laden, took over 4 commercial jets
with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit
75% of their targets. In turn, World Trade Towers 1, 2 & 7 collapsed due
to structural failure through fire in a "pancake" fashion, while the
plane that hit the Pentagon vaporized upon impact, as did the plane
that crashed in Shanksville. The 911 Commission found that there were
no warnings for this act of terrorism, while multiple government
failures prevented adequate defense.
***

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative.

As to what I believe, this is exemplified by the concluding statement of Zeitgeist in its 9/11 section:
***
Criminal Elements within the US government staged a "false flag" rerror
attack on its own citizens, in order to manipulate public perception
into supporting its agenda.

They have been doing these for years.

9/11 was an Inside Job.
***

For anyone considering responding to this thread for the first time, I ask that you consider briefly pointing out what you think happened on 9/11; it can be as simple as stating that you believe in one of the 2 summaries outlined above, or it can be more detailed. At that point, I will endeavour to comment on your entry, and explain why I agree or disagree with your point of view.

ADIZ were designed to track planes coming into the US from outside the US. Not to track commercial airliners within the US.

For those in the audience who don't know what ADIZ means:
**The Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) is an area surrounding much of North America – namely airspace surrounding the United States andCanada – in which the ready identification, location, and control of civil aircraft over land or water is required in the interest of national security.[1] This ADIZ is jointly administered by the civilian air traffic control authorities and the militaries of both nations, under the auspices of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) handles the requests of international aircraft and Transport Canada handles Canadian requests. Any aircraft flying in these zones without authorization may be identified as a threat and treated as an enemy aircraft, potentially leading to interception by fighter aircraft.

An aircraft entering an ADIZ is required to radio its planned course, destination, and any additional details about its trip through the ADIZ to a higher authority, typically an air traffic controller. The aircraft must also be equipped with a radar transponder.**

Source: Air Defense Identification Zone (North America) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For domestic air travel transponders are used. NORAD didn't know about the hijacking of any of the planes until someone at a civilian air traffic control tower called and told them.

Which in the case of 2 of the planes was after the planes had already impacted. Making your 'evading ADIZ' claims disingenuous at best. And startlingly misinformed at worst.

I think you're overlooking something here. Namely the war games that were going on during 9/11:
**
WAR GAMES ON SEPTEMBER 11TH
On the very morning of 9/11/01, five war games and terror drills were being conducted by several U.S. defense agencies, including one "live fly" exercise using REAL planes. Then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers, admitted to 4 of the war games in congressional testimony -- see transcript here or video here (6 minutes and 12 seconds into the video).
Norad had run drills for several years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, and "numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft". In other words, drills using REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers, were run. See also official military website showing 2000 military drill, using miniatures, involving a plane crashing into the Pentagon.
Indeed, a former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, claims that he obtained an on-the-record confirmation from NORAD that ON 9/11, NORAD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack exercise which involved government-operated aircraft POSING AS HIJACKED AIRLINERS.
On September 11th, the government also happened to be running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building.
In addition, a December 9, 2001 Toronto Star article (pay-per-view; reprinted here), stated that "Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what's known as an 'inject,' is purged from the screens". This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers' screens as part of the war game exercises.
Moreover, there are indications that some of the major war games previously scheduled for October 2001 were MOVED UP to September 11th by persons unknown.
Interestingly, Vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL of the war games and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks. See this Department of State announcement; this CNN article; and this previously-cited essay.
And while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck, this short video clip of the Secretary of Transportation's testimony before the 9/11 Commission shows that Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon. How could one of the most heavily-defended buildings in the world have been successfully attacked, when the Vice President of the United States, in charge of counter-terrorism on 9/11, watched it approach from many miles away?
Moreover, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says that that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off, and that Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon tracked three of the four flights from the point of their hijacking to hitting their targets (also, listen to this interview).
Additionally, this diagram shows that the hijacked planes flew over numerous military bases on 9/11 before crashing. See also this essay regarding the stand down of the military; and see this war game proposal created before 9/11 revolving around Bin Laden and including "live-fly exercises" involving real planes, later confirmed by this official Department of Defense website.
Which scenario is more likely from a strictly logistical perspective:
(1) An outsider sitting in a cave defeating the air defense system of the sole military superpower; or
(2) Someone like Cheney -- who on 9/11 apparently had full control over all defense, war game and counter-terrorism powers -- rigging and gaming the system?
Remember that for the attacks to have succeeded, it was necessary that actions be taken in the middle of the war games and the actual attacks which would thwart the normal military response. For example, Cheney watched flight 77 approach the Pentagon from many miles out, but instructed the military to do nothing (as shown in the testimony of the Secretary of Transportation, linked above). Could Bin Laden have done that?
Fighter jets were also sent far off-course over the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the attacks (testimony of Senator Mark Dayton), so as to neutralize their ability to intercept the hijacked airliners. Could Osama Bin Laden and his sent-from-the-cave band of followers have exercised this degree of control over the military? Obviously not.
And air traffic controllers claim they were still tracking what they thought were hijacked planes long after all 4 of the real planes had crashed. This implies that false radar blips remained on their screens after all 4 planes went down, long after the military claims they purged the phantom war-game-related radar signals. Could Bin Laden have interfered with the full purging of false radar blips inserted as part of the war games? In other words, could Bin Laden have overridden the purging process so that some false blips remained and confused air traffic controllers? The answer is clear.
Therefore, it is statistically much more likely that Cheney and/or other high-level U.S. government and military officials pulled the 9/11 trigger than that Bin Laden did it. At the very least, they took affirmative steps to guarantee that the hijackers' attacks succeeded.
As discussed previously, a former air force colonel and director of the Star Wars program stated "If our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing, and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. [T]hat is treason" **

Source: 911 Proof

And for those who want to know how ADIZ work in this country, its illustrated simply by this photo:

ADIZ are pointed outward, surrounding the US. They were not used for tracking civilian aircraft within the US until AFTER the 911.

The first ADIZ was established by the United States on December 27, 1950, shortly after President Truman had proclaimed a national emergency during the Korean War. [4] Following the September 11 attacks in 2001, when civilian commercial aircraft were utilized for mass destruction, ADIZ became prominent as a tool by which to monitor and control foreign aircraft entering a given national airspace.

Air Defense Identification Zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Instead, the monitoring of US airspace on 911 was delegated to the Air Route Traffic Control Centers. Which is a civilian network that wasn't directly connected to NORAD or the ADIZ on 911.

All of which phoenyx knows. But *really* hopes you don't. He wants you to believe that ADIZ and ARTCC are the same thing, despite knowing full well that they weren't.

Reminds me of some lines from V for Vendetta:
"A man as smart as you
has probably considered this.
A man as smart as you
probably has a plan."

Fact of the matter is, I didn't even know what ADIZ stood for until I googled it . But go on, make me out to be some villain that knows it all, it's entertaining if nothing else . I also see that you didn't address the points I made in the post you're responding to at all, namely the war games going on on 9/11.

And his 'evading the ADIZ' claims were a load of steaming horseshit.

Actually, I wrote:
"19 hijackers, directed by Osama Bin Laden, took over 4 commercial jets
with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit
75% of their targets."

No mention of ADIZ; like I said, I didn't even know what that meant, until you brought it up. Furthermore, the quote above wasn't actually my own words, they were part of the summary given in a documentary film named Zeitgeist. Based on what I know now, I definitely think that the ARTCC/ATC should have been mentioned. For those in the audience who haven't heard of the ARTCC before (like me, before I googled it), ARTCC stands for Air Route Traffic Control Center. NASA goes into more detail:
**
Center or Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC)
The first Air Traffic Control Center originated at Newark Airport, Newark, New Jersey, as a privately operatedventure formed by cooperative airline companies in October 1935. On July 8, 1936 the Department of Commerce's Civil Aeronautical Administration assumed operation of the air traffic responsibilities.

ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight. There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC)in the United States. Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.

The Federal Aviation Administration has made a long-term investment of tax dollars by providing the finest air traffic control service in the world. The largest component of the national airspace system is the Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC). Each ARTCC covers thousands of square miles encompassing all or part of several states. ARTCCs are built to ensure safe and expeditious air travel. All Centers operate 7 days a week, 24 hours a day and employ a combination of several hundred Air Traffic Control Specialists, Electronic Technicians, Computer System Specialists, Environmental Support Specialists, and administrative staff.**

Source: Air Traffic Management | Nasa

Speaking of the ARTCC, they were dealing with known hijackings. Up until July 31, 1997, commanders in the field could have done anything, even shoot down planes, without the need to get approval from the Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld at the time of 9/11). This order was modified slightly in June 2001, so that commanders in the field could now intercept, but they still couldn't shoot down a plane without Rumsfeld's permission. There was more blocking the U.S.'s air defense on 9/11, however:
**If it is true that the standing orders would have required approval by the Secretary of Defense for intercepts on 9/11/01, then, in theory, a defacto stand-down could have been implemented by the secretary simply failing to act during the crisis. However, it is doubtful that insiders planning the attack would have relied on the orders alone to assure that there was no effective military response to the attack. It was likely one of a number of "fixes" that included multiple war games planned on the day of the attack. Thus, even if commanders violated standing orders and ordered intercepts of the commandeered jetliners, they would face depleted interceptor resources and corrupted flight data.**

Source: 9-11 Review: The 'Stand-Down Order'

 

[phoenyx]

I've heard many theories as to what happened at the World Trade Center. As to the general outline of what happened on 9/11, I think I'll start with the general outline of both the official narrative of events, as well as the generally accepted outline of what those who disagree with it is, as outlined in a documentary film called Zeitgeist...

***
19 hijackers, directed by Osama Bin Laden, took over 4 commercial jets
with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit
75% of their targets. In turn, World Trade Towers 1, 2 & 7 collapsed due
to structural failure through fire in a "pancake" fashion, while the
plane that hit the Pentagon vaporized upon impact, as did the plane
that crashed in Shanksville. The 911 Commission found that there were
no warnings for this act of terrorism, while multiple government
failures prevented adequate defense.
***

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative..

Yes, I do. Evade NORAD? Do you even know what NORAD does and how the US air traffic control system works? It's not like they flew those planes from Russia.

Well, atleast you aren't assuming that I'm some villainous know it all that is hiding information to further his nefarious claims . I think the director of Zeitgeist did a pretty good job in his documentary, but he may have not been up to snuff on the fact that the FAA's ARTCCs handled air traffic within the U.S.

As for conspiracy theories, the problem with them is that most not only take hundreds, if not thousands of people to carry out, but for all of those people to never, ever speak of it.

Have you ever heard of information security compartmentalization? Just in case you haven't:
**
In matters concerning information security, whether public or private sector, compartmentalization is the limiting of access to information to persons or other entities who need to know it in order to perform certain tasks.

The concept originated in the handling of classified information in military and intelligence applications, though it dates back to antiquity, and was used to successfully keep the secret of Greek fire.[1]

The basis for compartmentalization is the idea that, if fewer people know the details of a mission or task, the risk or likelihood that such information will be compromised or fall into the hands of the opposition is decreased. Hence, varying levels of clearance within organizations exist. Yet, even if someone has the highest clearance, certain "compartmentalized" information, identified by codewordsreferring to particular types of secret information, may still be restricted to certain operators, even with a lower overall security clearance. Information marked this way is said to be codeword–classified. One famous example of this was the Ultra secret, where documents were marked "Top Secret Ultra": "Top Secret" marked its security level, and the "Ultra" keyword further restricted its readership to only those cleared to read "Ultra" documents.[2]
**
Source: Compartmentalization (information security) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Using compartmentalization, while many people may have unwittingly participated in 9/11, most of them didn't actually need to know what was truly happening. Of those who were likely to figure it out after the fact, they were probably killed. Some if not all of those killed may have later been said to have died as passengers on the doomed flights, or actually died at the Pentagon and WTC buildings. I definitely believe some near the very top had to have known what was going on. Here's a small clip from the pilot episode of an Xfiles spinoff that gets the gist of it:


One last thing: some witnesses on 9/11 may have been deemed to know 'too much' and thus killed off. There is evidence that this has occurred:

 

[Divine Wind]

...Have you ever heard of information security compartmentalization? ...

Yes. I was a career military officer with a TS clearance while working at MAG-16, but downgraded back to Secret when I went back to my squadron since part of compartmentalization is "a need to know".

What you are talking about goes beyond compartmentalization. It's murder and treason. Any military or government personnel who took part would be violating their oaths to support and defend the Constitution. An operation as you suggest would take hundreds to execute and thousands more to cover up.

 

[candycorn]

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative..

Yes, I do. Evade NORAD? Do you even know what NORAD does and how the US air traffic control system works? It's not like they flew those planes from Russia.

As for conspiracy theories, the problem with them is that most not only take hundreds, if not thousands of people to carry out, but for all of those people to never, ever speak of it.

How many Americans would keep their mouths shut about an operation which killed thousands of other Americans? 10%? 50%? 90%? Someone would talk and, from my experiences with both the military and our government, I know a lot of them would talk. In fact, I doubt the operation could be done for lack of cooperation.

P knows full well how ADIZ work.The picture I pulled of ADIZ was from the very same webpage that he drew his quote. P knew that the ADIZ surrounded the US mainland on 911. He knew that his 'evading ADIZ' horseshit was a profound misrepresentation and deeply dishonest.

But as is so common among conspiracy theorists, their arguments require an ignorant audience. As his argument is dependent on his readers NOT knowing what ADIZ are, how they work, or what they do.

You’re accusing a conspiracy theorist of dishonesty? Next you’ll be telling us that water is wet.

The litmus test is that you need a plausible explanation for the physical evidence. Saying “they’re making it all up” is not plausible.
This is why I believe the 9/11 Commission; it makes sense. Nothing else accounts for the physical evidence.

For this, I get called a government shill or whatever. Thats fine.

The thing is that I apply it to the JFK matter also. I find it very hard to believe that Lee Oswald was able to defect from the US to Russia then back from Russia to the US during the height of the cold war. From all outward appearances, he was not some brilliant mathematician or violinist or even that good of an employee. His contributions to either society were minimal so why welcome him back at all? The number of people who were able to defect—twice—between the world super powers is probably very low. If someone knows how many did so during the 60’s..please let me know but I’m guessing you could count it on your hands and feet and have several fingers and toes left over. Then…he just happens to have the only job he’s capable of having—a menial job lugging boxes in Dallas—right smack dab on a presidential motorcade route? I don’t worry too much about his being the lone gunman or whatever. I think he was capable but the physical evidence of his moving from the US to Russia then back to the US is suspect. That he just happened to be on the motorcade route is maybe just the fickle finger of fate but the odds of one of the few who were able to pull off a double defection to the world’s two super powers being on the motorcade route?

Physical evidence is a bitch.

 

[phoenyx]

...Have you ever heard of information security compartmentalization? ...

Yes. I was a career military officer with a TS clearance while working at MAG-16, but downgraded back to Secret when I went back to my squadron since part of compartmentalization is "a need to know".

Alright.

What you are talking about goes beyond compartmentalization. It's murder and treason.

What I'm suggesting is that if you were going to commit murder (something which the U.S. military arguably does all the time overseas, just generally not against its own people), the perpetrators would be wise to compartmentalize the objective as much as possible. Do you disagree? As to treason, I imagine they could argue they were doing no such thing. Tell me, have you ever heard of a think tank group called PNAC, or Project for a New American Century?

Any military or government personnel who took part would be violating their oaths to support and defend the Constitution.

By the standards of many, I agree. That being said, I imagine that some could imagine they hadn't, just as some in the Bush administration came up with fancy words for permitting torture, such as "enemy combatant", "rendition" and "enhanced interrogation techniques" to weasel their way out of following the Geneva Conventions on Torture.

An operation as you suggest would take hundreds to execute and thousands more to cover up.

It's easy to bandy numbers about, but I'd like you to offer some evidence that it would require more then a few key people to actually -know- what was being done. And while you're at it, I'd like to know if you have atleast -considered- the possibility that the numerous war games that were taking place on 9/11 were used as part of the 9/11 operation itself. To do so, you may wish to read and respond to my post #92 in this thread, which describes these war games, with many embedded links within the text.