Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush buying time 'til hijacked planes hit government targets on 911

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Th1onein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:18 PM
Original message
Bush buying time 'til hijacked planes hit government targets on 911
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 04:21 PM by Th1onein
I've looked at the timeline on this thing, over and over again. Andrew Card told Bush that the second plane had hit the WTC at approximately 9:03AM. Bush gave a SPEECH at the elementary school at approximately 9:29AM! He didn't leave the school until approximately 9:38AM! This is EXACTLY when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon!

I think that he was delaying any action until Flight 77 could hit the Pentagon.

What do you think?

On edit: I think that the plan was to take out Congress and institute rule by the shadow government, with Bush as dictator.

Okay, put on your tinfoil hats, folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Okay, put on your tinfoil hats, folks.
I had to use mine to bake some yard bird... but your theory is interesting just the same....

Caught napping
Why America Slept, by Gerald Posner
http://www.posner.com/Reviews/asia%20times%20WAS.htm
>>WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is struggling to contain and subdue Iraq, a country it said was a haven for al-Qaeda terrorists and a clandestine laboratory for weapons of mass destruction. As it spin-doctors its way out of old rationales and creates new ones, its leading lights may find better clues to international terrorism and how it germinates and operates in Gerald Posner's latest book Why America Slept. And many clues incidentally are buried comfortably in US policy and right here in the capital. There is more credible information in these 196 pages than the tons of "evidence" thrown at the world by the administration prior to the war. The book is a painstaking, piece-by-piece assemblage of an enormously complex puzzle, with players scattered around many countries, which begins to look complete by the end.<<
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ck4829 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. Seems strange
With the plan to postpone the election if there is a terrorist threat, I am starting to think that some of Bush's best friends are terrorists.

However I don't think Bush would take out Congress, they for the most part agree with him. However they could turn Congress into a Republican-puppet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Not himself?!?!?!?
And they let you e-mail from Shawshank these days or are you in Mexico?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Th1onein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. You know it would be REALLY good if you could support your points.
It's always good to provide some sort of foundation for your points, if you want to argue them. Or is it, in fact, that you don't really want to discuss anything on a civil level, and feel a lot more comfortable just disrupting?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. More like 907 men, so far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Did you mispell your sig line on purpose?
And your non-argument is weakest of all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrBB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. That would be Dufresne, actually
But it's a good moniker nonetheless. Welcome to DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
13.  never mind
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 04:56 PM by ElsewheresDaughter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. I don't think Bush is capable of complex planning...
I believe the time delay was a function of Bush's inept leadership skills. He had no sense of urgency because he was never qualified to hold the job. It's a plain and simple explanation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Bush had his role and his cue marks to hit.
The Bush family invented the "out of the loop" plausible deniability gambit.

But I suspect that they are quite concerned about losing control of Congress, maybe more than the Presidency. A Democratic majority might be far more interested in peeling the paint off the whitewash.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
20. Hi mckara!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
11. I agree 100%
The anthrax was meant as a follow-up to control rioting people, but ended up being used against Dems in congress instead - this is what I think happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
12. "EXACTLY when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon"
according to the CNN timeline:

9:43 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon, sending up a huge plume of smoke. Evacuation begins immediately.

http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Th1onein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Actually, others report between 9:34 and 9:38AM that the plane hit
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 06:02 PM by Th1onein
Another couple of weird things:

1. Supposedly, at the time that Card told Bush that the second plane had hit the second tower, he also said, "America is under attack." This doesn't sound right to me. The WTC had been attacked before, during Clinton's term, and no one labeled it an attack on America, itself.

2. Assuming that Bush knew that the other planes were hijacked, then the "America is under attack" statement seems okay, on it's face....BUT, then he gives a speech at the elementary school at 9:29! Why give a speech at this point? WTF is going on here? You know at least two other planes are off course, and two others have hit their target, WHY give a speech at that moment, instead of doing your job?

I'm sorry, I think the man was stalling. And, then, after he left the school, to go to AF1, there is a more than usually through search of baggage for air force one, and the plane doesn't take off until 9:55AM.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Except who believes it really was a plane that hit the Pentagon?
I dont. Absolutely no debris from the plane, far too small a whole for a plane to have hit.... seems to me it would do WAY more damage.... it just doesnt add up.

Not that I have any idea what did hit the Pentagon that awful day, but sure cant believe it was a plane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Th1onein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. I think that the idea that it was a missile is a red herring.
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. That's irrelevent.
The attacks on 9/11 happened, whatever the means used. The relevant questions are: who plotted the attacks, who aided and abetted them, and who profited?

Speculating about a no plane hit at the Pentagon is a red herring and a distraction. It's simply beside the point.

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. "no pentagon plane"
is the worst of the tin foil 'theories' and, imho, discredits legitimate question about that day.

so, they hijacked the plane but, what? dumped it in the ocean while actually using the other two hijacked planes to hit their targets?

the pentagon was a 'hardened target' quite unlike the WTC. the wings snapped off. it basically disintegrated on impact.

this fringe fantasy deeply weakened THE NEW PEARL HARBOR.

has anyone ever heard people like the "Jersey Girls" give an iota of credence to this?

no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
17. You're right. Time for the gullible to wake up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC