Miami Herald columnist: We are avoiding hard questions about 9/11

[HamdenRice]

I hope this post is not taken as violating guidelines which require discussion of 9/11 to be confined to that forum, because this post is not about an alternative (or conspiracy) theory of 9/11, but about how 9/11 doubts are gaining momentum.

I realize this is not a popular topic outside the 9/11 dungeon, but frankly, the veneer of the official story is all but demolished and even the mainstream media is beginning to point to the obvious three thousand pound elephant in the room -- that the government's culpability for 9/11 is something more than mere spectacular incompetence and a gracious plenty of extremely unfortunate, inexplicable, yet statistically incredible coincidences -- and yet the obvious conclusions to be drawn from that remain uncontemplatable in polite or even progressive society.

And this has nothing to do with any outlandish theories (no planes at the Pentagon, pods, etc) or even worry about why the towers collapsed.

Simply by reading the mainstream-sourced timeline, and digging a bit into the movement of capital and intelligence assets before 9/11, as well as scrutinizing the backgrounds and behaviors of the hijackers and their associates, one comes to the seemingly irrefutable conclusion that some elements within our government were complicit in the 9/11 atrocities.

And if that is true, and if that can be demonstrated to the American public, as it has been to the European public, then all American politics change forever. Who needs election machine reform or a poll-tested and approved message to be crafted for Democrats if the leadership of the Republican administration is complicit in mass murder, as increasing numbers of Americans have been convinced?

Miami Herald columnist Robert Steinback's recent column accuses the American public of having a severe case of "probe-ophobia" at this exceptionally inopportune time in history -- of not wanting to know about what is now all but obvious to anyone who has an internet connection and is willing and able to read.

Steinback, by the way is African American and originally a New Yorker. Here in New York, the bull's eye of 9/11, the majority of the public believe that the government was in some way complicit. After all, not only do we have to walk by (and be reminded by) the hole or have to view the now snaggle-toothed skyline from anywhere in the city, but the stories of secondary explosions, and other weirdness of that day, are passed around this city outside the control of the national media like soviet era samizdat. Outside New York, deviation from the official story is unthinkable. My experience is that most African Americans I know believe that the government was complicit. Perhaps it's just a matter of having a skeptical frame of mind, rooted in personal and familial history that prima facia violates the official version of American history; it's a matter of having always known that the official version of everything is a bald-faced lie. After all, recent public opinion polls show that President Bush's approval ratings within the black community are actually lower than the margin of error, suggesting he may actually have zero black support; while a stupefyingly large percentage of the majority community continue to be counter-factually enthralled with their president, whom they actually believe to be a direct messenger from Jesus.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/robert_steinback/13760721.htm

Avoiding the hard questions
ROBERT STEINBACK

<snip>

Since Kennedy's assassination, Americans have lurched between demanding to know and plugging their ears: The Pentagon Papers, My Lai, the King assassination, Watergate, Iran-contra, the savings-and-loan debacle, Monicagate. Lately, however, it would seem the public's verdict is in: Don't tell us. Keep us in the dark. We don't want to know.

This is the worst possible time for probe-ophobia to grip us. Our nation was irretrievably transformed by 9/11 -- and yet there remain troubling questions about what really happened before, during and after that day. Rather than demanding a full and fearless vetting to hone in on the truth and silence the conjecture about 9/11, many Americans remain unwilling to peer into the microscope.

An online cottage industry of theorists, theory debunkers and debunker debunkers has flourished since 9/11. Sometimes the flimsy theories are easy to spot -- come on, if the four passenger jets didn't crash where it appears they did, where did they go? More often, though, the cases aren't so obvious.

A group of experts and academicians 'devoted to applying the principles of scientific reasoning to the available evidence, `letting the chips fall where they may,' '' last week accused the government of covering up evidence that the three destroyed New York City buildings were brought down that day by controlled demolition rather than structural failure. The group, called Scholars for 9/11 Truth, has a website, www.st911.org.

[elehhhhna]

1. That's what I don't get:

whay was there apparently NO investigating of insiders? Clearly there were some insiders in the system somewhere...one would think it would be crucial to the Nations Defense to fully invetigate every inch of the chain that so conveniently fell apart.

[MadHound]

2. Because it is the insiders who have benifitted greatly from 911

And if they were exposed to the light of truth, their whole house of cards would fall, and they would be lynched in the streets. Therefore the truth of 911 is to be hidden away by all means neccessary.

[savemefromdumbya]

5. unless

Abramoff is the achilles heel?

[dchill]

86. Also, the "Insiders" ...

would have had to authorize that investigation.

BTW, "lynched in the streets" would be way too good for them.

[savemefromdumbya]

4. the attacks happened during drills

so there was confusion

[FreedomAngel82]

77. They had that planned too

To throw them off. But remember what Rummy said about that one flight? That someone shot it down?

[savemefromdumbya]

3. I think many people know the truth but it has been spun so much that..

people are afraid to bring the subject up for the fear as being branded as a loony/tinfoiler.

When Dems win in 2006 and 2008 the truth will be unzipped (unless some of ours had something to do with it).

Some of the conspiracy sites do not seem to go anywhere regurgitating the same old photos and pods etc. I expect there are many who saw and photographed the planes going into the WTC and could provide a lot more info. There are many who experienced the explosions inside the WTC.
However, it wouldn't do any harm for an independent enquiry.

[HamdenRice]

7. We live in unreality anyway ...

You are right about spin. How can we get to the truth about 9/11 when we live in a world in which the main stream media reports as objective truth that the Abramoff scandal is bipartisan?

It's gone way beyond spin; it's hyper-unreality.

Meanwhile we are stuck in our "reality based community."

[savemefromdumbya]

12. It's been cleverly orchestrated

[malaise]

45. No

It is an inversion of reality.

[FreedomAngel82]

78. One of the best sites in my opinion

is http://www.reopen911.org

[yurbud]

6. a positive note: there have been a couple of articles like this lately

maybe as a warning to the Bushies about trying this again to do a 'motivator' for war with Iran.

[drduffy]

13. if you have the links....

[Jujiman]

15. Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax

(PRWEB) - Duluth, MN (PRWEB) January 30, 2006 -- A group of distinguished experts and scholars, including Robert M. Bowman, James H. Fetzer, Wayne Madsen, John McMurtry, Morgan Reynolds, and Andreas von Buelow, have concluded that senior government officials have covered up crucial facts about what really happened on 9/11.

They have joined with others in common cause as members of "Scholars for 9/11 Truth" (S9/11T), because they are convinced, based on their own research, that the administration has been deceiving the nation about critical events in New York and Washington, D.C.

These experts suggest these events may have been orchestrated by elements within the administration to manipulate Americans into supporting policies at home and abroad they would never have condoned absent "another Pearl Harbor."

They believe that this White House is incapable of investigating itself and hope the possibility that Congress might hold an unaccountable administration accountable is not merely naive or wishful thinking.

http://www.st911.org/

Yep, EXPERTS are telling it like it is!

:)

[underpants]

8. Question about NYC

Is that really what is said "on the street", that the govt. had to be involved somehow?

I have never heard that that is commonly talked about there?

I don't live in NYC so I don't know

Really?

[MsKandice01]

9. I saw a Zogby poll

That said that something like 60% of New Yorkers believe that the government at LEAST let it happen on purpose.

[debbierlus]

10. Bump.

[HamdenRice]

14. Among people I come into contact with in NYC ...

if the subject comes up, the first reaction is -- eyes roll and a sly, "of course they did it" usually followed by "but people really don't want to know."

But that's my impression. Plus there are the polls.

[underpants]

17. Talk about tightly guarded secrets

I had never heard that before. Wow you would think that ONE media outlet would mention something about it or would have slipped by now.

BTW_ I don't subscribe to LIHOP or MIHOP I sleep well at night just sticking to my "gross negligence and incompetence" storyline.

[HamdenRice]

18. Just curious ...

Are you saying that even if there was evidence of LIHOP or worse, you would not want to know? Or that you have looked at the sources and come to the conclusion of "gross negligence and incompetence". Because the way you phrase it, it seems more like the former than the latter.

That's the attitude that I'm having difficulty understanding.

[underpants]

20. I sleep well at night

Of course I would want to know. I have read on it. I see where everything points....I just stick with "gross negligence and incompetence" (ABC -Anything but Clinton- really) in mixed company.

I should edit that to say I don't OPENLY subscribe to LIHOP or MIHOP....

Got it?

I am still amazed that this is regularly discussed by people.

[HamdenRice]

25. To paraphrase Colin Powell, I sleep like a baby ...

I wake up every two hours screaming! Not really, but confronting the reality is very depressing.

[underpants]

26. .

Funny bit my wife and I have going.

The inside joke is that because of my DU membership and our work on the Kerry campaign and Kaine campaign (such as it was) we both will stop in the middle of any conversation that starts to push the limits and look up and state our name and social security number.

MY part of the joke is doing a voice like it is coming over a Public Address system and saying, "Yeah we already have you down".

:evilgrin:

[milkyway]

54. Actually, Zogby's poll showed 49.3% of NYCers believed last year that

there was government complicity (I'm one of those New Yorkers). Here's the link:
http://www.zogby.com/search/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855

[Stephanie]

29. No, it is not commonly talked about.

And the 9/11 Theorists with their banners regularly appear at Ground Zero and are generally ignored. Nobody I know believes the stories about controlled demolition, etc. There were too many eyewitnesses - it's absolutely impossible. But I think everybody agrees that Bush & Co. let us down completely when they failed to do anything to prevent the attacks, about which they had ample warning, and that the Crawford Coward went into hiding that day rather than lead the country. That job was left to Giuliani and much as I loathe him he was a great leader on that day just for showing up and stating the facts.

[underpants]

30. Okay

That is more of the way I have always seen it.

[HamdenRice]

32. I guess we move in different circles in NYC ...

and I'm not talking about people at the site with banners, but just family, friends, colleagues and acquaintances.

But the polling suggests that the people I interact with are a more typical sample of New Yorkers than the people you interact with, because polls show about 60% of city residents believe that the government had prior knowledge and didn't stop the attacks.

[Stephanie]

33. Well that's exactly as I stated above

They had dozens of warnings and their own PDB and did nothing and in fact they left town, and it's my opinion that they did that to get out of harm's way. I absolutely believe they LIHOP. But I don't know anyone who believes that controlled demolition story. There were thousands of eyewitnesses that day. It's absolutely impossible. But I think you and I agree.

[HamdenRice]

34. I misunderstood you ...

when your above post talked of warnings that were ignored I thought you were subscribing to the astonishing incompetence only theory. And when you said no one paid attention to the "9/11 theorists" I assumed you were including LIHOP, which is considered a "conspiracy theory" by some, because it requires that group to actively let the attacks happen and cover it up.

As for demolition, that's a tough one. The video of WTC 7 was what got me involved in questioning the official theory in the first place. Since then I've seen really remarkable video of WTC 1 & 2 which appear to show charges -- not just squibs, but bright explosions -- on floors below the impact area. There is also the tremendous number of first hand accounts in which newscasters, fire fighters and other witnesses either described other explosions or described the collapses as looking like controlled demolition. There is no question in my mind that even if there was no CD, there was a lot more going on in NYC both in the streets and in the towers than we have been led to believe.

But I understand that it is too unthinkable for most, and it is almost impossible to imagine how it could have been carried out, and it is impossible to prove. But I would certainly not say that no one believes in controlled demo. Maybe no one you know; but it seems like the majority of people I know who are not Bush fan nut jobs think a CD assist of the collapse is possible to probable.

At any rate, I don't pursue it precisely because it causes such strong negative reactions, and more importantly you can pretty much prove LIHOP or even MIHOP without reference whatsoever to how the buildings fell. For that reason, I think even if there was controlled demolition, it is not the most fruitful avenue to pursue either to get to the truth or to convince the unconvinced.

[Stephanie]

38. we agree

except for the demo ideas which I think are silly considering probably ten thousand people were standing right there watching the whole thing, but otherwise I am right there with you, neighbor.

[HamdenRice]

40. Just curious ...

You mention the thousands of witnesses as a reason for not believing CD is possible; but reading transcripts and looking at video of that day, my impression is that many witnesses actually believed there were explosions and demolition had occurred. Why does the idea of witnesses make you think CD could not have occurred?

[Stephanie]

43. people always say that but I've only seen one actual quote

and that was vague. there is a difference just because someone says "it sounded like explosions" doesn't mean they actually thought it was explosives - it's just a description of the sounds. with all the eye-witnesses who were there that day, don't you think there'd be more than just a few off-hand remarks about the sounds? what else were they going to compare it to? nobody SAW explosions. have you ever gone up in the WTC, with all the security since '93? how did explosives get in there without anyone noticing? what about all the rescue workers that cleared the site, hundreds and hundreds of them - why was NO evidence of explosives found? were they ALL in on it? what about the forensics experts who sifted through the debris out at Fresh Kills? why did they find NO evidence? it's a ridiculous and harmful theory, IMO, b/c it taints the obvious questions that have never been answered, such as why did they ignore the PDB, why NORAD did nothing, why Rummy sat in a meeting, why Bush read a book about goats, why airlines got no warnings, etc. I think it's disinfo deliberately put out to obscure the rest, which, if you think about it, is a classic Rovian tactic.

[oblivious]

49. Well here's quite a few quotes from firemen on the scene.

http://www.flcv.com/firemen.html

from the 911 forum:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x65771#65927

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Justice Is Comin]

79. And CD is tinfoil on it's face.

If you were to hypothecate that the buildings were manually brought down, first of all, you would have to do something to discount the actual physics of what would have been taking place. The planes flew at 600 miles an hour into the buildings. I repeat 600 miles per hour. And FULL OF FUEL.

The explosions could have been numerous as combustibles were igniting. The heat of the inferno was so hot, it made the steel beams become almost a licorice consistency. That would make the weight of each floor falling another zillion pounds heavier on the one below it and they pancaked until there was no way they could fall any further.

Then, the most obvious thing that occurs to me about the other building is that no one wanted to be within a mile of those buildings during and after the collapse. I'm pretty sure 7 didn't go down before the main towers, so if it was imploded by demolition, first of all somebody would have had to set those many many charges at crucial points within the building, then wires from those charges would have had to run outside the building to a detonator control. And that would have had to be done long before that morning unless you REALLY believe in fairytales. And I have to think wires running from a building would have pretty noticeable to anyone.

But now let's even concede that just for the hell of more fantasy. SOMEBODY would then have had to push that plunger. The dust and smoke alone was so thick you couldn't see six inches in front of your face. And I don't think anybody would have been that anxious to volunteer to die.

Bush is a nobel prize winning vine swinging fucking asshole but he didn't implode the buildings. And I agree with you.

[jschurchin]

82. Sir or Madem...........

anyone who has done even a cursory examination of the event's of 9-11 can easily tell you have not.
Before you begin to spout off your theory's as FACT I suggest you read the FEMA, NIST and available FBI report's to see what the PROVABLE FACTS are.
You are not helping!

[rman]

92. wow, that's a lot of... data falsification

[jschurchin]

93. Permit me rman.......

to clarify myself. Being we do not and cannot get access to the blueprints and /or the Scopes of Work for either, the Towers or WTC 7 the best available evidence to their construction and materials used is in the FEMA and NIST reports.

I am not a huge fan of the conclusions in either report as I do not believe that their evidence supports them, however I am also not convinced that demolition has been proven. The avaliable evidence does not support that either.

We really, at this time, can not conclusivly prove the structual damage/fire hypothisis nor the demolition/implosion hypothisis. We simply do not have the evidence.

[rman]

95. oh yes we do have evidence

steel that has been party evaporated, lots of sulfur found in the steel, pools of molten steel in the basements, staying red hot for weeks.
fire doesn't do that, military grade thermite does.

explosions reported by police, fireman, eyewitnesses, MSM.

it's not 'our' job to provide conclusive proof. conclusive proof can only be provided by official criminal investigation. the many holes in the official story should be enough to raise suspicions that warrant such investigation.

[rman]

91. You've heard one quote regarding explosions?

You should get out more (or maybe just hang around in the DU basement a bit more).

Explosions are mentioned on several occasions in the recordings of police and firefighters that day. Those recordings have been released on a FOI request by the NYT.
Some of the smaller MSM that day had eyewitnesses reporting explosions.

[milkyway]

59. I think anything's possible, but I agree it's counterproductive to put

forth seemingly wild theories without rock solid evidence. It just causes people to tune out everything else, labelling everyone who doubts the official 9/11 theory as the lunatic fringe. The further away from the mainstream you get, the more proof you need. Besides, there's plenty of other evidence that points to at least LIHOP.

Here's my two biggest reasons for doubting the official 9/11 theory:

1. How can the world's lone superpower, with a multi-trillion dollar military, not even be able to defend its own headquarters when they knew that more than an hour before jets had been hijacked...and certainly once the first tower had been struck, they knew the jets were being used to target prominent buildings. Yet nearly an hour after that first strike, the Pentagon could not defend itself from horizontal-flying less-than-amateur pilots in passenger jets. I'm sorry, I refuse to believe our military is that incompetent.

2. The bush administration has repeatedly lied about everything else. Why on earth should we unquestioningly believe their fairy tale about 9/11? And they don't just lie; as they have said, they create their own reality (and the rest of us just live in it). A major foundation of this manufactured reality that we now confront every day is the bush admin's version of 9/11.

[rman]

90. Presumably many of the witnesses heard the explosions,

the same explosions that were mentioned in some of the MSM that day, same explosions that police and firefighters mentioned in their communications. Same explosions that were recorded on the "911 eyewitness" video (www.911eyewitness.com).

I'm not sure what exactly you think is impossible, maybe you think that according to the demolition theory, the explosions were planted on 9-11? That would indeed be highly implausible, but that's not what the demo CT says.

[malachibk]

41. I live in NYC

I'd say among my friends (all of whom are liberal, but less so than I) the breakdown is about 40% MIHOP 40% LIHOP and 20% shudder to think but don't deny.

I myself have moved from the LIHOP to the MIHOP camp over the past 4+ years.

[yodermon]

52. here is a link.

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855

Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals

[rman]

87. For one, NY-ers probably know EPA lied about air quality

We can only guess how many people there have died by now due to the toxic dust.

Also more then a few people there heard the explosions preceding the collapses. And presumably many saw WTC7 collapse, unlike must of the rest of us (thanks to the liberal media).

Got to make one wonder.

[AZCat]

88. Probably not that many have died from the dust...

In cases like this there aren't usually that many deaths that can be directly linked to the pollution at (and around) ground zero. Instead there are two other results of far greater impact: reduction in quality of life for large numbers of people (health problems) in the short to mid-term, and shortened life spans because of exacerbated issues or long-term damage from the pollution.

I read "When Smoke Ran Like Water" a couple of years ago and the author talked a lot about how difficult it is to determine the number of people affected by things like pollution. Good book, IMO (if a bit depressing).

[rman]

89. good points, but still

I suspect many NY-ers know/suspect that many of them are suffering from reduction in quality of life and shortened life spans because of 9-11 - regardless of the official story.

After all, officially there was/is nothing wrong with the air quality.

[AZCat]

94. I hope they are aware of...

both the lies present in the air quality debate and the lies spread (or truth unsaid) about the events of September 11th.

Unfortunately the residents of the rest of the country don't have the benefit of such tangible aids - understanding the deviousness of the Bush Admin requires a little more imagination.

[CJCRANE]

11. "Simply

by reading the mainstream-sourced timeline, and digging a bit into the movement of capital and intelligence assets before 9/11, as well as scrutinizing the backgrounds and behaviors of the hijackers and their associates, one comes to the seemingly irrefutable conclusion that some elements within our government were complicit in the 9/11 atrocities."

There's the rub. The truth lies not in looking for pods or controlled demolitions but by simply following the money and the personal, political and business connections involved.

It's staring everyone in the face, who cares to look.

[Tuesday_Morning]

35. I really appreciate Paul Thompson's timelines

http://cooperativeresearch.org/

Also recommend this essay
An Interesting Day: President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11

http://cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essayaninterestingday

All of it nicely sourced.

[CJCRANE]

37. "Don't just DO something, SIT there!"

seems to sum up *'s reaction that morning.

The fascinating thing is that Cheney seemed to want * out of the loop for as long as possible...

[donsu]

16. kicking for justice

nt

[LunaC]

19. "mainstream-sourced timeline"

For anyone not already familiar with the details, please visit the link in my sig line.

[HamdenRice]

23. Great work -- a comment and possible correction

Is this entry yours? If so, in your paragraph on 9/11 you mention the chief of Pakistan's ISI participating in the plan to attack Afghanistan and wiring $100,000 to the hijackers "just days" before 9/11.

There are competing accounts of that transaction. The general is Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad. I think the more credible accounts have him wiring the money a year or more before the attacks, because Mohammed Atta used the funds for flight school training. I think it was Sept. 2000, which leads to the confusion.

The intermediary was ISI operative Saeed Sheikh. Atta is alleged to wired the leftover money back to Sheikh just days before 9/11, another source of confusion.

Gen. Ahmad flew to DC on Sept 6, 2001, to meet with Pentagon, US intelligence and State Dept. counterparts, and was having breakfast with Porter Goss and Bob Graham, chairs of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on 9/11 as the planes slammed into the buildings.

The intermediary, Sheikh, murdered Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, presumably because Pearl was documenting the money trail between Atta and Gen. Ahmad for the Wall St. Journal.

[JohnyCanuck]

21. 20 reasons to question the official story of 9/11

20 reasons to question the official story of 9/11
by dailykoster
Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 07:16:42 AM PDT

(1) While the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck, the Secretary of Transportation testified before the 9/11 Commission that Vice President Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon and -- when a military man asked "do the orders still stand?" -- Cheney responded affirmatively.

http://www.911truthmovement.org/video/hamilton_win.wmv

<snip>

(2) The tape of interviews of air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 was intentionally destroyed by crushing the cassette by hand, cutting the tape into little pieces, and then dropping the pieces in different trash cans around the building

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F0091FFE3C580C748CDDAC0894DC404482&incamp=archive:search
and
http://web.archive.org/web/20040509021515/http://www.suntimes.com/output/terror/cst-nws-tape07.html


(3) The 9-11 Commission refused to examine the vast majority of evidence about 9/11, and even the former director of the FBI says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/11/17/122900.shtml
and
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1566565847/qid=1120623441/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_ur_1/103-5910915-8313462?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Continued at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/31/91642/9872

[kiki]

22. Might as well

kick this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3950570

For new DUers, and the "Oh, they'd never be that evil" crowd...

[CJCRANE]

28. Fantastic work!

You should do more like this.

(This is the kind of stuff I tell my RW-apologist friend. Due to the fact that I cite known historical
conspiracies he no longer calls me a "conspiracy theorist". He just calls me "cynical").

Another historical LIHOP is when Churchill knew the Nazis were going to bomb Coventry but didn't warn the city's population to evacuate...doing so would have tipped off the Nazis that the British could crack their enigma code...Churchill sacrificed Coventry for a longer-term strategic gain).

[bobbieinok]

71. Leslie Howard (Asheley in Gone with the Wind) was on a plane shot

down by the Germans on June i 1943.

'When the Ultra secret was disclosed long after WW2 ended, the public learned that the Allies had broken the Nazi codes for most of the war. Subsequently it was also revealed that the British had known in advance of possible German plans to intercept the airliner. To avoid compromising the Ultra secret, the British did not pass on their knowledge to the airline.'

I was very upset when I learned about this and the 'permitted Coventry bombing' b/c Howard was one of my most favorite actors when I was a teenager.

[HughBeaumont]

24. I go by Paul Thompson's "The Terror Timeline"

That's the best place to start for mainstream-timeline'd, proof-positive happenings surrounding the events of 9/11.

[Stephanie]

31. I agree - Paul's timeline is the very best sourc

Plus, he's a DU'er. And he's slept on my couch! :)

www.cooperativeresearch.org

[KoKo]

56. Anyone reading Thompson's Timeline or watch the events on 9/11 glued

to their TV from the time the first pictures appeared HAS TO HAVE DOUBTS that what we were told is any where near the the truth.

Especially those of us who remember living through the Cold War and "Duck and Cover" exercises and the warnings that used to come on our TV periodically. We were told we had total protection. Norad was out there manning our skies.

When jets escorted Payne Stewart's Jet flying solo with pilot and passenger long gone to bring it down it seemed normal that our air defenses were doing their job.

yet on September 11th American Public was left wondering "Who is in Charge" after the horrible pictures we were subjected to and Chimp fleeing DC in Air Force One running from Americans who were in PANIC!

It was left to Rudi Guliani and even Tony Blair to make sense and calm the people. Our President and Vice President were nowhere to be seen until the end of the day.

NO...9/11 was not an "accident of faulty intelligence." And it didn't happen on ANY OTHER PRESIDENTS WATCH...except THIS One's.

[Imagevision]

27. As Bush/Cheney claimed 9-11 could have been avoided if they wiretapped??

or?... if the FBI acted on existing information about the 9-11 hijacjers taking flight instructions - lessons in Arizona.

[Jujiman]

44. Bush Wiretapped Before 9-11!

He did spy before 9-11

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011306Z.shtml

Major media censors the story.

:shrug:

[Jujiman]

46. Bush Wiretapped Before 9-11

Bush spied before 9-11

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011306Z.shtml

Media censors the story.

:shrug:

[Wilms]

36. .

[MellowOne]

39. Great post!

I'm so glad people are asking questions, maybe someone will someday expose it all.

[abex]

42. it's good to see this discussed in gd where it will be seen by more people

[Disturbed]

47. LIHOP is not Tinfoil hat, at all.

It is absolutely a logical conclusion.

[Jeanette in FL]

48. Exactly, after the second plane hit, my reaction was

"Heads are going to roll over this". Well since heads did not roll, it leads you to only one conclusion. LIHOP. But I am way over that. I am so "MIHOP"

[Wilms]

50. kick

[samhsarah]

51. KICK!

[Roland99]

55. I finally saw Loose Change...Shines the light on some odd coincidences!!

[Hailtothechimp]

57. We have been lied to about so many other things....

like WMD, the NOLA levees, the assertion that wiretapping requires a warrant, Alberto's confirmation hearings, and on and on, that it's completely logical to question whether the truth was told about 9/11. And it's increasingly clear that we have been had on that one too.

If Bush and Cheney had nothing to hide, why did they not testify separately before the 9/11 commission? That's a huge red flag in my mind.

[Straight Shooter]

58. I have never seen this question answered:

Shortly after the destruction and carnage on September 11, I read an article which indicated that someone in bush's entourage, someone in the back of the room, held up a sign on which was printed, Don't Say Anything, after Card advised bush of the second plane hitting.

Does anyone know who that person was and why that story was never investigated? Why wouldn't they want him to say anything?

To this day, I believe bush thinks he saw the first plane hit the tower because he was actually remembering a video simulation version of the attack, which he had watched pre-September 11. Whether it was shown to him following the infamous PDB as a demonstration of what might happen, or whether it had a more nefarious purpose, I cannot say. But bush sometimes has a weird way of blurting out the truth even if it doesn't seem to make sense at the time.

[toddaa]

60. For crying out loud!!!

It's 2006 and we're still in denial. Duh, duh, duh, and duh.

All you have to do is look at the timeline and use Occam's razor.

[il_lilac]

61. K&R

for truth and justice.

[G_j]

62. K & R

[Blue_Tires]

63. ttt n/t

[farmbo]

64. Given Bush's capacity for deceit, all aspects of 9/11 deserve scrutiny.

And it should be the GOVERNMENT's obligation-- NOT THE PEOPLE's-- to prove their "theory" of 9/11 as an unforeseeable act of terror for which the government had no viable defense.

People, including some DU posters, who demand "hard evidence" of LIHOP before ascribing any significance to critical theories, are erecting unfair and impossible barriers to the reasoned evaluation of the many irreconcilable facts associated with that infamous date.

Who knows...maybe in the end Condi is right and "...nobody could have envisioned terrorists using aircraft as missles..." and Bush's version will go permanently into the history books.

But, Good Gawd, people. Not without a fight!

[Beam Me Up]

65. Thank you, HamdenRice, for doing what others have been unable to do:

Bring the subject of 9/11 into the General Discussion Forum of DU.

As 9/11 skeptics, it is NOT necessary for us to prove conclusively that the official government story is false--munch less generate alternative theories of what happened and who may be responsible. All of that SHOULD BE the end result of a transparent process of discovery in a criminal case of near mythical proportions. All WE have to do is show that the "official theory" is so flawed as to be highly unlikely if not impossible--and this the 9/11 skeptics movement has done IN SPADES.

From this point on, the only thing that we have to do is slowly dissolve the ages of denial that cover our weary souls--and this we must do not only as citizen patriots of the United States of America, but as citizens of the world. With 9/11, we have crossed a threshold in the history of human civilization: The reign of oligarchical terror that has been used to shape human history and has pitted us one against another for the past two thousand years and longer can now be exposed for precisely what it is--a form of social control.

The New American Revolution will be an awakening.

[fooj]

66. Holy crap. How moving. So very true.

From this point on, the only thing that we have to do is slowly dissolve the ages of denial that cover our weary souls--and this we must do not only as citizen patriots of the United States of America, but as citizens of the world. With 9/11, we have crossed a threshold in the history of human civilization: The reign of oligarchical terror that has been used to shape human history and has pitted us one against another for the past two thousand years and longer can now be exposed for precisely what it is--a form of social control.


Peace.

[Beam Me Up]

85. Why, thank you, fooj!

:blush:

I love your spinning daisy avatar. It could make me crazy if I stared at it too long but mostly it just makes me smile.

:hi:

[autorank]

67. HamdenRice, You're the f'ing Best!!! No "coincidences" as they say.

"Who needs election machine reform or a poll-tested and approved message to be crafted for Democrats if the leadership of the Republican administration is complicit in mass murder, as increasing numbers of Americans have been convinced?"

Well, there you have it. Just keep telling the truth everybody. It's not about cooking up stories, it's about asking questions. What major crime doesn't involve a conspiracy. Ask any cop or prosecutor.

:wtf: Why are we holding back? "Wouldn't be prudent" isn't our motto.

I want the truth. I want it real damn quick. And I don't want anybody telling me I'm a nut because I have questions that are quite legitimate.

[Corgigal]

68. I'm not sure how every New Yorker in NYC thinks

but they are paying good bucks for their "own" terror agency network. I don't know of one other city that doesn't trust the feds now as NYC. Below is a small part of a New Yorker article that appeared, I believe last year, on what they do now. Did you know that NYPD is larger then the FBI?

If anything gives you pause it should be this information. These people live and love their city and are tired of getting info, when they get it, in an untimely manner. Without saying a word, NYC did what they thought they must do to protect their citizens.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/content/articles/050725on_onlineonly01

Another structural advantage that the N.Y.P.D. has is simply its size—it’s almost twice the size of the F.B.I., for instance. Paradoxically, the N.Y.P.D. seems to be far more nimble, institutionally, than its federal counterparts. The Administration’s efforts to reform our national-security agencies since the catastrophic failures that allowed the 9/11 attacks to succeed—I’m talking about the creation of the Homeland Security Department, as well as the attempts to radically restructure both the F.B.I. and the C.I.A.—have been, so far, a disheartening spectacle. You start to wonder if we’re dealing with bureaucracies that are so dysfunctional they’re simply impervious to reform. The reorganization of the N.Y.P.D., by contrast, has been fast, fairly smooth, and basically self-driven. You get the sense that the N.Y.P.D., big as it is, can practically turn on a dime. David Cohen, who is the N.Y.P.D.’s Deputy Commissioner for Intelligence, spent thirty-five years at the C.I.A.—he rose to become director of operations there—and he told me, “The N.Y.P.D. is on a hair trigger. The air gap between information and action is the shortest I’ve ever experienced.” He said that he and Kelly started talking about stationing N.Y.P.D. officers overseas, but when he, Cohen, tried to bring up the idea, which he thought was pretty interesting, the following week, Kelly cut him off by saying, “Didn’t we already decide that?” In virtually no time, the N.Y.P.D. had detectives stationed in France, Britain, Israel, Canada, and Singapore, filing daily reports. It wasn’t as if there was any blueprint for these kinds of deployments. It simply got done.

[autorank]

69. I love New York!!!

NEW YORK IS A FUN CITY Mayor Lindsay

[Tigress DEM]

70. It takes some chutzpah to face the truth.

"....not wanting to know about what is now all but obvious to anyone who has an internet connection and is willing and able to read."

I remember buying the CSpan CD of a professor that had 3 levels of theory on 9/11 and he went into detail about how various evidence can suggest incompetence, complicity or worse knowing intent.

I couldn't go to the farthest levels at first even though I had seen a lot more truth than most, simply because as what I hope could be called an honorable American I tend to reserve judgement until I have real facts in front of me.

I didn't like it at all that they let Osama's family leave on planes before they let private US flights up.

The possibility that there was evidence of demolition type explosions that took out the solid steel framework in addition to the planes damage could have been part of the whole terrorist plan, but it certainly defies the laws of physics when anyone says the planes could have made the towers collapse just so. It looked like a controlled demolition.

But the more outrageous things this administration does, the less I doubt that they could have done virtually any heinous crime and covered it up without breaking a sweat, because if there is one thing this administration DOES do well, it's lie their stinking hearts out.

[ClayZ]

72. K & R

:kick:

[rman]

73. General Richard B. Myers admits to War Games on 9-11-01

This casts doubt on official government claims that "they did not know an attack such as 9-11 was possible". Various government agencies were conducting exercises on 9-11 for exactly the kind of attack that took place that day.


The War Games of September 11th
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/11/war-games-of-september-11th.html
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 into the video).
http://www.spiegltech.com/media/McKinney2.rm (C-SPAN footage)

[Wilms]

74. .

[stickdog]

75. The Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11

Originally posted in this very forum:

http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html

[atomic-fly]

80. wow great blog...

[FreedomAngel82]

76. I wonder today how many people buy

the official story. Too bad there wasn't a poll or anything to take. I think when the democrats take control again there should be an independent investigation with experts of people like David Ray Griffin and other people who know their 9/11 history and can share information. I don't buy the "we didn't know" line from the Bush administration for shit. In July 2001 Alex Jones had on his program (he has video footage of this) the document "BinLadin Determined to Strike Inside the United States" and urging people to call their represenitivies about it. So if he knew than we all know Bush knew.

[mikelewis]

81. We must never question 9/11.

[jschurchin]

83. Explain Please

[bud E. holly]

84. He's being sarcastic

He has had some excellent posts in the 911 Forum. I believe he is a fire investigator and has raised many valid questions about the WTC fires and the sprinkler systems. Long before I officially joined DU, I lurked in the 911 Forum. Had to quit going there....too many circular discussions. Many good questions raised there, but trouble starts when people with tunnel vision start trying to answer the questions themselves. And there's a lot of tunnel vision in 911 Forum, on both sides of the issue.

Edit for clarity