Atlantis Online
May 27, 2020, 11:40:21 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Were seafarers living here 16,000 years ago?
http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=34805893-6a53-46f5-a864-a96d53991051&k=39922
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

September 11th: Conspiracies & Cover-ups - Original Version

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 32   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: September 11th: Conspiracies & Cover-ups - Original Version  (Read 2008 times)
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #75 on: March 06, 2008, 03:20:18 pm »

FLIGHT 93
Cockpit recordings indicate the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 teamed up to attack their hijackers, forcing down the plane near Shanksville, in southwestern Pennsylvania. But conspiracy theorists assert Flight 93 was destroyed by a heat-seeking missile from an F-16 or a mysterious white plane. Some theorists add far-fetched elaborations: No terrorists were aboard, or the passengers were drugged. The wildest is the "bumble planes" theory, which holds that passengers from Flights 11, 175 and 77 were loaded onto Flight 93 so the U.S. government could kill them.

The White Jet
CLAIM: At least six eyewitnesses say they saw a small white jet flying low over the crash area almost immediately after Flight 93 went down. BlogD.com theorizes that the aircraft was downed by "either a missile fired from an Air Force jet, or via an electronic assault made by a U.S. Customs airplane reported to have been seen near the site minutes after Flight 93 crashed." WorldNetDaily.com weighs in: "Witnesses to this low-flying jet ... told their story to journalists. Shortly thereafter, the FBI began to attack the witnesses with perhaps the most inane disinformation ever--alleging the witnesses actually observed a private jet at 34,000 ft. The FBI says the jet was asked to come down to 5000 ft. and try to find the crash site. This would require about 20 minutes to descend."

FACT: There was such a jet in the vicinity--a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C., an apparel company that markets Wrangler jeans and other brands. The VF plane was flying into Johnstown-Cambria airport, 20 miles north of Shanksville. According to David Newell, VF's director of aviation and travel, the FAA's Cleveland Center contacted copilot Yates Gladwell when the Falcon was at an altitude "in the neighborhood of 3000 to 4000 ft."--not 34,000 ft. "They were in a descent already going into Johnstown," Newell adds. "The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on." Reached by PM, Gladwell confirmed this account but, concerned about ongoing harassment by conspiracy theorists, asked not to be quoted directly.

Roving Engine
CLAIM: One of Flight 93's engines was found "at a considerable distance from the crash site," according to Lyle Szupinka, a state police officer on the scene who was quoted in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Offering no evidence, a posting on Rense.com claimed: "The main body of the engine ... was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner."

FACT: Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.

Indian Lake
CLAIM: "Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains," states a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article dated Sept. 13, 2001. "Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly 6 miles from the immediate crash scene." Commenting on reports that Indian Lake residents collected debris, Think AndAsk.com speculates: "On Sept. 10, 2001, a strong cold front pushed through the area, and behind it--winds blew northerly. Since Flight 93 crashed west-southwest of Indian Lake, it was impossible for debris to fly perpendicular to wind direction. ... The FBI lied." And the significance of widespread debris? Theorists claim the plane was breaking up before it crashed. TheForbiddenKnowledge.com states bluntly: "Without a doubt, Flight 93 was shot down."
« Last Edit: March 06, 2008, 03:25:06 pm by Tesha Dodge » Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #76 on: March 06, 2008, 03:25:58 pm »



Map by International Mapping

F-16 Pilot
CLAIM: In February 2004, retired Army Col. Donn de Grand-Pre said on "The Alex Jones Show," a radio talk show broadcast on 42 stations: "It [Flight 93] was taken out by the North Dakota Air Guard. I know the pilot who fired those two missiles to take down 93." LetsRoll911.org, citing de Grand-Pre, identifies the pilot: "Major Rick Gibney fired two Sidewinder missiles at the aircraft and destroyed it in midflight at precisely 0958."

FACT: Saying he was reluctant to fuel debate by responding to unsubstantiated charges, Gibney (a lieutenant colonel, not a major) declined to comment. According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning--but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state's response to 9/11. Jacoby confirms the day's events. "I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany." Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. "I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes--it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims' families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REPORTING: Benjamin Chertoff, Davin Coburn, Michael Connery, David Enders, Kevin Haynes, Kristin Roth, Tracy Saelinger, Erik Sofge and the editors of POPULAR MECHANICS.
PHOTOGRAPHY RESEARCH: Sarah Shatz.
SOURCES: For a list of experts consulted during the preparation of this article, Click Here .
PM consulted more than 300 experts and organizations in its investigation into 9/11 conspiracy theories. The following were particularly helpful.

Air Crash Analysis
Cleveland Center regional air traffic control

Bill Crowley special agent, FBI

Ron Dokell president, Demolition Consultants

Richard Gazarik staff writer, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Yates Gladwell pilot, VF Corp.

Michael K. Hynes, Ed.D.,
ATP, CFI, A&P/IA president, Hynes Aviation Services; expert, aviation crashes

Ed Jacoby Jr. director,
New York State Emergency Management Office (Ret.); chairman, New York State Disaster Preparedness Commission (Ret.)

Johnstown-Cambria County Airport Authority

Cindi Lash staff writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Matthew McCormick manager, survival factors division, National Transportation Safety Board (Ret.)

Wallace Miller coroner, Somerset County, PA

Robert Nagan meteorological technician, Climate Services Branch, National Climatic Data Center

Dave Newell director, aviation and travel, VF Corp.

James O’Toole politics editor, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Pennsylvania State Police Public Information Office

Jeff Pillets senior writer,
The Record, Hackensack, NJ

Jeff Rienbold director, Flight 93 National Memorial, National Park Service

Dennis Roddy staff writer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Master Sgt. David Somdahl public affairs officer,
119th Wing, North Dakota
Air National Guard

Mark Stahl photographer; eyewitness, United Airlines Flight 93 crash scene

Air Defense
Lt. Col. Skip Aldous (Ret.) squadron commander,
U.S. Air Force

Tech. Sgt. Laura Bosco public affairs officer,
Tyndall Air Force Base

Boston Center regional air traffic control

Laura Brown spokeswoman,
Federal Aviation Administration

Todd Curtis, Ph.D. founder, Airsafe.com; president, Airsafe.com Foundation

Keith Halloway public affairs officer, National Transportation Safety Board

Ted Lopatkiewicz director, public affairs, National Transportation Safety Board

Maj. Douglas Martin public affairs officer,
North American Aerospace Defense Command

Lt. Herbert McConnell public affairs officer,
Andrews AFB

Michael Perini public affairs officer, North American Aerospace Defense Command

John Pike director, GlobalSecurity.org

Hank Price spokesman, Federal
Aviation Administration

Warren Robak RAND Corp.

Bill Shumann spokesman,
Federal Aviation Administration

Louis Walsh public affairs officer, Eglin AFB

Chris Yates aviation security editor, analyst, Jane’s Transport

Aviation
Fred E.C. Culick, Ph.D., S.B., S.M. professor of aeronautics, California Institute of Technology

Robert Everdeen public affairs, Northrop Grumman

Clint Oster professor of public and environmental affairs, Indiana University; aviation safety expert

Capt. Bill Scott (Ret. USAF) Rocky Mountain bureau chief, Aviation Week

Bill Uher News Media Office, NASA Langley Research Center

Col. Ed Walby (Ret. USAF)
director, business development, HALE Systems Enterprise, Unmanned Systems, Northrop Grumman

Image Analysis
William F. Baker member, FEMA Probe Team; partner, Skidmore, Owings, Merrill

W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., P.E., S.E. senior vice president, CTL Group; director,
FEMA Probe Team

Bill Daly senior vice president, Control Risks Group

Steve Douglass image analysis consultant, Aviation Week

Thomas R. Edwards, Ph.D. founder, TREC; video forensics expert.

Ronald Greeley, Ph.D. professor of geology, Arizona State University

Rob Howard freelance photographer; WTC eyewitness

Robert L. Parker, Ph.D. professor of geophysics,
University of California, San Diego

Structural Engineering / Building Collapse
Farid Alfawakhiri, Ph.D. senior engineer, American Institute of Steel Construction

David Biggs, P.E. structural engineer, Ryan-Biggs Associates; member, ASCE team for FEMA report

Robert Clarke structural engineer, Controlled Demolitions Group Ltd.

Glenn Corbett technical editor, Fire Engineering; member, NIST advisory committee

Vincent Dunn deputy fire chief (Ret.), FDNY; author, The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety

John Fisher, Ph.D. professor of civil engineering, Lehigh University; professor emeritus, Center for Advanced Technology; member, FEMA Probe Team

Ken Hays executive vice president, Masonry Arts

Christoph Hoffmann, Ph.D. professor of computer science, Purdue University; project director, September 11 Pentagon Attack Simulations Using LS-Dyna, Purdue University

Allyn E. Kilsheimer, P.E.
CEO, KCE Structural Engineers PC; chief structural engineer, Phoenix project; expert in blast recovery, concrete structures, emergency response

Won-Young Kim, Ph.D. seismologist, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University

William Koplitz photo desk manager, FEMA

John Labriola freelance photographer, WTC survivor

Arthur Lerner-Lam, Ph.D. seismologist; director,
Earth Institute, Center for Hazards and Risk Research, Columbia University

James Quintiere, Ph.D. professor of engineering, University of Maryland member, NIST advisory committee

Steve Riskus freelance photographer; eyewitness, Pentagon crash

Van Romero, Ph.D. vice president, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology

Christine Shaffer spokesperson, Viracon

Mete Sozen, Ph.D., S.E. Kettelhut Distinguished Professor of Structural Engineering, Purdue University; member, Pentagon Building Performance Report; project conception, September 11 Pentagon Attack Simulations Using LS-Dyna, Purdue University

Shyam Sunder, Sc.D.
acting deputy director, lead investigator, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology

Mary Tobin science writer, media relations, Earth Institute, Columbia University

Forman Williams, Ph.D. professor of engineering, physics, combustion, University of California,
San Diego; member, advisory committee, National Institute of Standards and Technology

Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #77 on: March 06, 2008, 03:26:16 pm »

Andrew Waters

Member
Member # 914

  posted 12-24-2006 08:09 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay conspiracy theorists, I'm on your side. The only thing is, you can't count on me for any evidence to bolster your support.

Wait, yes you can. I have it right here...it's titled mismanagement of comprehension. Well don't get mad at me, it is evidence. How so. Well for starters it's evidence of, well, mismanagement of comprehension. There are other euphemisms but I'll pass on them. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2648 | From: Akron, Ohio, USA | Registered: May 2002   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #78 on: March 06, 2008, 03:26:30 pm »

19Merlin69
unregistered


  posted 12-24-2006 08:27 PM                 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gosh I love it when facts are brought to bear on nonsense. It always makes the loonies look desperate.

Moreover, it is really easy to see how they come up with this kooky stuff. They get a scrap of info., exploit it, stretch it, and finally warp it into shape - VIOLA! 
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #79 on: March 06, 2008, 03:26:49 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-24-2006 10:59 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gosh I love it when facts are brought to bear on nonsense. It always makes the loonies look desperate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd say that you're the one that looks like the desperate loony here. You're still the one supporting Bush aren't you? You're a stooge for the administration.

Oh, and, as for "the facts," you have the government version of the facts and that is all. Since you're an apologist for the Bush Administration and are clearly biased, your version of the facts don't mean a lot to people here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #80 on: March 06, 2008, 03:27:13 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-24-2006 11:13 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you bother to read any of the 9/11 investigative reports (11 of them)? Did you fail to catch the part where ALL OF THEM said that there was no clear indication of an impending attack, a date for a possible one, a location, or even an organization to monitor? "The Guy" you so specifically refer to was nervous about increasing "signals traffic" indicating a crescendo in his opinion, but "he" had no specific intel to react to.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More partisan bull **** on your part, Bush supporter. He lied to the 9/11 Commission Report, which was a political snow job anyway. Read the Woowdward book, "State of Denial," if you want to actually learn something.



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are we to believe that you are an expert and that the only options you give us are valid? What are your credentials for making that assertion?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have eyes, I'm not a partisan hack/nutjob like yourself who goes around making apologies for Bush like you do.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you think he stays up nights, thinking about the 3,000 dead from 9/11, or the 3,000 vets dead in Iraq or Afghanistan, the 1300 dead from Katrina, or the 50,000 + dead Iraqis since the invasion, you are mistaken."

If you think he isn't, you are deluded and/or irrational.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you think he doesn't, that can mean only one thing - you're a Bush supporter!!

The guy could care less about how many people have gotten killed in Iraq and hasn't even gone to a single military funeral. Wake up, Bush supporter.



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way, why would you blame Katrina on him when the mayor of New Orleans and the Govenor of LA deserve the blame for most of the problems? It's funny how Mississippi fared so much better, and they had the same federal resources available to them as LA did... Oh well, let's blame Bush, it makes us feel better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gee, uhm I guess since it was a Federal emergency which made getting help to those people the President's problem? You are so lame.



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The guy could care less about human life, it's all political to him."

Yep, you're right, he doesn't care about people - all he wants to do is further his political aspirations.... What's that? He's already the president of the U.S. and at the political pinnacle of his career? So, he must be trying to further the Conservative agenda by grooming other "wannabes" for the future...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Setting up a bunch of lame strawmen to discusse something not even relevant to the discussion. You have to be one of the lamest people here - still giddily supporting Bush, even though he's down to 30% in the polls. Take a walk, Goober.

[ 12-24-2006, 11:14 PM: Message edited by: Tempest ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #81 on: March 06, 2008, 03:27:35 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-24-2006 11:20 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 19Merlin69:
Gosh I love it when facts are brought to bear on nonsense. It always makes the loonies look desperate.

Moreover, it is really easy to see how they come up with this kooky stuff. They get a scrap of info., exploit it, stretch it, and finally warp it into shape - VIOLA!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can make light of it all you want, Andrew Waters. The point is, you are under the control of a government that thinks nothing of lying to get you into war, leaving people to die for five days in Hurricane Katrina, locking people up in secret jails around the world and toruturing them and stealing ytour civil liberties. If you don't think this is beyond them, you're a fool.

The point is, had 9/11 not occurred, tbey wouldn't havce gotten away with half of that, as well as the big fat contracts to Halliburton and the stealing of Iraq's oil.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #82 on: March 06, 2008, 03:29:19 pm »

 
Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-24-2006 11:33 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I said earlier, the Bush Adminstration was warned three times prior to 9/11. The first time was in January of 2001 by the Clinton Administration where they actually handed them a plan to deal with Al Queada.

This plan (forumulated by Richard Clarke and the Clinton administration) was only implemented after 9/11, and included attacking the Taliban in Afghanistan and terrorism around the world. The Bush plan for the "war on terror" wasn't even original, it came from Clinton's people:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They Had A Plan
Long before 9/11, the White House debated taking the fight to al-Qaeda. By the time they decided, it was too late. The saga of a lost chance
By MICHAEL ELLIOTT


Posted Monday, Aug. 12, 2002

Sometimes history is made by the force of arms on battlefields, sometimes by the fall of an exhausted empire. But often when historians set about figuring why a nation took one course rather than another, they are most interested in who said what to whom at a meeting far from the public eye whose true significance may have been missed even by those who took part in it.

One such meeting took place in the White House situation room during the first week of January 2001. The session was part of a program designed by Bill Clinton's National Security Adviser, Sandy Berger, who wanted the transition between the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations to run as smoothly as possible. With some bitterness, Berger remembered how little he and his colleagues had been helped by the first Bush Administration in 1992-93. Eager to avoid a repeat of that experience, he had set up a series of 10 briefings by his team for his successor, Condoleezza Rice, and her deputy, Stephen Hadley.
Berger attended only one of the briefings--the session that dealt with the threat posed to the U.S. by international terrorism, and especially by al-Qaeda. "I'm coming to this briefing," he says he told Rice, "to underscore how important I think this subject is." Later, alone in his office with Rice, Berger says he told her, "I believe that the Bush Administration will spend more time on terrorism generally, and on al-Qaeda specifically, than any other subject."

The terrorism briefing was delivered by Richard Clarke, a career bureaucrat who had served in the first Bush Administration and risen during the Clinton years to become the White House's point man on terrorism.
As chair of the interagency Counter-Terrorism Security Group (CSG), Clarke was known as a bit of an obsessive--just the sort of person you want in a job of that kind. Since the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen on Oct. 12, 2000--an attack that left 17 Americans dead--he had been working on an aggressive plan to take the fight to al-Qaeda. The result was a strategy paper that he had presented to Berger and the other national security "principals" on Dec. 20. But Berger and the principals decided to shelve the plan and let the next Administration take it up. With less than a month left in office, they did not think it appropriate to launch a major initiative against Osama bin Laden. "We would be handing [the Bush Administration] a war when they took office on Jan. 20," says a former senior Clinton aide. "That wasn't going to happen." Now it was up to Rice's team to consider what Clarke had put together.

Berger had left the room by the time Clarke, using a Powerpoint presentation, outlined his thinking to Rice. A senior Bush Administration official denies being handed a formal plan to take the offensive against al-Qaeda, and says Clarke's materials merely dealt with whether the new Administration should take "a more active approach" to the terrorist group. (Rice declined to comment, but through a spokeswoman said she recalled no briefing at which Berger was present.) Other senior officials from both the Clinton and Bush administrations, however, say that Clarke had a set of proposals to "roll back" al-Qaeda. In fact, the heading on Slide 14 of the Powerpoint presentation reads, "Response to al Qaeda: Roll back." Clarke's proposals called for the "breakup" of al-Qaeda cells and the arrest of their personnel. The financial support for its terrorist activities would be systematically attacked, its assets frozen, its funding from fake charities stopped. Nations where al-Qaeda was causing trouble--Uzbekistan, the Philippines, Yemen--would be given aid to fight the terrorists. Most important, Clarke wanted to see a dramatic increase in covert action in Afghanistan to "eliminate the sanctuary" where al-Qaeda had its terrorist training camps and bin Laden was being protected by the radical Islamic Taliban regime. The Taliban had come to power in 1996, bringing a sort of order to a nation that had been riven by bloody feuds between ethnic warlords since the Soviets had pulled out. Clarke supported a substantial increase in American support for the Northern Alliance, the last remaining resistance to the Taliban. That way, terrorists graduating from the training camps would have been forced to stay in Afghanistan, fighting (and dying) for the Taliban on the front lines. At the same time, the U.S. military would start planning for air strikes on the camps and for the introduction of special-operations forces into Afghanistan. The plan was estimated to cost "several hundreds of millions of dollars." In the words of a senior Bush Administration official, the proposals amounted to "everything we've done since 9/11."
And that's the point. The proposals Clarke developed in the winter of 2000-01 were not given another hearing by top decision makers until late April, and then spent another four months making their laborious way through the bureaucracy before they were readied for approval by President Bush.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1003007-2,00.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
 
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #83 on: March 06, 2008, 03:30:27 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-24-2006 11:41 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second time was a July 2001 briefing that Condaleeza Rice had with George Tenent about an impending Al Queada attack. Rice first denied remembering the meeting, then had to once records confirmed it happened.

The Bush Administration has tried to make the CIA the scapegoat throughout all of this, this proves that they were more on the ball then was previously thought, and that the Bush people were the ones to fall down on the job:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Records Show Tenet Briefed Rice on Al Qaeda Threat

By PHILIP SHENON and MARK MAZZETTI
Published: October 2, 2006


JIDDA, Saudi Arabia, Oct. 2 — A review of White House records has determined that George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, did brief Condoleezza Rice and other top officials on July 10, 2001, about the looming threat from Al Qaeda, a State Department spokesman said Monday.

The account by Sean McCormack came hours after Ms. Rice, the secretary of state, told reporters aboard her airplane that she did not recall the specific meeting on July 10, 2001, noting that she had met repeatedly with Mr. Tenet that summer about terrorist threats. Ms. Rice, the national security adviser at the time, said it was “incomprehensible” she ignored dire terrorist threats two months before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Mr. McCormack also said records show that the Sept. 11 commission was informed about the meeting, a fact that former intelligence officials and members of the commission confirmed on Monday.

When details of the meeting emerged last week in a new book by Bob Woodward of The Washington Post, Bush administration officials questioned Mr. Woodward’s reporting.

Now, after several days, both current and former Bush administration officials have confirmed parts of Mr. Woodward’s account.

Officials now agree that on July 10, 2001, Mr. Tenet and his counterterrorism deputy, J. Cofer Black, were so alarmed about an impending Al Qaeda attack that they demanded an emergency meeting at the White House with Ms. Rice and her National Security Council staff.

According to two former intelligence officials, Mr. Tenet told those assembled at the White House about the growing body of intelligence the Central Intelligence Agency had collected pointing to an impending Al Qaeda attack. But both current and former officials took issue with Mr. Woodward’s account that Mr. Tenet and his aides left the meeting in frustration, feeling as if Ms. Rice had ignored them.

Mr. Tenet told members of the Sept. 11 commission about the July 10 meeting when they interviewed him in early 2004, but committee members said the former C.I.A. director never indicated he had left the White House with the impression that he had been ignored.

“Tenet never told us that he was brushed off,” said Richard Ben-Veniste, a Democratic member of the commission. “We certainly would have followed that up.”

Mr. McCormack said the records showed that, far from ignoring Mr. Tenet’s warnings, Ms. Rice acted on the intelligence and requested that Mr. Tenet make the same presentation to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Atttorney General John Ashcroft.

But Mr. Ashcroft said by telephone on Monday evening that he never received a briefing that summer from Mr. Tenet.

“Frankly, I’m disappointed that I didn’t get that kind of briefing,” he said. “I’m surprised he didn’t think it was important enough to come by and tell me.”

The dispute that has played out in recent days gives further evidence of an escalating battle between the White House and Mr. Tenet over who should take the blame for such mistakes as the failure to stop the Sept. 11 attacks and assertions by Bush administration officials that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling chemical and biological weapons and cultivating ties to Al Qaeda.

Mr. Tenet resigned as director of central intelligence in the summer of 2004 and was honored that December with a Presidential Medal of Freedom during a White House ceremony. Since leaving the C.I.A., Mr. Tenet has stayed out of the public eye, largely declining to defend his record at the C.I.A. even after several government investigations have assailed the faulty intelligence that helped build the case for the Iraq war.

Mr. Tenet is now completing work on a memoir that is scheduled to be published early next year.

It is unclear how much Mr. Tenet will use the book to settle old scores, although recent books have portrayed Mr. Tenet both as dubious about the need for the Iraq war and angry that the White House has made the C.I.A. the primary scapegoat for the war.

In his book “The One Percent Doctrine,” the journalist and author Ron Suskind quotes Mr. Tenet’s former deputy at the C.I.A., John McLaughlin, saying that Mr. Tenet “wishes he could give that damn medal back.”

In his own book, Mr. Woodward wrote that over time Mr. Tenet developed a particular dislike for Ms. Rice, and that the former C.I.A. director was furious when she publicly blamed the agency for allowing President Bush to make the false claim in the 2003 State of the Union Address that Saddam Hussein was pursuing nuclear materials in Niger.

“If the C.I.A., the Director of National Intelligence, had said ‘take this out of the speech,’ it would have been gone, without question,” Ms. Rice told reporters in July 2003.

In fact, the C.I.A. had told the White House months before that the Niger intelligence was bogus and had managed to keep the claim out of an October 2002 speech that President Bush gave in Cincinnati.

More recently, Mr. Tenet has told friends that he was particularly angry when, appearing recently on Sunday talk shows, both Ms. Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney cited Mr. Tenet by name as the reason that Bush administration officials asserted that Mr. Hussein had stockpiles of banned weapons in Iraq and ties to Al Qaeda.

Mr. Cheney recalled during an appearance on “Meet the Press” on Sept. 10 of this year: “George Tenet sat in the Oval Office and the president of the United States asked him directly, he said, ‘George, how good is the case against Saddam on weapons of mass destruction?’ the director of the C.I.A. said, ‘It’s a slam dunk, Mr. President, it’s a slam dunk.’ ”

Philip Shenon reported from Jidda, Saudi Arabia, and Mark Mazzetti from Washington.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/02/washington/03ricecnd.html?ex=1167195600&en=16774dcc7348ea7a&ei=5070
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
« Last Edit: March 06, 2008, 03:31:13 pm by Tesha Dodge » Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #84 on: March 06, 2008, 03:32:01 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-24-2006 11:49 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the third warning that Bush received personally, while vacationing in Crawrord:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White House releases bin Laden memo
Presidential briefing was at center of Rice's testimony
Wednesday, May 19, 2004 Posted: 12:22 AM EDT (0422 GMT)


(CNN) -- The White House declassified and released Saturday the daily intelligence briefing delivered to President Bush a month before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

The declassified intelligence report said the FBI had detected "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings."

The names of countries that supplied the CIA with intelligence have been removed from the memo dealing with Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network and dated August 6, 2001.

"We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [redacted] service in 1998 saying that bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to secure the release of 'Blind Sheikh' Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists," the memo says in part.

Rahman is serving a life sentence for conspiring to assassinate Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and to blow up New York landmarks.

The White House said the presidential daily briefing, or PDB, was requested by Bush, who sought information about the possibility of an al Qaeda attack in the United States.

"The PDB article did not warn of the 9/11 attacks," the White House said in a statement released Saturday night. "Although the PDB referred to the possibility of hijackings, it did not discuss the possible use of planes as weapons."

The memo, titled "Bin Laden determined to attack inside the U.S.," had been described by the White House as a largely historical document with scant information about domestic al Qaeda threats.

The memo includes intelligence on al Qaeda threats as recent as three months before the attacks.

Highlights of the report include:

• An intelligence report received in May 2001 indicating that al Qaeda was trying to send operatives to the United States through Canada to carry out an attack using explosives. That information had been passed on to intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

• An allegation that al Qaeda had been considering ways to hijack American planes to win the release of operatives who had been arrested in 1998 and 1999.

• An allegation that bin Laden was set on striking the United States as early as 1997 and through early 2001.

• Intelligence suggesting that suspected al Qaeda operatives were traveling to and from the United States, were U.S. citizens, and may have had a support network in the country.

• A report that at least 70 FBI investigations were under way in 2001 regarding possible al Qaeda cells/terrorist-related operations in the United States.

The two-page document became the highlight of national security adviser Condoleezza Rice's testimony Thursday before the commission investigating the attacks.

Rice told the commission Thursday that the briefing included mostly "historical information" and that most of the threat information known in the summer of 2001 referred to overseas targets.

She said she did not recall any reports about al Qaeda using aircraft as weapons before September 11.

Former counterterrorism aide Richard Clarke had testified two weeks before that the White House had ignored warnings about bin Laden's terrorist organization. Clarke said the Bush administration, including Rice, was aware of al Qaeda threats but did not treat them as "urgent."

The commission asked that the presidential daily briefing be declassified after Rice's testimony.

"This was the commission's hope," spokesman Al Felzenberg said Saturday.

"The White House has now complied. The White House agreed to release the documents. This is what the commission had hoped."

The August briefing was delivered to Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.

Some commission members said the administration was given enough information about bin Laden's intentions and capabilities to have warned the public that an attack was possible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/bush.briefing/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #85 on: March 06, 2008, 03:33:31 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-24-2006 11:57 PM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the transcript of the memo, by the way:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript: Bin Laden determined to strike in US
Saturday, April 10, 2004 Posted: 6:51 PM EDT (2251 GMT)



The following is a transcript of the August 6, 2001, presidential daily briefing entitled Bin Laden determined to strike in US. Parts of the original document were not made public by the White House for security reasons.

Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Laden implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America."

After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a -- -- service.

An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told - - service at the same time that bin Laden was planning to exploit the operative's access to the U.S. to mount a terrorist strike.

The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of bin Laden's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S.

Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that in ---, Laden lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own U.S. attack.

Ressam says bin Laden was aware of the Los Angeles operation. Although Bin Laden has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Laden associates surveyed our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.

Al Qaeda members -- including some who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks.

Two al-Qaeda members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our embassies in East Africa were U.S. citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a bin Laden cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ---- service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/

It mentions hijackings, it mentions surveillance of federal buildings in New York, it mentions explosives. Did they have to draw them a picture?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #86 on: March 06, 2008, 03:34:44 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-25-2006 12:06 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And Bush's response to the briefing? This is how "detail-oriented" the Bush Administration is:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For America, 9/11 was more than a tragedy -- it changed the way we look at the world."
George W. Bush
Address to the Nation
September 11, 2006


The alarming August 6, 2001, memo from the CIA to the President -- "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US" -- has been widely noted in the past few years.
But, also in August, CIA analysts flew to Crawford to personally brief the President -- to intrude on his vacation with face-to-face alerts.


The analytical arm of the CIA was in a kind of panic mode at this point. Other intelligence services, including those from the Arab world, were sounding an alarm. The arrows were all in the red. They didn't know the place or time of an attack, but something was coming. The President needed to know . . .

George W. Bush seems to have made the wrong choice. He looked hard at the panicked CIA briefer. "All right," he said. "You've covered your ass now."
Ron Suskind
The One Percent Doctrine
2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://billmon.org/archives/002723.html

"You've covered your ass now."
All because George (the guy who could care who lives and who dies) Bush didn't want to be bothered on vacation, he ignored the memo and went back to fishing and clearing brush.

No special measures, no increased security for New York City, no special new security measures for the airlines to follow - what a loser.

So either he intentionally allowed it to happen, or wasn't interested enough in trying to stop it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #87 on: March 06, 2008, 03:36:04 pm »

 
Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-25-2006 12:12 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's another meeting Rice had before the attacks, this one was five days before 9/11 with former Senator Gary Hart:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hart, Rice talked security before attacks

Former Democratic Sen. Gary Hart of Colorado, who was co-chairman of an earlier bipartisan commission that studied national security, said Sunday that he met with Rice five days before the September 11 attacks because he was concerned that the Bush administration was not moving on his panel's call for action against al Qaeda.


The U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century, created by Clinton in 1998 with congressional approval, released its final report in January 2001 and predicted "Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers."

"What this administration has done ... is to say that until someone tells us that 19 men are going to hijack four airplanes and fly them into the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon at 9 a.m. on September 11, we are not accountable," Hart said on CNN's "In the Money."

Hart was co-chairman of the commission with former Republican Sen. Warren Rudman of New Hampshire.

Among the Hart-Rudman commission's proposals was one "for a new Cabinet-level National Homeland Security Agency that would combine the Federal Emergency Management Agency with several other agencies," Hart said.

The commission also called for an overhaul of the State and Defense Departments to reflect the changing security environment.

Hart said he asked for and got a meeting with Rice on September 6, 2001.

"She was a supporter of mine when I was a presidential candidate in '84 ... and has been a friend over the years," he said.

"I asked to see her in September because I didn't see any movement from the administration on our suggestions.

"She simply said, 'I'll talk to the vice president about it.' "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/11/911.investigation/index.html


Five days before 9/11!
They still could have had time to tighten security and keep their eyes open for suspicious activity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005 
 
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #88 on: March 06, 2008, 03:37:03 pm »

Tempest

Member
Member # 2634

Member Rated:
   posted 12-25-2006 01:17 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's also a myth that Bush and his cronies never foresaw the possibility of airliners being used as weapons. In July, 2001, he attended a Genoa summit where anti-aircraft missiles were employed because they thought that Bin Laden was going to launch an air attack:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 18 July, 2001, 14:03 GMT 15:03 UK
Genoa set for summit onslaught

Barricades


The summit meetings themselves are due to be held in the city's Palazzo Ducale (Duke's Palace). The roads leading there are being barricaded behind four-metre (13-foot) iron barriers.

Up to 20,000 police and military personnel are involved in the security operation.

The huge force of officers and equipment which has been assembled to deal with unrest has been spurred on by a warning that supporters of Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden might attempt an air attack on some of the world leaders present.

Anti-aircraft missiles have been deployed at the airport, and naval vessels are patrolling the seas.

"It looks like we're at war," said one resident inside the red zone, Attilio Cipollina.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/1444922.stm

[ 12-25-2006, 01:19 AM: Message edited by: Tempest ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 285 | Registered: Aug 2005   
Report Spam   Logged
Tesha Dodge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1666



« Reply #89 on: March 06, 2008, 03:37:25 pm »

Volitzer

Member
Member # 245

Rate Member   posted 12-25-2006 01:43 AM                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 19Merlin69:
I've watched the boobtube video Volitzer. Clearly, the fella doing the commentary has no clue whatsoever. His "physics" do not exist on a world where gravity exists, so I'm curious to know why you would recommend that a "physicist" view it for Brooke. For Example:


The notion that 10 million pounds (est. weight of floors above the damage) moving at 100 feet per/sec would "slow down" as they impacted the floors beneath them is patentedly ludicrous. There isn't a physicist in the world that would be able to keep from spitting Diet Coke through his nose upon encountering that "evidence". The FACT IS, the "expert" commentating the video fails to account for 10 million pounds, moving at 100 feet/sec is accelerating and acting upon joints designed to maintain a stationary object (not a moving one). Nothing in the design of the building would accomodate collapse pressure beyond simple movement due to hurricane wind pressure.

True but the joints and framework would slow the acceleration downward due to gravity significantly. It didn't. Go back to the stone drop in the air to the ground versus the stone drop in water to the ground. That water decelerates the effects of gravity. Gravity accelerates all objects at 9.81 meters per second squared. Water would bring it down to 6.5 m/s^2 roughly. The building fell at the same rate in which gravity works. After the plane crashed there wasn't enough flame to melt anything away to weaken the concrete or steel. The thermite charges were detonated from the top down to prevent any resistence so that the plane would fall straight through. If the plane were to collapse a floor by its weight the underlying floors would have stopped it because there wouldn't have been that much energy falling from one floor to another. That and the planes stayed in position for at least 40 minutes. So what provided the energy for the fall??? Even it it was the weight the building was designed to have a certain saftey. In the 1993 bombing one of the 4 main support beams at basement level was taken out entirely; what happened was that the weight got redistributed to the other 3 support beams. Much like a table take out one leg to a table and the other 3 work harder.

If the plane did fall thru by its own weight the floors below it would slow it to a stop and it would be like a fly in a spider web.
Jets' of smoke emanating from floors lower than the collapsing debris are indication of demolition ignition..."[/i] Yeah - right. How about this? Pressure is building up inside of the building, ahead of the shock wave, due to the reality that mass is being maintained although volume is rapidly decreasing. The pressure (ahead of the collapsing debris front) was forced to go wherever it could, and intermittently blew out as it found weaknesses to exploit, once the "blow-outs" occurred, the pressure would drop, thereby limiting the need to blow out large numbers of windows. Physically speaking - that makes sense.

Pressure?HuhHuh? Shockwave?HuhHuhHuh Decreasing volume?HuhHuh Nice to know the Bilderbergs can count on your lack of a physics background to perpetuate their lies. None of this stuff is involved in architecture by the way. 
-
"Only a demolition could cause a building to 'pancake...'" Uh... {insert cricket sound effect here}... I don't think so. "Pancaking" is a very unscientific term, but I think we all get the mental picture. The fact is, pancaking occurs all of the time in buildings and houses during the winter due to snow & ice loading. It does not require symmetric loading to cause symmetric destruction. Asymmetric displacement on a steel building (built symmetrically) causes it much more easily.
-
"My accusation that the WTC buildings 1, 2 & 7 are based upon scientific evidence and you cannot dispute them..." Yes I can, and I have. He delivers no scientific evidence whatsoever, it is all "layman's common sense" of which none of it translates into the real science of physics. 

A building collapses at the same rate of gravitational acceleration and you don't see anything odd with that?Huh?
-
"Pieces of a building cannot crash through steel and concrete floors as fast as they will fall through the air." Again, he forgets about velocity, momentum and inertia. An artillery round fired from a tank certainly moves faster than the same artillery shell tossed off the top of a building... Why? Velocity, Inertia & Momentum! The fact that the pressure wave ahead of the collapse was working to aid the speed of the collapse is one thing, but the fact that the floors were exploding due to the collapsing pressure was accelerating them downward. Again, a real "expert" would understand this rather easily.
-

A bullet has kinetic energy coming out of the barrel After the crash the plane had no more kinetic energy velocity = 0, momentum = mass x velocity. Mass of the plane x 0 = momentum of 0. As far as inertia the plane was stopped a force had to act to change it from the stopped position. Hence the detonation of the joints in the floor.
"Anbody who looks at this evidence and continues to insist that fires caused the collapse of the buildings is simply having a difficult time facing the possibility that a government could commit such a crime." I could easily say the following in reply, "Any one that would believe that their government orchestrated such an event, based upon the abject absence of information and evidence that this (and all) conspiracy video(s) supplies is a danger to themselves and possibly others. Your driving priviledges should be revoked and you should be sterilized to prevent the chance that you may procreate."

Spoken like a true pro-authortarian fascist.

-
In his summation he ties the conspiracy to not only the governments, but also the media and eventually the public. I have to laugh just a bit there though, because he requires that the very same government that cannot keep a secret to save their lives are orchestrating the largest coverup in the history of mankind. {snicker}. Everyone is complicit if they don't agree with him.

Look at how many people on Earth think the moon is a dead place with no atmosphere. Lies are perpetuated and the Bilderberg power-base maintained cuz of Earth humanity's to use critical thinking skills.

It's funny really, this is just an amateur taking a whack at Jeff King's speech , of which, he himself took a beating over. King is a physician, not a physicist and was summarily dismissed by the entire scientific community. He received a B.S.E.E. in 1974 from MIT, but never progressed in the field of physics or engineering. He's a nobody, as are the other "experts". In the credits you will see two others, James H Fetzer - Professor of Philosophy & Morgan Reynolds - Professor Emeritus of Economics. Yep, just the experts I'd call on for an explanation of demolition.. ROTFLMAO  [/QB]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have to take basic physics before moving up in any medical career, had you ever been to college you'd know this.

Right and just because you teach english or philosophy means you can't possibly know anything about physics or do any research. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 6724 | From: Jacksonville, Florida | Registered: Oct 2000   
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 32   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy