News

The Blame Game.. "CIA, FBI Disagree on Urgency of Warning"

www.latimes.com/news/nati...able.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-101801cable.story)

Yeah, whatever!

National Media Lies...

Here in Pennsylvania we were under a threat of attack in my neck of the woods. National media didn't cover it but local media did.

www.lancnews.com/intell_news/tmio18.htm (http://www.lancnews.com/intell_news/tmio18.htm)

Iranians believe Israel had hand in US attacks
www.taipeitimes.com/news/...0000107349 (http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/10/16/story/0000107349)

This is a very important story.

"Osama bin Laden is a terrorist and he has a vast network, but he couldn't do anything so sophisticated," said Abdol Karim, a law student."

I would be pressed to disagree.

"Ali Maliki, another student, said he had heard of a report in the US media that 4,000 American Jews who worked in the Trade Center didn't go to work on Sept. 11. Somebody must have warned them."

I believe this may be true but I don't agree why. I believe that Israel warned both the US government and it's people. Their people listened and we let it happen.

Oh my gosh! The story has been changed. This story got rid of the reasons that I was going to use as my argument for the commentary that I planned.

This story originally said that the automatic pilot was disabled before all the flights took off and that the black boxes were erased before they took off. They said a few other great points but they blamed it all on Israel. Their point was that for all of this to happen the Jews had to disable all the things at the airport.

Although I agreed with some of the original story and some of what Iran said, I don't believe it was the Jews who did it. The story is now gone forever I guess. It was replaced with this crap!!!!

Let me tell you a dirty little secret. This story deleted it, but it's true that there's a safety device on all jetliners in case the Jet is hijacked. If terrorist take over a jetliner, then it can be taken over and be driven by remote control. Iran stated that this was disabled before the flights by the Jews who control the airports.

This is real. Although I don't think it was the Jews although it could be.

So I'll lay it out for you.....

1. The remote control pilot was disabled by somebody before the flights so the alleged Arabs could fly them into buildings.
This IMO couldn't be done without the governments approval or help.

2. The alleged Arabs took over the jets and we did nothing to stop it.

3. Our government flew them planes into the buildings via remote control.

Wake up people! Drone jetliners is 1960s technology.

The radical right-wing JCS and Pentagon of the 60's wanted to set up all kinds of bogus attacks and blame it on Castro so they could have a full military invasion of Cuba. This was planned behind the back of Kennedy and our real government at this time.

These right-wing Eisenhower generals and other ranks went out of control. They hated Kennedy and his admin because they were young and not one of them. These criminals thought that they should run the country not the elected officials according the Constitution.

One of these criminal plans was to charter a jetliner for a special interest group or university students to take a field trip down south that would have to fly near or over Cuba.

The passengers were to be carefully selected. The plan was to paint and disgiuse a drone jetliner to match the real flight. The plan was to replace the real flight with the drone over an airport called Elgin. The drone was then to fly over Cuba via remote control and it was suppose to give a voice message stating "Mayday, mayday, we're under attack by Cuban Migs." Then while they were transmitting this then the remote controller would hit a button to explode the plane during the transmission.

Their plan was so clever that their mayday message would be heard by other countries and not our own. So other nations would tell us what had happened.

I can document this story if anybody calls me on it. My point is that drone jetliners is 1960's technology. ANd I'm told (can't document it at this time although Iran did so on the original story) that every jetliner has this safety device.

Read Brother Rage's post about on how Isalm will have to be destroyed because nobody including the anti-christ will be able to control them.

I also believe the attack on our ships in the gulf of Tonkin was bogus although I can't document it. I bet I could if I researched it because this world is nuts.

Quote: "Let me tell you a dirty little secret. This story deleted it, but it's true that there's a safety device on all jetliners in case the Jet is hijacked. If terrorist take over a jetliner, then it can be taken over and be driven by remote control. "

Your credibility suffers with each and every stupid bonkers consperacy nut post that you make.

Quote: "So I'll lay it out for you.....
1. The remote control pilot was disabled by somebody before the flights so the alleged Arabs could fly them into buildings.
This IMO couldn't be done without the governments approval or help.
2. The alleged Arabs took over the jets and we did nothing to stop it.
3. Our government flew them planes into the buildings via remote control.
Wake up people! Drone jetliners is 1960s technology."

Like I said. What a FREAK!!!

Credibility? Rage lose his credibility? I didn't know he had any to lose!

Posted: 10/21/01 7:42:07 pm
"I don't know why I even respond to this freak

Your credibility suffers with each and every stupid bonkers consperacy nut post that you make.



Like I said. What a FREAK!!!"

THis is the last time I'll respond to a nitwit that won't use a handle or doesn't have anything to say but childish name calling.

Here's a link:
www.infowars.com/saved%20...munity.htm (http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Police_state/sunspot_net%20-%20maryland%27s%20online%20community.htm)

Check page 85 of his book for the details. His research is listed in the Notes section at the end of the book.

You did not counter anything I wrote with any evidence whatsoever. You responded with childish name calling and things are too important and time is too short to argue with children.

Rage, now you are quoting traitors to this nation. Shame on you. These guys quote each other in an endless round robin of, "a recognized authority." I have no doubt a bunch of guys sat around and shot the bull with a bunch of outrageous ideas. Then they went on with more serious notions, like the Bay of Pigs. Bet they wished they had gone back to switching Castro's cigar with an exploding model following that one. And the NSA shows off with Bin Laden talking with dear old mom. There's a news flash. Just possibly Osama obseves higher security precautions when he's calling hijackers.

Quote: "You did not counter anything I wrote with any evidence whatsoever."

Because the comments were too stupid to be taken seriously enough to counter.

OK, point by point.....

Quote: "1. The remote control pilot was disabled by somebody before the flights so the alleged Arabs could fly them into buildings. "

No matter how much you want to believe it, there is no remote control on the fleet of jet liners used by the airlines of the United States. To believe so just shows total gullability. The capability to do so is there, and has been done on test airplanes (where you want to crash a plane to test "non combustable fuel, etc.), but there has been no mass deployment of such a system. If this type of system had been deployed, the number of people involved in THIS part of your consperacy would be beyond count, starting with everyone in the assembly line at Boeing, Airbus, the former McDonnel Douglas, and the MANY other manufacturers making the regional jets now and in the past, all the pilots of every airline in the country (or world depending on if this "option" is added to every airplane), all air traffic controllers, all mechanics working on all the planes currently in use, all pilots learning to fly these planes, and the list goes on forever. To believe your claptrap you would have to believe that ALL of the above are active participants in this plot to destroy the WTC and kill thousands of our citizens because none have come forward to inform the world of the technology used.

Quote: "2. The alleged Arabs took over the jets and we did nothing to stop it."

There is a plane that was driven into the ground in Pennsylvania that disproves THAT part of your theory. THe passengers on that plane did something to stop it. Of course you probably think this twarted our government's plans to take out more of our citizens. How did the passengers know to do something you might ask? They had communicated by cell phone with their loved ones, just as the ones on the planes that completed their missions had done. Now, here you either have to believe that the cell phone story is true, or that some devine force intervened and told these people to rise up against the government agents acting as "hijackers". If the cell phone story is true, then the identification of the hijackers (being Arabs) from the other planes and this plane is also true. If the cell phone story is false, then you have to believe that all the people claiming to have received phone calls from the planes are part of the consperacy, including the Solicitor General of the United States.

Quote: "3. Our government flew them planes into the buildings via remote control."

That's too stupid to even respond to seriously.

I like the fact that one person is quoting another on suppositions with no proof as proof that the supposition is true. I also like that unsupported allegations are treated as reality without so much as a cursory investigation on the facts of the statement. This is not even good fiction!

"Ali Maliki, another student, said he had heard of a report in the US media that 4,000 American Jews who worked in the Trade Center didn't go to work on Sept. 11. Somebody must have warned them."
This is just so much hogwash! I want proof. Any proof other than "I heard it from this guy who is a reliable source." I can say I have it on good authority that 1700 Muslim Arabs didn't show up to work that day. Disprove that.
1. The remote control pilot was disabled by somebody before the flights so the alleged Arabs could fly them into buildings.
This IMO couldn't be done without the governments approval or help.
I have two different responses to this.
1) (Reality) My cousin is a pilot for U.S. Air. When he read this, he couldn't stop laughing! He assures me that no plane he had ever flown as he had moved up the ranks from a regional cargo carrier that was purchased by Piedmont that merged with Allegheny to form U.S. air (727, 767, 757 and several different prop planes) has EVER had any type of remote control device. He tells me that the 777 does have the capability to program a computer to go from one airport to another, but the final approach HAS to be done manually. The computer on the 777 will NOT allow the plane to deliberately crash into a building. He said perhaps you could have it crash into a mountain if it's high enough and the incline is steep enough, but he guessed we were talking something akin to the Andes, Himalayas or Alps. The 767 had a similar device. But there is no "remote control" on any jet liner currently in standard service. Again, I need proof that such a devise IS on the airline fleet. I have (admittedly second-hand) proof from a reliable source that they do not.

2)(Fiction) If the planes can be taken via remote control, wouldn't it have made much more sense for the terrorists to take over the planes via remote? They could have take over hundreds of planes! All could have been done from one location and without risking their own lives so they could kill even more Americans!
2. The alleged Arabs took over the jets and we did nothing to stop it.
Hindsight is indeed 20/20, isn't it. Okay. At about 8:15am Air Traffic control got a cryptic message from one of the jet liners. Now remember that most air traffic controllers haven't seen a hijacking in their lifetimes and the ones that they have read about have the hijacker take the plane to Cuba or some other location where it lands and negotiations take place. In one instance (D.B. Cooper) the hijacker jumped from the plane in mid-flight. He was never heard or seen again.
So at 8:15 or so Air traffic controllers get their first hint that their is trouble. The plane takes a sharp left turn. Still not knowing what was going on, ATC try to contact the plane. At about 8:25, another plane goes off course. Keep in mind that the ATC weren't dealing with each other. It took a little bit of time before they "got together" to figure out what was going on.
At about 8:45 the first plane slams into one of the towers. ATC tries desperately to get in contact with the second plane. Unconfirmed reports say that fighters were scrambled (This takes several minutes to do...not including the amount of time it would take to get the command from ATC to the correct military command structure and an appropriate order to be issued). Minutes later, the second plane slams into the other tower. If there were a scrambled jet, it had no time to intercept.
At about that time a plane takes off from National airport. Almost immediately, the plane goes off course. ATC having been alerted to problems immediately contact military authorities. Within 4 minutes, the plane slams into the Pentagon.
A fourth plane goes off course making a u-turn. The FAA grounds all planes and orders all those in the air to land immediately. No international flights are allowed to enter U.S. air space. Fighters ARE scrambled to intercept the 4th flight. The U.S. President is rushed to Airforce One and heads to whereabouts unknown as is policy to protect the chain of command.
Before the fighter jets have come close to the fourth airliner, allegedly passengers have forced the plane to crash outside Pittsburgh.

Total elapsed time about 1 hour 20 minutes or so.

In hindsight, you can ALWAYS say, this or that should have been done. But in reality, before the events of 9/11, this scenario was inconceivable to all but the terrorists who devised it!

3. Our government flew them planes into the buildings via remote control.
Point 3 assumes point one is correct. Point one is still under screuteny. Beyond that, there is absolutely not even the tiniest bit of evidence (let alone proof) that our government did this.

In short, Rage, you're a blooming idiot if you actually believe this. If your purpose is to create a good conspiracy story just for fun and to see other's reactions, I tip my hat to your imagination.

See ya
Tony

"In short, Rage, you're a blooming idiot if you actually believe this. If your purpose is to create a good conspiracy story just for fun and to see other's reactions, I tip my hat to your imagination."

Since this is not even a GOOD conspiracy story, nor a show of good imagination, I suspect that your first comment is correct.

"This is just so much hogwash! I want proof."

Why's it so hard to believe? The FBI and the CIA didn't show up from work. Go ahead and listen to the spin if you want to.

"My cousin is a pilot for U.S. Air. When he read this, he couldn't stop laughing! He assures me that no plane he had ever flown as he had moved up the ranks from a regional cargo carrier that was purchased by Piedmont that merged with Allegheny to form U.S. air (727, 767, 757 and several different prop planes) has EVER had any type of remote control device."

I hope this is the case. I do not state that this is fact. However, evidence suggest that this is the case by my sources and confirmed by the Iraqi government which then somebody deleted from the original story. If this is kook stuff (which I don't think it is) then my did they delete what the "kooks" from Iran said? Hmmm? I suppose because it's true. And don't ask for evidence because people who get this kind of evidece end up dead.

"In short, Rage, you're a blooming idiot if you actually believe this."

Bless you too, Tony. All I'll say is that something stinks in Denmark.


Bogy,

"Then they went on with more serious notions, like the Bay of Pigs."

Actually these same people (JCS) told the prez to go ahead with the Bay of Pigs because they knew it would fail and they wanted then to be in total power over the Cuban crisis while making the CIA look bad for their stupid plan. This government let a lot of Cubans get killed because we didn't back them like we said we would.

Why's it so hard to believe? The FBI and the CIA didn't show up from work. Go ahead and listen to the spin if you want to.
What spin? The allegations have been made by nut cases and even just a cursory look at the allegation reveals that they are baseless. Again, I want proof. Belief is for religion and that is something that doesn't apply to this.
However, evidence suggest
What credible evidence? All I've seen so far are baseless reports that have been disproven or have no basis in fact! Show me the evidence, not the suppositions supported by others supposing the situation.
that this is the case by my sources
What sources? Point them to me so I can examine their evidence.
and confirmed by the Iraqi government which then somebody deleted from the original story.
So the story was out there and it has been altered since the beginning of this thread?
If this is kook stuff (which I don't think it is) then my did they delete what the "kooks" from Iran said? Hmmm?
Again, I don't know that anyone deleted anything at all! I haven't seen the proof!
I suppose because it's true.
Not necessarily! This is a huge leap in logic. Some one edits out (if indeed that is what happened) a bunch of baseless, inflammatory comments from some uncorroborated sources due to journalistic integrity and right away it's the guys in black helicopters spinning the news?
And don't ask for evidence because people who get this kind of evidence end up dead.
Well, I was wondering when it would come to this cliché. Without evidence, how am I or anyone else supposed to believe even a word of it? How are intelligent people who can see 15 thousand holes in this unbelievable conspiracy going to patch even some of the holes with suppositions, unnamed sources quoting deleted references and disproven "facts" held sacrosanct by those that wish to believe this ludicrous tale?
Bless you too, Tony. All I'll say is that something stinks in Denmark.
Yes, it does. But rather than looking for the answer in government conspiracies, just consider that the smell is from sewage that has seeped into the canals in Copenhagen!

BTW, I love the revision on the Bay of Pigs too. My question is, when did the government conspiracies all begin? I thought they started after the Kennedy assasination! You do know it was a successful coup by the CIA, right? And they have been in charge of the government ever since. Why do you think the head of the CIA and now his puppet son have been president? Just so much hogwash!

See ya
Tony

Tony,

No Tony I can't prove it. The article was changed before I brought it up to quote it. I went ahead and posted anyway to share the info with you.

I can't prove that, I can't prove that a plane ran into the Pentagon, I can't prove that there were any Arabs on any of those planes, I can't prove that they took over the planes with box cutters and niether can you.

In fact, I heard an eye-witness account with my own ears that's contrary to the media reports on what happened in D.C.

In fact, I heard an eye-witness account with my own ears that's contrary to the media reports on what happened in D.C.

That's the kind of baseless claims I'm taking about.

What eye witness? What is his name? Where did you hear it? When did you hear it? Is the eye witness relyiable? If not, why not? Does this source have an ulterior motive? Where can anyone go examine this whiness' statements?

All these are factors.

Rage. The info I have about the terrorist strike on 911 was gathered from news sources in the U.S., Mexico, Puerto Rico, England, Bolivia, Chile, Spain, Canada, France, Japan, Germany and Venezuela. Not all had the exact same stories, but all came to the same conclusions and essentially had the same facts from all sorts of souces. Some of the foreign sources are state run and some are not. Is the conspiracy so broad that it encompases the free press in all these countries? Is this conspiracy so sweeping that even state-run news agencies that are hyper-crytical of the US due to previous history will overlook the "evidence" of a cover-up? Why haven't Woodward and Bernstien done a piece on this. they've faced off with the government over a REAL conspiracy that was widely speculated before hand by the legitamate press.

As to proof of the accepted chronology of events and those involved. I heard the answering machine tapes describing the men. I heard the air controller's tape with the somewhat cryptic message that in hindsight was the harbinger of evil tidings. I saw the Wal*Mart security picture of Mohamad Ata the day before. I saw the picture of the same man in a Portand, ME airport taken the morning of the flight. I heard the report of and saw the interview with the man who had a run-in with 4 arab-speaking men in Logan Airport's parking lot the morning of... It was reported from San Francisco where the man realized what had happened and reported it to authorities. I saw reports about an arabic flight manual recovered from that car.

In short, I have seen PLENTY of evidence from oodles of independent news agencies that mostly fits into the current story. I have yet to see from ANY source out of the dozens of separate domestic and foreign press I read and watch on TV or hear on commercial or short-wave radio that even comes close to what you have reported.

Allegations need to be supported eventually. All I'm asking for is one or two RELIABLE sources for your contension that this was all a set-up by the government to take away our freedoms one-by-one.

See ya
Tony