The Truth about September 11 ( 9-11 )

by UnDisfellowshipped 58 Replies latest social current

  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    I challenge anyone to logically answer and explain the questions below, and if anyone can, then I will no longer believe that the U.S. Government had a hand in the 9/11 Attacks, and if no one can give logical answers to the questions below, maybe people will start wondering more.

    Questions about George W. Bush's Reaction to the World Trade Center Attacks on 9/11/01:

    According to ABC News, within ten minutes of the first plane crash into the World Trade Center, President George W. Bush was aware of it.

    Quote from ABC News:

    "He [George W. Bush] got out of his hotel suite this morning, [on his way to a school] was about to leave, reporters saw the White House chief of staff, Andy Card, whisper into his ear. The reporter said to the president, 'Do you know what's going on in New York?' He said he did, and he said he will have something about it later." (ABC's John Cochran, Peter Jennings)

    Then, (according to CNN) George W. Bush was informed of the situation at 9 AM, by National Security Advisor Condaleeza Rice, (by telephone) as he was arriving at the school, (CNN, "Breaking News" White House correspondent, Major Garrett, 9:31, Sept.11).

    Then the President was updated a third time about the attacks.

    According to Associated Press (AP) News, George W. Bush was... "In Sarasota, Florida.... reading to children in a classroom at 9:05 a.m. when his chief of staff, Andrew Card, whispered into his ear." ['Associated Press' (AP) 12 September 2001, This also appeared on TV]

    And what did George W. Bush do when he received the update from Andrew Card, some five minutes later?

    According to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, apparently, George W. Bush did nothing.

    "The president briefly turned somber before he resumed reading. He addressed the tragedy about a half-hour later." ['Associated Press' (AP) 12 September, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 12 September 2001 Pg. A 20].

    Further, according to CNN’s Garrett, (on the scene)...

    "the spectacular, horrific pictures began appearing on television sets here at the elementary school... Shortly before [George W. Bush's] statement [addressing the tragedy] he was actually sitting down with some children here at the elementary school reading them a book.... Reporters asked him if he was aware of the situation in New York. He nodded a bit gravely, and said he would have something to say about that shortly.

    You can look this up for yourself at CNN.com:

    http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.01.html ("Breaking News" 9:25)

    To the suggestion, (made by CNN anchor Daryn Kagan) that this "exchange of questions with the president came at... a sensitive time... sitting in front of a bunch of schoolchildren... not wanting to scare [them]," Garrett replies:

    "Well, precisely. And the president has a way of letting reporters know that it's either an appropriate... or inappropriate time to take questions. He does that in many different environments, many different situations. Clearly this morning, with a crowd of children, he wanted to keep an even keel, keep the situation under control as best as possible. He just nodded and said -- we'll talk about this later."

    Just after 9:30, the President excused himself from the classroom to make a statement that a "terrorist attack on America has occurred." (CNN, "Breaking News, 9:31)

    So, for almost thirty minutes after President Bush was officially updated about the Terrorist Attacks on the World Trade Center for the the third time, he remained sitting in a classroom of children, (apparently, reading a book about goats).

    Does this not seem rather negligent?

    As we shall soon see, officials would repeatedly claim that the President was the only one who could order a domestic airliner to be shot down.

    Why did George W. Bush remain sitting in the classroom? Why did he even GO into the classroom in the first place? -if he had already been informed of the Attacks, not once but twice?

    Was he not told the whole story?

    Three months later, on nationwide TV, President Bush tells a captive audience,

    "I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot."

    http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0112/04/se.04.html

    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bushlie.html

    This is a very interesting statement for Bush to make, seeing as the first plane, (at that time) was not actually caught on network TV -striking the tower. Only the second one was.

    Clearly, the President is giving the impression that he was not then aware that this plane crash was a terrorist attack; but is this, in fact what we would expect from the commander-in-chief?

    As supreme commander, the President is tied into civilian air defense through the secret service.

    There is time-honored, standard procedure -whereby, the command-center in the Pentagon, radar defense, the National Security Council, and the President are quickly informed of any national emergencies, including hijackings.

    As Vice-President Dick Cheney says on the Sept. 16th edition of "Meet The Press,"

    "The secret service has an arrangement with the FAA. They had open lines after the World Trade Center was...."

    Cheney neglects to finish his sentance, but the implications are clear.

    The FAA suspected that Flight 11 was hijacked at 8:20, and confirmed it with NORAD at 8:38, well before the plane struck the tower at 8:46; thus, the Pentagon, and the secret service also knew. (There is documentation to prove this, which I can post upon request).

    By the time that George W. Bush first admits knowing about the crash, (ten minutes later, about 8:55) he has already been briefed, for he shows no emotional response to either his chief of staff, or the reporters question.

    Not only the crash of a single, hijacked plane, but two other planes in close proximity are hijack-suspected/confirmed.

    A national emergency is in progress.

    All this would have been known by the secret service -and hence, the President.

    After his first public admission of being informed, George W. Bush is updated five minutes later, (at 9:00) then five minutes later again, (presumably, about the second plane which crashed into the World Trade Center, at 9:02).

    http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.hijack.warning/

    Yet he continues sitting in the classroom with the children; and when reporters dare to ask whether he’s going to do something about it, he appears to suggest that (presumably by some kind of stern expression) ‘now is not an "appropriate" time to talk about it’?

    We common folk might be forgiven if we think it only natural that a person might need a few minutes to collect their thoughts; but the commander-in-chief is no ordinary person. In the case of a national emergency, seconds of indecision on his part could cost thousands of lives; and it's precisely for this reason that he has a whole network of adjuncts and advisors to insure that he is among the first to be informed, not the last.

    Only at 9:30 did the President finally confirm what the FAA, the military, and the secret service had already known fifty minutes before -and what the entire television-watching world had known for forty.

    Tentative conclusion?

    Either the President was criminally mis-informed by his own secret service/staff; or he was deliberately mis-representing the extent to which he knew that a national emergency was underway.

    His inaction is most unsettling.

    Questions about Flight 77 and the Pentagon Attack:

    By 9:05 AM, flight number 77 from Washington, (the "third plane") had been severely off-course some twenty minutes before, (beginning at approx. 8:46). It had made a huge northward /westward/southward loop, before resuming its proper course again.

    You can find this information at USA Today's Website:

    http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gflightpath2/flash.htm

    This fact, (based on the actual radar reports from government and private industry) was likely the source of the above statement, that,

    "within a few minutes more... [8:50] controllers would have known that... Flight 77 had probably been hijacked." (New York Times, September 15 )

    At the same time...

    "controllers at Washington Air Route Traffic Control Center—who handled American Airlines Flight 77, which hit the Pentagon—knew about the hijacking of American Flight 11 even before it crashed [at 8:46]" (CNN, September 16)

    Village Voice, September 13

    Thus, when Flight 77 started to go off-course, the Air Traffic Control officials, who were watching the plane, were also aware that another plane on the east coast had been hijacked-confirmed.

    Around this time, they would also have been informed that Flight 175 had been declared "hijacked," (at 8:43 according to CNN, September 16, earlier than the New York Times article suggests. This CNN document is based on official government timeline: NORAD).

    Thus, two other planes were officially confirmed as hijacked, by the time that Flight 77 had begun to go dramatically off-course.

    Within minutes, these officials would be informed that Flight 11 had crashed into the World Trade Center.

    They should have been extremely concerned.

    Flight 77 managed to return to it's proper westward course, after flying about twenty miles north, then west, then south; yet officials should have still been on a high state of alert.

    [NOTE: we don't know what kind of radio communications existed between Air Traffic Control officials and Flight 77; because, for some reason, the FBI has not publicly released the tapes; so it's possible that, with radio contact, (and a clear sign of "ok" from the pilot) officials were convinced that things were under control, once the plane was back on its original course].

    Yet the fact remains that the plane these officials were monitoring had been well off-course around the same time that two other planes in the area had been hijacked; and now, by 9:05 (at the same time that President Bush was updated) a second crash into the World Trade Center had occurred, in what was now confirmed to be two, intentional terrorist attacks.

    At the very least, the officials must have had suspicians, (as the NY Times article, cited above clearly suggests).

    Then, at approx. 9:00 AM, Flight 77 ceases its transponder signal.

    For a very short period of time, (as they frantically try to regain radar contact through other facilities) Air Traffic Control officials would have been unaware that Flight 77 had made a 180 degree turn near the Ohio state border, and was heading straight back for Washington.

    (NOTE: according to Newsday, (Sept 23rd) this occurred at 8:55, http://www.newsday.com/ny-uspent232380681sep23.story -- calculations based on the above radar map, take-off time, crash time, etc. suggests it was likely about five minutes after that.)

    At any rate, according to the above source,

    "9:06, Washington notifies all air traffic facilities nationwide of the suspected hijacking of Flight 11."

    This was as clear an expression of a national emergency as these officials had ever known; and yet, although "military officials in a command center on the east side of the [Pentagon] were urgently talking to law enforcement officials about what to do," (N.Y. Times, Sept. 15) air traffic control continued to watch Flight 77 on the radar screen without any fighters scrambled to intercept it.

    Then, at 9:25, the F.A.A. (the Federal Aviation Authority, oversight body of all Air Traffic Control centers) notifies NORAD (military air-radar defense) that Flight 77 may have been hijacked. [CNN, Sept 16]

    That is:

    40+ minutes after two other planes had been hijack-confirmed: (Flight 11 at 8:38, Flight 175 at 8:43, CNN Sept 16)

    Approximately 40 minutes after Flight 77 had begun to go dramatically off-course, (radar map, USA Today)

    Almost 40 minutes after Air Traffic Control officials would have known that Flight 11 had struck the World Trade Center; (CNN, Sept 16)

    35 minutes after Air Traffic Control officials "would have known that... American 77 had probably been hijacked" (New York Times, ibid)

    About 25 minutes after Flight 77 had ceased its transponder signal, and made a 180 degree turn over West Virginia, (when it was now just thirteen minutes from the Pentagon, Newsday, ibid);

    Over 20 minutes after a second plane had struck the World Trade Centre, (9:02, CNN, Sept 16, ibid)

    And finally:

    19 minutes after every other air traffic facility in the country knew that Flight 77 was likely hijacked, (Newsday, ibid) the FAA notifies NORAD that Flight 77 may have been hijacked?

    May have been hijacked?!?

    This is an unbelievable lapse of the most elementary, routine procedures of Air Traffic Control and the FAA, (as we shall now see); yet this appears to be exactly what happened, for it’s only at,

    9:27 a.m.: (approximate time) NORAD orders jets scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to intercept United Airlines flight 77. (CNN, Sept 16, ibid )

    Now, let’s be absolutely clear about this.

    It is the sworn duty of the FAA to follow certain safety procedures; such as, "Consider that an aircraft emergency exists ... when: ...There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any ...aircraft." --FAA Order 7110.65M 10-2-5

    "If ... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency." --FAA Order 7110.65M 10-1-1-c (ibid)

    The reason for this is simple: in busy airspace, an airliner without radio and transponder contact is a collision waiting to happen.

    When an airliner goes off course, it is equally, (if not more) dangerous.

    Every commercial jet is required to follow IFR, or Instrument Flight Rules. IFR requires pilots to file a flight plan with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) before takeoff.] (FAA Order 7400.2E 14-1-2) (ibid)

    "Pilots are supposed to hit each fix with pinpoint accuracy. If a plane deviates by 15 degrees, or two miles from that course, the flight controllers will hit the panic button. They’ll call the plane, saying "American 11, you’re deviating from course." It’s considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour. When golfer Payne Stewart’s incapacitated Learjet missed a turn at a fix, heading north instead of west to Texas, F-16 interceptors were quickly dispatched." (MSNBC, Sept 12)

    http://www.msnbc.com/news/627524.asp#BODY

    To give an idea of acceptable, routine response times:

    "... from the official National Transportation Safety Board crash report [of Payne Stewart's plane]:

    9:19 AM: The flight departs. 9:24 AM: The Learjet's pilot responds to an instruction from air traffic control. 9:33 AM: The controller radios another instruction. No response from the pilot. For 4 ½ minutes the controller tries to establish contact. 9:38 AM: Having failed, the controller calls in the military.

    http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewMediaFile.cfm?REF=138

    The standing rule of NORAD officals, (at the central U.S. radar facility, Cheyenne Mountain) is to give unknown airplanes which are approaching U.S. airspace, (off any of the coasts of North America) two minutes to make a satisfactory identification.

    After two minutes, fighter-intercepts are ordered to scramble, without exception.

    On the other side of the world, the head of the (rather antiquated) Russian Air Force, Anatoli Kornukov, has this to say, (of the Sept 11 attacks)

    "such a scenario is impossible. "We had such facts [i.e., events or incidents in Russia] too.... as soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up."

    Can someone please explain to me why Payne Stewart's missing Learjet was MORE IMPORTANT than FOUR HI-JACKED JUMBO JETS?

    Let’s also be absolutely clear about what is meant by "interception."

    "[Marine Corps Major Mike] Snyder, the NORAD spokesman, said its fighters routinely intercept aircraft.

    "When planes are intercepted, they typically are handled with a graduated response. The approaching fighter may rock its wingtips to attract the pilot's attention, or make a pass in front of the aircraft. Eventually, it can fire tracer rounds in the airplane's path, or, under certain circumstances, down it with a missile." --'Boston Globe,' 15 September 2001

    FAA:

    "INTERCEPTING SIGNALS
    "Signals initiated by intercepting aircraft and responses by intercepted aircraft."

    "...Rocking wings from a position slightly above and ahead of, and normally to the left of, the intercepted aircraft..."

    This conveys the message, "You have been intercepted." The commercial jet should respond by rocking its wings, indicating it will comply.

    The escort then makes a "slow level turn, normally to the left, on to the desired heading [direction]."

    The commercial jet is supposed to respond by following the escort.

    (FAA 'AIM' 5-6-4) (ibid)

    So, it is a matter of routine procedure for fighter-jets to "intercept" commercial airliners, in order to regain contact with the pilot.

    "Intercept" and "shoot-down" are two entirely different commands.

    The question of whether an airliner may have to be shot down, (and who might give the order) is completely irrelevant to the fact that fighter-intercepts should have been ordered into the air, at the first sign of the emergency.

    Let's now review the course of events in the light of the above regulations:

    Flight 77 was wildly off-course at about 8:46.

    The standard procedure, in this case, would be to request a fighter-intercept within a few minutes.

    According to our above radar map,

    http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gflightpath2/flash.htm

    Flight 77 went about fifteen miles off-course, and was off-course for approximately ten minutes.

    This would normally have compelled ATC/FAA to at least notify NORAD and/or an appropriate Air National Guard (ANG) base.

    The fact that Flight 77 went so far off-course after Flights 11 and 175 had been hijack-confirmed, should have doubly motivated Air Traffic Control/FAA officials to inform NORAD.

    Nothing was done:

    Then, when the Air Traffic Control officials (watching Flight 77) were informed, (likely by 8:48) that Flight 11 had struck the World trade Center, (8:46) surely NORAD should have been informed that this other plane had been, (or was) off-course/in trouble.

    Still nothing was done when transponder contact with Flight 77 was lost, even after Flight 175 had hit the World Trade Center at 9:02.

    Flight 77 was visible on various radar screens, heading back towards Washington -for another 23 minutes, before the FAA informed NORAD that the plane may have been hijacked.

    Shocking, unbelievable: is it not?

    What were these officials doing?

    According to the above-mentioned Newsday article,

    "After losing [i.e. transponder] track of Flight 77 for about 10 minutes, the FAA rediscovered the plane heading east over West Virginia, then took about 19 more minutes to alert the military."
    The most sophisticated air-traffic communications system in the world: regional radar systems, national satellite radar, command centers in the Pentagon: essentially, not responding.

    Flight 77 continued to fly towards Washington, unopposed.

    When the FAA finally informs NORAD, the plane is little more than thirty miles outside the Capital. (10)

    According to CBS News, (transportation correspondent Bob Orr)

    "the plane flew several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House. At 9:33, [it] crossed the Capital Beltway... flying at more than 400mph, [which] was too fast and high when it neared the Pentagon at 9:35. The hijacker pilots were then forced to execute a difficult high-speed descending turn."

    "Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes."

    "The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it’s clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijacker had better flying skills than many investigators first believed."

    "The jetliner disappeared from radar at 9:37 and less than a minute later it clipped the tops of street lights and ploughed into the Pentagon at 480mph." (10)

    The N.Y. Times, (Sept. 15) adds,

    "the fighter planes that scrambled into protective orbits around Washington did not arrive until 15 minutes after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon."

    So the question remains:

    Why weren’t intercept aircraft scrambled in time to intercept Flight 77?

    Why did it take the FAA thirty-five minutes after the first hijacked plane struck the World Trade Center –to inform NORAD? –when Flight 77 was already clearly in trouble, (likely hijacked) and another plane (175) had also been hijack-confirmed?

    Is this not an incredibly lax response?

    But there’s more.

    When officials at NORAD issued the order to scramble jets, (at 9:27) they chose Langley Air Force Base, which is one-hundred and thirty miles outside of Washington, (where Flight 77 was at the time). (CNN, Sept 16, ibid)

    Given the time to scramble, (seven minutes) and the fourteen minutes it takes the planes to fly to Washington, ("at 720 knots, breaking the sound barrier," CNN, ibid) the planes could not possibly have gotten there in time to prevent a direct attack on the Pentagon, the White House, or any of the major buildings in the Capital.

    And yet, Andrews Air Force base is located right on the outskirts of Washington, (ten miles away) and is home to two 'combat-ready' squadrons:

    the 121st Fighter Squadron (FS-121) of the 113th Fighter Wing (FW-113), equipped with F-16 fighters;
    the 321st Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA-321) of the 49th Marine Air Group, Detachment A (MAG-49 Det-A), equipped F/A-18 fighters.

    The mission of 121 Fighter-Wing reads, in part, "provide capable and ready response forces for the District of Columbia in the event of a natural disaster or civil emergency."

    F-16 Fighters from Andrews Air Force Base were actually put into the air over Washington on Sept 11th, but only after the attack on the Pentagon was completed, (after planes from Langley were on their way).

    " Within minutes of the attack ... F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington DC." --'Sunday Telegraph,' (London), 14 September 2001

    " an audible gasp went up from the rear of the audience as a large black plume of smoke arose from the Pentagon... Overhead, fighter jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base and other installations and cross-crossed the skies… --'Denver Post,' 11 September 2001

    "It was after the attack on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a--a protective cover over Washington, DC." --NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11 2001

    "Air defense around Washington is provided mainly by fighter planes from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland near the District of Columbia border. The D.C. Air National Guard is also based there and equipped with F-16 fighter planes, a National Guard spokesman said. ‘But the fighters took to the skies over Washington only after the devastating attack on the Pentagon’..." --'San Diego Union-Tribune' 12 September 2001. (ibid)

    Is this not astounding?

    A few days later, however, another version began to appear in the mainstream press:

    "Andrews Air Force Base, home to Air Force One, is only 15 miles [sic!] away from the Pentagon, but it had no fighters assigned to it. Defense officials won't say whether that has changed."

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/16/military-home-front.htm

    and

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/16/pentagon-timeline.htm

    "The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles [sic!] from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed." (USA Today, Sept 17, ibid))

    Also curious, what appears to be the reputable, well-documented website of the American Federation of Scientists lists the top speed of the F-16 fighters as 1500mph; which means that, according to NORAD and CNN, the fighters from Langley flew at well below their top speed.

    http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-16.htm

    The Pentagon also has surface-to-air missiles surrounding it. Why weren’t they used?

    Neither was the Pentagon evacuated, until the plane had struck its target, (CNN, Sept 16, ibid).

    Does all this not sound as if nobody was minding the store in regards to Flight 77?

    Would the terrorists on Flight 77 have been able to get to Washington, (and the Pentagon) if the air defense had functioned properly?

    Do we not deserve some answers?

    Clearly, without gross incompetence on the part of ATC, FAA, and/or NORAD officials, Flight 77 would have not got near Washington -without being "intercepted."

    Whether or not a pilot would have been authorized to shoot down the airliner is absolutely irrelevant to the fact that no planes were in the air in time –as routine procedure clearly demanded.

    Now, at this point, we don’t know exactly where the breakdown in communication occurred.

    By the above information, it would appear that ATC and the FAA were more at fault than NORAD, (though not appreciably); and yet, these communication timelines come to us largely from NORAD.

    We don’t know, for example, whether or not ATC and the FAA notified NORAD early on, and whether NORAD simply lied about it -and that the military end was largely or solely responsible for the breakdown in communication.

    What we do know, however, is that by official NORAD statements, there was at least a thirty-five minute delay between the time when planes should have been ordered to scramble, and when they actually were.

    If routine procedures had been followed, Flight 77 would not have made it to Washington.

    The fourth hijacked plane, meanwhile, "was being tracked by the Pentagon," (according to Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz) "and could have been shot down." (NY Times, Sept 15, ibid)

    That plane, (Flight 93) crashed into rural Pennsylvania at about 10:10.

    Wolfowitz says that "any military intervention would have ultimately been the decision of President George W. Bush." (ibid)

    If this is true, and George Bush didn’t immediately excuse himself from the classroom, (at 9:00 am, or 9:05 at the latest) -to assume his role as commander in chief- then we must include his actions in with the above list of organizations: guilty of criminal incompetence.

    The fact that his negligence would have made no difference, (i.e. no planes in the air, even if the President was on duty) matters not.

    Moral authority begins with admitting one’s own mistakes: only then can one be forgiven them.

  • William Penwell
  • William Penwell
  • Gerard
    Gerard

    Yeah, right. And the Watchtower is a direct channel to God and Elvis Presley did not die, but was abducted by aliens.

  • Pleasuredome
    Pleasuredome

    i know gerard. i mean, what will we here next? Oswald wasnt the lone gunman? a fertilizer bomb couldnt have destroyed the murrah building in oklahoma?

  • ThiChi
    ThiChi

    Wow! I am still trying to figure out who was the second gunman in the grassy knoll.........

  • ThiChi
    ThiChi

    I don't agree, but another viewpoint of the same side of the coin: DEBUNKING CONSPIRACY THEORISTS —
    PARANOID FANTASIES ABOUT SEPT 11 DISTRACT FROM THE REAL ISSUES

    by Gerard Holmgren [email protected]
    http://quebec.indymedia.org/node.php?id=10560
    Copyright Gerard Holmgren. Jan 9 2003.

    Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will usually be at least one ,often several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it. "The CIA killed Hendrix" " The Pope had John Lennon murdered ", "Hitler was half Werewolf", "Space aliens replaced Nixon with a clone" etc,etc. The bigger the event, the more ridiculous and more numerous are the fanciful rantings which circulate in relation to it.

    So its hardly surprising that the events of Sept 11 2001 have spawned their fair share of these ludicrous fairy tales. And as always, there is - sadly - a small but gullible percentage of the population eager to lap up these tall tales, regardless of facts or rational analysis. One of the wilder stories circulating about Sept 11, and one that has attracted something of a cult following amongst conspiracy buffs is that it was carried out by 19 fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, with no apparent motivation other than that they "hate our freedoms."

    Never a group of people to be bothered by facts, the perpetrators of this cartoon fantasy have constructed an elaborately woven web of delusions and unsubstantiated hearsay in order to promote this garbage across the internet and the media to the extent that a number of otherwise rational people have actually fallen under its spell.

    Normally I don't even bother debunking this kind of junk, but the effect that this paranoid myth is beginning to have requires a little rational analysis, in order to consign it to the same rubbish bin as all such silly conspiracy theories. These crackpots even contend that the extremist Bush regime was caught unawares by the attacks, had no hand in organizing them, and actually would have stopped them if it had been able.

    Blindly ignoring the stand down of the US air-force, the insider trading on airline stocks - linked to the CIA, the complicit behavior of Bush on the morning of the attacks, the controlled demolition of the WTC, the firing of a missile into the Pentagon and a host of other documented proofs that the Bush regime was behind the attacks, the conspiracy theorists stick doggedly to a silly story about 19 Arab hijackers somehow managing to commandeer 4 planes simultaneously and fly them around US airspace for nearly 2 hours ,crashing them into important buildings, without the US intelligence services having any idea that it was coming, and without the Air Force knowing what to do. The huge difficulties with such a stupid story force them to invent even more preposterous stories to distract from its core silliness, and thus the tale has escalated into a mythic fantasy of truly gargantuan proportions.

    It's difficult to apply rational analysis to such unmitigated stupidity, but that is the task which I take on in this article. However, it should be noted that one of the curious characteristics of conspiracy theorists is that they effortlessly change their so called evidence in response to each aspect which is debunked. As soon as one delusion is unmasked, they simply invent another to replace it, and deny that the first ever existed. Eventually, when they have turned full circle through this endlessly changing fantasy fog , they then re-invent the original delusion and deny that you ever debunked it, thus beginning the circle once more.

    This technique is known as "the fruit loop" and saves the conspiracy theorist from ever having to see any of their ideas through to their (ill)logical conclusions. According to the practitioners of the fruit loop, 19 Arabs took over the 4 planes by subduing the passengers and crew through the use of guns,knives,box cutters and gas, and then used electronic guidance systems which they had smuggled on board to fly the planes to their targets.

    The suspension of disbelief required for this outrageous concoction is only for the hard core conspiracy theorist. For a start, they conveniently skip over the awkward fact that there weren't any Arabs on the planes. If there were, one must speculate that they somehow got on board without being filmed by any of the security cameras and without being registered on the passenger lists. But the curly question of how they are supposed to have got on board is all too mundane for the exciting world of the conspiracy theorist. With vague mumblings that they must have been using false ID ( but never specifying which IDs they are alleged to have used, or how these were traced to their real identities), they quickly bypass this problem, to relate exciting and sinister tales about how some of the fictitious fiends were actually searched before boarding because they looked suspicious.

    However, as inevitably happens with any web of lies, this simply paints them into an even more difficult corner. How are they supposed to have got on board with all that stuff if they were searched ? And if they used gas in a confined space, they would have been affected themselves unless they also had masks in their luggage. "Excuse me sir, why do you have a boxcutter, a gun, a container of gas, a gas mask and an electronic guidance unit in your luggage?" "A present for your grandmother? Very well sir, on you get." "Very strange", thinks the security officer. "That's the fourth Arabic man without an Arabic name who just got on board with a knife, gun or boxcutter and gas mask. And why does that security camera keep flicking off every time one these characters shows up? Must be one of those days I guess..."

    Asking any of these basic questions to a conspiracy theorist is likely to cause a sudden leap to the claim that we know that they were on board because they left a credit card trail for the tickets they had purchased and cars they had rented. So if they used credit cards that identified them, how does that reconcile with the claim that they used false IDs to get on to the plane? But by this time ,the fruit loop is in full swing, as the conspiracy theorist

    tries to stay one jump ahead of this annoying and awkward rational analysis.They will allege that the hijackers' passports were found at the crash scenes. "So there!" they exalt triumphantly, their fanatical faces lighting up with that deranged look of one who has just a revelation of questionable sanity. Hmm? So they got on board with false IDs but took their real passports with them?

    However, by this time the fruit loop has been completely circumnavigated,and the conspiracy theorist exclaims impatiently, "Who said anything about false IDs? We know what seats they were sitting in! Their presence is well documented!" And so the whole loop starts again. "Well, why aren't they on the passenger lists?" "You numbskull! They assumed the identities of other passengers!" And so on...

    Finally, out of sheer fascination with this circular method of creative delusion , the rational sceptic will allow them to get away with this loop, in order to move on to the next question, and see what further delights await us in the unraveling of this marvelously stupid story. "Uh, how come their passports survived fiery crashes that completely incinerated the planes and all the passengers? "

    The answer of course is that its just one of those strange co- incidences, those little quirks of fate that do happen from time to time. You know, like the same person winning the lottery four weeks in a row. The odds are astronomical, but these things do happen...

    This is another favourite deductive method of the conspiracy theorist. The "improbability drive" , in which they decide upon a conclusion without any evidence whatsoever to support it, and then continually speculate a series of wildly improbable events and unbelievable co-incidences to support it, shrugging off the implausibility of each event with the vague assertion that sometimes the impossible happens (just about all the time in their world).

    There is a principle called "Occam's razor" which suggests that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the simplest explanation is most likely to be correct. Conspiracy theorists hate Occam's razor. Having for the sake of amusement, allowed them to get away with with the silly story of the 19 invisible Arabs, we move on to the question of how they are supposed to have taken over the planes. Hijacking a plane is not an easy thing to do. Hijacking it without the pilot being able to alert ground control is near impossible. The pilot has only to punch in a four digit code to alert ground control to a hijacking.

    Unconcerned with the awkward question of plausibility, the conspiracy buffs maintain that on that Sept 11, the invisible hijackers took over the plane by the rather crude method of threatening people with boxcutters and knives, and spraying gas (after they had attached their masks, obviously), but somehow took control of the plane without the crew first getting a chance to punch in the hijacking code. Not just on one plane, but on all four.

    At this point in the tale, the conspiracy theorist is again forced to call upon the services of the improbability drive. So now that our incredibly lucky hijackers have taken control of the planes, all four pilots fly them with breath taking skill and certainty to their fiery end, all four pilots unflinching in their steely resolve for a swift meeting with Allah. Apart from their psychotic hatred of "our freedoms" , it was their fanatical devotion to Islam which enabled them to summon up the iron will to do this. Which is strange, because according to another piece of hearsay peddled by the conspiracy buffs, these guys actually went out drinking and womanizing the night before their great martyrdom, even leaving their Korans in the bar -really impeccable Islamic behavior - and then got up at 5am the next morning to pull off the greatest covert operation in history.

    This also requires us to believe that they were even clear headed enough to learn how to fly the huge planes by reading flight manuals in Arabic in the car on the way to the airport. We know this because they supposedly left the flight manuals there for us to find. It gets better. Their practical training had allegedly been limited to Cessnas and flight simulators, but this was no barrier to the unflinching certainty with which they took over the planes and skillfully guided them to their doom. If they are supposed to have done their flight training with these tools, which would be available just about anywhere in the world, its not clear why they would have decided to risk blowing their cover to US intelligence services by doing the training in Florida, rather than somewhere in the Middle East, but such reasoning is foreign to the foggy world of the conspiracy theorist , too trapped in the constant rotation of the mental fruit loop to make their unsubstantiated fabrications seem even semi-believable.

    Having triumphantly established a circular delusion in support of the mythical Arabs, the conspiracy theorist now confronts the difficult question of why there's nothing left of the planes.

    Anybody who has seen the endlessly replayed footage of the second plane going into the WTC will realize that the plane was packed with explosives. Planes do not and cannot blow up into nothing in that manner when they crash. Did the mythical Arabs also haul a huge heap of explosives on board, and mange to deploy them in such a manner that they went off in the exact instant of the crash, completely vapourizing the plane?

    This is a little difficult even for the conspiracy theorist, who at this point decides that its easier to invent new laws of physics in order to keep the delusion rolling along. There weren't any explosives. It wasn't an inside job. The plane blew up into nothing from its exploding fuel load! Remarkable! Sluggishly combustible jet fuel which is basically kerosine,and which burns at a maximum temperature of around 800 C has suddenly taken on the qualities of a ferociously explosive demolition agent, vapourizing 65 tons of aircraft into a puff of smoke. Never mind that a plane of that size contains around 15 tons of steel and titanium, of which even the melting points are about double that of the maximum combustion temperature of kerosine - let alone the boiling point - which is what would be required to vapourize a plane. And then there's about 50 tons of aluminium to be accounted for. In excess of 15lbs of metal for each gallon of kerosine.

    For the conspiracy theorist, such inconvenient facts are vaguely dismissed as "mumbo jumbo". This convenient little phrase is their answer to just about anything factual or logical. Like a conjurer pulling a rabbit out of a hat, they suddenly become fanatically insistent about the devastating explosive qualities of kerosine, something hitherto completely unknown to science, but just discovered by them, this very minute.

    Blissfully ignoring the fact that never before or since in aviation history has a plane vapourized into nothing from an exploding fuel load, the conspiracy theorist relies upon Hollywood images, where the effects are are always larger than life, and certainly larger than the intellects of these cretins. "Its a well known fact that planes blow up into nothing on impact." they state with pompous certainty. "Watch any Bruce Willis movie." "Care to provide any documented examples? If it's a well known fact, then presumably this well known fact springs from some kind of documentation - other than Bruce Willis movies ?"

    At this point the mad but cunning eyes of the conspiracy theorist will narrow as they sense the corner that they have backed themselves into, and plan their escape by means of another stunning backflip. "Ah, but planes have never crashed into buildings before, so there's no way of telling." they counter with a sly grin.

    Well, actually planes have crashed into buildings before and since, and not vapourized into nothing. "But not big planes, with that much fuel ", they shriek in hysterical denial. Or that much metal to vapourize. "Yes but not hijacked planes!"

    "Are you suggesting that whether the crash is deliberate or accidental affects the combustion qualities of the fuel?" "Now you're just being silly". Although collisions with buildings are rare, planes frequently crash into mountains, streets, other aircraft, nosedive into the ground,or have bombs planted aboard them, and don't vapourize into nothing. What's so special about a tower that's mostly glass?

    But by now, the conspiracy theorist has once again sailed happily around the fruit loop. "Its a well documented fact that planes explode into nothing on impact." Effortlessly weaving back and forth between the position that its a "well known fact" and that "its never happened before, so we have nothing to compare it to", the conspiracy theorist has now convinced themselves ( if not too many other people) that the WTC plane was not loaded with explosives, and that the instant vapourization of the plane in a massive fireball was the same as any other plane crash you might care to mention. Round and round the fruit. loop...

    But the hurdles which confront the conspiracy theorist are many, and they are now forced to implement even more creative uses for the newly discovered shockingly destructive qualities of kerosine. They have to explain how the Arabs also engineered the elegant veritcal collapse of both the WTC towers, and for this awkward fact the easiest counter is to simply deny that it was a controlled demolition, and claim that the buildings collapsed from fire caused by the burning kerosine. For this, its necessary to sweep aside the second law of thermodynamics and propose kerosine which is not only impossibly destructive, but also recycles itself for a second burning in violation of the law of degradation of energy.

    You see, it not only consumed itself in a sudden catastrophic fireball , vapourizing a 65 ton plane into nothing, but then came back for a second go, burning at 2000C for another hour at the impact point, melting the skyscraper's steel like butter. And while it was doing all this it also poured down the elevator shafts, starting fires all through the building.

    When I was at school there was a little thing called the entropy law which suggests that a given portion of fuel can only burn once, something which is readily observable in the real world, even for those who didn't make it to junior high school science. But this is no problem for the conspiracy theorist. Gleefully, they claim that a few thousand gallons of kerosine is enough to : completely vapourize a 65 ton aircraft : have enough left over to burn ferociously enough for over an hour at the impact point to melt steel ( melting point about double the maximum combustion temperature of the fuel ) : still have enough left over to pour down the elevator shafts and start similarly destructive fires all through the building.

    This kerosine really is remarkable stuff! How chilling to realize that those kerosine heaters we had in the house when I was a kid were deadly bombs, just waiting to go off. One false move and the entire street might have been vapourized. And never again will I take kerosine lamps out camping. One moment you're there innocently holding the lamp - the next - kapow! Vapourized into nothing along with with the rest of the camp site, and still leaving enough of the deadly stuff to start a massive forest fire.

    These whackos are actually claiming that the raging inferno allegedly created by the miraculously recycling, and impossibly hot burning kerosine melted or at least softened the steel supports of the skyscraper. Oblivious to the fact that the smoke coming from the WTC was black, which indicates an oxygen starved fire -therefore, not particularly hot, they trumpet an alleged temperature in the building of 2000 C , without a shred of evidence to support this curious suspension of the laws of physics. Not content with this ludicrous garbage, they then contend that as the steel frames softened, they came straight down instead of buckling and twisting and falling sideways.

    Since they're already re-engineered the combustion qualities of jet fuel, violated the second law of thermodynamics, and re-defined the structural properties of steel, why let a little thing like the laws of gravity get in the way?

    The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free falling object, dropped from that height, meaning that its physically impossible for it to have collapsed by the method of the top floors smashing through the lower floors. But according to the conspiracy theorists, the laws of gravity were temporarily suspended on the morning of Sept 11.

    It appears that the evil psychic power of those dreadful Arabs knew no bounds. Even after they were dead, they were able, by the power of their evil spirits, to force down the tower at a speed physically impossible under the laws of gravity, had it been meeting any resistance from fireproofed steel structures originally designed to resist many tons of hurricane force wind as well as the impact of a Boeing passenger jet straying off course.

    Clearly, these conspiracy nuts never did their science homework at school, but did become extremely adept at inventing tall tales for why. "Muslim terrorists stole my notes, sir" "No miss, the kerosine heater blew up and vapourized everything in the street, except for my passport." "You see sir, the schoolbus was hijacked by Arabs who destroyed my homework because they hate our freedoms."

    Or perhaps they misunderstood the term "creative science" and mistakenly thought that coming up with such rubbish was in fact, their science homework. The ferocious heat generated by this ghastly kerosine was, according to the conspiracy theorists, the reason why so many of the WTC victims can't be identified. DNA is destroyed by heat. (Although 2000 C isn't really required, 100C will generally do the job.)

    This is quite remarkable, because according to the conspiracy theorist, the nature of DNA suddenly changes if you go to a different city. That's right! If you are killed by an Arab terrorist in NY, your DNA will be destroyed by such temperatures. But if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in Washington DC, your DNA will be so robust that it can survive temperatures which completely vapourize a 65 ton aircraft.

    You see, these loonies have somehow concocted the idea that the missile which hit the pentagon was not a missile at all, but one of the hijacked planes. And to prove this unlikely premise, they point to a propaganda statement from the Bush regime, which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA testing, even though nothing remains of the plane. The plane was vapourized by the fuel tank explosion maintain these space loonies, but the people inside it were all but one identified by DNA testing.

    So there we have it. The qualities of DNA are different, depending upon which city you're in, or perhaps depending upon which fairy story you're trying to sell at any particular time. This concoction about one of the hijacked planes hitting the Pentagon really is a howler. For those not familiar with the layout of the Pentagon, it consists of 5 rings of building, each with a space inbetween. Each ring of building is about 30 to 35 ft deep, with a similar amount of open space between it and the next ring. The object which penetrated the Pentagon went in at about a 45 degree angle, punching a neat circular hole of about a 12 ft diameter through three rings ( six walls).A little later

    a section of wall about 65 ft wide collapsed in the outer ring. Since the plane which the conspiracy theorists claim to be responsible for the impact had a wing span of 125 ft and a length of 155 ft, and there was no wreckage of the plane, either inside or outside the building, and the lawns outside were still smooth and green enough to play golf on, this crazy delusion is clearly physically impossible.

    But hey, we've already disregarded the combustion qualities of jet fuel, the normal properties of common building materials, the properties of DNA, the laws of gravity and the second law of thermodynamics, so what the hell - why not throw in a little spatial impossibility as well ? I would have thought that the observation that a solid object cannot pass through another solid object without leaving a hole at least as big as itself is reasonably sound science. But to the conspiracy theorist, this is "mumbo jumbo". It conflicts with the delusion that they're hooked on, so it "must be wrong" although trying to get them to explain exactly how it could be wrong is a futile endeavour.

    Conspiracy theorists fly into a curious panic whenever the Pentagon missile is mentioned.They nervously maintain that the plane was vapourized by it's exploding fuel load and point to the WTC crash as evidence of this behavior. (That's a wonderful fruit loop.)

    Like an insect which has just been sprayed, running back and forth in its last mad death throes, they first argue that the reason the hole is so small is that the plane never entered the wall, having blown up outside, and then suddenly backflip to explain the 250 ft deep missile hole by saying that the plane disappeared all the way into the building, and then blew up inside the building (even though the building shows no sign of such damage). As for what happened to the wings - here's where they get really creative. The wings snapped off and folded into the fuselage which then carried them into the building, which then closed up behind the plane like a piece of meat.

    When it suits them, they'll also claim that the plane slid in on its belly, (ignoring the undamaged lawn) while at the same time citing alleged witnesses to the plane diving steeply into the building from an "irrecoverable angle."

    How they reconcile these two scenarios as being compatible is truly a study in stupidity. Once they get desperate enough, you can be sure that the UFO conspiracy stuff will make an appearance.

    The Arabs are in league with the Martians. Space aliens snatched the remains of the Pentagon plane and fixed most of the hole in the wall, just to confuse people. They gave the Arabs invisibility pills to help get them onto the planes. Little green men were seen talking to Bin Laden a few weeks prior to the attacks.

    As the nation gears up to impeach the traitor Bush, and stop his perpetual oil war, it's not helpful to have these idiots distracting from the process by spreading silly conspiracy theories about mythical Arabs, stories which do nothing but play into the hands of the extremist Bush regime.

    At a less serious time, we might tolerate such crackpots with amused detachment, but they need to understand that the treachery that was perpetrated on Sept 11, and the subsequent war crimes committed in "retaliation" are far too serious for us to allow such frivolous self indulgence to go unchallenged.

    Those who are truly addicted to conspiracy delusions should find a more appropriate outlet for their paranoia. Its time to stop loony conspiracy theories about Sept 11.

  • William Penwell
    William Penwell

    I don't believe conspiracy theories either and I have never said that Bush was behind Sept 11 but there is some evidence that the Bush or his Administration had some intelligence information there was something in the planning. If there is nothing to hid then why don't they release these documents?? Or will this information be that damaging to a Bush 2004 reelection bid?

    Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bob Graham is reportedly sitting on damaging evidence that the Bush administration could have prevented the Sept. 11 attacks - but he hasn't released the information yet because it's classified.

    Will

  • Trauma_Hound
    Trauma_Hound
    Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bob Graham is reportedly sitting on damaging evidence that the Bush administration could have prevented the Sept. 11 attacks - but he hasn't released the information yet because it's classified.

    Or because it doesn't exist? I don't think bush is smart enough to do something this big. The company I worked for, almost lost two people that day, it was about timing.

  • Hungout
    Hungout

    These "conspiracy theories " are the biggest bunch of bullshit Ive ever heard.

    Please Find something better to do with your time all you believers of these conspiracy theories.

    Like if you live in America, pack up your shit and leave.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit