What are the odds...

[geggy]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS

I'd say 100 million to 1.

[Alareth]

Considering the fact that they did it, I'd say the odds were 1:1

[alexg]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS

I'd say 100 million to 1.
Being new here I don't know quite what to make of this but I'm down with those odds - 100 million (they got through) to 1 (government did it)

[Dave1001]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS

I'd say 100 million to 1.

Honestly, what do you think the odds are that the 911truth organization is itself a conspiracy orchestrated by elites?

[slingblade]

Not only what Alareth said, but also note that just because the odds are high, it doesn't prove or establish impossibility.

[WildCat]

That doesn't make any sense at all. That's like asking how a bank robber defeated:
The FBI
Municipal police dept.
County police dept.
State police dept.
The bank's employees.
The bank's private security company.

Of course, you don't have to "defeat" all those agencies to walk in a bank branch and say you have a gun, please fill this bag w/ money.

[alexg]

That doesn't make any sense at all. That's like asking how a bank robber defeated:
The FBI
Municipal police dept.
County police dept.
State police dept.
The bank's employees.
The bank's private security company.

Of course, you don't have to "defeat" all those agencies to walk in a bank branch and say you have a gun, please fill this bag w/ money.

Exactly, every crime defeats an army of crime fighters. Why can't all of Israel stop a few suicide bombers? CTers must think the government is omnipotent.

[geggy]

All I'm asking you to do is to think like a terrorist. Pretend you're osama and the major part of planning an attack such as 9/11, especially 9/11, is to map out strategies in bypassing defense and security, let alone the US spending an average of 300 million a year on it, what odds would you think you have in succeeding?

[Bell]

Said before by wiser men than me:

The security agencies have to be right every time. The terrorists only have to be right ones.

[Soapy Sam]

geggy- You calculated 100 million to one.

Can you show how you arrived at this figure?

[DarkMagician]

Said before by wiser men than me:

The security agencies have to be right every time. The terrorists only have to be right once.
MY SPILLMING BEE WON ME A SCHLARSHIP!

[Dog Town]

Said before by wiser men than me:

The security agencies have to be right every time. The terrorists only have to be right ones.

By another little Ol' terrorist group, know as the I.R.A.!

[David Wong]

All I'm asking you to do is to think like a terrorist. Pretend you're osama and the major part of planning an attack such as 9/11, especially 9/11, is to map out strategies in bypassing defense and security, let alone the US spending an average of 300 million a year on it, what odds would you think you have in succeeding?

Think like a terrorist. You have an infinite advantage. The Americans have to try to protect every crack and opening.

You just have to find one.

So, the airliners. America hadn't had a hijacking in 20 years. The Air Marshall program had been gutted (only a couple dozen agents in the whole program in 2001). Security was run by minimum wage kids.

You experiment, do some dry runs. See what kind of weapon you can sneak on board. Read up on what the policy is when people try to take over a plane (hint: it's to do whatever they want and not to resist in any way).


If they had looked into it and the hijacking thing seemed to hard, fine. Let's look into driving a truck full of explosives into the Sears Tower. Are there barricades around the building? Is it reinforced at the base? An internet search will tell you.

And if that seems to hard, you just find something else. You keep looking for wherever security is lax. What's security like at the resevoirs? Could the water be poisoned?

And on and on. You just poke and prod until you find where they're weak. And then you strike. You have forever to plan.

[Bell]

MY SPILLMING BEE WON ME A SCHLARSHIP!

Yeah, thank you DarkMagician. As you can read under my avatar, I'm from the Netherlands, from which you could conclude English is not my native language. Got any remarks that matter? Jeez...

[Foolmewunz]

Exactly, every crime defeats an army of crime fighters. Why can't all of Israel stop a few suicide bombers? CTers must think the government is omnipotent.

This is part of Gumboot's view of why CT is so popular with certain elements. They do want to believe the US is omnipotent, and that they can sleep safely. The only way to foster this belief is to say that no outsiders could've possibly done this, because we're too powerful and smart. Thus, it HAD TO BE an inside job. Only our own military and resources are strong enough to beat our own military and resources, after all. Irresistible force and immovable object, and all that.

[DarkMagician]

Yeah, thank you DarkMagician. As you can read under my avatar, I'm from the Netherlands, from which you could conclude English is not my native language. Got any remarks that matter? Jeez...

Okay, I feel like an ass now. Sorry 'bout that. I was just trying to be funny. I meant no malice with that post.

[stateofgrace]

Well lets look at it another way.

What are the odds of teams of demolition experts planting explosives inside not one, not two but three buildings before 911 and not being noticed?
Then add the odds of a plane flying at high speed into a tower and missing pre planted explosives.
Then add the odds of a second plane doing it.
Then add the odds of both sets of pre planted explosives still being in working order, all primers and detonators left unaffected.
Then add the odds of them surviving the fires.
Then add the odds of them both working perfectly.
Then add the odds of WTC7 still standing after a 500,000 tons structure collapsed beside it.
Then add the odds of the pre planted explosives inside WTC 7 not being damaged.
Then add the odds of them surviving fires for some six hours
Then add the odds of the firemen not noticing them
Then add the odds of them working perfectly.
Then add the odds of somebody researching all the passengers onboard flight 93 ensuring perfect fake calls were made to their relatives
Then add the odds of somebody shooting down Flight 93 and everybody involved denying it
Then add the odds of nobody noticing a missile being fired at the Pentagon in broad day light, as Flight 77 flew over it.
Then add the odds of this missile hitting a number of lamp posts on the way.
Then add the odds of every witness saying they saw a large fixed wing aircraft and not a missile.
Then add the odds of fooling all the aircraft investigators
Then add the odds of all the forensic scientists being fooling
Then add the odds of over 200 independent experts employed by NIST to investigate the Towers being fooled or bribed
Then add the odds of the 911 commission being totally corrupt and covering it all up.

I know I have missed a lot but could somebody actually come up with odds of this conspiracy working or does it simply go off the scale?

Finally what are the odds of somebody aurthorising this?

[Bell]

Okay, I feel like an ass now. Sorry 'bout that. I was just trying to be funny. I meant no malice with that post.

Ah, okay. You know, since I've seen JREF members trip over bad spelling before, I assumed you did as well.

Could have used one of those --> ;)

No bad feelings :)

ETA: Sorry for the outburst.

[defaultdotxbe]

All I'm asking you to do is to think like a terrorist. Pretend you're osama and the major part of planning an attack such as 9/11, especially 9/11, is to map out strategies in bypassing defense and security, let alone the US spending an average of 300 million a year on it, what odds would you think you have in succeeding?
well obviously hijacking planes is nothing new to terrorists, and after that its pretty much downhill

[Anti-sophist]

What are the odds that the lottery numbers last week were 6-37-41-43-45-47? (florida, btw.. in case you might have won). They are pretty bad.. like 1 in 22 million, I think... since a 1:22Million event occured, does that mean it's a conspiracy?

I forget the name of the fallacy, but it is one. Looking at things that did happen, and then asking the odds. You fail to account for all the other attempts that didn't happen and were foiled.

Furthermore, you grossly overestimate the difficulty in commit a terrorist attack.

[T.A.M.]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS

I'd say 100 million to 1.


Geggy. If all of these organizations were present at all points in the hijacking/crash plot, and aware something like this was going to happen, and were waiting for it, than yes I think your odds are correct.

I think David Wong did a good job on any other comment I would make...so what he said.
:)
TAM

[T.A.M.]

What are the odds that the lottery numbers last week were 6-37-41-43-45-47?

I forget the name of the fallacy, but it is one. Looking at things that did happen, and then asking the odds. You fail to account for all the other attempts that didn't happen and were foiled.

Furthermore, you grossly overestimate the difficulty in commit a terrorist attack.

yes, tell the dinosaurs there is no way that an asteroid/meteorite hit the earth and caused their extinction, the odds had to be 100 Million to 1...

Oh wait, they are already extinct...a meteorite/asteroid I believe.

:)
TAM

[defaultdotxbe]

I forget the name of the fallacy, but it is one. Looking at things that did happen, and then asking the odds. You fail to account for all the other attempts that didn't happen and were foiled.
texas sharpshooter i believe, but i could be wrong

[Parsman]

What are the odds that, in a society like the USA with a very active and inquisitive media that the BIGGEST story in the world, a government pre-planned and carried out the assassination of 3,000 of its own civilians, and this was exposed not by the print or television media but by a few teenagers on the internet?

[Blackwell]

Hey Geggy,

What would you have put Mathias Rust's odds at, on evading Soviet Air Defence, the KGB, Moscow police, and the Soviet army?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust

[TheGrunion]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS

I'd say 100 million to 1.

I don't agree with your posted odds, but putting that aside:

An average human ejaculate contains about 180 million sperm.

http://www2.oakland.edu/biology/lindemann/spermfacts.htm

The majority of us has already beaten those odds at least once.

[Dog Town]

The majority of us has already beaten those odds at least once.

Ahh... the Trojan conspiracy!

[steve s]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?


The only "defense system" they had to beat was airport security. And how did all previous hijackers throughout history manage to get past this defense system? The difference on 9/11 was that once the hijackers had control of the plane, rather than just demand ransom, they decided to crash the planes into some buildings. What were the odds of that succeeding? Pretty damn good.

Steve S.

[Dog Town]

The only "defense system" they had to beat was airport security. And how did all previous hijackers throughout history manage to get past this defense system? The difference on 9/11 was that once the hijackers had control of the plane, rather than just demand ransom, they decided to crash the planes into some buildings. What were the odds of that succeeding? Pretty damn good.

Steve S.

Good one, me thinks it is lost, on the hindsight conspiracy theorizers!

[steve s]

Good one, me thinks it is lost, on the hindsight conspiracy theorizers!

I think that most of the Loosers are too young to remember the hijackings that took place in the '70s and '80s. They seem to think hijackings had never happened prior to 9/11.

Steve S.

[Dog Town]

I think that most of the Loosers are too young to remember the hijackings that took place in the '70s and '80s. They seem to think hijackings had never happened prior to 9/11.

Steve S.

What's f' ed-up about that is... it still happens! Happened the other day!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/10/04/turkey.hijack.pope.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest

[TruthSeeker1234]

Geggy -

Elias Davidsson has given a paper using the approach you suggest. He assigns probabilities to various aspects of 9/11 and computes the resulting odds.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV504A.html

Perhaps you will find it interesting.

[steve s]

Geggy -

Elias Davidsson has given a paper using the approach you suggest. He assigns probabilities to various aspects of 9/11 and computes the resulting odds.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV504A.html

Perhaps you will find it interesting.

And it's as reliable as the creationists trying to calculate the odds of life evolving. Totally worthless.

Steve S.

[defaultdotxbe]

Geggy -

Elias Davidsson has given a paper using the approach you suggest. He assigns probabilities to various aspects of 9/11 and computes the resulting odds.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV504A.html

Perhaps you will find it interesting.
did you know the odds of any of use being born are 1:180,000,000^2^n where n is the number of generations since the dawn of man

suffice it to say the probability of any of us existing is basically 0, so all this conspiracy talk is pointless, the conspirators dont exist, you dont exist, i dont exist, we are all figments of some greater beings active imagination

[Horatius]

Geggy -

Elias Davidsson has given a paper using the approach you suggest. He assigns probabilities to various aspects of 9/11 and computes the resulting odds.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV504A.html

Perhaps you will find it interesting.

Yeah, but with perfect hindsight, you could construct a list such as this to prove that any event is so unlikely as to be impossible. I could prove that there's no way I can be living in the house I am now, if I wanted to. And yet, I mowed the lawn this week.

Anyone can pull "probablities" out of their a$$ if they want to, it doesn't "prove" anything.

[CurtC]

Pretend you're osama and the major part of planning an attack such as 9/11, especially 9/11, is to map out strategies in bypassing defense and security
I'll tell you one thing - I sure wouldn't steal a Russian bomber and fly from Asia to the US, and I wouldn't buy a fleet of tanks and try to attack US forces in the Middle East, 'cause that $300 billion a year is spent defending against that kind of stuff.

[dirtywick]

Geggy, I know it's been a while since 9/11 and everyone's gotten pretty comfortable with that, but do you remember what it was like before that? I remeber at airports you could walk in and go to a terminal, you didn't even need a ticket. Now, of course, you need an ID and a ticket and to be searched, you can't even send off family members. There was no security at all then. You used to be able to bring knives that were smaller than the palm of your hand, scissors, nail clippers, lighters, etc. Now you can't bring your toothpaste apparently. You used to be able to check your bags and they might do a random search, now they X-ray everything you own and run it through metal detectors.

[Piggy]

Once the hijackers realized that SOP for airlines (at that time) was to cede the plane to the hijackers and allow them to fly to their destination, and once they understood that they could smuggle boxcutters onto the planes and easily take hostages and work their way into the cockpit, the odds were extremely high in their favor.

It ain't hard to get around the dogs once you figure out where they're not at.

[Dog Town]

Geggy, I know it's been a while since 9/11 and everyone's gotten pretty comfortable with that, but do you remember what it was like before that? I remeber at airports you could walk in and go to a terminal, you didn't even need a ticket. Now, of course, you need an ID and a ticket and to be searched, you can't even send off family members.

Hell as a non-passenger you could even walk on planes!
In the early 80's I used to fly free from PHX to Dallas, by just staying on a non-sold out southwest flight, that I only bought from LA to PHX.
I knew the system in highschool!

[Triterope]

This sort of analysis is the equivalent of of dealing yourself a five-card poker hand, and then saying "the odds against getting that exact hand were 2,596,959 to 1!" It's technically true, but completely meaningless. The steps taken were going to lead to SOME result.

This is all a fallacy. You can take any event, and work backwards to determine incredible odds against it happening.

[Spindrift]

Never mind a box cutter.

I once got on board with a knife that I had in my computer bag and it went through the x-ray machine! It was a pretty good sized Buck knife and I didn't realize it until I got to where I was going. Made sure I packed it in my checked bag on that way back.

If I could do it by accident, could it be that difficult to do it on purpose?

[shuize]

Geggy, I know it's been a while since 9/11 and everyone's gotten pretty comfortable with that, but do you remember what it was like before that? I remeber at airports you could walk in and go to a terminal, you didn't even need a ticket. Now, of course, you need an ID and a ticket and to be searched, you can't even send off family members. There was no security at all then. You used to be able to bring knives that were smaller than the palm of your hand, scissors, nail clippers, lighters, etc. Now you can't bring your toothpaste apparently. You used to be able to check your bags and they might do a random search, now they X-ray everything you own and run it through metal detectors.

I remember about a year before 9/11 my wife and I were at Hartsfield International Airport in Atlanta heading out one of the less-used exits. As we approached, a number of security staff ran past us at full sprint. What was the problem? The only two security screeners at that location were literally rolling around on the floor in the middle of a knock-down-drag-out fight. How long they left the post unguarded is anyone's guess.

ETA: That's not to say Al Queda waited for just such a moment to smuggle weapons on the plane as much as it is to point out the quality of security that existed pre-911.

[TruthSeeker1234]

This sort of analysis is the equivalent of of dealing yourself a five-card poker hand, and then saying "the odds against getting that exact hand were 2,596,959 to 1!" It's technically true, but completely meaningless. The steps taken were going to lead to SOME result.

This is all a fallacy. You can take any event, and work backwards to determine incredible odds against it happening.

Well yes and no. If you specify in advance the exact hand you're aiming for, and get it, then the odds are astronomical. If you wait until after the fact, then "specify" the hand you just dealt, indeed the probability of success is 1.

The question with 9/11 then, is whether there is something equivalent to "specify in advance". The answer is yes there is.

For example, if we knew that FEMA ran an average of one terror drill every three years for 27 years prior to 9/11, then we might be able to assign some reasonable probability to the occurence of tripod II coinciding with 9/11. If they ran terror drills every month, it would be a different probability.

If FEMA had in the past always chosen different locations for terror drills, and this time just happened to pick lower Manhattan, we could estimate some probability that this occured by chance. If FEMA had done many terror drills in lower Manhattan before, we would assign a higher probability that they would choose it again.

This is not as cut-and-dry as calculating odds of dice throws or card flips, but nor is it a totally unreasonable approach.

[Gravy]

That's 253, geggy.

[Pardalis]

That's 253, geggy.

What are the odds of geggy posting 253 times and being wrong 253 times?

[chacal]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS

I'd say 100 million to 1.

Hey geggy what were the ods for this:

September 6th 1970: Dawson's Field hijackings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawson%27s_Field_hijackings), PFLP members attempt to hijack simultaneously four aircraft bound for New York City. They succeed on three and force the planes to fly to the Jordanian desert, where the hijackers blow up the aircraft after releasing most of the hostages.

Now, how did they defeat all defence systems, government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies? Following your logic the ods are 100 million to 1. So you now must conclude that the Dawson's Field hijackings were a conspiracy too?

[Pardalis]

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS


geggy, what are the odds of all the people involved not saying anything if all of these agencies were "in on it"?

[apathoid]

What are the odds of geggy posting 253 times and being wrong 253 times?

64,009:1

Way to beat the odds Geggy!

[Piggy]

Well yes and no. If you specify in advance the exact hand you're aiming for, and get it, then the odds are astronomical. If you wait until after the fact, then "specify" the hand you just dealt, indeed the probability of success is 1.

The question with 9/11 then, is whether there is something equivalent to "specify in advance". The answer is yes there is.

For example, if we knew that FEMA ran an average of one terror drill every three years for 27 years prior to 9/11, then we might be able to assign some reasonable probability to the occurence of tripod II coinciding with 9/11. If they ran terror drills every month, it would be a different probability.

If FEMA had in the past always chosen different locations for terror drills, and this time just happened to pick lower Manhattan, we could estimate some probability that this occured by chance. If FEMA had done many terror drills in lower Manhattan before, we would assign a higher probability that they would choose it again.

This is not as cut-and-dry as calculating odds of dice throws or card flips, but nor is it a totally unreasonable approach.

So where does that leave the question in the OP?

The chances are 100%, because it happened.

Of course, a lot of the references in the OP are irrelevant, even if we were calculating the odds. I mean... NORAD?! If I wanted to smuggle a box-cutter onto a plane and hijack it in 1990, then do a u-ie and smash into a nearby building, NORAD would not be on my list of concerns.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

So where does that leave the question in the OP?

The chances are 100%, because it happened.

Of course, a lot of the references in the OP are irrelevant, even if we were calculating the odds. I mean... NORAD?! If I wanted to smuggle a box-cutter onto a plane and hijack it in 1990, then do a u-ie and smash into a nearby building, NORAD would not be on my list of concerns.

It's also making the assumption that the terrorists thought all four hijackings would succeed. They may well have been attempting four and hoping/assuming one would succeed.

[Oliver]

All I'm asking you to do is to think like a terrorist. Pretend you're osama and the major part of planning an attack such as 9/11, especially 9/11, is to map out strategies in bypassing defense and security, let alone the US spending an average of 300 million a year on it, what odds would you think you have in succeeding?

What´s so implausibly to the attacks? As far i know the USA didn´t see or didn´t realize any possible attacks on their soil - that´s why the security efforts were not that high. We also know that there were cells of Al-Q. in the USA who checked the security-precautions before the attacks and they also checked possible Targets - like the WTC-film they made some years before the attacks...

What´s your question about that?

[eeyore1954]

The only "defense system" they had to beat was airport security. And how did all previous hijackers throughout history manage to get past this defense system? The difference on 9/11 was that once the hijackers had control of the plane, rather than just demand ransom, they decided to crash the planes into some buildings. What were the odds of that succeeding? Pretty damn good.

Steve S.

I agree wholeheartedly. The odds weren't very high it wasn't hard too get through airport security before 9/11. I always carried a lot of stuff with me (camera bag, diaper bag , laptop etc) and never had any bag looked into. The first two planes hit within a few minutes of each other before anyone had a clue of what the real plan was. This was followed by a short period of confusion before the next plane hit. The fourth plane didn't make its target.

What were the odds of all the other succesfull hijackings. how often have you heard of one being stopped before 9/11. Have you ever heard of the pilot refusing to do the bidding of the hijackers (like JohnDoe claims he would have). There may have been a few but I don't know of them. Maybe if the last flight had made it to its destination then you would have some point. how quickly do you think a decision such as shooting down an airliner full of passengers could have been reached.

I hate to say it but the only the only thing that surprises me is that there hasn't been another terrorist attack in the US not that 9/11 was succesful.

[MRC_Hans]

Geggy -

Elias Davidsson has given a paper using the approach you suggest. He assigns probabilities to various aspects of 9/11 and computes the resulting odds.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV504A.html

Perhaps you will find it interesting.Jeesh, that paper is so silly I don't know where to begin. Well, TS, I'll give you an offer: Choose the three arguments that are, in your opinion, the best from that paper, and I'll shred those for you.

Hans

[shuize]

I hate to say it but the only the only thing that surprises me is that there hasn't been another terrorist attack in the US not that 9/11 was succesful.
No kidding. I remember a few weeks after 9.11 I put myself in Al Queda's shoes and tried to imagine other possible ways a group of dedicated suicide terrorists could strike again. I need not post the results online, but the relative simplicity of my ideas worried me.

[milesalpha]

Hmmm this could be fun from a historical sense, we could start listing all the longshots that hit.

My favorite. What are the odds that a vastly superior naval force (in both numbers and quality) would be crushed by a far smaller force that included a ship held together with rubber bands and glue? What are the chances that the smaller force would attack at the exact time when the superior force was at its most vulnerable? What are the chances that the aircraft protecting the larger force would be pulled away by the disjointed low level attacks while the high level attacks came in untouched?

I could go on for some time, but I guess in my world the longshot hit at Midway, while in Geggy's world there is a conspiracy out there somewhere.

[Donal]

For example, if we knew that FEMA ran an average of one terror drill every three years for 27 years prior to 9/11, then we might be able to assign some reasonable probability to the occurence of tripod II coinciding with 9/11. If they ran terror drills every month, it would be a different probability.

If FEMA had in the past always chosen different locations for terror drills, and this time just happened to pick lower Manhattan, we could estimate some probability that this occured by chance. If FEMA had done many terror drills in lower Manhattan before, we would assign a higher probability that they would choose it again.


Just out of curiousity, did FEMA keeps these drills secret, or were they public knowledge?

And, geggy, as was pointed out to you on I-Mockery, most of those defenses were pointed outward. NORAD and the DoD have nothing to do with airport screening.

[eeyore1954]

The question with 9/11 then, is whether there is something equivalent to "specify in advance". The answer is yes there is.

For example, if we knew that FEMA ran an average of one terror drill every three years for 27 years prior to 9/11, then we might be able to assign some reasonable probability to the occurence of tripod II coinciding with 9/11. If they ran terror drills every month, it would be a different probability.

If FEMA had in the past always chosen different locations for terror drills, and this time just happened to pick lower Manhattan, we could estimate some probability that this occured by chance. If FEMA had done many terror drills in lower Manhattan before, we would assign a higher probability that they would choose it again.

This is not as cut-and-dry as calculating odds of dice throws or card flips, but nor is it a totally unreasonable approach.

if it was an inside job why would FEMA have chosen that day to run a drill. How does that imply foreknowledge. if anything I would think the argument is stronger that they would have chosen a different day to not draw suspicion . Explain how you think having that drill implies they knew. What was to be gained by it?



Also are you going to answer this comment from Hans? Did you read the paper? and really believe it?

Jeesh, that paper is so silly I don't know where to begin. Well, TS, I'll give you an offer: Choose the three arguments that are, in your opinion, the best from that paper, and I'll shred those for you.

Hans

[Loss Leader]

NSA FBI DIA CIA NIC DOD NORAD USAF NEADS FAA INS DEA CT DS

How are NORAD and the USAF different? The USAF would have been the interdiction arm of NORAD if, you know, NORAD's mission had been in any way compatable with intercepting hijacked flights originating within the borders of the US.

What the hell was the FAA supposed to do that it didn't?

And where exactly does the Drug Enforcement Agency fit in? I mean, for that matter the terrorists also slipped past the FDA and the Department of Agriculture.

I don't know what CT and DS stand for.

[Donal]

Death Star. The terrorists snuck past the Galactic Empire.

[Hellbound]

CT=Contact Team. They're the ones who are coordinating all of our technological advances gained fromt eh aliens.

[Ersby]

Geggy? Truthseeker?

Well lets look at it another way.

What are the odds of teams of demolition experts planting explosives inside not one, not two but three buildings before 911 and not being noticed?
Then add the odds of a plane flying at high speed into a tower and missing pre planted explosives.
Then add the odds of a second plane doing it.
Then add the odds of both sets of pre planted explosives still being in working order, all primers and detonators left unaffected.
Then add the odds of them surviving the fires.
Then add the odds of them both working perfectly.
Then add the odds of WTC7 still standing after a 500,000 tons structure collapsed beside it.
Then add the odds of the pre planted explosives inside WTC 7 not being damaged.
Then add the odds of them surviving fires for some six hours
Then add the odds of the firemen not noticing them
Then add the odds of them working perfectly.
Then add the odds of somebody researching all the passengers onboard flight 93 ensuring perfect fake calls were made to their relatives
Then add the odds of somebody shooting down Flight 93 and everybody involved denying it
Then add the odds of nobody noticing a missile being fired at the Pentagon in broad day light, as Flight 77 flew over it.
Then add the odds of this missile hitting a number of lamp posts on the way.
Then add the odds of every witness saying they saw a large fixed wing aircraft and not a missile.
Then add the odds of fooling all the aircraft investigators
Then add the odds of all the forensic scientists being fooling
Then add the odds of over 200 independent experts employed by NIST to investigate the Towers being fooled or bribed
Then add the odds of the 911 commission being totally corrupt and covering it all up.

I know I have missed a lot but could somebody actually come up with odds of this conspiracy working or does it simply go off the scale?

Finally what are the odds of somebody aurthorising this?

[Hellbound]

Geggy? Truthseeker?

Oh, sure. USe facts and logic.

Facts and logic can prove anything that's even remotely true.

:D

[TruthSeeker1234]

if it was an inside job why would FEMA have chosen that day to run a drill. How does that imply foreknowledge. if anything I would think the argument is stronger that they would have chosen a different day to not draw suspicion . Explain how you think having that drill implies they knew. What was to be gained by it?

Hundreds of FEMA and OEM agents had arrived in lower Manhattan on Monday night, 9/10/01, supposedly to take place in a bio-terror drill at the pier right next to WTC. On Tuesday morning, 9/11/01, they were quickly deployed into action at ground zero, keeping civilians away from the area, confiscating cameras, etc.

If I were planning an inside job like this, I too would have security forces in place ready to commandeer the situation. They had to prevent the collection of evidence as much as possible while the scene was scrubbed. That is "what was to be gained by it".

[geggy]

Before I go on, the earliest indication that al-qaeda terrorists were plotting to use planes as weapons and crash it into buildings was in 1995...

Project Bonjinka (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Bojinka)

Much of the info was classified by the us govt

[geggy]

Btw thanks T.S. for posting the article. Am only done reading half of it. Interesting so far

[DavidJames]

If I were planning an inside job like this, I too would have security forces in place ready to commandeer the situation. They had to prevent the collection of evidence as much as possible while the scene was scrubbed. That is "what was to be gained by it".and your evidence that anything like this actually happened is...

[Piggy]

Now that their "what are the odds" strategy has been totally trashed, I see the CT'ers are dredging up their usual strategy of changing the subject.

Herring! Get your herring! Nice and red like you like 'em!

[T.A.M.]

You know if the only reference you have is Wikipedia, than you might as well send me to "reading rainbow". Jeez...

TAM

[Gravy]

Hundreds of FEMA and OEM agents had arrived in lower Manhattan on Monday night, 9/10/01
Prove it.

[Shrinker]

Hundreds of FEMA and OEM agents had arrived in lower Manhattan on Monday night, 9/10/01, supposedly to take place in a bio-terror drill at the pier right next to WTC. On Tuesday morning, 9/11/01, they were quickly deployed into action at ground zero, keeping civilians away from the area, confiscating cameras, etc.

If I were planning an inside job like this, I too would have security forces in place ready to commandeer the situation. They had to prevent the collection of evidence as much as possible while the scene was scrubbed. That is "what was to be gained by it".

Wouldn't it have been easier just to have someone shout 'asbestos!'. No, for some reason 'they' didn't want to use the perfect excuse to clear the area, they preferred to dupe a busload of extras into the scene, and hope they'd do as expected. Or were all those agents in on it too?

[twinstead]

Hmm. hundreds of FEMA and OEM agents had arrived in lower Manhattan on Monday night, 9/10/01, huh?

I'd be curious to see the evidence on that one myself.

[TruthSeeker1234]

What are the odds of teams of demolition experts planting explosives inside not one, not two but three buildings before 911 and not being noticed?

50,000 people in and out of each twin tower per day. 100 extra security or maintenence workers could blend in easily. Most of the work was done in elevator shafts. Many people did notice odd things like evacuations, and power downs, and loud construction noises coming from empty offices, of which there were many.

So they were "noticed".

Then add the odds of a plane flying at high speed into a tower and missing pre planted explosives.

False premise. It looks like explosives did go off.

Then add the odds of a second plane doing it.

Ditto.


Then add the odds of both sets of pre planted explosives still being in working order, all primers and detonators left unaffected.

Those buildings were disintegrated, as it turned out. A few duds wouldn't have made any difference.

Then add the odds of them surviving the fires.

Explosives can be firepoofed.

Then add the odds of them both working perfectly.

They don't have to work "perfectly", the demolitions were not "perfect".

Then add the odds of WTC7 still standing after a 500,000 tons structure collapsed beside it.

WTC7 was not beside twin towers, it was over 300 feet away, across the street, with a building in between. The closer buildings suffered much worse damage, were smaller to begine with, yet stood.


Then add the odds of the pre planted explosives inside WTC 7 not being damaged.

Given the circumstances, I'd day those odds were about 9,999,999/1,000,000

Then add the odds of them surviving fires for some six hours

Fireproofing

Then add the odds of the firemen not noticing them

Firefighters? in WTC7??

Then add the odds of them working perfectly.

see above.

Then add the odds of somebody researching all the passengers onboard flight 93 ensuring perfect fake calls were made to their relatives

False premise. I certainly don't endorse fake phone call theories.

Then add the odds of somebody shooting down Flight 93 and everybody involved denying it

Military guys are sworn to follow orders. I'd say 9,999/10,000


Then add the odds of nobody noticing a missile being fired at the Pentagon in broad day light, as Flight 77 flew over it.

False premise, people did notice. We don't know what happened at the Pentagon. Some people "noticed" a missile. Others noticed a global hawk. Others "noticed" a 757. Others didn't notice anything. Discrediting eyewitness testimony is part of the op.


Then add the odds of this missile hitting a number of lamp posts on the way.

False premise. We don't know what happened. Lamp posts can be knocked over by a guy with a wrench.

Then add the odds of every witness saying they saw a large fixed wing aircraft and not a missile.

Every witness? False premise.

Then add the odds of fooling all the aircraft investigators

NTSB is required to investigate all air crashes. Where are the reports in this case? Excellent point. THe odds of fooling all the NTSB guys are slim, hence no investigations.

Then add the odds of all the forensic scientists being fooling

False premise. Who says they were "fooled"? Look at the fire temp data from NIST. They don't show any hot steel from the fires. THe super hot fire temps come from the computer model. The truth movement doesn't suggest they were "fooled", we suggest they are lying.

Then add the odds of over 200 independent experts employed by NIST to investigate the Towers being fooled or bribed

Fooled - 1/100,000,000,000,000,000

Bribed - 1

Then add the odds of the 911 commission being totally corrupt and covering it all up.

1 - Consider Zelikow, a man whose stated area of expertise is the creation of myth.

I know I have missed a lot but could somebody actually come up with odds of this conspiracy working or does it simply go off the scale?

Consider other conspiracies, such as operation ajax, which were successful and kept secret for decades. Not off the scale.

Finally what are the odds of somebody aurthorising this?

Given the long, long history of blood thirsty, greedy tyrants who have lusted after global domination, sadly, the odds are

Absolute Certainty.

[T.A.M.]

yes evidence from a credible source, not PRISONPLANET, or INFOWARS, or AFP...etc.

TAM

[twinstead]

Good god truthydude you call THAT a rebuttal?

[T.A.M.]

TS:

All your rebuttal shows is the level of your paranoia EOS.

TAM

[Dog Town]

Many people did notice odd things like evacuations, and power downs, and loud construction noises coming from empty offices,

Prove that please, and not with the fictional Scott Forbes! Willie R. is your other one, I'm bett'en!

Thanx,
DT

[twinstead]

Those buildings were disintegrated, as it turned out. A few duds wouldn't have made any difference.

A FEW duds? LOL

[twinstead]

Fooled - 1/100,000,000,000,000,000

Bribed - 1



Of course they were bribed. They HAD to have been for your theory to work, therefore it is a fact, right?

Your theory has the ability to bob and weave like the best boxer. Since you don't feel you have to substantiate anything, you can alter history to fit your theory at will.

Can't fool somebody? Well that means they had to have been bribed.

[Stellafane]

...of osama bin laden and the 19 hijackers defeating the US's defense system, including the government insiders, military departments and intelligence and security agencies...?

To name a few...
NSA
FBI
DIA
CIA
NIC
DOD
NORAD
USAF
NEADS
FAA
INS
DEA
CT
DS

I'd say 100 million to 1.

Problem is, they didn't have to beat all these guys. They just had to beat my semi-senile Uncle Frankie and his cohorts working in what passed for airport "security" back in those days.

[Brainache]

So you are asserting that every structural engineer who studied the WTC collapse was bribed. How much? Not one of them refused. I would go on, but your premise is just too stupid.

[Horatius]

So, BS, see what I mean about pulling probabilities out of your a$$? Every probability you don't like is dismissed as one in a million or so, but if it's one you like, then it's 9,999/10,000 time. Do you honestly think these odds are anywhere close to reality? If you do, you're totally whacked in the head, if you don't, then why do you expect any of us to buy them?

Why don't you try honestly evaluating some probabilities? It still wouldn't prove a thing, but we might almost start to respect you.

[TK0001]

False premise. We don't know what happened. Lamp posts can be knocked over by a guy with a wrench.

...with roughly 2500 people in cars and trucks whizzing by, witnessing it, not thinking to inform the authorities that some guy is loosening the bolts of the lamp posts which may or may not fall into traffic when he gets done....

And I suppose this same fella had a REAL big hammer to make it look like the lamp posts were struck by a plane.

OOOH!! Maybe the Flash is real!!! And maybe he carried the Hulk (also real) on his back while he zoomed to each lamp post, loosened the bolts, and toppled them over!! And when everyone was distracted by the big boom at the Pentagon, Hulk smashed up the posts!!!

I can see why you claim to be a seeker of truth. This is some brilliant analysis right here. I would've never thought of it if I weren't led down the path by someone who tirelessly pursues the truth. Thanks, man.

[R.Mackey]

Then add the odds of over 200 independent experts employed by NIST to investigate the Towers being fooled or bribed
Fooled - 1/100,000,000,000,000,000

Bribed - 1

Charlatan, you have just besmirched an entire profession. Not cool.

I strongly suggest you back that up with some evidence. You want to play the "odds?" By that logic, it is far far more likely that you have been bribed by a foreign power hostile to the United States.

I don't believe that either, I think you're just blowing smoke and have an utter disregard for other human beings, notably professional scientists. Possibly out of jealousy.

[Deus Ex Machina]

All I'm asking you to do is to think like a terrorist. Pretend you're osama and the major part of planning an attack such as 9/11, especially 9/11, is to map out strategies in bypassing defense and security, let alone the US spending an average of 300 million a year on it, what odds would you think you have in succeeding?

Pretty good ones depending on the level of risk you are willing to assume.

YOU are the one who needs to "think like a terrorist".

The downside for Al Qaeda was minimal - if the US discovered the plan and arrested all 19 of the terrorists then AQ was out 19 drones and a couple of hundred thousand dollars. The only risk was possible exposure of their support networks via interrogation of the arrested.

From there, from the terrorist view it's all "gain". the purpose of terror (to quote our good friend Lenin) is terror. Anything in this operation which increased the perception of threat was a "gain". Even if they had not succeeded in hitting the Towers deliberately crashing the airliners would have been horrifying to most people.

The downside was minimal, the upside in their terms was huge.

How did you come up with your 100 million to one figure? It doesn't appear to be based on anything except your own preconceptions and misunderstandings.

[Gravy]

50,000 people in and out of each twin tower per day. 100 extra security or maintenence workers could blend in easily. Most of the work was done in elevator shafts. Many people did notice odd things like evacuations, and power downs, and loud construction noises coming from empty offices, of which there were many.

So they were "noticed".

False premise. It looks like explosives did go off.

Ditto.

Those buildings were disintegrated, as it turned out. A few duds wouldn't have made any difference.

Explosives can be firepoofed.

They don't have to work "perfectly", the demolitions were not "perfect".

WTC7 was not beside twin towers, it was over 300 feet away, across the street, with a building in between. The closer buildings suffered much worse damage, were smaller to begine with, yet stood.

Given the circumstances, I'd day those odds were about 9,999,999/1,000,000

Fireproofing

Firefighters? in WTC7??

see above.

False premise. I certainly don't endorse fake phone call theories.

Military guys are sworn to follow orders. I'd say 9,999/10,000

False premise, people did notice. We don't know what happened at the Pentagon. Some people "noticed" a missile. Others noticed a global hawk. Others "noticed" a 757. Others didn't notice anything. Discrediting eyewitness testimony is part of the op.

False premise. We don't know what happened. Lamp posts can be knocked over by a guy with a wrench.

Every witness? False premise.

NTSB is required to investigate all air crashes. Where are the reports in this case? Excellent point. THe odds of fooling all the NTSB guys are slim, hence no investigations.

False premise. Who says they were "fooled"? Look at the fire temp data from NIST. They don't show any hot steel from the fires. THe super hot fire temps come from the computer model. The truth movement doesn't suggest they were "fooled", we suggest they are lying.

Fooled - 1/100,000,000,000,000,000

Bribed - 1

1 - Consider Zelikow, a man whose stated area of expertise is the creation of myth.

Consider other conspiracies, such as operation ajax, which were successful and kept secret for decades. Not off the scale.

Given the long, long history of blood thirsty, greedy tyrants who have lusted after global domination, sadly, the odds are

Absolute Certainty.
Well, that's the dumbest post I've seen on these forums. Odds that TS1234 will learn an actual fact about 9/11 in the next 6 months? Vanishingly small.

How about those hundreds of FEMA and OEM agents in NYC on 9/10? Let's see your evidence for that.
:dl:

[Deus Ex Machina]

50,000 people in and out of each twin tower per day. 100 extra security or maintenence workers could blend in easily. Most of the work was done in elevator shafts. Many people did notice odd things like evacuations, and power downs, and loud construction noises coming from empty offices, of which there were many.

So they were "noticed".


Oh my god - you are an idiot!! That explains your postings!

Holy crap - when I started reading this thread I thought you may have a brain cell or two to rub together but apparently not.

You do realize, of course, that when that streetlight turns red in front of you at the intersection it has nothing to do with chance or timers but is because the "secret cabal" is tracking your every move and decided to piss you off?

You have, obviously, never worked in plant services in a high rise building. You certainly have never worked in construction or demo. How do I know this? because what you are writing is utter hogwash.

[Big Les]

My god, these CreTins just don't give up, do they? What utter, utter drivel. Come back when you have something vaguely approaching evidence. If you're going to argue "odds", what are the odds that the US gov could pull off what you claim AND get away with it? Agh, that point's been made to you already, along with plenty of others that you'll just ignore or see as proof that we're either in denial or in the pay of the Illuminati.

I don't think there have been enough "ad homs" in this thread, so I'm going to call you both "sad freaks" and leave it at that.

[geggy]

Fema and OEC, 9/10

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0406/S00031.htm

[Hellbound]

Fema and OEC, 9/10

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0406/S00031.htm

Credible source, geggy.

Credible.

Here, you can go to www.dictionary.com to find out it's meaning...I know you don't understand what it means.

[Gravy]

Credible source, geggy.

Credible.

Here, you can go to www.dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com) to find out it's meaning...I know you don't understand what it means.
What Huntsman said, geggy. How many times do you need to be lectured about your sources?

[Loss Leader]

I'm still waiting for geggy to tell me what the hell the DEA was supposed to do to stop Al Qaida on 9/11. He took the time to list it in the OP, it would be nice if he could take the time to explain it.

[Bell]

So you are asserting that every structural engineer who studied the WTC collapse was bribed. How much? Not one of them refused. I would go on, but your premise is just too stupid.

If only the Jews informed me of 9/11 about 10 years before, I could have choosen to study structural engineering. Could have made me rich after 9/11.

[Alareth]

I'm still waiting for geggy to tell me what the hell the DEA was supposed to do to stop Al Qaida on 9/11. He took the time to list it in the OP, it would be nice if he could take the time to explain it.

What about the Salvation Army? Why didn't they do more? Or Goodwill? The Red Cross?

My god this is all spiraling out of control!!!!!

[Gravy]

I'm still waiting for geggy to tell me what the hell the DEA was supposed to do to stop Al Qaida on 9/11. He took the time to list it in the OP, it would be nice if he could take the time to explain it.
We all know that the DEA was deliberately distracted by attractive Isreali "art students." Therefore they could not...oh, wait.

[Hellbound]

Well, see if the DEA had given up this silly war on drugs, then the funds released could have been used for airport securoty. And the security guards would be more relaxed and alert because they could all smoke a big fattie right before shift, so they'd be more likely to catch the terrorists.

Am I getting close?

[fuelair]

Honestly, what do you think the odds are that the 911truth organization is itself a conspiracy orchestrated by elites?

I've never heard of elite idiots as a class, but I won't quibble the elite part.

[CptColumbo]

The eyewitness testimony, in the case of the Pentagon, is important but not the only piece of evidence of the way things actually happened. There is the evidence that a passenger jet was hijacked, the evidence that debris recovered at the site matches that plane, the Flight Data Recorder recovered at the site matches that plane, the DNA recovered at the scene matches almost all the passengers of the hijacked plane, and there are many eyewitnesses who say they saw a plane matching the description of the missing plane.

I would suggest, if you plan on using the eyewitnesses as the basis for your argument, look at the ratio of people who said they saw a 757 with AA markings to saw those who saw nothing. Then break it down into more categories.

Those who saw a 757 with AA markings.
Those who saw a plane with AA markings.
Those who saw a 757 passenger plane.
Those who saw a passenger plane.
Those who saw a 757.
Those who saw a commercial plane.
Those who saw a non-passenger plane.
Those who saw a cargo plane.
Those who saw a military plane.
Those who saw a plane.
Those who saw a missile.
Those who saw something.
Those who saw nothing.

I'd have to do some research, but I'm willing to bet most would fall near the top. I wouldn't discount the other possibilities, but with evidence backing up the eyewitnesses near the top I would assume that those near the bottom are mistaken. It was traveling at a high rate of speed and most humans cannot see things in "bullet time" (stopping the image and circling it as in The Matrix).

[fuelair]

Exactly, every crime defeats an army of crime fighters. Why can't all of Israel stop a few suicide bombers? CTers must think the government is omnipotent.

Sadly, many people do. Thus my use of the word idiots in a post above this.

[twinstead]

What seems to continue to escape many of these 'truth' seekers is that this is not a video game, or some kind of esoteric rhetorical exercise.

These are real people they are so cavalierly accusing of complicity to mass murder, on the slimmest of evidence.

[CptColumbo]

What seems to continue to escape many of these 'truth' seekers is that this is not a video game, or some kind of esoteric rhetorical exercise.

These are real people they are so cavalierly accusing of complicity to mass murder, on the slimmest of evidence.

They also think that life is like an episode of "Lost," where people involved in a "cover-up" or "conspiracy" want you to find out. So they leave clues that only the most observant of us can find (the Naudet's name being an anagram of the street they were on). If there was a conspiracy, especially one as complicated as the CTs involving 9/11 are, they would never leave any evidence or any obvious clues.

[Donal]

Fema and OEC, 9/10

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0406/S00031.htm

That article says FEMA claims they never sent and Urban search and rescue team in on 9/10. Granted, they go out of their way top put a devious spin on FEMA being in the biggest city on earth preparing to conduct a drill, but they fall short at that.

Still not reading your own "sources" I see.

[geggy]

Hey, blanco. :rolleyes:

The article says the equipments were already set up in a warehouse for Tripod drill that were going to take place on 9/12. Hundreds of fema, oec personals had arrived 9/10 and 9/11 as well as firemen and police recruits to attend the drill. So that pretty much contradicts fema's denial.

Only further to validate Kenney's "quips" about arriving in NYC on 9/10, there were also several emergency drills being performed within few miles of the pentagon that were scheduled to start before the impact in DC. Some of the drills included firemen responding to plane crashes and medic team performing a drill in case of a distaster. Both teams had already arrived the pentagon within minutes of the impact.

And...and...and...the CIA/FBI counter terrorism unit were stranded in california while performing a scheduled terror drill. Smart move by those who designed and scheduled these exercises to keep the CT unit away and prevent them from gathering evidence for further evaluation and improve their responses in the next attack. The evidence were quickly collected and disposed before they could access to them.

Only if you actually did some research like I told you

[TruthSeeker1234]

Prove it. [that FEMA arrived in lower Manhattan on Sept 10 supposedly for a bioterror drill called "Tripod II"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8288604829321343357

Start by watching Kenney. There is a Giuliani video as well, in which he talks about all the FEMA and OEM guys. I'll find it.

[Belz...]

50,000 people in and out of each twin tower per day. 100 extra security or maintenence workers could blend in easily.

Yes, and it would take them 50,000 years to complete the work.

So they were "noticed".

Only in one tower, bucko. What about the other one ?

False premise. It looks like explosives did go off.

"Looks like" are the key words.

Those buildings were disintegrated, as it turned out. A few duds wouldn't have made any difference.

You mean they were converted to energy ?

Explosives can be firepoofed.

Not against airliners.

They don't have to work "perfectly", the demolitions were not "perfect".

Nor were they demolitions.

WTC7 was not beside twin towers, it was over 300 feet away, across the street, with a building in between. The closer buildings suffered much worse damage, were smaller to begine with, yet stood.

First off, it was right across the street, and the WTC1 was a very high structure, as you might have noticed.

Second, just because something is closer doesn't mean it'll always take more damage. The universe is not as simple as you'd like.

Military guys are sworn to follow orders. I'd say 9,999/10,000

When the murder of the civilians they are sworn to protect is involved, I should hope not.

False premise, people did notice. We don't know what happened at the Pentagon. Some people "noticed" a missile. Others noticed a global hawk. Others "noticed" a 757. Others didn't notice anything. Discrediting eyewitness testimony is part of the op.

Of course, when you make 1 person saying it was a missile the same as 300 who say it was a plane, it all makes sense! :rolleyes:

False premise. We don't know what happened. Lamp posts can be knocked over by a guy with a wrench.

All while the plane passes by. Fast guy. Mighty wrench.

The truth movement doesn't suggest they were "fooled", we suggest they are lying.

That's actually funny. The TRUTH movement suggests they are LYING. Truth is all about lies, it seems.

Consider other conspiracies, such as operation ajax, which were successful and kept secret for decades. Not off the scale.

Does that even compare ?

Given the long, long history of blood thirsty, greedy tyrants who have lusted after global domination, sadly, the odds are

Absolute Certainty.

Given that something similar happened before, the odds are certainty ? You have some catching up to do in the logic department.

[Piggy]

Let's get back to the probability question....

Chances of being able to fly a plane into the WTCs, given the 1991 SOP followed by the airlines, once you managed to get onto the plane with boxcutters, which were easy to smuggle in 1991 -- extremely high.

Chances of a demolition being proposed, accepted, planned, and executed without anyone defecting and without leaving any valid evidence -- zero.

Game over.

[Gravy]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8288604829321343357

Start by watching Kenney. There is a Giuliani video as well, in which he talks about all the FEMA and OEM guys. I'll find it.
Kenney, who was exhausted, was speaking on Thursday. He misspoke and said he had arrived on Monday evening, when he actually arrived on Tuesday evening, the 11th. His wife confirms this. The slightest bit of research would show that you're wrong. Instead, you turn one person's misstatement about a time they did something into a conspiracy involving hundreds.

Why do you continue to behave this way?

[Loss Leader]

Still waiting for geggy to explain how the DEA should have stepped in to foil the whole thing. The DEA, the Drug ... Enforcement ... Agency.

[Horatius]

Still waiting for geggy to explain how the DEA should have stepped in to foil the whole thing. The DEA, the Drug ... Enforcement ... Agency.

Well, they could have strategically weakened their interdiction of drugs to the muslim community, so that all the hijackers would have become crackheads who couldn't find a plane, let alone fly it.

Or something.......

[Piggy]

Still waiting for geggy to explain how the DEA should have stepped in to foil the whole thing. The DEA, the Drug ... Enforcement ... Agency.

No no no... this is the Demolition Evasion Authority. Geez, what country do you live in?

[Donal]

Hey, blanco. :rolleyes:

The article says the equipments were already set up in a warehouse for Tripod drill that were going to take place on 9/12.

No it doesn't. The article only implies personell.

Hundreds of fema, oec personals had arrived 9/10 and 9/11 as well as firemen and police recruits to attend the drill.

no. Here is what was in the articcle when they quoted Guiliani.

it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office,

Hundreds of people from several agencies. Not just FEMA.

So that pretty much contradicts fema's denial.

FEMA only denies having the Urban Search and Rescue Teams there on 9/10.

Only further to validate Kenney's "quips" about arriving in NYC on 9/10, there were also several emergency drills being performed within few miles of the pentagon that were scheduled to start before the impact in DC. Some of the drills included firemen responding to plane crashes and medic team performing a drill in case of a distaster. Both teams had already arrived the pentagon within minutes of the impact.

1) source?

2) So what? That is what First Response units do. Drill and respong quickly.

And...and...and...the CIA/FBI counter terrorism unit were stranded in california while performing a scheduled terror drill.

Imagine that. Counter terror units performing counter terror drills.

Smart move by those who designed and scheduled these exercises to keep the CT unit away and prevent them from gathering evidence for further evaluation and improve their responses in the next attack. The evidence were quickly collected and disposed before they could access to them.

Completly false. Rescue and recovery efforts were going on well after the first investigators arrived. How much evidence could they possibly have moved within a day?

Only if you actually did some research like I told you

Only if you started reading your own posts like I keep telling you.

[Gravy]

And...and...and...the CIA/FBI counter terrorism unit were stranded in california while performing a scheduled terror drill.Uh, counterterrorism is about stopping terrorist acts. They wouldn't have been necessary at Ground Zero, the Pentagon, or Shanksville immediately after the terrorist acts.

Smart move by those who designed and scheduled these exercises to keep the CT unit away and prevent them from gathering evidence for further evaluation and improve their responses in the next attack. The evidence were quickly collected and disposed before they could access to them.I'm calling your bluff again, geggy. Provide one shred of evidence that this is true, or retract it. You may, just may, want to look into how many FBI Evidence Response Teams were at Ground Zero. And did you know there were 52 such teams at Fresh Kills, where debris was sorted and sifted for 9 months? That doesn't include all the other city, state, and federal agencies who participated in evidence recovery.

So go ahead, geggy, my ever-fixéd star of ignorance. Show your proof that "the evidence were quickly collected and disposed" from the 3 billion pound pile of debris, or retract the claim.

ETA: Your count is now 257. Still waiting for an intelligent post.

[tsig]

[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black]
50,000 people in and out of each twin tower per day. 100 extra security or maintenence workers could blend in easily. Most of the work was done in elevator shafts. Many people did notice odd things like evacuations, and power downs, and loud construction noises coming from empty offices, of which there were many.

False premise. We don't know what happened. Lamp posts can be knocked over by a guy with a wrench.

I've worked as building maint. We always knew who was who.

Must be a big guy with a big wrench. Or was he frantically unbolting the poles as the missle, plane or whatever hit?

[Dog Town]

I've worked as building maint. We always knew who was who.

I've done shows in arenas, stadiums, and theatres. The maint, and engineering guys are always my go to's. They seem to almost treat their buildings as "theirs". Anything out of line raises red flags w/these chaps, it is usually someone on my staff. They always, and I mean always, have the keys to everything, which I kinda digg!

[Piggy]

I'd like to see just how fast a guy with a wrench could actually knock down a lamp post. :rolleyes:

[geggy]

Sergeant Matt Rosenbergm an army medic at the pentagon, is studying "a new medical emergency distaster plan based on the unlikely scenario of an airplane crashing into the place."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38407-2001Sep15

"Ironically, we were conducting classes about rescue techniques when we were told of the planes hitting the World Trade Center," said Staff Sgt. Mark Williams. "My team was one of the initial response groups and one of the first to enter the building upon our arrival at the site (pentagon)."

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?archive=true&article=9181&paper=69&cat=104

"USA Today reports that at this time, a joint FBI/CIA anti-terrorist task force that specifically prepared for this type of disaster" is on a training exercise in Monterey, Calif. Consequently, as of late Tuesday, with airports closed around the country, the task force still hasn't found a way to fly back to Washington."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/11/security.htm

At the Education Center at Fort Myer, an army base 1.5 miles northwest of the Pentagon, the base's firefighters are undertaking training variously described as "an airport rescue firefighters class"; "an aircraft crash refresher class"; "a week-long class on Air Field Fire Fighting"; and a "training exercise in airport emergency operations." Despite hearing of the first WTC crash during a break, with no access to a TV, the class simply continues with its training. According to Bruce Surette, who is attending the session: "We had heard some radio transmissions from some other units in Arlington about how they thought they had a plane down here or a plane down there. So you're thinking, 'Hey this could be real.' But it really didn't strike home as being real until our guy came on the radio and said where the plane crash was." The Fort Myer firefighters then immediately head for the Pentagon, arriving there at 9:40 a.m., only three minutes after it is hit, and participate in the firefighting and rescue effort there. The fire station at the Pentagon heliport is actually operated by the Fort Myer Fire Department, and is manned on the morning of 9/11 by three Fort Myer firefighters who have already undertaken the airfield firefighting training.

http://www.mdw.army.mil/content/anmviewer.asp?a=511
http://www.dcmilitary.com/army/pentagram/6_44/local_news/11746-1.html
http://info.jems.com/911/pdf/jems0402.pdf
http://www.arlingtonva.us/departments/Fire/edu/about/FireEduAboutAfterReport.aspx
http://web.archive.org/web/20030417074321/http://www.oapff.com/first-due.htm

xxx

[geggy]

The anti-terrorist unit responsiblity is to gather evidence in order to track those who are connected to the attack and have the potentinal to lead them in preventing future attacks by the same group. Unfortunately they weren't there at the crash site. The evidence they've received are either fabricated/stolen (hijackers' identifications) or disposed (plane parts).

ETA: they had to rely on flight manifest to prove who boarded AA77 yet DNA testing of bodies recovered from the crash site showed there were no arabs on the flight, as stated in FOIA's forms.

[DavidJames]

The evidence they've received are either fabricated/stolen (hijackers' identifications) or disposed (plane parts).and your evidence for that is....

[Horatius]

So, do you have any data on how frequent such training exercises were prior to 9/11? Without knowing how common they are, the fact that some people were drilling that day tells us very little.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

At the Education Center at Fort Myer, an army base 1.5 miles northwest of the Pentagon, the base's firefighters are undertaking training variously described as "an airport rescue firefighters class"; "an aircraft crash refresher class"; "a week-long class on Air Field Fire Fighting"; and a "training exercise in airport emergency operations." Despite hearing of the first WTC crash during a break, with no access to a TV, the class simply continues with its training. According to Bruce Surette, who is attending the session: "We had heard some radio transmissions from some other units in Arlington about how they thought they had a plane down here or a plane down there. So you're thinking, 'Hey this could be real.' But it really didn't strike home as being real until our guy came on the radio and said where the plane crash was." The Fort Myer firefighters then immediately head for the Pentagon, arriving there at 9:40 a.m., only three minutes after it is hit, and participate in the firefighting and rescue effort there. The fire station at the Pentagon heliport is actually operated by the Fort Myer Fire Department, and is manned on the morning of 9/11 by three Fort Myer firefighters who have already undertaken the airfield firefighting training.
xxx

Wow, that quite a coincidence that these guys were training to deal with aircraft crashes when in close proximity to events wich had alot more in common with major building fires than the takeoff/landing incidents wich comprise the vast majority of conventional aircraft crashes.

Waitaminute... that's not a coincidence at all.

Swing and a miss, Geggy.

[stateofgrace]

Ts 1234.

You are fool, that is all I have to say.

[Triterope]

ETA: they had to rely on flight manifest to prove who boarded AA77 yet DNA testing of bodies recovered from the crash site showed there were no arabs on the flight, as stated in FOIA's forms.

victims list != passenger manifest

[Loss Leader]

victims list != passenger manifest

Please, they get this confused all the time.

Kind of like geggy is confused about what in heaven's name the Drug Enforcement Agency would have to do with preventing 9/11.

[Dog Town]

Please, they get this confused all the time.

Kind of like geggy is confused about what in heaven's name the Drug Enforcement Agency would have to do with preventing 9/11.

Chemtrails man...chemtrails! Bwahahaha...

[T.A.M.]

its the afghan opium man...ya thats the ticket.

[Dog Town]

its the afghan opium man...ya thats the ticket.

Where do I sign?

[defaultdotxbe]

The anti-terrorist unit responsiblity is to gather evidence in order to track those who are connected to the attack and have the potentinal to lead them in preventing future attacks by the same group. Unfortunately they weren't there at the crash site. The evidence they've received are either fabricated/stolen (hijackers' identifications) or disposed (plane parts).

wow, for once the CTers have a belief that contradicts a movie or video game, cuz that sure isnt how counter-strike is played

ETA: they had to rely on flight manifest to prove who boarded AA77 yet DNA testing of bodies recovered from the crash site showed there were no arabs on the flight, as stated in FOIA's forms.

how exaxtly does one distinguish "arab" dna?

[Kent1]

Originally Posted by geggy
ETA: they had to rely on flight manifest to prove who boarded AA77 yet DNA testing of bodies recovered from the crash site showed there were no arabs on the flight, as stated in FOIA's forms.
victims list != passenger manifest


He's parroting this old myth
http://www.911myths.com/html/autopsy_list.html

[ktesibios]

The anti-terrorist unit responsiblity is to gather evidence in order to track those who are connected to the attack and have the potentinal to lead them in preventing future attacks by the same group. Unfortunately they weren't there at the crash site. The evidence they've received are either fabricated/stolen (hijackers' identifications) or disposed (plane parts).

ETA: they had to rely on flight manifest to prove who boarded AA77 yet DNA testing of bodies recovered from the crash site showed there were no arabs on the flight, as stated in FOIA's forms.

Umm, Geggy...

"FOIA" stands for "Freedom of Information Act". There aren't any official forms involved in making a request for documents under the FOIA, it's done by means of a letter. You can find sample FOIA request letters on the Web, e.g. here ("http://foi.missouri.edu/foialett.html), but those aren't "forms" in the sense that most people use the word.

Get it? There is no agency abbreviated as "FOIA" which produces forms..

Second, what exactly is your evidence that the DNA identification of bodies and body parts recovered from the Pentagon ruled out there being anyone of Arab descent on AA77?

For that matter, what is your evidence that the use of forensic DNA analysis for identification normally produces conclusions about the ethnicity of the person from whom the sample originated, apart from what can be determined once you know who the person was? (If DNA analysis were to be used to identify my corpse, once that identity was established it would be trivial to determine that I was of Italian descent by simple research into my family history; no "Italian DNA" required.)

Indeed, what evidence have you that the loci examined in the DNA identification process are those used in genealogical DNA analysis?

Step up to the plate, geggy. You've already got umpty-ump +1 strikes against you (exposing your ignorance of the FOIA was the +1), but have a swing anyway. Produce some support of your "no Arab DNA" claim.

N.B.: Regurgitating crap cyber-metastasized among conspira-loon Web sites counts as foul balls.

[defaultdotxbe]

N.B.: Regurgitating crap cyber-metastasized among conspira-loon Web sites counts as foul balls.
but we are playing by softball rules, 3rd foul is strike 3, so you cant just keep fouling out to stay in the game

[TruthSeeker1234]

What are the odds that an entire U.S. government agency could be created, funded, employ thousands of people, conduct secret operations all over the world, and be kept secret for 30 + years?

[CptColumbo]

What are the odds that an entire U.S. government agency could be created, funded, employ thousands of people, conduct secret operations all over the world, and be kept secret for 30 + years?

Which agency is this then? If it's still a secret, how do you know about it?

[defaultdotxbe]

Which agency is this then? If it's still a secret, how do you know about it?
TS1234 fails to see the similarity in the laughable "secrecy" of area 51 and the NSA

[Piggy]

Probably referring to the NSA, which has been jokingly referred to as the No Such Agency for years.

[CptColumbo]

TS1234 fails to see the similarity in the laughable "secrecy" of area 51 and the NSA

If he/she is refering to the NSA, it's been around for nearly 60 years.

[defaultdotxbe]

If he/she is refering to the NSA, it's been around for nearly 60 years.
and supposedly no one knew about it for the first 30

of course peopel did know, the govt just did not acknowledge its existance (much liek area 51) leading to piggy's "No Such Agency" joke

[CptColumbo]

So, it wasn't really "kept secret" it was just not acknowledged by the Gov't?

[stateofgrace]

What are the odds that an entire U.S. government agency could be created, funded, employ thousands of people, conduct secret operations all over the world, and be kept secret for 30 + years?

What are the odds that somebody could get a blow job in total secrecy and get caught?

What are the odds that somebody could send secret smutty texts to young boys and get caught?

What are the odds that somebody could secretly phone tap somebody else and get caught?

ZERO.

Secrets of the magnitude you are talking about do not stay secret for long.

Of course you don't believe me, but then again I'm sure Bill Clinton never thought anybody would find out about his secret private blow job neither.

Your paranoid delusions simply blind to the total and absolute impossibility of this not been blown wide open years ago.

[Loss Leader]

What are the odds that an entire U.S. government agency could be created, funded, employ thousands of people, conduct secret operations all over the world, and be kept secret for 30 + years?

Please provide the list of the 3,000 US citizens the NSA murdered.

Oh, right, you can't. An agency that decodes signals intelligence is not a massive conspiracy to murder one's own citizens. For one thing, the NSA's building was set way back in the woods. The World Trade Center, on the other hand, was in the middle of New York Frickin' City.

[PerryLogan]

We have here a primary logical fallacy of the conspiracy guys.

If someone is pulling off a hoax, they don't make the cover story an unlikely or incredible one.

The more anomalies, oddities, and long shots you find in the cover story, the less likely there's a conspiracy--not more. Conspirators want their story to go down smoothly. Otherwise, they're caught.

So, in collecting huge numbers of smoking guns, conspiracy folks are actually proving the incident wasn't a conspiracy. They're disproving their own theory, but they just don't know it. That's why people laugh at them.

[Dog Town]

Correct! TAM will be along in a minute.


edit: Till then...welcome PL.

[Piggy]

The more anomalies, oddities, and long shots you find in the cover story, the less likely there's a conspiracy--not more.

Yes, but again here's the primary (as in first in order) reason this whole CT is bunk (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=63835):

Even if they had these motivations and goals, here's the trick....

No one would ever have thought to propose such a complex, resource-intensive, high-risk plan as what the CTers are proposing, when there are any number of cheap, quick, low-risk, low-cost alternatives that could be devised.

And even if anyone had proposed such an ambitious, expensive, and likely-to-fail plan which required involving so many contractors in an ultra-sensitive scheme, no one with the power to give a green light would have approved it.

And even if someone had approved it, it would never have passed muster and made it to the planning stage, much less gone through to execution. (Note that the Kennedy-era military plans -- which were simple and low-resource -- were squelched and never made it past the drawing board.)

Hell, even Liddy's Watergate plan -- which cost a couple hundred K, posed very low risk, and involved a mere half dozen outsiders -- was only approved after at least 2 previous plans, which were more costly, complex, and ambitious (but still nothing near what the CTers are describing) were flat-out rejected. And Nixon had no scruples at all.

So you see, all this back-and-forth over details (which the CTers have never been able to push beyond "coulda been" in any case, and which they are demonstrably wrong about in all other cases) is a bunch of sound and fury over nothing.

Their very premise reveals them to be utterly ignorant of how such decisions are made, or else willing to ignore that reality for the sake of a good story. And of course, the elaboration of the theory reveals them to be utterly ignorant of just about every other issue relevant to the event, or else willing to lie.

[T.A.M.]

Dog:

You are mocking me aren't you.

Perry:

(putting the welcome sign around my neck)

Welcome to the JREF Forum on Conspiracy theories. Your opinions will always be allowed, if not accepted.

(takes off sign and proceeds to beat it over Dog towns head).

TAM

[Dog Town]

(takes off sign and proceeds to beat it over Dog towns head).

Wow there big fella, that was nothing but respect.



ETA: It was funny though.

[T.A.M.]

ya, ya, whatever...lol

back at ya k9

TAM

[Triterope]

He's parroting this old myth
http://www.911myths.com/html/autopsy_list.html

It's actually simpler than that. The FOIA letters sent to Thomas R. Olmsted, which can be found all over the internet, clearly state that the names are of "victims who were identified." That's two criteria each passenger has to meet to be listed. Hijackers are not victims.

In addition to the hijackers, one of the flight lists is also missing the name of an infant, but the conspiracists are oddly disinterested in that discrepancy. It betrays the fact that the omission of passenger names from the FOIA victim lists is not meaningful.

Furthermore, the FOIA law has built-in exemptions as to what can be released. One of them is #7A, "could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings." Refusing to release hijacker names for this reason might be a stretch, but if the government didn't want to release the names, they could probably find an FOIA exemption for it.

[DarkMagician]

geggy, your innumeracy makes me cry.

[TjW]

I've worked as building maint. We always knew who was who.

Must be a big guy with a big wrench. Or was he frantically unbolting the poles as the missle, plane or whatever hit?

Oh, man, you just don't understand. If they can project a hologram to cover a missile to make it look like an airliner, projecting a hologram to make a guy unscrewing lamp post bases look like a lamp post with no one around it should be a piece of cake!

[Crungy]

[FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][/
50,000 people in and out of each twin tower per day. 100 extra security or maintenence workers could blend in easily. Most of the work was done in elevator shafts. Many people did notice odd things like evacuations, and power downs, and loud construction noises coming from empty offices, of which there were many.


I love it when 9/11 conspiracy idiocy intersects with my line of work. I've worked as a mechanical engineer in several A/E firms going on 14 years. Past clients that I've worked with included various large hospitals in and around the Chicago area, over 50 telecommunications facilities of various sizes, large manufacturing facilities, universities, courthouses, jails, transportation facilities, airports (O'Hare and Indy), oil companies (both research and refinery) city of Chicago (primarily department of water), as well as many projects located in high rise buildings throughout Chicago. I also work in a 47 story building.

Part of my job requires that myself and the design team make extensive field visits to the projects. In some cases I am issued a building security photo ID. Field visits require that I always check in with building security. Most times, I also check in with building engineering. The size of the security staff depends on the building function and client. Hands down, courthouses are the most secure, followed by jails (you'd be surprised at how unsafe I felt with the yahoos in charge of security) then hospitals, then oil refineries. Commercial real estate, where I include urban high rises, have medium security. Pre 9/11, I would classify high rise security as medium light. Security is based on the ground floor. CCTV does the bulk of the surveilance. You'll have a few Barney Fifes doing walking duty.

Engineering staffs are mainly in house, although some companies outsource building engineering. Also, engineering staffs are also almost always short staffed and prone to budget cuts. There ain't as many working in a building as you you think. As someone wrote before, not only do these guys know every nook and cranny of their building, but they know when any type of out of house work is scheduled. For any building over 10 years old there is always something that needs to be fixed. From leaky faucets, to broken pumps, to misaligned fan shaft, to screwed up digital controls. I'm involved in larger projects. First on the design side, then on the construction side to do construction administration (CA). Construction projects are run by a general contractor (GC) with a forman in the lead, who oversees the various subcontractors (electrical, mechanical, plumbing, fire protection, etc.) Number of construction workers and hours spent on site are kept track of.

Typical building upkeep includes things such as fixing the elevator, escalator (two things that seem to be in perpetual repair no matter where I'm employed), security card reader system, lighting systems, architectural (interior design) renovations, etc. It is not uncommon for me to see workers in the building lobby. When the work affects the floor that I am on, building management always sends out an email to let my firm know the work scope and duration.

If I or anyone else would try alone to engage in some type of unauthorized work inside my high rise, I'd bet a Benjamin that I'd be approached within 20 minutes. If a group of workers would try to do some unauthorized work, I doubt that they'd last 10 minutes before being approached. Also, any thought as how they would gain access to the mostly locked areas and rooms?

Now, here's what elicited howls of laughter in my office today.

"100 extra security or maintenence workers could blend in easily." writes TruthSpanky

100?! If WTC tower operates in the manner of other high rises, I doubt that any more then 50 maintenance/security are on one shift. Ok, the WTC had the 93 bombing, so throw in an extra 10 security workers. I've got over a dozen years of experience (guessing over a 1000 hours) of field surveying various buildings, and have been stopped and asked 100s of times for my credentials and TruthSpanky nonchalantly, claims that it would be easy for a team, likely consisting of twice the head count of the actual staff, to blend in with them?!

*********** absolute rubbish! Let this Bears season ticket holder make this analogy. Try imagining two dozen men dressing up in authentic football attire, getting inside the stadium, sneaking onto the sidelines and then inserting themselves into the play action on the field. Yeah, it'd be easy for them to blend in my ass! :p

[defaultdotxbe]

Oh, man, you just don't understand. If they can project a hologram to cover a missile to make it look like an airliner, projecting a hologram to make a guy unscrewing lamp post bases look like a lamp post with no one around it should be a piece of cake!
It's got a cloaking device that disguises it as two homeless guys fighting over a wedge of cheese.

http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/pictures/before.JPG
http://xbehome.com/screwloosechange/pictures/after.JPG

[Horatius]

If WTC tower operates in the manner of other high rises, I doubt that any more then 50 maintenance/security are on one shift. Ok, the WTC had the 93 bombing, so throw in an extra 10 security workers. I've got over a dozen years of experience (guessing over a 1000 hours) of field surveying various buildings, and have been stopped and asked 100s of times for my credentials and TruthSpanky nonchalantly, claims that it would be easy for a team, likely consisting of twice the head count of the actual staff, to blend in with them?!

Thanks for your input. We sometimes get so caught up in discussions of things like the physics of building collapse, and chemical residue of explosives and what not, that a practical minded guy like you is a breath of fresh air.

Some of the smartest and most no-nonsense guys I've known were tradesmen, who'd cut through a load of BS with a few keen observations based on their practical experience. Nice to see it again!

[geggy]

Anyway,

Speaking of DEA, I always believe al-qaeda was more of a drug trafficking network under control of the pakistan ISI, rather than simply a terrorist network. The pakistan ISI reportedly collects up to 1+ billions a year from drug trade.

Atta was heavily involved in drug trafficking as well as smuggling them in various destinations. He had already been charged for several petty drug crimes while residing in belgium, which is why I found it to be suspicious how he could've bypassed the INS with a criminal record while entering the US, and it was already known to the FBI that he was connected to al-Qaeda. Also he took up pilot training at huffington aviation in Florida, where moussaoui had been arrested by the FBI. Huffington is also known to have connections to mafia (espcially abramoff), drug-lords and involved with drug smuggling, especially directly from saudi arabia. They had strong ties to Jeb bush, the governer of Florida and HW Bush, a former head of DEA, as well. I had a feeling Atta was being set up as a patsy while performing drug trades inside the US.

It was widely reported that ahmed had ordered the wiring of 100,000 to atta few days before 9/11. Was it drug money? Why would the money go to atta few days prior to suicide mission? Where the money go after the mission? None of it makes sense to me, unless the report of the 100,000 dollars wire transfer was a fabrication created by India or Israel*, who both despise the muslim pakistanis.

Daniel Peral a wall street journalist, went to pakistan to investigate ISI's connection to 9/11 after hearing about the wire transfer. Too bad he had been captured and executed before he could further investigate the matter to find some answers.

*it was reported after the attacks that the israeli spies from the mossad agency gave list of potentinal hijackers' names prior to 9/11 and Atta was one of them. The US govt denied they've ever received warnings from the mossad. So either the US govt was lying or the mossad was behind the 9/11 attack and attempted to cover their tracks.

[Piggy]

HERRING! GET YOUR HERRING!

Nice an' red!

Big, fat, juicy, RED HERRING!

[Pardalis]

Nobody gives a crap load of what you think geggy.

[geggy]

Excellent counter-argument...

[Pardalis]

What about your controlled-demolition-made-to-look-like-a-fake-collapse-from-the-top theory geggy?

Whenever you're shown wrong you keep changing the subject. Now you're on to Atta and his alledged drug connections. You wouldn't have any proof to that either would you?

Douche bag.

[Piggy]

Excellent counter-argument...
Counter argument to what?

You're saying that Abramoff is mafia. That there are "ties" to Jeb Bush. That your speculations are "widely reported". This is grade-school stuff. Why should anyone take it seriously?

[firecoins]

what exactly prevents a group of 4 or 5 men from hijacking an aircraft? especially if they are willing to kill someone? espcially if they are willing to die themselves?

Pre 9/11 I got knife through security in Orlando. I did in January of 2001. I had it in my pants pocket and it never set off any security. Of course, I had no intentions of hurting people.

[stateofgrace]

Geggy,

in your post you mentioned Israel and Pakistan.

Do you think Israel and Pakistan were involved yes/no?

By the way I have also seen reports that Saudi Arabia may have been involved, have you?

So Israel, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia all or none, what do you think?

Now don't scuttle off to conspiracy web sites to check it all out, have a little think and post what pops into your head.

[firecoins]

The US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, Libya? any other suspect governments?

[Piggy]

Whenever you're shown wrong you keep changing the subject.
Exactly. You're like some graduate from the Barney Fife boxing school. Whenever someone demonstrates why you're full of it, you move to another topic, like a game of whack-a-mole.

Let's stick to the odds claim, shall we?

Anyone can play the game of look-here/look-there.

[Dog Town]

But State there are no real terrorists, just Jooooo's! /CT

[Pardalis]

So geggy, any proof to what you are saying this time?

Show us your stuff, or are you going to keep changing the subject like you always do?

[Dog Town]

Show us your stuff, or are you going to keep changing the subject like you always do?

He'll be doing that on another thread soon. These guys love to hop around more... than kids on Romper Room!

[Loss Leader]

Geggy, please look at your post again. I've deleted some of the words but I have not changed a single word you wrote and I have not changed the order in which they appear.

I always believe ... which is why I found it to be suspicious how ... is also known to have ... They had strong ties ... I had a feeling ... It was widely reported ... None of it makes sense to me ... after hearing about ... before he could further investigate the matter ... it was reported ... The US govt denied ...

All of your "facts" boil down to things you believe, things you heard, things you don't understand and things you have questions about. Nothing you wrote was an actual, verifiable fact. Nothing you wrote was reported by any reputable news agency of any sort.

Certainly you must see that your entire scenerio exists as loose connections that you made in your head, no piece resting on a proper foundation. And surely you must recognize how logically weak your argument is.

Does this mean nothing to you?

[geggy]

What about your controlled-demolition-made-to-look-like-a-fake-collapse-from-the-top theory geggy?

Whenever you're shown wrong you keep changing the subject. Now you're on to Atta and his alledged drug connections. You wouldn't have any proof to that either would you?

Douche bag.

This thread had seriously sidetracked after my post about the project bojinka.

Someone asked me why I included DEA in the original post so thought I'd clear it up, is all.

How is it delusional to think that osama and the 19 hijackers couldn't have possibly defeated the multi-trillion dollars defense system in the US?

[Gravy]

263, geggy!

eta: you brought up DNA on flight 77. Who were the two brothers identified by DNA from that flight, geggy? Eh?

[Donal]

They weren't up against the multi-trillion dollar defense system.

The vast majority of the system was (and still is) pointed outward.

We are a country that holds the right of free travel in high regard. They exploited this. We also have an open immigration policy.

Its about them taking rights we hardly even think about and twisting them into something horrific as it is about defeating our security.

[Horatius]

The vast majority of the system was (and still is) pointed outward.

And most of it wasn't pointed at terrorists, in any case. Exactly what could a bunch of tanks or B-52's done to prevent this attack?

Now, if we Canadians had decided to burn Washington again, you'd be set, but these guys? Slipped through the cracks.

[Piggy]

How is it delusional to think that osama and the 19 hijackers couldn't have possibly defeated the multi-trillion dollars defense system in the US?
It's delusional because you're drawing conclusions from an abstraction rather than the actual circumstances.

It's like saying that Malvo couldn't possibly have snipered all those people, or Manson's gang of drugged up hippies couldn't possibly have murdered those rich people, because they were up against multi-million dollar law enforcement systems.

It's ridiculous.

[stateofgrace]

How is it delusional to think that osama and the 19 hijackers couldn't have possibly defeated the multi-trillion dollars defense system in the US?

Because they didn't attack a multi-trillion dollar defence system. They attacked innocent,unarmed civilian’s onboard four planes.

They then used these planes to attack successfully two civilian buildings and a military complex.

[Belz...]

How is it delusional to think that osama and the 19 hijackers couldn't have possibly defeated the multi-trillion dollars defense system in the US?

Because it's completely rational to think that they did.

[firecoins]

Because they didn't attack a multi-trillion dollar defence system. They attacked innocent,unarmed civilian’s onboard four planes.

They then used these planes to attack successfully two civilian buildings and a military complex.
But they will say the Pentagon was a target...it was an unarmed target & te White House and Congress were just as suseptable to this attack. Of course there is no missle defense system...yet.

[Donal]

And as long as Reagan International sits next to the Pentagon, there won't be.

[R.Mackey]

But they will say the Pentagon was a target...it was an unarmed target & te White House and Congress were just as suseptable to this attack. Of course there is no missle defense system...yet.
No, it has a defense system, one that was partially completed when Flight 77 hit it. A passive defense system.

Not all defenses go boom. Sometimes alternate approaches are not only more acceptable, but equally effective, even cheaper.

[DarkMagician]

Besides, it's really stupid to have an active defense system out there firing on new and aspiring pilots.

[Loss Leader]

I, for one, think we need more automated anti-aircraft missile batteries placed randomly around the country.

[Pardalis]

I, for one, think we need more automated anti-aircraft missile batteries placed randomly around the country.

That's the funniest thing. That's what the CTists think the US defense system should be, which is insane and contradicts their own fear of their goverment becoming a "police state". :boggled:

[Gord_in_Toronto]

what exactly prevents a group of 4 or 5 men from hijacking an aircraft? especially if they are willing to kill someone? espcially if they are willing to die themselves?

Pre 9/11 I got knife through security in Orlando. I did in January of 2001. I had it in my pants pocket and it never set off any security. Of course, I had no intentions of hurting people.

Post 9/11 my wife and I took a trip to Jamaica. I took with me my CPAP machine -- a large black plastic box about 7" x 5" x 12" that I use for my sleep apnea -- in my checked luggage. On the way down from Toronto it went through the checked luggage procedure (disappearing out of sight and the belt into the bowels of the airport) where presumably it was x-rayed and someone said "that's a CPAP machine, it's OK". On the way back, at the airport in Jamaica, checked baggage is hand checked in the presence of the passenger. My CPAP was in my bag, wrapped in a towel and covered top, bottom and sides by folded clothing. When my bag was checked, I thought, "I'm going to have some explaining to do". The security guard, large, female and distinctly unfriendly looking, reached into both side of the bag and felt around. She actually felt on both side of the machine. Missed it completely and sent me on my way. I could have been going to the USA. I could have had a couple of kilos of gelignite.

I have absolutely no trouble thinking that terrorists with what we Canadians used to call box cutters could get on board a plane and hijack it. Why is this so hard not to understand?

[defaultdotxbe]

I have absolutely no trouble thinking that terrorists with what we Canadians used to call box cutters could get on board a plane and hijack it. Why is this so hard not to understand?
pre-9/11 (1996 actualy) i was coming home from a camping trip and i had a 4in pocket knife (which i believe is illegal in the US on its own, if its concealed) in my carryon

if i had taken it out of my bag and placed it against a flight attendants's neck im sure i could had the pilot take me wherever i wanted...naturally the thought never crossed my mind (honestly, it didnt)