To All You Liberals Out There

[AmariYah]

Enough of trying to hide from obvious publically available facts- by simply crying CONSPIRACY! And surely you can be more original Yod then to call me arrogant for pointing out the great arrogance of many of the posters in this thread.

Here is a little more evidence for y'all- Though at this point I kinda doubt if any of you will actually read or consider it???

Andrews Air Force Base is a huge military installation just 10 miles from the Pentagon. On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C. They failed to do their job. Despite over one hour's advance warning of a terrorist attack in progress, not a single Andrews fighter took off (or scrambled) to protect the city.

The FAA, NORAD and the military have cooperative procedures by which fighter jets intercept commercial aircraft under emergency conditions. These procedures were not followed.

Air Force officials and others have tried to explain away the failures:

"Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, another Pentagon spokesman, [said]: 'The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way, and I doubt prior to Tuesday's event, anyone would have expected anything like that here.'"

--'Newsday,' 23 September 2001 (1)

Using information from the mass media and official Websites, we will show that this is a lie.

Some of what happened on 9-11, such as planes flying into buildings, is unusual. But most of what happened, such as commercial jets flying off-course, transponder failures and possible hijackings, are everyday emergencies. We will show that these emergencies are routinely handled with expert efficiency based on clear rules.

The crash of the first hijacked jet into the World Trade Center made it clear the United States was faced with an extraordinary situation. This should have intensified the emergency responses of the air safety and air defense systems.

The whole country was aware. For example, at 9:06 AM the NY Police broadcast:

" 'This was a terrorist attack. Notify the Pentagon.'"

--'Daily News' (New York) 12 September 2001 (2)

'American Forces Press Service' reported that ordinary people working at the Pentagon worried they could be next:

"'We were watching the World Trade Center on the television,' said a Navy officer. 'When the second plane deliberately dove into the tower, someone said, 'The World Trade Center is one of the most recognizable symbols of America. We're sitting in a close second.'"

--'DEFENSELINK News', Sept. 13, 2001 (3)

U.S. air safety and air defense emergency systems are activated in response to problems every day. On 9-11 they failed despite, not because of, the extreme nature of the emergency. This could only happen if individuals in high positions worked in a coordinated way to make them fail.

Such operatives would almost surely have failed if they tried to disrupt and abort routine protection systems without top-level support. The failure of the emergency systems would be noticed immediately. Moreover, given the catastrophic nature of the attacks, the highest military authorities would be alerted. Acting on their own, the operatives could expect that their orders would be countermanded and that they themselves would be arrested.

The sabotage of routine protective systems, controlled by strict hierarchies, would never have been contemplated let alone attempted absent the involvement of the supreme U.S. military command. This includes at least U.S. President George Bush, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers.

In the following summary of evidence we will demonstrate probable cause for charging the above-named persons with treason for complicity in the murders of thousands of people whom they had sworn to protect.

The summary of evidence covers the following areas:

* Andrews Air Force Base and the myth of 'no available planes;'

* The air safety/air defense systems and the myth that they were not prepared;

* The actions of George Bush on 9-11 that clearly violated his positive legal and constitutional obligations and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;

* The testimony of General Richard B. Myers at Senate hearings on his nomination as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In these hearings, the contents of which were reported accurately by one lone journalist, General Myers attempted to cover up what had happened 9-11 when he was Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He offered three mutually contradictory cover stories and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;

To limit the length on this post follow the link... Also read Part 2 before presuming to comment. Please keep in mind that the primary sources consist of major media sources and Officail Military websites. This is not some vauge conspiracy, these are real, important and verifiable facts. Choose to ignore them if you will but that only means that your resulting ignorance is a conscious decision!

http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-1.htm

Edited September 14, 2004 by AmariYah

[AmariYah]

PART 2

Lie # 2: Presidential Authorization Was Needed To Scramble Jets To Intercept Flight 77

On Sunday, September 16th, Vice-President Richard Cheney was interviewed on NBC TV's 'Meet the Press'. During that interview he created the impression that the military would have needed presidential authorization to scramble fighter jets to intercept American Airlines Flight 77 before it hit the Pentagon.

Mr. Cheney did not present this lie in a straightforward manner.

Instead he did two things. First, he avoided discussing the failure to intercept Flight 77. Instead he talked only about the choices Mr. Bush supposedly made after the Pentagon was hit.

Second, he took it for granted that presidential approval was required to intercept a commercial jet, as if this were an accepted fact. Then based on this false foundation, he emitted a fog of emotional misinformation to confuse the millions of Americans who wanted to know: why didn't jet fighters scramble to intercept Flight 77 before it crashed into the Pentagon? Doesn't the U.S. have radar and an Air Force anymore?

It is common for officials attempting to cover-up a capital crime to put the blame on a subordinate. However Mr. Cheney used a different approach on 'Meet the Press.' Relying on his skills in public deception, Cheney tried to create the impression that nothing improper had occurred, that faced with horrendous choices a brave President had done the right thing.

But as soon as one sees through this verbiage, one realizes Mr. Cheney has actually placed the responsibility for the failure to intercept American Flight 77 on George W. Bush.

Here is the relevant excerpt from 'Meet the Press':

"Mr. Russert: What's the most important decision you think he made during the course of the day?

"Vice Pres. Cheney: Well, the--I suppose the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft.

"Mr. Russert: And you decided?

"Vice Pres. Cheney: We decided to do it. We'd, in effect, put a flying combat air patrol up over the city; F-16s with an AWACS, which is an airborne radar system, and tanker support so they could stay up a long time...

"It doesn't do any good to put up a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act, if, in fact, they feel it's appropriate.

"Mr. Russert: So if the United States government became aware that a hijacked commercial airline[r] was destined for the White House or the Capitol, we would take the plane down?

"Vice Pres. Cheney: Yes. The president made the decision...that if the plane would not divert...as a last resort, our pilots were authorized to take them out. Now, people say, you know, that's a horrendous decision to make. Well, it is. You've got an airplane full of American citizens, civilians, captured by...terrorists, headed and are you going to, in fact, shoot it down, obviously, and kill all those Americans on board?

"...It's a presidential-level decision, and the president made, I think, exactly the right call in this case, to say, "I wished we'd had combat air patrol up over New York."

--NBC, 'Meet the Press' 16 September 2001 (1)

Please continue article by following the link below.

http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-2.htm

[AmariYah]

"We recognize it

[AmariYah]

I realized that even just this one extremely important topic concerning the events of 9/11/ are far too important to simply discuss in the midst of a basically unrelated thread. For more information visit the new thread in the War on Terrorism heading entitled; AMERICAN MILITARY ORDERED TO STAND DOWN ON 9/11/01

[Guest yod]

* The actions of George Bush on 9-11 that clearly violated his positive legal and constitutional obligations and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;

That is your biased opinion. Nothing more. Can you bring yourself to admit that this was an unprecedented event?

Your analysis has a lot of flaws. You have the advantage of 20/20 hindsight in a post 911 world. The policy of dealing with hijackers before that date was based on an assumption that they wanted something....but ultimately they want to live long enough to get it...so the protocol of that day was to stall and negotiate in order to save the passengers. Now we know better.

You have decided that employees at every level and in dozens of branches of our government (including the civilian FAA) took part in letting this happen though not one of them has lodged a complaint with CBS or CNN......and/or you choose to believe that Bush and his "evil cronies" have been able to silence the hundreds of co-conspirators this operation would have taken.

I guess they set the date according to Rumsfeld having breakfast at Congress?

Wow...Bush is a freakin' genious!

The whole idea is totally whack. I read every bit of it....and it proves only that there was a lot of confusion in an hour on the morning of 911.

No one disputes that.

[senerhu]

* The actions of George Bush on 9-11 that clearly violated his positive legal and constitutional obligations and demonstrated consciousness of guilt;

That is your biased opinion. Nothing more. Can you bring yourself to admit that this was an unprecedented event?

Your analysis has a lot of flaws. You have the advantage of 20/20 hindsight in a post 911 world. The policy of dealing with hijackers before that date was based on an assumption that they wanted something....but ultimately they want to live long enough to get it...so the protocol of that day was to stall and negotiate in order to save the passengers. Now we know better.

You have decided that employees at every level and in dozens of branches of our government (including the civilian FAA) took part in letting this happen though not one of them has lodged a complaint with CBS or CNN......and/or you choose to believe that Bush and his "evil cronies" have been able to silence the hundreds of co-conspirators this operation would have taken.

I guess they set the date according to Rumsfeld having breakfast at Congress?

Wow...Bush is a freakin' genious!

The whole idea is totally whack. I read every bit of it....and it proves only that there was a lot of confusion in an hour on the morning of 911.

No one disputes that.

You read it?? I could have told you the idea of a conspiracy was whack without reading it....

kudos to you for the effort and...

an A+ for pointing out that literally hundreds would have to be involved in the "conspiracy"

maybe they don't believe the holocaust occurred either....