9/11 military tapes released - Pentagon lied to the 9/11 commission

[lyra_k]

So the top brass of the US military totally fucked up, then tried to cover it up afterwards.

Fuck me, that's shocking. The new world order will be brought to its knees by that, I reckon.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

So the top brass of the US military totally fucked up, then tried to cover it up afterwards.

Fuck me, that's shocking. The new world order will be brought to its knees by that, I reckon.

*suffers epiphany*

 

[Jazzz]

but they say the only had 4 planes on the eastcoast anyway... and that the war game was a cuban plane hijacking, (which I was just reading one actually happened a couple of days later...)

There were several exercises that day involving multiple hijackings - that was just one of them.

 

[kyser_soze]

I haven't had time to go through it carefully. But two things are particularly striking - the confusion (and lack of planes) due to the war games taking place, and the fact that NORAD had no idea that Flight 11 was crashing into the WTC, they thought it was on its way to Washington!

Oh and the fact that the Pentagon have lied like crazy to the 9/11 commission, which means you can distrust anything they say that isn't backed up by hard evidence.

Well, obviously the wargame was timed that day to ensure that there weren't enough planes, and NORAD was being guided by 'plants' among the staff, as was NEADS - clearly the staffer who refused to confirm whether it was a civilian aircraft was 'in' on everything and there as an agent provocatuer.

As were the airlines for following their standard crisis response of communications blackouts.

Jazzz - all this was pretty much obvious from even the snippets played at the Commission (re: the confusion between NORAD/NEADS etc) and that budget cuts had completely screwed US internal air defence (I dimly remember a comment about how the radar network internally was only switched on in chunks or at specific time periods because of the cost of running it full time)

As lyraK says, USM fucks up and tries to cover it up (and fails)...TBH that says a great deal about the chances of them being able to cover up something as big as 9/11 but hey, that's extrapolation on MY part.

 

[kyser_soze]

Long a teacher of ethics and theology, Griffin writes with compelling and passionate logic, urging readers to draw their own conclusions from the evidence outlined.

HA! 'I won't go on record and say 'The government did it' I'll put up loads of stuff, give my book a very leading title and let people 'draw their own conclusions'

 

[squeegee]

HA! 'I won't go on record and say 'The government did it' I'll put up loads of stuff, give my book a very leading title and let people 'draw their own conclusions'

Yeah fair enough, more conjecture. The point is alot of otherwise respectable academics, journalists and the odd politician are saying and writing these things. Can they really have all lost their minds? They are using their reputations as back up. Though they have no proof they are saying we need a full and thorough investigation. Which we aren't gonna get anytime soon. But it adds to the growing disquiet about events over the last 5 years. Even, or especially because the mainstream media seem incapable of using its influence to demand a full independent inquiry.

 

[editor]

Strange that Jazzz should be pointing out stories that disprove his bonkers theories, isn't it?!

They also provide further evidence against the conspiracy theory that the military shot the plane down: the tapes show Norad could never have been in the position to do so. In fact, two fighter jets wasted part of the morning pursuing a ghost:
Norad chiefs believed that American flight 11 had fallen beneath their radar and was heading to the US capital, even though it had already crashed into the World Trade Centre. A crucial part of the problem, one civilian aviation manager said, was that American Airlines refused to confirm for several hours that its flight 11 had hit the building.http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/story/0,,1835906,00.html

 

[Crispy]

Please ed, don't waste post #40,000 on this thread

 

[free spirit]

Strange that Jazzz should be pointing out stories that disprove his bonkers theories, isn't it?!

yeah, but that vanity fair article in particular is probably the best account of what actually went on that I've read, so maybe it makes up for all the more nuts threads I've wasted days reading through before - cheers jazz

 

[editor]

i like it when the ed has to get his italics out.

Here's a few for you, completely free of charge.

With a bit of bold thrown in for good measure.

Hey! Look! Bold and italic too! Wicked!

Hold on.. wait for it....Bold and italic AND underline!!!

Way to go!

 

[editor]

In this month's Vanity Fair article (as second post)

Interesting piece too.

"When they told me there was a hijack, my first reaction was 'Somebody started the exercise early,'" Nasypany later told me. The day's exercise was designed to run a range of scenarios, including a "traditional" simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum.

"I actually said out loud, 'The hijack's not supposed to be for another hour,'" Nasypany recalled.

(The fact that there was an exercise planned for the same day as the attack factors into several conspiracy theories, though the 9/11 commission dismisses this as coincidence. After plodding through dozens of hours of recordings, so do I.)

 

[Azrael23]

Wasn't the whole problem with the votes that they were made on old skool 'punch' style voting machines, and that there was much debate about 'hanging chads'? So nothing to do with electronic voting machines in fact...

Which successfully ignored the sterling efforts made by Florida Police departments state wide to stop BME and other non-Bush voters from actually voting...

Azrael, I HAVE watched that documentary and it's supposition and extrapolation, not hard evidence - find some hard evidence, not stringing together lots of circumstantial stuff and calling it a whole.

Well you obviously weren`t watching it very carefully.

HIJACKERS TRAINED AT PENSACOLA NAVAL BASE...

Oh yes, how circumstantial. fool.

Btw I wasn`t saying Bush used voting machines in florida to steal the election, I was just referring the fact that 40% of the country is covered by them and the 4 companies which operate them are all headed by former heads or deputy heads of the CIA. Its not see through at all.

 

[editor]

Btw I wasn`t saying Bush used voting machines in florida to steal the election, I was just referring the fact that 40% of the country is covered by them and the 4 companies which operate them are all headed by former heads or deputy heads of the CIA. Its not see through at all.

So all the bosses, staff, employees, fitters, engineers and mechanics of those four companies are in on it, yes?

 

[Azrael23]

No, no more so than a bank cashier is involved in the long term strategy of HSBC.

Compartmentalisation? Come on your not stupid your just being an ass.

 

[Crispy]

Those electronic voting machines are well flaky. Pretty much every other week there's a new story on slashdot about how they can be hacked very simply - eg. changing votes from one party to the other - without any trace, even in the paper record. However, from what I've read (and the writers know their shit), these holes are due to incompetence, not deliberate malice. Or at least if it is malice, it's been done very cleverly to look like incompetence. And if they're that good, then I would expect them to make their holes less obvious.

 

[editor]

No, no more so than a bank cashier is involved in the long term strategy of HSBC.

So how many people do you think would have to have been involved in 'fixing' those millions of votes without anyone else noticing?

 

[Crispy]

Not many. Hang on, let me go look this up.

 

[editor]

Not many. Hang on, let me go look this up.

Bear in mind that it's an election, so that there's going to be interested parties looking on from all directions.

 

[editor]

Tee hee!

At least one voting machine began counting backwards to zero when it reached 32,000 votes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U.S._presidential_election_controversy_and_irregularities

 

[Crispy]

Darn it I can't find the fecking story.

Basically, the flaw allowed a person to go into the booth with the machine and very easily access and change the voting records of everybody who'd used it. There's no paper record until after the voting is finished. At that point it is completely impossible to distinguish a fradulent vote from a genuine one. There are people looking everywhere, except behind the curtain in the polling booth, and that's where you can do the damage.

Luckily, these things are being made public and the manufacturers of these machines are having to fix their mistakes. Some states are even outlawing them (Maryland has already).

It's probably not possible to swing millions of votes with them, you'd need an operative for each machine (or at least someone with good disguises and faked electoral register entries) but then the way US voting works you only need 10-100,000 votes to swing the result in a close race.

 

[Azrael23]

So how many people do you think would have to have been involved in 'fixing' those millions of votes without anyone else noticing?

Ask a computer hacking expert.

A team of 4? A team of 20? Either way it does not require the GRAND CONSPIRACY which you seem to think it does.

Then we have the software which was responsible for the oddball behaviour, the code for which could have been written by what.... 3 people? 8 people? Not the entire program but the relevant sections.

Once again, no grand conspiracy required.

 

[editor]

Ask a computer hacking expert.

A team of 4? A team of 20? Either way it does not require the GRAND CONSPIRACY which you seem to think it does.

Then we have the software which was responsible for the oddball behaviour, the code for which could have been written by what.... 3 people? 8 people? Not the entire program but the relevant sections.

Once again, no grand conspiracy required.

Naturally, in your world, the opposition parties aren't remotely interested in checking the accuracy, letting these omnipotent gang of four super-fixers decide an entire election involving tens of millions of votes, yes?

I've no doubt that local fixing/fiddling could have taken place. But the entire nation-wide election harpooned in every state by an invisible gang of four? Nah.

Anyway, without any hard proof either way I can't be arsed with this idle speculation.

 

[Crispy]

Ask a computer hacking expert.

A team of 4? A team of 20? Either way it does not require the GRAND CONSPIRACY which you seem to think it does.

Then we have the software which was responsible for the oddball behaviour, the code for which could have been written by what.... 3 people? 8 people? Not the entire program but the relevant sections.

Once again, no grand conspiracy required.

Well, it requires more than 20 to swing the vote by a significant amount. You need to tamper with each individual machine, before the voting is finished. Seeing as there are multiple machines per polling station and multiple stations per district etc. then your army of operatives gets pretty big. And like I said, the people whose job it is to analyse security in software say that the holes in Diebold's systems look like lazyness and incompetence, not malice. There have been a couple of whistle-blowers who say the same thing. I see an opening for vote fraud, but not a concerted effort or conspiracy.

 

[editor]

. Seeing as there are multiple machines per polling station and multiple stations per district etc. then your army of operatives gets pretty big. And like I said, the people whose job it is to analyse security in software say that the holes in Diebold's systems look like lazyness and incompetence, not malice. There have been a couple of whistle-blowers who say the same thing. I see an opening for vote fraud, but not a concerted effort or conspiracy.

That's my take on it too.

 

[kyser_soze]

Well you obviously weren`t watching it very carefully.

HIJACKERS TRAINED AT PENSACOLA NAVAL BASE...

Oh yes, how circumstantial. fool.

Azreal, all this does is provide proof that they trained at a US Naval base, that's all. It asks lots of questions - how and why were they present on such a place; and there are further questions regards their trainer who died in a plane crash on 08/05, along with two Raytheon employees.

What it doesn't do is provide proof of a high level conspiracy in the USG, or provide any evidence that they LIHOP.

 

[dylanredefined]

Listened to an extract on the today program .Sounded like a gigantic rabbit headlight cock up not a conspricy .

 

[Azrael23]

Yes it was all a big mistake, go back to bed. (Google: W-199i)

Do I have to repeat who owns all the voting machine companies? Do you not even find it suspicious?

The thing with you "normal" people is you expect it all to be spelt out for you in 20ft high black letters. It never occurs to you that you have to use your own powers of deduction.

The case for LIHOP is convincing enough to a lot of people, regardless of what you may think.

Heres another documentary. http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-6495462761605341661&q=martial+law This time about how the event has been used to further usher in totalitarianism.

Que bono?

 

[London_Calling]

Fwiw, I think voting is too important to fuck with; a paper trail please, and a paper trail always, please - pref with plywood booths and old ladies standing around making tea.

This electronic malarkey at how many £/$,000 a pop seems absurd, you could almost think the idea was to create the opportunity for abuse . . .

 

[Azrael23]

Exactly, we fly half way around the world demanding a paper trail but if you ask for one in America its "oooooh don`t be paranoid...."

 

[editor]

Que bono?

He's the singer in U2.

HTH. HAND.