911 - please don't flame me

[Ae589]

As I was looking at this site, it *seemed* to have a fairly accurate 911 chronology. Facts (such as times, quotes) are backed up with links to the original source, mainly mainstream media.

I have no point, I just thought people might be interested. Apologies if this has been posted before.

Is that enough disclaimers?

 

[Sorry.]

you've not put the link in ...

 

[El Jugador]

you've not put the link in ...

- maybe that's just what they want you to think..?

 

[Loki]

yeah fela posted that one (well I think it's the one you mean) on the 911 thread that's in the dustbin, I can't be arsed to find it myself cos it's already been discussed.

It does indeed link extensively to media sources, it also doesn't make any bold claims or speculation about any cover-up as I recall.

So not sure it's worthy of a thread really.

 

[editor]

Do you mean this one?

 

[Ae589]

Shame.


Sorry, this one:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timelines.jsp

 

[Loki]

yeah that's the one that's already been posted by fela.

Not much to debate about it really.

 

[sparticus]

Would anyone like to suggest how the US government were so incompetant that it explains the unprecedented air defense failures and the chronology of events?

And if anyone chooses to say that they failed to intercept the planes because THEY did not see it coming and had no prior warnings I refer you again to this book and chapter 4.

When I posted this a couple of weeks ago sereval people offered explanations based on incompetence which must be added to the incompetence required to explain the air defense failures, but I haven't seen anyone questioning the references and evidence Nafeez Ahmed uses.

I reckon they knew and let it happen on purpose LIHOP and no amount of evidence that shows GWB is a moron explains a systematic incompetence from a system as sophisicated as the US. The only other explanation apart from incompetence is that at the most senior levels of government, business, media, law and military in the US (and U75 too) people are complicit (both knowingly and unknowingly) in covering up a much darker story. This dark story may or may not involve faked mobile phone calls or passenger lists. It matters not.

Ian

 

[editor]

I reckon they knew and let it happen on purpose LIHOP

Yes. You've made that abundantly clear - again and again and againzzzzzzz

 

[fela fan]

yeah that's the one that's already been posted by fela.

Not much to debate about it really.

Not much to debate?? I'd like to know how you arrived at that loki!

In fact, from where i'm sitting, there's plenty to debate about it. There's simply tonnes of information, particularly when one starts clicking onto the links it provides, never mind the whole commentary of the website itself.

At the time i wanted to get a thread going based on this website, but felt 911 fatigue was settling in, and didn't want to provoke.

But seriously, this cooperativereseach site, nothing much to debate?? Tell me how or i am forced to conclude you're on some kind of drug i've never come across...

I'll get digging now that we have the thread.

 

[fela fan]

Just to add, since this thread seems to be about this link.

Editor, it most certainly satisfies your requirements, in that it is all sourced from mainstream media.

And Ae589, any chance of a thread title change? Make it appropriate to this link. There can surely be nothing on the net so extensive, and sourced from media that most people feel comfortable dealing with, rather than any 'loony' websites.

Something like 'debating the 911 timeline'....? I don't know, but i think the content of this website is well worth debating in a thread of its own right.

So: AN APPEAL to posters, can we debate the contents of this website? It has enough material to keep us going without the need for talk about what some see as conspiracy theories.

That way, we might keep away from the usual degeneration...

 

[Loki]

Not much to debate?? I'd like to know how you arrived at that loki!

Well which excerpts do you want to debate then? There's reams of info just in the timeline.

Tell me how or i am forced to conclude you're on some kind of drug i've never come across...

Shurely you're vaguely aware of our Viking traditions... reindeer eat magic shrooms in the north of Scandinavia toxic to humans, but they metabolise the poisonous compounds thus meaning we can drink their urine and get bolloxed before going into battle, hence the now (in)famous "beserker" rage. True. And I would love to meet the guy who first thought it might be interesting to see what happened if he drank reindeer piss.

 

[fela fan]

The link Ae589 provided: if you go direct to this link it is the ‘homepage’ of the 911 stuff:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

To (hopefully!) kick of debate, how about this:

“Mid July 2001

John O'Neill, FBI counter-terrorism expert, privately discusses White House obstruction in his bin Laden investigation. O'Neill says: “The main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were US oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it.” He adds: “All the answers, everything needed to dismantle Osama bin Laden's organization, can be found in Saudi Arabia.” O'Neill also believes the White House is obstructing his investigation of bin Laden because they are still keeping the idea of a pipeline deal with the Taliban open. [CNN 1/8/02; CNN 1/9/02; Irish Times 11/19/01; Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth]”

From near the bottom of:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsptimeline=complete_911_timeline&theme=saudi

John O’Neill was conveniently killed in the 9/11 attacks! The man who knew most about OBL.

I think this connection between US oil companies (most of bush’s cabinet members are oil men, same as when they were in Reagan’s cabinet, and Bush snr’s), Saudi Arabia, and Islamic terrorism is the root of everything.

If anyone doubts that the USG could have been complicit in the attacks (including letting it happen when they could have prevented it), then they need to consider the roles of such figures as Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rove, Perle, all in power under Reagan, Bush Snr, and of course in government now.

 

[fela fan]

Well which excerpts do you want to debate then? There's reams of info just in the timeline.


Shurely you're vaguely aware of our Viking traditions... reindeer eat magic shrooms in the north of Scandinavia toxic to humans...

Ahhh, now i see!

Well, just kicked it off. Yes there is so much on that website. Too much going on for years leading up to September 11. So much behind the scenes of us, the public.

Everything happens for a reason. Oil is at the heart of all this, as is the agenda written and publicised by Cheney et al which they call PNAC, and whose objectives are on their own website.

US run the world. They have intelligence everywhere. They control oil with Saudi. Their fingers are in all the pies. If bush and his mob didn't have a clue what was being planned for New York, then i think the whole world's population needs some of those mushrooms...

 

[Lock&Light]

If bush and his mob didn't have a clue what was being planned for New York, then i think the whole world's population needs some of those mushrooms...

Are you taking the reindeer piss?

 

[fela fan]

Are you taking the reindeer piss?

Not possible mate, none of those animals in thailand...

 

[Ae589]

Sure, if you tell me how to.


I'm not sure I can debate what's on this site... I think it speaks for itself. All from (usually) reliable, and more importantly, multiple sources. With no comment, just facts and times.


Bush's Saudia Arabian/Bin Laden connections, US investigations being halted, people being allowed into the country with no checks on orders of US Intel, who subsequently end up being involved.

It's not a conspiracy, IMHO, it's incompetence, arrogance, greed. And we are all paying for it now.

 

[sparticus]

To try and help focus debate, whilst we could debate all the events and connections prior and since 9/11 and their relation to the air defense failures, what I was asking for is an explanation about the specific response or non-response of the USAF and the related organisations (FAA, Pentagon, NORAD, etc) to events on 9/11 over a 2 hour period from when the FAA first learnt that the first plane was probably hijacked through to the crash of the 4th plane and why over this period the USAF was incapable of intercepting any of the planes.

Now I could (and probably when I find a moment will) type out this sequence of events but anyone who has studied even the Blue Peter version of events will be aware of the rough sequence and how the official story rests on INCOMPETENCE to explain the failures. But to my mind the deviation from standard operating procedures set down to respond to exactly these type of situations (hijacking, lack of radio contact, deviations from flight path) and the inexplicable delays in scrambling fighter jets is what I would like to see someone try to explain.

To me it has never been explained why planes from the 2 combat ready squadrons including F16's based at the Andrews Air Force Base less than 15 miles from the Pentagon and White House were not scrambled until it was too late.

You would imagine that such gross imcompetence would not result in promotion and yet we still see General Myers (current head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) still bumbling along and currently trying to explain away the inexplicable this time in relation to the torturegate photos.

It's time to impeach the lot of them. Although if the supreme court was doing its job this bunch of crooks and clowns would have never stolen the election and made it into office in the first place.

Ian

 

[fela fan]

Very fair points sparticus.

If this thread continues along these lines, and no mention of the 'conspiracy theories', whether they deserve to be called that or not, i think it might develop along interesting lines.

The points you make are covered on the website that's been linked on this thread.

If we stick to such aspects of the events surrounding the attacks (as referred to on this website), two things could happen:

one, folk might be persuaded that perhaps something is wrong with the USG version of incompetence.

and two, folk might not make much of an appearance on this thread.

Coz after all, this is now dealing with stuff that cannot be included under the accusatory banner of 'conspiracy theory'. And therefore information has to be debated, not the posters themselves.

I've been waiting for such a thread on 911 for ages. Maybe Ae589 has nicely kicked it off...

 

[sparticus]

Thanks Fela. I hope so too.

As I've said on other posts, USG complicity can start and finish with prior knowledge, deliberate stand-down of air defense and then subsequent cover-up and that still adds up to the most outragous and high level crime.

No faked phone calls, no bombs in the towers, no drones required. The planes can still be hijacked by alQ, etc. In fact everything can be as we have been told (although I don't believe this is so) except the prior knowledge and stand down and this still adds up to the USG being complicit and Bush impeached for treason

No doubt some of the usual excuses may be suggested

That they didn't see this coming (not true IMO, see chp 4 of Nafeez's book)
That they required the president or other top officer's go ahead prior to authorising interception (not true IMO)
That somebody, somewhere would have tried to blow the whistle (they have tried)
That such a cover-up is impossible (well IMO the rock solid evidence of prior knowledge amongst significant sections of USG and the stand down orders of defenses during Pearl Harbour comes to mind of a similar attack that has been effectively covered-up)
That I'm (and other 9/11 skeptics) naive and gullible (IMO no more gullible than those who take the word of a discredited and fraudulent president seriously any more).

Ian

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

and U75 too people are complicit (both knowingly and unknowingly) in covering up a much darker story.

Ian

That's a bit fucking harsh


please now explain exactly who on urban had a role in blowing up the world trade centre or attacking the usa. It hink it's a fucking slur to suggest as you have that any one here becuase they disagree with you or your points are in some way or manner involved in these dispicable actions.

qualify your comments.

or are you so cock sure you're right when the rest of the world is wrong that you would actually be able to prove as in a court of law that there are currently spooks agents or terroists posting on urban75 which are directly related to the 11 of september attacks...

other wise for this remark alone you are a prize arse...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Very fair points sparticus.

If this thread continues along these lines, and no mention of the 'conspiracy theories', whether they deserve to be called that or not, i think it might develop along interesting lines.

The points you make are covered on the website that's been linked on this thread.

If we stick to such aspects of the events surrounding the attacks (as referred to on this website), two things could happen:

one, folk might be persuaded that perhaps something is wrong with the USG version of incompetence.

and two, folk might not make much of an appearance on this thread.

Coz after all, this is now dealing with stuff that cannot be included under the accusatory banner of 'conspiracy theory'. And therefore information has to be debated, not the posters themselves.

I've been waiting for such a thread on 911 for ages. Maybe Ae589 has nicely kicked it off...

regreabbley it hink with sparticus aqucing u75 enmass of being complict withthe whol shebang i doubt that very much the gernelising dick head

 

[sparticus]

Hi Garfield

apologies are in order. An unnecessary dig that diverts attention from the evidence. Just to clarify what I intended to say is that at senior levels of U75 there are people who either knowingly or unknowingly are complicit in helping cover-up USG complicity in 9/11. But I can see how you could read it as you have. So again apologies one for the comment and two for diverting attention from the evidence.

Ian

 

[El Jugador]

Just to clarify what I intended to say is that at senior levels of U75 there are people who either knowingly or unknowingly are complicit in helping cover-up USG complicity in 9/11.

Mate - if that's your way of simply saying "Mike the editor has a problem with letting his boards fill up with conspiracy theories" then you seriously need lessons in being 'clear'!

I can understand Mike's resistance to this (if indeed he has such) considering how he personally could be held to account for anything libelous that gets posted here, not to mention the stigma of losing a cool upbeat readership to a sad bunch of gullible badlyneedalays - but I suspect he actually merely enjoys putting the bold proposals of such theories to the test by way of open and straitforward discussion.

Now you might call that 'complicit in a cover up' but I and many others would simply call that 'yet to be convinced'..!

 

[bmd]

Just to clarify what I intended to say is that at senior levels of U75 there are people who either knowingly or unknowingly are complicit in helping cover-up USG complicity in 9/11.

Well? Come on Ed, let's be knowing, since when have you been on the CIA's payroll eh? All this stuff about being a web designer is just a front innit, eh? Eh?

 

[Barking_Mad]

DOH! I hate finding out website admin are undercover agents.......that's 3 times this week already!

 

[editor]

Just to clarify what I intended to say is that at senior levels of U75 there are people who either knowingly or unknowingly are complicit in helping cover-up USG complicity in 9/11.

What the fuck are you talking about?!

There are no 'senior levels' of urban75 "knowingly or unknowingly complicit in helping cover-up USG complicity"

But I could use a laugh, so I'll look forward to you enlightening me with your explanation of such an extraordinary claim.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Okay, I admit it.

This "moving to the US" thing was just a front. I actually moved to Cheney's secret bunker, where in-between harvesting fresh organs from healthy youths for implantation in his aging carcass, I help conduct the intricate CIA psyops campaign of suppression and disinformation that extends across the whole intarweb, even unto the Albert.

Now that I've put my hand up to this, can we please avoid any of this accusation rubbish? Because, you know, I can strike back there. Given that this seems to be a relatively sane 911 thread I'd really love to see actual examinations of available evidence without wild flights of speculation on possible technologies etc.

Why don't we have a thread limited to stuff that can actually be verified or supported for a change? Just for a bit of variety.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Hi Garfield

apologies are in order. An unnecessary dig that diverts attention from the evidence. Just to clarify what I intended to say is that at senior levels of U75 there are people who either knowingly or unknowingly are complicit in helping cover-up USG complicity in 9/11. But I can see how you could read it as you have. So again apologies one for the comment and two for diverting attention from the evidence.

Ian

Ian this still goes a long way to accuse people here in the UK of hiding some thing by challenging what you are saying.

in these bun fights as they occur i have often been at logger heads with those who would be seen to trying to debunk about their method of argument, as the editor will testify. But the alternative argument to the official story is as weakly presented as that of bush et al. The simple truth and perhaps the only truth about this whole affair is that no one knows what really happened. But to assume because those who challenge the information presented by the 'bush knew' side of the argument are complicit as they remain unconvinced by your explanations, is tantamount to stamping your foot and saying I'm right and I'll scream and scream until you accept that.

it certainly doesn't make the argument itself anymore valid.

now then where is the evidence. if we are to accept certain areas of the official story are false or certainly irregular with what one would expect then the evidence needs to come from a certified and reputable source. These are available too, what has always confused the fuck out of me is the willingness for those who are unbelieving of the official story to seize on anything which gives some credence to their doubt, no matter how fantastical badly researched it is. Equally the issue as i see it is whilst on one side the anti official story brigade are truly dismissive of that official explanation by weighing up the pros and cons of the argument and then deciding it to be in error, the same cannot be said for the evidence presented in order to support your own version of events. there is no quality filter.

It shows a bias, as much as those whom argue against what you are saying and thus the threads become entrenched because of that.

you cannot prove something to be truth only that everything else is false, perhaps if more energy was spent on doing this than on actually accusing those whom do not sing off the same song sheet as you as being complicit, it might further the investigation into what really happened.

failing that do tell the relatives of those who died in the WTC and pentagon as well as us sitting here at home exactly how urban 75 was in anyway responsible. I'm sure we're all dying to know, for myself i will of course hand myself in to the appropriate authorities as soon as it is evidenced how i was involved, i would also be throughly disappointed that i had allowed my self to get involved in such a thing and can only say that i must have fallen with the wrong crowd when i joined urban....


BTW valid research is available why is it never referenced in place of more questionable versions...? (apologies to big fish who has in the past referenced some very credibly sourced information)

 

[fela fan]

Talking of valid research, it can't come any better or more comprehensive, with more credible links and sources than the website linked on page one, I'll post it again here:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.net/project.jsp?project=911_project

Here's the intro by the site's compiler:

"This webpage is meant to be a comprehensive resource for anyone attempting to understand 9/11, the anthrax attacks, and the “war on terrorism.” Once you start reading, I think it will become clear that there is much more going on than the “official story” claims. The mainstream media is the one that's failed to “connect the dots.” There are an amazing amount of intriguing news stories that have squeaked into the media but not reached a wide audience, and/or have not been properly followed up or placed into context."

"I also have a slightly different approach to this timeline than they do. I am limiting my sources to only those one might call “mainstream.” Why? It's not because I believe one can only trust the mainstream media. In fact, I feel the opposite is true—much of the best reporting today is coming from the alternative media. But many people are initially very skeptical when they see an article by From the Wilderness or a similar source."


If posters have a free hour or so, why not have a look, choose the links on the right hand side of the page, and just get reading!

After all, at the end of the day, it really comes down to what we as individuals believe. None of us were there, none of us were in the planning.