• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Nine hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces

demon

Master Poster
Joined
Aug 1, 2002
Messages
2,736
An impressive article about 9/11 from the New York Press:

"Nine hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces
What don’t we know, and why don’t we know it?

The Southern Solstice has passed, and with it the deadline for 9/11 families to file their claims with the "Feinberg Fund," as it has come to be known. Of an official death toll of 2976, claims have been filed by for 2,851. The claim involves signing off on any future litigation against the government, the airlines, the airports or any security firms.

One hundred and twenty-five claims remain outstanding, but little has been written about any of these families. Where is the coverage of those insisting on finding out what really happened on that day before they sign away their "claims?"

First to stand up were five widows: Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie van Auken. Breitweiser’s husband was killed in his office at Fiduciary Trust on the 94th floor of the South Tower, while Casazza, Kleinberg and van Auken are Cantor-Fitzgerald widows. They began lobbying for answers early in 2002, navigating the labyrinth of American bureaucracy and hammering the bureaucrats for direct answers to direct questions. In September 2002, Breitweiser testified at the first televised public hearing before the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry (JICI) in DC.

Like many others, she wanted to know why, on May 16, 2002, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice stated that she didn’t "think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center… That they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."

Breitweiser knows the historical facts say otherwise. She noted the following points in her statement. In her words:

• In 1993, a $150,000 study was commissioned by the Pentagon to investigate the possibility of an airplane being used to bomb national landmarks. A draft document of this was circulated throughout the Pentagon, the Justice Department and to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

• In 1994, a disgruntled Fed Ex employee invaded the cockpit of a DC-10 with plans to crash it into a company building in Memphis. That same year, a lone pilot crashed a small plane into a tree on the White House grounds, and an Air France flight was hijacked by members of the Armed Islamic Group with the intent to crash the plane into the Eiffel Tower.

• In January 1995, Philippine authorities investigating Abdul Murad, an Islamic terrorist, unearthed a plot to blow up 11 airliners over the Pacific, and in the alternative, several planes were to be hijacked and flown into civilian targets in the U.S. Among the targets mentioned were CIA headquarters, the World Trade Center, the Sears Tower and the White House.

• In September 1999, a report, "The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism," was prepared for U.S. intelligence by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress. It stated, "Suicide bombers belonging to al Qaeda’s Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and Semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the CIA, or the White House."

Like many others, Breitweiser believes that American intelligence had long speculated that terrorist organizations could and would utilize airplanes as weapons.

She also included a March 11, 2002 statement by the director of the CIA, George Tenet: "[The United States] never had the texture–meaning enough information–to stop what happened." She offered a similar statement by the director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, from May 8, 2002: "[T]here was nothing the agency could have done to anticipate and prevent the attacks."

Once again Breitweiser argued that the facts indicated otherwise. As she said:

• Throughout the spring and early summer of 2001, intelligence agencies flooded the government with warnings of possible terrorist attacks against American targets, including commercial aircraft, by al Qaeda and other groups. The warnings were vague but sufficiently alarming to prompt the FAA to issue four information circulars, or ICs, to the commercial airline industry between June 22 and July 31, warning of possible terrorism.

• On June 22, the military’s Central and European Commands imposed "Force Protection Condition Delta," the highest anti-terrorist alert.

• On June 28, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said, "It is highly likely that a significant al Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks."

• As of July 31, the FAA urged U.S. airlines to maintain a "high degree of alertness."

• One FAA circular from late July noted, according to Condoleezza Rice, that there was "no specific target, no credible info of attack to U.S. civil aviation interests, but terror groups are known to be planning and training for hijackings, and we ask you therefore to use caution." Two counter-terrorism officials described the alerts of the early and mid-summer 2001 as "the most urgent in decades."

Breitweiser is resolute in her assertions. Airport security officials, she believes, could have done much more to prevent the hijackings. Beyond that, however, she wonders what September 11 would have been like had the government made the public aware of the threats. How many people, she asks, would have chosen to board planes that morning? And how many of those in World Trade Center 2 would have remained in their offices, watching the inferno of Tower 1, had they known of the possibility of an air attack?

One of the more compelling passages in Breitweiser’s statement concerns a July 5, 2001 White House gathering of the FAA, the Coast Guard, the FBI, Secret Service and INS wherein a top counter-terrorism official, Richard Clarke, stated that "omething really spectacular is going to happen here, and it’s going to happen soon." Despite being put on heightened alert, intelligence agencies ignored–or at least dismissed–what is now widely known as the "Phoenix Memo."

On July 10, an FBI field agent in Phoenix, AZ, named Kenneth Williams reported suspicions of a hijacking plot. He recommended that the FBI investigate the possibility that al Qaeda operatives were training at U.S. flight schools, suggesting that Osama bin Laden’s followers may have been securing jobs as security guards, pilots and other personnel.

Too many questions remain, and Breitweiser is very thorough in outlining the possible failures of not only our government’s communication prior to the attack, but its response. She wonders why, for instance, the NY/NJ Port Authority didn’t evacuate the World Trade Center when they knew that a second plane was heading in? And why weren’t the F-16s and Stealth bombers that tracked on radar screens at approximately 8:05 a.m. used to prevent tragedy?

Concerning the attack on the Pentagon, Breitweiser notes that Washington Air Traffic Control Center was aware of the first plane before it hit the World Trade Center. And yet, the third plane–American Airlines Flight 77, soon to plunge into the Pentagon–made a few "loop de loops" over DC one hour and 45 minutes after Washington Center was made aware of the hijackings. Why, she asks, was our Air Force so late in its response?"

Link: http://www.nypress.com/16/53/news&columns/feature.cfm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
demon said:

Too many questions remain, and Breitweiser is very thorough in outlining the possible failures of not only our government’s communication prior to the attack, but its response. She wonders why, for instance, the NY/NJ Port Authority didn’t evacuate the World Trade Center when they knew that a second plane was heading in? And why weren’t the F-16s and Stealth bombers that tracked on radar screens at approximately 8:05 a.m. used to prevent tragedy?

Decisions take time, communications take time. The decision to shoot down an airliner isn't as simple as "shoot it down". Stealth bombers couldn't have done anything to stop the airliner. Sending an F-16 to shoot it down also requires multi-level decisionmaking and discussion, and communications between pilot and ground must take place. None of this happens as quickly as some people think it should.

Concerning the attack on the Pentagon, Breitweiser notes that Washington Air Traffic Control Center was aware of the first plane before it hit the World Trade Center. And yet, the third plane–American Airlines Flight 77, soon to plunge into the Pentagon–made a few "loop de loops" over DC one hour and 45 minutes after Washington Center was made aware of the hijackings. Why, she asks, was our Air Force so late in its response?"
See the above.

The article is slanted toward supporting the conspiracy theory that the U.S. government not only allowed the attacks to happen, but that it was directly involved and actually planned the attacks. Pardon me, but while I agree that it's possible that the government has not been completely truthful about all aspects of the attacks, I think it's absolutely absurd that it planned the attacks.

Also from the article:


Some doubt altogether that a plane hit the Pentagon. On Sept. 12, Arlington County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher made some revealing statements. When asked about aircraft wreckage, he responded that "there are some small pieces of aircraft visible from the interior during this fire-fighting operation…but not large sections. In other words, there’s no fuselage sections and that sort of thing." When asked about jet fuel, he referred to a "puddle."

Look at pictures, however, and it’s hard to believe that a Boeing 757 flew into the Pentagon. The damage is not in proportion to the claim, especially when one considers that two Boeing 757s are said to have taken down three skyscrapers. The Pentagon was dented, the plane evaporated.
Comparing the construction strength of the Pentagon to the construction strength of the WTC towers and the other building that collapsed is like comparing cast iron to wood.

Why would seismographs in the NYC area register two tiny quakes at Ground Zero at the commencement of the collapse of each tower?
Experts pretty much agree that the upper floors collapsed into the lower floors as the steel supports lost structural integrity after having been subject to intense heat. When those very large sections of the buildings began to fall, they would quite naturally cause vibrations which could have triggered the seismographs. There is no evidence of controlled demolition.
 
Re: Re: Nine hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces

Pyrrho said:

Experts pretty much agree that the upper floors collapsed into the lower floors as the steel supports lost structural integrity after having been subject to intense heat. When those very large sections of the buildings began to fall, they would quite naturally cause vibrations which could have triggered the seismographs. There is no evidence of controlled demolition.

Not to put too fine a point on it: Half a million tonnes of collapsing building makes quite a racket.
 
Fair points one and all...all the more reason to have a proper inquiry then is it not?
Stop this "idle" and "misinformed" speculation.
 
demon said:
Fair points one and all...all the more reason to have a proper inquiry then is it not?
Stop this "idle" and "misinformed" speculation.

I wouldn't mind knowing if it was true that the Pentagon plane went into a controlled spiral over 7000 feet, if this is a complicated maneuver, and if so, how did the pilot learn this maneuver from a Cessna flying school.
 
I`d like to know that too...the Pentagon episode gets curiouser and curiouser...and I`d like to hear a definitive reply to the mobile phone thing too. Is it an unresolvable problem?
I`m not advocating conspiracy here, I`m just wondering why it all seems to be shrouded in so much mystery, problems with help from the administration etc.

What`s the problem?
People who lost loved ones in this are asking too.
 
I bow to nobody in my estimation of Government incompetence and stupidity, but this is getting absurd.

First of all, at the time, there were news reports that fighters were en route to NYC but arrived something like seven minutes too late, this due to the fact that for years we had been closing military bases like crazy, and the nearest base with 5-minute capability was quite far away.

Second, some people I knew in the military asserted that a plane had intercepted Flight 93 (or whatever it was, the one that went down). There's probably no way to verify this. I only saw the idea surface about 9 months later, and then it was immediately branded a nutjob conspiracy theory.

Third, there's the fact that before 9/11, no commercial airliner that had ever taken off from any US airport had ever gone down due to terrorism.

Fourth, there is some evidence that the Israeli intelligence had some warning that something was going to happen, but what are you going to do? Shut down all air traffic every couple of weeks? Nice way both to wreck the economy and get every US citizen against you. People ridicule the "orange alerts," because when nothing bad happens, they consider it a waste of time. We do have government by the consent of the governed, you know.

Besides, there's enough actual, demonstrable incompetence that there is no need to go looking. Mohammed Atta was granted a visa while he was on an FBI watch list, and he got his airline tickets under his name exactly as spelled on his visa. There was apparently plenty of evidence about the hijackers, as demonstrated by the fact that they were named very quickly, but apparently it was all sitting in dusty boxes somewhere, and nobody with two neurons to rub together had looked at it.
 
Mr Manifesto said:


I wouldn't mind knowing if it was true that the Pentagon plane went into a controlled spiral over 7000 feet, if this is a complicated maneuver, and if so, how did the pilot learn this maneuver from a Cessna flying school.

That's interesting - where did you hear that? The implications are pretty fascinating.
 
demon said:
"Nine hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces
What don’t we know, and why don’t we know it?

Answer 1: We don't know why the author and widows fail to understand the concept of 20/20 hindsight. Gee, things are so much clearer through the hindsight glasses.

Answer 2: We don't know it because it's (as stated in earlier replies) a nutjob conspiracy theory way of looking at the terrorist strike.

In a perfect world (with perfect intelligence gathering, perfect compilation of data obtained therefrom, perfect cross-correlation and communication of that data, perfect analysis of that data, and perfect reaction to the now known specific threat from specific persons in a specific place at a specific time) the US would have easily thwarted the 9/11 attacks.

Intelligence failures occur daily all over the world (no, I will not cite a source for that...just take it on faith or ignore the sentence), and the tendency of humans is (it seems to me) to assign blame and intent to every action or inaction. I fell off a bike when I was a teen and smashed my chin into the sidewalk. My mother asked me why I'd want to do that to myself. -sigh-

Intelligence didn't formulate the Big Picture prior to 9/11. It's that simple, in my opinion.


Luceiia
 
Except you are all formulated these opinions based on slips and portions of declassified documents that are specifically chosen for release. Why did they keep certain documents classified about Pearl Harbor until the people they pointed out as possible sources to prove it was a conspiracy were dead?
 
Re: Re: Nine hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces

Luceiia said:
In a perfect world (with perfect intelligence gathering, perfect compilation of data obtained therefrom, perfect cross-correlation and communication of that data, perfect analysis of that data, and perfect reaction to the now known specific threat from specific persons in a specific place at a specific time) the US would have easily thwarted the 9/11 attacks.

Also, that perfect intelligence gathering system would be dismantled completely on the grounds of "We spent all this money, and nuthin' happened."
 
NullPointerException said:
Why did they keep certain documents classified about Pearl Harbor until the people they pointed out as possible sources to prove it was a conspiracy were dead?
That question seems to assume the answer. They keep certain documents classified until the subjects are dead for several reasons that can be completely unrelated to any alleged conspiracy. Do you have any reason to think that documents were kept secret for this reason that would not normally have been kept secret?
 
Luceiia:
"We don't know why the author and widows fail to understand the concept of 20/20 hindsight. Gee, things are so much clearer through the hindsight glasses....

Intelligence didn't formulate the Big Picture prior to 9/11. It's that simple, in my opinion."

A word about hindsight.
The 'Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise' took place on Oct. 24, 2000, some 10 months prior to the attack on the Pentagon of 9/11/01.
After the attack, advisor Condoleeza Rice stated that she didn`t "think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center...That they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."
___________________________________________________________________________

Contingency planning Pentagon MASCAL exercise simulates
scenarios in preparing for emergencies.

Washington, D.C., Nov. 3, 2000 — The fire and smoke from the downed passenger aircraft billows from the Pentagon courtyard. Defense Protective Services Police seal the crash sight. Army medics, nurses and doctors scramble to organize aid. An Arlington Fire Department chief dispatches his equipment to the affected areas.

Don Abbott, of Command Emergency Response Training, walks over to the Pentagon and extinguishes the flames. The Pentagon was a model and the "plane crash" was a simulated one.

The Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise, as the crash was called, was just one of several scenarios that emergency response teams were exposed to Oct. 24-26 in the Office of the Secretaries of Defense conference room.

On Oct. 24, there was a mock terrorist incident at the Pentagon Metro stop and a construction accident to name just some of the scenarios that were practiced to better prepare local agencies for real incidents.

To conduct the exercise, emergency personnel hold radios that are used to rush help to the proper places, while toy trucks representing rescue equipment are pushed around the exercise table.

Cards are then passed out to the various players designating the number of casualties and where they should be sent in a given scenario.

To conduct the exercise, a medic reports to Army nurse Maj. Lorie Brown a list of 28 casualties so far. Brown then contacts her superior on the radio, Col. James Geiling, a doctor in the command room across the hall.

Geiling approves Brown's request for helicopters to evacuate the wounded. A policeman in the room recommends not moving bodies and Abbott, playing the role of referee, nods his head in agreement.

"If you have to move dead bodies to get to live bodies, that's okay," Abbott says as the situation unfolds .

Geiling remarked on the importance of such exercises.

"The most important thing is who are the players?" Geiling said. "And what is their modus operandi?"

Brown thought the exercise was excellent preparation for any potential disasters.

"This is important so that we're better prepared," Brown said. "This is to work out the bugs. Hopefully it will never happen, but this way we're prepared."

An Army medic found the practice realistic.

"You get to see the people that we'll be dealing with and to think about the scenarios and what you would do," Sgt. Kelly Brown said. "It's a real good scenario and one that could happen easily."

A major player in the exercise was the Arlington Fire Department.

"Our role is fire and rescue," Battalion Chief R.W. Cornwell said. "We get to see how each other operates and the roles and responsibilities of each. You have to plan for this. Look at all the air traffic around here."

Each participant was required to fill out an evaluation form after the training exercise.

"We go over scenarios that are germane to the Pentagon," Jake Burrell of the Pentagon Emergency Management Team said. 'You play the way you practice. We want people to go back to their organizations and look at their S.O.P. (standard operating procedure) and see how they responded to any of the incidents."

Burrell has coordinated these exercises for four years and he remarked that his team gets better each year.

Abbott, in his after action critique, reminded the participants that the actual disaster is only one-fifth of the incident and that the whole emergency would run for seven to 20 days and might involve as many as 17 agencies.

"The emergency to a certain extent is the easiest part," Abbott said. He reminded the group of the personal side of a disaster. "Families wanting to come to the crash site for closure."

In this particular crash there would have been 341 victims.

http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/Contingency_Planning.html
_____________________________________________________________________________
 
I didn't see any indication that the Mass Casualty Exercise contemplated an intentional plane crash into the Pentagon. The building is right in line with the flight path into and out of National Airport, and it's huge. A plane crashed into bridge over the river a few years ago. It doesn't seem unreasonable to speculate that one could hit the Pentagon.
A major player in the exercise was the Arlington Fire Department.

"Our role is fire and rescue," Battalion Chief R.W. Cornwell said. "We get to see how each other operates and the roles and responsibilities of each. You have to plan for this. Look at all the air traffic around here."
 

Back
Top Bottom