General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat question would you like answered about 9/11? Mine is,
Why were the Bin Laden's allowed to leave the United States so quickly?
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)..and never shown to anyone?
AnotherDreamWeaver
(2,850 posts)I think that is part of the cover-up.
There was never a real investigation.
See: http://ae911truth.org
barbtries
(28,799 posts)i'd like to know that too.
marlakay
(11,474 posts)if a plane when in, why not show it, unless they were afraid it would show someone else how to do it
but that seems nuts because after what happened I bet they would scramble planes instantly with Obama in charge!
My husband is convinced that Bush's people threatened Obama in some way and thats why he didn't do investigation on them.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)I'd like to know the answer as well.
Mine would be, "Why did Bush sit and do nothing after being informed that we were under attack?"
One photo speaks volumes:
9:05: After brief introductions to the Booker elementary students, President Bush is about to begin reading The Pet Goat with the students when Chief of Staff Andrew Card interrupts to whisper to the president, "A second plane has hit the second tower. America is under attack."[18] The president stated later that he decided to continue the lesson rather than alarm the students.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_for_the_day_of_the_September_11_attacks
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)In a no fly zone without shooting them down with 35 minutes notice? And yes where are those other tapes of the Pentagon? And why didn't the "terrorist" fly out of NY when they could see the towers from the runway. Why fly over military bases when all they had to do was take a flight out of NY and turn around after speed and altitude. You wouldn't need weapons, just enough to take over the plane.
hack89
(39,171 posts)you are aware the Pentagon is in the flight path of a major airport?
Whisp
(24,096 posts)prior to 911.
Apparently no records are kept of these things. hahaha. yah,sure
cpamomfromtexas
(1,245 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)Whisp
(24,096 posts)um, hum... sorry but I don't put much trust into the 911 commission.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_9/11_Commission
Criticism of the 9/11 Commission includes a variety of criticisms of the 9/11 Commission, the United States congressional commission set up to investigate the September 11 attacks in 2001 and chaired by former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean. Because the investigation was controversial and politically sensitive, many participants have been criticized during the process. Leading critics include members of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee and the Jersey Girls, who according to the documentary 9/11: Press for Truth, were instrumental in overcoming government resistance to establishing the 9/11 Commission.
The 9/11 Commission members were appointed by President George W. Bush and the United States Congress, which led to the criticism that the Commission was not independent. The Commission stated in its report that their "aim has not been to assign individual blame," a judgment which some critics believed would obscure the facts of the matter in a nod to consensus politics. In addition, some members of victims' families have claimed that the Commission had a conflict of interest.
Conflicts of interest
Members of the 9/11 Commission, as well as its executive director Philip Zelikow, had conflicts of interest. Philip Shenon, a New York Times reporter, in a book released in February 2008 entitled "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation" claims that Zelikow had closer ties with the White House than he publicly disclosed and that he tried to influence the final report in ways that the staff often perceived as limiting the Bush administrations responsibility and furthering its anti-Iraq agenda. According to the book, Zelikow had at least four private conversations with former White House political director Karl Rove, and appears to have had many frequent telephone conversations with people in the White House. The Commission staff kept a record only of calls Zelikow received, but Government Accountability Office records show his frequent calls to the 456 telephone exchange in the 202 area code used exclusively by the White House. Also, the book states that Zelikow ordered his assistant to stop keeping a log of his calls, although the Commission's general counsel overruled him. Zelikow had pledged to have no contact with Rove and Condoleezza Rice during his work for the 9/11 Commission.[1]
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)airline and brokerage firms. These options allow the owner of the option the right to sell a stock at a certain price, but not the obligation. So if you purchase the right to sell American Airlines at $10/share and its price plunges to $1/share after the attacks, your put options go up an opposite amount (900% in this example).
There were early reports of huge spikes in stock options on airlines and brokerages in the days before 9/11, implying advance knowledge of attacks had reached some traders.
I would like to see that followed up on in minute detail by Ralph Nader and Eliot Spitzer, the only two Americans I trust any longer (besides my brothers and sisters on DU) to run a competent and truly independent investigation.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)StrictlyRockers
(3,855 posts)That is, to me, completely and obiously true. And if that is true, then all you need to do is start digging deeper into it and you realize the whole story collapses like a house of cards. The other buildings were also controlled demolitions.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)I have tried hard to be as fair minded as possible in looking over what we know about 9-11, but that collapse in particular (and its relative obscurity) has always made me go "hmmmm."
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)Yet even reasonable doubters consider this topic too kooky.
Why is that?
I'm sure many intelligent people have looked at the Architects &
Engineers interviews yet many, even prominent government
critics, consider the controlled demolition theory to be wacky.
Why is this? Mystifies me.
Why do reasonable people question that some in the govt
might have had advance knowledge or even a subtle hand in
these horrific events? There is so much that doesn't add up.
Whisked away, shredded, covered up, too many missing
puzzle pieces.
RepublicansRZombies
(982 posts)but once you start digging there is no other conclusion.
Non Thinkers tend to think that 'conspiracy theorists' LIKE this bullshit we discovered.
I would like nothing more than to believe my government is good, working to serve and protect the American people.
I have been horrified since realizing what the Bush Administration (and Congress/ corporate media) is capable of.
I wish it weren't true.
But it is true.
Wake Up America!
hack89
(39,171 posts)There are eyewitness accounts of a 20 story gouge in the side of the building.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)delayed them for a while, as did Cheney's apparent order for them to stand down.
I have not heard anything about the 20-story gouge, only about the fire and some broken windows. I'll have to look for info on that.
StrictlyRockers
(3,855 posts)And I study this subject.
The obvious point to make here is that IF there were a "20-story gouge" in one side of the building, then the building would never fall down completely symetrically on all sides into it's own foot print while doing very little damage to surrounding buildings.
If there were a "20-story gouge" on one side of the building, that building would topple over. As we can see in the video, that does not happen.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Bush claims Card told him "America is under attack" but it's odd that he would inform the president of such news, and then promptly walk away. You'd think he would expect a response from the prez, but obviously he didn't expect one.
Go figure
deutsey
(20,166 posts)If he didn't want to engage in questions at that moment, I would have expected him to smile at the kids, apologize, and say something like, "Sometimes the President has to deal with something unexpected and this is one of them." Give them some kudos on their reading and excuse himself to go be briefed.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)to get the orders of the fucking POTUS! Or that Bush would immediately excuse himself to get a briefing on what had happened. But the Cheney crew didn't need no stinkin' orders...
quinnox
(20,600 posts)with a huge jet plane that some professional pilots have said even they would have trouble pulling off? That is just one of my questions.
FirstLight
(13,360 posts)look like something out of a demolition documentary? it imploded so 'clean'...just straight down...
just1voice
(1,362 posts)We knew where, when and why the "terrorists" were training and Bush told the FBI to lay off their investigations.
WHY? I'll tell you why, Bush is a traitor.
Qutzupalotl
(14,317 posts)And why did Bush and Cheney eventually speak to the panel off the record and not testify under oath?
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)Biafran
(45 posts)RepublicansRZombies
(982 posts)The only steel building to ever fall from fire, somebody must have sold them a load of crap steel.
You would think we would start double checking all of our steel buildings.
It is slightly embarrassing that we are the only country that has built steel towers that crumble due to small fires.
They did do a good job of making a structure that when destroyed by fire, would disintegrate into it's own footprint like a controlled demolition, that was good thinking.
lpbk2713
(42,759 posts)The country was literally left in the dark until that evening when someone convinced Shit-for-Brains
to say just a few words to the country so they would at least have an idea the worst of it was over.
Our top leaders were cowering and messing their pants until they were forced to say a few words.
Dems to Win
(2,161 posts)yet they couldn't even protect the Pentagon?
What does the Department of Defense do, if it takes no responsibility for actually defending the U.S.?
Since we required another enormous federal bureaucracy to actually defend the U.S. (Homeland Security), why do we still have the Department of 'Defense'?
panader0
(25,816 posts)Marvin was appointed by his brother George right after his "election".
Marvin was head of security for the towers. In the weeks prior to the attacks, he shut down certain areas for special reasons.
Like, maybe, planting explosives.
virgogal
(10,178 posts)NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)I know why, but no one ever said.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)I'd like to know in some considerable detail what the cabinet and JCS spent the next few days discussing - what was pitched around, what was known about the attacks at the time, what was known to be false about the attacks at the time, what was known to be false and would be publicly pushed anyway, what opportunities were seen, who was convinced of what, and who had to be pushed into being 'convinced' one way or another of events or plans from the day.
A large bulk of everything the western world's done since then would have flowed, not out of the attacks themselves, but of the government's immediate reactions to those attacks. I would like, someday, to know more about the process through which those reactions were assembled.
polichick
(37,152 posts)...strip us of our rights and asks us to look the other way when it's our own leaders who need to be brought to justice?
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)paraphrase Deep Throat (from a different era): "Follow the money." (Spike in options trades, short selling of airline and brokerage stocks, etc.)
central scrutinizer
(11,652 posts)Oh, you meant September 11, 2001, not September 11, 1973. My daughter was a foreign exchange student in Chile and September 11 has a whole different meaning there.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Zacharais Moussaoaui
Another high-level, critical intelligence breakdown occurred in the case of Zacharais Moussaoaui, the so-called 20th hijacker. Moussaoaui was arrested in August 2001. A full month before the 9/11 attacks. When arrested, he had in his possession a laptop computer filled with information and details regarding 9/11. Enough information to easily thwart the impending attacks. But when the FBI agents in charge of his arrest requested a search warrant to investigate his computer, top-level officials within the government denied the warrant. Why would government officials deny the search of a computer of a suspected terrorist? FBI agents Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit together sent more than 100 requests to their superiors attempting to search Moussaoaui's computer and ring the alarm bells about his terrorist connections. Each time they were denied. And the results are now well-known history. "In the hours after September 11th, FBI agents in Minneapolis (Samit and Rowley included) shared a macabre joke. For weeks prior, they had tried to interest FBI headquarters in Washington in Zacarias Moussaoui, now known as the 20th hijacker. They had begged FBI Headquarters to give them permission to seek a search warrant of Moussaoui's computer. They were denied. In their frustration, they joked that headquarters back in Washington must be infiltrated by agents of Osama Bin Laden. Why else would their work have been thwarted?" A fundamental question that Time Magazine logically asks, then bizarrely refuses to pursue or answer.
http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_06.htm
RepublicansRZombies
(982 posts)Why did the media pretend building 7 never happened?
Why don't they show that building falling over and over and over again?
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)begin_within
(21,551 posts)Trailrider1951
(3,414 posts)whether or not he knew in advance..........take a look:
What did the president know and when did he know it?
Atman
(31,464 posts)He knew EVERYTHING.
Atman
(31,464 posts)This thread of mine was locked for a couple of hours. It was called "conspiracy theory," even though I did nothing but post quotes from the people on-air at the time. Tom Brokaw, Jim Miklashewksi, Katie Couric, etc. No comments from me, just posted what the "journalists" said. And DU locked it as conspiracy theory.
My props to the GD host who listened to my plea and unlocked it. But it really makes you wonder...why are so many people so freaked out to discuss this?
Read the comments from Brokaw, et al as the events unfolded. They wouldn't be able to post their live comments on DU now without being locked or sent to the Dungeon.
Mac1949
(389 posts)that Rumsfeld announced were missing on Sept. 10?
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)That's my question...
CT folks should watch their trousers, I think.