HAARP/ Raytheon/ 9 11

[deconstruct911]

If you don’t believe 9/11 was an inside job, then this probably isn’t a post for you... ( still go ahead and leave any feedback you wish)

In 2001 it is said the Taliban eradicated almost all of the opium in Afghanistan which represented 90% of the world’s heroin.

The invasion was shortly after September of course, which is weeks before the planting season for opium.

But if the planning of 9 11 was an x amount of years in advance, it only makes sense that the Taliban were playing along, or the opium eradication was also to the benefit of those who pulled 9 11 off.

You see Raytheon/ E-systems apparently possessed patents for HAARP and they are one of the big key players in the war on terror. Perhaps even the pentagon strike. (Global Hawk)

One of Raytheon’s directors is also a director of the drug money bank Citigroup and Director of the CIA under the Clinton admin.

It turns out 2001 was the worst drought in 100 years for Afghanistan, starting in 1999 (the year of the bumper crop)and with the opium eradiation and drought reaching its peak in 01, the lucky Afghans had to sell of their animals in 2001 to survive.

Also if the Taliban’s objective was to surge the price of heroin from years of stockpiling, why then produce so much opium in 99? ( it seems this move only helped keep the price of heroin at a normal price/levle in 2001)
was this drought something else, perhaps the first military action on Afghanistan, or is it simply coincidence?

[zappaman]

1. Coincidence.

You do know what that means, don't you?
And what evidence do you have that Raytheon might have been involved in the pentagon strike?
I'm guessing its just another groundless accusation to perpetuate the fantasy going on inside your mind.

[deconstruct911]

2. 100% speculation

It just a little odd 10 years on after 9 11 Afghanistan produces 90% of the worlds heroin. Why do drug companies make so much Oxycontin with so much morphine readily available in Afghanistan? Are they simply absolute morons?

I also only suggest Global Hawk is a more likely candidate than a Boeing….. ( Also pure speculation)

"Oddities around Global Hawk regarding Sep11th attack: At least two passengers of the September 11th planes had indirect connections to "Global Hawk" and two more worked for Raytheon, one of the developers of Global Hawk

1) Herbert Homer was on United Airlines Flight 175, from Boston, Massachusetts, to Los Angeles, California. Herbert Homer, as described "..worked for Raytheon Co." was the DCE CACO under DCMC Commander - Col. Bryon Young of the RSC Corporate Management (Raytheon) Source: http://www.acq-ref.navy.mil/reflib/raytheon.pdf"


http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/GlobalHawk.shtml

[hack89]

5. You're kidding, right?

You really don't understand why the FDA and DEA would hesitate to allow pharmaceutical companies to sell opiates manufactured in primitive drug labs with no testing or quality control programs? Is it really hard to see the potential dangers to public health here?

Don't you think your Global Hawk theory might be a little more plausible if you could produce a witness that saw something other than a 757? How do you explain all the eye witnesses that saw a 757?

[deconstruct911]

6. Dont you think

I would believe a Boeing hit the pentagon if there was footage from the numerous places that could have seen this plane hit/approach its target.

How do I know these witnesses weren’t paid to say they saw a plane?

You know, they would buy the opium from the source. The farmer’s don’t make heroin dude. All they do is grow opium and gather the tar before it has undergone ANY process. If you’re worried about what they use to slice the poppy and gather the tar, I suggest we take a couple bucks out of our multibillion/trillion defense budget to buy them some spick and span utilities.

[deconstruct911]

7. OR

we just let it fund terrorism. I can see from your pint of view it is a no brainer. Don’t want to cut of the Taliban funding, then they will be really REALLY mad!
After all 9 11 was more than enough to see how angry they are, don’t need to make them more angry.

[hack89]

10. You realized that synthetic opiates were developed for some good reasons

why do you think we don't have massive poppy farms in the US if it was cheaper?

[deconstruct911]

13. Synthetics

are more addictive. The drug war and war on terror are not cheap. Afghanistan is a 3rd world county. 3rd from the bottom of the list I believe. They have all the heroin. They should be rich! But the ONLY reason they grow opium is to simply survive and keep mouths fed. I think they could pick it up for a bargain. They pay way more for morphine from Turkey. I'm not suggesting we should stop buying from Turkey.... I'm saying there is a MASSIVE shortage of morphine and as it stands it is funding terrorism and a 3RD world country will never stop production to grow grapes!

When you teach people how to stay live growing hard drugs, what are they supposed to do stop? Grow grapes? They grew this stuff before the opium, and a country in civil war opium is fairly desirable. If the CIA had put opium in Sudan in the 80’s I’m sure Sudan would be more than happy to continue production.

We already know eradication is counterproductive. Go ahead and watch modern drug war efforts fail miserably to stop the drug trade. What do you suggest? More DEA? Catch the drug lords? Yup we have been trying to catch the barons for decades. The Al capones are always a step ahead even if they dress up in sombreros and turbans….

[hack89]

3. Global Hawk is made by Northrop Grumman. nt

[deconstruct911]

4. My bad

Raytheon merely has links....

As details of the passengers on the four hijacked flights emerge, some are shown to have curious connections to the defense company Raytheon, and possibly its Global Hawk pilotless aircraft program (see 1998 (D) and August 2001).

*Stanley Hall (Flight 77) was director of program management for Raytheon Electronics Warfare. One Raytheon colleague calls him "our dean of electronic warfare."

*Peter Gay (Flight 11) was Raytheon's Vice President of Operations for Electronic Systems and had been on special assignment to a company office in El Segundo, Calif. Raytheon's El Segundo's Electronic Systems division is one of two divisions making the Global Hawk.

*Kenneth Waldie (Flight 11) was a senior quality control engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems.

*David Kovalcin (Flight 11) was a senior mechanical engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems.

*Herbert Homer (Flight 175) was a corporate executive working with the Department of Defense.

Raytheon employees with possible links to Global Hawk can be connected to three of the four flights. There may be more, since many of the passengers' jobs and personal information have remained anonymous.
A surprising number of passengers, especially on Flight 77, have military connections. For instance, William E. Caswell was a Navy scientist whose work was so classified that his family knew very little about what he did each day. Says his mother, "You just learn not to ask questions."

[hack89]

8. So a flight from the city with the largest concentration of defense companies in the world

might be expected to have a lot people with military connections on board, don't you think?

Anybody with a security clearance - which is basically everyone in the defense industry - is unable to tell their families much about what they do. A basic fact of life and certainly nothing to be suspicious about.

Raytheon has 75,000 employees with many working in the DC area - there was nothing unusual about a handful of them all flying on the same day. You are really working hard to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

[deconstruct911]

9. Not a coincidence they were on the plane at all

Because no one was on the flights that hit the targets....

[hack89]

11. So what happened to all the passengers? nt

[deconstruct911]

12. Thats a stupid question

Because I obviously don’t know. How about this: they are alive or they are dead.... Are you suggesting they couldn’t pull this off because they don’t know what to do with the passengers?

We have all heard of Operation Northwood’s.

And I'm sure your take would be its impossible OR they never pulled it off.

But it's even funnier because the only 2 planes seen that day (Flight 11+ 175) both crossed paths at the same time, over the same place. And it gets better, it happened over the privatized Stewart AFB/International airport.

Too bad, the attack on the WTC could have stopped rite there.

X marks the spot….

[zappaman]

14. "Because I obviously don’t know"

That should be your mantra.

[deconstruct911]

15. I hope

it's everyone’s for something.... After all we live in a world with a lot of uncertainty and unanswered questions.

[zappaman]

18. Oh, I use the phrase "I don't know"

for example
"I don't know how anyone could believe there were no planes involved on 9/11 unless the person who claims that is mentally unstable."

[hack89]

17. There should be plenty of eyewitnesses that saw them land

at Stewart - can you provide a link to some of them? Or is this simply another highly speculative CT without a shred of evidence?


You do realize that all four aircraft were seen on 911 before crashing - don't you?

[deconstruct911]

19. There should be all sorts of things

Were they seen? show me video of flight 93 and 77. There is none.

We have witnesses.... We have witnesses there was a 3rd guy at OKC. Lots of them. Means NOTHING!

I never said there were no planes! as far as the wtc's

And why would people think it’s unusual to see AA and UA flight land at an airport that is used by AA?

There were probably hundreds of flights that had to land at Stewart that morning….


Anywa post under other thread with same name and dont hi-jack it so off topic!

[zappaman]

20. "I never said there were no planes!"

Now you are playing games.

"I would believe a Boeing hit the pentagon if there was footage from the numerous places that could have seen this plane hit/approach its target.

How do I know these witnesses weren’t paid to say they saw a plane?"

[deconstruct911]

21. No games just how you phrased it

"I don't know how anyone could believe there were no planes involved on 9/11 unless the person who claims that is mentally unstable."

"NO planes involved in 9 11" was interpreted by me as the "hologram nonsense" no planes at WTC.

I said with respect to the WTC attack, there were no planes to hit there alleged targets.

[SDuderstadt]

23. Do you know the difference between "there" and "their"?

No offense, but you don't sound very educated, dude.

[deconstruct911]

26. It's not a there - their case

[SDuderstadt]

28. Dude...

how can you not know the difference between "there" and "their"?

[deconstruct911]

30. I post topics in 9/11 not "over there and their shit"

[SDuderstadt]

32. Remember this?

"there were no planes to hit there (sic) alleged targets".

Again, you don't seem to know the difference between "their" and "there" and you certainly don't seem very educated.

[SDuderstadt]

22. "show me video of flight 93"

Why would you expect there to be video of UA 93?

And, BTW, there IS video of Flight 77, however, when a security video camera shooting 1 FPS tries to capture a jet liner traveling in excess of 500 MPH, why would you expect to see anything but a blur? This is why people get so frustrated with you and don't take you seriously. You make stupid claims and ask even dumber questions.

[deconstruct911]

25. "Keep digging"

There were other cameras around that could have captured it. Not just the one at the pentagon.

OF COURSE there is no footage of 93. That why I mentioned it. BECAUSE IT WASNT SEEN! HAVE YOU SEEN IT? No one has. There is no video! That why I brought it up.

The only flights "publicly" seen are 11 and 175! No solid proof except eye witness- the same kind of people raising a red flag over OKC- so we both agree than that a witness in these events mean absolutely noting as far as credibility?

I say what about all the witness that say they heard bombs. Oh but they are not credible....

According to you however, witnesses at the pentagon are 100% correct.

2 PLANES SEEN
case closed!

[SDuderstadt]

27. dude...this is getting fucking stupid....

There are 100+ witnesses that saw the fucking jetliner hit the Pentagon. You stupidly reply that they were probably all paid to say that. So, where are all the witnesses that saw differently? Hint: there are none.

More importantly, can you do basic math? If a security camera is shooting 1 FPS and the jetliner is going 500 fucking MPH, what do you think that means? Hint: the jetliner is going 733 FPS. That is more than twice the length of a football field. On top of that, where would you expect security cameras to be aimed? At entrances and gates or aimed off into the distance? What do you think the field of view of a typical security camera is? Do you think it's wider than two football fields? In other words, again, anyone with normal reasoning sills would understand why we WOULDN'T have a clear view of the jetliner. Except for you and people with equal delusions.

Again, you make stupid claims and ask even dumber questions. This is why you are not taken seriously here, dude.

[deconstruct911]

29. But

I never said the Pentagon should have caught it.
I said other places should have!
You make no sense dude!
I said there is NO FOOTAGE. That’s it!
“On top of that, where would you expect security cameras to be aimed? At entrances and gates or aimed off into the distance?”
You Hi jack everything so off topic and then begin to tell me how stupid it is! For once we agree on something. Despite your ridicule how many 100’s if not 1000's of replies have you gotten going over this? I could probably make a rough estimate off reading these forums....

[SDuderstadt]

31. Dude....

do you understand plain english? Why would you expect a security camera to be aimed in the direction of AA77's flight path???? More importantly, do you grasp basic math? Do you understand how slow 1 FPS is when you are trying to capture a plane going 733 ft/sec??? There IS a video of the crash! It's from the Pentagon! And it shows just what you would expect...a huge blur, then a fiery explosion. How many videos or witnesses do you have that saw/show a Global Hawk?

Like I said, you make stupid claims and ask even dumber questions, dude.

[deconstruct911]

33. Confused?

I’m un aware of any pentagon posts you are attacking, but you have me mixed up. SEE I never said the pentagon should have captured it....

Last I checked the pentagon was not in the middle of the desert with no surrounding buildings. C’mon dude, the OKC video discrepancies on top of it. I'm not far out of line at all and your stupid claims won’t stop anything. It is what it is....

9/11 was an inside job.

[SDuderstadt]

34. But the Pentagon DID catch it on video, dude....

do you deny that?

Again, do you understand basic math? Why would security cameras from surrounding buildings have been aimed at AA77's flight path?

And you have yet to provide any concrete evidence that "9/11 was an inside job", dude. Everyone else seems to understand that except you and a handful of people who suffer from the same delusions as you. Let us know when you find one of these:




In the meantime, I sincerely beg you to quit rendering DU the liberal equivalent of Free Republic. BTW, when you described Clark Clifford as a "Democrat powerhouse", you used a GOP slur. "Democrat" is not an adjective. "Democratic" IS an adjective. The GOP refuses to use "Democratic" as an adjective in a transparent effort to deprive the Democratic Party of the goodwill associated with the word "democratic". Cetainly you're not trying to aid them, are you? Are you?

[deconstruct911]

35. You don't know what a smoking gun in this case is

Are you trying to defend Clark Clifford's crimes? ARE YOU? Or do you realize the scope of that connection and ignore it with other less relevant arguments?

[SDuderstadt]

36. Quit trying to change the subject...

why are you using a GOP slur here, dude?

[deconstruct911]

16. SEE OTHER

POST UNDER SAME NAME TO VIEW CHARTS!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x287869

[Jeffersons Ghost]

24. HAARPs' objective, in this application is provide all support at their disposal...

according to the National Geo-spacial Intelligence Agency website, they're doing all that they can to avert natural disaster. Namely the BP Oil Spill, in the gulf.