SPIEGEL debunks 9/11 final report

[Woody Box]

The proponents of the 9/11 "official story" are splitting up on the issue of the departure of Flight 11:

Flight 11 pushed back from Gate 32 in Terminal B at 7:40. (9/11 commission final report)

However, the departure of flight 11 is described most accurately by DER SPIEGEL, the German weekly, in a cover story from December 2001. The newspapers sent one of his teams to Boston to interview eyewitnesses:

http://news.globalfreepress.com/ewing/flight11_spiegel911.pdf

Page 37/38 (Attention, 3,9 MB, in German).

The SPIEGEL reporters tell a different story (translation from German):

Atta and Umari are reaching Gate 26 at 7:25. Some witnesses recall them running. But they are not too late. The boarding has not yet begun. Ten minutes later, i.e ten minutes before start, the passengers are called to embark on the plane. In the USA, people are taking flights like busses.
...
Atta and Umari approach the security check in front of the gate. The metal detectors don't raise alarm. The X-ray pictures of their bags don't show anything that raises the suspicion of the security personnel. But even knives as long as 12 inches wouldn't have violated the then valid security rules. Atta and Umari have passed the procedure without problems. "Thank you, Sir." The coup is going on. "Thank you, Sir. Have a good flight."

Gate 26. They sit down for three, four minutes. Flight attendants in blue-red AA uniforms are sorting out papers and checking computer lists. Flight 11 is a F9C19Y53-Job, i.e. there are 9 passengers in first class, 19 in business class, and 53 people have taken economy. These lists also contain the seat numbers of Mohammed Atta (8D), Abd Al-Asis al-Umari (8G), Wail al-Schehri (2A), Walid al-Scheri (2B), and Satam al-Suqami (10B). The conspirators must have met at the gate already. The team is complete. The coup is going on.
...
Boston, September 11, 7:30 a.m. The passengers are scraping their feet in front of Gate 26, 81 people, carrying bags and newspapers. They are making phone calls, rustling with newspapers and drink their "Latte Decaf Fat-Free".
...
Finally, Mohammed Atta embarks on the plane, together with the other passengers. He's the "boss" - this is how Jarrah called him on a message on his cell phone mailbox: "Boss Atta". It is 7:36. The start will be delayed by 14 minutes, so it leaves at 7:59.

So, after being in Boston DER SPIEGEL says that Flight 11 departed from Gate 26 and was delayed, ie. it left the gate later than 7:45.

According to he New York Times, by the way, Flight 11 pushed back at 7:45 from Gate 32.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/national/16TEXT-FLIGHT11.html

So who is right?

Flight 11 - The Twin Flight

http://911wideopen.com/mirror/twin11-1/twin-11-mod.html

[Woody Box]

1. correction: knives of 4 inches length are allowed, not 12 inches

I got the measure wrong, sorry. Just for the record.

[Woody Box]

2. Wrong URL - One letter too much

Flight 11 - The Twin Flight

http://911wideopen.com/mirror/twin11-1/twin-11-mod.htm

[objection]

3. Spiegel published that in 2001

:eyes:

[DulceDecorum]

4. Which was the same year of the "hijackings."

Have the facts changed since then?

[objection]

5. For as long as you're

forever going around and around in circles nothing is going to change, is it?

[Woody Box]

7. strange

which circles are you talking about?

[objection]

23. Repetition.

Your issue has been aired before, hasn't it?

[Woody Box]

6. And it was repeated in 2003

in the best-selling Spiegel book "11. September - Geschichte eines Terrorangriffs".

I don't know which book will sell more often in the long run, this Spiegel book or the just released 9/11 report. But we have to establish that these books are irreconcilable with each other.

That will be interesting for generations to come.

:bounce:

[LARED]

8. This is an easy one

But we have to establish that these books are irreconcilable with each other.

Is this any surprise?

Lets see. The 9/11 commission has access to whatever documentation it requested. The 9/11 commission was able to cross reference events of that day against as many institutions and organizations as needed to get to the facts as best they were able. It was able to codify and verify the events of 9/11 in ways that no other organization is capable.

The Spiegel book/article has none of this capacity.

Is it any wonder the book are irreconcilable? The 9/11 report is the standard reference guide to the events of 9/11.

[Abe Linkman]

9. Would you say the 9/11 "report" is on a par w/The Warren Comm. Report?

Warren Commission Report was a coverup, so is the 9/11 "report".

[objection]

10. No.

In the mean time an information technology revolution took place, alongside ever increasing advances in forensic analysis, public access to information and democratic involvement.

Furthermore while the chances of pulling off a hoax are inversely proportional to the number of people independantly involved, never before did any event ever attract so much attention.

[Abe Linkman]

12. Which one (Warren C. or 9/11C.) is dishonest cover-up?

Tell us which one YOU think is a lie.

[objection]

13. Neither.

n/t

[Abe Linkman]

14. Then, they must BOTH be HONEST cover-ups.

Thanks for playing.

[objection]

15. That's right

The same as it is honest not to walk in the street with you genitals displayed. Committees and Commissions don't lie. It would be too much like hard work to keep it up. They bluff their way through to help to keep the kids from losing too much sleep at night.

Mind how you go. Does your mum realise how much time you spend at the keyboard?

[Abe Linkman]

17. Anyone that naive doesn't deserve more response than this.

.

[objection]

19. Naive?

How many Committees did you ever sit with, Abe?

[LARED]

16. Just curious

Have you read the 9/11 and the Warren Commision report?

[Woody Box]

18. Not so easy

The Spiegel guys have been in Boston and spoken with eyewitnesses. The 9/11 commission did not. Concerning the gate departure issue, it refers to "AAL records" only.

According to the AAL record, some passengers boarded Flight 11 after the plane from Gate 32 had pushed back from the gate (confirming the Spiegel, btw). No problem for the 9/11 commission - it simply concludes that the AAL data are "approximate only".

Sorry, I don't see how this methodigically sloppy investigation will ever be accepted as the "standard reference guide to the events of 9/11".

[objection]

20. not so easy indeed

Not when a methodigically inadequate author lacks the means to go deeper in his investigation, be it interviewing witnesses or sifting documents.

How so sure then that the Spiegel guys spoke with eyewitnesses? Do you seriously think that no journalist ever presented hearsay as first hand? Do you seriously think that no journalist ever assumed a fact to fill a gap? Do you seriously think that no journalist ever fiddled an expense account? I have barely met anybody ever interviewed by a journalist who did not complain of being misquoted or misrepresented.

It should not then be so difficult to appreciate that the official report is credible simply because it gains the most serious public attention. With the process in public view it is open to anybody in a position to know better to object. If indeed you believe
you know better then it falls to you to lodge a formal objection. If you fail to lodge an objection then you have no right to complain that an inquiry was negligent. The negligence is your own.

This is all a part of the due process. If at the end nobody had objected it is then reasonable to infer the official result is correct. That is how it works. That is what is to be trusted.

Bouts of informal indisciplined banter on the internet are not to be preferred.

[Woody Box]

21. objection rejected

If the amount of "most serious public attention" is a criterion for credibility, George W. Bush would be the most credible person on Earth. Is that what you mean?

The commission ordered boarding records from AAL. They indicate that some people have "boarded" the plane after its gate departure. In other words: the boarding data of AAL either point to another flight, or they are pure craps. The commission obviously prefers the second possibility (without mentioning the first one), but says it politely: "The boarding data are approximate only."

Nevertheless, the commission takes the alleged gate departure of 7:40 from AAL for real without even noticing that the radio tape of Flight 11 clearly shows that it had departed at 7:45. Didn't they know this tape or what? This is not methodically correct . (Thank you, Mr. Nice English Teacher!)

And when I detect mistakes in the report like the ones I've already mentioned, I feel not obliged to formulate a formal objection. I just present it to the online community. That' s free speech. That's my right. Maybe it results in a formal objection, but this is not a must.

The 9/11 report is an attempt to freeze the history of 9/11. It will not be successful.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DulceDecorum]

24. objection, you are posting on the wrong website.

objection says:
George Bush has a strong claim to be credible. Or do you mean to presume that the very purpose of the American people is something other than to elect a credible person? If you believe yourself to be more credible by all means stand for election.

Objection has come RIGHT out
on the Democratic Underground
in support of George Bush.

Democratic Underground (DU) was founded on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2001, to protest the illegitimate presidency of George W. Bush and to provide a resource for the exchange and dissemination of liberal and progressive ideas. Since then, DU has become one of the premier left-wing websites on the Internet, publishing original content six days a week, and hosting one of the Web's most active left-wing discussion boards.
<snip>
Visitors may also participate in our discussion forums, which have become one of the most popular places on the Web for members of the political left to share ideas and discuss the issues.

This website exists so our members and guests are assured that there are many others across the country who share their outrage at the unilateral, arrogant, and extreme right-wing approach taken by George W. Bush and his team, the conservative Republicans in Congress, and the five conservative partisans on the Supreme Court. We address the right in harsh terms, and we fully intend to make the word "conservative" absolutely radioactive. In that spirit, DU has already gained countrywide notoriety as the originator of the weekly Top Ten Conservative Idiots list, which is published (almost) every Monday.

Democratic Underground gets lots of visitors and we rely mostly on donations to pay our expenses. We therefore invite you to make a contribution to our efforts in whatever amount you can afford. Democratic Underground is legally a for-profit organization, therefore, you won't get a tax deduction for your contribution. However, you will get the satisfaction of knowing that as long as there are conservative idiots, Democratic Underground will be here to hold them accountable (and maybe even make fun of them).

Since you, objection,
are here to preach conservatism,
I humbly state that you MUST be one of those who are described in the last sentence of the previous paragraph.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.