A Simple Question

[dcrooksjr]

Why do the remains of flight 93 need 24 hour armed security deep in a mountain in Pennsylvania? If their is truley no conspiracy why does the government not just hand over the remains.
What are they hiding?
The above question is based on fact that the wreckage does indeed lay under Iron Mountain as reported by KOMO 4 News.
The video clip can be seen at the link below.

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/3...7armedguard.htm

[Scheetz]

OOOOOOOH maybe there are no bodies? IT WASN'T A PLANE IT WASN'T A PLANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111!!!!!!!!!@@@!!!!!!!!!





I don't know. Possibly the fact that if they were not guarded idiots would try and sneak in and take photos/steal things from the wreck. Look at what happened when the last space shuttle blew up. People were ebaying pieces of it.

[dcrooksjr]

The point I was trying to get across is that 9/11 was a criminal act and should have been investigated as such.

[tyciol]

Aren't things classified as terrorist acts also considered criminal acts?

What would they shoot down if not a plane? How can we explain where the passengers on 93 went then?

[Øskorei]

Actually, the Pen third 'plane' was in fact a very big kite made from human beard-hair that was sourced from the afghani hairdresser's floor - it was a high-fibre product called "Talibarbers" that was woven into a silk-ish fabric, stretched over a balsa wood frame and launched into the airstream in order to act as a decoy for the other flying macines.

What about all the pubic crabs that died ? Crustaceans are people too.

OK, maybe they're not.

[pboyle]

it never happened.
tell me the names of the lost
and the families wanting restitution from those flights
i've only heard of families from planes that hit the towers

And show me the plane that hit the pentagon.

cover-up. wire-tap. police state.

[dcrooksjr]

it never happened.
tell me the names of the lost
and the families wanting restitution from those flights
i've only heard of families from planes that hit the towers

And show me the plane that hit the pentagon.

cover-up. wire-tap. police state.

Something did indeed happen to flight 93, I dont think crashed however.
I think it was shot down because their is no way an engine would end up 5 miles away otherwise. The only problem with it is they won't allow any one to see the remains or examine them so we may never know.

[Sonthert]

I think there is a conspiracy...a conspiracy to cover up that the Feds were warned and chose to gamble that nothing was going to happen. Thats enough reason to cover it up. I think the Pentagon and Pennsylvania planes were shot down, by the Air Force, as well they should have been, its been standard operating procedure for decades, a plane goes off course, control tower attempts to raise them, if attempts to raise them by radio fail, fighters are scrambled to make visual contact and attempt to communicate by signals, if that fails, they shoot the plane down. Simple, effective. A couple experts I heard interviewed said that would take 6-9 minutes. 9 minutes would be a maximum...not 3 hours...it would stand to reason they were shot down. Of course, if my theory is correct, and the truth comes out, then the government shot down planes and killed people because the government ignored a credible warning...several actually. Check it...Al Queda always precedes their attacks with a warning. True in the first WTC bombing ('94?), The bombing of the USS Cole and the bombings of the US embassies in Africa. Of course, once the whole thing turns into a shit sandwich, it makes sense that if they are going as far as they are, that they use the attacks for political currency, to pass newer more restrictive laws and to justify an unjustifiable war in Iraq. None of this protects us...it makes us less safe. Iraq is less stable now and more terrorists are being recruited there than ever before. As far as abridging our civil liberties...name a police state that was safe to live in. Only through a popularly supported democracy that offers liberty does safety come. More laws and more restrictions increase violence.

[dcrooksjr]

I think there is a conspiracy...a conspiracy to cover up that the Feds were warned and chose to gamble that nothing was going to happen. Thats enough reason to cover it up. I think the Pentagon and Pennsylvania planes were shot down, by the Air Force, as well they should have been, its been standard operating procedure for decades, a plane goes off course, control tower attempts to raise them, if attempts to raise them by radio fail, fighters are scrambled to make visual contact and attempt to communicate by signals, if that fails, they shoot the plane down. Simple, effective. A couple experts I heard interviewed said that would take 6-9 minutes. 9 minutes would be a maximum...not 3 hours...it would stand to reason they were shot down. Of course, if my theory is correct, and the truth comes out, then the government shot down planes and killed people because the government ignored a credible warning...several actually. Check it...Al Queda always precedes their attacks with a warning. True in the first WTC bombing ('94?), The bombing of the USS Cole and the bombings of the US embassies in Africa. Of course, once the whole thing turns into a shit sandwich, it makes sense that if they are going as far as they are, that they use the attacks for political currency, to pass newer more restrictive laws and to justify an unjustifiable war in Iraq. None of this protects us...it makes us less safe. Iraq is less stable now and more terrorists are being recruited there than ever before. As far as abridging our civil liberties...name a police state that was safe to live in. Only through a popularly supported democracy that offers liberty does safety come. More laws and more restrictions increase violence.

Couldn’t agree more, at least some one understands the purpose of this post.

9/11 Direct involvement by our government or indescribable, unimaginable incompetence.

My under lying concern is that its bound to happen again because of the incompetence. Was the incompetence real or did it happened because it was suppose to?
If an event of this magnitude or greater happens again and they show mass incompetence to do the jobs they are en-trusted to perform I will forever point my finger at Uncle Sam and not at al-qaeda.

[SafeSearchOff]

i agree with eric and dcrook, but only to an extent. the governent is covering something important up, but not that they were tipped off beforehand, i'm pretty sure that Bush has admitted in a speech that we did recieve a warning from Al Qaeda beforehand.
but to play devil's advocate here/also *sort of* support Bush...
so the gov. gets a thread from Al Qaeda, and we goes: oh shit! raise terror alert level. there are now more police and national guard in the airports. what does this do? frighten the girly terrorists to run away? the terrorists didnt smuggle any weapons onto the plane, they were using legit box cutters and regulation length knives. unless the government was given pictures by Al Qaeda being like "dude, these men will be the one's hijacking your plane", i really don't think it could have been prevented. yeah, we could have shut down all air traffic in the area, but what good would that do? they still know how to fly planes, and they can still get legit weapons onto them.

so what i'm saying is - yeah, its fucked up, the government got tipped off and didnt do anything, but if you think further, what could they do?
don't get me wrong, i'm very sorry for all the losses of 9/11, may they rest in peace, but overall these great people's deaths werent a result of the gov. not trying to stop the attacks, they were the result of our shitty airport security.

all in all its like Hurrican Katrina - yeah, they could have issued an evacuation warning sooner, but all those people didn't die/get their city destroyed because the evac warning wasnt issued early enough, its because preventative measures for something like this were never installed, and simple fixes to the system could have stopped it all. In the case of Katrina - repair the flood gates and river dikes. In the case of 9/11, don't have such lax security rules, and be safer with things that may be considered weapons. also, put locks of friggin airplane pilot doors.

[oggie505#2]

about the 911 plot, the CIA, FBI, DIA, NSA all had some intelligence that something like this could happen, they get it all the time. The break in the system was agencys do not like sharing their information with each other, that why the National Counter-terrorism Center was established, the NCTC is staffed with people from all agencys, this way they have a place to combine intel.

The talk about how Al Qaeda warns people before an attack is true, they caught a lot of flak because on 911 they did not. They are supposed to make a public announcement and try to tell people to convert to Islam and stuff like that. they made a public announcement 2 years ago I think, to warn people of upcomming attacks

[SafeSearchOff]

yeah, i never heard of anyone saying that the gov. got a video from osama before 9/11, i know for certain the agencies were definately tippedo ff though.

[PerznPerversion]

i believe when it comes to national security or something of that matter they keep the evidence for 75 years or some bullshit like that. i forget exactly what the reasoning was but my old US history teacher said that lol :-P

[Firm Young Carrot]

Ah yes, Prison Planet...

Had some dealings with them on a blog I run. We finally booted them off as their gibberish was just deeply boring and repetative. They then started a campaign to blacken our reputation. It's all a bit 14 year old stuff isn't it.

They have a habit of grasping the wrong end of the stick and refusing to let go, regardless of the overwhelming evidence shown to them.

[nestormakhno]

I can't take anyone who supports Mumia seriously...

[Sonthert]

Well, not that I agree 100%, but I agree maybe 35% with the notion that a pro-choice neo-conservative person I know (She's got big tits, but, she's not a friend of mine )...Lets say we were warned...then what? We notify the American people...then what? Shut down the airports? Then what? What if the threat is fake? They never actually have to attack us, they can have us running around like heads with our chickens cut off. Look at the past successes of Al Queda...their known attacks of US targets range from poor to average...not total destruction as was seen on 9/11 (Of course, for you pro-conspiracy people, it would lend credence that the attacks had to be "helped" along with US knowledge/help ). They did it for awhile in 2002/2003, but I think they should start broadcasting the threats they receive, along with an estimate of the likelihood that its credible or not...let the American people decide if they want to change their plans or not. Some people, warned on 9/10/01 might have chose not to fly, they might have chose not to go to work at the pentagon or the WTC, they might have chose to go into their bomb cellar. People plan car-trips, maybe they decide not to take the trip because if the terrorist threat, maybe they just change their route to avoid the areas in question...it would reduce traffic, make emergency response better, maybe make terrorists easier to spot. I envision something like the weather report, except for terrorism. They have this ambiguous scale, move it when they feel like it, nobody knows what if anything that was supposed to happen. I believe that if you give people information, many people will just ignore it, but some people will use it in a sensible way. Maybe, all in all, it saves one person's life. It would be all worth it.

Edit: The Bush Administration...wait that's an oxymoron! The Bush Incompetency (Even Carl Rove jumped ship!) has done next to nothing to prevent future terrorist attacks. Their performance has been D- in preventing terrorist attacks. Relying on surveillance to prevent terrorism is tantamount to suicide...they know how to communicate without being surveilled; they're terrorists. Of course, nodding to the conspiracy-theory people, if they know that surveillance won't prevent terrorist attacks, and they knowingly allowed or actively encouraged 9/11,...then what purpose does it serve...Prison Planet, step in here...to surveil the American people? Those cameras in convenience stores and fast-food joints aren't watching the robbers...they're watching the employees. With good reason, too. Employee theft/shrinkage is a huge margin larger than robbery...like 5 times...apply that to the US...

Objectively, it seems that the Bush Administration has done little to prevent terrorist attacks...I can't see everything, obviously. Why? It does lend some credence that terrorism is in their best interests for whatever reason. If I say high interest rates are bad and enact policies that do nothing to lower them...you'd assume I'm incompetent or a liar. Edited August 14, 2007 by Sonthert

[SafeSearchOff]

on a similar note - eric brought it up - conspiracy

anyone ever see "loose change" ? it was a 9/11 conspiracy video on google video among other sites, like an hour and 18 minutes long. it has really well documented material, good scientific fact all cited, and shows you the rational thought process to believe 9/11 was a conspiracy. it almost makes you believe it...

it was an interesting video to see though, whether you believe it or not.



as for eric's "Terrorism Weather Channel", i don't think we've escelated far enough that we actually need that. maybe in places like israel or pakistan, but there arent nearly enough terrorist acts (thank god) to do something like that.

[KillZedKill]

Jesus was smiting the world with an iron fist, an iron fist made of air plains and people. I think they learned their lesson.

Not seriously.

[Sonthert]

on a similar note - eric brought it up - conspiracy

anyone ever see "loose change" ? it was a 9/11 conspiracy video on google video among other sites, like an hour and 18 minutes long. it has really well documented material, good scientific fact all cited, and shows you the rational thought process to believe 9/11 was a conspiracy. it almost makes you believe it...

it was an interesting video to see though, whether you believe it or not.



as for eric's "Terrorism Weather Channel", i don't think we've escelated far enough that we actually need that. maybe in places like israel or pakistan, but there arent nearly enough terrorist acts (thank god) to do something like that.

Yeah, but remember in 2002/2003, they mentioned like one every two or three weeks. I would guess that there would be at least one threat a week...it wouldn't have to be a whole channel, just a daily report or whatnot.