some things to think about.... (very long)
WhiteWolf
for re-formatting it to fit here, there have been no changes made to
it.
while i don't agree with everything that is written below, i do think
there is sufficient cause to seriously reconsider many aspects of the
events surrounding the fall of the WTC.
finally, i would like to thank everyone for their emails.
unfortunately, due to the amount of emails i get every day (i average
about 250 - 600 emails a day, of which, about 1/8 is garbage spam) it
is sometimes impossible to respond to everyone in a timely manner. i
do try, so rather than resending me the message multiple times, please
have a little patience.
and now for today's masterpiece theater.............
WW
=====================================================
Here are some interesting points:
WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTACK - UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
From: "Harmon Taylor"
Copyright October 2001 Lawrence Stephen Maxwell
Permission granted to reproduce and distribute.
Ever think or say "Gee, I wish I'd said that," or "written that?" We
all have. Tonight I bring you an analysis I wish I had written. My
friend, Larry Maxwell, wrote it. Larry is better at deductive
reasoning than anyone I have ever known. He has a keen, analytical
mind and takes nothing for granted. Like Sergeant Joe Friday, he's
interested only in "the facts, ma'am, just the facts."
Larry and I have discussed the WTC matter back and forth by email.
Larry has followed the case, from its first moment, observing the
reporting from all directions. After we had disagreed on a couple of
particulars, I asked him outright, "What's your take" on the
subject?" His response, sent personally to me, follows. I was so
impressed with it that I quickly asked if I could "go public" with it
and he gave his permission. To protect his work, he has copyrighted
it.
Here is Larry's "take:"
Four planes that were supposed to go to particular destinations did
not go to those destinations. Three of the planes hit buildings. One
of them crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.
No ones knows what happened because EIGHT (8) indestructible black
boxes (2 on each flight) were destroyed or reportedly damaged beyond
possible restoration. Guess that is why they are referred to as
indestructible.
The crash in Pennsylvania did not even cause an
explosion. Even if it had, the boxes are designed to
withstand twice the maximum heat that can be generated by a
jet fuel fire. Why didn't they show us the destroyed boxes?
Do you think the guys who actually found them would talk to anyone? Or
are they still alive to discuss what THEY saw with their own eyes?
Paper passports of two (2) of the alleged hijackers survived just fine
and were supposedly found in the burning ruble of the Pentagon crash,
and another three blocks from the WTC.......three blocks. I would bet
good money to anyone who thinks he could contrive a way to launch a
passport a distance of three city blocks.
We have been told that seven cell phone calls were made from the
planes. Not ONE of the callers described the hijackers as Arabic,
Saudi, Muslin, Iranian or anyone from the Middle East.
Barbara Olson, writer, author, investigative reporter, famous
commentator, attorney, and wife of the Solicitor General of the United
States (Mr. Olson being George W's lawyer who argued before the
Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore), did not describe the hijackers to him
as being from the middle east.
She was trained to be observant and mentally record details, yet there
has been no report that she described the hijackers at all. Are we to
believe she didn't describe them, or did she describe them and we just
aren't being told? And if we aren't being told, is it because her
description doesn't match the profile being fed to us?
And are we to believe the Solicitor General forgot to
ask her to DESCRIBE the criminals? I guess we are to accept
that this is obviously an insignificant "fact" that the
most high-powered-lawyer in the United States would
understandably forget to ask.
From almost the moment it happened it was dubbed an ATTACK ON
AMERICA. I have videotape referring to it in that manner BEFORE
George W made his speech in the Florida elementary school and went
prancing across the country. It has NEVER been referred to as an
Attack on the United States.
In everything the federal government does from a legal perspective -
writing and executing laws, prosecution -- everything is the based on
an entity known as the United States. But on September 11, 2001 and
every day since, the criminal acts were an Attack on America. Why are
we suddenly America, not the United States?
The Pentagon is NOT in the District of Columbia -- it is in Virginia.
That is a FACT and it would take volumes to explain its significance.
I will give you a hint. D.C. is the United States. Virginia and New
York are American States. I am doing some research to find out, but I
do not believe that the soil under the Pentagon was ever ceded by
Virgina to the United States. I know for CERTAIN that the Arlington
National Cemetery has NOT been ceded because a federal prosecution for
larceny in the Cemetery was dismissed a few decades back by a federal
district court because the federal government has no territorial
jurisdiction (United States v. Penn, 48 F. 669 (E.D.Va., 1880). The
State of Virgina prosecuted the felony. That area was first ceded to
the federal government for the seat of government in 1791 along with
land on the east side of the Potomac ceded by Maryland for the same
purpose.
Collectively the 10-mile-square was to be the seat of government as
specified in 1.8.17 of the federal constitution. Thomas Jefferson and
the Virginia Legislature took it back (22 square miles) after
Jefferson and Washington had a serious rift over civil rights issues
in 1792 (making Virginians license carriages and wagons and carry
identification on their person). The place where the Pentagon and the
Cemetery are situated was the General Robert E. Lee Plantation and
Estate. It was sold to the federal government after the Civil War.
Had the planes hit a military installation that had been ceded
(federal territory) or anything in DC (78 square miles of federal
territory ceded by Maryland under 1.8.17 of the federal constitution
in 1791) it would immediately be considered and ACT OF WAR, not
terrorism. Pearl Harbor was a military base. Hawaii was federal
territory. That ATTACK was an ACT OF WAR. In this instance none of the
planes hit anything in federal territory.
The soil was American soil of two of the States which united to form
the United States of America and to create the military government
known as the United States that would protect America. Hence, Attack
on America.
BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) agents have been
walking around all over the ruble for two weeks. Why?
More defense systems were disabled than can even be listed. And the
media are NOT talking about THAT.
When OKC was bombed, all we heard for more than a week was Osama Bin
Laden, Osama Bin Laden. Then they pinned it on a guy that they said
was driving a Ryder rental truck.
They arrested McVeigh, according to news reports, 2 hours after the
bombing, driving south on Interstate 45 toward Dallas......barefoot,
no shirt, plates expired, no driver license, speeding, with a loaded
.45 caliber automatic on the front seat. Just exactly what you would
expect from someone who had just blown up an 8 story building with a
fertilizer bomb.
From that moment on, they called OKC a terrorist act. Without McVeigh
they had no terrorist. We still, to this day, do not know what McVeigh
was supposedly trying to influence the civilian population to do, or
how he was supposedly trying to influence government policy....
By definition this was NOT a terrorist act (attached as PDF file). But
the media spin is NOT based on FACT or LAW.
See Attachment: PDF of definition of ACT OF TERRORISM from Black's Law
Dictionary, Abridged 6th Edition -- adopted word for word by Congress
codified at 18 USC § 3077. (You will need Acrobat Reader to download
and read Black's Law Dictionary's legal definition of "terrorism." If
you cannot download it, email Widowmaker and he will send it to you in
email form).
Do you really think that a few 120 pound middle-easterners overtook
eight pilots, and their crew members and passengers, using razor-blade
boxcutters?
Do you really think a commercial pilot would give up his plane under
threat from ANYONE with a boxcutter? How many hijackings have you ever
heard of where the hijackers brought their own pilot? And four times
in one day?
And if you were going to do this deed, wouldn't you have a driver's
license in your own name, get your pilot's license in your own name,
and leave your calling card everywhere you went, being rude and
obnoxious so everyone would notice you?
Explain to me how all of the defense systems were disabled? How did
four planes, that were not on their computerized flight paths, fly
around for more than an hour and a half without alarms going off all
over the place?
When their altitudes and positions CEASED TO BE VISIBLE ON RADAR, why
weren't people (air traffic controllers) alarmed?
As close as Boston and Dulles are to D.C., why would disappearing
planes NOT be a cause for alarm? Why was it more than an hour AFTER
the WTC crashes that fighters were scrambled? Was the Air Force
sleeping at 7:45 AM on a Tuesday morning when the planes were
supposedly hijacked, and deviated from their designated flight paths?
Are we supposed to believe that when a transponder is turned OFF that
no one is alerted that the plane is no longer being tracked by
altitude; and that such a thing could occur to four planes almost
simultaneously in the same geographical region, dangerously close to
the seat of government, and NO ONE was alerting the media, the defense
department, or anyone?
Am I supposed to believe that no one even had a clue for an hour and a
half from the time the first plane left its flight plan until smoke
started coming out of a WTC tower?
And when the first plane hit the tower, no one knew that three other
planes were missing, and thought it prudent to call the media or
government officials and tell them that three other planes were
missing and that other locations might not be safe?
I have talked to three pilots who have told me in their own words and
understandings that what we are being told happened, could NOT
possibly have happened.
What I DO KNOW is that we are not hearing much TRUTH.
And 110 story buildings do NOT collapse because a plane hits them. The
second plane nearly missed the building, only going through the
corner. Most of the fuel burned in an outside explosion. It collasped
first, long before the tower that the plane completely entered. The
refined Kerosene (a/k/a jet fuel) burned up fairly quickly. The
stuff burning from that point on was desks, paper, plastics, carpet,
etc. That fuel did not generate 2000-degree heat that would compromise
6 tubular steel columns in the center of the building designed
SPECIFICALLY to keep the building from collapsing if hit by a Boeing
707 that, because it was older and less efficient, carried MORE
fuel that the 757 and 767 that hit the towers. The structural
engineer who designed the WTC Towers explained how the towers were
designed to withstand a hit by a commercial jet -- and he did explain
this to an international coalition on Terrorism in Frankfurt, Germany
on Wednesday before the event.
And 53 minutes after Tower 2 was hit the tower just imploded because
it was on fire? Yeah right! I discussed this with a structural
engineer who investigated a HOTEL in Los Angeles that he said was 30
stories and it burned from the ground floor up. It burned for nearly a
week. The fire totally destroyed everything on all 30 floors. The
estimated temperatures were 2200 degrees because of the natural gas
and other fuel that was the catalyst for the fire.
The concrete and infrastructure did not budge. It cost more than a
million dollars to TEAR IT DOWN. The 30 floors above the first floor
did NOT cave in on the first floor when the support structure go hot.
And he reviewed the architecture on the WTC and said the type of steel
and the type of construction for the WTC was double the strength of
the LA hotel.
Just like in OKC, people reported hearing multiple EXPLOSIONS before
the WTC collapsed. I have video of people who were interviewed after
the collapses and they said they heard a series of explosions (not
floors collapsing) and then the buildings came down. The media
dismissed it as exploding main gas lines. Gas mains on the 104th
floor? Yeah right!
We know that there would NOT be any safety mechanism in place that
would have shut off gas flow throughout the buildings in the case of
fire -- 53 minutes after a plane hit the building. Guess it was a big
gas valve and it could not be vented to the outside air after it was
shut off. If that is true, I have better safety measures in my own
house than the WTC had.
And why would they need safety mechanisms in place? It isn't like
anyone has ever tried to blow up those same two towers before.
The strength of the WTC towers was in the 6 Tubular Steel Columns in
the CENTER of the buildings, not the steel structure on the outside
like most construction. The buildings were literally, according to the
builder, designed NOT to pancake in the event of a Boeing 707
crashing into them.
But they collapsed. It took 53 minutes for Tower 2 and 88 minutes for
Tower 1 -- to simply COLLAPSE. Excerpts of his speech in Germany were
posted to the internet five days before the planes hit the towers.
My take? Americans are not very bright. Americans don't think. They
accept what they are told. They don't TEST what they are told. They
are lazy, and naive to the point of being undeserving of liberty. And
for that reason they will sacrifice liberty for what they perceive to
be security.
That is exactly, in fact, the genesis for the federal government.
The States gave up their RIGHTS in exchange for perceived security.
And as long as the talking-heads can convince the general public that
the federal government can PROTECT THEM, the sheeple will
patriotically give up every right they have if it makes them feel safe
-- while singing GOD BLESS AMERICA.
Software © 2001 Prospero Technologies Corporation. All rights
reserved.
Jenn e fir
>From: WhiteWolf
[conspiracy theories snipped]
All that, and no mention of a grassy knoll.
-----------------
Jennifer
JJ
More urban legend crap. Pure BS. Several of the passengers who
made cell phone call did describe the hijackers as being of middle
eastern decent, one of those callers was one of the flight
attendants. As P.T. Barnum said, "there's a sucker born every
minute".
WhiteWolf wrote:
>
> =====================================================
> Here are some interesting points:
> WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTACK - UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
> From: "Harmon Taylor"
> Copyright October 2001 Lawrence Stephen Maxwell
>
> Permission granted to reproduce and distribute.
>
> Ever think or say "Gee, I wish I'd said that," or "written that?" We
> all have. Tonight I bring you an analysis I wish I had written. My
> friend, Larry Maxwell, wrote it. Larry is better at deductive
> reasoning than anyone I have ever known. He has a keen, analytical
> mind and takes nothing for granted. Like Sergeant Joe Friday, he's
> interested only in "the facts, ma'am, just the facts."
>
>
<Rest of total BS deleted>
Drooling Coyote
100 points for the first one who can i.d. the following:
"Paranoia strikes deep,
into your heart it will creep.
There's a man with a gun over there,
Tellin' me I got to beware..."
WhiteWolf
as i said, i don't buy into all of it.
some of it, ie. the architectural stuff, i would have no knowledge of
but would be interested in hearing if others do.
there are still some genuine questions raised that are worth
exploring.
WW
WhiteWolf
point, then it's because you don't want to.
as for the cell phone calls - i've checked & all i can find is a
reference that 'they spoke with what appeared to be a mid-eastern
accent'
i didn't post it as gospel, just as something to think about.
WW
Steve Dunlop
fact.
For example, it is not unusual for flight recorders to be destroyed in
severe crashes. Most crashes of passenger jets occur during operations
in and around airports, at low speed, in landing configuration, and often
with near-empty fuel. Flight recorder data is not recovered even in all
these cases, and a higher-speed crash with full fuel makes recovery
all the more difficult.
Air traffic control was aware of the hijack situation shortly after it
occured
and the published news reports acknowledge this.
Early reports did not identify the hijackers as of Middle Eastern
appearance because of news organizations' unwillingness to state the
race of any person, especially a criminal.
Other examples abound.
* * * *
Coyote's quotation is from a Buffalo Springfield song which, contrary
to widely held urban legend, was written in response to events in
an African nation, not Viet Nam.
--Steve Dunlop
Nerstrand, MN
"Drooling Coyote" <dco...@cybernaut.com> wrote in message
news:3bd0...@news.gj.net...
Lewin A.R.W. Edwards
> some of it, ie. the architectural stuff, i would have no knowledge of
Re the FDRs and CVRs, there are two technologies - an older tape system and
a newer solid-state (flash memory) type storage. The NTSB or FBI - not sure
who was handling it, but I think it was the NTSB - said that the "too
damaged to salvage" units used tape, and that's why the data couldn't be
recovered.
The FDR/CVR boxes are designed to stand two hours of a "normal" fire, not an
ongoing 5000F conflagration, or so I've read.
Geoffrey L. Hardin
of this
WhiteWolf wrote:
> the following is from an email that i received this morning. except
> for re-formatting it to fit here, there have been no changes made to
> it. while i don't agree with everything that is written below, i do
> think
> there is sufficient cause to seriously reconsider many aspects of the
> events surrounding the fall of the WTC.
Not based on this stuff, there ain't.
> =====================================================
> Here are some interesting points:
> WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTACK - UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
> From: "Harmon Taylor"
> Copyright October 2001 Lawrence Stephen Maxwell
A copyright? For what? All of this stuff (and much, much better) can be
found in alt.conspiracies or at any number of websites. There is nothing
new or revolutionary about this.
> Permission granted to reproduce and distribute.
>
> Ever think or say "Gee, I wish I'd said that," or "written that?" We
> all have. Tonight I bring you an analysis I wish I had written. My
> friend, Larry Maxwell, wrote it. Larry is better at deductive
> reasoning than anyone I have ever known. He has a keen, analytical
> mind and takes nothing for granted. Like Sergeant Joe Friday, he's
> interested only in "the facts, ma'am, just the facts."
Well, then. . .your friend might want to go back and review some of the
"facts" he put forth.
> Larry and I have discussed the WTC matter back and forth by email.
> Larry has followed the case, from its first moment, observing the
> reporting from all directions. After we had disagreed on a couple of
> particulars, I asked him outright, "What's your take" on the
> subject?" His response, sent personally to me, follows. I was so
> impressed with it that I quickly asked if I could "go public" with it
> and he gave his permission. To protect his work, he has copyrighted
> it.
Again, there is no protection because nothing he put forth is new or
revolutionary. He can put a copyright on it all he wants (did he, in
fact, send his two obligatory copies to the LoC?), but that don't mean
it's protected.
> Here is Larry's "take:"
>
> Four planes that were supposed to go to particular destinations did
> not go to those destinations. Three of the planes hit buildings. One
> of them crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.
>
> No ones knows what happened because EIGHT (8) indestructible black
> boxes (2 on each flight) were destroyed or reportedly damaged beyond
> possible restoration. Guess that is why they are referred to as
> indestructible.
First off, no one in the FAA refers to them as "indestructible." When you
have that much mass and explosive fuel going in one direction, you're
going to be hard-pressed to find anything that will withstand a crash.
These are recording devices. They have moving parts and very durable (not
indestructible) innards.
The ones that crashed into the WTC may yet be found. They're sitting
somewhere in all that rubble. How easy is it to find two relatively small
metal boxes while digging through the remains of two massive steel and
glass towers?
> The crash in Pennsylvania did not even cause an
> explosion. Even if it had, the boxes are designed to
> withstand twice the maximum heat that can be generated by a
> jet fuel fire. Why didn't they show us the destroyed boxes?
Well, as with most conspiracy theories, the facts don't match fantasy. .
.they DID find the black box from the PA crash site.
Now don't that just put a twist in your knickers?
> Do you think the guys who actually found them would talk to anyone?
Yes. Of course. But it would be actually up to the NTSB to "talk to
anyone."
> Or are they still alive to discuss what THEY saw with their own eyes?
Well, maybe they wish they WEREN'T alive after being sexually used by the
Human-Alien hybrids.
> Paper passports of two (2) of the alleged hijackers survived just fine
> and were supposedly found in the burning ruble of the Pentagon crash,
> and another three blocks from the WTC.......three blocks. I would bet
> good money to anyone who thinks he could contrive a way to launch a
> passport a distance of three city blocks.
Yeah. . .that's it. Heaven forbid that the explosion might have ejected
things out and away before being burned. Maybe it was a bunch of CIA guys
who were hiding on the roof of the building in photo-tropic camoflage (or
SEP-field protected Black Helicopters) throwing thousands of pages of
papers out the windows to make it LOOK like paper was being thrown from
the explosion.
Maybe, here in the midwest, secret covert-operatives are running around
during tornadoes and sticking pieces of straw in telephone poles. Yeah,
that's the ticket.
Wierd things happen in explosions.
> We have been told that seven cell phone calls were made from the
> planes. Not ONE of the callers described the hijackers as Arabic,
> Saudi, Muslin, Iranian or anyone from the Middle East.
What, exactly, did they say? Have we heard ALL of the phone calls?
Perhaps the milktoast-eating yuppies didn't realize they were supposed to
immediately launch into a SALUTE report when they called out.
We don't know everything that was said.
> Barbara Olson, writer, author, investigative reporter, famous
> commentator, attorney, and wife of the Solicitor General of the United
> States (Mr. Olson being George W's lawyer who argued before the
> Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore), did not describe the hijackers to him
> as being from the middle east.
What did she describe the hijackers as?
Did you ever think that she might have given her life voluntarily as part
of this conspiracy in order to lend it some credence?
Geez. Can't this guy even whip up a decent paranoid fantasy?
> She was trained to be observant and mentally record details, yet there
> has been no report that she described the hijackers at all. Are we to
> believe she didn't describe them, or did she describe them and we just
> aren't being told? And if we aren't being told, is it because her
> description doesn't match the profile being fed to us?
A hell of a lot of accusations are being made based solely upon
assumption.
People get scared. Why launch into a detailed report on what the
hijackers look like? Who really cares? Until 9/11, hijackers would steal
a plane full of people and land at an airport making demands. There's a
lot of time later to worry about who these people are and what they want.
It may have been more important to her (and everyone else) to simply let
everyone know that the plane was being hijacked.
From what I understand, the terrorists from the Pennsylvania flight told
everyone that they were returning to the airport.
> And are we to believe the Solicitor General forgot to
> ask her to DESCRIBE the criminals? I guess we are to accept
> that this is obviously an insignificant "fact" that the
> most high-powered-lawyer in the United States would
> understandably forget to ask.
There might have been other questions and items of more importance such as
his fear that his wife might be discovered and used as a bargaining chip
in negotiations. . .you know. . .like those soldiers were back in the 80's
when their heads were blown off and they were tossed out on the tarmac.
Personally, I'd be more worried about my wife's well-being than I would
about what the hijackers looked like.
Again, remember that most of previous hijackings resulted in a landed
plane and negotiations.
> From almost the moment it happened it was dubbed an ATTACK ON
> AMERICA.
By the media who just love to incite. Take a look at CNN, et al. They
just rejoice in running headlines such as "America Strikes BACK!" or
"Tracking the Terror!" and other such crap like that. If they don't make
it emotional and grab people's attention, people start flipping the
channel. If they guess wrong, no biggie, they'll run another headline.
If they make it right, people will assume they are some super-omniscient
news reporting agency and tune in to them at the first sign of future
news.
> I have videotape referring to it in that manner BEFORE
> George W made his speech in the Florida elementary school and went
> prancing across the country. It has NEVER been referred to as an
> Attack on the United States.
What?
Okay, let me get this straight. . .You have videotape referring to the
incident as an "Attack on America" but you state that it has never been
referred to as an "Attack on the United States."
What's your complaint? Either you don't listen to what you're saying, or
you are complaining that the newsmedia hasn't said "United States."
They also haven't referred to it as an "Attack on the East Coast." What's
the point?
> In everything the federal government does from a legal perspective -
> writing and executing laws, prosecution -- everything is the based on
> an entity known as the United States. But on September 11, 2001 and
> every day since, the criminal acts were an Attack on America. Why are
> we suddenly America, not the United States?
Oh please.
Next thing you'll be trying to convince us of is that the "Star Spangled
Banner" isn't really the official national anthem because it refers to
neither America nor the United States.
> The Pentagon is NOT in the District of Columbia -- it is in Virginia.
Yes, and. . .
>
> That is a FACT and it would take volumes to explain its significance.
> I will give you a hint. D.C. is the United States. Virginia and New
> York are American States. I am doing some research to find out, but I
> do not believe that the soil under the Pentagon was ever ceded by
> Virgina to the United States. I know for CERTAIN that the Arlington
> National Cemetery has NOT been ceded because a federal prosecution for
> larceny in the Cemetery was dismissed a few decades back by a federal
> district court because the federal government has no territorial
> jurisdiction (United States v. Penn, 48 F. 669 (E.D.Va., 1880). The
> State of Virgina prosecuted the felony. That area was first ceded to
> the federal government for the seat of government in 1791 along with
> land on the east side of the Potomac ceded by Maryland for the same
> purpose.
> Collectively the 10-mile-square was to be the seat of government as
> specified in 1.8.17 of the federal constitution. Thomas Jefferson and
> the Virginia Legislature took it back (22 square miles) after
> Jefferson and Washington had a serious rift over civil rights issues
> in 1792 (making Virginians license carriages and wagons and carry
> identification on their person). The place where the Pentagon and the
> Cemetery are situated was the General Robert E. Lee Plantation and
> Estate. It was sold to the federal government after the Civil War.
OH MY GOD, THE TERRORISTS WERE ATTACKING THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF
AMERICA!!!!
We should be flying Confederate flags!!!!!
> Had the planes hit a military installation that had been ceded
> (federal territory) or anything in DC (78 square miles of federal
> territory ceded by Maryland under 1.8.17 of the federal constitution
> in 1791) it would immediately be considered and ACT OF WAR, not
> terrorism. Pearl Harbor was a military base. Hawaii was federal
> territory. That ATTACK was an ACT OF WAR. In this instance none of the
> planes hit anything in federal territory.
> The soil was American soil of two of the States which united to form
> the United States of America and to create the military government
> known as the United States that would protect America. Hence, Attack
> on America.
You know. . .I just love this crap.
<mocking tone on> "This means something, but I'm not going to tell you
what. . .okay, maybe just a hint!" <mocking tone off>
So, If a foreign government launches an attack on, say, Kalifornia and it
doesn't strike federal land. . .it's not an act of war?
By this reasoning, Russia could launch a nuclear missile, hit Illinois and
as long as no destruction occurred to a federal property, it couldn't be
considered an act of war.
Bullshit.
This is merely more convoluted crap whipped up to make it appear as if
there is some super-secret, Bilderberger-orchestrated conspiracy.
> BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) agents have been
> walking around all over the ruble for two weeks. Why?
They are trained in finding evidence following explosions and fires.
Or. . .maybe they're looking for secret Infra-red tapes and evidence of
the flame-throwing tanks.
> More defense systems were disabled than can even be listed. And the
> media are NOT talking about THAT.
Where? And why would they talk about that? IIRC, they did discuss this
about the ADA for the White House.
Or were there supposed to be ADA for the WTC?
> When OKC was bombed, all we heard for more than a week was Osama Bin
> Laden, Osama Bin Laden. Then they pinned it on a guy that they said
> was driving a Ryder rental truck.
Uh, it was one day. And they still want to know where JD#2 is.
> They arrested McVeigh, according to news reports, 2 hours after the
> bombing, driving south on Interstate 45 toward Dallas......barefoot,
> no shirt, plates expired, no driver license, speeding, with a loaded
> .45 caliber automatic on the front seat. Just exactly what you would
> expect from someone who had just blown up an 8 story building with a
> fertilizer bomb.
Hey, any dumbass can whip up an ANFO bomb. Just because Little Timmy
wanted to do the Jethro Bodine routine doesn't validate (or invalidate)
any points whatsoever.
> From that moment on, they called OKC a terrorist act.
Uh, they called it a terrorist act the very morning of the incident. They
just didn't know who pressed the figurative button.
> Without McVeigh they had no terrorist.
Okay, we have yet another inconsistency in your thinking. You stated that
"for a week. . .they were screaming Osama Bin (sic) Laden. . ." and then
you state that they had no terrorist without McVeigh?
> We still, to this day, do not know what McVeigh
> was supposedly trying to influence the civilian population to do, or
> how he was supposedly trying to influence government policy....
Yes we do.
You continue to speculate based on assumption (or more likely, ignorance).
McVeigh was trying to start an uprising of the people against the
government. I'd bet that you didn't know the militia back in '91 or '92
actually tried to organized an armed march on Washington, D.C. (hmm. .
.that's federal land, so it would be an attack on the United States and
would be considered an Act of WAR. . .I guess if they went and marched on
a state capitol, it wouldn't be, despite the fact they were supposed to
ARREST and HOLD TRIBUNALS for the congresspeople). He felt that the time
was right for The People to rise up against their increasingly oppressive
government. He had been immersed in the militia and neo-Nazi culture and
obviously deluded himself into thinking that these idiots would ever put
their money where their collective mouth was.
He wanted to start the Second American Revolution (or Second Civil War).
> By definition this was NOT a terrorist act (attached as PDF file). But
> the media spin is NOT based on FACT or LAW.
So what else is new? The media spew their crap so they can get
listeners/watchers/readers and eventually sell advertising space/time.
Anyone who believes what is spouted by the media as Gospel. . .
>
> ee Attachment: PDF of definition of ACT OF TERRORISM from Black's Law
> Dictionary, Abridged 6th Edition -- adopted word for word by Congress
> codified at 18 USC § 3077. (You will need Acrobat Reader to download
> and read Black's Law Dictionary's legal definition of "terrorism." If
> you cannot download it, email Widowmaker and he will send it to you in
> email form).
And it's obvious why you don't post this for everyone to see.
Here's the website :
http://resource.lawlinks.com/Content/Legal_Research/US_code/Title_18/title_18_204.htm
You want to state that neither OKC nor WTC was a terrorist act? Well,
here ya go :
CITE 18 USC Sec. 3077
01/26/98
EXPCITE TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART II - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 204 - REWARDS FOR INFORMATION CONCERNING TERRORIST
ACTS AND ESPIONAGE
TEXT Sec. 3077. Definitions
As used in this chapter, the term -
(1) ''act of terrorism'' means an activity
that -
(A) involves a violent act or an act
dangerous to human life
that is a violation of the criminal laws
of the United States
or of any State, or that would be a
criminal violation if
committed within the jurisdiction of the
United States or of
any State; and
(B) appears to be intended -
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian
population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a
government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a
government by
assassination or kidnapping;
Neither OKC nor WTC were a violent act that is a violation of the
criminal laws intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or
influence the policy of the government?
I know you won't explain this because you can't. It is obvious that these
inane conspiracy theories disappear when the facts are put forth.
> Do you really think that a few 120 pound middle-easterners overtook
> eight pilots, and their crew members and passengers, using razor-blade
> boxcutters?
Yes. That's what they were told to do in their manuals and Standard
Operating Procedures.
> Do you really think a commercial pilot would give up his plane under
> threat from ANYONE with a boxcutter?
Yes. It's in their manual. It's their instructions. Again, they didn't
know at the time that the planes were to be flown into a building. Most
hijackings resulted in landing the plane and making demands. Why wrestle
some idiot when you should be flying the plane?
Those box-cutters can (and did) kill just as easily as a knife or a gun.
> How many hijackings have you ever
> heard of where the hijackers brought their own pilot? And four times
> in one day?
How many hijackings have you been privvy to?
And what of the significance? They get access to the cockpit. The Pilot
(not knowing of their ultimate plan) does what he's supposed to do (after
all, I doubt that one of the hijackers ran into the cockpit screaming "I'M
A PILOT!!! I'M A PILOT!!! ALLAH O AKHBAR!!! WHERE IS THE WORLD TRADE
CENTER FROM HERE?!?!"). They demand he place the plane on autopilot,
wrestle him from the seat, cut his and the copilot's throat. No one in
the back of the plane knows what's going on.
Again, remember, until then, hijackings went comparatively peacefully.
You threated to shoot, cut or blow up something and you land to make
demands.
> And if you were going to do this deed, wouldn't you have a driver's
> license in your own name, get your pilot's license in your own name,
> and leave your calling card everywhere you went, being rude and
> obnoxious so everyone would notice you?
WHAT?
First off, a terrorist would not want to draw attention to himself under
any circumstances. He's going to either eventually be dead or in jail and
they'll know who and what he is. Why draw attention to yourself BEFORE
you do anything?
Dude, you're not making any sense.
> Explain to me how all of the defense systems were disabled?
What Defense systems? You keep referring to these mythical "Defense
Systems." Give us specifics.
> How did four planes, that were not on their computerized flight paths,
> fly
> around for more than an hour and a half without alarms going off all
> over the place?
I don't know in what hole you are hiding, but none of what you're spewing
forth seems to mesh with what has been reported.
Alarms WERE going off, the recordings in the towers were aired several
times. The ATC's did not assume that they were attacking anything. Where
do you come up this "hour and a half" time period?
> When their altitudes and positions CEASED TO BE VISIBLE ON RADAR,
The planes did not "cease to be visible on radar." They turned off their
transponders which tells the tracking systems which blips are what
planes/flights. They were fully visible on radar, just without the
indicators.
Is this ignorance of the facts or is this person intentionally lying?
> why weren't people (air traffic controllers) alarmed?
They WERE alarmed. They were trying to raise the planes in their areas on
the radio with no response. They gave out instructions to other pilots in
the area to help look for the planes to see if they could determine
problems. Standard procedure. They were more worried about a technical
problem than a terrorist attack.
A plane loses both voice and transponder but doesn't crash and doesn't
attempt to make a landing immediately. . .there are procedures to be
followed. Until 9/11, we didn't consider just scrambling a military jet
or whipping out a Stinger and blowing the thing out of the sky.
> As close as Boston and Dulles are to D.C., why would disappearing
> planes NOT be a cause for alarm?
See above.
1. No one knew they were going to be used as flying car bombs.
2. They lose commo and transponder but the planes are still on radar
(i.e., not crashing immediately).
3. They were alarmed.
Quit making things up as you go.
> Why was it more than an hour AFTER the WTC crashes that fighters were
> scrambled?
Ah, not a military man, I see.
> Was the Air Force sleeping at 7:45 AM on a Tuesday morning when the
> planes were
> supposedly hijacked, and deviated from their designated flight paths?
But, to use your reasoning. . .they were in on it.
Of course, the Air Force cannot just start launching planes and shooting
down anything in the sky without proper authorization. . .but that's too
simple of an explanation.
> Are we supposed to believe that when a transponder is turned OFF that
> no one is alerted that the plane is no longer being tracked by
> altitude; and that such a thing could occur to four planes almost
> simultaneously in the same geographical region, dangerously close to
> the seat of government, and NO ONE was alerting the media, the defense
> department, or anyone?
Obviously, in your conspiracy-fevered mind we are.
Stuff like this happens all too frequently. Hell, I'd bet you didn't even
know that sometimes airports lose ALL their radar.
And up until 9/11 no one figured a hijacker would use a plane as a flying
carbomb.
> Am I supposed to believe that no one even had a clue for an hour and a
> half from the time the first plane left its flight plan until smoke
> started coming out of a WTC tower?
I don't care what _you_ believe. If you understood all this, why didn't
YOU alert the media?
> And when the first plane hit the tower, no one knew that three other
> planes were missing, and thought it prudent to call the media or
> government officials and tell them that three other planes were
> missing and that other locations might not be safe?
Where would they hide? PLEASE, if you fail to answer any other questions,
answer this one :
WHERE DO YOU HIDE?
> I have talked to three pilots who have told me in their own words and
> understandings that what we are being told happened, could NOT
> possibly have happened.
Bullshit. Post their names here (oh, let me guess, they want to remain
anonymous).
Yeah, I'm sure they all fly heavies, don't they. Uh-huh.
Bullshit.
> What I DO KNOW is that we are not hearing much TRUTH.
> And 110 story buildings do NOT collapse because a plane hits them.
Ah, we're a structural engineer, now, are we?
. . .snip. . .
> The structural
> engineer who designed the WTC Towers explained how the towers were
> designed to withstand a hit by a commercial jet -- and he did explain
> this to an international coalition on Terrorism in Frankfurt, Germany
> on Wednesday before the event.'
They did withstand a direct hit. It was the fire they didn't survive.
. . .snip more drivel. . .
> Just like in OKC, people reported hearing multiple EXPLOSIONS before
> the WTC collapsed. I have video of people who were interviewed after
> the collapses and they said they heard a series of explosions (not
> floors collapsing) and then the buildings came down. The media
> dismissed it as exploding main gas lines. Gas mains on the 104th
> floor? Yeah right!
Oh here we go again. . .where are the seismic recording tapes when you
need them?
. . .snip. ..
> And why would they need safety mechanisms in place? It isn't like
> anyone has ever tried to blow up those same two towers before.
Now you're answering your own accusations.
. . .snip. . .
> My take? Americans are not very bright. Americans don't think. They
> accept what they are told. They don't TEST what they are told.
And you are what nationality again?
> They are lazy, and naive to the point of being undeserving of liberty.
Yeah. . .it's just too bad that we have the most of it while citizens of
other countries have gleefully bent over and grabbed their ankles for
their politicians.
> And for that reason they will sacrifice liberty for what they perceive
> to
> be security.
Ah, the words of Ben Franklin come to mind.
> That is exactly, in fact, the genesis for the federal government.
>
> The States gave up their RIGHTS in exchange for perceived security.
> And as long as the talking-heads can convince the general public that
> the federal government can PROTECT THEM, the sheeple will
> patriotically give up every right they have if it makes them feel safe
> -- while singing GOD BLESS AMERICA.
No argument there.
That's the problem with conspiracy theories. They unravel at the
slightest tug on the first string.
All of this crap has been regurgitated time and again since OKC.
At least you could be original.
Geoffrey L. Hardin,
geo...@abcs.com
Then again. . .I could be one of THEM.
Geez
Harris
Well, I was in 7WTC that morning, as my office was in that building.
In two cases, people I work with told me that pieces of their
stationery, or other work-related papers, landed on people's lawns in
Midwood, Brooklyn!!! That's across Manhattan Island, over the East
River, and maybe several MILES into Brooklyn!
There ya go!
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 12:58:39 GMT, WhiteWolf <whit...@rubyridge.com>
wrote:
WhiteWolf
i posted the letter to get some people thinking. you didn't
disappoint!
i disagree with a few points of yours - ie. at least 1 out of 4 black
boxes should have survived, and a few other things like that.
there are a few things worth questioning.
for me, the bottom line is that this is a government by the people,
for the people and our government is accountable to us. there are many
questions, and have been many asked that we have not received answers
to.
it is time to get some answers.
BTW - in my original post, everything below the '====' is what was
sent to me.
thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts.
WW
KB9WFK
--
"WhiteWolf" <whit...@rubyridge.com> wrote in message
news:p160tts7m8k98sgh0...@4ax.com...
> Here is Larry's "take:"
snip
>
> Four planes that were supposed to go to particular destinations did
> not go to those destinations. Three of the planes hit buildings. One
> of them crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.
>
> No ones knows what happened because EIGHT (8) indestructible black
> boxes (2 on each flight) were destroyed or reportedly damaged beyond
> possible restoration. Guess that is why they are referred to as
> indestructible.
They are designed to survive any water crash.
> The crash in Pennsylvania did not even cause an
> explosion. Even if it had, the boxes are designed to
> withstand twice the maximum heat that can be generated by a
> jet fuel fire. Why didn't they show us the destroyed boxes?
>
I would like to see a source on this. I have heard several reports that
they are only designed to survive ANY water crash and have a pretty high
failure rate on ground impacts. Besides, the ones in PA survived. I saw a
report where they were synching the voice recorder with the flight recorder.
The voice recorder was good enough that they heard someone turning pages of
a book at one point .
> Do you think the guys who actually found them would talk to anyone? Or
> are they still alive to discuss what THEY saw with their own eyes?
> Paper passports of two (2) of the alleged hijackers survived just fine
> and were supposedly found in the burning ruble of the Pentagon crash,
> and another three blocks from the WTC.......three blocks. I would bet
> good money to anyone who thinks he could contrive a way to launch a
> passport a distance of three city blocks.
They have also found stock cirtificates that far away. There goes that
conspiracy theory.
>
> We have been told that seven cell phone calls were made from the
> planes. Not ONE of the callers described the hijackers as Arabic,
> Saudi, Muslin, Iranian or anyone from the Middle East.
This guy REALLY needs to check some facts. One woman alone made 3 calls ot
her husband. EVERYONE was encouraged to call loved ones. One of the talk
shows a few weeks ago had on about 20 people that had talked to family
members just before the crash. What the heck does he propose happened then?
a MASSIVE confrence call? As for the descriptions, a flight attendent gave
seat numbers for those on her flight that were involved in the incident.
That sounds to me like a nationality could be gained from that.
I couldn't even read all that was left. There was just too many
inaccuracies and just plain pointless points. I think he wasted a lot of
time writing that and even more thinking about it.
KB9WFK
TITLE: For What It's Worth
There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware
I think it's time we stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind
I think it's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
What a field-day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side
It's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away
We better stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, now, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
--
"Drooling Coyote" <dco...@cybernaut.com> wrote in message
news:3bd0...@news.gj.net...
Mysterion
Buffalo Springfield "For What Its Worth"
PnL
I'm a mechanical engineer for building systems - HVAC, plumbing, sprinklers,
etc. I work with architects and other engineers (esp. structural)
constantly. And WRONG, the strength for the WTC was primarily in the
exterior steel tubular frame. All that has to happen (and did), is for a
single floor to collapse onto the one below it. Towers are engineered that
way, for economic and practical reasons; more than tough enough to support
their own weight, but not enough to hold up the entire remainder of the
building.
Furthermore, I can't believe that you automatically subscribe to the
American Media as a technical authority figure. If you want to know anything
for sure, you MUST check it out for yourself. Basically all this is, is a
rant attempting to tie-together multiple abstract elements
(Business-as-usual security measures, OKC bombing, the ATF, hell, how about
UFO's while we're at it!) into some pathetic "big-picture" conspiracy
theory. Face it, pal, America got screwed on 9/11 and that means ALL OF US!
Just for the record, I don't trust the ATF either. But that's got nothing to
do with the price of tea in China. The following offers a remarkably lucid,
objective analysis from an educated source:
<<Collapse of the World Trade Center.url>>
http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm
"WhiteWolf" <whit...@rubyridge.com> wrote in message
news:p160tts7m8k98sgh0...@4ax.com...
snip
>
WhiteWolf
and a very good post.
i still think that there are a LOT of unanswered questions.
yes - ALL of america got screwed - but by whom?
i don't 'subscribe' to anyone or anything as a complete authority
without checking it out completely, or in the case that i am unable
to, the word of someone i trust.
a LOT of good information has come out of what i posted, by people
such as yourself responding.
WW
ThisREALLYisMyAddress
<snipped>
>They arrested McVeigh, according to news reports, 2 hours after the
>bombing, driving south on Interstate 45 toward Dallas......barefoot,
>no shirt, plates expired, no driver license, speeding, with a loaded
>.45 caliber automatic on the front seat. Just exactly what you would
> expect from someone who had just blown up an 8 story building with a
>fertilizer bomb.
Uhh, his plates were M-I-S-S-I-N-G. He wasn't aware of it. Just an
unlucky asshole.
<snippety do dah>
Jerry Miller
>would compromise 6 tubular steel columns in the
>center of the building designed SPECIFICALLY to
>keep the building from collapsing if hit by a Boeing
>707 that, because it was older and less efficient,
>carried MORE fuel that the 757 and 767 that hit the
>towers.
Hmmmm..... poster evidently never checked the basic source
material for info, such as Boeing's webpage, for capacities.
According to their webpage, the 707 carries around 11,500
gallons. The 767 lists as 23,890. Hmmmmm.......
And that JP-8 can't generate 2000+ degree fires? Evidently
not a fireman, nor bothered to check any basic fire
behavior websites. A basic housefire, if allowed to burn,
can generate around 2300 degrees, on household
contents. I can't find a figure for JP-8 temperature release,
but I know fuel burns hotter than carpet & plywood!
Next!........
David L. Moffitt
"Gunner" <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:23j3ttov4ui1571q3...@4ax.com...
| Everybody look whats going round...."
|
| <G>
|
| Gunner who still loves the Fish Song..
|
| "Gimme a "F"
| Gimme a "U".........."
|
| Or...
|
| "Be the first one on the block
| To have your boy come home in a box
| And its 1234 Wadarewefighten for
| Dont ask me I dont give a damn
| Next stop is Vieetnammmm"
|
%%%% Then it's 567 open up the pearly gates.
Well now ain't no time to wonder why,
Whoopee we're all going to die!
( Took me 2 hrs of poking through the barn to find that damn Woodstock album
and something to play it on---thank's a fuk'n bunch!)
| ---------------------------------------------------------
|
| "A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
| invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write
| a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort
| the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone,
| solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program
| a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die
| gallantly. Specialization is for insects." Robert Heinlein
Drooling Coyote
wonderful generation who either went to the jungle as the noble soldiers
they truly were, or stayed behind and fought to stop an incredibly stupid
situation.
Lonnie Courtney Clay
***************************************************************************
In 1973-74 I was assigned DDA out of basic to SACHQ command post
ADOFWD. While there I rewrote the assembler driver interface for
AUTODIN, revamped some of the command post displays (17) and was
kicked out (not being trusted) for suggesting that the entire WWMCCSS
Cobol spinning group be replaced by 30 of us Fortran/Jovial writers
and once we had a good grip on the situation then we could launch a
preemptive nuclear strike to take out USSR and China at once. Lesson
learned - an E2 should not discuss global strategy while a Rear
Admiral whose three blond daughters he is chasing is somewhere in the
command structure.
In 1979 with a beard that made me look like Rasputin I graduated Summa
Cum Laude electrical engineering. In 1990 I turned down a job working
direct for IBM, ending my career. In 2001 at 45 I am tired of being
poor, have a beard that can stretch down to my belly button and am
gung-ho to assimilate all the third world nations into civilization. I
am a peculiar hippy hybrid indeed. I want to make love/money and am
not averse to a *judicious* application of war such as we are doing in
Afghanistan.
My name anagram does a lot of reference to Lenin, but I prefer Groucho
Marx, other comedians, and rock and roll or classical music. I despise
acid rock and heavy metal random noise. I am a star trek fan and lust
after the borg bimbo 7 of 9. So I guess that you could say that I am a
typical male American 40-50 year old, past my prime but not yet beyond
exerting some power. The world should tremble in fear, not of me in
particular because the government pays me disability checks for good
behavior, but of all the rest out there who have unsatisfied
ambitions.
Three cheers for sex, soft drugs and rock and roll !!! !!! !!!
Lonnie Courtney Clay
Drooling Coyote
"Lonnie Courtney Clay" <LCC...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7edd270a.01102...@posting.google.com...
A.T. Tapman
>the following is from an email that i received this morning. except
>for re-formatting it to fit here, there have been no changes made to
>it.
>while i don't agree with everything that is written below, i do think
>there is sufficient cause to seriously reconsider many aspects of the
>events surrounding the fall of the WTC.
>
>finally, i would like to thank everyone for their emails.
>unfortunately, due to the amount of emails i get every day (i average
>about 250 - 600 emails a day, of which, about 1/8 is garbage spam) it
>is sometimes impossible to respond to everyone in a timely manner. i
>do try, so rather than resending me the message multiple times, please
>have a little patience.
>and now for today's masterpiece theater.............
>
>WW
>
>=====================================================
>Here are some interesting points:
>WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTACK - UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
>From: "Harmon Taylor"
>Copyright October 2001 Lawrence Stephen Maxwell
>
A first year engineering student would be ashamed to present this article as a
review of the WTC failure
Best Regards, A.T. Tapman U.S.A. (Ret)
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With NINE Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Lonnie Courtney Clay
> I knew they were around here.
>
misc.survivalism, I am whistling off to rec.arts.sf.written........
Lonnie Courtney Clay