OK - here's an idea I have long held about the "cause" of 9/11 --

[PinkTiger]

I feel it could have been a botched war game exercise gone crazy bad. Let me explain: that day war games about the exact thing that happened (hijacked airliners) were scheduled. I think that somehow, the people who were playing the part of the hijackers actually succeeded too well, and that the information about these people was planted by the CIA to cover up the reality.

Whether it was a plan to have it succeed too well or whether it accidentally worked too well, I don't know. Maybe they never got the message to stand down. Or maybe the auto pilots were rigged or they couldn't get the computer program to abort.
I just know from being in the Army that when you are in war games it is easy to get caught up in the exercise. They may not have realized it was really happening until it was too late. This would explain the excellent flying (they were military pilots) and the way it played out. It would explain the lack of response from the military. And it would also explain that they had to force flight 77 to crash in Pennsylvania to keep it from going to Washington and crashing into the White House. It would also reveal why they all were so f----ing scared and panicked when it began to go wrong.

I also think the twin towers were designed, after 1993, to go down the way they did, to protect the people of NY from one of them toppling down forward. So, if it looked as if collapse was imminent, they could remote control the demolition.


Before you flame me too much, ask: is this any different than the other theories playing around here?

[spillthebeans]

1. Have you listened to the Norad tapes? nt

[PinkTiger]

6. No, please. What are they? nt

[spillthebeans]

7. here

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608?currentPage=1

11 pages



The day's exercise was designed to run a range of scenarios, including a "traditional" simulated hijack in which politically motivated perpetrators commandeer an aircraft, land on a Cuba-like island, and seek asylum. "I actually said out loud, 'The hijack's not supposed to be for another hour,'"



08:37:56
WATSON: What?
DOOLEY: Whoa!
WATSON: What was that?
ROUNTREE: Is that real-world?
DOOLEY: Real-world hijack.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00hGzbfw0AE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOuZS_RMgbE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crcz7iWkXz4

[PinkTiger]

8. Thanks. I did read that, I subscribe to VF.

But it never hurts to read it again.

I'm a journalist and I know the writer is putting it down as best he can. I still think, though, we don't know the whole story.

[spillthebeans]

9. I don't know how many minutes or hours are not in it nt

[truth01]

28. The NORAD Audio Tapes: Real or Faked?

http://911blogger.com/node/2391

The NORAD Audio Tapes: Real or Faked?

Interview with Dr. David Ray Griffin regarding his most recent article, "9/11 Live or Fabricated: Do the NORAD Tapes Verify the 9/11 Commission Report?" Griffin's article, written primarily in response to Vanity Fair Magazine's, "9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes" by Michael Bronner in their September 2006 issue, deconstructs the preposterous argument that NORAD was not notified by the FAA of hijacked airliners until they had struck their targets or crashed, and that the only jets the military scrambled were in response to a flight that did not exist. Griffin takes a close look at NORAD's audio tapes, on whose authenticity these claims depend.

Very interesting listen.

[wildbilln864]

2. Please...

Look here!

[KJF]

3. That's not the dumbest idea I've heard...

... but it still needs quite a lot of work. I see where you're coming from though.

[John Q. Citizen]

4. If you blend your speculation with the speculation that the accused

hijackers may have been thought to be double agents actually working for US intel, but in fact were triple agents working for a rogue faction within US intel, then I think it makes even more sense.

Have you read Synthetic Terrorism; Made in the USA by Webster Tarpley?

You can read it here for free http://www.american-buddha.com/911.syntheticterrormadeusa.htm

Tarpley makes a pretty good argument for a Western rogue network being the insiders. If you do read it. also check out the PDF with the new updates to the book. Facinating and well documented reading.

[sagesnow]

14. Video Webster Tarpley on 9/11 as a False Flag Operation

I agree, Tarpley's book is very convincing that 9/11 was another False Flag Operation, like the sinking of the Maine. The 9/11 False Flag operation manipulated the American Public and Congress to agree to a war on another nation before the full truth of who perpetrated of the attack could be known. According to Tarpley, the 9/11 attacks were brought to us by the same Military Industrialists that brought us the 9/11 Terror Attacks. He names about 14 Military drills that coincidentally were being carried out on September 11th, such as Vigilant Warrior. Some of the scenarios the military drills played out included hijacked planes off course. These emergency drills totally confused airflight controllers and pilots who couldn't be sure whether the hijackers were real or whether they were part of the emergency drills they were taking part in. He also says that many of the jet pilots who normally would intercept off course planes were sent to Canada, for example as part of the Emergency drills taking place on that fateful day. Here is a video of Tarpley talking about the 9/11 false flag operation:
<http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-609179074068244932&q=webster+tarpley&hl=en>

[peanutbrittle]

5. Here is a more likely implied scenario....

The Surreal Politics of Premeditated War
by R.W. Behan

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1203-21.htm



But no such manufactured reality is more misleading, fraudulent, and damaging than the “global war on terror.”

snip

The wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq were not simply justified and honorable retaliations to the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. They couldn’t possibly have been that, because both of them were premeditated—conceived, planned, and prepared long before September 11, 2001.

snip



Also common to both lines of dots, and integral to the overall story, is the historic, intimate, and profitable relationship across several generations between the Bush family and the royal family of Saudi Arabia. It can be seen today in the Carlyle Group, a Washington-based investment company focused primarily in the arms, security, and energy industries. Both George H.W. and George W. Bush have been deeply involved in Carlyle, and so have a number of the Saudi royalty. (And so, incidentally, has the family of Osama Bin Laden.)

Carlyle has profited immensely from the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars. Its legal matters are handled by Baker, Botts—James Baker’s law firm in Texas. Mr. Baker also has a personal interest in Carlyle, amounting to some $180 million. (Baker, Botts defended Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, the Defense Minister of Saudi Arabia, who was sued by the families of Trade Tower victims for alleged complicity in the attacks.) Another client of Baker, Botts is Exxon-Mobil.

In September of 2000, with the Presidential election approaching, the Project for a New American Century published a report, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” The PNAC once more advocated pre-emptive war, i.e., premeditated war, something unprecedented in the U.S. history, but it realized what a radical departure that would represent. Moving to such a mindset would be long and difficult, in the absence of “some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor.”


snip

The story of George Bush’s premeditated wars now enters its final chapter.

The catastrophic event takes place. A hijacked airliner probably en route to the White House crashes in Pennsylvania, the Pentagon is afire, and the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center are rubble.

In the first hours of frenetic response, fully aware of al Qaeda’s culpability, both President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld seek frantically to link Saddam Hussein to the attacks, we know from on site-witnesses. They are anxious to proceed with their planned invasion. And less than a week later, at a meeting of the National Security Council, President Bush ordered the Defense Department to be ready to handle Iraq, “possibly occupying Iraqi oil fields.”

The controversies rage on yet today about the events of September 11, 2001. No steel building has ever collapsed from fire alone. Buildings falling precisely into their footprints are the marks of deliberate (and expert) demolition. The faulty construction/foreshortened lifespan/insurance angle. The collapse of a third building that was not hit at all. The short-selling of airline stock in previous days. The Pentagon hit by a missile, not a civilian airliner. Michael Rupert’s book “Crossing the Rubicon” lays the blame for 9/11 directly at Dick Cheney’s feet. Senator Robert Dole’s former chief of staff, Mr. Stanley Hilton, claims he can prove George Bush signed an order authorizing the attacks. Half the people polled in New York city believed the Bush Administration had prior knowledge of the attack, and “consciously failed” to act. Et cetera.

(Conspiracy is forever easier to see than to find, but that does not obviate the need to seek thoroughly the whole truth about 9/11, and that has yet to be done.)

Involving the Bush Administration in the execution of 9/11, or even accommodating their informed inaction, is almost too appalling to contemplate. But if they needed a reason to proceed with their planned invasions, they could not have been handed a more fortuitous and spectacular excuse.

snip

much, much more........http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1203-21.htm


Blood for oil

[MervinFerd]

10. PT, have you even the tiniest bit of evidence?

Because if you do not, then your speculation is worthless and not all that entertaining. LOTS of things --might-- have happened. I favor the theory of Spontaneous Airframe Combustion, myself.

If there were military exercises gone bad, wouldn't you expect that several thousand service people would have been involved? And wouldn't at least -one- of those people have come forward by now?

OTOH, if you want to indulge in fact-free and illogical speculation, you are in the right forum.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[achtung_circus]

12. Which name was called ? nt

[SidDithers]

13. Only see one name being called...

and that would be in your post, not MF's.

Sid

[PinkTiger]

15. I believe I was clear in stating I didn't have evidence.

My intent was to ask if anyone else did, and to relay a suspicion of mine. That is all.

[MervinFerd]

20. Then what's the point? And don't you see the horror?

911 is a tragic and emotional event. -Real- people died. Many of them.

Speculate about whether Dubya is boning Condi.

[CJCRANE]

16. Um....

haven't you noticed what happens to people who come forward, like Sibel Edmonds? They are gagged and completely ignored by the MSM.
That's slighlty more civilized than what happens to Russian whisteblowers (like Litvinenko) but it's still obvious.

[MervinFerd]

19. Edmonds is hardly gagged.

I agree she should have got more attention.

OTOH, if I remember correctly, her information was not all that explosive. Or different from things we know from elsewhere.

[seemslikeadream]

23. Edmonds is hardly gagged?

you should read a little more

on edit you could start here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2809706

[John Q. Citizen]

24. She's under a gag order from a court. So how would you know what info she

has?

[savemefromdumbya]

29. not explosive?

watch this space

[spillthebeans]

17. When Sergeant Lauro "LJ" Chavez came out ..

he is ridiculed for being not credible

[MervinFerd]

18. Perhaps because he was -not- credible?

I don't know Ser Chavez, but if he was involved in a military exercise that involved flying airliners into skyscrapers, it shouldn't be very hard for him to prove that.

[spillthebeans]

21. How many people do you know, who want to get unemployed?

There are not many, I would think.



Take just the example of LT. Col Shaffer and what they did with him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx2v8ManHIU

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger

[spillthebeans]

22. Or take Rodriguez

William spent hours testifying before the 9-11 Commission behind closed doors. His testimony as an eye witness does not appear anywhere in the 576 page report. But after all, Bush told us who did it, so why bother to examine the evidence or talk with the witnesses. The only agency that was allowed to investigate the circumstances of the event was FEMA.

The National Institute of Safety and Technology (NIST), an independent investigative group ignored his plea to tell his story. He contacted them four times but never got a response. NIST was funded by the government which gives you a pretty good idea of just how subjective their findings were. They were paid $35 million dollars and the investigation lasted two years. The taxpayers certainly did not get their money's worth.

William Rodriguez also contacted the FBI who never followed up. The media was not interested. CNN spent a day filming and interviewing him at his home but when it was shown the following day it was thoroughly edited. Some reporters have subtly warned Rodriguez to keep quiet as he could jeopardize his life. They said "You do not know who you are dealing with!" He already looked death in the face and he will probably continue to courageously tell his story. He is speaking the truth and he is speaking it for his friends. He says: "I am living on borrowed time since I probably should be dead anyway."

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=7762

[PinkTiger]

27. Mervin. Why does it bother you that we talk about this?

Yes, you are right, people died. And that is the point. If they did do this to us, the government, that is, then we need to know it. If not, fine. But we need to know so we can keep it from happening to us again.
I think all possibilities should be discussed and open for discussion. Otherwise we are in a fascist world where we have to watch what we say.

[Old and In the Way]

25. I sure would like to know more about the simulated hi-jackings that day.

I saw an interesting fact last night that on 8/25, Raytheon and the Pentagon were test-landing 727's via remote control. Seems to me, a key component of this hi-jack simulation would be to actually test RC capabilities on planes that were "hi-jacked". That would mean some of the planes would require RC systems onboard, no? Probably would want some of the contractor's program engineers onboard to evaluate the exercise first hand, too. Raytheon had personnel on 3 of the 4 flights.

We know the hijacker's picked the day when one of the largest military exercises is underway. What I'd like to know was: were one, some, or all of the commercial planes that were actually hi-jacked on 9/11, part of this exercise? If they were, this becomes an unbelievable coincidence.

I think the 19 hijackers were part of the exercise....either they boarded the aircraft as patsies who thought they were going to play the role of designated terrorists or they used this exercise to double cross their CIA handlers and become suiciders for Allah and the Al Qaeda cause. I lean towards the former.

[reprehensor]

26. I think you are in the ballpark, but...

I think the hijacking Wargame was simply very good cover.

There was no "botching". Except for maybe United 93.