[quote]jeffdirect wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
jeffdirect wrote:
It would be impossible for an ordinary fire resulting from an airplane crash to destroy or obliterate all of those critical time-change parts or their serial numbers. I repeat, impossible.
How about a plane crashing full speed into a building, which then explodes into a huge fireball and has the building crash down on the wreckage? Has he considered all of that?
And who says the stuff was not recovered in some form?
So…
… a fireball will destroy ( melt ?) the engines…who were designed to burn in their chambers this very fuel who destroyed them…
The same goes for the landing gears…crushed by the debris falling on top of them…
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
I think you are part of the conspiracy Sloth. Everyone knows 9/11 was done in Hollywood back in '69 along with the moon landing.
mike[/quote]
Unfortunately I didn’t work on that project (the moon landing). However, I did participate in faking Elvis’ death.
1990-September 10, 2001: Around Three to Four Dozen Al-Qaeda Operations Thwarted before 9/11
Counterterrorism expert Rohan Gunaratna will claim in a 2002 book that �??in addition to successfully completing many missions, a significant number of planned bombings and assassinations [by al-Qaeda] have been thwarted. At least three to four dozen operations were detected and disrupted by government security and intelligence agencies or called off by al-Qaeda.�??
For instance, he cites a 1992 al-Qaeda plot to blow up a plane, which is called off when an operative involved in the plot is arrested. He also cites attempts to bomb US embassies in Albania, Bosnia, and Uganda, and a 2000 plot to assassinate King Abdullah II of Jordan. [Gunaratna, 2003, pp. 133]
Gunaratna has had unusually good access to US intelligence information. One article calls him �??something of an ad hoc adviser to US intelligence officials.�?? And he is the only private citizen believed to have access to some top secret transcripts of al-Qaeda prisoners interrogated after 9/11. [Bergen Record, 7/10/2003]
NORAD will play a key role in responding to the hijackings on 9/11. By then, it will have just 14 fighters available around the US on �??alert�??�??on the runway, fueled, and ready to take off within minutes of being ordered into the air. [Code One Magazine, 1/2002; 9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 17]
The GAO report points out that launching fighters in response to suspicious aircraft (like what happens on 9/11) is a routine occurrence, saying, �??Overall, during the past 4 years, NORAD�??s alert fighters took off to intercept aircraft (referred to as scrambled) 1,518 times, or an average of 15 times per site per year. Of these incidents, the number of suspected drug smuggling aircraft averaged one per site, or less than 7 percent of all of the alert sites�?? total activity. The remaining activity generally involved visually inspecting unidentified aircraft and assisting aircraft in distress.�?? [General Accounting Office, 5/3/1994]
July 2001: NORAD Plans a Mock Simultaneous Hijacking Threat From Inside the US
NORAD is already planning for the Amalgam Virgo 02 exercise. This exercise, scheduled for June 2002, will involve the simulation of two simultaneous commercial aircraft hijackings. One plane, a Delta 757, flown by Delta pilots, will fly from Salt Lake City, Utah to Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage, Alaska. It will be �??hijacked�?? by FBI agents posing as terrorists. The other plane will be a Navy C-9 bound from Oak Harbor, Washington to Vancouver, British Columbia, and will be �??hijacked�?? by Royal Canadian Mounted Police. On both planes, military personnel will act as civilian passengers. US and Canadian fighters are to respond, and either force the planes to land or simulate shooting them down. Describing Amalgam Virgo 02 to the 9/11 Commission, NORAD�??s Major General Craig McKinley later says, �??Threats of killing hostages or crashing were left to the script writers to invoke creativity and broaden the required response for players.�?? About 1,500 people will participate in the exercise.
USA Today will note that this is an exception to NORAD�??s claim that, prior to 9/11, it focused only on external threats to the US and did not consider the possibility of threats arising from within the US. 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste will similarly comment that this planned exercise shows that, despite frequent comments to the contrary, the military considered simultaneous hijackings before 9/11. [CNN, 6/4/2002; American Forces Press Service, 6/4/2002; Associated Press, 6/5/2002; 9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003; USA Today, 4/18/2004]
USA Today will note that this is an exception to NORAD�??s claim that, prior to 9/11, it focused only on external threats to the US and did not consider the possibility of threats arising from within the US. 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste will similarly comment that this planned exercise shows that, despite frequent comments to the contrary, the military considered simultaneous hijackings before 9/11. [CNN, 6/4/2002; American Forces Press Service, 6/4/2002; Associated Press, 6/5/2002; 9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003; USA Today, 4/18/2004]
[/quote]
It gets even better:
"In 1995, the Manila police uncovered an al Qaeda terrorist plot to hijack commercial airliners and fly them into American buildings. The plan was code named “Project Bojinka” and the World Trade Center was specifically mentioned as a target. This information was turned over to U.S. Intelligence authorities.
The CIA later on when making intelligence manuals for CIA officiers printed the WTC towers in the center of a target practice as the front cover for these manuals.
Of course, 6 years later “Project Bojinka” is carried out, and now some high-ranking American authorities are telling us that the possibility of such an atrocity was unimaginable"
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
jeffdirect wrote:
So…
… a fireball will destroy ( melt ?) the engines…who were designed to burn in their chambers this very fuel who destroyed them…
The same goes for the landing gears…crushed by the debris falling on top of them…
WOW.
What about the video tape and witnesses who said a plane hit the building?
[/quote]
Fake tape and the witnesses are all in on the conspiracy.
Not only that but the engine parts that were photographed were transported to the site by Illuminati reptile people after the missile attack. They used mind control so the media didn’t see them do it.
The following link doesn’t show the Illuminati but it is obvious they must have transported the airplane engine parts to site. The only other possible explanation is that an airplane hit the Pentagon.
USA Today will note that this is an exception to NORAD�??s claim that, prior to 9/11, it focused only on external threats to the US and did not consider the possibility of threats arising from within the US. 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste will similarly comment that this planned exercise shows that, despite frequent comments to the contrary, the military considered simultaneous hijackings before 9/11. [CNN, 6/4/2002; American Forces Press Service, 6/4/2002; Associated Press, 6/5/2002; 9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003; USA Today, 4/18/2004]
"In 1995, the Manila police uncovered an al Qaeda terrorist plot to hijack commercial airliners and fly them into American buildings. The plan was code named “Project Bojinka” and the World Trade Center was specifically mentioned as a target. This information was turned over to U.S. Intelligence authorities.
The CIA later on when making intelligence manuals for CIA officiers printed the WTC towers in the center of a target practice as the front cover for these manuals.
Of course, 6 years later “Project Bojinka” is carried out, and now some high-ranking American authorities are telling us that the possibility of such an atrocity was unimaginable"
[/quote]
Yes, they should have banned all airlines from operating.
"In 1995, the Manila police uncovered an al Qaeda terrorist plot to hijack commercial airliners and fly them into American buildings. The plan was code named “Project Bojinka” and the World Trade Center was specifically mentioned as a target. This information was turned over to U.S. Intelligence authorities.
The CIA later on when making intelligence manuals for CIA officiers printed the WTC towers in the center of a target practice as the front cover for these manuals.
Of course, 6 years later “Project Bojinka” is carried out, and now some high-ranking American authorities are telling us that the possibility of such an atrocity was unimaginable"
[/quote]
Yeah, I mentioned this. These attacks were in the works but they were all thwarted. You can’t fault them for stopping a bunch of attacks before they started.
Like I mentioned somewhere,before 9-11 there was never a case of an aircraft being used as a weapon after a hijacking. Enless everyone knew about these terrorist plans you quote, they had no reason to suspect anything than an ordinary hijacking.
The only thing I can fault them with is being caught off guard, thinking this could or would never happen in America.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
jeffdirect wrote:
It gets even better:
"In 1995, the Manila police uncovered an al Qaeda terrorist plot to hijack commercial airliners and fly them into American buildings. The plan was code named “Project Bojinka” and the World Trade Center was specifically mentioned as a target. This information was turned over to U.S. Intelligence authorities.
The CIA later on when making intelligence manuals for CIA officiers printed the WTC towers in the center of a target practice as the front cover for these manuals.
Of course, 6 years later “Project Bojinka” is carried out, and now some high-ranking American authorities are telling us that the possibility of such an atrocity was unimaginable"
Yeah, I mentioned this. These attacks were in the works but they were all thwarted. You can’t fault them for stopping a bunch of attacks before they started.
Like I mentioned somewhere,before 9-11 there was never a case of an aircraft being used as a weapon after a hijacking. Enless everyone knew about these terrorist plans you quote, they had no reason to suspect anything than an ordinary hijacking.
The only thing I can fault them with is being caught off guard, thinking this could or would never happen in America.
[/quote]
You can fault them for not stopping attacks that were occurring. Interception is ROUTINE for these events, NOT THE EXCEPTION. You should have retained that crucial information by now, lol.
“The GAO report points out that launching fighters in response to suspicious aircraft (like what happens on 9/11) is a routine occurrence, …
Overall, during the past 4 years, NORAD’s alert fighters took off to intercept aircraft (referred to as scrambled) 1,518 times, or an average of 15 times per site per year.
Of these incidents, the number of suspected drug smuggling aircraft averaged one per site, or less than 7 percent of all of the alert sites’s total activity.
The remaining activity generally involved visually inspecting unidentified aircraft and assisting aircraft in distress. [General Accounting Office, 5/3/1994]”
