Why conspiracy theorists do not use these photos ...

They never refer to this:
http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/Contingency_Planning_Photos.html

Because if Pentagon officials prepare for a commercial jet - why should they use a missile ?

Because if Rumsfeld and the top officials are safe behind the girder of steel beams and kevlar in the wedge which was hit why should they not use exactly the object which they were prepared for ?

I notice the exaggeration for the socalled "physical evidence" which simply means: Let us ask for "WHAT really happened" instead of "WHO did it ?"

In effect it means to place speculations measuring the unmeasurable instead of the key question: "who opened the air space ?". The last question points to the culprits and it is possible to be answered. The question for "explosions" leads directly into the nirwana. And BTW nobody asks: "why did they need a crash commercial plane when the explosives were so neatly prepared anyway? And when explosions would directly point to the first try to make it by explosions some years before?" ("This time we succeeded ! sihnature Osama) Nobody asks for thousands of witnesses who must have observed the impementation of explosives to kill them - which might have caused one or two questions.

So my guess is: there is an interest in boosting "physical evidence". And lots of innocent people follow the nice photos and videos and more photos and ask senseless questions.

When "able dangers" will be the issue in congressuonal hearings in January there will be an interest too not to rise the question:

"who was responsible for the double existence, for the visa, for destroying evidence of the two Mohammed Attas ?"
(Atta #1 under observation of CIA, LfV, BKA in Hamburg, Atta #2 buying things in the BJ`s in Florida, in flight schools, having a girl friend Amanda and so on, all under observation of the "able dangers" officials). They cannot get out of this problem by dismissing i.e. the CIA as havong somebody else under surveillance.

Not to suggest interested sides in these discussions is, to say it mildly, funny.

"Coincidence Theorists" don't refer to those photos.

The War Games of September 11th.

Of all the people who knew the German Mohammed El Amir(Atta).........

These 3 individuals interest me the most because they seem to be the only ones who invoke Atta's hatred of the Jews as proof of his membership of AlQuida or some hard core group.


1)Shahid Nickels

"Israel had no right to exist and that suicide attacks by Palestinians on Israeli civilians were "legitimate."


2)Ahmed Maglad

"the Palestinian conflict "was always a topic for Atta. He spoke out against the United States because it defends Israel. The Jews were his enemies, in particular because of Palestine."

3)Julian Miklaszeski

"All non-believers were evil in his eyes,"

But it is just these 3 that knew the German Atta that mention Atta in this way....and no others....unless include you fuckers like Ramzi Binalshib who we can discount as a credible source anyway.

I thought I would be able to collect the whole bundle of red herrings in one thread.

Most important is not to discuss the implications of the contingency planning photos.

So we notice the try to discuss identities of witnesses in a laughable trial, poor in its methods, in its objectives and its results.

We could as well discuss the thoughts of Attas landlords. Or the political position of Attas haircutter in Hamburg. Maybe he is antisemitic too ?

So this leads immediately to the red herring antisemitism. We do not even have evidence of ANY Atta sitting in or piloting the AAL11. But we shall discuss how anti-jewish was somebody who knew one of the Attas. The absurdity is really nice.

There are more red herrings to come. Let`s roll. Show what you have got.

Medianalysis....I am on your side.

These 3 "friends" of the German Atta are suspect.


1)Shahid Nickels says that Atta told him that:

"Israel had no right to exist and that suicide attacks by Palestinians on Israeli civilians were "legitimate."


2)Ahmed Maglad says that Atta told him that:

" The Jews were his enemies, in particular because of Palestine."

3)Julian Miklaszeski says that Atta told him that:

"All non-believers were evil in his eyes,"

But these appear to be the only 3 individuals that knew El Amir(Atta) in Germany that say this about Atta.Everyone else that knew him in Germany say he was not that bad......in fact they say he was quite nice....that he was tolerant of other religions and that he always wanted to resolve political situations like these in non violent ways.

So who exactly are Nickels,Maglad and Miklaszeski?

The above 3 "friends" of Atta seem to be "framing" the German Atta POST 9/11 to make him a more believable hijacker to the Arab and world wide public.

And.......

I agree with you about the 2 Atta's and their different ways of behaving.


A:
The Atta in Florida liked Rap/Rock music.

The Atta in Germany did not like music.


B:
The Atta in Florida had several pilot licenses before even arriving in the U.S.

The Atta in Germany hated flying and even needed medication to stop him getting sick when he did fly.

C:
The Atta in Florida had a son to a French woman.

The Atta in Germany only ever had one girlfriend and she was Syrian!

D:
The Atta in Florida has lived and traveled to the U.S.

The Atta in Germany had never even been to the U.S(according to his father).

It's a "key question" to you, but I don't understand what you're asking. What airspace? Why are you assuming it was "opened"?

"key" means to open or to close something.

Aside from the restrictions concerning the airspace over Washington d.c. in general we could notice a succession of decisions concerning the airspace of the U.S.A.. I quote the Daily Telegraph:

"Within minutes of the attack American forces around the world were put on one of their highest states of alert - Defcon 3, just two notches short of all-out war - and F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington DC."
(concerning the time AFTER the impacts)

But take-offs were stopped in the New York / D.C. area after 9:00. Fighter jets from OTIS scrambled a quarter of an hour before (allegedly) and did not make their way to NY in time, miraculously, and not at all to Washington. Where, as we know, two squadrons wait to be scrambled to protect Washington, to protect Airforce#1, to escort presidents of foreign states when coming in.
In the highest state of alert they have all time of the year and every minute at least two interceptors. This is called QRA. They are in the air in 5 to ten minutes.

Where were they?

What are trhe Stinger missiles for which are places in the courtyard of the Pentagon ? Where is the discussion about the air defense which is always ready and which was on alert 67 times in the year BEFORE 9/11 ?

and why would discussion about the previous years air defense alerts have any bearing on the truth of what happened on 9-11?


What do you hope to accomplish with this inquiry? Let us have your reasons.

There were no Stinger missiles (or any other missile defense) active at the Pentagon on 9/11. Even if Stinger missiles HAD been deployed there, a Stinger would not have stopped a 757.

What, specifically, do you mean by "on alert 67 times" in the year before 9/11?

"There were no Stinger missiles (or any other missile defense) active at the Pentagon on 9/11."

Yes there was nothing active for defense. Nada.
Especially not Mr. Rumsfeld was not active.

"America is under attack" is what Andy Card told at 9:05. The Secretary of Defense startet breakfast with Senator Cox.

"America is under attack" said Mr. Bush after another 25 minutes that day into the cameras in Sarasota. It took such a long time to end reading the goat story and to get the meaning of "attack". The Secretary of Defense was going on to have breakfast.

"The Pentagon building was hit" they said another 10 minutes later. The Secretary of Defense visited the hole and had a nice time in front of some cameras.

In the war room of the pentagon some people were waiting on this hero to take decisions, at least to confer a little bit. I.e.: "What is Andrews AFB doing ?"


Mercutio: mission alerts are normal because of electric failure, because of unclear identity or because of hijackings i.e. to Cuba in the 70s. The german Luftwaffe commemorates just the 250.000th alert for the past 4 decades. QRA ist a daily NATO standard procedure - and it is normal to have alerts even in peace times. Not only the famous Payne Stewart one. How else would you protect the closed airspace, Mr. ATC ? Don`t tell the people here it is otherwise or I will fill these sides with links of alerts, with links to regulations.

Why do you ask - if you really were an ATC ?

Because, as usual, I'm looking for you to clarify your post. Does an "alert" to you constitute an intercept or just going on alert status?

That aside, just because I'm an ATC doesn't mean I know what military planes are doing at all times all over the country.

at the Pentagon on 9/11."

There were none active--everybody knows that. Were there none installed? How do you know?
Don't you think that the missile defenses of the Pentagon would have been restricted info before
9/11? And if there were missiles that were inactive 9/11, don't you think thag after 9/11 their
existence would also be resticted information?

then they'd have a hard time having the public believe that it was a terrorist attack.

that the missile scenario was what the neocons sold Congress under "National Security." Only an idiot would believe a 757 hit. We have to assume that there are at least a few sane people in Congress!

"Only an idiot would believe a 757 hit."

I like that.

Idiots on one side. Sane on the other.

We call that "manichaeic world view", with some religious cream on it: believe".

You have the evidence that they were prepared for a heavy plane. A Boeing hit. Nearly no important damage because of the special wedge which was hit.

The Bushists tell us: it was AlQaida.
Conspiracy theorists tell us: it was whoever, but it was no 757 but something else.

Most important is to hide that exactly that happened what they were prepared for and what they did not stop. Ignore reality and bomb the world and get the oil.

Not just any missile but a bunker-buster type. Fired at the Pentagon. What are they going to do? Just drive up to the building, set up on the lawn and fire away?
The easiest way to deliver the missile would be by means of some kind of RC drone. Terrorists would not have easy access to that.

So a missile hit would logically not play part in any official preparations and exercises regarding a terrorist attack on the Pentagon.

If they'd prepare for any terrorist hit against the Pentagon, it would involve a large plane, because there are plenty of those flying around ready for terrorists to be hijacked. An alternative might be a truck bomb. But delivery through the air would seem more secure.

The fact that they prepared for a plane to hit the Pentagon does not prove that nothing else but a plane did hit.

And as far as i am concerned it wasn't done by whoever.
You only need to listen to Sibel Edmonds and Indira Singh to get an idea who i think did it:

Sibel Edmonds and other Whistleblowers Group
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=344

A dirty bunker buster at that.

A perfect sell to the US Congress.

===============================================================
"Where were our aircraft, when a missile is heading toward the Pentagon" - Jamie S. Gorelick <9/11 Commission>
===============================================================

"The fact that they prepared for a plane to hit the Pentagon does not prove that nothing else but a plane did hit."

Good logic. It could have been a heap of bullshit too which hit the Pentagon. Deep frozen to break the steel beams in the width of a palne.

- PNAC needed a "second Pearl Habor".
- They prepared for the impact of a plane.
- They got the impact of planes.
- They behaved as if the knew that exactly that happened what was prepared, not more, not less, and safe for them personally. As Bush in sarasota and Rumsfeld in the Pentagon:
http://www.medienanalyse-international.de/rumsfeld.html

They used the impacts exactly in the way that PNAC said it would be usefull.

You use the term "would" six times in your sentences. I WOULD really like you WOULD provide just the sigh of a ghost of a thought of an image of the possibility of the "cruise missile" or the "whatever" which hit the pentagon. Just a shadow of evidence.

And please be so kind to explain how they were able to shovel all the dead bodies of the pilots and passengers, of their peronals belongings and of i.e. the wheel into the Pentagon dust.

Do cruise missiles carry bodies? Do they have Boeing-wheels?

I could vomit when I see you conspiracy nuts deviate all attention from the open evidence of the crime.

You are the culprits for the red herrings and for Bushists laughingly denouncing alll questions and the publication of facts as unreliable, irrelevant, not scientific and so on.

then they can fake evidence and/or bring reports of non-existent evidence in circulation.

If they'd do a false-flag op, why bother with passengers and having to find a skilled pilot willing to give his life for this? Why not do it in the same way that was planned before, with an RC plane or drone (op Northwoods)?

As to evidence supporting the missile theory: what caused the series of holes that goes straight through the walls of 3 of the rings? Looks like a tell-tale sign of a bunker-buster, much more so then being caused by some plane part.

To add: as i said, it's pretty much inevitable that the missile was delivered by an airplane of some kind - which also hit the Pentagon. So indeed, the Pentagon was hit by a plane.

And if you want to continue this discussion, then drop the condescending attitude.

are gravity bombs that would not travel horizontally into a building.

Exactly what make and model missile did you have in mind?

Now we know you are confused. Truly.

Shall we or shall I regret you?

Or shall we hand an enxyclopedia to you ?

Who shall do what?


Or shall we do nothing and just take the above information ?

Shall we pray?