Rat & Swan wrote:


> our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,

Show it, liar.



I see where Howard Dean went down the same dirty road:

Dean's Remarks on 9/11 Stir Furor

By Mark Z. Barabak and John M. Glionna, Times Staff Writers

Howard Dean, whose penchant for off-the-cuff comments
has proved both a strength and political liability, is
facing a new flap over suggestions that President Bush
had advance knowledge of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Dean broached the possibility during a radio interview
last week, but dismissed the notion in the same breath.
A spokeswoman said Monday the former Vermont governor
"obviously doesn't believe it's true."

But the fact Dean alluded to a "theory" that Bush had
received prior intelligence from Saudi Arabian sources
— which Dean called "most interesting" — was enough to
incite Republicans. The national party chairman, Ed
Gillespie, issued a blistering attack on Dean over the
weekend, calling his comments "reckless and irresponsible."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...adlines-nation


Dean has a little more to lose than the
self-marginalized Karen Winter, so after getting in his
lick that Bush knew in advance of the 9/11 attacks, he
tries to cover his pimply ass. Karen, though, who
*likes* her marginalization and isn't looking to
persuade anyone of anything, is perfectly happy
trotting out a paranoid conspiracy nut's lie, and
leaving it there.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote shit as per ****ing usual
news



**** off ~~jonnie~~ you balding little ****.

Zakhar wrote:

> **** off ~~jonnie~~ you balding little ****.

The best way to counter jonnie is to ignore him -- although I
don't always follow my own advice, I know. You'll notice as
soon as I got into a real discussion with a person who actually
had something meaningful to say, jonnie started stamping his
widdle feet and screaming for me to notice him again. Poor
jonnie -- his life has no meaning unless I pay attention to him, even if
everyone knows he's nothing but a troll.

Rat

"Rat & Swan" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Zakhar wrote:
>
> > **** off ~~jonnie~~ you balding little ****.
>
> The best way to counter jonnie is to ignore him -- although I
> don't always follow my own advice, I know.

You're right of course! I had an idle minute, scanned the list of messages
and just had to share my thoughts.

>You'll notice as
> soon as I got into a real discussion with a person who actually
> had something meaningful to say, jonnie started stamping his
> widdle feet and screaming for me to notice him again. Poor
> jonnie -- his life has no meaning unless I pay attention to him, even if
> everyone knows he's nothing but a troll.

He's more than a troll. He a nasty little troll, an evil little shit.

All the best. ;-)

Zak.

>
> Rat
>

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
news
> Rat & Swan wrote:
>
>
> > our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> > evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>
> Show it, liar.
>
>
>
> I see where Howard Dean went down the same dirty road:
>
> Dean's Remarks on 9/11 Stir Furor
>
> By Mark Z. Barabak and John M. Glionna, Times Staff Writers
>
> Howard Dean, whose penchant for off-the-cuff comments
> has proved both a strength and political liability, is
> facing a new flap over suggestions that President Bush
> had advance knowledge of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
>
> Dean broached the possibility during a radio interview
> last week, but dismissed the notion in the same breath.
> A spokeswoman said Monday the former Vermont governor
> "obviously doesn't believe it's true."
>
> But the fact Dean alluded to a "theory" that Bush had
> received prior intelligence from Saudi Arabian sources
> — which Dean called "most interesting" — was enough to
> incite Republicans. The national party chairman, Ed
> Gillespie, issued a blistering attack on Dean over the
> weekend, calling his comments "reckless and irresponsible."
>
>
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...adlines-nation
>
>
> Dean has a little more to lose than the
> self-marginalized Karen Winter, so after getting in his
> lick that Bush knew in advance of the 9/11 attacks, he
> tries to cover his pimply ass. Karen, though, who
> *likes* her marginalization and isn't looking to
> persuade anyone of anything, is perfectly happy
> trotting out a paranoid conspiracy nut's lie, and
> leaving it there.

--------



There you go again ~~jonnie~~ Politics
These are not a political NGs - **** off you little ****.
If you feel so strongly, go and join the army - (oh sorry I forgot:-) But
you could be a suicide bomber.
Your Christmas gift to mankind.
>

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
news
> Rat & Swan wrote:
>
>
> > our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> > evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>
> Show it,

Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;

http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html

pearl wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> news >
>>Rat & Swan wrote:
>>
>>
>> > our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>> > evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>
>>Show it,
>
>
> Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>
> http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html

Wild, conspiratorial bullshit; not a shred of evidence.
I'm sure it's good enough for Karen, though.

Thanks for the new item to add to your growing list.

Rat & Swan wrote:

>
>
> Zakhar wrote:
>
>> **** off ~~jonnie~~ you balding little ****.
>
>
> The best way to counter

You made a claim:

Rat & Swan wrote:


> our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,


You are a liar. You have no evidence.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> > news > >
> >>Rat & Swan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> >> > evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
> >>
> >>Show it,
> >
> >
> > Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
> >
> > http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>
> Wild, conspiratorial bullshit; not a shred of evidence.

Wild, shameless, ballshite ipse dixit.

> Thanks for the new item to add to your growing list.

An invaluable service in helping to spread the word.
Be sure to include these links as well;
http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...=bush+knew+911
http://www.activeopposition.com/911exposed.htm

pearl wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
>>>news >>>
>>>
>>>>Rat & Swan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>> evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>
>>>>Show it,
>>>
>>>
>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>
>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>>
>>Wild, conspiratorial bullshit; not a shred of evidence.
>
>
> Wild, shameless, ballshite ipse dixit.

Your page was bullshit. There was no evidence; not
anything even close. It was nothing but wild
allegations by a crackpot.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> >>>news > >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Rat & Swan wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> >>>>> evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
> >>>>
> >>>>Show it,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
> >>>
> >>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
> >>
> >>Wild, conspiratorial bullshit; not a shred of evidence.
> >
> > Wild, shameless, ballshite ipse dixit.
>
> Your page was bullshit. There was no evidence; not
> anything even close. It was nothing but wild
> allegations by a crackpot.

And again.

pearl wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
thlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
>>>>>news >>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Rat & Swan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>>>> evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Show it,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>>>>
>>>>Wild, conspiratorial bullshit; not a shred of evidence.
>>>
>>>Wild, shameless, ballshite ipse dixit.
>>
>>Your page was bullshit. There was no evidence; not
>>anything even close. It was nothing but wild
>>allegations by a crackpot.
>
>
> And again.

Yes, again: there was no evidence, only the ravings of
a crackpot. Just your style.

pearl wrote:

>>Your page was bullshit. There was no evidence; not
>>anything even close. It was nothing but wild
>>allegations by a crackpot.

> And again.

The page itself mentions having the evidence for complicity but in the
next breath simply suggests that it presents circumstances (or
coincidences) that should be investigated. Which is about all you can
say of alleged 'evidence' if you value the principal that someone is
innocent until proven guilty. Seems like a grab for headlines; right or
wrong (or right or left.)

Regards

Ian

pearl wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
thlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
arthlink.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>news >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Rat & Swan wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Show it,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wild, conspiratorial bullshit; not a shred of evidence.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wild, shameless, ballshite ipse dixit.
>>>>
>>>>Your page was bullshit. There was no evidence; not
>>>>anything even close. It was nothing but wild
>>>>allegations by a crackpot.
>>>
>>>
>>>And again.
>>
>>Yes, again: there was no evidence, only the ravings of
>>a crackpot. Just your style.
>
>
> No. The raving crackpot is you, ball.

That is really stupid of you. Can't you do something
more creative than simply to try to redirect the
well-founded accusations about you? You sound like a
bratty school kid.

That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
irrational ravings. It figures you'd believe it. The
page is bullshit, just like all your "inner earth"
bullshit.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> thlink.net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>pearl wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> >>>>>news > >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Rat & Swan wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> >>>>>>> evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Show it,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
> >>>>
> >>>>Wild, conspiratorial bullshit; not a shred of evidence.
> >>>
> >>>Wild, shameless, ballshite ipse dixit.
> >>
> >>Your page was bullshit. There was no evidence; not
> >>anything even close. It was nothing but wild
> >>allegations by a crackpot.
> >
> >
> > And again.
>
> Yes, again: there was no evidence, only the ravings of
> a crackpot. Just your style.

No. The raving crackpot is you, ball.

--

"If you step back and look at the data, the optimum amount
of red meat you eat should be zero."
-- Walter Willett, M.D., of Brigham and Women's Hospital,
director of a study that found a close correlation between
red meat consumption and colon cancer.

http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/reports/beyond.html
"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> thlink.net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>pearl wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> arthlink.net...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>pearl wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>news > >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Rat & Swan wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> >>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Show it,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html

> That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
> irrational ravings

Who are you trying to smear exactly???

Why did you snip these links, ball?
http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...=bush+knew+911
http://www.activeopposition.com/911exposed.htm

Lesley the pathological liar and conspiracy believing
twit wrote:

> http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/reports/beyond.html
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>

>>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Show it,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>
>
>>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
>>irrational ravings
>
>
> Who are you trying to smear exactly???

No one, skank.

>
> Why did you snip these links

Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
happened was known in advance by the Bush
administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
where.

That filthy slag Karen Winter has claimed that the Bush
administration staged the attacks. She's as full of
shit as you, but she doesn't even have any of her own
bullshit links to support her paranoid claims.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
Ball the pathological liar wrote:
>
> > http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/reports/beyond.html
> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> >
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> >>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>Show it,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
> >
> >
> >>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
> >>irrational ravings
> >
> >
> > Who are you trying to smear exactly???
>
> No one, skank.

Who is 'that moron', moron? Who are you irrationally ranting about?

> > Why did you snip these links, ball?
>
> Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
> conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
> publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
> to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
> happened was known in advance by the Bush
> administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
> and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
> something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
> where.

Ipse unsupported evasive dixit, ball.

Pentagon says Sept. 11 interceptors flew:
TOO FAR, TOO SLOW, TOO LATE
by William Thomas

Senior Correspondent lifeboatnews.com
Dec. 5/03

It happens all the time. When a small private plane recently entered
the 23-mile restricted ring around the U.S. Capitol, two F-16
interceptors were immediately launched from Andrews Air Force Base,
just 10 miles away. In a similar episode, a pair of F-16 "Fighting Falcons"
on 15-minute strip alert was airborne from Andrews just 11 minutes after
being notified by the North American Aerospace Defense Command
(NORAD) of a Cessna straying towards the White House. [AP
Nov11/03; CNN June20/02]

These were well-practiced routines. With more than 4,500 aircraft
continuously sharing U.S. airspace, between September 2000 and
June 2001 the Pentagon launched fighters on 67 occasions to escort
wayward aircraft. [FAA news release Aug/9/02; AP Aug13/02]

But on Sept 11, 2001, NORAD and the FAA ignored routine
procedures and strict regulations. In response to a national
emergency involving hijacked airliners as dangerous as cruise
missiles, interceptors launched late from distant bases flew to
defend their nation at a fraction of their top speeds. [NORAD
news release Sept. 18/01]

WHAT NORAD KNEW

A recently resurfaced NORAD news bulletin released seven days after
Sept. 11 explains that America's aerial defenders were slow to counter
rapidly developing air attacks because they didn't hear from the FAA
that American Airlines Flight 11 had been hijacked until 8:40 that
fateful morning. [NORAD news release Sept. 18/01]

But at the National Military Command Center (NMCC) in the basement
of the Pentagon, Air Force staff officers monitoring every inch of airspace
over the northeastern seaboard would have caught that first hijacking
when Flight 11's identification transponder stopped transmitting at 8:20
-- automatically triggering a radar alarm.

With their capability to monitor developing "situations" by tapping into
military and civilian radars, U.S. military commanders would have also
seen Flight 175 turn abruptly south 25 minutes later -- just as they had
watched on radar in October 1999 when pro golfer Payne Stewart's
Learjet abruptly departed its flight path while enroute to Dallas.
[CNN Oct26/1999]

In that legendary intercept, a fighter jet out of Tyndall, Florida was
diverted from a training flight to escort the Lear, whose pilot had
become incapacitated, trapping Stewart in the stratosphere. An F-16
was reportedly sitting off the left wingtip of Payne's pilotless business
jet within 19 minutes of the FAA alert. [ABC News Oct25/99]

If NORAD had been as quick to scramble or divert airborne fighters
on Sept. 11, two "anti-terrorist" F-15's on armed alert could have
been sent south from Otis Air Force Base on Cape Cod. Flying at
full afterburners without edging over the Atlantic to disperse their
sonic footprint, two of the fastest fighters on the planet would have
broken a few windows. But all the glass in the Twin Towers might
have stayed intact had the "fast-movers" intercepted Flight 11 over
the Hudson River at least six minutes from Manhattan.

NO HURRY SAYS NORAD

Instead, in a stunning admission that received little press scrutiny at
the time, NORAD noted that for all interceptions flown against the
hijackers on Sept. 11, "Flight times are calculated at 9 miles per
minute or .9 Mach." In other words, every interception flown by the
world's hottest air-combat aircraft was flown at less than a third of
the planes' top speed.

A Defense Department manual insists, "In the event of a hijacking, the
NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA."
To make this happen, the Federal Aviation Administration permanently
posts a liaison officer in the Pentagon air defense room.
[CJCSI 3610.01A, June1/01]

Yet, according to NORAD, after air traffic controllers realized that
Flight 11 had been hijacked, 38 vital minutes passed before a pair of
F-15's was scrambled from Otis. As they lifted off, American Airlines
Flight 11 struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center, 153 air
miles away as a Falcon flies. [NORAD Sept. 18/01]

United Airlines Flight 175 was still 20 minutes out.

"The F-15 pilots flew ''like a scalded ape, topping 500 mph but were
unable to catch up to the airliner," Maj. Gen. Paul Weaver later told
reporters. [St. Augustine Times Sept16/01]

Scalded apes? Airliners fly at 500 mph. An F-15 can fly almost
four-times faster.

STEP ON IT

One of the Otis intercept pilots dubbed "Duff", later lamented: "We've
been over the flight a thousand times in our minds and I don't know
what we could have done to get there any quicker."

For starters, he and his wingman could have tried pushing their twin
throttles fully forward. Instead of flying two-and-a-half times faster
than a bullet, "Nasty" and "Duff" drove their expensive air superiority
fighters at a leisurely 447-mph -- supposedly to intercept a Boeing 767
flying 43 mph faster! Utilizing only 27% power, the F-15's were "eight
minutes/71 miles" away, according to NORAD, when Flight 175 struck
the South Tower with 56 souls and more than ten tons of fuel onboard.
[Christian Science Monitor Mar8/02]

HONOR THE THREAT

With both Trade Towers burning, and hijacked United Flight 93
shadowed by a circling F-16 over Pennsylvania, American Airlines
Flight 77 was the only threat left in the sky. When that Boeing 757
silenced its transponder signal, made a U-turn over Kentucky and
headed directly for the White House and the Pentagon, one billion
viewers riveted to the big networks knew this was a kamikaze run.
[Telegraph Sept13/01]

With no other bogeys on eastern seaboard scopes, air combat doctrine
dictates that the two unemployed Otis F-15s already in the area be
redirected to "honor the threat" of an incoming flying bomb, 330 miles
out. Even loafing along, the fighters would have more than 20 minutes
to confront Flight 77 before it neared the Pentagon.

Instead, Pentagon professionals defending their country's nerve centers
waited more than an hour after watching Flight 11 go rogue -- including
30 critical minutes after Flight 77 turned abruptly toward them and the
nearby White House -- before scrambling two F-16's out of Langley Air
Force Base to protect the capitol.

Nearly half-an-hour after receiving the belated order to scramble, two
Falcons coasted in over the burning Pentagon. Slowed down to just
410 mph, it had taken the 1,500 mph-capable fighters 19 minutes to
cover the 130 miles from Virginia. It should have taken just over
seven minutes to reach the Pentagon -- at about the time Flight 77
was making a predatory circle overhead. [NORAD Sept18/01;
USAF]

GROUNDED

The supersonic jets were flown no faster than WWII prop-driven
fighters. But it hardly mattered. Sitting on the Andrews ramp just 10
miles away, were two fully armed and fueled supersonic interceptors
tasked with protecting the capitol from airborne terrorist threats on 15
minutes' notice!

Isn't it about time someone asked why those routinely launched Andrews
interceptors were "stood down" as Flight 77 bored in toward the
headquarters they were supposed to protect? [San Diego Union-Tribune
Sept12/01

In the most heavily armed nation on Earth, at least two-dozen air force
installations were within fast flying time of the World Trade Center and
Pentagon. Does anyone else wonder why none of those aircraft were
ordered launched -- or why none of the armed fighters on training
flights or patrolling Air Defense Intercept Zones just off the Atlantic
Coast were diverted to intercept four commandeered airliners until after
the Pentagon was struck -- one-hour and 18 minutes after Flight 11 was
hijacked? [www.af.mil/sites/alphabetical.shtml#a]

According to NORAD, the F-16s from Langley were still "12 minutes/105
miles" away when the big Boeing they were "chasing" soared past the
White House and the Andrews runways. Allegedly flown by an incompetent
Egyptian flight student who couldn't solo a Cessna, the 757 peeled off
and piled into the Pentagon after an abrupt dive and pull-up that left
veteran pilots agape. [San Diego Union-Tribune Sept12/01; NBC Nightly
News Sept11/01; All Fall Down]

Immediately after the Pentagon was hit, the Andrews alert jets were
launched to guard empty skies. [Mirror Nov13/03]

ASLEEP AT THE SWITCH

Responding to questions from a Senate confirmation committee two
days after this suspicious fiasco, the Joint Chief's acting air defense chief
on Sept. 11 said he was in a meeting while all hell was breaking loose
in his sector.

Air Force Gen. Richard Myers had not let a TV report about a small
plane hitting the World Trade Center interrupt his routine. As jumbo
jetliners kept diving into buildings, apparently no one thought to
inform the acting commander of U.S. air defenses that his country was
under attack. Myers said he came out of his meeting just as the
Pentagon was hit.

Asked repeatedly when the brass were first informed of the emergency,
and when interceptors were scrambled, Myers repeated a muddled
mantra six times, saying ""I'll have to get back to you on that."
[http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2...00110236.html]

Instead of being court-martialed like the luckless commanders defending
Pearl Harbor, or even reprimanded, General Myers was awarded
command of the entire U.S. military as new chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff. Bush publicly commended the air force general for his "calm
manner, sound judgment, and his clear strategic thinking." [White House
press release Oct15/01]

As this bizarre and possibly treasonous story goes to press, the FAA
has refused to disclose documents relating to when that agency notified
U.S. air defenses about the four hijacked airliners. A second subpoena
served on the Pentagon by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
Upon the United States has been similarly unsuccessful in attaining
records concerning whether NORAD responded quickly enough in
dispatching interceptors on Sept. 11. [Washington PoX-Mozilla-Status:
0009 of fingering air traffic controllers for not following procedures,
these documents could show that the FAA did follow its own Standard
Intercept Procedures and notify NORAD within a few minutes of each
hijacking -- which would leave the Air Force with even more explaining
to do. [AP Oct18/03]


# # #

William Thomas is the award-winning author of "Scorched Earth",
"Bringing The War Home", "Chemtrails Confirmed" and "All Fall
Down: The Politics of Terror and Mass Persuasion."



--
One 9-11 Commissioner complained, ''The Department
of Homeland Security has been unhelpful."

pearl wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Show it,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>>>
>>>
>>>>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
>>>>irrational ravings
>>>
>>>
>>>Who are you trying to smear exactly???
>>
>>No one, skank.
>
>
> Who is 'that moron', moron?

The moron who crapped together that irrational
conspiracy page you linked; you know, the irrational
conspiracy page you HAD to link.

>
>>>Why did you snip these links, ball?
>>
>>Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
>>conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
>>publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
>>to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
>>happened was known in advance by the Bush
>>administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
>>and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
>>something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
>>where.
>
>
> Ipse unsupported evasive dixit, ball.
>
> Pentagon says Sept. 11 interceptors flew:
> TOO FAR, TOO SLOW, TOO LATE
> by William Thomas
>
> Senior Correspondent lifeboatnews.com

In other words, another moron. "lifeboatnews.com" is
anything but news. It's unadulterated bullshit.
"William Thomas" seems to be the author of "Chemtrails
Confirmed"; that proves he's a nut, just like you.
"Chemtrails" is on the loooooong list of irrational
beliefs you hold.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
link.net...
> pearl wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>Show it,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
> >>>
> >>>>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
> >>>>irrational ravings
> >>>
> >>>Who are you trying to smear exactly???
> >>
> >>No one, skank.
> >
> > Who is 'that moron', moron?
>
> The moron who crapped together that irrational
> conspiracy page you linked; you know, the irrational
> conspiracy page you HAD to link.

Ipse dixit.

> >>>Why did you snip these links, ball?
> >>
> >>Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
> >>conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
> >>publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
> >>to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
> >>happened was known in advance by the Bush
> >>administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
> >>and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
> >>something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
> >>where.
> >
> > Ipse unsupported evasive dixit, ball.
> >
> > Pentagon says Sept. 11 interceptors flew:
> > TOO FAR, TOO SLOW, TOO LATE
> > by William Thomas
> >
> > Senior Correspondent lifeboatnews.com
>
> In other words, another moron. "lifeboatnews.com" is
> anything but news. It's unadulterated bullshit.

More ipse dixit ad hominem. You're fooling no one, ball.

> "William Thomas" seems to be the author of "Chemtrails
> Confirmed"; that proves he's a nut, just like you.
> "Chemtrails" is on the loooooong list of irrational
> beliefs you hold.

Your carpet must be really hard to walk on, ball.

http://www.ligh****cher.com/chemtrails/hos.html

pearl wrote:

> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Show it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>>>>>
>>>>>>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
>>>>>>irrational ravings
>>>>>
>>>>>Who are you trying to smear exactly???
>>>>
>>>>No one, skank.
>>>
>>>Who is 'that moron', moron?
>>
>>The moron who crapped together that irrational
>>conspiracy page you linked; you know, the irrational
>>conspiracy page you HAD to link.
>>
>>>>>Why did you snip these links, ball?
>>>>
>>>>Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
>>>>conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
>>>>publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
>>>>to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
>>>>happened was known in advance by the Bush
>>>>administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
>>>>and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
>>>>something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
>>>>where.
>>>
>>>Ipse unsupported evasive dixit, ball.
>>>
>>>Pentagon says Sept. 11 interceptors flew:
>>>TOO FAR, TOO SLOW, TOO LATE
>>>by William Thomas
>>>
>>>Senior Correspondent lifeboatnews.com
>>
>>In other words, another moron. "lifeboatnews.com" is
>>anything but news. It's unadulterated bullshit.
>>
>>"William Thomas" seems to be the author of "Chemtrails
>>Confirmed"; that proves he's a nut, just like you.
>>"Chemtrails" is on the loooooong list of irrational
>>beliefs you hold.
>
>
> Your carpet must be really hard to walk on, ball.

Your sources are all crap. There's not a shred of
documented evidence of any of it, just the irrational
ravings of uneducated goofs like you.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> pearl wrote:
>
> > "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Show it,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
> >>>>>>irrational ravings
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Who are you trying to smear exactly???
> >>>>
> >>>>No one, skank.
> >>>
> >>>Who is 'that moron', moron?
> >>
> >>The moron who crapped together that irrational
> >>conspiracy page you linked; you know, the irrational
> >>conspiracy page you HAD to link.
> >>
> >>>>>Why did you snip these links, ball?
> >>>>
> >>>>Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
> >>>>conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
> >>>>publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
> >>>>to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
> >>>>happened was known in advance by the Bush
> >>>>administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
> >>>>and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
> >>>>something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
> >>>>where.
> >>>
> >>>Ipse unsupported evasive dixit, ball.
> >>>
> >>>Pentagon says Sept. 11 interceptors flew:
> >>>TOO FAR, TOO SLOW, TOO LATE
> >>>by William Thomas
> >>>
> >>>Senior Correspondent lifeboatnews.com
> >>
> >>In other words, another moron. "lifeboatnews.com" is
> >>anything but news. It's unadulterated bullshit.
> >>
> >>"William Thomas" seems to be the author of "Chemtrails
> >>Confirmed"; that proves he's a nut, just like you.
> >>"Chemtrails" is on the loooooong list of irrational
> >>beliefs you hold.
> >
> >
> > Your carpet must be really hard to walk on, ball.
>
> Your sources are all crap. There's not a shred of
> documented evidence of any of it, just the irrational
> ravings of uneducated goofs like you.

More ad hominem ipse dixit. SHAME ON YOU, liar ball.

pearl wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Show it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
>>>>>>>>irrational ravings
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Who are you trying to smear exactly???
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No one, skank.
>>>>>
>>>>>Who is 'that moron', moron?
>>>>
>>>>The moron who crapped together that irrational
>>>>conspiracy page you linked; you know, the irrational
>>>>conspiracy page you HAD to link.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>Why did you snip these links, ball?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
>>>>>>conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
>>>>>>publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
>>>>>>to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
>>>>>>happened was known in advance by the Bush
>>>>>>administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
>>>>>>and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
>>>>>>something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
>>>>>>where.
>>>>>
>>>>>Ipse unsupported evasive dixit, ball.
>>>>>
>>>>>Pentagon says Sept. 11 interceptors flew:
>>>>>TOO FAR, TOO SLOW, TOO LATE
>>>>>by William Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>>Senior Correspondent lifeboatnews.com
>>>>
>>>>In other words, another moron. "lifeboatnews.com" is
>>>>anything but news. It's unadulterated bullshit.
>>>>
>>>>"William Thomas" seems to be the author of "Chemtrails
>>>>Confirmed"; that proves he's a nut, just like you.
>>>>"Chemtrails" is on the loooooong list of irrational
>>>>beliefs you hold.
>>>
>>>
>>>Your carpet must be really hard to walk on, ball.
>>
>>Your sources are all crap. There's not a shred of
>>documented evidence of any of it, just the irrational
>>ravings of uneducated goofs like you.
>
>
> More ad hominem ipse dixit

Nope. The sources are crap. Not one of them offers
any corroborated evidence, just loony raving.

"Chemtrails", "inner earth beings", "zappers" - this is
all the stuff of paranoid lowlifes. It's all bunk.

pearl wrote:

> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Show it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Plenty to chew on (and spit out), here;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.patriotsaints.com/News/91...ush/index.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That moron's page offers no evidence, just his
>>>>>>>>irrational ravings
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Who are you trying to smear exactly???
>>>>>>
>>>>>>No one, skank.
>>>>>
>>>>>Who is 'that moron', moron?
>>>>
>>>>The moron who crapped together that irrational
>>>>conspiracy page you linked; you know, the irrational
>>>>conspiracy page you HAD to link.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>Why did you snip these links, ball?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Because they are just MORE irrational, unsupported
>>>>>>conspiracy bullshit. They're taking well known, well
>>>>>>publicized bits and pieces of intelligence, and trying
>>>>>>to suggest that the *specific* 9/11 attack that
>>>>>>happened was known in advance by the Bush
>>>>>>administration and by Bush himself. It's shit. U.S.
>>>>>>and other western intelligence knew al Qaeda were up to
>>>>>>something, but they didn't know exactly what, when or
>>>>>>where.
>>>>>
>>>>>Ipse unsupported evasive dixit, ball.
>>>>>
>>>>>Pentagon says Sept. 11 interceptors flew:
>>>>>TOO FAR, TOO SLOW, TOO LATE
>>>>>by William Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>>Senior Correspondent lifeboatnews.com
>>>>
>>>>In other words, another moron. "lifeboatnews.com" is
>>>>anything but news. It's unadulterated bullshit.
>>>>
>>>>"William Thomas" seems to be the author of "Chemtrails
>>>>Confirmed"; that proves he's a nut, just like you.
>>>>"Chemtrails" is on the loooooong list of irrational
>>>>beliefs you hold.
>>>
>>>
>>>Your carpet must be really hard to walk on, ball.
>>
>>Your sources are all crap. There's not a shred of
>>documented evidence of any of it, just the irrational
>>ravings of uneducated goofs like you.
>
>
> More ad hominem ipse dixit.

Something on one of your supposed links to "chemtrails":

Study Links Temperature Range to Air Traffic

By AYANA E. MORALES (NYT) 348 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 9 , Column 1

ABSTRACT - Study published in journal Nature reports
unusual widening in average daily temperature range
immediately after Sept 11 terrorist attacks on New
York and Washington, after skies were cleared of
almost all air traffic; Dr David J Travis, lead
author of study, theorizes that absence of
contrails--drifting streaks of heavy exhaust plumes
left by aircraft--was responsible for difference;
says in areas of high dennity air traffic, contrails
contribute to thicker cloud coverings that reflect
warmth from sun, making days cooler, but trap heat
radiated from ground, making nights warmer.

CONTRAILS, you stupid bitch; not "chemtrails". Weird,
irrational, conspiracy-minded believers in "chemtrails"
foolishly believe we are being "sprayed" with some
secret stuff. The only stuff being sprayed on us is
your liquified BULLSHIT.

>>You are a liar. You have no evidence.

Yeah people living in caves in another part of the world defeated the greatest military in the history of the world. Our military only stand down when ordered to do so.

Why have the planes not been intercepted?

It is standard procedure that unidentified airplanes and hijacked airplanes are intercepted and monitored by fighter-aircrafts. Why has this not be done on 9/11?

FAA Regulations say:
Consider that an aircraft emergency exists and inform the RCC or ARTCC and alert the appropriate DF facility when: .... There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any IFR or VFR aircraft.

For example, check this out - Payne Stewart's Learjet got off course, and there were two F-15's, a total of 8 F-16's and a refuelling tanker plane there immediately.

The Air Force is proud to announce their pilots are ready anytime to scramble and intercept "bogies" or "unknown riders" - unidentified or off-course aircraft.

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 11

08:13 transponder is switched off

08:14 two controllers are recorded discussing the fact that the pilot is out of contact.

08:24 a hijacker's voice is heard. "We have some planes," it says. "Just stay quiet and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport." (Guardian)

A controller asks "Who's trying to call me?"

08:25 air traffic control centres are told that a plane has been hijacked.

08:31 Air National Guard Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins is notified of the hijacking - this time was later corrected to 08:40

08:36 flight attendant Betty Ong reports that the plane tilts all the way on one side and then becomes horizontal again. Flight attendant Amy Sweeney then reports on her phone that the plane has begun a rapid descent.

08:40 FAA alerts NORAD AA11 has been hijacked (now-official version)

08:41 The pilots of Flight 175 tell ground control about Flight 11, "We figured we'd wait to go to your center. We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure out of Boston. Someone keyed the mike and said: 'Everyone stay in your seats.' It cut out."

08:45 Just prior to the crash of Flight 11, flight attendant Amy Sweeney is asked on the phone if she can recognize where she is. She says, "I see the water. I see the buildings. I see buildings," then after a pause, a quiet "Oh, my God!" Mere seconds later the line goes dead. Meanwhile, flight attendant Betty Ong ends her call repeating the phrase "Pray for us" over and over. Apparently there is quiet instead of screaming in the background

08:46 NORAD orders 2 F-15 jets from Otis Air National Guard Base in Falmouth, Mass.

08:47 Plane crashes into the north tower of the World Trade Centre

08:52 the F-15's are airborne

12 minutes from 08:25 when hijacking was confirmed to 08:47 crash, almost half an hour until the F-15's are scrambled after the hijack got reported!

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77

8.50:51 there is the last radio communication with aircraft

08:57 transponder contact is lost.
For some minutes the plane is missing because flight controllers are looking for the radar signal toward the west and don't realize the plane is headed east. Rumors circulate that the plane might have exploded in midair

08:58 Brian Sweeney on Flight 175 tries to call his wife but can only leave a message. "We've been hijacked, and it doesn't look too good." He calls his mother and tells her what's happening onboard

09:05 West Virginia flight control notices a new eastbound plane entering its radar with no radio contact and no transponder identification. They are not sure it is Flight 77. Supposedly they wait another 19 minutes before notifying NORAD about it. (!)

09:24 FAA notifies NORAD about the hijacking

09:25 the controller observes the plane moving towards Washington

09:30 fighters are scrambled

09:38 American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon in Washington.



08:57 - 09:24 it took half an hour to notify NORAD after the signal was lost, and there were 14 minutes between notification and the crash

Considering what happened just before one would excpect a faster response.



UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 175

08:41 The pilots of Flight 175 tell ground control about Flight 11, "We figured we'd wait to go to your center. We heard a suspicious transmission on our departure out of Boston. Someone keyed the mike and said: 'Everyone stay in your seats.' It cut out."

08:42 Flight 175 veers from its official course without authorization. A flight controller says of Flight 175, "... looks like he's heading southbound but there's no transponder no nothing and no one's talking to him."

08:43 NORAD, their headsets linked to Boston Center, heard of a second plane, United Flight 175, that also was not responding

08:44 The pilot of US Airlines Flight 583 tells flight control, regarding Flight 175, "I just picked up an ELT [emergency locator transmitter] on 121.5 it was brief but it went off."

08:46 Two F-15 fighters are ordered to scramble from Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts

08:46 Flight 175 stops transmitting its transponder signal (?!) - see 08:42 (!) and starts sending a different one (!) (was that really the same airplane?)

08:53 Controller: "We may have a hijack. We have some problems over here right now."

09:00 Last radar reading is seen at an altitude of 18,000 feet as flight is descending at a ground speed of 480 knots.

09:03 Plane crashes into south tower of World Trade Centre
F-15's still about 70 miles from the WTC


08:43 - 09:03 twenty minutes


UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 93

09:00 + (just after 09:00) United warns all of its aircraft of the potential for cockpit intrusion and to take precautions to barricade cockpit doors. Flight 93 pilots acknowledge the message

09:16 FAA informs NORAD that United Airlines flight 93 may have been hijacked. (according to CNN)

09:27 Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena and says, "I'm on United Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco. The plane has been hijacked. We are in the air. They've already knifed a guy. (One of them has a gun - this was later dismissed). There is a bomb on board. Call the FBI." Deena connects to emergency 911

9:28 there are the first audible signs of problems, in background cockpit noise.

09:34 Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena a second time. He says, "They're in the cockpit." He has checked the pulse of the man who was knifed (later identified as Mark Rothenberg, sitting next to him in seat 5B) and determined he is dead. She tells him about the hits on the WTC. He responds, "Oh my God, it's a suicide mission." As they continue to talk, he tells her the plane has turned back. By this time, Deena is in constant communication with the FBI and others, and a policeman is at her house

09:35 the plane climbs without authorisation

09:37 Jeremy Glick calls his wife Lyz from Flight 93. He describes the hijackers as Middle Eastern, Iranian looking. They put on red headbands and the three of them stood up and yelled and ran into the cockpit. He was sitting in the front of the coach section, but was sent to the back with most of the passengers. They claimed to have a bomb, which looked like a box with something red around it. He says the plane has turned around. Family members immediately call emergency 911 on another line.

09:39 The hijackers probably inadvertently transmit over radio: ''Hi, this is the captain. We'd like you all to remain seated. There is a bomb on board. And we are going to turn back to the airport. And they had our demands, so please remain quiet.''

09:41 From Flight 93, Marion Birtton calls a friend. She tells him two people have been killed and the plane has been turned around

09:40 Transponder signal from United flight 93 ceases and radar contact is lost.

09:42 The Mark-Bingham phone call according to the Post Gazette:
"Mom? This is Mark Bingham," the voice said. It sounded strange for her son to introduce himself by his full name. She knew he was flustered.
"I want to let you know that I love you. I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco and there are three guys who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb," he said.
"Who are these guys?" Alice Hoglan asked.
There was a pause. Hoglan heard murmurs of conversation in English. Mark's voice came back.
"You believe me, don't you?" he asked.
"Yes, Mark. I believe you. But who are these guys?"
There was a pause. Alice heard background noise. The line went dead.

09:45 Tom Burnett calls his wife Deena for the third time. She tells him about the crash into the Pentagon. Tom speaks about the bomb he'd mentioned earlier, saying, "I don't think they have one. I think they're just telling us that." He says the hijackers are talking about crashing the plane into the ground. "We have to do something." He says that he and others are making a plan. "A group of us."

09:45 - 10:00 The "Let's Roll" Todd Beamer phone call

09:47 Jeremy Glick is still on the phone with his wife Lyz. He tells her that the passengers are taking a vote if they should try to take over the plane or not, and that the hijackers are only armed with knives - no guns

09:49 flight controllers called Pittsburgh flight control and said a plane was heading toward Pittsburgh and refusing to communicate

09:50 Sandra Bradshaw calls her husband from Flight 93. She says, ''Have you heard what's going on? My flight has been hijacked. My flight has been hijacked with three guys with knives."

09:54 the Thomas Burnett phone call

09:57 supposed start of the fight of the passengers against the terrorists. they may have used a fire extinguisher and the food cart as weapons / for ramming

09:57 - 10:00 several cell-phone calls from passengers saying "they are storming the cockpit", "everybody is running to first class", "they are doing it, they are doing it!"

09:58 phone call from a man who said he was a passenger locked in a bathroom aboard United Flight 93, said dispatch supervisor Glenn Cramer in neighboring Westmoreland County. The man repeatedly told officials the call was not a hoax. "We are being hijacked, we are being hijacked!" Cramer quoted the man from a transcript of the call. The man told dispatchers the plane "was going down. He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him," Cramer said. (there never was an explanation for the explosion and smoke)


10:02 After a review of radar tapes, a radar signal is detected near Shanksville, Pennsylvania

10:03 According to the US government, Flight 93 crashes at 10:03

10:06 a seismic study authorized by the US Army to determine when the plane crashed concludes the crash happens at 10:06:05

When or if fighters have been dispatched at all, remains a mystery. There have been reportings of fighters that where later denied. Eyewitnesses talked of a second plane and explosion(s) before the plane hit the ground bot those reports have been dimissed. The last 5-6 minutes of the voice-recorder tape are kept secret.

The NORAD statement is also strangely unspecific about this flight.

http://www.utopiax.org/airdefense.html

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message ink.net...
Rat & Swan wrote:

>
>
> Zakhar wrote:
>
>> **** off ~~jonnie~~ you balding little ****.
>
>
> The best way to counter

You made a claim:

Rat & Swan wrote:


> our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
k.net...
> pearl wrote:
<..>
> >
> > More ad hominem ipse dixit.
>
> Something on one of your supposed links to "chemtrails":
>
> Study Links Temperature Range to Air Traffic
>
> By AYANA E. MORALES (NYT) 348 words
> Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 9 , Column 1
>
> ABSTRACT - Study published in journal Nature reports
> unusual widening in average daily temperature range
> immediately after Sept 11 terrorist attacks on New
> York and Washington, after skies were cleared of
> almost all air traffic; Dr David J Travis, lead
> author of study, theorizes that absence of
> contrails--drifting streaks of heavy exhaust plumes
> left by aircraft--was responsible for difference;
> says in areas of high dennity air traffic, contrails
> contribute to thicker cloud coverings that reflect
> warmth from sun, making days cooler, but trap heat
> radiated from ground, making nights warmer.
>
> CONTRAILS,

Do these look like contrails?;
Massive Chemtrails Over Idaho....'Just Dripping Down'
http://www.rense.com/general4/drip.htm

What about these?;
http://www.rense.com/politics6/chemdatapage.html

> you stupid bitch;

"All cruelty springs from weakness." (Seneca, 4BC-AD65)

I know what 'contrails' look like. A clued-up friend showed me
chemtrails being sprayed in the skies overhead three years ago.
I didn't believe it either at the time. But afterwards I paid closer
attention to what goes on overhead. I have witnessed not only
high-altitude spraying, but regular low-altitude laying of chemtrails
as well. The summer of 2002, we were allowed only two days
of sunshine! Invariably, when a clear day was forcast, the jets
would be out from early morning laying their toxic filth across
the sky. The trails gradually spread out and merge into an oily
haze, effectively blocking out sunlight. Not to mention the ill
health that follows this insane, irresponsible, criminal activity.

Project Cloverleaf
http://www.ligh****cher.com/chemtrails/cloverleaf.html

> not "chemtrails".

'What's the difference between a jet contrail and a chemtrail?
According to the U.S. Air Force, jet contrails form above
33,000 feet when hot engine exhaust momentarily condenses
ice crystals into pencil-thin vapor trails that quickly vanish like
the wake behind a boat.

Chemtrails (CTs) look like contrails initially, but are much
thicker, extend across the sky and are often laid down in
varying patterns of Xs, tick-tack-toe grids, cross-hatched
and parallel lines. Instead of quickly dissipating, chemtrails
expand and drip feathers and mares tails. In 30 minutes or
less, they open into wispy formations which join together,
forming a thin white veil or a "fake cirrus-type cloud" that
persists for hours. ....'
http://www.rense.com/general4/fre.htm

[image]
'you see A NORMAL CONTRAIL high up above (where it
should be because normal contrails soon melt as they descend).
And you see TWO, BIG, DESCENDING CHEMTRAILS.
Chemtrails descend right down to ground-level, and into your
lungs. '
http://www.world-action.co.uk/police.html

Verify chemtrails for yourself
http://www.ligh****cher.com/chemtrai...hemtrails.html

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
k.net...
> pearl wrote:
<..>
> >>Your sources are all crap. There's not a shred of
> >>documented evidence of any of it, just the irrational
> >>ravings of uneducated goofs like you.
> >
> > More ad hominem ipse dixit
>
> Nope. The sources are crap. Not one of them offers
> any corroborated evidence, just loony raving.

"Well, would you care to address the points I raised?
You still haven't done so. You keep making blanket
assertions, demanding proof of other people's assertions
without providing any of your own, and ignoring those
proofs that are shown to you. "
http://www.iol.ie/~creature/boiled%20ball.html

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
k.net...
> pearl wrote:
<..>
> >>Your sources are all crap. There's not a shred of
> >>documented evidence of any of it, just the irrational
> >>ravings of uneducated goofs like you.
> >
> > More ad hominem ipse dixit
>
> Nope. The sources are crap. Not one of them offers
> any corroborated evidence, just loony raving.

Change the record, ball. That one's cracked.

pearl wrote:

> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>
> <..>
>
>>>>Your sources are all crap. There's not a shred of
>>>>documented evidence of any of it, just the irrational
>>>>ravings of uneducated goofs like you.
>>>
>>>More ad hominem ipse dixit
>>
>>Nope. The sources are crap. Not one of them offers
>>any corroborated evidence, just loony raving.
>
>
> Change the record, ball. That one's cracked.

You are what is cracked. You believe weird, irrational
bullshit:

"veganism"
"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
your helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction (caused by American demand
for beef)
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Zapper
Foot massage (as medical practice)
Astrology
Numerology
Alien abduction
Holocaust denial
Leprechauns
Channeling
Polar fountains
Sun gazing
"Chemtrails"
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts
participation in skinhead subculture
the validity of online IQ tests
crackpot 9-11 conspiracy theories
Jeff Rense for "news"


You are an utter crackpot. You believe in or
participate in ALL of the above. You are not a
reliable source for anything.

pearl wrote:

> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>
> <..>
>
>>>More ad hominem ipse dixit.
>>
>>Something on one of your supposed links to "chemtrails":
>>
>> Study Links Temperature Range to Air Traffic
>>
>> By AYANA E. MORALES (NYT) 348 words
>> Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 9 , Column 1
>>
>> ABSTRACT - Study published in journal Nature reports
>> unusual widening in average daily temperature range
>> immediately after Sept 11 terrorist attacks on New
>> York and Washington, after skies were cleared of
>> almost all air traffic; Dr David J Travis, lead
>> author of study, theorizes that absence of
>> contrails--drifting streaks of heavy exhaust plumes
>> left by aircraft--was responsible for difference;
>> says in areas of high dennity air traffic, contrails
>> contribute to thicker cloud coverings that reflect
>> warmth from sun, making days cooler, but trap heat
>> radiated from ground, making nights warmer.
>>
>>CONTRAILS,
>
>
> Do these look like contrails?;

Who knows what they originally were...

There is no evidence they are "chemtrails". There are
just two photographs of some kind of cloud vapor, one
of the photos reproduced twice again.

> Massive Chemtrails Over Idaho....'Just Dripping Down'
> http://www.rense.com/general4/drip.htm

"Rense" is not a reliable source for news. It's a web
page for ignorant anti-scientific believers in conspiracy.

>
> What about these?;
> http://www.rense.com/politics6/chemdatapage.html

Same again.

>
>
>>you stupid bitch;
>
> )
>
> I know what 'contrails' look like.

Apparently not.

However, you also claim to know about "inner earth
beings" and "hollow earth", and neither of those exists.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
nk.net...

<..>

There's none so blind as those who will not see.

There's none so deaf as those who will not hear.

- Mid-14th Century French Proverbs

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> pearl wrote:
<..>
> > Change the record, ball. That one's cracked.
>
> You are what is cracked. You believe weird, irrational
> bullshit:


Ad hominem.

You're repeating lies, ball, but what else could we expect from you.

pearl wrote:
> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>
> <..>
>
>>>Change the record, ball. That one's cracked.
>>
>>You are what is cracked. You believe weird, irrational
>>bullshit:
>
>
>
> Ad hominem.

No, and you clearly have misused the term. You don't
know what it means.

>
> You're repeating lies

No. You believe in all that bullshit, every last bit
of it:

"veganism"
"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
your helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction (caused by American demand
for beef)
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Zapper
Foot massage (as medical practice)
Astrology
Numerology
Alien abduction
Holocaust denial
Leprechauns
Channeling
Polar fountains
Sun gazing
"Chemtrails"
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts
participation in skinhead subculture
the validity of online IQ tests
crackpot 9-11 conspiracy theories
Jeff Rense for "news"


You are an utter crackpot. You believe in or
participate in ALL of the above. You are not a
reliable source for anything.

pearl wrote:

> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>
>>You are what is cracked. You believe weird, irrational
>>bullshit:
>
"veganism"
"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
your helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction (caused by American demand
for beef)
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Zapper
Foot massage (as medical practice)
Astrology
Numerology
Alien abduction
Holocaust denial
Leprechauns
Channeling
Polar fountains
Sun gazing
"Chemtrails"
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts
participation in skinhead subculture
the validity of online IQ tests
crackpot 9-11 conspiracy theories
Jeff Rense for "news"


You are an utter crackpot. You believe in or
participate in ALL of the above. You are not a
reliable source for anything.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...

> You are what is cracked. You believe weird, irrational
> bullshit:

<snip ball's crooked crutch>

> You are an utter crackpot. You believe in or
> participate in ALL of the above. You are not a
> reliable source for anything.

'Since fact and truth seldom fall on their own, they must be
overcome with lies and deceit. Those who are professional in
the art of lies and deceit, such as the intelligence community
and the professional criminal (often the same people or at least
working together), tend to apply fairly well defined and
observable tools in this process. However, the public at large
is not well armed against such weapons, and is often easily led
astray by these time-proven tactics.

The overall aim is to avoid discussing links in the chain of
evidence which cannot be broken by truth, but at all times,
to use clever deceptions or lies to make the links seem
weaker than they are, or better still, cause any who are
considering the chain to be distracted in any number of ways,
including the method of questioning the credentials of the
presenter. ..

So, as you read here in the News Groups the various
discussions on various matters, decide for yourself when
a rational argument is being applied and when disinformation,
psyops (psychological warfare operations) or trickery is the
tool. ...'
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html

pearl wrote:

> "Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
> <..>
>
> There's none so blind as those who will not see.
>
> There's none so deaf as those who will not hear.

There's none so willfully stupid as those who believe
in irrational, debunked conspiracies.

Jonathan Ball
early 21st century sage

born free wrote:
> >>You are a liar. You have no evidence.
> Yeah people living in caves in another part of the world defeated the
> greatest military in the history of the world.

Wrong.

"born free" > wrote in message news:__ACb.531864$Tr4.1459893@attbi_s03...
<..>
> http://www.utopiax.org/airdefense.html

Hunt the Boeing!
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero...erreurs_en.htm


http://www.thepowerhour.com/postings...hole-photo.htm


Attack On The Pentagon & World Trade Center
http://www.thepowerhour.com/pentagon-911.htm

Pit_Bull wrote:
>>There's none so willfully stupid as those who believe
>>in irrational, debunked conspiracies.
>>
>> Jonathan Ball
>> early 21st century sage
>
>
> HA!
>
> What about all the black helicopter crap you believe about bush, chaney, and
> the pentagon? You talk out of both sides of yer ass mr ball.

I don't believe any black helicopter crap. I refute
black helicopter crap.

"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
news
> Rat & Swan wrote:
>
>
> > our Reichstag fire ( 9/11 -- there's
> > evidence Bush knew about it beforehand,
>
> Show it, liar.
>
>
>
> I see where Howard Dean went down the same dirty road:
>
> Dean's Remarks on 9/11 Stir Furor


And here's Howard Dean sharing his feelings on the 1st Amendment:

"On ideological grounds, absolutely yes, but . . . I don't want to answer
whether I would break up Fox or not."
--Howard Dean, when asked by Chris Matthews whether he would break up
Fox

Freedom of speech to the Left means freedom of the right *kind* of speech,
it would seem.