Here's a hold the phone:
Any time an aircraft deviates from it’s course, the air traffic controller requests a military intercept according to military response code 7610-4J. This was the first time interceptors were not sent up in the history of this policy...Planes were sent to the New York area, after unprecedented delay, from Falmouth, Massachusetts rather than nearby Ft. Dix or LaGuardia. Of course, they didn’t arrive in time - there was no visual scan of the cockpits....Furthermore, it’s a fact that Air Force One codes were known and punched in by a rogue source on 9/11
The above were points from a longer article I read, but if this is fact it is worrying indeed. How can not one, but four, rogue flights not be attended promptly? One rogue flight you might think - oh that's a bit slack - but four! Anyone should hit the panic button over that. From what I understand there was more than adequate time since the flights went rogue to scramble the planes to take them out. Why didn't this happen in the normal timely manner? And what is this about air force one codes!?!?! How the hell would a rag tag bunch of terrorist hijackers, who brought computer simulation games or whatever to learn how to fly, ever get access to such codes? There had to be inside collusion for that to happen.
The same article also pointed out that 5 of the supposed 'hijackers' are alive and well and wishing to have their names cleared!!?!?!?! I can't keep up with all of this!
Further, from the same article:
The seismic record from Columbia University’s observatory in Palisades, NY (21 miles away) provides indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down those towers. At the precise moment the South Tower began collapsing, a 2.1 earthquake registered on the seismograph. At the precise moment the North Tower began collapsing, a 2.3 earthquake registered; however, as the buildings started to crumble these waves disappeared. The two ‘spikes’on the seismograph, which both occurred at the exact instants the collapses began, are twenty times the amplitude, or more than 100 times the force of the other waves. If the buildings had simply collapsed, the largest jolts would have occurred when the massive debris struck the earth, not at the beginnings of the collapses. Seismologist Arthur Lerner-Lam of Columbia University stated, “Only a small fraction of the energy from the collapsing towers was converted into ground motion. The ground shaking that resulted from the collapse of the towers was extremely small.” In other words, the collapsing did not cause 2.1 and 2.3 magnitude earthquakes. Furthermore, a ‘sharp spike of short duration’ is how underground nuclear explosions register on seismographs. Underground explosions, where the steel columns meet Manhattans granite would account for both the demolition-style implosions and these ‘spikes’ on the seismograph. Another seismologist at the Palisades observatory, Won Young Kim said the 1993 truck bomb did not even register on their seismographs because the explosion was ‘not coupled’ to the ground. Imagine the magnitude of explosions it would take to register the two earthquakes, when the truck bomb didn’t even show up.
No mention of this is made in the Protec Documentation Services paper that I posted a link to earlier in this thread (the implosion world post). They claim they had their own seismologists in the vincinty at the time and noted no irregularities that would cause them to think a controlled demolition had taken place, but here are seismology readings from Columbia University giving different readings? What do you make of this?
I looked further into Protec Documentation Services - their website was incomplete in a number of places - there was not the evidence of their past history in all of the places it was meant to be - however, that is not evidence that they are not a credible business - a lot of businesses have websites that are not maintained to proper standard. What was interesting was that they listed Betchel Corp. as one of the companies they provided services to - although I could find no history listed elsewhere on the net about a relation between the two companies, even under the name Protec formely traded under (Asbestos Training Inst.). Betchel, of course, is one of the companies linked to Bush cronyism, who were awarded commissions in Iraq and also a non-open-tendered multi million dollar contract with the Katrina disaster. In both cases, if memory serves me right, Betchel has been criticized for taking a lot of money for not much evidential return on the investment in them. Is Protec a front, set up to legitimise and cover up or are they for real? The minute I think something has been served up that quashes my suspicions I come across something that brings them all back again.
Given the sheer amount of inconsistencies, not least that 5 of the supposed hijackers that were meant to die in these airplane crashes are alive and well, what are we left to credibly believe? Was there an assumption that people would just believe what they were told and not question it, and a genuine lack of understanding into just how easy it is to uncover such inconsistencies in the age of the web? Are we just Ct theorists with too much time on our hands, or is there something we should be questioning here?
The terrible thing about lying is that it is one thing to think out a reasonable lie to start with, but the thing about lies is that people ask you to elaborate on them to gain understanding - that's when you have to think on your feet - so lies build upon lies, and once that starts to happen it is only a matter of time before inconsistencies become transparent and the whole stack of cards falls down around you. That's not to say that I am like 'ok - this was all lies' - I won't close myself off to that conclusion just yet - there might be some credible return case - and I am open to that - it's just looking like a house of cards at the moment.
Custom Search
