It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: samkent
June 25, 2002: The last truckload of debris is carried out of the World Trade Center site. More than 110,000 truckloads of debris have been removed from ground zero.
That was probably the quickest the evidence could be removed. It does not allow very much time to examine anything.
About two million tons of material[citation needed] obtained from Ground Zero was taken to the landfill for sorting.[6] Thousands of detectives and forensic evidence specialists worked for over 1.7 million hours at Fresh Kills Landfill to try to recover remnants of the people killed in the attacks.
The remaining debris was buried in a 40-acre (160,000 m2) portion of the landfill; it is highly likely that this debris still contains fragmentary human remains.[8]
originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: MALBOSIA
That was probably the quickest the evidence could be removed. It does not allow very much time to examine anything.
About two million tons of material[citation needed] obtained from Ground Zero was taken to the landfill for sorting.[6] Thousands of detectives and forensic evidence specialists worked for over 1.7 million hours at Fresh Kills Landfill to try to recover remnants of the people killed in the attacks.
I assume they mean 1.7 million man hours.
That's a bunch if you ask me.
The remaining debris was buried in a 40-acre (160,000 m2) portion of the landfill; it is highly likely that this debris still contains fragmentary human remains.[8]
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
No one wanted...
To discuss why the United States had a whopping total of 14 fighter aircraft as the CONTINENTS SOLE AIR DEFENSE...
To discuss why the Clinton Administration changed the rules on the type of people we gathered intelligence from (i.e. GOOD people with no human rights issues....the type of people who rarely have the intel we need)
To discuss why we lived with rules that prevented the "criminal" desk at the FBI from sharing information with the "terrorism" desk.
To discuss why we lived with rules that prevented the FBI from sharing information with the CIA
To discuss why the communications gear on Air Force One failed MISERABLY on that day. (why else do you think that AF-1 landed first in Louisiana and then in Nebraska? So the President could use a land based secure phone.....)
There a couple hundred reasons why the career politicians really did not want to have an investigation, and even THEN, when they started one, they put people like Jamie Gorelick on the Commission....when SHE should have been testifying in front of it on why she did not allow information to be shared from the Phoenix FBI office to the Terrorism Desk.
originally posted by: lexyghot
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
No one wanted...
To discuss why the United States had a whopping total of 14 fighter aircraft as the CONTINENTS SOLE AIR DEFENSE...
To discuss why the Clinton Administration changed the rules on the type of people we gathered intelligence from (i.e. GOOD people with no human rights issues....the type of people who rarely have the intel we need)
To discuss why we lived with rules that prevented the "criminal" desk at the FBI from sharing information with the "terrorism" desk.
To discuss why we lived with rules that prevented the FBI from sharing information with the CIA
To discuss why the communications gear on Air Force One failed MISERABLY on that day. (why else do you think that AF-1 landed first in Louisiana and then in Nebraska? So the President could use a land based secure phone.....)
There a couple hundred reasons why the career politicians really did not want to have an investigation, and even THEN, when they started one, they put people like Jamie Gorelick on the Commission....when SHE should have been testifying in front of it on why she did not allow information to be shared from the Phoenix FBI office to the Terrorism Desk.
That is one of the most important and educational posts ever made on ATS. So many of these truthers were too young to be aware of the political situation in the years leading up to 9/11 that they just don't comprehend how this happened. There can be a meaningful discussion on whether or not Clinton's policies were wise or not, but one must keep in mind just who Clinton is. He is a lawyer. His sense of jurisprudence meant that a person's civil rights must be protected at all costs, even if that person was not even a citizen of the US. To this end, aggressively pursuing possible terrorists was not allowed, or at the very least blocked by the "stovepiping" of info between departments and agencies.
Gorelick was there to preserve Clinton's legacy. There's no doubt in my mind that a deal was made : The commission wouldn't dig into these issues in exchange for Democraps allowing the WoT to proceed.
Just look at Kerry - first he was all for it (per the deal made) and then he immediately flip flopped to being against it.
Those were man hours spent looking for remains of humans. Not evidence of explosives.
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
They have taken WAY more heat from not investigating 9/11 than they did for ANY of those reasons which makes using that as an excuse outright stupid.
originally posted by: lexyghot
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
They have taken WAY more heat from not investigating 9/11 than they did for ANY of those reasons which makes using that as an excuse outright stupid.
You're Canadian. And obviously young.
You have no idea of what the political climate was in the US in the 90's.
Your remark is rejected.
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: MALBOSIA
They have? Who has received ANY meaningful heat that has caused them to adjust the way they live their lives or how business is done in Washington D.C.?
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: MALBOSIA I see you have fallen victim to falsehoods again. Gag orders were never flying, and what books and songs do you think were banned?
Edmonds testified before the 9/11 Commission, but her testimony was excluded from the official 567 page 9/11 Commission Report.[3]
The 2001 Clear Channel memorandum is a document distributed by Clear Channel Communications shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, to the more than 1,200 radio stations they owned. The memo contained a long list of what the memo termed "lyrically questionable" songs.[1]
A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Defense has officially commented that the book's publication was "a slap in the face and real offense to the American people, particularly to the memory of victims of the attacks".[6] The book is regarded as a significant international misinformation threat to national interests by the U.S. Department of State, which has issued an official rebuttal of its key claims.[8]
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: MALBOSIA You might want to research Sybil Edmonds history a wee bit before you put too much faith in her words regarding 9/11. She, like a few other darlings of the truth movement have......embellished.....their stories over years. Then you mention Clear Channels decision, which has little to do with anything really. Finally you mention the idiotic book written by Thierry Meyssan, which was still published. So you quote a "whistleblower" who was caught overstating her importance, a list of songs that a media company suggested their stations not play, and a published book that belongs in the fiction section. I'm sorry......what were you saying about banned books, songs and flying gag orders? Because you haven't offered proof of anything, other than a former FBI employee who was fired.
originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: cheery1
Well, that just goes to show that you believe wrong. Osama Bin Laden was never a CIA agent, and his parents were not "friends" of Daddy Bush.
Who Is Osama bin Laden? The prime suspect in the New York and Washington terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, “ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders”.
US Government support to the Mujahideen was presented to world public opinion as a “necessary response” to the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal. Recent evidence suggests, however, that the CIA’s military-intelligence operation in Afghanistan had been launched prior rather than in response to the Soviet invasion. Washington’s intent was to deliberately trigger a civil war, which lasted more than 20 years.
The CIA’s role in support of the Mujahideen is confirmed in an 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter:
Brzezinski: According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, [on] 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul.