The real 911 smoking gun

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Also, maybe, just maybe, to carry out the largest terrorist attack in history....maybe you do a little homework and planning, no? Finding out when these exercises occur is not difficult.

So, can I get a list of the upcomming exercises for the next year? Not that I'm planning a terrorist attack but could you back your statements? Thanks.

I just wanted to let you know that I'm with you on this one LightWorker, don't let the turkeys bring you down.

People will quibble and debate over any evidence you show them, regardless of how convincing it may seem to you. For some reason people like you and I have to debate against "The Official Story" simply because it's "Official". There is no better logic or stronger evidence to support the Official story than there is to support our "Crazy Anti-American" theory. People would just rather go along with the official theory because it's easier, everything is all thought out for them, all the dots are already connected. Believing the official story is just an easy, quick way for people to feel like they're right about something. It also requires no action what so ever, just stay in the pen like a good sheep.

Don't get too frustrated, you may find it hard convincing anyone of anything on ATS. But don't waste your time on people who would rather believe anything they're told than spend one ounce of brain power even contemplating an alternative.

Until these people realize that the government is there to do anything but Serve and Protect the people they won't be able to see your evidence. They'll just pick a few easy points and debate that to troll filled cyber hell. Case in point, when you posted the stat numbers for the coincidence. I knew where you got them from, I'm sure 90% of ATSers knew you got it from Alex Jones. They don't care though, they're going to pin point that one piece of evidence, they're going to use their poor logic and fuzzy knowledge to try and discredit you.

Until they realize that the government itself is a facade, that it's not votes but money that breeds power, they will remain the teaming mass of chaff and stupidity one must wade through en route to enlightenment. Keep researching, keep reading, always question. Don't let immature armchair "experts" keep you from finding the truth. You may start at 9/11 but you will eventually find that everything and everyone is connected and you will end up with a completely different view of life on this planet than you ever expected.

( And no, i don't mean any metaphysical nonsense, just that life on this planet has always been brutal, cruel, dirty, painful and intermittently laced with extreme beauty. People have always sought power and control over other people and have always used violent sadistic means to achieve it But that's the way it's always been, that's life on Planet Earth, enjoy your stay )

Originally posted by Griff
Not that I'm planning a terrorist attack but could you back your statements? Thanks.

lol
Sure. Incoming U2U....

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
lol
Sure. Incoming U2U....

Thanks for the info. It seams strange that they would announce their military exercises. Just by going on what you said (that the terrorists may have done their homework and used that against us) it seams extremely counter productive to me. But, thanks for the info.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
People will quibble and debate over any evidence you show them...

Especially "statistics" that look like they came out of a Dr. Suess book.

People would just rather go along with the official theory because it's easier, everything is all thought out for them, all the dots are already connected.

My complaints have nothing to do with how selfless connects the dots. My complaints are that, in the case of this thread, selfless is writing in his own dots to make the picture more interesting than it actually is.

Believing the official story is just an easy, quick way for people to feel like they're right about something.

As compared to putting your faith in fictional and hyperbolic statistics.

It also requires no action what so ever, just stay in the pen like a good sheep.

Odds of being called a sheep while attempting to end hyperbole in the 9/11 Conspiracies forum:

1:1

But don't waste your time on people who would rather believe anything they're told than spend one ounce of brain power even contemplating an alternative.

Are you going to actually present alternative facts at some point...or just wax poetic about how brilliant you are?

Until these people realize that the government is there to do anything but Serve and Protect the people they won't be able to see your evidence.

Easy now. Not many "official story" folks believe the government is infallible. In fact, most of us believe the government is messed up enough that we don't need to completely manufacture fictional "facts" to make them look bad.

...they're going to use their poor logic and fuzzy knowledge to try and discredit you.

A stirring diatribe really.

Please present a fact or two ON TOPIC that we can discuss. I promise that if you can provide a logical explanation for that 3 GRILLION number I will give 5 stars to every post you've ever made on ATS.

Congrats Esse,

You managed to debunk me. I'm not the all knowing super genius I was trying to play myself off as. You've proven that my generalizations don't apply to you as an individual. I guess I'll have to re-align all my beliefs lest I get disproven by you yet again.

In all honesty I wasn't talking to you Esse but to the OP. I was trying to tell him how I support him, his search for the truth and his ability to look at the whole picture. I wasn't saying I support every piece of evidence he put forth.

No offense, but it is people like you and your friends that make it so hard to get anywhere with the 9/11 research. Instead of trying to help or to offer productive statements and data you simply derail the debate and focus on something easily argued against like the OPs stats (which he got from Alex Jones). It may be a surprise to some but you can't EVER trust statistics, they will always be biased and swayed and there will always be an infinite number of variables that've been ignored to achieve the final numbers. Ever read the Bell Curve?

The OP asked all of us to take the evidence as a whole, to take each purported fact as a piece of a much larger puzzle. You can't decide for good and all who was behind 9/11 based solely on what the NORAD traffic controllers had for breakfast but you might be able to get a better understanding of the whole day when you compare it with the larger picture.

I want to ask you Esse, why you feel so strongly about your position on 9/11. Why do you feel the need to write line for line responses to a letter not written to you? I hope you are very sure of your beliefs regarding 9/11 because you seem pretty set in them. I, personally, like to keep an open mind and while I may tend to swing one way or another I will not dismiss something outright if it seems plausible.

You should always endeavor to think first, to understand fully where you stand on a given subject before making such definitive and factual claims. You seem so sure that you're right on this topic yet I hardly see why.

The purpose of this thread was to present to us the facts as a whole and present them as the smoking gun, which I believe is quite effective. The purpose of my last post was to reassure the OP that I'm with him, that I see it that way too and that regardless of comments from the peanut gallery we should push forwards and uncover the truth. The purpose of your last post was to start an argument with me and to reiterate the statement that the statistical numbers are unreal. It seems you've missed the point of this thread completely by bickering on that one subject, actions like this are what motivated me to write a post to the OP reassuring him that he's not crazy and other informed, open minded people are with him 100%.


And just as an aside: The purpose of those numbers were to illustrate to the common, under-informed person that what the news has told them is completely impossible. It was meant to be a short bit of information that is easily delivered and shocking enough to be remembered. Obviously the OP didn't do the math himself and neither did Mr. Jones. If you'd like to see the work used to attain that number I suggest you deny ignorance and write Alex Jones a letter. Even with the stats removed the OP's original thesis is fully intact, I suggest you try and provide factual evidence refuting his original thesis.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
I have a hunch no one actually ever calcualted that number. I'd guess they just typed lots of zeros. Do you have any idea how huge that number is?
I just get tired of seing tis "figure" batted around. Suffice to say, the odds are slim, perhaps in the 1/100 - 1/1,000 range.

No offense, but do you realize what you just did? You accussed someone of comming up with that number and never calculating it. Then, you say "perhaps in the 1/100-1/1,00 range." You are treading on hypocritical waters IMO. Again, no offense ment.

Except I'm not claiming it was a claculation based on 10 year mean, and offering a specific number with 3s and 5s and stuff, and THAT MANY O THEM! Mine is just a guess, and a very broad one. I may've been low - let's just add three 0s - so maybe 1/100,000 - 1/100,000,000. That right there is VERY slim odds.

Suffice to say, we're off-topic now. Or is this calculation the topic? 'cause if so we better get some serious math goin on...

As I see it, 2 things matter here:
1) Were the wargames on 9/11 coincidental?
2) What effect did they have on the attack? Were they operationally relevant, or some other type of "coincidence"?

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
Suffice to say, we're off-topic now. Or is this calculation the topic? 'cause if so we better get some serious math goin on...

The topic is, any evidence that demonstrates the implications of 911 being an inside job.

The stats of the odds of the coincidence is just to make a person realize that the co-siding events were not a coincidence and so, it's just another piece of evidence in the whole prospect of evidences.

I guess you can look at it this way, the news says that it was a coincidence and so the people who thought that was a ridiculous statement cooked up some numbers that would illustrate how slim the chances are of it being a coincidence.

Which by the way, I still personally think is a bigger number then said by Alex Jones

Just adding more and more consensus that the official story is very much flimsy.

Some good point regarding this stuff from both sides in this thread, but the truth is I think somewhere in the middle. I don't have time to repost it all, but I've collected some of the most verifiable points about the wargames in a few aticles lnked together here.
Sources indicated in each piece. It's really hard to say for sure what they did and didn't do on 9/11, since most of them have "classified" details.
One new one I hadn't heard about when I compiled, revealed last year:

(9:40 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Hijacking Simulation Scheduled as Part of NORAD Exercise

As part of a NORAD training exercise, a simulated hijacking was scheduled to occur around this time. It was to have been based around politically motivated perpetrators taking command of an aircraft, landing it on a Cuba-like island, and seeking asylum there. The hijacking was one of several simulated scenarios prepared for the day. Details of the other scenarios are unknown. Major Kevin Nasypany, the NEADS mission crew commander who’d helped designed the exercise, initially thought the reports of Flight 11 being hijacked were because “Somebody started the exercise early.”

CCR timeline - 9:40

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
let's just add three 0s - so maybe 1/100,000 - 1/100,000,000. That right there is VERY slim odds.

Like I said, I ment no offense. That's probably more like it. Anyone know a statistician?

Suffice to say, we're off-topic now. Or is this calculation the topic? 'cause if so we better get some serious math goin on...

I'd also like to see the math of this. Or at least the reasoning behind the math.

As I see it, 2 things matter here:
1) Were the wargames on 9/11 coincidental?

I guess that depends on your point of view.

2) What effect did they have on the attack? Were they operationally relevant, or some other type of "coincidence"?

I'd like to find out also. It would be nice if all operations were in public view but unfortunately they are not. So, neither of us (or anyone from either side) can say definately yes or no until we know all the truth.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
Instead of trying to help or to offer productive statements and data you simply derail the debate...

I'm confused. If you disagree with my first post in this thread, then I encourage you to show me where I'm derailing the thread or offering innacurate information. (That would certainly be more "productive" than giving it one star and saying it doesn't apply...)

I want to ask you Esse, why you feel so strongly about your position on 9/11.

My "position" on 9/11 is that I'm curious what really happened. I doubt that really sets me apart from anyone else in this forum.

Why do you feel the need to write line for line responses to a letter not written to you?

My apologies. In the future, please use a U2U for personal messages.

I will not dismiss something outright if it seems plausible.

Neither will I. I'm not sure when I gave the impression that I would.

You seem so sure that you're right on this topic yet I hardly see why.

Again, please respond to my first posting with your disagreements. I'd really like to see them (no sarcasm...I'm serious).

The purpose of your last post was to start an argument with me..

That's fair. Guilty.

It seems you've missed the point of this thread completely by bickering on that one subject... The purpose of those numbers were to illustrate to the common, under-informed person that what the news has told them is completely impossible.

And the purpose of my first post was to point out that it's not completely impossible at all. How is that off topic? (Wrong? Maybe...please fire back with something more than a character attack...)

I suggest you try and provide factual evidence refuting his original thesis.

Seriously...it's only one page back...one click...

Okay, Esse, I agree with your above post. On-subject, I would like to offer my minor criticisms of your earlier points, which are about the closest to accurate I've yet seen:

Originally posted by Essedarius
You are implying several things about the 9/11 military drills that simply aren't true.

1) These drills were singular events that had never occurred before.

False. Global Guardian is an annual event. Vigilant Guardian and Amalgam Warrior are semi-annual events (every six months).

Sounds about right. They were regular recurring exercises, and VG was multi-day, so it didn't just happen ON 9/11. Was AW a 9/11 drill? I've not heard about that one

2) These drills were simulating attacks that resembled 9/11.

Not really. These drills simulated a Russian bomber attack (Vigilant Guardian)...on 9/11 a scenario involving a hijack (over Alaska was being used, American nuclear executions (Global Guardian).

The ones with "northern" were done in Canada/Alaska and focussed on a Russian bomber exercise monitoring. NW may have involved invading craft, i'm not sure... VG was at least partly in the NEAD Sector where the attacks happened. This one also seemed to maybe involve hijackings, judging from the responses - it must be part of the exercise, they thought.

3) These drills put planes in the air that could confuse controllers.

True and False. Vigilant Guardian was a Command Post Exercise (CPX)...nothing real in the air...all about pushing the right buttons on the ground. Amalgam Warrior did put planes in the air.

Ahh, think you have AW mixed up with Vigilant Warrior. Live-flies indeed, according to a NORAD guy Mike Ruppert talked to. Also I think NV had radar blips - non-real planes inserted onto radar screens, tho purged at 9:00 and irrelevant thereafter.

4) These drills slowed response time and caused confusion.

False. If anything, the fact that personnel were at their desks and did not need to be called in made military response faster than it would have been.

So we're told, and perhaps so. Having the fighters at ready too with extra gas and (weapons?) was to be a big help also. But whatever help these were, the response wound up being shoddy as all hell, slower by half than in the harmless Payne Stewart case. In short, if the drills helped, there was something else apparently hindering even more than that.

Or so it seems to me. Maybe there are other good explanations why air defenses proved so inadequate at just that time, or perhaps were usually that bad, Payne Stewarts' crash happening to coincide with an exceptionally lucid defense day.

Was AW a 9/11 drill? I've not heard about that one...

Here's a little summary. I guess it was part of the Global Guardian exercise...? (I have to admit, it's hard to keep track of all these exercises...which, I suppose, could be used as a decent argument on either side of the 9/11 debate...)

But whatever help these were, the response wound up being shoddy as all hell... In short, if the drills helped, there was something else apparently hindering even more than that.

Absolutely agreed.

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Also, why would they need to run a training excersise at the same time if it was a "false flag" operation?

So the military stand down can happen.

Surely a conspiricy should involve the least number of people?

So you assume that NORAD has a drill scheduled to give the real perp plausable deniability and EVERYONE at NORAD knows that they are assisting in treason? I don't even know where to begin with this assumption, and I can't believe that the more gung ho ATSers didn't pick up on it. You see, everyone involved in such a training excercise, in fact, believes that it is just an excercise. Hope I cleared that one up.

And as for the probability numbers, I think they're a bit off. So let's do them together. Please feel free to correct me.

I believe we're dealing with a ten year mean? (or whatever)

Okay, in ten years the US has about 2 terrorist attacks.
So that's 1 in 1825.

I figure each agency had about 1 drill every two years (pre 911). Because we are dealing with NORAD here, let's just say 1 in 730.

For the sake of bedtime-creeping-up-on-me let's just say that there are 50 targets in the US. Some states have more than one, some have none, but whatever, rough estimate here. 1 in 50

So, the odds of a drill involving a specific target are 1 in 1825 X 1 in 50.

That's 1 in 91,250

And the odds of an attack involving a specific target are 1 in 730 X 1 in 50.

That's 1 in 36,500

And the odds of a drill and an attack occuring on the same day involving the same target?

1 in 91,250 X 1 in 36,500

1 in 3,330,625,000

Now, can anyone tell me the odds of this both drills and attacks occuring on two seperate targets on the same day?

Very good, boys and girls

1 in 111,093,062,890,625,000,000

But what do I know, I'm just an idiot. Go back to sleep, your gubment loves you.

A person has to be receptive to the frequencies that leads to awareness on how the government or shadow government does not represent the people it enslaves.

Before a person opens up that door of perception, No matter how much convincing your evidence is,
It won't be acknowledge by the person who,
Hasn't opened that door

When that reception is not established, the person cannot assess the evidence that demonstrates the corruption of the government and the system

that post deserves an applause because people have a brick wall up to keep there belief systems in place, they are ignorant and they fear losing there bliss and changing yet they don't even admit it

i don't think alot of people are that smart , they would rather just drink a beer and watch the simpsons, thus when they awake one day and say wow there is finally so much pain in my every day life that maybe i should rethink a few things, but by then it may be 2 late

We can argue about the actual odds, but please understand okay, the odds are great, very very great. It is next to impossible in logic alone, that the drills and attacks coincided by accident, on 2 different events...you dont need the actual odds to tell you that.

And this is just one of a whole book full, you can fill a book full of the proof that 911 was an inside job, people have. What more proof do you need?

I bet if George Bush came out publically and said "yea we planned it, we did it, we lied to you, we did it on behalf of our globalist masters who put us in power" Youd still debunk it as a conspiracy theory, I mean its so unbelievably ignorant.

[edit on 12-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

Originally posted by gen.disaray
No " smoking gun " can be found because one DOES NOT exist.
One can search forever but will never find one untill people realize that
19 zelots pulled off the amazing . plain and simple . or should i say plane .

[edit on 10-6-2007 by gen.disaray]

Yea I got a mountain on mars I wanna sell you, keep living in your little fantasy world of programmed reality. I suppose you believe that the constitution is a goddamn piece of paper, just like Bush does.

There is no smoking gun, there is an army of guns smoking to prove it.

But hey, just look at the inconsistencies of the official story. AT THE VERY LEAST, you have to admit that they are not telling the full truth.

But this debate about 911, its a no brainer okay, its not a debate. They lied since the beginning. What do they have to do for you to understand they are lying to you constantly?

Oh theres no Bilderberg, theres no amnesty bill, theres no warrantless wiretapping, theres no secret prisons in Europe, theres no cops raiding Ed Browns house, theres no male prostitution in the White House, theres no pagan rituals at Bohemian Grove even though it was caught on tape, Al Queda wasnt created by the CIA, 911 was done by arabs who hate freedom, believe it, everybodys doing it, everybodys doing the monster mash....

I mean they get off on lying to you, they do it all the time, and of course they do, cuz it works on most of you!


[edit on 12-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

Have you considered the possibility that the coordination of large scale excercises that day
was leaked to OBL from someone high up and well connected?

The terrorists were actually set up as patsies for the whole event.

If only we could pump Marvin Bush full of truth serum.

I have a few $Trillion reasons to believe he was directly responsible for much of what went on
leading up to 9/11

How secret were those before hand? What are we to be looking for if there is something to find(~)another "test/ exerceise"?

Thank you for your time.

Originally posted by LightWorker13

And this is just one of a whole book full, you can fill a book full of the proof that 911 was an inside job, people have. What more proof do you need?

[edit on 12-6-2007 by LightWorker13]

That's interesting. Because I have been on this forum for many years and have read pretty much every thread and read pretty much ever 9/11 web site and still have not seen any real proof. So perhaps you have some proof that I just have not seen. Care to give examples of this proof that proves 9/11 was an inside job? If what you say is true, it would be very important to know this information.

What more proof do I need? Proof that isn't conjecture or speculation.