Let's get back to asking questions

Originally posted by OrionStars
If people were being searched on 9/11, how is it no weapons were found on them at the time of search? Where did 19 alleged people stash utility knives aka box cutters, and no security personnel found any of them?

box cutters were not illegal to carry onto planes on 9/11. Atta knew this and incorporated the box cutters into his takeover strategy, knowing full-well that they would not be confescated.

[edit on 26-12-2007 by powerdive]

reply to post by powerdive

Wanna know how he knew they wouldn't be either discovered or confiscated?

He packed them in a bag that was checked in. In other words, once the bag was loaded aboard the plane, he wouldn't have had access to it.

One of the many reasons why the account of Atta is flawed as it stands.

reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar




Exactly. Mohamed Atta was a very sharp individual. A very meticulous and deliberate person. Remember he did graduate from Cairo University in 1990 with a degree in architectural engineering,so he was not a mindless fool most people would like to believe.He was not concerned with covering anything up. He was the one of them all that knew exactly what he was going to be doing. He is the only pilot to execute his hit perfectly. Flight 11's impact was perfectly centered with the only flaws being perhaps he hit the building too high and that his voice was heard by ATC ,but that really didn't deter him or even threaten his mission. Nonetheless,it collapsed anyway. He turned off his transponder in a timely manner. His plane was the first, and least likely to be interfered with. Something I'm sure he knew when he planned to board the first flight to depart that morning. Al-shehhi's flight went all wrong until the "miracle" ending.

Anyhow It is reported that Atta was seen keeping Al-shehhi and Jarrah in check during flight school when they tried to veer off and partake in american pleasures. He kept the rains tight enough to see that the plan saw success.


[edit on 26-12-2007 by powerdive]

reply to post by powerdive


I did not see box cutters/utility knives as any type of protective weapon, considering how many people, versed in self-defense, may have been on any alleged planes.

If someone simply said there was a bomb, and people were not shown a bomb, or saw any movement to set off a bomb carried on the body somewhere, or a remote control device, why would utility knives pose that big a threat to all people on the alleged planes, particularly the men?

My first reaction, when I heard it was box cutters, was this. "BOX CUTTERS?!?!?!?! Why box cutters?" All they would have had to do is show some device that looked like remote to a bomb, and say, "We have a bomb on board." I do not recall any particular concentration in reporting bomb threats on all four alleged planes. The only alleged flight I recall, with any type of minimal concentration on a bomb threat, was the flip-flop story related to alleged Flight 93.

Originally posted by OrionStars
The only alleged flight I recall, with any type of minimal concentration on a bomb threat, was the flip-flop story related to alleged Flight 93.

Interestingly, there is evidence of a bomb on Flight 11, which raises all sorts of questions.

This from Allen L Rolland's Radio Weblog

"My wife’s call was the first specific information the airline and the government got that day," said Mike Sweeney, the widowed husband of Amy Sweeney, who went face to face with the hijackers on Flight 11. She gave seat locations and physical descriptions of the hijackers, which allowed officials to identify them as Middle Eastern men—by name—even before the first crash. She gave officials key clues to the fact that this was not a traditional hijacking. And she gave the first and only eyewitness account of a bomb on board.

"How do you know it’s a bomb?" asked her phone contact.

"Because the hijackers showed me a bomb," Sweeney said, describing its yellow and red wires.

Of course, Sweeney gave the wrong seat locations, but that's another story.

reply to post by powerdive


However, guerilla armies are only successful for many years, because their operatives do not link back to anyone else in the chain of command. Leaving actual incriminating evidence around is the fastest way to bring a guerilla army down from the inside out.

It is the same reason the CIA and other covert agencies disavow any knowledge of their operatives, if their covert operatives are captured dead or alive. Their operatives know better than to leave anything lying around, even though those doing the capturing know, but cannot prove with evidence of link to organization, their prisoner, dead or alive, is a covert CIA or other domestic or international agency operative.

reply to post by OrionStars


There are sketchy reports that bomb threats were made on flight 175 and flight 93. There are reports of mace being used to force people to the back of the plane after 1 or 2 people were slaughtered in the aisle for all up front to see. You are right, these guys were all very small in stature (atta was 5'9 approx 155lbs) and not physically imposing in the least. They had to instill fear in some way in order to control the passengers. I believe cutting the throats of stewardess' and pilots would have done the trick for unsuspecting,bewildered passengers. And knowing that flight 11,flight 175 and flight 77 were all in the air,hi-jacked, for apporximately 30 minutes it is conceivable that the people aboard did not have enough time to fully accept the extent of what was going on in order to organize some type of revolt. FLight 93 was in the air ,hi-jacked for a much longer perioed of time when compared to the other flights and its probable that the passengers on 93 knew about the WTC and pentagon hits. Hence, the story of the flight 93 revolt.....



[edit on 26-12-2007 by powerdive]

reply to post by coughymachine


I did not make it clear and will qualify. I was referring to national and international reports from the media of bomb threats.

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by powerdive

 

However, guerilla armies are only successful for many years, because their operatives do not link back to anyone else in the chain of command. Leaving actual incriminating evidence around is the fastest way to bring a guerilla army down from the inside out.

It is the same reason the CIA and other covert agencies disavow any knowledge of their operatives, if their covert operatives are captured dead or alive. Their operatives know better than to leave anything lying around, even though those doing the capturing know, but cannot prove with evidence of link to organization, their prisoner, dead or alive, is a covert CIA or other domestic or international agency operative.

accept in this case the only evidence left behind is religious and attack-specific.......not specific to "where to find bin laden". The closest they have come to following trails from these guys to terrorists in the middle east were the accounts that atta and alshehhi recieved large donations through.

reply to post by powerdive


Unless pocket knives were illegal pre-9/11, I still have trouble dealing with box cutters being that much of a threat, and are hardly efficient throat slicing weapons. My concept of the box cutter is Stanley utility knives. Many times they barely cut well at all, even with a sharp blade, except through tape at the flap closure of boxes. Box cutters are normally razor blades.

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by powerdive

 

Unless pocket knives were illegal pre-9/11, I still have trouble dealing with box cutters being that much of a threat, and are hardly efficient throat slicing weapons. My concept of the box cutter is Stanley utility knives. Many times they barely cut well at all, even with a sharp blade, except through tape at the flap closure of boxes. Box cutters are normally razor blades.

Consider other things. The hijackers were reported to be attending a gym on a regular basis with personal trainers. Jarrah had an instructor that raved about his physical progress months before 9/11 stating that "he could take on an army". There are different types of box cutters,some of which allow the blade to pertrude inches beyond the top of the "body". Efficient? For what they intended, absolutely. These people were READY to die and kill everyone they possibly could. They were islamic extremists. They hated americans and had enough rage to jump up behind someone in a split second and drive a butter knife or a spoon into someones neck. A box cutter is more than adequate with plenty of force applied

[edit on 26-12-2007 by powerdive]

reply to post by powerdive


I have always been amazed at the reports of Atta's superb flying skills. The alleged man could not even successfully fly a Cessna, and had never flown a commercial jetliner, not even with an instructor. And, yet, such expert skill was reported, from a man never having flown a commercial jetliner, with an instructor or solo. Is there any valid documentation Atta had a pilot's license certifying him to fly any plane, much less a commercial jetliner?

I am certainly no expert in aviation. However, I do not believe that 20 hours of flying time, with an instructor in a single engine plane, hardly qualifies anyone to be considered a "skilled pilot", particularly in the cockpit of a commmercial jetliner.

"Having attended Huffman Aviation flight school in Venice, Florida since early July, Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi move to Jones Aviation in Sarasota, about 20 miles north of Venice, to continue their training. However, their instructor finds them rude and aggressive, and claims they sometimes fight with him to take over the controls of the training plane. The instructor later says that when he talks to Atta, “he could not look you in the eye. His attention span was very short.… [T]hey didn’t live up to our standards.” Atta and Alshehhi each complete about 20 hours of flying time in single-engine planes, but early in October fail their Stage I exam for instruments rating. Gary Jones, the vice president of the school, later states, “We told them we wouldn’t teach them anymore. We told them, one, they couldn’t speak English and, two, they had bad attitudes. They wouldn’t listen to what the instructors had to instruct.” The two then return to Huffman Aviation to continue their training. [Chicago Tribune, 9/16/2001; Washington Post, 9/19/2001; 9/11"

reply to post by OrionStars


Atta never flew a large jetliner but had enough hours to get his license. He and Al-shehhi had several hundred hours in flight simulators. Besides, Consider something. Taking off and landing are hands down the most difficult aspect of flying. Turning an airplane is difficult but managable. These guys were not taking the planes of, not landing them. All they had to do was point and accelerate. Atta wasn't really regarded as "skilled" as a pilot. Not sure where you heard that. He was adequate. It was Marwan Al-shehhi that shocked everyone with was appeared to be a last-second pullout of a hard-core nose dive that had everyone on the plane puking their guts out. Not only that,but seconds after he pulled out of the dive he banked left , as you can see in all footage of the impact, and sliced into the tower at a severe angle. An extremely difficult compressed manuever to pull off at an unprecedented 590mph in a commercial jetliner

unbelievable

The interesting thing was that just before that was accomplished, at 8:58 as 175 started to descend from 28k feet , Delta flight 2315 was on a collision coarse with 175. Al-shehhi, supposedly, nosed the plane down and gradually accellerated from 3k feet per minute to 6k feet per minute and after ATC tried to radio to the cockpit to warn the pilot of the possible collision the pilot revved the throttle and accelerated up to a phenomenal 10,000k feet per minute and ATC waited in horror as both planes were headed toward each other. Delta 2315 radio'd in that flight 175 barrelled right in front of him and missed by less than 200 feet.

Delta 2315 passed right behind 175 and watch the plane head down to New York

reply to post by powerdive


That is the first I have heard or read of their intense interest in physical fitness. I do not recall that in the original media reports or even later through the first year after 9/11.

With all due respect, as the years rolled by, I saw the "official" version fish growing bigger and bigger all the time. No valid documentation to support the "original" or growing fish-to-whale size version.

I have to agree with the poster, who mentioned the parlor game of "I've got a secret" or "Telephone". By the time the story gets back, it has grown so out of proportion, it does not remotely resemble the few words uttered to pass along. Blogs on the Internet have failed to keep the actual facts, of what we can prove, in proper perspective over the 6+ years time since 9/11/2001.

reply to post by powerdive


Again, I am certainly no expert in aviation. However, that would be like saying anyone driving a simulated auto, could automatically drive on the open road with many other drivers or not on the open road. Commercial aircraft do not handle like pre-programmed flight simulators sitting on the ground, not in the air.

reply to post by OrionStars



yes, it is sad

what a private organization needs to do is finance a 9/11 reconstructive effort

build two exactly identical towers

fill two boeng 767 with jet fuel and mimic the speed and angle of impact and slam the planes right into the reconstructed towers

an expensive test,but at least there will be something tangible to compare to!

reply to post by powerdive


Based on what I have researched for 6+ years starting on 9/11/2001, it would not have taken an investigative genius to figure out where it led, considering what was reported but not validated, to have been found. There is no way in on 9/11 anyone could have known where to link back. On 9/11, it was already being blamed on Osama bin Laden. How the US bureaucrats could validate that so swiftly, I have no idea.

Couple this with the fact, Donald Rumsfeld said they had no idea anything was going to happen on 9/11/2001. Either they knew it and let it happened. Or did it themselves, and pulled the biggest hoax on the entire earth history will ever record.

If they did not know, how could they start making definitive claims on 9/11/2001, that they knew exactly who was responsible at the very top of the chain of command? They could not even have yet known who was supposed to be flying alleged planes, into alleged buildings and into an alleged ground site. But yet they swore, on 9/11/2001, they knew who was top of the chain of command ultimately responsible.

reply to post by powerdive

Atta and Jarrah in Afghanistan with bin Laden.

msnbc