9/11 Questions and ONE Single Answer... WE WILL NOT FORGET!

9/11 Questions and ONE Single Answer... WE WILL NOT FORGET!

With all the various and sundry topics discussed each day on ATS it is all too easy to forget the one topic that rises above all the rest... the truth behind 9/11!

No other topic has had such a profound effect on the lives of everyone in the entire world. No other topic continues to affect us daily, for it is this event that changed our world forever... unless we can do something to restore things back to a level of sanity through the revelation of truth.

It is my goal to never let the topics here on ATS stray for too long away from this one central and defining topic of discussion and inquiry. Until the truth comes out, may we never grow tired of asking, probing, questioning, and analyzing the claims made by TPTB and all the TRUSTERS who adhere like faithful cult followers to those claims.

"Let us never entertain ridiculous conspiracy theories..." theories which ask us to ignore what our eyes show us, what our heart tells us, and what numerous witnesses share with us... for the OS is indeed the most ridiculous conspiracy theory of all.

Let us never stop seeking the more detailed answers to questions like the following list... and even though I have put a single word answer to each, it will become the job of a new investigation to discover the full truth behind these and many other anomalous questions concerning the events of that day and the days that led up to it... and the days following it.

Small sample of troubling questions:

Q: Why were nearly all of “Al Qaeda” Mujahadeen members accused of 9/11 involvement trained in military training facilities in the US, or other facilities connected to the Pentagon?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why did Rumsfeld, 3 months before 9/11, remove the 2-protocol system for scrambling fighters to a single protocol system, requiring his personal approval, and then return it to a 2-protocol system on Sept. 12th, 2001? Why was Rumsfeld not reachable during those critical moments when scrambling authority could have prevented the attacks? Why was Rumsfeld seen helping to carry injured people on the front lawn of the Pentagon, instead of being at his post, ready to grant scrambling authority?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why did the batteries of missile defense at the Pentagon, which are automatically triggered by non-military aircraft entering the Pentagon’s airspace, not shoot down the supposed airliner that entered that 50-mile radius no-fly zone? In essence, why was the system deactivated?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why were many simultaneous training exercises being conducted on that very morning of Sept. 11th, exercises that had nearly all air defenses for the eastern seaboard positioned far away, and why were those exercises structured so that many false radar blips were generated on air traffic control radar screens, thereby creating a great deal of ATC confusion?

A: Conspiracy

Q: How was the FBI able to put out a list of all the supposed hijackers within 3 days of Sept. 11th, and why were many of those on that list subsequently found alive, and why were those found alive never removed from the list?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why was nearly all the scrap metal from the demolished buildings immediately shipped off for recycling, instead of keeping it for a thorough criminal investigation, as would be in standard procedure?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why did the white house resist so vehemently against an official 9/11 inquiry, and why was the 9/11 Commission only approved after extreme pressure from a few relatives of 9/11 victims, and why was Henry Kissinger first suggested to head that Commission (who had to be rejected because of extreme conflict of interest), and why were all the main Commission members tightly connected to Oil interests, or connections to countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why were so many FBI agents told to ignore any anomalies or suspicions they had regarding certain individuals on the FBI list of terror suspects? Why were so many efforts by FBI agents obstructed, such as those by agent Colleen Rowley?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why did John Ashcroft, in August of 2001, have terrorism at the very bottom of his priority list, claiming he didn’t want to hear anything about terrorism, even though there were many attempted warnings coming in from many sources?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why did the 9/11 Commission interview 17 firefighters, but they didn’t interview any of the 22 surviving witnesses, names given to them by the very man (William Rodriguez) who worked at the towers for 20 years, who had the master key to the towers and who personally saved many people on that day? And why did they insist on interviewing Rodriguez behind closed doors, instead of openly for the whole world to hear what was said?

A: Conspiracy

Q: Why was only ONE group of people allowed to leave the country immediately after the attacks… the members of the Bin Laden family?

A: Conspiracy


[edit on 15-2-2010 by downisreallyup]

If you have any other questions that you can add to the list I have started, please add them so that we can begin to see in one place just how large the list is, and why so many are having a hard time being TRUSTERS in the official story.

Great questions and all I know is that if they have been answered someone should have been fired at the very least even if there is no conspiracy per se. the fact nobody was fired makes the conspiracy option more probable.

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
Great questions and all I know is that if they have been answered someone should have been fired at the very least even if there is no conspiracy per se. the fact nobody was fired makes the conspiracy option more probable.

That is another very good question to add to the list!

Q: Why, instead of getting fired, were so many of the top government and military people involved that day PROMOTED and given even greater responsibilities than what they had before 9/11? If they had committed gross negligence, the very last thing you would do is promote them. If, however, there was indeed a conspiracy, then promotion would be the logical thing to do, since all the players had performed admirably indeed!

A: Conspiracy

The one about the drills taking place that day.. I want to add 7/7 to that list also..

7/7 There were drills going on that day also..

Here is a lil side info on both them days..

Rudy Giuliani was in the vicinity of both incidents when they went down..

There is alot more questions than answers from that day, but you know.. This day will be like 12/7/1941. We all know what happened but nothing was or will be done about it.

Also to add about the phone call on Flight 93 from Ed Felt prior to the plane crashing that he seen white smoke on it.




[edit on 2/16/2010 by ThichHeaded]

reply to post by downisreallyup


A good list of questions but the view is somewhat narrow by suggesting 'conspiracy' as the only possible answer.

The one that sticks out for me is the suggestion of the Pentagon missile batteries being stood down on the day - what missile batteries?

You'd have to realise that Reagan airport is only about 1 mile from the Pentagon and these batteries, unproven to exist in 2001, would have been claiming a 100 or more 'kills' every day if they targetted non-military aircraft within 50 miles.

Originally posted by downisreallyup
Q: Why did the batteries of missile defense at the Pentagon, which are automatically triggered by non-military aircraft entering the Pentagon’s airspace, not shoot down the supposed airliner that entered that 50-mile radius no-fly zone? In essence, why was the system deactivated?

This again shows how stupid the silly conspiracy theories actually are.

What Pentagon missile batteries? There are none. If you think that they exist, how about showingsome proof of them?

This also shows the conspiracy theorists ignorance of Air Defence, you do not put AA missiles on top of the target you want to defend.

Ronald Reagan Airport is a few miles away, so how can the Pentagon have a 50 mile no fly zone?

and why were those exercises structured so that many false radar blips were generated on air traffic control radar screens, thereby creating a great deal of ATC confusion?

Who claims many false blips were generated? Another sill conspiracy story, not based on any fact!

Question: How could shrub have watched the first plane hit the tower?



Question: Why did rumsfeld tell us flight 93 was shot down?





As a side note...I commend your efforts here downisreallyup.

Much Respect!




We Surround them...Think about that!

Question: How did this passport survive
1: A vaporizing plane crash into the north tower?
2: A raging inferno allegedly hot enough to collapse the north tower?
3: A pyroclastic debris cloud reminiscent of the Mt St Helens eruption?

Virtually Un-Touched

Yet the black boxes for both planes were un-recoverable?




We Surround them...Think about that!

Originally posted by TaZCoN
Question: How did this passport survive
1: A vaporizing plane crash into the north tower?
2: A raging inferno allegedly hot enough to collapse the north tower?
3: A pyroclastic debris cloud reminiscent of the Mt St Helens eruption?

Virtually Un-Touched

Yet the black boxes for both planes were un-recoverable?




We Surround them...Think about that!

What about the identity documents on display in this clip :-

news.bbc.co.uk...

Was this a conspiracy too ?

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by downisreallyup
Q: Why did the batteries of missile defense at the Pentagon, which are automatically triggered by non-military aircraft entering the Pentagon’s airspace, not shoot down the supposed airliner that entered that 50-mile radius no-fly zone? In essence, why was the system deactivated?

This again shows how stupid the silly conspiracy theories actually are.

What Pentagon missile batteries? There are none. If you think that they exist, how about showingsome proof of them?

This also shows the conspiracy theorists ignorance of Air Defence, you do not put AA missiles on top of the target you want to defend.

Ronald Reagan Airport is a few miles away, so how can the Pentagon have a 50 mile no fly zone?

and why were those exercises structured so that many false radar blips were generated on air traffic control radar screens, thereby creating a great deal of ATC confusion?

Who claims many false blips were generated? Another sill conspiracy story, not based on any fact!

Dereks, obviously you are not very up on what is actually being said by many who are not talked about in the few "truster" sites you have gone to. A lot of people have been talking about the injection of exercise blips in the NORAD radar, and also it is evident that the FAA was also involved, otherwise the following conversation between NORAD and the FAA makes no sense:

Otherwise this exchange (from the 911CR) makes no sense: "This was the first notification received by the military-at any level-that American 11 had been hijacked:115

FAA: Hi. Boston Center TMU , we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.

NEADS: Is this real-world or exercise?

FAA: No, this is not an exercise, not a test."

Conversation mentioned in the Commission Report

If the controllers were NOT involved in the exercise:
a) why does the military ask them if the hijacking was part of the exercise, and
b) why does the FAA they have to tell the military that the hijacking wasn't an exercise?

Note, the FAA is not taken aback by the odd question: "Is this real-world or exercise?" They responded immediately as if they knew what was going on. I suppose the commission put this passage in the report to illustrate the confusion going on that morning, but they oddly fail to explain the fact that there was actually a NORAD hijacking exercise going on that morning. But in any case, since the FAA was involved in the hijacking exercise that morning, are we really supposed to believe that the FAA wasn't confused by the real hijackings going on? Wouldn't this confusion have cost precious minutes in the response?

Another question: how did the FAA decide the hijacking was real and not part of the exercise, since at minimum, they knew there was a hijacking exercise going on?

Source

And how were these blip insertions done? Well, through the interoperability that was done by PTECH for the two years prior to 9/11, using a sophisticated piece of software called PROMISE:

And that relationship had been going on mediated by Ptech for 2 years prior to 9/11. You elsewhere say that the Secret Service is among the government entities that had a contract with Ptech. Mike Ruppert’s thesis in Crossing the Rubicon, as you know, is that the software that was running information between FAA & NORAD was superseded by a parallel, subsuming, version of itself that was being run by the Secret Service on state of the art parallel equipment in the PEOC with a nucleus of Secret Service personnel around Cheney. In your view, might it have been the case that Cheney was using Ptech to surveil the function of the people in FAA & NORAD who wanted to do their jobs on 9/11, and then intervene to turn off the legitimate response?

Source

As far as the surface-to-air missile defense system, there are a number of these batteries deployed all over the United States protecting all kinds of high-value military installations and facilities:

In the mid 1960s, the United Stated Air Force was ready to deploy its first advance surface-to-air missile defense system, the BOMBARC. The BOMBARC was to have a 440 mile range of operation but constant problems with their guided system limited the deployment of the system from nation-wide, integrated system to a more regional.

On the other hand, the U.S. Army had fielded its own missile defense system since 1953, the NIKE. The initial deployed surface-to-air NIKE system used the Nike-Ajax liquid fueled missile with an operational range of thirty miles as its main interceptor asset.

By the late 1958, there were over two hundred NIKE missile batteries in the U.S., primarily defending nuclear research facilities and depots. On December of 1958, the Army began the process of supplanting its Nike-Ajax missile with the more advance Nike-Hercules.

The Hercules was a leap forward in the development of a surface-to-air missile. It was propelled by solid-fuel which gave the missile an operational range in excess of seventy five miles. The Hercules was also the first interceptor missile with a nuclear warhead capability. About one hundred NIKE sites were upgraded with the Hercules.

Of these facilities, around fifty were redeployed to defend the Air Force’s Strategic Air Command bomber bases. The Air Command was the United States primary source for massive nuclear retaliation after a Soviet attack.

The key component of the NIKE system was the advance, early-warning radar.

The U.S. Defense Department was committed from the beginning to build a series of interlocking radar stations that would allow the Army to monitor the perimeter and selecting interior parts of the North American continent.

The goal of the system was to provide the Air Force and Army with up-to five hours of warning to response in case of a Soviet bomber attack.

The U.S. Air Force took the lead in the design, development and deployment of radar systems. The first significant antiaircraft radar platform was the LASH-Up system. It was designed by the Air Force to cover America’s costal centers and major nuclear production facilities.

In 1949, LASH-Up radar stations numbered just seven, but by the end of 1951, the system grew to fifty stations. The LASH-Up system was eventually replaced by the PERMANENT system, which was to number seventy-four radar locations by mid 1952.

The U.S. early warning radar system was supplemented by the thirty four stations of the PINETREE LINE system located across the vast Canadian territory, which in theory could provide the Air Force with two additional hours of warning in a case of a surprise attack.

Source

Are you suggesting that out of all the surface-to-air batteries all over the U.S., the Pentagon would leave the nerve center for the entire military unprotected? That is just ludicrous to the maximum, and if you suggest such a thing, you only prove how much you are grabbing at straws.


[edit on 16-2-2010 by downisreallyup]

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by TaZCoN
Question: How did this passport survive
1: A vaporizing plane crash into the north tower?
2: A raging inferno allegedly hot enough to collapse the north tower?
3: A pyroclastic debris cloud reminiscent of the Mt St Helens eruption?

Virtually Un-Touched

Yet the black boxes for both planes were un-recoverable?

We Surround them...Think about that!

What about the identity documents on display in this clip :-

news.bbc.co.uk...

Was this a conspiracy too ?

Of course it was! That is another great one to add to the list. There is not one single reasonable explanation for how paper passports, sealed in a tightly closed airliner, could possibly survive intact while the airplane itself gets disintegrated into a huge fireball.

Those few documents in the Iran crash underwent a completely different event... nowhere near as destructive. That plane did not crash into a building where it completely exploded in a tight area, and then subsequently fell along with thousands of tons of other material that demolished virtually everything. Normal plane crashed will have more things that survive because the fuselage breaks apart across the land and not every part of the plane is engulfed in flames or demolished to bits. Nobody questions that the planes in the towers got virtually disintegrated, especially after falling amidst the massive amount of exploded building material. Only some big pieces like engines survived because they came flying out the other end of the building moments after impact.

The presence of any passports from the alleged hijackers in the wreckage only goes to prove that these men were NOT part of the event, and that those papers were most certainly planted in the mountainous heap of dust and twisted/melted metal. If anyone believes anything different, then you are purely delusional and in need of serious psychiatric help... seriously...


[edit on 16-2-2010 by downisreallyup]

reply to post by downisreallyup



What OTHER (if any) passports were recovered?

Originally posted by downisreallyup
As far as the surface-to-air missile defense system, there are a number of these batteries deployed all over the United States protecting all kinds of high-value military installations and facilities:

In the mid 1960s, the United Stated Air Force was ready to deploy its first advance surface-to-air missile defense system, the BOMBARC.

Oh dear, here we have more "truther" quality research!

For a start it is BOMARC, and you must have missed this little bit.... they were all retired by 1972

the Army began the process of supplanting its Nike-Ajax missile with the more advance Nike-Hercules.

And the "truther" quality research continues, they were all deactivated by 1979!

Are you suggesting that out of all the surface-to-air batteries all over the U.S., the Pentagon would leave the nerve center for the entire military unprotected? That is just ludicrous to the maximum, and if you suggest such a thing, you only prove how much you are grabbing at straws.

and still the "truther" quality research continues.... they were all for use during the cold war.... it must have slipped your mind that that is over. There are currently no USA based air defence sites in current use...

www.fas.org...
"Continental Air Defense: A Dedicated Force Is No Longer Needed (Letter
Report, 05/03/94, GAO/NSIAD-94-76).

The continental air defense evolved during the Cold War to detect and
intercept Soviet bombers attacking North America via the North Pole.
GAO concludes that such an air defense is no longer needed and could be
disbanded at an annual savings of as much as $370 million."

www.fas.org...

So once again, it is just a silly conspiracy theory that the Pentagon had a air defence system in 2000

[edit on 16/2/10 by dereks]

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

What OTHER (if any) passports were recovered?

No others were found anywhere near the towers, and apparently a totally undamaged California ID card of a passenger was supposedly found in the Pentagon wreckage, again magically surviving unharmed when the airplane itself was supposedly demolished to bits.

My comment was that ANY passports found would obviously be planted after-the-fact. That was a generic comment meant to establish a general rule of truth. I never said there was more than one passport found in the tower wreckage. Isn't it amazing how the only passport "found" just happened to be for one of the suspects? My, my, how lucky the government is!

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by downisreallyup

Oh dear, here we have more "truther" quality research!

For a start it is BOMARC, and you must have missed this little bit.... they were all retired by 1972

So once again, it is just a silly conspiracy theory that the Pentagon had a air defence system in 2000

[edit on 16/2/10 by dereks]

If you read your own links, you will see they are talking about getting rid of the FORCES, which means the troops, and they went on to say that the duties performed by the air force in this regard would now be carried out by other groups within the military to enforce air sovereignty!

A dedicated continental air defense force is no longer needed. Since the threat of a Soviet-style air attack against the United States has largely disappeared, the air defense force has been focusing its activities on air sovereignty missions. Active and reserve general-purpose and training forces could perform these missions because they have comparable or more capable aircraft, are located at or near most existing continental air defense bases and alert sites, and have pilots capable of performing air sovereignty missions or being trained to perform such missions.

Source

This link you provided has ABSOLUTE NOTHING to do with a missile defense system, whatsoever.

Nice try TRUSTER... but no cigar on that one!

Why is it that a couple of people who have already posted on this thread always come to 9/11 forums and illogically defend what is clear to virtually every informed observer of unsolved mysteries in the OS?

Why are these people so interested in the obstruction of the truth, which may or may not be represented by "truthers" but is clearly not represented by the OS?

Why is it they choose to avoid anwsering (or even think about) a multitude of glaring questions that bother not just "truthers" but "victims" as well, instead focusing on those particular questions that are either too technical for average observers (often including themselves) to have truly informed opinions or erroneous and unimportant errors?

Why is it they routinely resort to name-calling and absurdly ridiculous arguments to support the OS?

Case in point:

So once again, it is just a silly conspiracy theory that the Pentagon had a air defence system in 2000

Right! What kind of idiot would think the guys who run the world's most powerful military would have the foresight to defend its headquarters and the captital of the gov't for that matter from attacks from the air by possibly hiding surface to air missiles? Pfft....hahaha.....idiot "truthers" who in their right mind could have imagined an "attack from the air", utterly ridiculous!

Originally posted by TaZCoN
Question: How did this passport survive
1: A vaporizing plane crash into the north tower?
2: A raging inferno allegedly hot enough to collapse the north tower?
3: A pyroclastic debris cloud reminiscent of the Mt St Helens eruption?


Virtually Un-Touched





Yet the black boxes for both planes were un-recoverable?




We Surround them...Think about that!



What about the identity documents on display in this clip :-

news.bbc.co.uk...

Was this a conspiracy too ?

Of course, avoid anwering the question, just pose another question to deflect the conversation and maybe everyone will forget their common sense and all relevant life-experience that says this passport must be a fraud.

Why was Able Danger shut down 4 months before 9-11? (investigation of al qaeda by D.O..D)

Why was that information ordered destroyed?

Why was Sibel Edmonds ordered gagged? Indira Singh?

WHy is there not ONE picture showing the plane that supposedly hit the pentagon?

Why did Bush run and hide on 9/11 when the nation needed a leader, not a coward?

Why was the hole in the Pentagon not big enough to even put the fuselage of an airplane in?

why do eyewitness reports conflict with the OS on the trajectory of the Pentagon plane?

Why did building 7 fall into itself with only small fire inside?

I could go on all day until my fingers fell off. That's how weak the 9/11 ommisson report truly is, that there are literally THOUSANDS of unanswered questions still floating around. I have one answer only - TREASON,

I would suppose one question I have concerns those on flight 77.

How many times, when you call your mother, do you find it necessary to IDENTIFY yourself so she know who is calling from a plane on a cell phone???

Hi everybody,

It's a truism to say that the more evidence is gathered, the more it will point to a single correct theory. More data usually equates to a more accurate hypothesis. While Dereks might well be correct on the issue of the missile defense at the Pentagon, it is sadly amusing that for someone with such a negative mindset that he/she cannot apply such logic to the story provided by the US government.

The more times I see the building explode, the more times I see the flight path of the Pentagon attack, and the more I hear from eye-witness, the more I am lead to believe that the attacks were not carried out in the way we have been told.

NIST peer review process ignoring valid questions,
Seismic data showing 'spikes' before the planes hit,
Bush and Cheney giving evidence behind closed doors,
A media unwilling to ask questions ect

When something is true, the more it is examined the more the truth becomes obvious. I mean, even a 50 foot tall Lego building with a large amount of gasoline set on fire in the top third section would not collapse into it's own footprint, the plastic would melt and bend, and not explode outwards from every side. Maybe that is not a very good analogy but neither is 'they hate us for our freedoms'. The idea that the attack was 'blowback' from annoyed folk in the Middle East is nothing but the perpetrators trying to frame innocent people.

Now more so than ever: Peace