Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who was president in 1993? Slick Willie? Yeah, well there was the 1993 WTC Bombing. As I recall, the idiot driver didn't park the truck next to one of the support columns as he was instructed, s
t
You 'remember' incorrectly. The support column he parked next to was destroyed.
You 'remember' incorrectly. The support column he parked next to was destroyed.
One problem, in my opinion, is that many people who were never at, in and through the World Trade Center don't have a grasp on the size of the complex. I was down to see the hole in the basement in 1993. It was enormous. Compared to 2001, it looks like nothing, yet the 1993 bomb caused significant destruction. It wasn't enough, however, to take down the towers no matter where they had put it.
By the way, Condoleezza Rice's statement notwithstanding, when we used to talk about how they would try next time (normal idle conversation for people who worked at the WTC), at least two people I know said they would do it with planes (I voted for a larger bomb in a big truck a la OK City.) One is an engineer who thought they might hijack a cargo plane, like a FedEx plane, and load it with explosives. Another was the woman who sat next to me on the 82nd floor. It was very easy up there to imagine a plane hitting the building as you'd see them fly over the river lower than where you were sitting. She used to say with her expletive-peppered way of talking that someday they were going to come back with a kamikaze plane and fly it into the building. Both of those people were also in the north tower that day, and both of them lived to say "I told you so."
One problem, in my opinion, is that many people who were never at, in and through the World Trade Center don't have a grasp on the size of the complex. I was down to see the hole in the basement in 1993. It was enormous. Compared to 2001, it looks like nothing, yet the 1993 bomb caused significant destruction. It wasn't enough, however, to take down the towers no matter where they had put it.
By the way, Condoleezza Rice's statement notwithstanding, when we used to talk about how they would try next time (normal idle conversation for people who worked at the WTC), at least two people I know said they would do it with planes (I voted for a larger bomb in a big truck a la OK City.) One is an engineer who thought they might hijack a cargo plane, like a FedEx plane, and load it with explosives. Another was the woman who sat next to me on the 82nd floor. It was very easy up there to imagine a plane hitting the building as you'd see them fly over the river lower than where you were sitting. She used to say with her expletive-peppered way of talking that someday they were going to come back with a kamikaze plane and fly it into the building. Both of those people were also in the north tower that day, and both of them lived to say "I told you so."
Just a few days ago, I was at my parents' house and Mom showed me a box of photos my Dad took over the years. There was one of me next to the replaced column, after I had taped flowers on it in memory of the 4 friends and unborn baby that we lost. It brought all those horrible memories back.
You're welcome. Although I am not a CT, well not about the WTC. I know that Big Brother is watching; (digital cameras & mics in digital TV boxes???) that much I will believe. I linked to a truthers site on that posting, but yet here is another explanation:
The Patriot Act is suppose to increase the amount of information that is shared between the alphabet soup boys and the local PDs. Thus break down the 'wall' barrier between them and increase cooperation.
Don't let some one else interpret it for you though, the link to the legislature is posted on the first link I gave. Read it and understand it for yourself.
I had asked GNT to show something of his homework and he danced around the question.
I have not danced around anything ... but you sure do dance around the points ... addressing maybe 1 out of 10, and doing a lousy job on the 1.
So you believe your TV is watching you, instead of the other way around, but that's as far as you'll go? You won't consider the possibility that the government played a role in facilitating 911, even though it's a proven fact that the FBI facilitated the 1993 attack on the WTC, including providing the explosives? (an issue you conveniently failed to address earlier). There are only a couple of reasons for such inability to make the connection here ... willful denial, or alarming stupidity, one of the two. The 1993 incident doesn't prove guilt of 911, but it certainly does establish willingness to do so ... something you can't seem to bring yourself to "believe".
As for the timing of the Patriot Act .. this is an important question to consider, and the question itself shows a thinking person behind it. The Bill was submitted to congress within two weeks of 911. The nature and complexity of the Bill suggests it was an effort initiated long before 911, and was simply waiting for the proper climate to exist, given its extreme nature and the obvious controversy it still generates to this day. Given the close timing of this Patriot Act after 911, the Bush administration literally forced it's passage, under the pressure of "protecting Amerka" from the "terrists". And yes, the reason given was to facilitate better coordination among agencies .... a totally absurd and patently ridiculous excuse. Better coordination among agencies might require processes and procedures, not a bloody ACT OF CONGRESS. The Bill was needed to offer agencies freedom to violate civil liberties at will, virtually eviscerating the F'ing constitution. Another prime example of modern Orwellianism, calling this anti-American, anti-Constitution piece of Nazi legislation "Patriotic". Some of the elements of this bill would have made Hitler blush.
• Warnings on the eve of the attack
• Operation Bojinka/Planes as Bombs
• W199I - FBI hindered in Al-Qaeda investigation
• Terrorists trained at US flight schools
• Protection of Zacarias Moussaoui
• Making it easy for the terrorists to attack
• Questionable Ties
• Protection of terrorists post-9/11
• CIA meeting with bin Laden
• Operation Bojinka/Planes as Bombs
• Warnings ignored
• Russian foreknowledge and warnings
• Israeli foreknowledge and warnings
• FEMA in place on September 10th?
• Clinton administration protection of terrorists
• Insider trading immediately prior to 9/11
Clicked through on that which I have in bold there. Fema Deployment Pre 9-11?
Tom Kennedy made a slip of the tongue when speaking.
How comprehensive of you. See, I was actually generous with my 1 out of 10 issues addressed ... this is 1 out of 16 ... and yes, you did a lousy job of the one, AGAIN.
Tom Kennedy made a "slip of the tung"? No, he was speaking to Dan Rather on Wednesday September 12th. He told the Rather he was one of the first teams deployed to support NY in this tragedy. He said "we got into NY on Monday night (September 10th), and went right into action on Tuesday Morning, 911. But it wasn't until today that we got full access to the entire site". His statement accounts for three days ... Monday, Tuesday Today, proving that he knew what day it was he was talking to Rather. I think the man clearly knew night from day, and his friggin arse landed in New York at night ... monday night, since he went into action on Tuesday morning. There is absolutely no question here ... no slip of the tung ... just an inconvenient slip of truth being revealed (and ignored, excused, denied).
Quote:
Originally Posted by actonbell
Upnort, I recall my first assumptions. Bush in the classroom hears about the first plan, tells them, let me know if there is any more development and the returns to the classroom. (that's suspicious)
What appears to be may not be what is...and that is what all of this is about.
The CT need to prove that which appears to be, to be what is.
Bush's behavior was extremely Bazaar, but that could be said of Bush the other 364 days of the year too. But his lack of any expression of surprise (not even a raised eyebrow) as he is notified of the second plane hitting the second Tower tells me that they were not operating under the assumption that the first plane was an accident. If they had been, there would have been some indication of surprise or alarm. And this is where suspicion ends, and evidence begins. It wasn't Bush's behavior, but an issue of the Secret Service failing to react that is the red flag here. You see, after the second plane hit the tower, White House officials were whisked of to protected areas when it was evident that this was an attack, and not an accident. The same action "should" have been immediately initiated with the President of the United States sitting in a far less secure location (a public grade school), especially with all of the media exposure as to his exact whereabouts. That he would be allowed to sit there for 10 or 12 minutes after it was clear the nation was under attack is incomprehensible, and extremely suspicious.
His account of the morning just adds to that. He clearly said that he saw the first plane hit on TV. He was notified of the second plane while sitting in the classroom. How could he possibly confuse the two events. He was either lying about seeing any plane hit on TV, or he actually did watch the first plane hit by "special" means that no one else had access to. But again, this is just another inconsistency among many many others that have questionable relations with the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by actonbell
We had a building (repeating myself) in my little town that was to be demolished. It was a historical building thus received allot of press. (late 90's I think it was) They flattened that building with explosives and it came down in it's foot prints. So---I see the towers---so I remember the historical building---and I go, hum. It appears to be...is it?
Basically what this boils down to is the word Trust. (1984, Orwellian, he was in an institute for the insane when he wrote the book.) Knowing at what time in his life that he wrote the book, puts into perspective in what and how he saw what he saw and wrote for our entertainment purposes.
The voters do not trust those whom they have voted into office any more than those holding the power of those offices, trust in their voters. That is the most bizarre summation I think that can actually be the truth to this and all matters, as it all boils down to the simple lack of trust.
If we don't trust them, then why are we voting for them? Not only that, if they are out to kill us and pick us off one by one , then what the heck are any of us here for?, please tell me that. Because that is what I want to know.
Maybe, just maybe we are here to learn how to stop acting like children, and start acting like grown adults? Maybe we are here to learn how to deal with unpleasant truths, instead of gravitating to and accepting any lie that makes us feel more comfortable and secure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by actonbell
We are the government. Those in office hold no power except that which is granted to them by us. Think about it. What have we done?
That is the way it is SUPPOSED TO BE ... but not how it is PRESENTLY. And it will never, EVER be that way with the people behaving like human Ostridges, burying their collective heads in the sands of denial.
When we have such blatantly transparent criminals behaving in the manner in which they have been behaving, for as long as they've been doing it, and continuing to get away with it precisely because we allow it to continue though willful ignorance, denial, and apathy. Without a massive outcry from the public in MAJORITY and in CONCERT ... whatever changes we might see, won't be for the better.
Just a few days ago, I was at my parents' house and Mom showed me a box of photos my Dad took over the years. There was one of me next to the replaced column, after I had taped flowers on it in memory of the 4 friends and unborn baby that we lost. It brought all those horrible memories back.
As for the timing of the Patriot Act .. this is an important question to consider, and the question itself shows a thinking person behind it. The Bill was submitted to congress within two weeks of 911. The nature and complexity of the Bill suggests it was an effort initiated long before 911, and was simply waiting for the proper climate to exist, given its extreme nature and the obvious controversy it still generates to this day. Given the close timing of this Patriot Act after 911, the Bush administration literally forced it's passage, under the pressure of "protecting Amerka" from the "terrists". And yes, the reason given was to facilitate better coordination among agencies .... a totally absurd and patently ridiculous excuse. Better coordination among agencies might require processes and procedures, not a bloody ACT OF CONGRESS. .
and how fast did congress take to present the stimulus and omnibus bills...5000 pages and 2 days.....again you are grasping at straws
Quote:
Tom Kennedy made a "slip of the tung"? No, he was speaking to Dan Rather on Wednesday September 12th. He told the Rather he was one of the first teams deployed to support NY in this tragedy. He said "we got into NY on Monday night (September 10th), and went right into action on Tuesday Morning, 911. But it wasn't until today that we got full access to the entire site". His statement accounts for three days ... Monday, Tuesday Today, proving that he knew what day it was he was talking to Rather. I think the man clearly knew night from day, and his friggin arse landed in New York at night ... monday night, since he went into action on Tuesday morning. There is absolutely no question here ... no slip of the tung ... just an inconvenient slip of truth being revealed (and ignored, excused, denied).
Devvy Kidd
November 25, 2002
Not long after the heinous attacks on September 11, 2001, many questions began to surface about the sequence of events which took place. A little less than two months after the attacks, the allegation was made that FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) had prior knowledge of 9-11 because they deployed rescue workers the night before the actual attacks.
This allegation was based on an interview broadcast September 13, 2001, on Dan Rather's news program. A Tom Kennedy allegedly stated he arrived in NYC on September 10, 2001 - the night before the attacks. This allegation of prior knowledge became so persistent, WND addressed the issue in an article November 15, 2002:
This, however, did not satisfy many who felt that the audio of this interview proved that a Tom Kennedy, who works for FEMA, stated emphatically that he arrived in NYC on September 10, 2001. In an effort to determine the truth of the matter, I filed a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request on April 19, 2002 for the following:
* A copy of Mr. Kennedy's deployment/TDY orders for the time period of September 1st through and including September 15, 2001.
* Copies of any memos, directives or orders relating to his assignment in NYC as it relates to the WTC disaster.
FEMA responded to this FOIA on June 6, 2002 and stated the following:
"Liaison with cognizant personnel reveals that no responsive documents exist within the files of the Federal Emergency Management Agency relative to your request."
On June 10, 2002, I filed an appeal with FEMA because it provided no answers to my questions. In part, I based my appeal on WND's article and it was also my suspicion at that point that this Mr. Kennedy was probably a contract employee. FEMA doesn't have the budget to employ the number of individuals needed for disaster response nationwide on a full time basis, so they contract out the work to various agencies and companies.
The key to this entire allegation hinged on the live interview between Ran Rather and this "Mr. Kennedy." However, having finally obtained the audio feed (while awaiting a response to my appeal), this is the exact transcript concerning the Tom Kennedy broadcast November 13, 2001:
Ran Rather: "[unintelligible] Tom Kennedy, uh, Kenney, a rescue worker with the National Urban Search & Rescue which is part of FEMA."
Mr. Tom Kenney: "We're currently one of the first teams that was deployed to support the City of NY for this disaster. We arrived on late Monday night and went into action on Tuesday morning, and not until today did we get a full opportunity to work the entire site..."
Right away we have a number of inconsistencies:
* Dan Rather erred when he pronounced the name of his guest, but immediately corrected himself and continued. Those raising this theory about prior knowledge did not listen carefully to the audio feed.
* Rather also stated that Mr. Kenney was a rescue worker with the National Urban Search & Rescue, a part of FEMA. This would eventually prove to be somewhat inaccurate. According to FEMAs web site, the concept of using a combination of various resources performing the functions of urban search and rescue was based on a model concept developed in the early 1980s down in Florida.
* Did Mr. Kenney, during an interview in the middle of the most horrendous disaster in American history on home soil inadvertently give the wrong day he was deployed?
According to two press news releases from FEMA dated September 11, 2002, deployment was as follows:
FEMA Responds to Terrorism Attacks
"FEMA is working closely with the White House and federal agencies to provide assistance following several apparent terrorism attacks today...An operation plan for these types of acts is in place, and FEMA is currently implementing them."
Later in the day, they issued a second press release:
"In response to the apparent terrorist events, FEMA's Washington-based Emergency Response Team (EST) has fully activated and on 24-hour operations. All 10 of the FEMA regions - headquartered in Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Chicago, Denton, TX, Denver, San Francisco and Bothell, Wash. - are also fully activated.
"FEMA has activated the Federal Response Plan... Already, FEMA has deployed eight Urban Search & Rescue teams (US&R) to New York City to search for victims in the affected buildings. "In response to the apparent terrorist events, FEMA"
Several months later in another press release from FEMA, a list of operations and teams was listed: "The first teams at the WTC site were Pennsylvania Task Force (TF)1 and Massachusetts TF1, both arriving on
September 11, 2001."
But does any of this prove or disprove the theory that Mr. Kenney arrived in NYC the night before the attacks? We have already established that it was not a Tom Kennedy, it was a Tom Kenney (from the audio feed). I finally received a reply to my FOIA appeal, which, I believe, puts the matter to rest.
Mr. Kenney is a member of the Massachusetts Urban Search & Rescue Task Force. (Massachusetts Task Force 1) They are contracted by FEMA to respond immediately upon receiving activation orders. As was noted above in a FEMA press release, Massachusetts, designated as Task Force 1 Area, were one of the first two teams to arrive at the WTC.
The Activation order from FEMA was issued on September 12, 2001, effective immediately. Under the
circumstances of this horrific event, and having worked for DoD, an activation order issued after an emergency situation has occurred is not uncommon, it's simply necessary for the circumstances. The documents from FEMA under my FOIA can be viewed by |clicking here.|
What about Mr. Kenney's statement on the audio feed that he "arrived late Monday night and went into action on Tuesday morning"? This interview took place sometime on the 13th, two full days after all Hell had broken loose. Mr. Kenney sounds winded on the audio as if he had been exerting himself. We can all remember the big network anchors doing interviews close to ground zero almost 24/7 for the first few weeks. It is more than likely, Mr. Kenney, having worked virtually non-stop since his arrival in NYC , had his days run together and his statement simply came out wrong.
There is a final step that can be taken if one were so inclined: File a FOIA with the contracting officer with FEMA for the Massachusetts Urban Search & Rescue Task force contract. Having been a contract administrator for the Air Force, I know that all contractors bill for their time with very specific deployment/activation orders and time sheets to back up their billing to the government.
Considering the lawsuits already filed by family members of lost loved ones as a result of 9-11 with unanswered questions, any hint of prior knowledge by any government agency would be explored during the discovery process of these lawsuits. This would include this particular issue with Mr. Kenney and his actual deployment.
At this time I am fully satisfied that Mr. Kenney, an outside contractor was not deployed until the afternoon of September 11, 2001. If I had any doubts left, I would file another FOIA to the contracting officer at FEMA who handles MATF-1 because it's the truth I seek when I file FOIAs, and in this case, I believe it's been uncovered.
Quote:
Bush's behavior was extremely Bazaar, but that could be said of Bush the other 364 days of the year too. But his lack of any expression of surprise (not even a raised eyebrow) as he is notified of the second plane hitting the second Tower tells me that they were not operating under the assumption that the first plane was an accident. If they had been, there would have been some indication of surprise or alarm. And this is where suspicion ends, and evidence begins. It wasn't Bush's behavior, but an issue of the Secret Service failing to react that is the red flag here. You see, after the second plane hit the tower, White House officials were whisked of to protected areas when it was evident that this was an attack, and not an accident. The same action "should" have been immediately initiated with the President of the United States sitting in a far less secure location (a public grade school), especially with all of the media exposure as to his exact whereabouts. That he would be allowed to sit there for 10 or 12 minutes after it was clear the nation was under attack is incomprehensible, and extremely suspicious.
His account of the morning just adds to that. He clearly said that he saw the first plane hit on TV. He was notified of the second plane while sitting in the classroom. How could he possibly confuse the two events. He was either lying about seeing any plane hit on TV, or he actually did watch the first plane hit by "special" means that no one else had access to. But again, this is just another inconsistency among many many others that have questionable relations with the truth.
bush stated that he saw the "news' of the hit...not the DIRECT hit.. and commented " what a bad pilot"
bush was told to sit, until all is secure by the secret service
bush was told to sit, until all is secure by the secret service
Honestly, how did you react when you heard about the attacks?
Did you just continue what you were doing, or did you perhaps get excited and started cursing, yelling, some kind of reaction...
The way Bush just continued reading childrens books is mindboggling, it has got to get you thinking.
Come'on
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not only that, if they are out to kill us and pick us off one by one 
, then what the heck are any of us here for?, please tell me that. Because that is what I want to know.
