It tells a story alright. Just not the one you want to hear. And by the way . . . you didn't answer my question. For your convenience, I'll repeat it. Were those military aircraft or commercial fiights?
Military...ever been to VA beach? You wouldn't ask that if you had been. There are gazillions taking off, landing and flying all over the place practically 24/7. VA beach is SOOOOOOO far from Washington though....
Nope, can't say that I have. Spent a week in DC last summer though. Didn't notice an inordinate number or aircraft overhead though. Also went to the Pentagon. Visited the 9/11 Memorial. Funny . . . I also didn't notice the 100s of cameras that Michael Moore claims are there. "I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon-- before 9/11-- there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere." http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/180607_moore_911.html Oh . . . and you have avoided my question twice now. So for the third time . . . Would have been okay with the US military blowing a commerical American Airlines flight out of the sky over a residential area of Washington DC?
It would have been nice to see ONE in the sky out of the hundreds or thousands of aircraft that COULD HAVE been available (like maybe ONE of the ones that take off and land 24/7 in VA beach). Didn't happen though...did it? Probably because the military was STOOD DOWN. Ya think? To answer your third time question, you're conducting a straw man argument. There was no plane in the air anywhere near Washington for a couple of hours during the worst terrorist attack on our soil in history. Plenty in VA beach 24/7...but, couldn't spare ONE during that stand down. I understand. Total BS nonsense to believe that we couldn't find ONE to hover near Washington, after EVERYBODY was aware of what happened in NY. Horse sheet....PERIOD. No amount of shill spin or other "official" BS can change that. Now, shills can get back to reshaping and refocusing the discussion on where they want it to go instead, as they do so very well. Why was there no aircraft response? THEY WERE ORDERED NOT TO. Plain...simple...straight forward and comprehensive. Simple answer to a simple question.
You may want to review the definition of straw man argument. Here, I'll help you. "A straw man is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man I am not misrepresenting your position. I am trying to determine what your position is. You lament the fact that . . . Now for the fourth time, would you have been okay with the US military blowing a commerical American Airlines flight out of the sky over a residential area of Washington DC?
Okay...fourth time. In actuality or in theory? Theoretically, it would have been acceptable if the story tellers could prove their case. Realistically and with the shaky story of this whole fiasco? Probably not. Now what are you going to tell me...that they didn't want to risk the lives of citizens by flying over the skies of Washington during a terror attack? It's a BS question you're asking, and it has nothing to do with anything except to steer the point that not ONE aircraft could manage to be flown over Washington for almost 2 hours AFTER a known terrorist attack took place. That's your goal here I would say. Now you answer me...why is it that not ONE aircraft could be deployed over Washington for a good hour and a half over Washington after the biggest terror attack had occurred? Why can they take off and land 24/7 out of VA beach and yet not be able to send ONE over Washington that day? They not have enough time to scramble one or what? Everybody on extended coffee break or what? Our elite military is all hype and so incompetent that they couldn't muster ONE plane ANYWHERE to even head in the direction of Washington?? Or...how about...DUH...they just didn't know, didn't have ANY idea there could still be a plane not responding to ATC, or thought it could be a good idea to have at least ONE aircraft over Washington?. What's it gonna be? You DO see the idiocy of defending this BS, don't you?
Where do you get your timeline? Two hours? AA11 struck the WTC at 8:46 AM AA77 struck the Pentagon at 9:37 AM That's only 51 minutes, even in letsroll land. So where did you come up with two hours?
Okay....51 minutes....that make it better? That change the scenario somehow? What did they do? Sit around with their collective thumbs up their azz during a crisis? Did the 24/7 VA beach operations pause while they watched CNN? Even in shill land, that's a bit far fetched, wouldn't you say? Oh.....and...way to intervene for your confidant. But since you stuck your nose in anyway, go ahead and answer how Washington was unprotected while Cheney was safely tucked underground. This will to be pointless as usual, but go ahead anyway...have at it.
Oye vay....... Consulting with the team, no doubt. Stall somebody else dude..you don't have an answer...we know.. About time to move the cup that has the ball under it about now, isn't it? Who will you hand it off to now? It's your forum man..have at it. Don't answer...I don't need to either....waste of effort regardless in the controlled environment anyway. I stand relieved sir.
So we can assume you just made it up. Now you resort to insults and running away, per usual. You claim you want to discuss specifics, but flee when presented them.
Good Lord, talk about dancing. So realistically you are saying that you would NOT have been okay with the US military blowing a commerical American Airlines flight out of the sky over a residential area of Washington DC. No, that's not what I am going to tell you. Actually that's NOT my goal. My goal is to determine what in your view they should have done had a military jet flown over Washington before the plane hit the Pentagon. If you say you would not have been okay with them shooting the AA flight out of the air, what would you have wanted them to do?
The archived chat is worth reading over the past few days. "Yes Phil, anything you say, Phil. Please don't ban me Phil. I'll tell you any personal info you want, Phil!" ~ some sap named Tom. http://letsrollforums.com/mgc_cb_evo.php?do=view_archives&channel_id=0&dlimit=2&page=12 It's a cult.
It should be noted, as well, that when the plane hit the North Tower it wasn't assumed to be a terrorist attack either. They were under the impression at first that the airplane crash was an accident. They didn't realize it was an actual terrorist attack until the second tower was hit at 9:03. With the Pentagon being hit at 9:37 it doesn't leave much time to track down an airplane that isn't relaying information. On that same page, airplanes aren't like cars. They aren't all on the same level. With something like this never having happened before there really wasn't a go-to plan. The individuals involved were confused from all angles. The dispatchers, radio control, etc.
Right, because the use of "they" (in the context people who didn't realize a terrorist attack was underway) is totally ambiguous. He could be talking about the West Avon widowed women's sewing circle, the united federation of one legged circus clowns, or even the citizen's bureau of amateur seashell collectors. He should really clarify so that we can hold those rather well dressed but clueless widows accountable if need be.
Well yes, because the media was completely unaware of how much, again? So naturally they wouldn't assume the very worst at first. But why would "they" as in =ing the government (CIA, FBI, NSA, etc) not automatically assume the worst given *all* of the intelligence they had. It would be worthwhile to know their first reactions, thoughts, etc. Paperwork too, 'cause I think they knew they just got hit. 8:46 to 9:03 is a span of time of thinking for government workers who had been privy to the intelligence.
Maybe during that 20 minutes they were discussing the "is this real world or exercise" smokescreen. We'd need Mr. Cheney for help with this but he's not talking (especially under oath). Allow me to restate the "official" position. We were just so confused, and so incompetent, and so bad at everything, we couldn't find a plane anywhere to defend Washington, because...DUH...we just didn't know anything about anything. We didn't send a plane anywhere because Mr. Cheney told us to stand down, plus...we were so confused and incompetent we couldn't have done much anyway. I think it was his fault...no..no..it was her fault...er...no...it was their fault. Oh...forget it...let's just not blame anybody and promote the whole lot of them. Shhhhh!
Your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) lies just keep getting funnier and funnier! I wonder when you are going to start charging admission for your little fantasy land. Will it have Dick Cheney as Mr. Rourke with a little Bush Tattoo pointing at the plane?
Misrepresenting the facts is all your post does. Where did you get your two hour claim? Made it up? Did Phil whisper it in your ear?
What you seem to not be understanding is it didn't GET to the government level right away. The moment the plane shut off it's transponder there wasn't someone on the phone with the President explaining the situation. It's a common truther theory that whenever something bad happens the government has instant avenues for resolution. I'd prefer it if you didn't, but since you're going too... Uhm, I think I might have missed the part where a plane hit in Washington. I know 2 hit in NYC and 1 in Arlington County, VA, then one crashed in PA. Did Washington suffer some damage on 9/11? I thought I saw you arguing in a different thread about how flight 93 was shot down. So what is it? It can't be both because that doesn't make sense. Either there was no stand down order and flight 93 crashed, or as you suggested flight 93 was shot down. Meaning there was no stand down order. You know, I am actually slightly inclined to agree with you on this one. I think there was a lot of finger pointing, and trying to weezle out of blame. I don't see that as a conspiracy, just a lot of ass covering.
I will only address the bottom portion of your post for now. I will come back for the others later. It sickens me as an American citizen, as a man, to know that you know that government officials did a lousy job, and you care none the least that they did a better job to protect their job after the worst day in American History then they did to actually do their jobs on the days leading up to and on 9/11. WHY ARE YOU NOT DEMANDING THE INVESTIGATION TO BE RE-DONE? WTF? Have you lost your morality? Have you all lost your morality? Where is your patriotism? Why are you allowing them to get away with it? WHY? And I'm the one one being demonized as Anti-American. The (*)(*)(*)(*) ever.
