My thoughts on 9/11

[FaithIsFilth]

Did it ever occur to you that the people that were defending america that day were just fallible human beings that could only act on the information that was presented to them at the time?  By the time anyone realised that anything was seriously wrong, it was way to late to put any kind of effective plan into operation.

Yes, that occurred to me, and could be the truth. I don't know, like I said before. I'm constantly questioning my views and I know I could be wrong about a lot of things.

Either of us could be wrong. How can we tell? We can't. People have no problem calling Bush murderous scum for what he's done overseas, but when it comes to the possibility that he might not have cared that a small number of Americans were killed on 9/11, this is unthinkable. It's compared to religion and such. People have no problem talking about how the government only cares about the rich, doesn't care about people having good healthcare, and are killers overseas, so letting the country get hit on top of that (a small price for long term gain) is not that unthinkable, and has no place being compared to Jesus rising from the dead. The US letting 9/11 happen is a very real possibility.

[Poison Tree]

(a small price for long term gain)

What gain exactly?

[FaithIsFilth]

What gain exactly?

Endless war in the Middle East like we are seeing right now. I'm not saying it's smart. Obviously they think it is or they would not be engaging in endless war.

[FaithIsFilth]

All facts, but not the relevant facts. I don't think anyone has questioned America's ability to shoot down planes in the abstract. Hell, I have the ability to shoot down planes, at least hypothetically. The question is about the ability to shoot down the hijacked planes between the time that the hijackings became known and the planes hit.

NORAD did order fighters into the air, but only had 6 minutes between being alerted that Flight 11 had been hijacked and flight 11 hitting the first  tower. Although there was 20 minutes between the first and second tower being hit, there was only 8 minutes between the New York Air Traffic Control Center's operations manager being alerted that Flight 175 had been hijacked and Flight 175 hitting the second tower.

Unless you are now willing to suggest that air traffic controllers, NORAD, air national guard pilots, ect, also were knowledgeable about an imminent terrorist attack, its target and method--which would obviously expand the number of people in on the conspiracy well beyond Bush's close circle--why should they have been in a position to shoot down these two planes in the time allotted? It is not as if it had been standard policy to have AA capabilities ready to go at major landmarks all across America. It is not as if hijacked planes had a history of being used as a weapon. It is not as if readying fighters and intercepting a commercial flight in a crowded sky is a simple or quick matter. It is not as if Bush were simply sitting on the phone ready to give the order to shoot down commercial flights. It is not as if he immediately know what planes were hijacked and how they'd be used.

All the steps necessary to shoot down these planes--realize they are hijacked, realize they are to be used as weapons, get presidential authority to shoot down these planes, communicate each step, have armed fighters airborne, identify and intercept target and shoot it down--all take time; time that wasn't abundant on that day.

Thank you for this post. This is the kind of response I wanted when making this thread. Good points and maybe that does explain things. I will think about this for a while.

I really think they should have been prepared for an attack though. I've heard from people formerly in the Government that the idea of planes crashing into the WTC was an idea thrown around. Hell, tv shows and movies prior to 9/11 had plots of terrorists crashing planes into the WTC. Is the US government not even as bright as Hollywood? There was no plan put in place for something like this? I don't know. I'm trying to be as logical and reasonable as I can here, but something is telling me, no, I don't buy it.

We knew the Republicans wanted to go to war with Iraq before 9/11 happened. Stuff like this bothers me and I can't seem to shake it.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Could also be the risk of shooting down planes over major metropolitan city was just to high not knowing the destinations. As for the 2nd plane, same thing. Hitting a tower>bad. Shooting down airliner over NY>WORSE..

[Poison Tree]

I've heard from people formerly in the Government that the idea of planes crashing into the WTC was an idea thrown around.

True, but there is a serious difference between an idea being thrown around and it being seen as probable enough to take action against. Even if they did think it probable enough to take action, they couldn't have just put AA around WTC and call it good enough.
How many terrorist attack worth sights to you think there are in America? I don't know, but I'd guess into the hundreds--at least if you consider 50 state capital buildings as worth of attack. Throw in a bunch of tall buildings --WTC, Sears, Empire, Chrysler, ect--military bases, chemical plants, nuclear plants (which are usually built rather solidly and, supposedly, could survive a 9/11 style attack). I bet a lot of governors/congressmen would fight to have more locations in there state protected then really would deserve it.
It would be enormously expensive to have put ground based AA or constant fighter patrols over all of these locations, even without considering--as APA pointed out--the possible collateral damage from crashing plane debris. And this is obviously ignoring more conventional methods of attack like car bombs, suicide bombs, gun men, ect.

To go from a vague concern about terrorist attacks using various weapons/methods to concluding that the WTC should have had AA protection on 9/11 is a major leap.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

The gubnit moved the towers into the paths of the planes..

[Solitary]

The circumstances leading up to 911 after the Twin Tower had already been bombed are a little fishy to me, and it sure made it a lot easier to keep people afraid so they would support more war, and take more of our freedoms away, which has happened. Has there been even one single terrorist attack stopped at airports since? Let's see, terrorist comes to airport with a bomb vest with C4 and they find out he has it on------BOOM!

[Minimalist]

Yeah, but isn't that usually because someone makes a farfetched claim,

Excuse me but:

I think it is very likely that the US wanted the 9/11 attacks to happen, and purposely didn't shoot down the planes so there could be maximum damage.

You just made a farfetched claim.

[pr126]

Islam is peace.
Those hijackers were not real Muslims.
Bush done it.
The Qur'an forbids killing innocent people.
The Jews done it.
It had nothing to do with Islam.
Now that the plot is vacant, we want a nice big mosque there.
Sorry, I meant a community center. Well, maybe a small prayer room, Everybody is welcome.
No infidels or dogs allowed. Hope you understand.
Islam is peace.
It had nothing to do with Islam.

[Mermaid]

My sister-in-law's brother was a first responder, he was there for the duration after the attacks. He got cancer and died last year. He had a teenaged son and a wife and he leaves a family who is devastated by his death.

Conspiracy theories about the government being in cahoots with the terrorists that brought the planes down are a slap in the face and a dishonor to anyone who died or who lost someone they love as a result.

Think about that as you are pontificating about consipiracies.

[FaithIsFilth]

Excuse me but:

You just made a farfetched claim.

Well, I didn't claim I believe that is what happened. I didn't even claim that I think that happened. I said it's a suspicion. I don't accept claims without evidence, or I try not to at least. See my screen name.

[FaithIsFilth]

Islam is peace.
Those hijackers were not real Muslims.
Bush done it.
The Qur'an forbids killing innocent people.
The Jews done it.
It had nothing to do with Islam.
Now that the plot is vacant, we want a nice big mosque there.
Sorry, I meant a community center. Well, maybe a small prayer room, Everybody is welcome.
No infidels or dogs allowed. Hope you understand.
Islam is peace.
It had nothing to do with Islam.

Don't know where this came from. Muslims are the best warriors on the Earth. The bravest. The most brutal. The most willing to die. The promise of a martyrs afterlife has a lot to do with building up their courage in battle.

[FaithIsFilth]

My sister-in-law's brother was a first responder, he was there for the duration after the attacks. He got cancer and died last year. He had a teenaged son and a wife and he leaves a family who is devastated by his death.

Conspiracy theories about the government being in cahoots with the terrorists that brought the planes down are a slap in the face and a dishonor to anyone who died or who lost someone they love as a result.

Think about that as you are pontificating about consipiracies.

Sorry, but those deaths are no more important than the thousands of people that die every day. I guess we shouldn't discuss death on this board at all, since someone is bound to get upset. Plenty of 9/11 families question the official story themselves.

And I don't think I've been pontificating about anything. Like I said, I'm having a problem logically accepting something, so I'm wanting you guys to help me see what may very well be an error in my logic. As you know, free will does not exist, so I can't just force myself to accept something I'm really unsure of at the moment. Don't you think it's better for me to ask for your guys help on this, rather than staying quiet and continuing to have what may be unreasonable suspicions? Like I said, I even supported torture a few years ago, so I'm very open to changing my way of thinking.

"People died. How dare you question the government? It's a slap in the face" isn't really helping here, I'm sorry to say.

[Solitary]

This topic reminds me of the OJ trial, where he got off because everyone thought it was impossible for him to do such a horrible act as butchering people alive. Our government would never do something so despicable as letting a terrorist attack happen just because Bush and his cohorts who invaded another country based on a lie getting the best this country has to offer killed and maimed that is still going on. The war makes millionaires selling arms and ammunition, equipment, fuel for equipment and planes, private companies like Halliburton. What better way to keep a war going than by fear of the terrorists.

And King Bush before this happened said his job would be a lot easier if he were a dictator who ruled with an iron fist after reading about advice from Machiavelli. I wouldn't put anything past our government after what they have done in the past. Do I believe this is what happened? No! But it is not beyond reason to think it may have with an idiot as a president, who took advice from a cold blooded psychopath that thinks water boarding is not torture. There are people in high office in the military special forces, and politics that had first hand experience and access to secret documents and meetings that think it was allowed to happened, but that the results weren't expected to actually happen and be stopped before it did.

But like the Republicans say: "We are the job makers."