Enhanced interrogations worked!

[jimnyc]

They worked and they saved lives - all that matters to me. Like I always said, if JUST ONE American life is saved, it's worth it.

-----

A horrifying look into the mind of 9/11’s mastermind, in his own words

What is it like to stare into the face of evil? James E. Mitchell knows.

In his gripping new memoir, “Enhanced Interrogation: Inside the Minds and Motives of the Islamic Terrorists Trying To Destroy America,” Mitchell describes the day he was questioning Khalid Sheik Mohammed, when the 9/11 mastermind announced he had something important to say. “KSM then launched into a gory and detailed description of how he beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl,” Mitchell writes. Up to that moment, the CIA did not know KSM had personally carried out the murder. When asked whether it was “hard to do” (meaning emotionally difficult), KSM misunderstood the question. “Oh, no, no problem,” KSM said, “I had very sharp knives. Just like slaughtering sheep.”

To confirm his story, the CIA had KSM reenact the beheading so that it could compare the features of his hands and forearms to those in the video of Pearl’s murder. “Throughout the reenactment, KSM smiled and mugged for the cameras. Sometimes he preened,” Mitchell writes. When informed that the CIA had confirmed that he was telling the truth, KSM smiled.

“See, I told you,” KSM said. “I cut Daniel’s throat with these blessed hands.”

This is the pure evil Mitchell and his colleagues confronted each day at CIA “black sites.” “I have looked into the eyes of the worst people on the planet,” Mitchell writes. “I have sat with them and felt their passion as they described what they see as their holy duty to destroy our way of life.”

The world has heard almost nothing from KSM in the 15 years since the 9/11 attacks, but Mitchell has spent thousands of hours with him and other captured al-Qaeda leaders. Now, for the first time, Mitchell is sharing what he says KSM told him.

Mitchell is an American patriot who has been unjustly persecuted for his role in crafting an interrogation program that helped stop terrorist attacks and saved countless lives. He does not shy from the controversies and pulls no punches in describing the interrogations. If anything, readers may be surprised by the compassion he showed these mass murderers. But the real news in his book is what happened after enhanced interrogations ended and the terrorists began cooperating.

Once their resistance had been broken, enhanced interrogation techniques stopped and KSM and other detainees became what Mitchell calls a “Terrorist Think Tank,” identifying voices in phone calls, deciphering encrypted messages and providing valuable information that led the CIA to other terrorists. Mitchell devotes an entire chapter to the critical role KSM and other detainees played in finding Osama bin Laden. KSM held classes where he lectured CIA officials on jihadist ideology, terrorist recruiting and attack planning. He was so cooperative, Mitchell writes, KSM “told me I should be on the FBI’s Most Wanted List because I am now a ‘known associate’ of KSM and a ‘graduate’ of his training camp.”

KSM also described for Mitchell many of his as yet unconsummated ideas for future attacks, the terrifying details of which Mitchell does not reveal for fear they might be implemented. “If we ever allow him to communicate unmonitored with the outside world,” Mitchell writes, “he could easily spread his deviously simple but potentially deadly ideas.”

But perhaps the most riveting part of the book is what KSM told Mitchell about what inspired al-Qaeda to attack the United States — and the U.S. response he expected. Today, some on both the left and the right argue that al-Qaeda wanted to draw us into a quagmire in Afghanistan — and now the Islamic State wants to do the same in Iraq and Syria. KSM said this is dead wrong. Far from trying to draw us in, KSM said that al-Qaeda expected the United States to respond to 9/11 as we had the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut — when, KSM told Mitchell, the United States “turned tail and ran.” He also said he thought we would treat 9/11 as a law enforcement matter, just as we had the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the USS Cole in Yemen — arresting some operatives and firing a few missiles into empty tents, but otherwise leaving him free to plan the next attack.

“Then he looked at me and said, ‘How was I supposed to know that cowboy George Bush would announce he wanted us ‘dead or alive’ and then invade Afghanistan to hunt us down?’” Mitchell writes. “KSM explained that if the United States had treated 9/11 like a law enforcement matter, he would have had time to launch a second wave of attacks.” He was not able to do so because al-Qaeda was stunned “by the ferocity and swiftness of George W. Bush’s response.”

But KSM said something else that was prophetic. In the end, he told Mitchell, “We will win because Americans don’t realize . . . we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.”

KSM explained that large-scale attacks such as 9/11 were “nice, but not necessary” and that a series of “low-tech attacks could bring down America the same way ‘enough disease-infected fleas can fell an elephant.’ ” KSM “said jihadi-minded brothers would immigrate into the United States” and “wrap themselves in America’s rights and laws” until they were strong enough to rise up and attack us. “He said the brothers would relentlessly continue their attacks and the American people would eventually become so tired, so frightened, and so weary of war that they would just want it to end.”

“Eventually,” KSM said, “America will expose her neck for us to slaughter.”

KSM was right. For the past eight years, our leaders have told us that we are weary of war and need to focus on “nation building at home.” We have been defeating ourselves by quitting — just as KSM predicted.

But quitting will not bring us peace, KSM told Mitchell. He explained that “it does not matter that we do not want to fight them,” Mitchell writes, adding that KSM explained “America may not be in a religious war with him, but he and other True Muslims are in a religious war with America” and “he and his brothers will not stop until the entire world lives under Sharia law.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-horrifying-look-into-the-mind-of-911s-mastermind-in-his-own-words/2016/11/28/bf5827a8-b575-11e6-b8df-600bd9d38a02_story.html?postshare=361480384702368&tid=ss_fb

[Balu]

No doubt that 9/11 is an awful Tragedy of American Nation and those who were engaged in organizing and executing this crime must be found and punished.
But there are a lot very strange things over these events which cause questions of those who used to think, analyze, have some knowledge and personal experience.
In this respect I would ask some questions.
Is there anybody on the board who is a professional pilot? He could tell us how much time it takes to learn all the instruments and controls as well as teach a pilot with previous experience to control every particular type of a huge jet-liner.
No need to say that it differs greatly from single engine Cessna and the pilot of Cessna is not able to control and maneuver huge jet liner especially on descend in manual mode when autopilot is useless as the jet-liner is not guided by approach beacons.
Every pilot knows that descend and landing are the most difficult phases of a flight as it is necessary to keep the course and altitude to aim a plane strictly to a prescribed points - another unsolvable task for yesterday's graduate of a light aircraft flying school.
There also are some discrepancies with Pentagon, but it is another separate story.

[SassyLady]

No doubt that 9/11 is an awful Tragedy of American Nation and those who were engaged in organizing and executing this crime must be found and punished.
But there are a lot very strange things over these events which cause questions of those who used to think, analyze, have some knowledge and personal experience.
In this respect I would ask some questions.
Is there anybody on the board who is a professional pilot? He could tell us how much time it takes to learn all the instruments and controls as well as teach a pilot with previous experience to control every particular type of a huge jet-liner.
No need to say that it differs greatly from single engine Cessna and the pilot of Cessna is not able to control and maneuver huge jet liner especially on descend in manual mode when autopilot is useless as the jet-liner is not guided by approach beacons.
Every pilot knows that descend and landing are the most difficult phases of a flight as it is necessary to keep the course and altitude to aim a plane strictly to a prescribed points - another unsolvable task for yesterday's graduate of a light aircraft flying school.
There also are some discrepancies with Pentagon, but it is another separate story.

Asked and answered years ago.

[Balu]

Asked and answered years ago.
Fine!
If it is so, it means that you know much more than me here in Russia.
So, would you kindly answer the question HOW persons who are strangers in a cock of such a jet, on their own, without any technical support from the ground, without any practice and preliminary training could have managed to pilot huge air-jet liner so accurately to achieve such terrible results as it is extremely difficult task for a highly skilled pilot even to aim such a liner to a runway without assistance of air traffic control?
Please, scatter my doubts.

[CSM]

Fine!
If it is so, it means that you know much more than me here in Russia.
So, would you kindly answer the question HOW persons who are strangers in a cock of such a jet, on their own, without any technical support from the ground, without any practice and preliminary training could have managed to pilot huge air-jet liner so accurately to achieve such terrible results as it is extremely difficult task for a highly skilled pilot even to aim such a liner to a runway without assistance of air traffic control?
Please, scatter my doubts.

Not sure what you hear in Russia but some of the terrorists did receive training in multi-engine commercial aircraft prior to executing their plot. They received this training in the US and was originally why they were granted entrance to the US in the first place. In fact, terrorists attending various flight schools in the US had been going on for quite a while. Unfortunately, because the many different US agencies could not legally exchange information at that time, nobody ever connected the dots. There are many , many explanations if you care to Google who trained the 911 terrorists.

[Balu]

Not sure what you hear in Russia but some of the terrorists did receive training in multi-engine commercial aircraft prior to executing their plot. They received this training in the US and was originally why they were granted entrance to the US in the first place. In fact, terrorists attending various flight schools in the US had been going on for quite a while. Unfortunately, because the many different US agencies could not legally exchange information at that time, nobody ever connected the dots. There are many , many explanations if you care to Google who trained the 911 terrorists.
Thank you for your kind reply.
I am more or less acquainted with FAA requirements. (*) So I have very deep hesitations that they were duly trained.
Moreover, I paid special attention to visual flight (VFR) problems when piloting jet-liner without air traffic control and usage of radar beacons and landing lights to guide the aircraft.

(*)
The EASA Commercial Pilot's Licence (CPL) Course with a EASA Instrument Rating (IR) provides the training required to meet the level of proficiency necessary to operate single-pilot multi-engine aeroplanes and to obtain the EASA CPL/IR.

Entry Requirements:



Hold a PPL (A) issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1
Completed 5 hours night flight time (http://www.flysfc.com/ppl-night-rating-course-stapleford-flight-centre.php)
Completed 200 hours total flying time prior to Skills Test (100 of which must be P1)
Completed 20 hours cross-country flight time as pilot-in-command
The cross-country flight time must include a qualifying 540 km cross-country flight
Hold a valid EASA 1st Class Medical Certificate (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=49&pageid=527)
Passed a course of theoretical instruction as set out in the EASA-FCL (https://easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/AMC%20and%20GM%20to%20Part-FCL.pdf)
The minimum age for issue of a CPL licence is 18

[CSM]

Thank you for your kind reply.
I am more or less acquainted with FAA requirements. (*) So I have very deep hesitations that they were duly trained.
Moreover, I paid special attention to visual flight (VFR) problems when piloting jet-liner without air traffic control and usage of radar beacons and landing lights to guide the aircraft.

(*)
The EASA Commercial Pilot's Licence (CPL) Course with a EASA Instrument Rating (IR) provides the training required to meet the level of proficiency necessary to operate single-pilot multi-engine aeroplanes and to obtain the EASA CPL/IR.

Entry Requirements:



Hold a PPL (A) issued in accordance with ICAO Annex 1
Completed 5 hours night flight time (http://www.flysfc.com/ppl-night-rating-course-stapleford-flight-centre.php)
Completed 200 hours total flying time prior to Skills Test (100 of which must be P1)
Completed 20 hours cross-country flight time as pilot-in-command
The cross-country flight time must include a qualifying 540 km cross-country flight
Hold a valid EASA 1st Class Medical Certificate (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=49&pageid=527)
Passed a course of theoretical instruction as set out in the EASA-FCL (https://easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/AMC%20and%20GM%20to%20Part-FCL.pdf)
The minimum age for issue of a CPL licence is 18


Training requirements not withstanding, clearly the terrorists were not interested (other than to continue their deception and protect their plot) in learning to navigate or land. They only needed to learn enough to control the aircraft (once airborne and close enough to their target) and direct it into some building such as the Pentagon or the twin towers.

[Balu]

Training requirements not withstanding, clearly the terrorists were not interested (other than to continue their deception and protect their plot) in learning to navigate or land. They only needed to learn enough to control the aircraft (once airborne and close enough to their target) and direct it into some building such as the Pentagon or the twin towers.
To be enlisted to the training they should have initially correspond to the Entrance requirements. Shouldn't they?
Then as to the Pentagon case. ANY pilot knows that maximum possible speed of a liner depends on the Flight Level and NO civilian air-jet liner is able to fly at 0.7-0.8 M at ground altitude. The structure of a plane will be destroyed far before. This is physics and nobody could do anything against it.
This is another discrepancy that makes me doubt.

[CSM]

To be enlisted to the training they should have initially correspond to the Entrance requirements. Shouldn't they?
Then as to the Pentagon case. ANY pilot knows that maximum possible speed of a liner depends on the Flight Level and NO civilian air-jet liner is able to fly at 0.7-0.8 M at ground altitude. The structure of a plane will be destroyed far before. This is physics and nobody could do anything against it.
This is another discrepancy that makes me doubt.

EASA is European. The FAA controls training requirements for the US. Most flight training schools in the US offer a complete training course beginning with no license all the way through complete commercial certification. Requirements are different in thee US. as for the physics of flight, all that was required for the terrorists to complete their mission was to crash the plane into a building. They weren't making a bombing run, they were trying to crash so as long as they maintained enough speed to stay airborne until that happened, they could accomplish their goal.

[Gunny]

Not sure what you hear in Russia but some of the terrorists did receive training in multi-engine commercial aircraft prior to executing their plot. They received this training in the US and was originally why they were granted entrance to the US in the first place. In fact, terrorists attending various flight schools in the US had been going on for quite a while. Unfortunately, because the many different US agencies could not legally exchange information at that time, nobody ever connected the dots. There are many , many explanations if you care to Google who trained the 911 terrorists.

Once airborne, the plane can fly itself. Rudimentary skills will get you where you're going. Take off and landing are the bitches. If landing consists of hitting a geo-grid coordinate as big as a building, not likely to miss.

[CSM]

Once airborne, the plane can fly itself. Rudimentary skills will get you where you're going. Take off and landing are the bitches. If landing consists of hitting a geo-grid coordinate as big as a building, not likely to miss.

Exactly. Frankly, they didn't need to hit the Twin Towers.... just crashing into Manhattan would have achieved the same effect.

[Balu]

... as for the physics of flight, all that was required for the terrorists to complete their mission was to crash the plane into a building. They weren't making a bombing run, they were trying to crash so as long as they maintained enough speed to stay airborne until that happened, they could accomplish their goal.
You see at speeds exceeding about 300 knots at ground altitude the aircraft just falls apart and nothing will reach the Pentagon. The reason - the density of the air at ground level which destroy the structure of the aircraft as the civil aircrafts are not designed to fly at such speeds at such altitudes.

[Gunny]

Exactly. Frankly, they didn't need to hit the Twin Towers.... just crashing into Manhattan would have achieved the same effect.I've said this along: If they were not so caught up in attacking Americal symbols of power, they could have done WAY more strategic damage. They could easily have doubled or tripled their bodycount hitting Manhattan during rush hour.

This was more of a Tet Offensive type victory. Strategic damage was minimal, we won, yet the left and their cohort terrorist buddies declared victory and the MSM convinced everyone it must be so.

[CSM]

You see at speeds exceeding about 300 knots at ground altitude the aircraft just falls apart and nothing will reach the Pentagon. The reason - the density of the air at ground level which destroy the structure of the aircraft as the civil aircrafts are not designed to fly at such speeds at such altitudes.

Yeah, that was debunked years ago. There are many articles out there claiming such but when actually tested, it was proven that the aircraft in question could not only fly at low altitude but were very controllable at speeds over .86 M. I am sure with the resources available to you, you could do a little research on the internet and find that information.

[CSM]

I've said this along: If they were not so caught up in attacking Americal symbols of power, they could have done WAY more strategic damage. They could easily have doubled or tripled their bodycount hitting Manhattan during rush hour.

This was more of a Tet Offensive type victory. Strategic damage was minimal, we won, yet the left and their cohort terrorist buddies declared victory and the MSM convinced everyone it must be so.

yep ... and of course they were not counting on the reaction of the Bush administration either....

[Gunny]

Yeah, that was debunked years ago. There are many articles out there claiming such but when actually tested, it was proven that the aircraft in question could not only fly at low altitude but were very controllable at speeds over .86 M. I am sure with the resources available to you, you could do a little research on the internet and find that information.

Who brought this clown commie in? Here's a little info from actually being there (the Pentagon, not 9/11) ... You got a line of sight approach from the Potomac River. Every other angle of approach is blocked by infrastructure. Unfortunately, aside from the cost in lives, hitting the D ring at the River entrance to the Pentagon means you interrupted some low-level meetings. You ain't going to damage anything that counts in that monster with a plane.

[Drummond]

To be enlisted to the training they should have initially correspond to the Entrance requirements. Shouldn't they?
Then as to the Pentagon case. ANY pilot knows that maximum possible speed of a liner depends on the Flight Level and NO civilian air-jet liner is able to fly at 0.7-0.8 M at ground altitude. The structure of a plane will be destroyed far before. This is physics and nobody could do anything against it.
This is another discrepancy that makes me doubt.

Balu ... I'm really not sure I'm following your argument correctly. Because .. if I really AM, then you're defying what we all know to be true of the events of that day.

Are you saying that the physics of the commercial jet actually mean that the flight path it took .. it could NOT have taken ?

What on earth leads you to think we will take any of this seriously ?? SURELY, you must know otherwise ... ?

We all know that the jets flew as they did, and at the altitude they did. Unless you're claiming that all evidence has been faked ... and that everyone in the media since have also been lying about it (or, been massively duped) .. your assertions make not the slightest sense.

Here's the thing. Conspiracy theories always find the light of day a long time after the event(s) they purport to be addressing. We see this time and again. WHY ? Because, the longer it takes for them to be concocted and surface in the minds of the target audience, the harder it generally is to refute them. Critically .. memories fade. Evidence disappears (or is sidelined) over time, and becomes more easily questionable. There's ever-more 'opportunity' to challenge (should I say ATTACK ?) what's really TRUE.

I'm fascinated by your contributions here, Balu. Do you seriously hope to propagandise a 'version' of events which we all know can't stand up to what remains as known fact, and this, way more than a decade after the event(s).. ???

I wonder what you could hope to achieve, Balu. And .. why.

[Gunny]

Balu ... I'm really not sure I'm following your argument correctly. Because .. if I really AM, then you're defying what we all know to be true of the events of that day.

Are you saying that the physics of the commercial jet actually mean that the flight path it took .. it could NOT have taken ?

What on earth leads you to think we will take any of this seriously ?? SURELY, you must know otherwise ... ?

We all know that the jets flew as they did, and at the altitude they did. Unless you're claiming that all evidence has been faked ... and that everyone in the media since have also been lying about it (or, been massively duped) .. your assertions make not the slightest sense.

Here's the thing. Conspiracy theories always find the light of day a long time after the event(s) they purport to be addressing. We see this time and again. WHY ? Because, the longer it takes for them to be concocted and surface in the minds of the target audience, the harder it generally is to refute them. Critically .. memories fade. Evidence disappears (or is sidelined) over time, and becomes more easily questionable. There's ever-more 'opportunity' to challenge (should I say ATTACK ?) what's really TRUE.

I'm fascinated by your contributions here, Balu. Do you seriously hope to propagandise a 'version' of events which we all know can't stand up to what remains as known fact, and this, way more than a decade after the event(s).. ???

I wonder what you could hope to achieve, Balu. And .. why.

The plane that hit the Pentagon was at a downward angle. It hopped the District and Potomac and tried to fly belly up into the building. a 747 does not respond to manual control quick enough to make that maneuver. Thus the nose dive into the turf at the River entrance which is nothing more than a parade deck. River, parade deck, lovely staircase entrance, building. It was a stupid target for the weapon chosen.

There is nothing of importance in that particular ring of the Pentagon. A bunch of historical crap. Some really nice art.

People (detractors) love to make fun of the place. As a fortress, it really is no joke and wasn't built by dummies.

[Balu]

Yeah, that was debunked years ago. There are many articles out there claiming such but when actually tested, it was proven that the aircraft in question could not only fly at low altitude but were very controllable at speeds over .86 M. I am sure with the resources available to you, you could do a little research on the internet and find that information.
OK.
What would you say about all this?

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.htm

[Gunny]

OK.
What would you say about all this?

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.htm

That it's theater, written by ignorant journalists and/or politicians.

[CSM]

OK.
What would you say about all this?

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.htm

Conspiracy theories abound....just one more.... I am sure you will have no difficulty finding very many of them....

Quite frankly, at this point, I will not even attempt to answer or defend what has already been answered and defended here on this board so many times in the past. I would encourage you to search threads here to that.

[Balu]

Conspiracy theories abound....just one more.... I am sure you will have no difficulty finding very many of them....

Quite frankly, at this point, I will not even attempt to answer or defend what has already been answered and defended here on this board so many times in the past. I would encourage you to search threads here to that.
It is a pity.
Curiosity and hesitation are the qualities which are very valuable in our world overfilled with many kinds of propaganda. Or you are a supporter of the approach of Hegel who said: "If facts contradict to my theory, the worse for the facts."?

[CSM]

It is a pity.
Curiosity and hesitation are the qualities which are very valuable in our world overfilled with many kinds of propaganda. Or you are a supporter of the approach of Hegel who said: "If facts contradict to my theory, the worse for the facts."?

and therein lies the heart of the matter..... determining what is fact .... all the conspiracy theory sites such as the one you provided a link for base their assertions on half truths rather than complete fact. and yes, propaganda is prevalent across the globe... some propaganda is very well executed (as I am sure you know all too well) and it takes quite a bit of persistent effort to get at the facts.

[Gunny]

It is a pity.
Curiosity and hesitation are the qualities which are very valuable in our world overfilled with many kinds of propaganda. Or you are a supporter of the approach of Hegel who said: "If facts contradict to my theory, the worse for the facts."?

The pity is the person who rather than defend his argument puts people on ignore rather than face the music. Try manning up instead of making excuses.

[Elessar]

As far as a plane that large being able to fly at the height it did to strike the Pentagon,
I've seen many planes, even large ones, that do 'touch and go' landings yet able to maintain velocity
on approach, powering down to put wheels on the tarmac, then powering up to lift off again.

[Drummond]

OK.
What would you say about all this?

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.htm

What would I say ? Are you being serious ??

As for what I'd say ... I'd say the obvious. That it was a conspiracy-fueling site. That it contained some anti-American 'material' (the description 'material' is unsupportively generous, I suspect ...).

I'm already convinced, Balu, that your driving sentiments are anti-American .. and your latest offering helps add to that belief. WHY, otherwise, would you offer as an 'objective' source, a site which also pushed THIS load of rubbish .. ??

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc14.htm

-- It's called .. 'The American Drive for World Domination'


In August 2002 George W. Bush (whose public utterances finally demonstrated that he is mentally deranged, unhinged, demented and a lunatic) and his crony Tony Blair were talking up their intention to attack Iraq, going on like a broken record about its "weapons of mass destruction", hypocritically ignoring the facts that (a) it is the U.S. which leads the world in the manufacture and use of such weapons (Germany and Japan 1945, Vietnam and Cambodia 1960s and 70s, Iraq 1991, Kosovo 1999 and Afghanistan 2001) and (b) it is Israel, America's client state in the Middle East, which already possesses over 100 atomic bombs and is entirely willing to use them against its neighbours.

Iraq's immediate neighbours did not consider Iraq a military threat, so why did the U.S.? Iraq's missiles could reach parts of Europe and Russia but neither Europe nor Russia considered Iraq a threat; indeed, in mid-2002 Russia signed a multi-billion dollar trade deal with Iraq. Only Israel considered Iraq a threat (consistent with the pan-Arab hatred of Israel for its brutality toward the Palestinians), and in the U.S. Congress and in the Bush [and Obama] Administration what Israel wants Israel gets.

As British elder statesman Tony Benn said, the American desire for a war against Iraq was based not on any concern over what weapons Saddam Hussein might possess but sprang from the desire of the U.S. to grab Iraq's oil.

Bush's "War on Terrorism" is not about terrorism (except insofar as staged terrorist acts are an important part of the propaganda campaign) — it's about control of all of the Earth's economic resources, not just oil.

The United States government wants economic control and exploitation of the vast oil and mineral wealth of the Middle east and Central Asia, and if perpetual worldwide war is required to achieve this then so be it .....

THIS, Balu, as almost all of us will recognise, is an almighty load of c**p. OBVIOUSLY anti-American (I see an anti-Semitic reference too, by the way), penned to make America out to be some sort of belligerent pariah power hell-bent on international domination, evidently those maintaining the site producing this stuff are following an especially belligerent and rather sick agenda of their own.

By the way, that so-called 'elder statesman' referred to .. TONY BENN .. was, when alive, a British politician of the HARD LEFT (ex-Labour minister, at one time). Typical of this site to speak of him in unearned 'glowing terms' ... eh ?

So let's drop the pretence, Balu, of any interest of yours in objective reporting. You're pushing propaganda. And it's pernicious stuff at that.

[aboutime]

No doubt that 9/11 is an awful Tragedy of American Nation and those who were engaged in organizing and executing this crime must be found and punished.
But there are a lot very strange things over these events which cause questions of those who used to think, analyze, have some knowledge and personal experience.
In this respect I would ask some questions.
Is there anybody on the board who is a professional pilot? He could tell us how much time it takes to learn all the instruments and controls as well as teach a pilot with previous experience to control every particular type of a huge jet-liner.
No need to say that it differs greatly from single engine Cessna and the pilot of Cessna is not able to control and maneuver huge jet liner especially on descend in manual mode when autopilot is useless as the jet-liner is not guided by approach beacons.
Every pilot knows that descend and landing are the most difficult phases of a flight as it is necessary to keep the course and altitude to aim a plane strictly to a prescribed points - another unsolvable task for yesterday's graduate of a light aircraft flying school.
There also are some discrepancies with Pentagon, but it is another separate story.


Balu. I'll bet you knew Oswald, and you probably believe he did not shoot John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Tx. on November 22, 1963.
And, I suppose you joined the conspiracy nuts who are convinced Americans did not step on the Moon in July, 1969.
So. Can you tell us all...WHAT DO YOU KNOW about where Jimmy Hoffa is buried?:laugh:

[jimnyc]

OK.
What would you say about all this?

http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.htm

Mr. Balu - I love ya buddy!! If you were to look around the board, mostly in the conspiracies section, you'll find plenty of threads discussing 9/11. Any talk of blaming anyone other than the 19 scumbags involved that day, is a bunch of shit. These things have been debunked over and over, time and time again.

Sure, there are some out there that will not let go, they will always believe there is some hanky panky in everything that happens.

But look at it this way. With the amount of the tragedy, the size of the destruction and following operation in Washington, then the massive amount in NYC, and the other buildings, and the amount of folks involved in recovery operations, literally in the thousands and thousands. The the amount of actual officers, whether federal or local, firemen and investigators... there is literally no solid proof of anything other than those 19 men and their terrorist attacks that day.

With an operation that big (others can save their links to Northwood or other crap)... with an operation that big, whether 10 people involved or 500, there would be SOME proof of some sort - not just circumstantial things that can be tossed around and blamed on the government.

But if you must, like I said, look in the conspiracies section. Plenty of talk. You may even get some to bite! :)

[Elessar]

To put something into perspective, here is a map and list of the nationalities of
persons killed on 9/11. Not all of them were Americans, so it can be
considered an international attack:

http://brilliantmaps.com/9-11-victims/

[Gunny]

As far as a plane that large being able to fly at the height it did to strike the Pentagon,
I've seen many planes, even large ones, that do 'touch and go' landings yet able to maintain velocity
on approach, powering down to put wheels on the tarmac, then powering up to lift off again.It actually did not strike its target. There isn't enough room to touch n go in a plane that big. Remember, this ain't a combat plane with touch controls. Civilian airliners are busses with wings. They scare the crap out of me. :laugh: