U.N. delegates walk out / 911 to investigated - Ahmedinejad

[gambit]

Pakistan and Australia are not the USA -- the sole hyperpower on the planet with a military might greater than most of the rest of the world combined.

For a Pakistani, the most important government is not the American government but the Pakistani one. For an Australian, it is the Australian government. Get it? So if you expect the American government to have such absolute airspace control over Washington DC, as in this is the normal thing for a government to do, then you need to show the readers that this is the norm BEFORE you can argue on how is the airspace over Washington DC is 'the most heavily guarded' in the world. We are not talking about Somalia where the country is practicall a 'failed' state. We are talking about Pakistan, a nuclear weapons state.

I find it hard to believe that the US was waiting for a precedent before instituting policies to guard the seat of all three branches of government, plus the military.

I find it hard to believe that the Pakistani government, with a hostile neighbor -- India -- who is also a nuclear weapons state, is STILL waiting despite a precedent in America to institute policies to guard the seat of government. So do so the readers how is Pakistan taking protection measures.

You are stating that a less heavily guarded region was also breached. And your point is...?

The point is that...If Moscow's airspace was breached by a small aircraft flown by a West German teenager and who landed himself practically in Red Square, then like other 9/11 loony conspiracy theory believers, you do not know what you are talking about.

But manned fighters were dispatched. To the wrong destination.

So at worst this proved incompetence, not conspiracy. The point that disproved you is that IF the airspace over Washington DC is supposed to be 'the most heavily guarded' in the world, then it make no sense to restrict that defense to manned aircrafts, which are slow to respond to any emergency, but to include missile batteries stationed around. So now in order to support this 'most heavily guarded' argument, you need to show us how is Islamabad defended before 9/11 so the readers can see how airspace over Washington DC qualified to be 'the most heavily guarded' in the world.

No, you walked away from that argument because all the points you raise here were already dismissed in that thread. The fact is that the US-led sanctions banned chlorine, which is essential for water purification. They banned critical repair parts and the resulting disrepair devastated the water and food preparation facilities in Iraq. All these led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi childern.

Aaawww...Like I said, facts are not truths...And here is one truth...

The Oil-For-Food Program (OFFP) was installed in 1995. Operation Iraqi Freedom was in 2003...

UN Office of the Iraq Program - Oil for Food: About the Program

Water and sanitation: In the period to 20 March 2003, the deterioration of water facilities was halted. Oil-for-Food Programme supplies and equipment improved access to potable water, and helped to reduce the incidence of water-borne illnesses, including diarrhoeah.

Now where did all that money go?

Saddam's palace open to Iraqi public - USATODAY.com

"It is difficult to see how Saddam lived and to remember how much we suffered," said Rahab Hussain, 33, as she strolled through the palace on a recent sunny afternoon with her husband. "While he was building this, what was happening to our country?"

This is not counting the off-the-books oil profits with Syria, Libya, Germany, and just about all the other members of the UN Security Council. You cannot avoid the truth that Saddam Hussein and his black market oil profiteering partners are at least equally, if not more, culpable for the tragedy that was Iraq under sanctions.

Indeed. Almost all of the oil producing Muslim countries, except Malaysia, are run by sycophantic tyrants bent on appeasing the West and brutally suppressing their own people.

But at least the muslims are lord over by their own people. Again...The muslims cannot claim they are 'victims' of the West when they have their own countries, create their own laws, shape their own societies, and war against each other whenever they get the urges.

So are the various neo-Nazi groups. And the growing number of Islamophobic groups. And these latter groups are just as bloodthirsty as AQ, except they advance their agenda through think tanks advising their respective governments.

How many neo-Nazi groups committed terrorism against any muslim country? So...Oh, give it a rest...

There is nothing to avoid. The most important question in any crime is the same one asked by Cicero in antiquity, cui bono? who benefits? 9/11 did not benefit AQ, the Taliban or any Muslims. It did benefit the Zionist and neocon agenda tremendously.

A similar event in Tel Aviv would not benefit any Muslim group, since the resulting worlwide sympathy for Israel would give it license to unleash even more brutality. Such an action would backfire.

The reason why the muslims did not benefit is because al-Qaeda made a mistake and attacked US, the only country that can exact vengeance the way we did. As far as the Israelis are concerned, it is a war between Islam and the Jewish people. As far as the American public was concerned, we know next to nothing about Islam and al-Qaeda was just another grievance group among the many. So if a '9/11' did occurred on Tel Aviv instead of New York City, Israel could do nothing except vocally rage and mourne their deads while the muslims rejoice and exalt the al-Qaeda martyrs. In this, the muslims would gain enormously, at least in morale instead of seething with helpless anger at seeing two muslim countries felled to American wrath because of al-Qaeda's mistake.

I was in the US when she went on that damage control tour. Nobody, not even the sympathetic American media, believed her lame damage control spin.

Sure...For the same reason why no one bought the spin that Ahmawhatshisname did not called for Israel to be 'wiped off' the map. Lame it was.

Suspending critical judgement and common sense in a frenzy of faux patriotism is not logic, it is intellectual laziness.

Absolutely...Like yourself.

That is your agenda -- to define terrorism selectively and to associate Islam to it. Even attacks on US soldiers are now considered terrorism. The word is so abused, it has lost its meaning.

Sure...Like how the perpetual muslim victimhood mentality is getting tiresome.

A rogue aircraft following the same pattern as two rogue aircraft which already crashed into WTC 1-2 half an hour prior is certainly suspect.

The point is that no aircraft were sent in time to intercept the rogue aircraft heading towards DC.

Radar contact was lost when the transponders were turned off.

This is what an air traffic control radar view look like WITH the assistance of transponders.

The source is here...

http://taylorempireairways.com/tag/atc/

The radar shows to air traffic control the exact coordinates of planes in the air, or those waiting to take off, their altitude, their speed and the distance between them — it can get bumper-to-bumper up there.

– “Airport radar crash: 60 mins on brink of disaster.” Hindustan Times, 14 January 2010.

With no transponder an aircraft would not be displayed. But that does not mean the default assumption is that the aircraft is hostile UNTIL control receive a '7500' code...

Transponder (aviation) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Emergency codes

* 7500: Unlawful Interference (i.e. Aircraft hijacking)[6]
* 7600: Lost Communications[6]
* 7700: General Emergency[6]

Tracking problems exists even when traffic control is assisted by transponders...

MSY Airport Monitor

Aircraft tracking, using secondary surveillance radar and the software that supports it, while highly reliable, is also complex. Sometimes circumstances can interfere with the signal, causing temporary distortions. For example, you will probably notice that an aircraft flying over MSY will temporarily disappear from the screen and then reappear away from the airport. This is due to the aircraft passing directly over the radar antenna and the temporary loss of signal. This is known in the industry as the cone of silence. You may also notice aircraft icons sometimes "dropping off" and/or suddenly doing unusual things. This is especially true in the area immediately around MSY, but could also occur away from the airport as well. These "ghost" aircraft are due to radar and aircraft transponder reflections from the ground and high-rise buildings around the airport, and possibly from terrain and meteorological conditions farther away from MSY.

In order for your argument to be accepted by the gullible, be he a muslim or not, but we should not be surprised if the person is a muslim, you must exaggerate everything to perfection, such as how US civil aviation must be under the control of the military, responses to deviations are immediate and violators faced possible deaths, and that radars are omnipotent. The list goes on and on.

During my student pilot days, I accidently wandered too close to (but not over) Miramar AFB near San Diego, and two military aircraft were vectored in less than ten minutes to escort me (and my harried flight instructor) away.

Big deal. I took flight lessons in high school back in Hawaii, routinely flew over Pearl Harbor, and often got close to Hickam AFB. Nothing happened except for a warning.

 

[Developereo]

So if you expect the American government to have such absolute airspace control over Washington DC, as in this is the normal thing for a government to do, then you need to show the readers that this is the norm BEFORE you can argue on how is the airspace over Washington DC is 'the most heavily guarded' in the world.

No-fly zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pakistan and India (The Parliament Building)
UK (Buckingham Palace)
Russian Federation (City of Moscow)

The point is that...If Moscow's airspace was breached by a small aircraft flown by a West German teenager and who landed himself practically in Red Square, then like other 9/11 loony conspiracy theory believers, you do not know what you are talking about.

You still don't get it.
Moscow's airspace was not breached 30 minutes after two 747s crashed into one of the most prominent landmarks in the country.

So at worst this proved incompetence, not conspiracy.

From Andrews Air Force Base

According to journalist and author Dan Verton, around the time of the Pentagon attack, “civilian and military officials [are] boarding a militarized version of a Boeing 747, known as the E-4B National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC), at an airfield outside of the nation’s capital. They [are] preparing to conduct a previously scheduled Defense Department exercise”
[...]
Another major exercise taking place this morning is called Vigilant Guardian. All of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) is participating in it
[...]
Furthermore, members of the 113th Wing have just returned from a major training exercise in Nevada (see Late August-September 8, 2001), and so, with only a few pilots and planes available, today is a “light flying day” for their unit

Wow, what convenient timing! The attacks just happened to occur precisely during a simulated hijacking exercise at the relevant AFB. For a bunch of cave dwellers in Afghanistan, these hijackers seem to have been privy to some very juicy information.

The point that disproved you is that IF the airspace over Washington DC is supposed to be 'the most heavily guarded' in the world, then it make no sense to restrict that defense to manned aircrafts, which are slow to respond to any emergency, but to include missile batteries stationed around.

How planes are intercepted is a matter of detail for the appropriate authorities. The point, again, from the above source is:

A 9/11 Commission document summarizing key transmissions from the Andrews tower will show that warning messages are broadcast about once or twice every 10 minutes. The messages, which are all quite similar, include: “No fly notice. Remain clear of Andrews Class B airspace or you will be shot down,” and, “Any aircraft monitoring Andrews Approach Control frequency: remain clear of Andrews Class B airspace or you will be shot down.” [9/11 Commission, 2/17/2004] (Class B airspace is restricted airspace in which no one is supposed to fly without a working transponder and permission from an air traffic controller. The airspace around much of Washington is designated Class B airspace.

The Oil-For-Food Program

All it proves is that some hasty remedial measures were taken towards the end of the program as damage control.

I will take the word of the UN officials like Denis Halliday, Hans von Sponeck, and others with first-hand inside knowledge of the facts rather than a propaganda puff piece.

Now where did all that money go?

From your own source:

Seventy two per cent of Iraqi oil export proceeds was allocated to the humanitarian Programme, [...] 25% was allocated to the Compensation Fund for war reparation payments, 2.2% for United Nations administrative and operational costs; and 0.8% for the weapons inspection programme.

You cannot avoid the truth that Saddam Hussein and his black market oil profiteering partners are at least equally, if not more, culpable for the tragedy that was Iraq under sanctions.

Nobody's claiming that Saddam was a saint. He had been building palaces befure and during the sanctions. It is irrelevant to the discussion at hand, which is about the impact of the sanctions on ordinary people who did not have access to 'special' channels the way Saddam did.

the muslims [...] The muslims

Sigh. There's that megalomania again. Better call up your shrink.

How many neo-Nazi groups committed terrorism against any muslim country? So...Oh, give it a rest...

I specifically zeroed in on neocon and Zionist groups who advise Western governments on foreign policy matters. Advice which results in the deaths of Muslim civilians. Lack of reading comprehension on your part, no doubt.

The reason why the muslims did not benefit is because al-Qaeda made a mistake and attacked US, the only country that can exact vengeance the way we did.

You seriously think OBL did not know what the US reaction would be when he destroyed one of the most visible landmarks on the American landscape and killed 3000 people.

As far as the Israelis are concerned, it is a war between Islam and the Jewish people.

You are absolutely right. This is the way the Zionists portray their war, as a religious war, in order to milk the anti-Semitism and Holocaust sympathy cards.

As far as the American public was concerned, we know next to nothing about Islam

Most Americans still don't. You least of all.

if a '9/11' did occurred on Tel Aviv [...] the muslims rejoice [...] seething with helpless anger at [...] American wrath

This level of visceral bigotry on your part is beyond ridiculous.

Lame it was.

Glad you admit that Albeight's damage control spin was lame.

Absolutely...Like yourself.

Oh really now. Again with the "I know you are but what am I" routine?

With no transponder an aircraft would not be displayed. But that does not mean the default assumption is that the aircraft is hostile UNTIL control receive a '7500' code...

Again, from the above source:

The Secret Service tells FAA headquarters that it wants fighter jets launched over Washington, DC, and this message is then relayed to the air traffic control tower at Andrews Air Force Base, which is 10 miles from Washington. The District of Columbia Air National Guard (DCANG) at Andrews is notified, but no jets will take off from the base until 10:38 a.m. [9/11 Commission, 8/28/2003; 9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 44, 465] The request for fighter jets is apparently made by Secret Service agent Nelson Garabito, who is responsible for coordinating the president’s movements, during a phone call with his counterpart at FAA headquarters in Washington, Terry Van Steenbergen. This call began shortly after the second tower was hit at 9:03 a.m. (see Shortly After 9:03 a.m. September 11, 2001).

In case you missed it, the Secret Service alerted the FAA at shortly after 9:03am but the fighters were not dispatched until 10:38am.

It takes the USAF 90 minutes to respond to an urgent call from the Secret Service????

In order for your argument to be accepted by the gullible, be he a muslim or not, but we should not be surprised if the person is a muslim, you must exaggerate everything to perfection, such as how US civil aviation must be under the control of the military, responses to deviations are immediate and violators faced possible deaths, and that radars are omnipotent. The list goes on and on.

The only people who are gullible are the ones like you who ignore the facts quoted above. Most of these are confirmed by the 9/11 commission.

Washington DC is a class B no-fly zone with a standing order to shoot down. The USAF did take 90 minutes to respond to an urgent request by the Secret Service even after the Towers had been hit.

Big deal. I took flight lessons in high school back in Hawaii, routinely flew over Pearl Harbor, and often got close to Hickam AFB. Nothing happened except for a warning.

The point, which clearly went above your head, is that fighters are scrambled almost instantaneously when unauthorized aircraft approad restricted airspace. This did not happen when a 747 piloted by a third rate student pilot flew straight through restricted airspace to hit its bull's eye at the Pentagon, of all places!

 

[Chogy]

I suspect your Miramar intercept was done by jets on a routine training sortie, already airborne. Like this: "Sabre flight, we've got a lost civilian about to penetrate the hot range. Can you escort him out, please?" Sabre says "sure" and gets a vector. I did this myself over the Nellis range when some clown got lost in a Mooney and penetrated restricted airspace. I had no hot weapons, but I probably almost gave him a coronary.

I know you won't believe me, but with regards to airspace, ATC, military scrambles - what Gambit is saying is true. Frankly, the U.S. had (in terms of defense) airspace defense that could be considered quite weak, although it has been beefed up post 9/11, mostly by coordination between civilian and military entities.

Nutshell: Our airspace is run by civilian ATC, not military, and once the transponder is turned off, ATC radars have an immensely difficult time tracking aircraft. They are not designed to do so. Combined with massed, unbelievable confusion, lack of communication, you get what became 9/11.

 

[Irani]

That is a laugh. There are no shortage of sources that absolutely debunked those 'tones of other queries'. What you brought on is nothing new. What you did was simply took on one side that conformed to your preconceived notions and bring them on as if it is new and shocking. Not. You do not have the intellectual honesty, as in objectivity, to sit down and do an honest assessment of both sides.

You could laugh hysterically as much you want, nothing going to change. There are no shortage of sources that absolutely debunked your position as well. New or old, these queries are available and many people believe them. You could accept the investigation or childishly address me, an old strategy, exactly the same as what pharaoh did to Moses and called him magician, the old Arab leaders did to Mohammad and called him insane and your government doing now to every independent nation who put your policies under question.

Really? Has there been an international investigation on the death of Neda Agha-Soltan when Iran said a CIA agent shot her? What is Iran afraid of? But if you argue that her death was an internal affair, then why is the US obligated to Iran's or anyone's demand for an 'international' investigation? But...What is preventing Iran from reconstructing the event and present the technical findings to the world? Iran is filled with oil wealth, no?

Really? You think these are the same? had we asked for an international investigation about The Davidian Massacre (for forther information click here)? Do we ask investigation about FBI crack down of anti-war activists ( click here ) ? No! because those are internal affairs. But 9/11 was an internal affair, before you change it to an international matter. Did Iran start any war for Neda Agha Soltans tragic death? NO. For 9/11 we have 10 years of war with millions of casualties and on going accusations and threats for wars to other nations! So, it's not an internal affair any more.

 

[CardSharp]

You could laugh hysterically as much you want, nothing going to change. There are no shortage of sources that absolutely debunked your position as well. New or old, these queries are available and many people believe them. You could accept the investigation or childishly address me, an old strategy, exactly the same as what pharaoh did to Moses and called him magician, the old Arab leaders did to Mohammad and called him insane and your government doing now to every independent nation who put your policies under question.

Really? You think these are the same? had we asked for an international investigation about The Davidian Massacre (for forther information click here)? Do we ask investigation about FBI crack down of anti-war activists ( click here) ? No! because those are internal affairs. But 9/11 was an internal affair, before you change it to an international matter. Did Iran start any war for Neda Agha Soltans tragic death? NO. For 9/11 we have 10 years of war with millions of casualties and on going accusations and threats for wars to other nations! So, it's not an internal affair any more.

These sources of course being complete idiots with too much time on their hands. I've browsed these conspiracy forum. What passes for critical thinking there is a joke. Someone will post a conspiracy theory they thought up, and others join in to add details until they arrive at something believable (to them at least). I'm sorry that not how empirical truth is arrived at, they've got the damned thing backwards.

 

[gambit]

How planes are intercepted is a matter of detail for the appropriate authorities. The point, again, from the above source is:

The airspace around much of Washington is designated Class B airspace.

Washington DC is a class B no-fly zone with a standing order to shoot down.

The order to shoot any unidentified aircraft was 'standing' only for Sept 11, 2001, because of the chaos that day. Not that such a lethal use of arms is the default position for any 'restricted' airspace...

Airspace class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The world’s navigable airspace is divided into three-dimensional segments, each of which is assigned to a specific class. Most nations adhere to the classification specified by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and described below. Individual nations also designate Special Use Airspace, which places further rules on air navigation for reasons of national security or safety.

The classifications adopted by ICAO are:

* Class A: All operations must be conducted under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) or Special visual flight rules (SVFR) and are subject to ATC clearance. All flights are separated from each other by ATC. Class A airspace starts at FL 180 or 18000ft to FL 600 or 60000ft. And also must change from the local altimeter to 29.92 inHg or 1013.2 mb.

* Class B: Operations may be conducted under IFR, SVFR, or Visual flight rules (VFR). All aircraft are subject to ATC clearance. All flights are separated from each other by ATC.

* Class C: Operations may be conducted under IFR, SVFR, or VFR. All flights are subject to ATC clearance. Aircraft operating under IFR and SVFR are separated from each other and from flights operating under VFR. Flights operating under VFR are given traffic information in respect of other VFR flights.From the primary airport or satellite airport with an operating control tower must establish and maintain two-way radio communications with the control tower.

* Class D: Operations may be conducted under IFR, SVFR, or VFR. All flights are subject to ATC clearance. Aircraft operating under IFR and SVFR are separated from each other, and are given traffic information in respect of VFR flights. Flights operating under VFR are given traffic information in respect of all other flights.

* Class E: Operations may be conducted under IFR, SVFR, or VFR. Aircraft operating under IFR and SVFR are separated from each other, and are subject to ATC clearance. Flights under VFR are not subject to ATC clearance. As far as is practical, traffic information is given to all flights in respect of VFR flights.

* Class F: Operations may be conducted under IFR or VFR. ATC separation will be provided, so far as practical, to aircraft operating under IFR. Traffic Information may be given as far as is practical in respect of other flights.

* Class G: Operations may be conducted under IFR or VFR. ATC separation is not provided. Traffic Information may be given as far as is practical in respect of other flights.

Classes A-E are referred to as controlled airspace. Classes F and G are uncontrolled airspace.

Just because an airspace is designated as 'restricted' or 'controlled' that does not automatically mean there is a default lethal use of arms authorized. Assuming this is a civilian airspace...It mean that ANY aircraft that wished to traverse a restricted airspace, the aircraft MUST be equipped with a transponder and obey ATC instructions. Not advisories, as in weather advisories. None of this 'FYI' stuff. But INSTRUCTIONS. Restrictions are usually imposed because of high air traffic over population centers, not because there are any purported military value below.

Here is another example of a 'Class B' restriction...

Skydive Carolina!: Class B Airspace and What It All Means

Since the fall of 2008, Skydive Carolina management was informed that the Charlotte Douglas airport was expanding its facility with the addition of a third runway in order to meet the demands of increased traffic flow into the airport. As a result of heavier traffic, the Charlotte ATC has requested that the perimeters of the current Class B airspace be extended to a full 30 miles from the airport. This would result in Skydive Carolina having to operate within this new and more restrictive airspace.

If there is a default lethal use of arms for Class B airspace, then what is and where are the air defense network for North Carolina?!?! And for what?!?! Orlando International is also a 'Class B' restricted airspace. I lived in Orlando for five years. If there is anything of military value in Orlando, it would be the USN basic training center there. My MacDill AFB sticker on my Jeep allowed me access on base and there is nothing there except for what it is: a training facility. There are no USN fighters on full running engines alert ready to pounce on any stray aircraft into Orlando International 'Class B' restricted airspace.

Is Islamabad International in compliance with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) classification? No one can force Pakistan into compliance. Such compliance is voluntary. But if yes, then I want to see how is Pakistani air defense arrayed around the airport. I want to see missile batteries as well as manned fighters on full running engines alert.

This is the reason why muslims, even educated ones like yourself, are generally perceived as gullible when it comes to 9/11. Bad enough that ignorance prevent people from exercising critical thinking skills but a thousand times worse that educated muslims refused to exercise the same.

 

[gambit]

You still don't get it.
Moscow's airspace was not breached 30 minutes after two 747s crashed into one of the most prominent landmarks in the country.

It is YOU who does not 'get it'. During the Cold War, Moscow's airspace was probably more heavily guarded than Washington DC. So if by your argument that DC's airspace is 'the most heavily guarded' in the world, then explain how was it that Mathias Rust was able to land in Red Square after flying from Finland to Russia. By positing that 'most' you are implying that capital air defense is the norm for every country. So show us how Pakistan is protecting Islamabad airport and the capital city.

Wow, what convenient timing! The attacks just happened to occur precisely during a simulated hijacking exercise at the relevant AFB. For a bunch of cave dwellers in Afghanistan, these hijackers seem to have been privy to some very juicy information.

Wow...And the same bunch of 'cave dwellers' boasted that they defeated the USSR.

All it proves is that some hasty remedial measures were taken towards the end of the program as damage control.

No...All it proved is that you have been thoroughly debunked. The Oil-For-Food Program began in 1995 and the UN determined that for the most, water treatment was effective, contrary to what you claimed.

I will take the word of the UN officials like Denis Halliday, Hans von Sponeck, and others with first-hand inside knowledge of the facts rather than a propaganda puff piece.

And Dennis Halliday supported continuing the 'military' sanctions on Iraq. Unfortunately, he did not specified as to the extent of what is 'military'. Halliday admitted that the Iraqi government failed in its contracting many of the necessary basic medicines to companies that could not deliver. Halliday resigned in 1998 without knowing the full extent of the OFFP's corruption.

Nobody's claiming that Saddam was a saint. He had been building palaces befure and during the sanctions. It is irrelevant to the discussion at hand, which is about the impact of the sanctions on ordinary people who did not have access to 'special' channels the way Saddam did.

No...It is not irrelevant. Iraq was not ruled by the UN. The country was ruled by Saddam Hussein. His decision inevitably affected the Iraqis, especially during the sanction years. Pointing out that he built palaces before and during the sanction years begs the questions of why and was it necessary that those palaces be built.

Sigh. There's that megalomania again. Better call up your shrink.

My shrink entered rehab after only one session with me.

I specifically zeroed in on neocon and Zionist groups who advise Western governments on foreign policy matters. Advice which results in the deaths of Muslim civilians. Lack of reading comprehension on your part, no doubt.

If you are willing to associate state-on-state relations as being evidence of a global war against Islam, then I see good reasons to consider Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda as representatives of the ummah.

You seriously think OBL did not know what the US reaction would be when he destroyed one of the most visible landmarks on the American landscape and killed 3000 people.

Yes...He miscalculated. After all, al-Qaeda attacked US before, just never on US soil. Our tepid responses to those overseas attacks, such as the USS Cole, emboldened bin Laden into making that miscalculation.

You are absolutely right. This is the way the Zionists portray their war, as a religious war, in order to milk the anti-Semitism and Holocaust sympathy cards.

No different than how the muslims intent to portray everything, no matter how innocuous like athletic shoe design, as 'insulting' to Islam.

Most Americans still don't. You least of all.

And we do not care. The more al-Qaeda attack US, the more we see those 'Death to America' rallies, the greater our conviction that the muslims want a fight.

Glad you admit that Albeight's damage control spin was lame.

As well as Ahmadenijad's defenders who spins that he did not want to wipe Israel off the map.

In case you missed it, the Secret Service alerted the FAA at shortly after 9:03am but the fighters were not dispatched until 10:38am.

It takes the USAF 90 minutes to respond to an urgent call from the Secret Service????

The US Secret Service does not have authority over military assets. There is a chain of command they must obey like everyone else.

Washington DC is a class B no-fly zone with a standing order to shoot down. The USAF did take 90 minutes to respond to an urgent request by the Secret Service even after the Towers had been hit.

What was that request? What was the content of that request? I want to see a source.

The point, which clearly went above your head, is that fighters are scrambled almost instantaneously when unauthorized aircraft approad restricted airspace. This did not happen when a 747 piloted by a third rate student pilot flew straight through restricted airspace to hit its bull's eye at the Pentagon, of all places!

Almost instantaneously? You obviously do not have a clue of what it take and how much time to get a fighter jet going from cold start to end-of-runway, let alone take-off and be vectored to a point in the air by ground control. Ignorant people like you imposed their own ignorance on the issue to deceive gullible people. Nothing more.

According to ATC data compiled by the FAA on Sept 17, 2001, American Airlines 77 dropped off primary and secondary radar at 0856:19.

Air traffic control radar beacon system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The system consists of transponders, installed in aircraft, and secondary surveillance radars (SSRs), installed at air traffic control facilities. The SSR is co-located with the primary surveillance radar, or PSR. These two radar systems work in conjunction to produce a synchronized surveillance picture. The SSR transmits interrogations and listens for any replies. Transponders that receive an interrogation decode it, decide whether to reply, and then respond with the requested information when appropriate. Note that in common informal usage, the term "SSR" is sometimes used to refer to the entire ATCRBS system, however this term (as found in technical publications) properly refers only to the ground radar itself.

The primary radar is independent of aircraft response, meaning its function is of the true radar detection. A pulse is transmitted, reflect off the aircraft, and that reflection is process by the radar system. The downside to the primary radar is that it is best for close range, like around 200 km (60nm) at best from the transmitter. The primary radar also pick up non-essential items like weather and terrain.

Secondary radar is not a true radar in that it is more of an interrogator system than a detection, aka 'skin painting', of an aircraft.

Secondary surveillance radar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Secondary surveillance radar (SSR) is a radar system used in air traffic control (ATC), which not only detects and measures the position of aircraft but also requests additional information from the aircraft itself such as its identity and altitude. Unlike primary radar systems, which measure only the range and bearing of targets by detecting reflected radio signals, rather like seeing an object in a beam of light, SSR relies on its targets being equipped with a radar transponder, which replies to each interrogation signal by transmitting its own response containing encoded data. SSR is based on the military identification friend or foe (IFF) technology originally developed during World War II, and the two systems are still compatible today.

Major ATC centers relies on the cooperative relationship between aircraft and ground control -- SSR -- to effect air traffic 'deconfliction'. The primary radar system is relegated to being a back-up system. Elaboration...Current air traffic control system is based upon the default cooperative relationship between ground control and aircraft. That is why there are 'transponders' on airliners. The transponder respond to queries from the SSR. As long as this cooperative relationship exist, and we have no reason to question as to why an aircraft would refuse to respond, then there is no need to see weather and mountains on the radar scope.

So if an aircraft that is equipped with a transponder does not respond, the default assumption is that something is wrong with hardware, not with the people flying the aircraft, and tacit to that default assumption is that the aircraft is not hostile. An aircraft that does not respond to an SSR query may still be available to the primary radar, depending on its range.

But when an aircraft is lost to BOTH primary and secondary systems, as in timestamp 0856:19, there is no way to know where it is in the sky, its status, and its intention. There is also no way for ground control to call in assistance from other aircrafts to see if they can find the 'missing' aircraft. AA77 crashed into the Pentagon at 0938.

It is only in the muslims' fantasy world that the US can respond -- 'nearly instantaneously' -- in -- 'the most heavily guarded airspace in the world' -- in order to support the delusion that it was a Zionist-CIA plot to kill nearly 3000 US citizens to justify a war in Iraq to steal the muslims' oil.

 

[Developereo]

Nutshell: Our airspace is run by civilian ATC, not military, and once the transponder is turned off, ATC radars have an immensely difficult time tracking aircraft. They are not designed to do so. Combined with massed, unbelievable confusion, lack of communication, you get what became 9/11.

I appreciate that the USAF is not omnipotent, but 90 minutes seems like an eternity after the Secret Service explicitly requests aircraft to be sent to DC, and after two commercial jetliners are known to have crashed into the Towers.

Not that such a lethal use of arms is the default position for any 'restricted' airspace...
[...]
I want to see missile batteries as well as manned fighters on full running engines alert.

You contradict yourself in your own post.

I don't know what is your obsession with missile batteries, but I would expect that all non-dictatorial countries would use manned fighters to escort problematic aircraft out of restricted airspace before resorting to a shootdown as a last resort.

Missiles cannot coax and escort their targets out of harm's way; only manned fighters can do that.

During the Cold War, Moscow's airspace was probably more heavily guarded than Washington DC. So if by your argument that DC's airspace is 'the most heavily guarded' in the world, then explain how was it that Mathias Rust was able to land in Red Square after flying from Finland to Russia.

The penetration of Moscow's airspace happened on an otherwise 'normal' day. 9/11 was not a normal day by the time the Secret Service requested air cover for Washington DC. Two commercial jetliners had already crashed into the Towers by the time the request was made.

Even the Somali airforce would take less than 90 minutes to respond in similar circumstances.

Wow...And the same bunch of 'cave dwellers' boasted that they defeated the USSR.

Precisely my point!

These guys could have done diddly without military and intelligence support from the US military. As happened on 9/11.

Glad to see you are starting to see the light finally.

No...All it proved is that you have been thoroughly debunked.

Hardly! Any number of well-informed insiders stand by their assertions to the contrary.

And Dennis Halliday supported continuing the 'military' sanctions on Iraq. Unfortunately, he did not specified as to the extent of what is 'military'. Halliday admitted that the Iraqi government failed in its contracting many of the necessary basic medicines to companies that could not deliver. Halliday resigned in 1998 without knowing the full extent of the OFFP's corruption.

Halliday resigned because he did not want to be party to what he called a 'genocide'.

No...It is not irrelevant. Iraq was not ruled by the UN. The country was ruled by Saddam Hussein. His decision inevitably affected the Iraqis, especially during the sanction years. Pointing out that he built palaces before and during the sanction years begs the questions of why and was it necessary that those palaces be built.

It is entirely relevant because it proves that the sanctions had precious little impact on Saddam and the ruling classes. All it did was harm the ordinary Iraqi citizen.

If you are willing to associate state-on-state relations as being evidence of a global war against Islam, then I see good reasons to consider Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda as representatives of the ummah.

non sequitur.
The military assault on Muslim civilians is carried out by official militaries of established countries. Al Qaeda's terrorism is carried out by a ragtag bunch of individuals. There is no state-on-state conflict.

As for the ummah, you totally discredit yourself when you use that term. 99% of Muslims don't ever think of themselves as belonging to an ummah; they are far too busy trying to raise their kids and earn a living. The only people who obsess about the ummah -- or even use that word -- are Islamic extremists and their counterpart Islamophobe extremists.

Yes...He miscalculated. After all, al-Qaeda attacked US before, just never on US soil. Our tepid responses to those overseas attacks, such as the USS Cole, emboldened bin Laden into making that miscalculation.

The US response to WTC attacks in 1993 was not timid. OBL would have known what the consequences would be if he actually felled the towers.

No different than how the muslims intent to portray everything, no matter how innocuous like athletic shoe design, as 'insulting' to Islam.

Here we go again....

And we do not care. The more al-Qaeda attack US, the more we see those 'Death to America' rallies, the greater our conviction that the muslims want a fight.

No, you do not care. You and the far right extremists who have already made up their minds and are spoiling for a fight.

Don't even begin to think that you speak for the American public at large, let alone the Western world. Give that megalomania a rest for a change.

What was that request? What was the content of that request? I want to see a source.

I already posted the source in my previous post. The request was part of the 9/11 commission's report. Here, is the source again.

http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=andrews_air_force_base

It is only in the muslims' fantasy world

Interesting that you resort to what you would consider ad hominem attacks, as if calling me a Muslim is somehow a derogatory writeoff.

I do not dismiss your arguments by calling you a Vietnamese-American. Unfortunate that you cannot conduct a discussion without making an issue of people's race or religion.

that the US can respond -- 'nearly instantaneously'

Granted it is not instantaneous, but ninety minutes is ridiculous. Especially given what had already happend that morning.

the delusion that it was a Zionist-CIA plot to kill nearly 3000 US citizens to justify a war in Iraq to steal the muslims' oil.

I never claimed that was the motivation for 9/11. In fact, if you read my post, one of the most plausible explanations is that federal records stored at the Pentagon and WTC-7 were the targets of the insiders. To them, WTC 1 and 2 were merely a distraction.

 

[gambit]

I appreciate that the USAF is not omnipotent, but 90 minutes seems like an eternity after the Secret Service explicitly requests aircraft to be sent to DC, and after two commercial jetliners are known to have crashed into the Towers.

I already posted the source in my previous post. The request was part of the 9/11 commission's report. Here, is the source again.

Andrews Air Force Base

The penetration of Moscow's airspace happened on an otherwise 'normal' day. 9/11 was not a normal day by the time the Secret Service requested air cover for Washington DC. Two commercial jetliners had already crashed into the Towers by the time the request was made.

Granted it is not instantaneous, but ninety minutes is ridiculous. Especially given what had already happend that morning.

The Secret Service does not have authority over USAF assets. No SS agent can simply order any fighter airborne on his own words.

If you actually read your source and exercise critical thinking skills, you would have seen the above document from your own source that clearly spelled out that -- The Secret Service is not a launch authority. If there is a request, it must go through the normal chain of command and in the confusion of that day resulted in the delay of sending Andrew's fighters into the air. While you admitted that Sept 11, 2001, was not a normal day, you demand that we should have had perfect responses at every level for that extraordinary day where just about anything that could go wrong -- did. Mathias Rust's landing in Red Square definitely made that day extraordinary for Muscovites, eh?

Mathias Rust - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After leaving Uetersen near Hamburg on May 13, Rust refueled his rented Reims Cessna F172P D-ECJB in the morning of May 28, 1987 at Helsinki-Malmi Airport. He told air traffic control that he was going to Stockholm, but right after his final communication with traffic control he turned his plane to the east. Air traffic controllers tried to contact him as he was moving around the busy Helsinki-Moscow route, but Rust turned off all communications equipment aboard.[1][2]

Rust disappeared from the Finnish air traffic control radar near Sipoo.[1] Air traffic control presumed an emergency, and a rescue effort was organized, including a Finnish Border Guard patrol boat. They found an oil patch near the place where Rust disappeared from radar and performed an underwater search with no results. Rust was later charged about $100,000 for this effort. The origin of the oil patch remains unknown.

In the meantime, Rust crossed the Baltic coastline in Estonia and turned towards Moscow. At 14:29 he appeared on air defense radar and, after failure to answer to an IFF signal, was assigned combat number 8255. Three SAM divisions tracked him for some time, but failed to obtain permission to launch at him. All air defenses were brought to readiness and two interceptors were sent to investigate. At 14:48 near the city of Gdov one of the pilots observed a white sport plane similar to a Yakovlev Yak-12 and asked for permission to engage, but was denied.[1]

Soon after, the fighters lost contact with Rust, and while they were directed back to him, he disappeared from radar near Staraya Russa. The then-West German magazine Bunte speculated that he might have landed there for some time, citing that he changed his clothes somewhere during his flight, and that he took too much time to fly to Moscow considering his plane's speed and weather conditions.

Air defense re-established contact with Rust's plane several times, but confusion followed all of these events. The PVO system had shortly before been divided into several districts, which simplified management but created additional overhead for tracking officers at the districts' borders. The local air regiment near Pskov was on maneuvers, and, due to inexperienced pilots' tendency to forget correct IFF designator settings, local control officers assigned all traffic in the area friendly status, including Rust.

A mysterious oil patch that distracted investigators. Three Soviet air defense missile batteries tracked Rust but none fired. A Soviet pilot wanted to 'engage' the teenager but his request was denied. Why? Air defense forces repeatedly acquired and reacquired Rust but 'confusion' occurred at all levels and units? How convenient. Ground controllers assigned ALL airborne targets as friendly as Rust was in the area? How even more convenient. The reason why no muslims will ever exert the same mental energy at this is because it would make their convictions about 9/11 more patently 'loony'.

Even the Somali airforce would take less than 90 minutes to respond in similar circumstances.

Is that experience talking?

You contradict yourself in your own post.

I don't know what is your obsession with missile batteries, but I would expect that all non-dictatorial countries would use manned fighters to escort problematic aircraft out of restricted airspace before resorting to a shootdown as a last resort.

Missiles cannot coax and escort their targets out of harm's way; only manned fighters can do that.

No such 'contradiction'. Now it is YOU who contradicted himself based upon your own illogical thinking. Why would non-dictatorial countries have 'heavily guarded' airspaces in the first place, let alone have the US 'the most heavily guarded' in the world? Why should we 'scrambled' anything when polite warnings and requests worked and worked quite well in the past? But if the airspace over Washington DC is supposed to be 'the most heavily guarded' then it is natural that missiles should be the following response after polite warnings and requests to leave the area went unobeyed, after all, if warnings and requests to leave the area went unheeded, why should I spend any more time putting the White House, Capitol Hill, and the Pentagon in danger by sending up manned fighters to scope out the potential threat? Even worse, in the former USSR, there was no private (civil) aviation, but in the US, general aviation is all over the US. For the paranoid USSR, which truly did have 'the most heavily guarded' airspace in the world, even the Soviets did experienced confusion and delays against a peaceful if misguided teenage pilot, but now we are talking suicidal Islamic jihadists who are convicted adults, educated, patient, and highly motivated, and you expect US to have perfect responses.

Precisely my point!

These guys could have done diddly without military and intelligence support from the US military. As happened on 9/11.

Glad to see you are starting to see the light finally.

The light here is the one shining on the perpetual inconsistency of these loony 9/11 conspiracy theories, in particular the muslims when it comes to them. What you said is heresy -- that the mujahedeens drove out the Soviets with US help. This will get you excommunicated and disfellowshipped. The 'cave dwelers' bit is nothing more than rhetorical nonsense. Special operations forces are very much 'cave dwellers' when they are out in the field but they have no problems accomplishing their missions. The 19 hijackers were not special operation opertors but they have no need to be. Our society gave them all the intel they need to accomplish their missions.

Hardly! Any number of well-informed insiders stand by their assertions to the contrary.

Any number? How about none.

Halliday resigned because he did not want to be party to what he called a 'genocide'.

That does not make his opinion overrode others. How about others who did not resigned because they did not see his view?

It is entirely relevant because it proves that the sanctions had precious little impact on Saddam and the ruling classes. All it did was harm the ordinary Iraqi citizen.

Little impact? Good...I share the same opinion. That mean the forced removal of the Saddam regime is the only option that would have much more than 'little impact' on the regime. Glad to see you tacitly approved of B43's adventure in Iraq.

non sequitur.
The military assault on Muslim civilians is carried out by official militaries of established countries. Al Qaeda's terrorism is carried out by a ragtag bunch of individuals. There is no state-on-state conflict.

As for the ummah, you totally discredit yourself when you use that term. 99% of Muslims don't ever think of themselves as belonging to an ummah; they are far too busy trying to raise their kids and earn a living. The only people who obsess about the ummah -- or even use that word -- are Islamic extremists and their counterpart Islamophobe extremists.

No. What is 'non sequitur' here is your continual association with a state-on-state action, vis-a-vis the US versus Iraq and Afghanistan, as if they were part of a global war plan against the muslim countries. But if you genuinely believe so, then we have every reason to believe that al-Qaeda is representative of the muslims in a war against the non-muslims. Osama bin Laden offers the muslims an attractive choice for their lives beyond the borders of whatever country they are living in: jihad. At the same time, he offer us infidels three choices: conversion to Islam, dhimmitude, or death. The jihadist is then turned loose to fight for Allah should the infidels refused the fist two choices.

Authenticity of the Qur'aan (www.islaam.org.uk)

And the saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him,: "When you deal in “al-ainiya” (i.e. become complacent and satisfied with a domestic life) and hang on to the cows tails, and abandon jihad, then Allah will permit your humiliation at the hands of your enemies and will not lift it from you until you return to your religion."

Since the jihadist is not a member of any organized military of any state, but in principle he is a soldier for the ummah, he is free to regard what we call 'civilians' as valid targets in this religious war. It does not matter if %99 of the muslims do not consider themselves members of the ummah, this claim is as laughable as Catholics or Baptists do not consider themselves members of Christendom, but that the jihadist consider himself fighting on the community's behalf, as misguided and lost as it is.

The US response to WTC attacks in 1993 was not timid. OBL would have known what the consequences would be if he actually felled the towers.

This is another sign of the lack of critical thinking. There was no guarantee that the 1993 WTC underground parking lot bomb would work...Or would not work. But in every endeavor, there is always the highest hope that the attack would utterly destroy the target, or kill the person, or steal everything from the safe, or copy exactly the map, and so on. The lesser hope is that the attack would severely damage the target, or render the person too wounded to contribute to the war effort, or steal most of the safe's contents, or copy the most important parts of the map, and so on. So for the 1993 WTC underground parking lot bombing, the highest goal was to bring down at least one tower. US response was not considered. It would be utterly absurd to bomb just to 'wound' the building instead of killing it.

Here we go again....

Correct. That is how non-muslims respond among themselves every time some muslims raged about some grievances, especially imaginary ones from ice cream cones to athletic shoes that supposedly 'insult' Islam.

No, you do not care. You and the far right extremists who have already made up their minds and are spoiling for a fight.

Don't even begin to think that you speak for the American public at large, let alone the Western world. Give that megalomania a rest for a change.

I do not presume to speak for the American public but I am a voice among the many who are fed up with 'Death to America' at the same time we hear 'Where is America' every time there is a natural disaster somewhere.

Interesting that you resort to what you would consider ad hominem attacks, as if calling me a Muslim is somehow a derogatory writeoff.

I do not dismiss your arguments by calling you a Vietnamese-American. Unfortunate that you cannot conduct a discussion without making an issue of people's race or religion.

I cannot change my ethnicity but I can change my religion. So it is YOUR problem if you perceive the 'muslim' tag as a derogatory writeoff.

I never claimed that was the motivation for 9/11. In fact, if you read my post, one of the most plausible explanations is that federal records stored at the Pentagon and WTC-7 were the targets of the insiders. To them, WTC 1 and 2 were merely a distraction.

Most plausible? What a riot...!!! There are far more safer and far less technically demanding methods if the goal was to simply get rid of some records. This extent of absurdity is a sign of a delusional mind.

 

[bigbrother]

ahmedijinad is a brave man.

 

[Developereo]

The Secret Service does not have authority over USAF assets. No SS agent can simply order any fighter airborne on his own words.

Neither I nor the 9/11 commission stated that the Secret Service 'ordered' fighters to be dispatched. The phrase in the 9/11 commission report is 'request for fighter jets'. Next time, try reading calmly when your mind is not doped up on anti-Muslim bigotry.

the confusion of that day resulted in the delay of sending Andrew's fighters into the air.

Splendid endorsement of the USAF. Don't call us during a national emergency; we function best on uneventful days.

While you admitted that Sept 11, 2001, was not a normal day, you demand that we should have had perfect responses at every level for that extraordinary day where just about anything that could go wrong -- did.

Not perfect, only reasonable. It is not reasonable that the USAF should take 90 minutes to respond to a direct request from the Secret Service after all that had happened that morning.

The only other source of confusion was the simulated-hijacking exercise which was rather convenient timing for the real hijackers.

Mathias Rust's landing in Red Square definitely made that day extraordinary for Muscovites, eh?

There's that lack of reading comprehension again. The day was normal until Rust's arrival in Moscow so there was no reason to be extra-vigilant before his arrival. AA77, on the other hand, crashed in DC after the Towers had already been hit and the Secret Service had directly issued a request for coverage.

muslims [...] 'loony'.

Oh dear...

Why would non-dictatorial countries have 'heavily guarded' airspaces in the first place

Go look at the link for no-fly zones that I posted earlier. Many (all?) countries have restricted airspace rules over certain areas because all countries have crazy or criminal people, let alone foreign threats.

it is natural that missiles should be the following response after polite warnings and requests to leave the area went unobeyed

Because there is no substitute for direct first-hand assessment by a professional soldier at the scene, and because shooting down a civilian airliner full of hostages is not exactly a good PR move, no matter what the provocation or circumstances. It is reasonable to do everything possible to the very last moment to avert a shootdown.

you expect US to have perfect responses.

Again, not perfect, only reasonable.

The light here is the one shining on the perpetual inconsistency of these loony 9/11 conspiracy theories, in particular the muslims when it comes to them. What you said is heresy -- that the mujahedeens drove out the Soviets with US help. This will get you excommunicated and disfellowshipped. The 'cave dwelers' bit is nothing more than rhetorical nonsense.

Go ahead, gambit.
I am enjoying your dance to try and squirm out of this one!

Our society gave them all the intel they need to accomplish their missions.

So the training and exercise schedule for military airbases is open to the general 'society', eh?

Any number? How about none.

Quite a few, actually. We already went over a few individuals in our last discussion.

That does not make his opinion overrode others. How about others who did not resigned because they did not see his view?

He resigned and his successor resigned for the same reasons.

Little impact? Good...I share the same opinion. That mean the forced removal of the Saddam regime is the only option that would have much more than 'little impact' on the regime. Glad to see you tacitly approved of B43's adventure in Iraq.

Off-topic lead-in. I don't want to digress into the Iraq war.

No. What is 'non sequitur' here is your continual association with a state-on-state action, vis-a-vis the US versus Iraq and Afghanistan, as if they were part of a global war plan against the muslim countries.

The US is a recognized state, so is Iraq and so is Afghanistan, both of which are Muslim. And the usual suspects in Western countries are beating the drums for bombing runs on Iran and Pakistan, two more Muslim countries. But I am sure this is all a coincidence...

But if you genuinely believe so, then we have every reason to believe that al-Qaeda is representative of the muslims

No more so than David Koresh was representative of Christians.

Osama bin Laden offers the muslims an attractive choice for their lives beyond the borders of whatever country they are living in: jihad. At the same time, he offer us infidels three choices: conversion to Islam, dhimmitude, or death. The jihadist is then turned loose to fight for Allah should the infidels refused the fist two choices.

All cult leaders offer all sorts of incentives to their followers and often misuse religious texts as justification. Koresh twisted Christianity, Meir Kahane used Judaism, Bin Laden uses Islam.

By the way, dhimmitude is another give away. Only Islamophobes use the word and your use of it outs you as a brainwashed and spoonfed Islamophobe. Too much Faux News, no doubt...

This is another sign of the lack of critical thinking. There was no guarantee that the 1993 WTC underground parking lot bomb would work...Or would not work. But in every endeavor, there is always the highest hope that the attack would utterly destroy the target, or kill the person, or steal everything from the safe, or copy exactly the map, and so on. The lesser hope is that the attack would severely damage the target, or render the person too wounded to contribute to the war effort, or steal most of the safe's contents, or copy the most important parts of the map, and so on. So for the 1993 WTC underground parking lot bombing, the highest goal was to bring down at least one tower. US response was not considered. It would be utterly absurd to bomb just to 'wound' the building instead of killing it.

Let's spell out your logic here:
- OBL failed in 1993 and the US response was stern.
- So he tried again in 2001 with greater chance of success and expected the US response to be less stern.

I do not presume to speak for the American public but I am a voice among the many who are fed up with 'Death to America' at the same time we hear 'Where is America' every time there is a natural disaster somewhere.

You do not even speak for yourself. Your ignorance of the dynamics of this conflict, and mindless parroting of Islamophobic rhetoric only proves that yhou are hopelessly out of your depth when you venture opinions beyond 'radar science'.

it is YOUR problem if you perceive the 'muslim' tag as a derogatory writeoff.

Your endless rants against 'the muslims' serves as ample testimony on how you intend the term when you use it.

Most plausible? What a riot...!!! There are far more safer and far less technically demanding methods if the goal was to simply get rid of some records. This extent of absurdity is a sign of a delusional mind.

It is but one explanation. Intent and motivation are notoriously hard to pin down, unless someone explicity states them. What we do know are the facts about the convenient coincidence of simulated-hijacking exercises at the relevant AFB at the time of the attacks, and the ridiculously delayed response of the USAF to a direct request from the Secret Service after the Towers had already been hit.

 

[gambit]

Neither I nor the 9/11 commission stated that the Secret Service 'ordered' fighters to be dispatched. The phrase in the 9/11 commission report is 'request for fighter jets'. Next time, try reading calmly when your mind is not doped up on anti-Muslim bigotry.

For people like you, the intention is to insinuate 'order' through 'request'. Just like how the CIA is exaggerated in everyway, whatever the Secret Service said, or 'requested', on that day is equally exaggerated. But for thinking people, which excludes loony 9/11 conspiracy theory believers, who works in organizations and deals with institutions' bureaucrats all day long, they have no problems seeing how, in the chaos of Sept 11, 2001, institutional inefficiencies, weakneses, and flaws overwhelmed everyone and everything.

Splendid endorsement of the USAF.

Don't call us during a national emergency; we function best on uneventful days.

Oooohhh...But do call US when there is a dictator that the rest of the ME cannot put down or when some need food and water because of some natural disasters. Take our aid and say 'Death to America' as a thank-you.

Not perfect, only reasonable. It is not reasonable that the USAF should take 90 minutes to respond to a direct request from the Secret Service after all that had happened that morning.

Again...Is this experience talking? Having problems admitting your inexperience is making you look silly.

The only other source of confusion was the simulated-hijacking exercise which was rather convenient timing for the real hijackers.

This is just another imaginary connection necessary to convince yourself.

There's that lack of reading comprehension again. The day was normal until Rust's arrival in Moscow so there was no reason to be extra-vigilant before his arrival. AA77, on the other hand, crashed in DC after the Towers had already been hit and the Secret Service had directly issued a request for coverage.

Wrong...The one who is still having reading comprehension problems are YOU. Rust's flight was tracked long before he landed in Red Square. The moment Soviet air defense forces found him, it was no longer a 'normal' day. Fortunate for the Soviets, they found only a peaceful and misguided young man. For US, the chaos was throughout the entire day. I would like to see any Pakistani show US an example of how the Pakistani military could have dealt with this. Of course none will take up this challenge. The best you can do is criticize, hoping and quite successful at distracting attention away from your lack of credible examples of how other countries could have dealt with something similar.

Go look at the link for no-fly zones that I posted earlier. Many (all?) countries have restricted airspace rules over certain areas because all countries have crazy or criminal people, let alone foreign threats.

Totally debunked. And you are utterly wrong. As usual. Restricted airspace is not so because of 'crazy or criminal people'. Islamabad International has 'Clas B' restricted airspace but does Pakistan has any general/private aviation? I challenge you to contact the Pakistani civil aviation authority and show us that Pakistani airspace has restrictions due to fear of 'crazy or criminal people' instead of traffic control. This is a clear example of someone who does not know what he is talking about and painted himself into a corner.

Because there is no substitute for direct first-hand assessment by a professional soldier at the scene, and because shooting down a civilian airliner full of hostages is not exactly a good PR move, no matter what the provocation or circumstances. It is reasonable to do everything possible to the very last moment to avert a shootdown.

Very good. That pretty much debunked 'the most heavily guarded airspace in the world' nonsense. For all the enertaining tap dancing around, the most you can come up with is Andrews AFB, which is not even a fighter base but a airlift wing. If you are going to make this 'the most heavily guarded airspace in the world' argument, we are still waiting for something more substansive than an airlift wing. It does not matter if we send fighters to investigate instead of missiles to kill, 'the most heavily guarded airspace in the world' should be the most paranoid and should have missiles. I want to see a credible source from you that show us where are the missile batteries around Washington DC, London, Paris, and Islamabad.

Again, not perfect, only reasonable.

Based upon what standard? I want to see precedents.

Go ahead, gambit.
I am enjoying your dance to try and squirm out of this one!

Nope...The one who is squirming here are YOU. You have been utterly debunked about aircrafts, radars, the Secret Service, and 'Class B' restrictions. A miserable record.

So the training and exercise schedule for military airbases is open to the general 'society', eh?

Believe it or not...Yes. Quite often a USAF base will announce an upcoming training or significant event if it feels said training may have some measurable impact on the local area and population. Everyone knows when is Fleet Week, or Red Flag.

http://www.norad.mil/News/2010/091410.html

Sept. 14, 2010

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. – The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) will conduct exercise flights today as they practice intercept and identification procedures. Exercise flights will take place over Southern Florida. Although they are scheduled for early to mid afternoon, the exercise flights could be delayed due to weather concerns.

Those living in the vicinity of Homestead and Dade-Collier airport may hear and/or see NORAD-controlled fighter jets in close proximity to a military or military contracted aircraft, which will be taking on the role of a Track of Interest (TOI).

But the point here is that our open society gave the hijackers all the flight information they need. All they have to do is pick a day where the flights are most opportune. No genius IQ required, just due diligence to details. You have been debunked again.

Quite a few, actually. We already went over a few individuals in our last discussion.

None of them came out and said: 'The US did it.' All we have are your innuendos.

He resigned and his successor resigned for the same reasons.

Name please.

Off-topic lead-in. I don't want to digress into the Iraq war.

Often it is the critic of US who has these off-topic lead in. Too late.

The US is a recognized state, so is Iraq and so is Afghanistan, both of which are Muslim. And the usual suspects in Western countries are beating the drums for bombing runs on Iran and Pakistan, two more Muslim countries. But I am sure this is all a coincidence...

Like I said, those are state-on-state actions. But if you want to interprete it to mean that the West is intending to wage another crusade against the muslims, then we have every reason to interpret al-Qaeda to be a duly appointed agent of the ummah.

No more so than David Koresh was representative of Christians.

All cult leaders offer all sorts of incentives to their followers and often misuse religious texts as justification. Koresh twisted Christianity, Meir Kahane used Judaism, Bin Laden uses Islam.

So how many acts of terrorism did the Branch Davidian committed against the muslims?

By the way, dhimmitude is another give away. Only Islamophobes use the word and your use of it outs you as a brainwashed and spoonfed Islamophobe. Too much Faux News, no doubt...

Nope...I got the word from the local mosque. A looonnng time ago.

Let's spell out your logic here:
- OBL failed in 1993 and the US response was stern.
- So he tried again in 2001 with greater chance of success and expected the US response to be less stern.

Nope...Let us review your lack of critical thinking skills here...

The US response to WTC attacks in 1993 was not timid. OBL would have known what the consequences would be if he actually felled the towers.

Why was there a bomb in the underground parking lot? Because the hope was to induce a collapse of a tower. Your absurd thinking is that somehow al-Qaeda did not want to collapse the towers but only to 'wound' it for fear that that the US would invade Afghanistan. This make you a member of Osama bin Laden's inner circle? Given the fact that functional democracies have frequent regime changes, it would not be unusual to have a leader take the opposite direction from his predecessor about a particular issue. The Soviet Union was glad that the US elected Carter and Iran feared what Raygun would do. So yes, Osama bin Laden probably did believed that the US would not respond any greater than the 1993 WTC failed attempt, the USS Cole and previous embassies attacks.

You do not even speak for yourself. Your ignorance of the dynamics of this conflict, and mindless parroting of Islamophobic rhetoric only proves that yhou are hopelessly out of your depth when you venture opinions beyond 'radar science'.

I speak for myself just fine. And you are no more better than I about the dynamics of this conflict just because you are a muslim. If anything, me being an infidel make me just as wise as you are because you are a muslim. You guys want 'Death to America'? Now you got a fight. Take a look at Europe for clues.

It is but one explanation. Intent and motivation are notoriously hard to pin down, unless someone explicity states them. What we do know are the facts about the convenient coincidence of simulated-hijacking exercises at the relevant AFB at the time of the attacks, and the ridiculously delayed response of the USAF to a direct request from the Secret Service after the Towers had already been hit.

A delusion and a pathetic one at that. We are still waiting for something more concrete about this 'the most heavily guarded airspace in the world' regarding methods.

 

[T-Rex]

Oooohhh...But do call US when there is a dictator that the rest of the ME cannot put down or when some need food and water because of some natural disasters. Take our aid and say 'Death to America' as a thank-you.

You're the one who has imposed despots like Mubarak, so relax, nobody is going to call you to overthrow them.

 

[gambit]

You're the one who has imposed despots like Mubarak, so relax, nobody is going to call you to overthrow them.

Hosni Mubarak - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mubarak was born on 4 May 1928, in Kafr-El-Meselha , Monufia Governorate, Egypt. Upon completion of high school, he joined the Egyptian Military Academy, where he received a Bachelor's Degree in Military Sciences in 1949. On 2 February 1949, Mubarak left the Military Academy and joined the Air Force Academy, gaining his commission as a pilot officer on 13 March 1950[1] and eventually receiving a Bachelor's Degree in Aviation Sciences.

As an Egyptian Air Force officer, Mubarak served in various formations and units, including two years when he served on one of the Spitfire fighter squadrons. Some time in the 1950s, he returned to the Air Force Academy, this time as an instructor, remaining there until early 1959. From February 1959 to June 1961, Mubarak undertook further training in the Soviet Union, attending a Soviet pilot training school in Moscow and another at Kant, near Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan (then a Soviet republic), an airfield that is today home to the Russian 5th Air Army's 999th Air Base.

Mubarak undertook training on the Ilyushin Il-28 and Tupolev Tu-16 jet bomber, and then joined the Frunze Military Academy in 1964. On his return to Egypt, Mubarak served in wing and then base commander appointments, taking up command of the Cairo West Air Base in October 1966 before briefly commanding the Beni Suef Air Base.[1]

In November 1967 Mubarak became the Air Force Academy's commander and two years later he became Chief of Staff for the Egyptian Air Force. His military career reached its pinnacle in 1972 when he became Commander of the Air Force and Egyptian Deputy Minister of Defence and the following year he was promoted to air chief marshal in recognition of service during the October War of 1973.[1]

Following the assassination of President Sadat on 6 October 1981 by army officers opposed to his signing of the Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty, Hosni Mubarak became the President of the Arab Republic of Egypt, and the Chairman of the National Democratic Party (NDP). He is also the longest serving President of Egypt(28 years).

Talk about being too lazy to look things up...

 

[below_freezing]

all i say is, it's unbelievable that the US would have washington DC unguarded and not be able to respond in time. i know that shanghai, beijing and hong kong are guarded permanently by a ring of long range SAM, even more scattered short range SAM, anti aircraft guns, and at least 1 air force base. this was published sometime last year. the defense of washington should be at least comparable.

i'm not saying either way, just questioning how could the US have been so incompetent to respond.