The following article and links is too long to post on the News Ticker but it contains many good links on the key question of: Where was NORAD?

911 Stand Down: http://www.standdown.net/index.htm

...SWALLOW the official conspiracy theory try rebutting this. It uses links to mainstream accounts to demonstrate it's key point. Someone ORDERED NORAD to NOT respond.

"Someone ORDERED NORAD to NOT respond."

Or maybe NORAD fucked up. Maybe NORAD's not as infallible as you would like to believe.

Talk about a red herring. This whole tangent is mindless. It does nothing to address the fact that Arab terrorists hijacked and crashed four jets on 9-11-03.

I guess NORAD needs to shape up huh?

That we paid 13 TRILLION ( many times the total worth of
EVERYTHING in the U.S.) for this great 'defense dept.'.
Oh.... didn't they just ah... misplace another few
TRILLION in hardware?

It seems kind weird that
the system put in place toensure our safety
didnt work when we needed it.

Our 'national debt' that the two parties keep bleating about
is the amount the defense industries have ripped off the
social security fund.
Where's the hemp rope?

"Our 'national debt' that the two parties keep bleating about
is the amount the defense industries have ripped off the
social security fund.
Where's the hemp rope?"

Your comments seem to suggest that NORAD needs to be taken to task for wasting so much taxpayer money, yet failing to ensure our safety.

But i thought they were told to stand down.

Which is it?

since you're a low grade moron, I just don't feel compelled to seriously consider much of anything you say.
No analysis, depth or understanding in general seems to
clutter your posts as you require updates on common knowledge and information, where as you promptly suffer acute Alzheimer's.
You're boring, and rather hateful. Simple Simon's testosterone flooded sister.

on the obfuscation scale.
Nice dodge.
So then, you'll admit that, faced with not having it both ways you've decided to fold, whine and resort to sexism.

#8 comming up......
"fresca
by paranoid gidderish from sheepdog • Saturday May 03, 2003 04:05 PM
Uh, thnaks for the ramblings but you needn't have wasted so much energy convincing the rest of us of something that is painfully obvious.
You're a paranoid fruitcake.


With an incredibly large ego"
*****It's so nice to be noticed.******

It is nice.

you get the dumptruck load of wiffel balls
I'll bring the roses.
So you agree not to use LOL anymore?

I promise.
I like the wiffle ball idea, as I'm a bit of a baseball fan.

I promise.
I like the wiffle ball idea, as I'm a bit of a baseball fan.

Baseball? boring.
Not a collective sports fan. All boring. Teamwork sucks.

I like to see good paired dancing or skating.
nah, that's art.

"Baseball? boring. "

But then so are books if you can't read.

I'm so ashamed.
I am once again humbled at the magnitude of some people to endure suffering.

No need to bring up the Israeli's.
They've suffered enough.
Back to baseball.

we know you're looking at some prime saltine sea property....
Spend the bucks for the long flight, land (er) is cheap and
sunny. I've got 275 acres of lake front for you to chose from.
It could be as private as you wish for your ‘room’.

This is a test of the less-comments feature.... hope it works.

I'll triple that offer if the sun (sets) shines in that paradise.
Are you the one sheep?

...whether fresca has said anything in this thread which would justify considering it sentient?

centre de europaien researche national(or somesuch thing) was the implementor of the internet, spearheaded by the american ??(name) to exchange science coffebreak talk...to dis this great inno, well...

Now people who disagree with you aren't even sentient.

Perhaps you ought to turn the Arrogant rheostat down a few notches. It seems to be set on "Pomposity of Francelike Proportions".

...apropos. Fresca has added nothing to the debate but loose unfounded accusations. That and vitriol - about 100 Octane.

we know where NORAD wasn't, don't we?
Good thing those Nicaraguans didn't attack
with Cuba...
god, the horror.

"NORAD fucked up." Yeah and in the same way by pure coincidence did:
The CIA
The FBI
Army Intelligence
Navy Intelligence
Air Farce Intelligence
The National Security Council
John Ashcroft
The National Security Agency
The National Reconaissance Office

What an amazing coincidence that all these agencies fucked up on the same exact day. Go Figure. ROFL!!

fresca you must think we are as "challenged" as you are.

Please post the article from http://www.standdown.net/index.htm as a number of folk are having trouble accessing the site.

Thanks.

...it will not fit within the limit of the article block on the Posting form. Otherwise I would have already done so. Only way to do it is to post it in chunks.

Diogenes,

You're preaching to the choir, and they went home already.

Neither you nor anyone else has ssubstantial evidence to prove any of these things you believe. If you do, take it before a Grand Jury, get an indictment, go to trial, prove your case. If you can't manage to do something that simple for something you believe to be so important, then all you're telling us is that you got a theory but nothing of substance with which to move forward.

We just love making money off oblivious morons like you. Thanks for being one of our cash cows!

You either got the evidence or you don't. Fox News knows that. Too bad CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC PBS, and Indymedia haven't figured that out yet.

Obviously you haven't read the article or made an unbiased examination of any of the volumes of information available.

The issue is not closed. The evidence mounts. And it is becoming more widely known.

I intend to continue to help do so.

You may continue to wear your blinders and remain willfully ignorant. However, your ignorance does not mean your position is valid it just means you are ignorant and unwilling to do anything about it.

I do not now, nor have I ever, demanded that someone else share my point of view. Frankly I much prefer that people THINK for themselves. An honest examination of just the publicly available evidence is enough to convince an honest person that the Official "Conspiracy Theory" does not adequately explain the evidence.

In short you are a buffoon.

Now that we have you COMPLETELY brainwashed, we have a mission for you. You are to blow up the nearest abortion clinic.

Obviously you don't have any evidence and must resort to ad homoneim attacks. Typical.

"Obviously you don't have any evidence..."

Unsubstantiated Allegation

For more about logic, see:

http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm

to convince you.
It's up to the government to convince me.
I don't believe in the Xmas bunny either.

debate coach thinks you have evidence. So take it to the Grand Jury. We're all waiting.

"debate coach thinks you have evidence."

Unsubstantiated Allegation

For more about logic, see:

http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm

There not enough of you who believe differently to make the effort. Those who believe as you do are in a very minute minority. If you got evidence otherwise, out with it. On to a Grand Jury and let's put these people on the spot. So far, all I see are allegations and no one wanting to move forward to actually prove it in court.

...is not an argument. Convening a Grand Jury would require those in authority to call one up. It is not within the legal rights of an individual citizen to summon forth and convene a Grand Jury.

It is however within the province of Congress.

To a limited degree they have investigated but the investigation was limited to a very narrow range, with little funding, i.e., Intelligence Failures only. No Forensic examination, no examination of where the terrists' actually came from. No investigation as to why NORAD was asleep on 911 or any of the other myriad outpoints that indicate that the sieve of an Official "Conspiracy Theory" comes nowhere near explaining or even taking into account. Because Rush says something does not make it true or complete. And the Bush Junta has opposed ANY investigation at EVERY turn. Why? Do they have something to hide? The excuse that we don't want to help our terrist' opponents is absolute total unaduterated Bull Shit! And I name it for what it is. What we have going on is Obstruction of Justice at the highest levels.

"Those who believe as you do are in a very minute minority."

Unsubstantiated Allegation

For more about logic, see:

http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm

>It is not within the legal rights of an individual citizen to summon forth and convene a Grand Jury.

Yes it is. You as an individual can call to present evidence to a Grand Jury on any matter you desire.

>And the Bush Junta has opposed ANY investigation at EVERY turn. Why? Do they have something to hide?

So if you got evidence, out with it. Take it to court. convene a Grand Jury and lets gets this thing rolling,........... if you got anything.

sure...
anyway, this is a case for the people in a court of
public opinion. Your courts are a joke.
We are doing what needs to be done, a little at a time
one or two opinions at a time.
You have very little control over this process and it will
not stop. The era of lies is closing.

Sorry, but I'm much too simpleminded to understand your post. I am but a conservative.

...Grand Funk Jury.

"Yes it is. You as an individual can call to present evidence to a Grand Jury on any matter you desire.

This is disengenuous at best. Dishonest at worst.

A Grand Jury must be COVENED before you can call to present evidence. None has been convened and it is still not within the legal rights of an ordinary citizen to convene one.

You have no point, no evidence, and no Case.

First of all, it's not my courts.

>We are doing what needs to be done, a little at a time
one or two opinions at a time.

Yeah. I noticed the poodle drowning in the pool.

Well, in the court of public opinion, you certainly believe the people have been fooled. No reason you can't fool them to believe your lies either. All's fair......right??

Dio-

You can convene a Grand Jury if you believe Krispy Creme doesn't put enough chocolate on their doughnuts. Read some of the things that go to Grand Jurys. They're a laugh. But as a citizen, you got the right to have your "evidence" heard, and it isn't even cross-examined. You claim the evidence is there. Go for it!

Well that sure put me and my comment in place.
I love search engines. I don't need to ask you
for your opinion because I just type in the event and
read. I do a buch of reading, it's a hobby.
Better than watching sports or 'Survivors'.

...again. NO GRAND JURY HAS BEEN CONVENED BY A LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE 911.

Nor would I need to attend to give evidence as all of the evidence I use in my Posts is freely available and in the public domain.

You are simply engaged in obfuscation. You have nothing but unsupported assertions and you answer none of the questions.

Where was NORAD? Where was the Agency that claims it can track any plane in the U.S. Skies at any time? Where was the most technologically sophisticated Air Tracking System in the World on 911?

The only way to account for NORAD's lapse is to assume either:

Complete Incompetence by the ELITE HIGHLY TRAINED PERSONNEL OF NORAD.

OR

Collusion to not respond which could only be ordered at the highest levels of government.

Which is it?

WHY do you believe the official "Conspiracy Theory" when the evidence just in the public domain makes it look the ridiculous ravings of a not very bright shill?

Sorry, but I'm much too simpleminded to understand your post. I am but a conservative.

The issue is that if you have enough evidence, why don't you go forward? Take it to court. If I believed as you do, I would have done it months ago. Instead, you just seemingly sit here and do nothing but write about it.

>NO GRAND JURY HAS BEEN CONVENED BY A LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE 911

Don't need a legal authority. You can do it. There are a few others like you. Get together. Make your case. Move forward.

>Nor would I need to attend to give evidence as all of the evidence I use in my Posts is freely available and in the public domain.

No one's denying that. It's just, if it's that important, you'd probably like to get some people convicted, wouldn't you? Well, your posts aren't going to jump off the page and put them on trial. You have to care enough to do that yourself.

>You have nothing but unsupported assertions and you answer none of the questions.

That's how a lot of us feel about you. Prove us wrong. Take it to court and present the evidence. Get a conviction. That'll show us.

>WHY do you believe the official "Conspiracy Theory" when the evidence just in the public domain makes it look the ridiculous ravings of a not very bright shill?

Twelve people sit on a jury. They all hear the same evidence. At the end of the trial, 6 say guilty, 6 say not-guilty. They all heard the same evidence, so why the split?

In the same manner, why can't you accept the fact that I have examined the same evidence as you but have reached a different conclusion?

"In the same manner, why can't you accept the fact that I have examined the same evidence as you but have reached a different conclusion?

That's not allowed around here.

You are nothing but a source of amusement. You lost all of your credibility when you admitted that you were simpleminded (as if anyone with half a brain didn't know that already).

"That's not allowed around here."

Unsubstantiated Allegation

For more about logic, see:

http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm

...to reach a different conclusion.

However, you generally engage only in insults and ad hominem attacks.

I have never seen you construct a logical argument to support your position. Such is the Empty Set.

You are also welcome to believe "Pigs can Fly" if that is your current fancy.

Where was NORAD on 911?

911 - What Really Happened?

Sorry, but I'm much too simpleminded to understand your post. I am but a conservative.

Might want to check the records on who was throwing the insults there, Dio.

--------------------------

"Yes it is. You as an individual can call to present evidence to a Grand Jury on any matter you desire.

This is disengenuous at best. Dishonest at worst.

A Grand Jury must be COVENED before you can call to present evidence. None has been convened and it is still not within the legal rights of an ordinary citizen to convene one.

-------------------

Re: the above

Dio,

Check with your local lawyer. You want to take something to trial, you can. If the evidence is such that it requires a Grand Jury, and the things you are pressing forward would fall into that category, then one will be called. Yes, you can convene a Grand Jury if your case calls for one. It is within the legal rights of an ordinary citizen to convene one. Happens all the time.

Take your evidence to court. Go for it! So far, all you're telling me and others is that the official version isn't true and we're all being lied to. That's against the law, we all agree. If the evidence is there, move forward. The truth must be known.

At least Sheepdog has opted out to the court of public opinion. That's as much to the rest of us as admitting you don't have enough concrete forensic evidence to go forward. Hey, OJ got off, but the court of public opinion says we know he did it. Maybe you'll make some headway there. Not counting on it.

But it's not just you. Michael Moore and Cynthia McKinney and others have all either said or strongly suggested these things. Yet none of them go forward beyond their accusations. It just makes the rest of us wonder "If they're so confident, why don't they do more than talk about it?" It's like someone who claims they can outrun you, but everytime you challenge them to a race, somethings always wrong. "I don't have on the right shoes", "I hurt my leg", etc......

"I would take it to court, but.....", "The powers that be are too strong, and I.......". Dio, sometimes you just gotta make a committment. You've actually got to be man enought to let the other foot hit the floor once in a while.

So what's it gonna be? You gonna cower in the corner with your "evidence", or you gonna move forward and take it to trial? Well be waiting to see what you do. That will tell us all we need to know regarding your "evidence" and your "personal convictions".

You are nothing but a source of amusement. You lost all of your credibility when you admitted that you were simpleminded (as if anyone with half a brain didn't know that already).

"
At least Sheepdog has opted out to the court of public opinion. That's as much
to the rest of us as admitting you don't have enough concrete forensic evidence
to go forward"
*****************************************************
I said that your courts are a joke. They are. Just because the pile o shit is so huge, the cover on it doesn't work
as there is so much leaking out. The smell is getting more
difficult to mask.
Our job has been done mostly by the arrogance of the enemy.

...can only be convened at the behest of a Legal Convening Authority. A citizen can REQUEST that one be convened but that does not mean it is going to happen.

However, your point is moot as the actual Constitutionally Authorized Body would be the U.S. Congress. A Grand Jury is not even the correct investigatory body.

However, given the epidemic corruption of our government I am not holding my breath awaiting Congressional action.

Actually I, and others like me, who raise their voice demanding Congress do an honest investigation, and who are, despite the slings and arrows of paid shills working to get people looking and thinking are having an effect. As your prescence on this Board illustrates. You have to try to keep a lid on it by discrediting those voices asking awkward questions.

As for my characterizations of your "argumentation" as dishonest: Calling a Spade a Spade is not an ad hominem attack it is simply the truth.

Where was NORAD on 911?

Where was the most technologically sophisticated, best manned, and best trained Air Tracking system in the world?

911 - What Really Happened?

"Calling a Spade a Spade is not an ad hominem attack it is simply the truth." I guess you DID learn something yesterday when I taught you about ad hominem arguments.
See, observing and stating the Failure is a racist is NOT an ad hominem attack.


Great job! You're learning yet.

Glad I could be the teacher.

>I said that your courts are a joke.

Exactly. That's as much to the rest of us as admitting you don't have enough concrete forensic evidence to go forward.

>as the actual Constitutionally Authorized Body would be the U.S. Congress

I got a problem with Congress wasting my hard-earned tax money on an investigation when we already know what happened. If private citizens think differently, let them put their money where their mouth is and do their own investigation and bring it to trial.

>You have to try to keep a lid on it by discrediting those voices asking awkward questions.

Contraire. Ask all the question you want. Urging you to take it to trial is far from trying to get a lid on it. I'm encouraging you to bring it to light ....in court.

You can get a Grand Jury for sneezing wrong. I've sat on two Grand Jurys. The last one was a 60+ yr old man who took blood thinner medication who cut himself shaving and wanted to sue the manufacturer for not placing a warning regarding shaving with these razors while taking bloodthinning medicine on the label. It was stupid, but I voted to let it go to trial. Let him have his day in court, I say. The jury in his trial voted against him, but it was a stupid lawsuit and he got what he deserved.

I've seen the same evidence you have, I just don't agree. But, if on a Grand Jury, I'd gladly vote to let your case go forward, if for no other reason than to make you a COMPLETE laughing stock in front of the whole world.

Let me ask, yes or no, do you believe you have sufficient forensic evidence to go forward in a trial?

...were just bitten. Ouch...NOT!

You are nothing but a source of amusement. You lost all of your credibility when you admitted that you were simpleminded (as if anyone with half a brain didn't know that already).

Com'n Dio. I wanna know too. It's a simple Yes or No question. You got enough evidence to go to trial or don't ya?

In the deluded minds of people like Dio, the complete refutation of their theories is the ultimate proof of the truth of their theories. Why else would anyone go to the trouble of proving Dio wrong unless they knew Dio was right all along and they were trying to cover it up.

Dio's and his band of nuts have minds like a snake eating it's tail. Complete circular logic.

...upon which to question the Official "Conspiracy Theory" of 19 Arabs, 8 of whom have been proven to be alive - which the FBI director allowed as true and that we really do not know who commandeered those aircraft, who hate our freedoms, and love Allah but went out drinking and whoring the night before they allegedly made the attack - convieniently leaving a Koran in the Bar.

The video of the towers collapse would seem to indicate explosive demolition cutting the supports. Not one of the towers tipped as would be expected in a normal catastrophic collapse caused by fire.

You know, and I know, that the remains of the towers have been carted away, without a Forensic Investigation being done, and that the remains were put under armed guard to prevent anyone from doing one. They were then cut up for scrap and sold.

It IS Congresses legitimate responsibility to conduct a complete and thorough investigation. A Grand Jury is still not the proper venue. It is not a waste of money to conduct an honest, complete, and thorough investigation. This was the largest attack ever launched on the American Mainland. It deserves a full, complete, and open investigation. Congress is abrogating it's responsibilities by not doing so.

You are a disinformation agent and are simply trying to muddy the waters. Whether because you believe the disinformation already put out or because you are paid to further it.

Believing a falsehood does not make it a truth.

I do not expect an honest investigation will be done. But I am hoping that enough people can be woken up to foreclose the next phony terrist' attack.

"In the deluded minds of people like Dio, the complete refutation of their theories is the ultimate proof of the truth of their theories."

Unsubstantiated Allegation

For more about logic, see:

http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm

...talking about? Put down the Crack Pipe and take a deep breath of clean air.

Evidence? We know.......but you can't have it. Ha Ha.

I love my crack pipe. Too much clean air is bad for me.

>It is not a waste of money to conduct an honest, complete, and thorough investigation.

Yes it is. I don't want my tax money wasted.

>You are a disinformation agent and are simply trying to muddy the waters.

No. I'm simply tying to pursuade you that if you have the evidence, you need to go forward on your own. You'll be doing us all a favor. So what gives? Why won't you go forward?

"I don't want my tax money wasted."

I wasted plenty of your tax money investigating Clinton's blowjob. I'll bet you were all for that.

...unaddressed and unanswered:

The only way to account for NORAD's lapse is to assume either:

Complete Incompetence by the ELITE HIGHLY TRAINED PERSONNEL OF NORAD.

OR

Collusion to not respond which could only be ordered at the highest levels of government.

Which is it?

To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point.

Where was NORAD ON 911?

911 - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

Read the evidence and decide for yourself. Do not let yourself be deterred from seeking out the truth.

Disinformation people exist to divert you from seeking the truth.

Why do they seem to feel the need to do so?

"To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point. "


Why is it that Dio is so stubbornly opposed to answering Grand Jury's simple question?

He's simply asking Dio why he doesn't go forward with his evidence.

Rather than answer this simple question, Dio gets all excited and strats misuing the glossary of logic and huffing and puffing; anything to divert attention to that same simple question.

So why do you think Dio is so adamantly against answering?

...you moron. It is a moot point which exists only to divert from the central issue.

Where was NORAD ON 911?

911 - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

It's actually not a diversion. It's a fair simple question.
Answer it.
What are you afraid of?

What are you afraid of?
Morons.
and their followers. Do your own research.
Think.
Question.
Doubt.
don't swallow.
Morons.

I actually like swallowing. Baby batter, that is.

>To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point.

Of all the people who have written to you regarding this at this site, I'm the only one encouraging you to move forward and present your findings in court. All those who agree with you are simply cheering you on, nothing more. If I was as confident as you claim to be regarding this matter, I'd have already hired a lawyer and would be pressing my case.

How can presenting your "evidence" to a jury of your peers be a diversion or somehow redirecting the truth? Presenting your evidence before a jury would be to bring out the truth as you see it and would be a confirmation of what's being discussed rather than a diversion.

Where was NORAD ON 911? You believe you have evidence that suggests that the "official version" is not the truth. So, lay your cards out on the table. Perjury is a felony offense. If you have proof that the official version doesn't match the evidence, then it is your duty as an American citizen to all other American citizens and to your fellow man in general to provide the evidence in such a manner that those who are responsible for this lie and/or cover-up can be tried and convicted. In other words, take it to court where the law of the land can put these people behind bars. Go for it!

Talking about it and raising questions may make you feel good about yourself and all, but it ain't getting the job done. The people demand action. Who can say that the reason you were born was for just such a worthy purpose as this, to save us all from this wicked and perverse generation. Arise, take up thy staff, and go to court.

-b

...where you will be righteously laughed at for presenting "evidence" from rense.com and whatreallyhappened.com.

And probably cited for contempt of court for wasting everyone's time.

They do not know the law and yet pretend they do.

The correct venue for a matter National Interest is a Congressional Investigation not a Grand Jury. If and when there is sufficient evidence to warrant Criminal Indictments it is then the responsibility of the Attorney General to take it to a Grand Jury. This is not going to happen because the Corrupt Bush Junta controls the Attorney General who doesn't dare step out of line or he gets the Axe.

The suggestion that an individual Citizen without any legal authority convene a Grand Jury is ludicrous and simply demonstrates the Poster's ignorance of the Law and how the Legal System operates. An individual Citizen has no such authority. The authority for convening a Grand Jury would lie with the Atoady General John Ashcroft. Ain't gonna happen with Bush in Office and Ashcroft as Attorney General. To suggest otherwise is simply Trolling to try and set up a "gotcha". Lost in such stupid pointless exchanges is that the Apologists, PsyOps People, PR Flacks, and Toadying scum will not actually address the questions to hand as they have zero explanations as to why NORAD WAS DERELICT IN THEIR DUTIES. The question is not was NORAD ABSENT but whether it was intentional or not.

Diversions and slurs their stock in trade. Notice that is all they do.

Still unaddressed and unanswered:

The only way to account for NORAD's lapse is to assume either:

Complete Incompetence by the ELITE HIGHLY TRAINED PERSONNEL OF NORAD.

OR

Collusion to not respond which could only be ordered at the highest levels of government.

Which is it?

To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point.

Where was NORAD ON 911?

911 - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

Read the evidence and decide for yourself. Do not let yourself be deterred from seeking out the truth.

Disinformation people exist to divert you from seeking the truth.

Why do they seem to feel the need to do so?

answer the question you coward.
If your evidence is so strong do something about it.
All this jabbering about Ashcroft keepin' you down and the "Bush Junta" suppressing the info is bullshit.
If you have the evidence there is plenty of legal recourse available to you.

And by the way, you know as well as any of us that no one at any point suggested that you should convene a grand jury.

so, when are you going to get off your whining ass and do something?

...the only Bull Shit is that which you routinely sling.

Where was NORAD on 911?

You are still avoiding the question and simply engaged in a diversionary gambit.

Of course you won't answer the question because you can't.

"Where was NORAD on 911? "

You ask that like you have some idea of where they were SUPPOSED to be. You do not. You've built a strawman that says that airforce jets are supposed to track, escort or engage any passenger flight which goes of it's flight plan. Wrong. Norad tracks its flight but there's no plan of confrontation which automatically goes into effect.

This whole "where was NORAD" is nonsense.

The correct question is "what was NORAD supposed to be doing".

for all you or I know, they may have been doing exactly as they should have.

But since you know differently, please share the info and answer the qyestion...
When are you going to get off your fat ass and do something about this awful conspiracy.

...calls for tracking any Aircraft off of it's flight plan and not communicating.

The Standard Response is to Scramble Interceptors.

When Golfer Payne Stewarts Lear Jet went off course and was incommunacado NORAD had 2 F-15's alongside 10 minutes after being notified.

It is NORADs Job.

They did not do it.

Why?

You obviously have not read the article at the head of this Thread.

Have your ears popped yet today?

..thanks. i've REREAD the article you posted, and while there's a no documentation anywhere on the site detailing any standard intercept procedure, like you mistakely claim, I do so appreciate the lyrics to "imagine" at the end.
Lends a nice bit of credibility, don't you think.

Maybe YOU should read the article.

Diogenes ...it will not fit within the limit of the article block on the Posting form. Otherwise I would have already done so. Only way to do it is to post it in chunks.

Please do it in chunks then (in a seperate thread if you like).

>The suggestion that an individual Citizen without any legal authority convene a Grand Jury is ludicrous and simply demonstrates the Poster's ignorance of the Law and how the Legal System operates.

I see you didn't ask your lawyer like I suggested. As a private citizen, you have the right to have your evidence heard by a jury of your peers, even such things as pertains to government and its functions. That's right, fellow citizens. If you have evidence that the government has committed crimes, you have the right to expose such crimes and to have the perpetrators stand trial in court. You can dance around it all day, but that doesn't change the facts. Call your lawyer, he'll tell you.

>To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point.

>Disinformation people exist to divert you from seeking the truth.
Why do they seem to feel the need to do so?

And again, Diogenes is lieing to you. I've never said not to ask questions regarding what happened. In fact, I encourage you to do so.

And while your asking questions, ask yourself why Mr. "I have indesputible proof that the official version does not match up with evidence yet I'm not willing to take this evidence and present it to a jury of my peers so that they too can examine this evidence and put these criminals on trial" Diogenes isn't willing to actually let the other foot hit the floor and press forward by taking his evidence before a court so they may examine the same and get the process started of putting these criminals behind bars.

That's right. As long as your asking questions about what happened, keep asking questions about those who believe they have indesputible proof of something other than the official version yet won't press the matter forward.

I must admit it is slightly ingenious - but only slightly.

The tactic at play here is to lay out a pointless and almost plausible sounding accusation - it is a set-up and I'm not biting.

INVESTIGATIONS OF THIS TYPE ARE CONGRESSES RESPONSIBILITY.

TO ASSERT OTHERWISE IS SIMPLY AN ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THOSE WHO WOULD RAISE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EVENTS OF 911.

What this particular Agent is engaged in is an attempt to discredit the opposition. Nothing more nothing less. While couched is seeming reasonableness it is not based upon a rational view of reality. Criminals do not like investigations. They sure as hell will squash any individual who tries to rock their boat. The kind of mind that would plan or acquiesce to an event such as 911 would not blink twice at the thought of whacking some gadfly.

However, if one looks at the ORGANIZATIONS who are better financed than any average individual you will note that they are pushing for CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS not some stupid Grand Jury with limited jurisdiction and which are generally beholden in some form to the convening authority. While it is not a side issue to this line of inquiry - we have a VERY CORRUPT Judicial System. But I am not going off into that debate for now.

What Brigg/Grand Theory bypasses in each new attempt to try and pin the tail on is that even if a Grand Jury were the correct venue, which it is not, an individual citizen has no authority to convene a Grand Jury. When you are dealing with a situation, as in 911, where the corrupt and criminal party is also the convening authority it is beyond ludicrous to expect that they would convene a legal body to investigate themselves.

The Bush Junta has at every turn attempted to prevent, derail, and obstruct any investigation into the events of 911.

This attempt by Brigg is a Red Herring and is nothing more than some PR Flack patting itself on the back at having created a brain teaser.

Brigg or Frigg or whatever it wants to call itself knows that.

AND YOU WILL NOTE THAT AT NO TIME HAS IT ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS THE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS IN THIS THREAD. This simply, by it's abscence demonstrates that it's purpose is not the discussion of issues. Q.E.D.

Still unaddressed are:

NORAD's doctrine calls for tracking any Aircraft off of it's flight plan and not communicating. Air Traffic Controllers are REQUIRED to report this to NORAD IMMEDIATELY.

The Standard Response is to Scramble Interceptors.

When Golfer Payne Stewarts Lear Jet went off course and was incommunacado NORAD had 2 F-15's alongside 10 minutes after being notified.

It is NORADs Job.

They did not do it.

Why?

The only way to account for NORAD's lapse is to assume either:

Complete Incompetence by the ELITE HIGHLY TRAINED PERSONNEL OF NORAD.

OR

Collusion to not respond which could only be ordered at the highest levels of government.

Which is it?

To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point.

Where was NORAD ON 911?

911 - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

Read the evidence and decide for yourself. Do not let yourself be deterred from seeking out the truth.

Disinformation people exist to divert you from seeking the truth.

Why do they seem to feel the need to do so?

Got something to hide?

>However, if one looks at the ORGANIZATIONS who are better financed than any average individual you will note that they are pushing for CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS

And if the evidence was worth anything, they'd be moving forward. Wouldn't they? If not, why not?

>They sure as hell will squash any individual who tries to rock their boat. The kind of mind that would plan or acquiesce to an event such as 911 would not blink twice at the thought of whacking some gadfly.

Now where would we be today if those who discovered Nixon's crimes didn't come forward? You think their might have been some who actually put themselves in danger out of principle back in the 70's? As many prosecutors in the US who would just LOVE to bring down a presidency, especially a Republican one, you'd think they'd go forward with all this indisputable evidence. Hell, there were prosecutors who made careers out of bringing down Nixon. You don't believe there are those who would love to do the same? So, why don't they?

>The Bush Junta has at every turn attempted to prevent, derail, and obstruct any investigation into the events of 911.

Given that argument, so did Nixon. But it actually took individuals who were willing to take the evidence forward to cause his resignation.

>This attempt by Brigg is a Red Herring and is nothing more than some PR Flack patting itself on the back at having created a brain teaser.

Thius is no red herring or PR flack. This is a legitimate question, one that with which Diogenese is obviously uncomfortable. With all this indisputable evidence, why aren't the prosecutors going forward? Maybe the evidence isn't all that good.

>AND YOU WILL NOTE THAT AT NO TIME HAS IT ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS THE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS IN THIS THREAD. This simply, by it's abscence demonstrates that it's purpose is not the discussion of issues. Q.E.D.

I'm not impeding your inquiry. I'm just making one of my own.

Some career prosecutors would love to make a name for himself bringing down a presidency. They've seen how the Nixon prosecutors made out like bandits. But they aren't. Why not? What is it about this "evidence" that makes it so they aren't calling the new "John Dean" to testify?

So, while you're asking "What really happened?", ask yourself why prosecutors who hate Bush (just like the prosecutors that hated Nixon) aren't all over this "evidence", pushing it forward, just like they did against Nixon?

"And if the evidence was worth anything, they'd be moving forward. Wouldn't they? If not, why not? "

Can you say CORRUPTION?

The Bush Junta has at every turn attempted to prevent, derail, and obstruct any investigation into the events of 911.

This attempt by Brigg is a Red Herring and is nothing more than some PR Flack patting itself on the back at having created a brain teaser.

Brigg or Frigg or whatever it wants to call itself knows that.

AND YOU WILL NOTE THAT AT NO TIME HAS IT ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS THE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS IN THIS THREAD. This simply, by it's abscence demonstrates that it's purpose is not the discussion of issues. Q.E.D.

Still unaddressed are:

NORAD's doctrine calls for tracking any Aircraft off of it's flight plan and not communicating. Air Traffic Controllers are REQUIRED to report this to NORAD IMMEDIATELY.

The Standard Response is to Scramble Interceptors.

When Golfer Payne Stewarts Lear Jet went off course and was incommunacado NORAD had 2 F-15's alongside 10 minutes after being notified.

It is NORADs Job.

They did not do it.

Why?

The only way to account for NORAD's lapse is to assume either:

Complete Incompetence by the ELITE HIGHLY TRAINED PERSONNEL OF NORAD.

OR

Collusion to not respond which could only be ordered at the highest levels of government.

Which is it?

To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point.

Where was NORAD ON 911?

911 - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

Read the evidence and decide for yourself. Do not let yourself be deterred from seeking out the truth.

Disinformation people exist to divert you from seeking the truth.

Why do they seem to feel the need to do so?

Got something to hide?

The more you consider this, the more absurd Diogenes excuses become.

After Florida 2000, how many of you really believe that their aren't a bunch of Democrats who'd just love to watch Bush go down?

You believe if they had evidence that Bush knew and just stood by and let all this stuff happen or that he planned it or whatever, they wouldn't be on it like flies on shit?

Do you realize just how many people would have to be involved to pull something like this off?

Nixon couldn't even cover up a simple break-in of a psychiatrists office, and we're supposed to believe that Bush can pull off something like this?

I agree, ask what really happened. And while you're at it, ask how the hell they're able to keep this quiet with angry Democratic dogs who'd just love to eat some Republican president meat along with career prosecutors who'd just love to bring down a presidency all nipping at you heals, when a former president couldn't even keep a simple break-in quiet.

Yeah, you do that.

...disability. I am not going to bite on your PsyOps Spam.

You are avoiding the issue of debate in this thread. You have no argument worthy of any further rebuttal.

YOU WILL NOTE THAT AT NO TIME HAS Brigg/Grand Jury/Troll ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS THE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS IN THIS THREAD. This simply, by it's abscence demonstrates that it's purpose is not the discussion of issues or examining the available evidence. Q.E.D.

Still unaddressed are:

NORAD's doctrine calls for tracking any Aircraft off of it's flight plan and not communicating. Air Traffic Controllers are REQUIRED to report this to NORAD IMMEDIATELY.

The Standard Response is to Scramble Interceptors.

When Golfer Payne Stewarts Lear Jet went off course and was incommunacado NORAD had 2 F-15's alongside 10 minutes after being notified.

It is NORADs Job.

They did not do it.

Why?

The only way to account for NORAD's lapse is to assume either:

Complete Incompetence by the ELITE HIGHLY TRAINED PERSONNEL OF NORAD.

OR

Collusion to not respond which could only be ordered at the highest levels of government.

Which is it?

To anyone perusing this thread the sum total of "Grand Theory's" argument amounts to nothing more than avoidance of addressing the evidence, casting aspersions, and substituting a moot point.

Where was NORAD ON 911?

911 - WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

Read the evidence and decide for yourself. Do not let yourself be deterred from seeking out the truth.

Disinformation people exist to divert you from seeking the truth.

Why do they seem to feel the need to do so?

Got something to hide?

>Can you say CORRUPTION?

Didn't stop the Nixon prosecutors, did it dioshitforbrains?? Of course, they had something you don't, tangible forensic evidence. You know, that shit you actually need to go forward. Fuck wad!!

>The Bush Junta has at every turn attempted to prevent, derail, and obstruct any investigation into the events of 911.

So did Nixon. Or does your memory only wander back to Nazi Germany?

>This attempt by Brigg is a Red Herring and is nothing more than some PR Flack patting itself on the back at having created a brain teaser. Brigg or Frigg or whatever it wants to call itself knows that.

What I know is that I'm going to hold your feet to the fire on this one. I'm not discouraging yours. Funny, you don't like mine so much. Tough.

You still aint got spit to debate. Diogenes is kicking your ass.
IMO
deal with it.

Life is precious to us all on this journey
Inside all of us a love that gives exists
Brevity of life demands we find our inner peace
Everyone must do their part for their fellowman
Remember those who have gone on before
Always caring for others before self
Love that had no beginning and no end
Sharing truth with those around us
Always pressing onward towards tomorrow
Reflecting on the peace we strive onward
Ever inching closer to our goal
Simply wanting a better world for our children
Others may jeer and jest at our motives
Saying things to tear and break us down
Truth cannot be quiet
Upon the mountains and in the valleys we shout
Peace to all and love for all mankind
Inside us all is love’s abounding message
Deliver us all to hope and peace and love.

...deeply wounded. Nixon was not gotten by a Prosecutor oh "savant". Nixon resigned when the Republican Leadership on the Hill took a Limo Ride over to his Office and told him it was over. Nixon resigned because otherwise Congress was going to Impeach his ass and send on an extended vaction.

Your Historical Scholarship is no better than your Legal Scholarship.

Have a nice day.

Yes, had he stayed, he likely would have been convicted. Needless to say to anyone except you, it was the evidence that took him down. You remember that, don't you? That stuff that need to actually have enough teeth to make a president realize he's been had.

So, when is some hotshot prosecutor or Congressperson looking to make a name off bringing down the president going to make their move?

Briggs isn't debating the issue.

He's merely asking why, if your evidence is so overwhelming, you haven't contacted a prosecutor.

That's all.

And you haven't answered the question.

Why haven't you?

Been outa town. Dio go to court yet?

Haifa? Yerusalayem?

Here is a link that explains the remote controlled aircraft theory on 9/11 well. http://www.public-action.com/911/robotplane.html