- Joined
- Feb 12, 2013
- Messages
- 160,900
- Reaction score
- 57,844
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Facepalm yourself.*blinks*
Now I know we are dealing with somebody that has absolutely no connection with reality.
No, it was not "hours", try 32 minutes (8:46) from the time of the first hijacking (8:14). And only 9 minutes form the time that NORAD was first told of the first hijacking (8:37). The aircraft were actually scrambling at the time of the first impact.
You really do not research anything, do you? You just make things up as you go along, hoping that everybody will buy your Kool-Aid.
From 8 am until 10--that's hours.The four flights were:
American Airlines Flight 11: Left Boston's Logan Airport at 7:59 a.m. enroute to Los Angeles with a crew of 11 and 76 passengers, not including five hijackers. The hijackers flew the plane into the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8:46 a.m.
United Airlines Flight 175: Left Logan Airport at 8:14 a.m. enroute to Los Angeles with a crew of nine and 51 passengers, not including five hijackers. The hijackers flew the plane into the South Tower of the World Trade Center at 9:03 a.m.
American Airlines Flight 77: Left Washington Dulles International Airport in Virginia at 8:20 a.m. enroute to Los Angeles with a crew of six and 53 passengers, not including five hijackers. The hijackers flew the plane into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m.
United Airlines Flight 93: Left Newark International Airport at 8:42 a.m. enroute to San Francisco, with a crew of seven and 33 passengers, not including four hijackers. As passengers attempted to subdue the hijackers, the aircraft crashed into the ground near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 10:03 a.m.
From 8 am until 10--that's hours.
Facepalm yourself.
From 8 am until 10--that's hours.
Er...why are you starting from 8? What happened at 8 that should've scrambled jets?
While I think everyone blaming Obama or Bush for all the world's ills are failing to use nonbiased "logic", you're certainly ahead of the curve right now.
We weren't even prepared enough to send fighter jets after those hijacked airliners. Hours passed and nothing was done, even after the first jet hit the tower. The jet that eventually hit the Pentagon flew lazily around DC and we did not one thing. Total screw up on our (Bush's) part.
The Benghazi faux pas is nothing compared to that. Hell, Boston was more of a screw up than Benghazi.
Why would they have been "prepared to send fighters"? There was no specific intel that they were going to crash planes in that manner. We do have jets sitting on a Ready 5, locked and cocked,.... but those still have to be launched at a credible threat.
The fact of the matter is, no one knew that the first crash was deliberate until the second plane hit the tower, some suspected, but there was a lot of disbelief... Once the second plane hit, there was no doubt.
WrongWhy would they have been "prepared to send fighters"? There was no specific intel that they were going to crash planes in that manner. We do have jets sitting on a Ready 5, locked and cocked,.... but those still have to be launched at a credible threat.
The fact of the matter is, no one knew that the first crash was deliberate until the second plane hit the tower, some suspected, but there was a lot of disbelief... Once the second plane hit, there was no doubt.
Sources quoted by the Washington Post and ABC TV said that at least two names listed in a July 2001 FBI memo about an Arizona flight school had been identified by the CIA as having links to al-Qaeda. But the memo was not acted on or distributed to outside agencies.
And, while administration officials have said repeatedly that intelligence analysts never imagined that terrorists would use planes in a suicide attack, a 1999 report for the National Intelligence Council warned that fanatics loyal to bin Laden might try to hijack a jetliner and fly it into the Pentagon.
On August 16, 2001, Moussaoui was arrested by Harry Samit of the FBI and INS agents in Minnesota and charged with an immigration violation.[21] Materials itemized when he was arrested included a laptop computer, two knives, flight manuals pertaining to Boeing's 747 aircraft, a flight simulator computer program, fighting gloves and shin guards, and a computer disk with information about crop dusting.
Some agents worried that his flight training had violent intentions, so the Minnesota bureau tried to get permission (sending over 70 emails in a week) to search his laptop, but they were turned down.[22] FBI agent Coleen Rowley made an explicit request for permission to search Moussaoui's personal rooms. This request was first denied by her superior, Deputy General Counsel Marion "Spike" Bowman, and later rejected based upon FISA regulations (amended after 9/11 by the USA Patriot Act). Several further search attempts similarly failed.
Ahmed Ressam, the captured al-Qaeda Millennium Bomber, was at the time sharing information with the US authorities, in an effort to gain leniency in his sentencing. One person whom he was not asked about until after 9/11, but whom he was able to identify when asked as having trained with him at al-Qaeda's Khalden Camp in Afghanistan, was Moussaoui.[23] The 9/11 Commission Report opined that had Ressam been asked about Moussaoui, he would have broken the FBI's logjam.[23] Had that happened, the Report opined, the U.S. might conceivably have disrupted or derailed the September 11 attacks altogether.
Zacarias Moussaoui - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bush ****ed up on his 9-11 far more than Obama did on his, but yet all you Righties whine about is how Obama ****ed up in Bnghazi.I think that calamity thinks we are still in an early Cold War type of posture, where we have aircraft orbiting locked and loaded 24-7.
And one of the biggest questions that still goes around those of us in the military to this day is "What would the fighters have done if they had found them before they hit?"
Shoot them down? On who's authority? Does anybody have the authority to shoot down an unarmed civilian passenger plane? And finally, even if such an order was given would the pilot follow through with it?
Being in Air Defense, myself and many others have discussed this as well. And we never really were able to come up with any kind of answer. But speaking for myself, at least honestly if I was given that kind of order on 10 September 2001, I would have refused to do so. Because there have been scores of hijackings prior to that day, and none of them was ever a real danger to the people on the ground.
And even today, I would have a hard time pushing that button unless I knew the plane was going to hit something that would kill a great many more people.
Point is those blaming Obama for Benghazi but giving a pss to Bush for 911 are hypocrites. That's all.Er...why are you starting from 8? What happened at 8 that should've scrambled jets?
While I think everyone blaming Obama or Bush for all the world's ills are failing to use nonbiased "logic", you're certainly ahead of the curve right now.
Point is those blaming Obama for Benghazi but giving a pss to Bush for 911 are hypocrites. That's all.
Wrong
Bush knew of terrorist plot to hijack US planes | World news | The Observer
You Righties and your rabbit hole.
You don't remember the "20th hijacker", the guy they arrested after he was acting weird in flight school?
Wrong
So you felt like you'd just blatantly tell a lie and hope it made your point?
Or did you just purposely say something dumb as hell in order to be facetious? I mean, you can't believe that anyone should've responded at 8AM to anything on September 11th, 2001, can you? You just said something retarded on purpose, right?
There's absolutely nothing wrong about what he said. And this is coming from a guy that voted for Obama twice.
I never said there were no mistakes. Some were pretty egregious. But to dump everything on Bush is a stretch. An even bigger stretch than to dump Benghazi on Obama. That was much more the fault of the SoS than the POTUS.
BUT......................... it is interesting how this went from a A vs. B discussion and morphed into a "Oh yeah! well C is much worse!!!"
He's there is. There is plenty of evidence cited here in this thread to indicate Bush and company should have known planes would be used...
not to mention knowing that once four planes were hijacked that the game was on. Our boys in the Bush-Cheney WH were asleep at the switch.
Not for the last time either. Katrina and the economic collapse were strike two and three. Again anyone criticizing Obama while giving Bush a pass is a partisan hack.
And to bring it back on track...
If you and other notice, I do not actually blame president Obama for Benghazi, but for his reaction to it after it happened.
I think that inside the State Department and the Administration there came a serious "Oh shoot" moment, when they realized that all of the warnings they had ignored came true. But instead of pulling up their pants and going "Well, we goofed, let's not do it again", they circled the wagon and started to try and spin the story like crazy.
More then anything else, that is what has pissed me off. I see that as no better then lying, and so far in his administration he has been responsible for nothing. Everything that has not gone perfectly has been the fault of somebody else. This is why I rate his honesty and integrity so low.
Why do so many people give Bush a pass for 911?No, dude, there's seriously not.
Can you show this at all?
Maybe. But that doesn't make Obama's failures real failures. I understand where you're coming from: Bush didn't **** up Katrina by his own hand, but he was negligent in dealing with the problem after it happened, and anyone who criticizes Obama for his likewise negligent- after the fact- dealing with issues is just being purposefully blind. I get that.
I'm just saying that 9/11 isn't one of those times. At all.
In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush officials attempted to deflect criticism that they had ignored C.I.A. warnings by saying they had not been told when and where the attack would occur. That is true, as far as it goes, but it misses the point. Throughout that summer, there were events that might have exposed the plans, had the government been on high alert. Indeed, even as the Aug. 6 brief was being prepared, Mohamed al-Kahtani, a Saudi believed to have been assigned a role in the 9/11 attacks, was stopped at an airport in Orlando, Fla., by a suspicious customs agent and sent back overseas on Aug. 4. Two weeks later, another co-conspirator, Zacarias Moussaoui, was arrested on immigration charges in Minnesota after arousing suspicions at a flight school. But the dots were not connected, and Washington did not react.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=1&
Communication with the first hijacked plane is lost by 8:15. Fighter jets never bothered intercepting it or the other three hijacked planes, the last of which hits the turf at 10:03. Fighter Jets are still hundreds of miles away, flying aimlessly somewhere in the DC area.
Why do so many people give Bush a pass for 911?
Well...Bush totally deserves blame for a lot, from blowing 911 and seeing WMD where they weren't to ignoring the demise of an American City after a hurricane and not getting ahead of the financial collapse.And NEADS was not informed until 8:37.
Within 20 minutes we had 2 F-15s from Massachusetts scrambled and directed to New York City. They were directed to hold off of Long Island until they had a vector towards Flight 11. 9 minutes later Flight 175 hit the South Tower. At this time ATC (who was directing them) were not aware that Flight 11 had already crashed, and were only becoming aware that Flight 175 had also been hijacked.
Flight 175 crashed into the South Tower only 10 minutes after being hijacked.
So once again, you fail to understand the timeline, or connect it to the President at all. However, I am aware that your "Centrist" claim is a complete joke, there is nothing "Centrist" about you at all.
And here we see a perfect example. If anything goes wrong, blame it on Bush.
Because they know a lot more about the intelligence system than one article for the New York Times could "teach" them?
I mean, what even about what you quoted could blame the Bush Administration?
The sum total, from the 911 commission and the NYT article to Richard Clark's statements a year later, shows that Bush was focused on Saddam and Iraq. He paid no attention to Al Qaeda, ignored all warnings about it. As a result, we were attacked over a two hour period without generating a single effective response.
Why do so many people give Bush a pass for 911?
In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush officials attempted to deflect criticism that they had ignored C.I.A. warnings by saying they had not been told when and where the attack would occur. That is true, as far as it goes, but it misses the point. Throughout that summer, there were events that might have exposed the plans, had the government been on high alert. Indeed, even as the Aug. 6 brief was being prepared, Mohamed al-Kahtani, a Saudi believed to have been assigned a role in the 9/11 attacks, was stopped at an airport in Orlando, Fla., by a suspicious customs agent and sent back overseas on Aug. 4. Two weeks later, another co-conspirator, Zacarias Moussaoui, was arrested on immigration charges in Minnesota after arousing suspicions at a flight school. But the dots were not connected, and Washington did not react.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/op...ngs.html?_r=1&
The sum total, from the 911 commission and the NYT article to Richard Clark's statements a year later, shows that Bush was focused on Saddam and Iraq. He paid no attention to Al Qaeda, ignored all warnings about it. As a result, we were attacked over a two hour period without generating a single effective response.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?