Letters to the Editor
-
9/11 AND SHOCK AND AWE
Why is it that a murderous attack on NYC that killed 3,000 civilians and a murderous attack on an innocent people (Shock and Awe) that almost certainly killed *more* innocent civilians are never compared and contrasted in the Western press? 9/11 was a drop in the killing ocean compared to the terror the US has rained on third world countries.
-
All men in uniform are blabber-mouths
Dear sir, Gene: the central assumption guiding your doubts about the probability that the US military is responsible for shooting down Flight 93 (intentionally) and Flight 800 (unintentionally) - both incidents resulting in cover-ups - your main assumption is that the men in uniform and posted on duty at the relevant times would have to both A) know enough from a low level and B) act like inveterate blabber-mouths.
To summarize your argument: the military guys would have labored their loose lips to spill the beans about Uncle Sam's cover-up, assuming they knew enough at a grunt level to put 2 and 2 together.
My position is that your assumption is unlikely, even implausible, not to mention, inconsistent with military virtues such as honor and obedience.
Second, re: Iran Contra and the missing armaments. For a discreet period of time, the Iran Contra cover-up scheme was successful, until it was found out. However, it did demonstrate that the Commander-in-Chief and the military are quite capable within the scope of their nearly limitless power to conceal the transaction or expenditure of arm stocks that the military possesses. That would include sidewinder missiles mounted on F-16s.
Third, the problem with accident reconstruction of Flight 93 from a scientific standpoint is that the body of evidence is neither complete nor coherent. Unless you are a licensed engineer, Gene, your expertise is wasted on accident reconstruction. From eye-witness accounts on the ground of a mid-air explosion to the closed government investigation of the site, only the naive are content to ask no questions.
I'm glad that you mentioned the AIM-7 Sparrow missile system. The range of that missile is in excess of 30 miles. This jeopardizes your earlier argument about the starting coordinates of the scrambled fighters to effect a kill on 93. F-16 top speeds are three times faster than 767/757 liners, and apparently the Falcons come equipped with medium range missiles. A strange feature for an eastern seabord civil defense strategy with no contingency plan for domestic attacks via commercial airliners, don't you think? Note that the Sparrow system was developed specifically to address potential engagements over the Bering Strait during the Cold War, which was over with more than a decade prior to 9/11.
-
Thanks mr 100percent
There is at least one person here who knows that most muslims condemned the 9/11 attacks, didn't believe they represented Islam, and was as hurt by them as anyone else was (there were, after all, muslims in the twin towers, and muslim nations voiced their sympathies with us and meant it). I'm not a muslim, but I went to one of those candlelight vigils that the local mosque put on after 9/11. I saw the same pain in their faces that I was feeling.
There are people who have called for the shunning, or even the mass murder, of every muslim on the planet because of 9/11. Even on this thread, I think someone said that 100 million muslims were our mortal enemies. That stinks. These people claim that the entire muslim religion is a religion of murder, and prescribe the same regimen of torture and mass murder for which Nazi Germany is today so justly reviled. At most, one to three percent of the one billion muslims around the world approve of the techniques of al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. To punish the millions of peaceful muslim families for the actions of the hijackers would be a deeply evil thing.
Anyone calling for the mass extermination of millions of muslim men, women and children, because of what a few thousand muslims wrongly believe in, has it on their own conscience. I don't believe in it, and those people do not speak for me as an American, nor for the many millions of Americans who recognize that the vast majority of muslims do not believe in murder. We are not at war with all of Islam. Those that are do not speak for us.
-
Give it up, Walt, your Paranoia is Obvious
Your paranoia and irrationality are showing, Walt. Let's look at the evidence...
...assuming they knew enough at a grunt level to put 2 and 2 together.
This is a typical feature of paranoia and the conspiracy-stories arising from it: the belief that "the enemy" (i.e., just about everyone else) are nothing but drones, incapable of independent thought, mindless parts of a larger malevolent monolithic entity.
However, it did demonstrate that the Commander-in-Chief and the military are quite capable within the scope of their nearly limitless power to conceal the transaction or expenditure of arm stocks that the military possesses.
Another feature of paranoia: the belief that those in power have "nearly limitless power" to accomplish...whatever actually happened, by unspecified means, without regard to the obvious limits of organizational power in the real world of people, politics and bureaucracy.
Third, the problem with accident reconstruction of Flight 93 from a scientific standpoint is that the body of evidence is neither complete nor coherent. Unless you are a licensed engineer, Gene, your expertise is wasted on accident reconstruction. From eye-witness accounts on the ground of a mid-air explosion to the closed government investigation of the site, only the naive are content to ask no questions.
Yet another feature common to EVERY conspiracy-story I've ever heard (trust me, I've heard many): disregarding huge masses of evidence from a discipline the conspiracy buff shows no sign of understanding, while trumpeting a handful of unreliable stories as conclusive proof of the Evil Conspiracy. And topped off, inevitably, with the obligatory shot at all those "naive" people who fail to see the deeper meanings that the paranoid is privileged to see.
(Are YOU a "licenced engineer," Walt? More to the point, what do you know of airplane-accident reconstruction specifically? Oh, wait, you'd said your experience is irrelevant. Never mind.)
For a discreet period of time, the Iran Contra cover-up scheme was successful, until it was found out.
Translation: the cover-up was successful, until the deed was actually done, and there was actually something to cover up. Not much of a cover-up, is it?
My position is that your assumption is unlikely, even implausible, not to mention, inconsistent with military virtues such as honor and obedience.
First, I don't even have to have worn a uniform to know how simpleminded and ignorant that statement is; all I have to have done is read newspapers for a few decades. Second, military people are still people (your transparent bigotry notwithstanding), and still act like people -- i.e., they see things and talk about them.
F-16 top speeds are three times faster than 767/757 liners, and apparently the Falcons come equipped with medium range missiles. A strange feature for an eastern seabord civil defense strategy with no contingency plan for domestic attacks via commercial airliners, don't you think?
What, nothing about the price of tea in China? You almost had the perfect non-sequitur there. Better luck next time, Skippy.