Marc Perkel Rantz

http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/ind...l_date=20040831

"Al Qaeda Attacked Us on 9/11. Maybe, maybe not. In late September 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell promised to "put out a paper...that will describe clearly the evidence that we have linking" Al Qaeda to 9/11. We're still waiting. "

Apparently so is the FBI, as they haven't felt compelled to even mention 9/11 on his Most Wanted page:

http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/terrorists/terubl.htm

I'm confused here. I thought that after last week's news of US officials saying they were close to catching Bin Laden, everyone suspected it was going to be Bush's "October Surprise".

Now it's back to "Bush doesn't care about catching Bin Laden" again?

I'm still sure they will come out saying they have captured him in the coming months.

I believe our people had some part in the attacks. Its clear that a missile hit the pentagon, not a plane.

Also in 1997 Cheney, Rumsfeild and some other people from the bush administration made a blueprint of what their doing now. They had already planned out the iraq crap, and others.

What a coincident 2 planes hit the twin towers with wierd objects on them, have some odd flash in front of them.

Also how they put demo charges in wtc building 7 in only 8 hours! And then the missile hitting the pentagon, and everyone covering it up.

Just letting them in office was a bad idea from the beginning, but then again, we didnt let them in office.

Oh itll still be Bush's surprise. Why do you think theyre ignoring him? "Surprise!" Think about it.

BumontheRun, that's only what the conspiracy theorists have said that the videos show. If you believe all that the conspiracy theorists have to show, and therefore, believe that the Bush administration inexplicably switched three planes full of commuters in mid-flight with missile-launching drones and could hide the evidence from the world - when they've shown themselves unable to successfully hide or fabricate anything to exonerate anything else they've done since 9/11 - then I have to question your ability to determine what's "clear".

they didnt hide anything, its all right there. except the pentagon, they tried to hide that. The pentagon only has one video camera watching it? why dont they show us the other videos?

Its a conspiracy, not a conspiracy theory... First off its obvious there was no plane that hit the pentagon, the whole was small, then the roof collapsed, which still wasnt big enough for a 747 to hit it. The wtc's planes could have been something totally different, they had something on the bottom, people who were there didnt see and windows on the planes, so it wasnt commercial planes that hit it. They said so on the news.

Check out that documentary "In plane Sight", title works well, because thats where they hid it.

Bum. you have got my attention. MadBlue asks I pretty good question. Are you saying that the Bush administration is smart enought to take four planes out, make them disappear, and then replace them with missiles? But they are not smart enough to keep it a secret?

Bum, I have read all of what you are talking about. I find 9/11 to be very interesting, not only because of what happened to the country went through. But, because I lost my whole New York branch in the action. My partner left Chicago one hour late that day to exit the airport in Jersey to the news that the tower was hit. If he had been on time that day, he would have perished. And if it were the NEXT Monday, I would have been there. We lost every employee. Yes, there are a lot unanswered questions that MadBlue could NEVER discount. But do you think that the US Government could pull of a fake attack is such spectacular fashion and not have the means to keep it under cover? You claim that these guys are stupid.

Im saying theres a conspiracy behind 9/11. It sure is hard to explain what is up with the flashin on the planes and why it looks like something is under them, i have no idea why, but its not normal. Now I do know that no plane hit the pentagon, its quite obvious. Why would they be covering it up too? If it was a terrorist attack, we should be allowed to see the videos.

Isnt the pentagon supposed to be the most secure building in the U.S.? How is there only one camera that caught the 'plane' hitting the building? And how did that 'plane' go through 9ft of steel reinforced concrete, and make such a nice whole in the 3rd wall, without any big fires from jetfuel?

Also, how did they put demo charges in wtc building 7 in 8 hours after a suprise attack? Normally it takes weeks of planning to make sure everything is right to blow a building up right.

All this info, video footage I'm talkin about came from that documentary "In Plane Sight". They go in to detail about it all. I dont know an answer, but I do believe the bush administration is connected somehow. If they werent, why try and cover it up?

Truthfully it kinda sounds like the gunman on the grassy nole type thing. I have watched the flash a couple times trying to think about it objectively. It is very hard to say, but what did happen to the plane that flew into it? At the same time, a plane does not make that concise a whole and when flying that low would have had the jet wake destroy traffic on the nearby freeway. I think it will be argued- JFK issues still are- for a long time.

I would have to disagree that liberals think that this administration is stupid. Although they do make a great case when such instances as the Unity Conference and defining "tribal sovereignty" happens. Truthfully I do not think that at all, they are quite the contrary. They are very articulate at times, BUT these times are when talking in a punitive or forceful manner. That in-itself scares me, he should be able to speak in a civil and eloquent style all the time. I think this says a lot about the psyche of a very influential man and what his priorities are.

To try to get this blog back on topic, anyone else extremely pissed that we pulled troops that initially were sent to Afghanistan and instead sent them to Iraq. I really am scared about the recent occurances in Afghanistan and the resurgence of the Taliban in the area. We are playing with fire, and Iraq is just lighter fluid.

I dont like the fact that anyone was sent to Iraq. No WMD's, oh but he killed 5,000 of his own people!... 15 years ago... we didnt care then, why now?

Bumontherun,

You might want to look at other sources for a change:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

Regarding the planes that hit the WTC, it's not clear that there was "something" on the bottom other than what is normally on the bottom of planes. I have yet to see any photos or film of another plane banking at the same angle to compare to the one that hit the 2nd Tower.

No windows? Occams Razor. The terrorists told the passengers to shut the windows. At the speed the plane was moving, people on the ground wouldn't see windows, and as grainy as the video footage is, they wouldn't show up there either.

I can buy the conspiracy theory that the administration sat on information that could have prevented the 9/11 tragedies (a la Pearl Harbor) in order to get the country into a war in the Middle East, and even that some of the evidence (the flight manual and fuel gauge in the car, the passport in the WTC wreckage, the fat Bin Laden video) was fabricated/planted, but the radio-control planes and missiles theory and cover-up requires me to suspend disbelief to the realm of science fantasy.

So snopes says that the plane hit the ground first, but the lawn looks pretty good to me. The fire cause by the planes that hit the towers was pretty big, it made them collapse, yet there wasnt a big fire right after the initial explosion.

If you watch the videos from news channels of the pentagon, there wasnt much damage to the whole outside part of the building until the roof collapsed. There were pictures of books, and a computer on the walls next to the collapse, wouldnt the fires burn these?

I know there were firetrucks, but the fire would have grown a bit before they got there. At the bottom of the snopes page they link to flash file. I've seen it before, dont remember it too well, but i think it points out some of the fire things.

also since ur not gonna believe theres nothing odd about the planes, please explain the flash before the planes hit...

if you watch the video, its odd that the pentagons survellaince must have been messed up. I dont know why they cant get their date right, but the 5 picture's say September 12th.

Also look at the picture on snopes at the bottom left, they say the whole is blocked by the water. So the plane hit the ground, without damaging the grass too much, then made a hole in the wall thats only 1 story high? and still went through 3 layers of the pentagon?

keep your mind open, anything could be possible.

To tell the truth, my roommate and myself are engineers, and to the both of us, the video raises mute points. At the same time, it raises points that aren't mute, and that we both think are impossible. Again, whether this is truth of fiction will be debated for a long time, but at some point, everyone will think that shit happened and whether it was an American conspiracy will follow.

Ah! Found one! A photo that actually shows what a normal Boeing 767 looks like from the same angle. Notice the "pod". It's a normal feature on a 767. Not that the 9/11 conspiracy theory sites have picked up on this.

http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/nopod767.jpg

The flash was probably the very tip of the nose striking the tower. The video is so blurry that it's impossible to tell exactly where the nose and tower meet. The flash occurs at the exact spot where the nose meets, though, and would have to be a fraction of a second before the rest of the plane enters.

Did you even READ Snopes? How about THIS site:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm

What do you mean there was no fire after the explosion? There was a raging fire. Besides, if you want to claim there was no fire, you'd have to rule out the "missile" theory too.

You tell me to keep my mind open, yet you reject any explanation that doesn't fit your conspiracy theory. They found the black boxes from Flight 77, they identified the remains of the passengers. Eye-witnesses SAW a 757 hit the pentagon. The damage to the Pentagon was sufficiently explained. Yet you're holding on to a belief that three Boeings full of people dissappeared on the morning of 9/11 and were replaced by radio-controlled attack drones and missiles, because some conspiracy theorist "analysts" have told you what "really happened"? Where do you think the three "missing planes" and passengers disappeared to? Do you seriously think Bush et al, could pull off a stunt of that kind? What, did they pay off every air traffic controller along the Eastern Seaboard to ignore three planes being swapped in mid-flight? Because that's the kind of thing you'd have to consider if you follow your conspiracy theory along its logical course.

I guess ur right but the fire didnt damage the books and anything on the wall that it hit, i figured it would have with making such a precise whole.

I never said Bush was smart enough, hes an idiot. Others in his administration could pull something off.

Doesnt rule out the idea of Bush having something to do with it. He sure did exploit it well.

Bumontherun, what you're saying is like claiming that, all evidence (well, fact actually) to the contrary, disease is spread by evil spirits, because we don't know for sure there aren't any evil spirits, and some people believe that's how disease is spread, and, "anything is possible" after all.

I mean, come on, "some people in the Bush administration could pull something off". That "something" being fabricating the remains of the passengers of Flight 77 and the black boxes, paying eye-witnesses to say they say a 757 slam into the Pentagon, bribing air-traffic controllers to look the other way while they swap planes in mid-air. And pulling this off so perfectly that nobody would leak any information over the past 3 years? Yet these same wizards can't manufacture bona fide links between Saddam and al Quaeda or "find" WMD programs in Iraq? Why not? because Bush is an idiot?

Why are they not showing us any videos of the pentagon being hit? Theres the 5 frames, dated sept 12 for some reason. There was a convenience store across the street with a camera pointed straight at it, why did the federal people confiscate it?

The pentagon only has one camera, with only 5 frames of video, only showing the explosion, that caught this?

Why cant we see a video of the plane hitting it?

This plane only seemed to make a 14-16 foot hole before it collapse. They also said the wings were pulled in, but would the wing make some damage to the bottom sides of the buildings? There wasnt any damage done by wings.

If there was a plane(in wich the only evidence i've seen was a picture of a little peice of metal), wouldn't trying to hide information implicate some sort of involvement?

Have u seen the documentary video I've already mention?

I've seen the "documentary" video. All the issues posed by the video are addressed by Snopes and About.com. You keep bringing up questions that have already been answered (damage done by the wings, pieces of the airplane, etc.)

Why aren't they showing us videos of the Pentagon being hit? For the same reason the FBI, CIA and police detectives don't show the clues they come up with to the general public and say "hey everyone, tell us what you think".

People SAW a 757 fly low over the highway and crash into the Pentagon. Was there some kind of holographic projector on the "missile" to make it LOOK like a 757? Were the eye-witnesses all bribed to say they saw a plane?

It was also reported that the remains of all the passengers save one were identified. Do you want to check through the remains too, to make sure they're telling the truth? Where do think the body parts came from? The "missile"? Or were there no bodies and the coroners "in on it" too?

Snopes et al have answered the questions you've posed. What about the questions they've posed to you? Do you have any answers, other than "anything's possible" and "some people could pull something off"? Because the veracity of the conspiracy theory hinges on solid answers to the questions posed.

Just another thought. If today, the government released the video of Flight 77 slamming into the Pentagon, how long would it be before conspiracy theorists "analyzed" the video and declared it a hoax?

So we cant see the videos because their clues to something else? Others saw it in person, why cant we see the videos? There shouldnt be anything to hide, its a plane, flying into a building.

We can't see the video for the same reason we don't get to hear and see everything going on inside a closed courtroom. We're not part of the investigation team. The 9/11 Commission got to see the videos. Are they part of some vast conspiracy to cover up "what really happened"?

Maybe!?!?