[TimeStar] A real conspiracy to reckon

[joann13 at att.net]

A real conspiracy 
Here's another question for Vinnie.........Several sites in the internet claim
that Passanger planes were not used to  hit these targets. They claim they
have pictures of drone or other plaines hitting these targets....If this
is true...........where did the original planes go and where are the passangers?

thanks 
jo
 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "TimeStar" <timestar at timestar.org>
> A real conspiracy that has openly functioned for 20 years and consistently 
> overlooked must be recognized.  It is time to talk about the obvious reality of 
> the "moral majority" movement that has been waging holy war on American culture 
> since the 1980's. 
> 
> I'll offer a little background about the "moral majority" problem.  In the six 
> years since the first TimeStar elist was created, very little time has been 
> given to conspiracy theories.  After G.W. Bush was elected in 2004 with exit 
> polls at voting places showing very different results than computer generated 
> vote results, a good friend that I speak with often called to ask my opinion.  
> My only opinion about the Bush election with questionable voting procedures was 
> that liberals need to wake up to the reality that fundamentalist Christians have 
> worked like demons for 20 years, since the Reagan administration, to take 
> control of American government.  My friend's response of silence and very brief 
> discussion indicated my opinion wasn't as satisfying as she thought it might be.  
> I had the feeling, although it was only a feeling, that she probably thought I 
> my opinion about the "moral majority" and the 2004 election discrepancies was 
> off base.  I didn't push the issue, and we ended the conversation quickly.
> 
> America's Right Turn: How Conservatives Used New and Alternative Media to Take 
> Power, by Richard Viguerie, changed my friend's mind.  After hearing an 
> interview of Richard Viguerie on National Public Radio, my friend call me back 
> to say she was stunned over what he outlined for America's future under 
> conservative control.  And Viguerie was clear that the convervative right's 
> objective was to gain control of American culture.  An author of the "moral 
> majority" movement in the 1980's, Viguerie told the NPR interviewer that 
> conservative control of the presidency, the House and the Senate wasn't enough.  
> They wanted American culture under their control.
> 
> Listening to rhetoric of Bush supporters in phone calls after the presidential 
> debates in 2004, I heard Bush supporters say that just because Kerry was a good 
> debater didn't mean he should be president.  Bush supporters wanted a Christian 
> president, a moral man.  Christian zeal consistently repeating nonsensical 
> rhetoric was the theme of most Bush supporters I heard.  The emotional hysteria 
> after 911 that blinded American reasoning to obvious facts sounded like the same 
> theme that inspired supporters for Bush.  
> 
> Are we supposed to run America on sheer faith in the morality of a man because 
> he claims to be a Christian, I wondered.  The answer is yes, according to 
> Richard Viguerie.  
> 
> The most horrific crimes against humanity have been committed in the passion of 
> frenzied religious zeal.  Nazi Germany was a Christian nation who made an 
> official alliance with the Vatican before World War II.  The Jews had killed 
> Jesus, according to the rhetoric of the 1930's, and corrupted good Aryan people.  
> Jews were the religious scapegoats for Hitler's Germany.  They were also the 
> Vatican's scapegoats for the Inquisitions.  The Klu Klux Klan is organized 
> around claims of Christian belief.   
> 
> Good people can do bad things when they believe the end justifies the means.  
> People conspire to get what they want all the time, but an extensive conspiracy 
> that requires long-term cooperation between government agencies, for example, 
> doesn't have much chance for survival among self-interested opportunists.  Given 
> the growing illiteracy, ignorance and of Americans, real conspiracies are not 
> necessary to accomplish the same objectives that officially sanctioned 
> conspiracies.   
> 
> The convervative right has planned and worked hard to take control of American 
> culture through the media for a good 20 years.  They are as dedicated to their 
> holy war as bin Laden is to his holy war.  
> 
> Wake up!  A small group of fundamentalist extremists is conspiring to take over 
> your culture.  
> 
> It's time to organize around the real principles of America:  An informed public 
> are essential to democracy.  After listening to interviews with 911 Commission 
> members and witnesses who reiterated the facts that had been obvious at the time 
> of the 911 hijackings, I decided speak up.  The price for frenzy after 911 has 
> been enormous.  The price for fundamentalist religious control over American 
> politics may be the highest price American can pay.  It violates the most basic 
> principles of America's founding, which were laid out after the hard lessons 
> colonists learned from early religions in America.  
> 
> The Salem witch trials were a few of the lessons that inspired American founders 
> to separate church from state.
> 
> Krsanna
> 
> 
> JANUARY 9, 2005
> 
> The puzzle that was the pretext for war, cost thousands of lives, and trillions 
> of dollars is solved.  The exchange below stands as a tribute to the simplicity 
> of the 911 problem and the devotion to confusion and hysteria of decent 
> Americans with a sweet tooth for glamor.  
> 
> The History Channel's review of this puzzle in a documentary last night, January 
> 8, 2005, prompted me to pull out the email exchange from October 2001, in which 
> we speculated how history would write the 911 story.  
> 
> The 911 Commission confirmed that the 911 hijackings were, in fact, an airline 
> security problem compounded by security failures from the highest levels of 
> American government.  The real puzzle is how American missed the simplicity of 
> the obvious data.    
> 
> Very little mail was posted on the TimeStar list about 911 at the time of the 
> event, because, as I indicated on October 13, 2001, I didn't want to get 
> enmeshed in the fear, ignorance and idiocy of the day.  Emotions are very real 
> energies of the human experience, which can be handled intelligently or used to 
> run idiotic schemes.     
> 
> Very real emotions of the families of 911 victims expressed intelligently forced 
> the Bush Administration to assemble a commission to answer questions Bush did 
> not want to answer.  The 911 Commission found that 19 men in remote Afghanistan 
> came up with a plan that evaded every security system America had.  The American 
> ego was humiliated that it had been outwitted by a handful of sophisticated, 
> dedicated Muslims with a small operating budget collected from donations by 
> Muslim militants.  Bin Laden's family had cut him off from a $300,000,000 
> fortune.  Bin Laden had chosen dedication to Jihad over comfort and fortune.  
> Operating on a shoe string, Al Qaeda had survived President Clinton's 1998 plan 
> to destroy a training camp, because Republicans opposed Clinton on Al Qaeda.  
> Republicans insisted on keeping media attention on President Clinton's affair 
> with Monica Lewinsky and accused Clinton of attempting to "wag the dog" when he 
> wanted to take effective military action against Al Qaeda
> 
> The simplicity of the 911 problem was evident on October 13, 2001, when I 
> discussed it with a Ph.D. historian on an elist.  Three years later, the 911 
> Comission concluded that all the security necessary to prevent 911 was in place 
> at the time the planes were hijacked.  As I had hoped in 2001, history was 
> writing the 911 story very differently in 2004 when The History Channel 
> interviewed witnesses, families, and 911 Commission members for a documentary.
> 
> Krsanna
> 
> OCTOBER 13, 2001
> 
> 
> KRSANNA WROTE:
> 
> 
> 
> This is the most intelligent analysis of the September 11 crash that I've yet 
> seen.  I've been waiting for the historians to take a look at this one, because 
> I think history will write this story very differently than the journalists 
> have. I too noticed that the most obvious problem was airline security but 
> decided to wait until the emotional reactions cool down to really look at data.
> 
> HISTORY WROTE:
> 
> 
> 
> THE PERPLEXING PUZZLE OF THE PUBLISHED [911] PASSENGER LISTS 
> 
> Maybe you like puzzles.  I hope so.  I don't like them.  I regard them as a 
> challenge, not a game.  I avoid them because, when I cannot find a solution, my 
> mind won't stop working on them.  Then I get very frustrated.  So, I avoid magic 
> shows, crossword puzzles, and similar brain-twisters.
> 
> Yet I am also a historian with a Ph.D.  Historians are trained to solve puzzles 
> with insufficient pieces. Historians never have all of the evidence that they 
> would like in order to come up with a coherent explanation of what happened.  
> They always want another piece in the puzzle before they go into print.  (Of 
> course, once they go into print, they will tend to reject any newly discovered 
> piece that messes up their version of the completed puzzle.)  At some point, 
> they are supposed to come to a conclusion.  They are supposed to make a judgment 
> about what happened.
> 
> I am presently stuck.  So, I am sending out this report.  Maybe there is someone 
> my on list who can get me unstuck.
> 
> Years ago, I saw a movie, "My Cousin Vinnie."  Vinnie was studying to be a 
> lawyer.  He wasn't a good classroom student, but he had a unique ability.  He 
> could figure out how things fit together.  Show him a magic trick, and he could 
> tell you how the magician did it.  Tell him a story with a missing link, and he 
> could identify where the missing link was, and maybe what it was.  He could 
> solve puzzles.
> 
> I am trying to locate Vinnie.
> 
> This puzzle is no game.  The United States has gone to war on the basis of one 
> solution to this puzzle.  We have not yet been told what this solution is.
> 
> The puzzle begins with the crash of four airliners. We must work our way 
> backward from this.
> 
> To do this, I decided to begin with official information that was published 16 
> days after the attack. To work my way backwards, I first leaped forward.
> 
> 
> ALLEGED HIJACKERS
> 
> On September 27, the Associated Press released a story about the hijackers.  The 
> version that I read, published in the ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, referred to 
> these men as alleged hijackers.  I shall do the same.
> 
> I located this article by using www.daypop.com. Daypop is the most complete 
> archive of recent news stories on the Web.  Daypop allows you to search for 
> stories that are up to four weeks old.
> 
> I searched for "passenger list" and "hijackers." Daypop produced three pages of 
> links -- not that many. Almost all of these links were to the same AP story, 
> which was published by numerous on-line news sources.  Here is the version I 
> used.
> 
> http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/terrorism/nation/0927hijackerlist.html
> 
> The headline reads: "FBI releases updated list of alleged hijackers."  Above the 
> headline is a link that says, "Click here to see 19 suspected hijackers."  I 
> clicked it.  A large box popped up.  It took a while for the photos to appear.  
> There are 19 photos, along with names.  The names appear to be Middle Eastern -- 
> Arabs. Most of the men look like Arabs, although a few might pass as Mexicans.  
> Only one of them looked vaguely like a European.
> 
> They are divided into four lists, according to which flight they are said to 
> have boarded.  There were five men on American Airlines Flight 77, five on AA 
> Flight 11, five on United Airlines Flight 175, and four on UA Flight 93 -- the 
> flight that crashed in Pennsylvania.
> 
> Let's return to the AP story itself.  We read the following:
> 
> As Attorney General John Ashcroft launched a "national neighborhood watch" with 
> the release of the photos, FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged that 
> questions remained about whether an accompanying list contained the true names 
> of the 19.
> 
> "What we are currently doing is determining whether, when these individuals came 
> to the
> United States, these were their real names or they changed their names for use 
> with false
> identification in the United States," Mueller said.
> 
> The FBI director said there was evidence that one or more of the hijackers had 
> had contacts with al-Qaida, the network associated with Osama bin Laden, the 
> exiled Saudi millionaire who is the Bush administration's top suspect in the 
> attacks.
> 
> This story indicates that, as of September 27, the FBI was not certain whether 
> these suspects had used their real names.  The remainder of the story listed 
> each of their names, along with possible aliases.  The aliases all look like 
> Arab names.
> 
> I have discovered no additional information released to the general public 
> regarding these suspects.
> 
> I now backtrack to the morning of September 11.  The issue that I am trying to 
> deal with is airline security. To draw rational conclusions about how the 
> alleged hijackers accomplished their acts of terrorism, we must begin with 
> airline security.
> 
> The United States has now gone to war because of a breakdown somewhere in 
> airline security procedures.  Yet nobody in government is blaming the specific 
> airlines. They are blaming the procedures.  This is why I want you mentally to 
> go through the procedures with me.  I have hit
> a brick wall.  I am asking you to help me knock it down.  I will show you how I 
> went through the procedures mentally. See if you can figure out which step I 
> missed.
> 
> Step One is check-in.
> 
> 
> STEP ONE: CHECK-IN
> 
> On September 11, airline check-in counters were the only places in the United 
> States that required travelers to present a photo ID in order to travel.  A 
> photo ID meant (and still means) a card issued by some branch of civil 
> government.  Years ago, the United States government took the first step toward 
> a national ID card when it mandated the requirement that all passengers present 
> a photo ID card before being allowed to get on a commercial airplane.
> 
> This means that the tightest security that the typical American ever confronts 
> is airport security.  This is the model for all other security systems governing 
> the general public.
> 
> Let's go through the check-in routine together. Pretend that it's September 11, 
> and you are a check-in agent at either a United Airlines counter or an American 
> Airlines counter.  It is your job to ask the standard questions.  "Did you pack 
> your own luggage?  Have you had it in your possession at all times?"  Then you 
> ask for a photo ID.  The name on the ID must match the name on the ticket.  The 
> photo must match the person presenting the card.
> 
> I began with American Airlines, Flight 11.  This was the plane that crashed into 
> the north tower of the World Trade Center.  I began with the list of passengers.  
> This was not difficult.  The passenger lists for all four planes are posted on 
> CNN's Website.
> 
> Click on the link.  This is a long link for the formatting of my newsletter.  If 
> it is broken on your screen, you will have to paste it into your Web browser's 
> address box.  This will take two steps.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html
> 
> The CNN page says that there were 92 people on board. I suggest that you print 
> out the list.  Part of my exercise was to count the names of the passengers.  
> Besides, you never know when a Web page will disappear.
> 
> Do you have the print-out in front of you?  Count the names.  I get 86 names, 
> including the crew.  But the CNN page says 92 people were on board.
> 
> None of the 86 names is an Arab name.  This is very, very strange.  First, how 
> did the CNN list-compiler know that there were 92 people on board?  Five of them 
> are not listed.  Second, how did anyone get on board who was not on the list of 
> ticketed passengers?
> 
> To get onto the flight legally, each passenger had to have a ticket with his or 
> her name on it.  Each passenger had to present a photo ID to the check-in agent.  
> The check-in agent was supposed to look at the picture and the person, and then 
> make a judgment.  Was it the same person? If the mandated procedure was 
> followed, the check-in agent decided that the ticket's name, the photo ID's 
> name, the photo, and the ID-holder's face all matched.  If there was any doubt, 
> the check-in agent was supposed to ask for some other form of identification.  
> If there was none, the person was not allowed to board the plane.
> 
> We are told by the United States government that five Arabs somehow got through 
> this initial screening procedure. How did they do this?  This is puzzle number 
> one regarding Flight 11.  Puzzle number two has to do with the incomplete 
> passenger list.
> 
> Airlines keep a list of passengers on board.  This is for insurance purposes, 
> should there be a crash.  It is also for the purpose of notifying relatives 
> after a crash. It is also for the purpose of in-cabin screening.  "Has everyone 
> paid who is on the plane?"  And, finally, is there a hijacker on board?
> 
> On American Airlines Flight 11, there were no Arab names on the passenger list.  
> So, how does the government know who the hijackers were?
> 
> Why does CNN's Web page list 92 dead, when there are only 86 name listed?  Who 
> was the non-Arab?
> 
> I have seen nothing about government accusations against American Airlines for 
> substandard check-in security procedures.  In fact, I have seen nothing about 
> the discrepancy between the published names and the published numbers regarding 
> how many people were on board.
> 
> Let's go to American Airlines Flight 77.  This plane crashed into the Pentagon.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html
> 
> We are told that 64 people were on board.  I count 56, including 6 crew members.  
> There is no explanation offered for the absence of 8 names.  There is no Arab 
> name on this list.
> 
> Something is definitely wrong here.
> 
> What about United Airlines?  Did the company's employees follow the same 
> check-in procedure?  Presumably, they did.  I checked Flight 175, which crashed 
> into the south tower.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua175.victims.html
> 
> There were 56 people on board, according to CNN's summation.  I printed out the 
> list.  I counted the names. Once again, they don't add up.  The summation says 
> there were 2 pilots, 7 flight attendants, and 56 passengers.  I counted the 
> names.  The total is 56 -- the number attributed to the passengers.  Nine names 
> are missing. None of the listed names is Arab.
> 
> This leaves United Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania.  It had 45 people 
> on board, according to the summation.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua93.victims.html
> 
> Again, there is a discrepancy.  Only 33 names appear on the list.  A dozen names 
> are missing.  Among the missing names are the four Arabs who allegedly hijacked 
> the plane.
> 
> So, the published names in no instance match the total listed for the number of 
> people on board.  CNN really should offer an explanation for this discrepancy.
> 
> In no case does an Arab name appear on a list, let alone one of the alleged 
> hijackers.
> 
> How did CNN fail to count the names accurately?  Did the airlines not provide 
> the full list of each flight's names?  Perhaps so.
> 
> This raises the next question.  How did the airlines know how many people were 
> on each of these flights?  The airlines must have had a list for each flight.  
> What possible reason could they have had for not releasing the full lists?  
> Finally, why are there no Arabs listed on any of these lists, let alone the 
> specific Arabs identified by the Attorney General and the head of the FBI in an 
> Associated Press story?
> 
> I do not understand how 19 Arabs could have evaded the check-in procedures.  I 
> also do not understand why every passenger's name is not on the published lists.
> 
> I have seen no other source of the passenger lists. (Another search word: 
> "manifests.")  It has now been over a month since the attack.  Where is a 
> complete list?  I don't know.  Where is a complete list of all four flights that 
> has the alleged hijackers' names on it?  I don't know.
> 
> Finally, where is some enterprising reporter who is trying to get answers?  I 
> don't know.
> 
> What about Step Two?
> 
> 
> STEP TWO: ON-BOARD SEATING
> 
> There were multiple terrorists in the cabin of each plane when the plane left 
> the ground.  They did not get there through the ticket-screening system.  Or did 
> they? If they did, then how?
> 
> I assume here -- again, maybe I am wrong -- that they got there through another 
> entrance.  Maybe they were part of the food service team.
> 
> These were all cross-country flights.  The planes were loaded with lots of fuel, 
> which is why they were selected: flying bombs.  On cross-country flights, 
> passengers still are given meals, not just pretzels and soft drinks.  The number 
> of meals is supposed to match the number of people on board, or at least come 
> close.
> 
> Flight attendants have a list of passengers and their assigned seats.  This is 
> to enable them to identify passengers who have requested special meals, such as 
> kosher meals.  It is also to enable them to identify people who have not bought 
> a ticket.  Flight attendants are supposed to know who has been assigned to which 
> seat.
> 
> It is September 11.  Here is the situation: there are an extra five men on three 
> flights, and four extra men on Flight 93.
> 
> You have already seen the photos of these men.  If I had been a flight 
> attendant, and I saw five extra men who looked like they did -- young, Arabic, 
> and without tickets -- I would have asked them to explain why they were on 
> board.  I would not have assumed that they belonged there.
> 
> Are we to assume that on four separate flights, none of the flight attendants 
> noticed that something was wrong? Are we to believe that they failed to notice 
> that five or four extra passengers were on board who were not on the passenger 
> list?  Furthermore, these men looked as though they were of one ethnic group.  
> They all had Arabic accents, I presume.
> 
> Why did the flight attendants ignore all this?  There is no indication from the 
> government that these men took over all four planes while the planes were still 
> on the ground.  Even if they had, the pilots would not have taken off if there 
> were hijackers on board.  They would have waited to hear the demands, and the 
> demand to "take off now" would have been refused by at least one flight crew -- 
> and I believe all four.
> 
> We need a theory of the co-ordinated hijacking that rests on a plausible 
> cause-and-effect sequence that does not assume the complete failure of both the 
> check-in procedures and the on-board seating procedures on four separate flights 
> on two separate airlines.  If the explanation does rely on a theory of check-in 
> procedural breakdown, where is the evidence?
> 
> I have heard no such theory from the government.  I have heard no such theory 
> from the news media.  In fact, I have heard neither the government nor the 
> mainstream media even mention these perplexing problems.  Perhaps you have. If 
> so, I would like to see the Web link or a reference to the newspaper or other 
> source where these matters have been discussed.
> 
> I don't mean this or that discussion forum devoted to conspiracy theories.  I 
> mean the mainstream press.  It is very peculiar that the mainstream media and 
> the government have not offered a detailed theory of how the hijackers evaded 
> both the check-in procedures and the pre-takeoff seating procedures.
> 
> Perhaps some airline industry publication has dealt with this.  If so, I would 
> like to see the document. 
> 
> I would also like to see passenger lists that include every passenger's name.  I 
> want to see 19 Arab names on these complete lists.
> 
> If these updated lists are ever released, I want to see that they match the 
> original lists that were not released immediately.  I want to know that any new 
> names have not been added retroactively.  I want evidence - from travel 
> agencies' records and credit card records - that everyone on each plane's 
> updated passenger list actually bought a ticket.
> 
> Is this to much to ask?  So far, apparently it is.
> 
> 
> CONSPIRACY THEORIES
> 
> Conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen.  Well, not all of them.  We have gone to 
> war based on one of them.  But I don't see how anyone can make an accurate 
> judgment about who was behind the attacks until he has a plausible explanation 
> of how the hijackers got onto the planes and were not removed.
> 
> I am not interested in any theory about who did it until I have a plausible 
> explanation for how he did it.
> 
> The key to discovering who planned this attack is inescapably tied to the 
> procedures used by his agents to do it.
> 
> I don't see how they did it, yet I know that three planes crashed into highly 
> visible targets.  A fourth plane had veered off course, and it seems plausible 
> that it was part of a co-ordinated attack.  This has yet to be proven, but it 
> seems plausible.
> 
> We keep hearing about plastic knives and box cutters. But we hear nothing about 
> how these 19 men took plastic knives and box cutters onto four planes, and no 
> one noticed that anything was amiss until the planes were in the air.
> 
> So, you tell me.  How did 19 Arabs get onto these planes and then remain 
> inconspicuous until the planes were aloft?
> 
> 
> CONCLUSION
> 
> I have no conclusion.  I told you this at the beginning.  I am stuck.
> 
> I am looking for Vinnie.  Maybe you're Vinnie.  After you have drawn your own 
> conclusion, and it seems reasonable, let me know.
> 
> But before you do, please run your theory by someone whose judgment you trust.  
> See if that person thinks your theory is plausible.  See if he or she can pick 
> holes in it.  Don't make me your first guinea pig.  I want to be at least 
> second.  Third would be even better.
> 
> We need to get the division of intellectual labor working here.  As the Bible 
> says, "Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their 
> labour. For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to him that 
> is alone when he falleth; for he hath not another to help him up" (Ecclesiastes 
> 4:9-10).
> 
> If you have no logical explanation, join the club. Maybe you know a potential 
> Vinnie.  Use your FORWARD button to send him or her a copy of this report.  Ask 
> for feedback.
> 
> Notice to all would-be Vinnies: with each forwarding, e-mail software adds 
> either a carrot -- this is a carrot: -- or a vertical line. This pushes the text 
> to the right.  If you have
> received this after several forwardings, the text may be difficult to read.  
> 
> Somewhere out there is a person who can solve this puzzle.  There has to be a 
> solution.  I just don't know
> what it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> EarthTimes mailing list
> EarthTimes at timestar.org
> http://mail.timestar.org/mailman/listinfo/earthtimes_timestar.org
> 
> 



-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
EarthTimes mailing list
EarthTimes at timestar.org
http://mail.timestar.org/mailman/listinfo/earthtimes_timestar.org