spooked911 must have had Saturday off.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x280884spooked911 (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-13-10 10:03 AM
Original message
Striking similarities with the NRO plane crash exercise and the Pentagon attack
http://hcgroups.wordpress.com/2009/09/07/911-training-e... /
9/11 Training Exercise Planned for Simulated Plane Crash Five Minutes before Pentagon Attack Took
Five minutes before the Pentagon was hit on September 11, 2001, a training exercise being run by a US intelligence agency just over 20 miles from the Pentagon was set to include the scenario of a small private jet plane crashing into a building. It is unclear whether the scenario was played out, or if the exercise had been called off by that time.
Important details of the exercise, which was being conducted by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) at its headquarters in Chantilly, Virginia, are revealed in a document obtained by the 9/11 Commission. The document, titled “Early Morning Flight Activity September 11, 2001,†was part of a series of 9/11 Commission records moved to the US National Archives at the start of this year. It was found there, and posted online, by History Commons contributor paxvector.
Exercise Observers Meet at 9:00 a.m.
(snip as there is nothing but a cut and paste job with no comments...)
SDuderstadt (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-13-10 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
1. So what, Spooked?
Jesus.
SD hates spooked911 with a passion. I think SD believes spooked911 makes DU look bad.
spooked911 (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-13-10 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. "Jesus"
What WOULD Jesus say about 9/11, anyway?
I bet he'd be pretty shocked at what happened, and how you constantly carry water for the powers that be.
spooked911 also hated SD with a passion only seconded by his belief in nukes in the twin towers.
SDuderstadt (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-13-10 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Of course you're absolutely right, Spooked...
How could I have possibly thought there are two sides to this matter. Of course I'm a traitor to my country.
Another one of your stupid "psychic foreclosure" attempts. I will ask you politely one time to quit accusing me of being a water carrier for the PTB or I will start calling you a bin Laden apologist. Deal?
those dammed PTB...er...wait...isn't that Obama?
spooked911 (1000+ posts) Mon Feb-15-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #12
75. I call 'em as I see 'em
When you support the OCT and dismiss all evidence of 9/11 being an inside job, and basically all evidence of all deep conspiracies, you are supporting the status quo, which helps the powers that be.
As far as me being an apologist for bin Laden, bin Laden officially takes credit for 9/11. He WANTS to take credit for it. I say he didn't do 9/11. How is that supporting bin Laden? In fact, by supporting the OCT, you are being more of a bin Laden apologist than I am.
How anyone can twist logic so well can be this crazy...oh. Never mind.
SDuderstadt (1000+ posts) Mon Feb-15-10 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #75
76. Define the "OCT", Spooked...
Edited on Mon Feb-15-10 11:08 AM by SDuderstadt
otherwise, it's just your one-size-fits-all rhetorical device you use to try to marginalize opponents of your various goofy claims and theories and make it seem like they are Bush supporters.
BeFree has defined part of the "OCT" to be Bush's claim that he had no warning of 9/11, a view that I believe everyone here categorically rejects. I don't hink we'll hear BeFree yammering, "you support the OCT" again anytime soon.
And no one is "dismissing all the evidence of 9/11 being an inside job", precisely because there really isn't any, unless you count stringing wild speculation together in a confused, disjointed pile. That's why when you're challenged on your so-called "evidence", you lash out by accusing anyone who dares to disagree on the facts of "carrying water for the PTB".
Simple question, Spooked. Since you seem incapable of admitting that there is a valid opposing view of 9/11, why do you scream bloody murder when people reject your goofy bullshit for lack of evidence? Despite what you think, 1 + 2 does NOT equal 4.
I am noting the fact that you now concede that bin Laden has claimed responsibility for 9/11. Perhaps you can explain to us what's in it for him to claim responsibility if he didn't do it.
Ah- there are stages to being a 911 truther. 'Bush Knew' is like being a Moderate Democrat...
spooked911 (1000+ posts) Tue Feb-16-10 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #76
104. what exactly is YOUR view of 9/11, then?
Was there US complicity or not?
As far as bin Laden, he's either:
1) a deluded patsy
2) completely fake and the CIA has dopplegangers/actors portraying him
Since he's likely dead, I would guess the second.
Obama's fake terrorist now.
Ohio Joe (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-13-10 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. Why of course!
If I were planning a massive psy-ops where I would trick the world into believing four planes had been hi-jacked... but they really had not been... then blew up the twin towers with miracle mini-nukes that leave no radiation but fooled everyone, including witnesses, by mind controlling them with the TV... then set off bombs in a field in PA and at the pentagon and quickly planted plane parts (in a very stealthy manner so no one saw me) at both locations, as well as in NYC (ohhhh, I'm so very stealthy, not a single witness... HA!). The key part of this whole plan would be to have an only vaguely similar dry run through that involved none of the participants to be held on the same day and then cancelled... bwahahahaha, yes, yes, the plan comes together.
OJ has the concept down pretty well, truth be told. (no pun)
travis80 (241 posts) Sun Feb-14-10 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. the NRO wouldn't release their secret files related to the exercise when i called
sorry.
ah....
....I think he is being serious.
