Is anyone interested in Apollo missions...

[Ron Ecker]

An important additional point Danny Hopsicker makes about Huffman Aviation at Venice airport, the flight school Atta attended, was the unusual arrival in the early hours of the following morning after 9/11, of Governor Jeb Bush aboard a C-130 transport aircraft. The purpose of Jeb Bush's fight was to apparently supervise seizing the records of Huffman Aviation that pertained to Atta and others.

The story of Governor Bush himself arriving to supervise the removal of records is one that I take with a huge grain of salt. I would love to see corroborating evidence of this. The story may be true, but it sounds too much to me like the claim that President George W. Bush was among two or three men seen hanging around JFK Jr.'s plane at the airport on the day of the fatal crash. Why don't I believe it? (Here's the main reason: what conspirators would choose a dolt like George W. Bush to sabotage a plane?)

[Michael Hogan]

An important additional point Danny Hopsicker makes about Huffman Aviation at Venice airport, the flight school Atta attended, was the unusual arrival in the early hours of the following morning after 9/11, of Governor Jeb Bush aboard a C-130 transport aircraft. The purpose of Jeb Bush's fight was to apparently supervise seizing the records of Huffman Aviation that pertained to Atta and others.

The story of Governor Bush himself arriving to supervise the removal of records is one that I take with a huge grain of salt. I would love to see corroborating evidence of this. The story may be true, but it sounds too much to me like the claim that President George W. Bush was among two or three men seen hanging around JFK Jr.'s plane at the airport on the day of the fatal crash. Why don't I believe it? (Here's the main reason: what conspirators would choose a dolt like George W. Bush to sabotage a plane?)

According to Hopsicker, he was at the Venice Police Station when Sergeant Marty Treanor told him the FBI seized all their records on Rudy Dekker, loaded them into two Ryder Trucks and took them to the Sarasota airport where they were driven onto a C-130, "which took off for Washington with Jeb Bush aboard."

Edited February 22, 2008 by Michael Hogan

[Guest David Guyatt]

An important additional point Danny Hopsicker makes about Huffman Aviation at Venice airport, the flight school Atta attended, was the unusual arrival in the early hours of the following morning after 9/11, of Governor Jeb Bush aboard a C-130 transport aircraft. The purpose of Jeb Bush's fight was to apparently supervise seizing the records of Huffman Aviation that pertained to Atta and others.

The story of Governor Bush himself arriving to supervise the removal of records is one that I take with a huge grain of salt. I would love to see corroborating evidence of this. The story may be true, but it sounds too much to me like the claim that President George W. Bush was among two or three men seen hanging around JFK Jr.'s plane at the airport on the day of the fatal crash. Why don't I believe it? (Here's the main reason: what conspirators would choose a dolt like George W. Bush to sabotage a plane?)

According to Hopsicker, he was at the Venice Police Station when Sergeant Marty Treanor told him the FBI seized all their records on Rudy Dekker, loaded them into two Ryder Trucks and took them to the Sarasota airport where they were driven onto a C-130, "which took off for Washington with Jeb Bush aboard."

Yes, Bush was conducting the orchestra from aboard the C-30 --- my apologies for causing this confusion. I should've been more precise in the detail.

[Len Colby]

NEW REVELATIONS ON 9-11 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html

Was it an ‘intelligence failure’ to give red carpet treatment to the ‘money man’ behind the 9-11 terrorists, or was it simply ‘routine’?

On the morning of September 11, Pakistan's Chief Spy General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged "money-man" behind the 9-11 hijackers, was at a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill hosted by Senator Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairmen of the Senate and House Intelligence committees.

I’ve pointed this out already on this forum but it is far from established that ISI chief Mahmud Ahmed was the person who wired Atta the money. The source of all such reports seems to stem from stories in Indian media citing unnamed Indian intelligences sources. Given the animosity between the two countries and India’s suspicion (almost certainly correct) that the ISI (or factions in it) are responsible for much of the problems in Kashmir it’s not surprising Indian intelligence would be alarmed by the suddenly warming relations between the US and Pakistan post 9/11.

Can anyone cite a report confirming that Ahmed or others in the ISI were responsible for the transfer that doesn’t stem from the aforementioned anonymous Indian intelligence/press sources?

http://911myths.com/html/pakistan_s_isi_link_to_9_11_fu.html

What has also not been established is that the ISI is or was under the control of the CIA. Their support of unrest in Kashmir* and post 1999 support of the Taliban would seem to indicate otherwise. Ahmed is seems was very unhappy with Musharraf’s post 9/11 decision to back the US against the Taliban**.

* http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/as...ice-515168.html

** http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/25/pakistan.india

Mike Hogan wrote:

According to Hopsicker, he was at the Venice Police Station when Sergeant Marty Treanor told him the FBI seized all their records on Rudy Dekker, loaded them into two Ryder Trucks and took them to the Sarasota airport where they were driven onto a C-130, "which took off for Washington with Jeb Bush aboard."

So Hopsicker claims that some cop told him Bush was on the plane? I guess that settles it, it must be true!

Even if true, what would it prove?

[Evan Burton]

TLDR, Peter, TLDR.

[Michael Hogan]

Who is Philip Shenon?

His book sounds interesting, and I will take a look at it on Amazon.

I guess that this explains why Sandy Berger risked his career and his freedom to steal and destroy documents from the National Archives relaing to the threat of OBL during the 2d Clinton Administration.....

Here's a review of The Commission by Evan Thomas of the New York Times. Shenon's book is currently #19 on their hardcover nonfiction bestseller list.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/books/04thom.html

[Guest David Guyatt]

Michael, is the author suggesting tat Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11?

[Len Colby]

TLDR, Peter, TLDR.

I’d make that TLOS

Too long, only skimmed,

Lots of wild claims with little documentation, are citations forthcoming for the following claims?

“Atta wore a crucifix. Atta went gambling on a Republican lobbyists yacht one week before 9/11. Atta was a drug smuggler.”

As has been pointed out previously the Abramoff claim (“gambling on a Republican lobbyists yacht”) is unsubstantiated, Hopsicker (the apperent souce) with his usually dedication to accuracy seems to have simply misquoted an article. AFAIK there is no proof any of the hijackers were on any of the cruises and no indication that Atta was a among the 1 - 3 that MIGHT have been. As written here it makes it sound like “Atta” was on Abramoff’s personal yacht s opposed to a paid cruise, a bend the truther strikes again!

http://911myths.com/html/atta_and_abramoff.html

[Charles Drago]

From now on, Peter, I see no reason to read a book, see a film, or listen to a concert in its entirety before I publish a scathingly negative review.

Whatever they're paying this guy, it's WAY too much.

Then again, let's take heart: He's taken not only to showcasing his ignorance and intellectual dishonesty. He's CELEBRATING it!

Sort of lessens our shared burden, wouldn't you say?

[Michael Hogan]

Michael, is the author suggesting that Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11?

David,

In short, yes. On page 118, Shenon writes:

The conspiracy theories about 9/11 began to circulate long before the ashes had stopped smoldering at ground zero. That was no surprise. After an event as horrifying - and to the public - unexpected as 9/11, the darkest theories about it cause did not seem beyond belief.

But by the time the 9/11 commission opened its doors in 2003, many of the most outrageous, if well circulated, of the theories - that the attacks were an inside job by the Bush administration, that the Twin Towers were brought down by preplaced explosives, that the Pentagon was hit by a missile and not a plane - had been well debunked.

The evidence was incontrovertible that al-Qaeda was behind the September 11 attacks; Osama bin Laden had been videotaped bragging to his colleagues about his role in the preparations. There was clear-cut documentation to show that bin Laden had dispatched nineteen young Arab men to the United States to carry out the hijackings - he had chosen them personally for the mission - and that those same men were aboard the four planes. Their was a well-documented money trail for the plot. Independent scientists and engineers had plausible explanations for the physical collapse of the Twin Towers and other buildings nearby.

Shenon is much less confident about the roles of the FAA, Norad, and the Pentagon and their reactions to the first reports of the hijackings. He finds it inexplicable how officials from these agencies repeatedly lied to the commssion about matters of vital importance.

Much more time is spent detailing how determined the White House was to use 9/11 as a pretext for invading Iraq and the extreme measures they took to ensure that a connection between al-Qaeda and Baghdad was maintained, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Shenon does close his book by writing:

If anyone is responsible for this book, ultimately, it is the families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks. The families were responsible for the creation of the commission, over the fierce opposition of the Bush White House and many in Congress; the families fought to try and keep the investigation honest, against incredible odds. They did much of the digging that produced scoops for me and raised important issues about the commission, its leadership and the conduct of the investigation. I cannot imagine their suffering. If the full truth is ever told about September 11, 2001, it will be their doing. It has not been told yet.

[Michael Hogan]

....Whatever they're paying this guy, it's WAY too much.

Then again, let's take heart: He's taken not only to showcasing his ignorance and intellectual dishonesty. He's CELEBRATING it!

Sort of lessens our shared burden, wouldn't you say?

I find it difficult to believe, or even imagine, that anyone would pay anything for such stuff. In my opinion, the explanation is much more benign, as in having no significant effect.

[Len Colby]

I didn’t have to read through the whole post to identify parts that were in error or detect a pattern of unsubstantiated claims.

Was I wrong in my claim that there was “little documentation”? If so list the documentation provided.

Was I wrong in saying Hopsicker’s claim that Atta was on a casino cruise boat owned by Abramoff was unsubstantiated? If so show how I was in error. Ditto if I was wrong about the author of particular POS making it sound like the terrorist was on the lobbyist’s private yacht.

Funny how some forum members are so quick to resort to attacking the messenger rather that rebut my comments.

As for he 50 claims about Atta I wonder if Peter (or anybody else) would willing to document them and then show how they significantly undermine the notion that Atta and the others acting on the behalf of OBL were the ones who carried out the attacks?

Does anybody seriously believe that Peter did the research to verify the accuracy of the 50 claims? Funny neither Drago or Hogan seem to be bothered by that, but then again their standards are (at least) double mine.

Edited February 23, 2008 by Len Colby

[Michael Hogan]

Does anybody seriously believe that Peter did the research to verify the accuracy of the 50 claims? Funny neither Drago or Hogan seem to be bothered by that, but then again their standards are (at least) double mine.

I wonder what makes Colby believe I even read Peter's post? Typical of his limited mindset.

[Guest David Guyatt]

Peter,

As a journalist you can spend time and effort tracking down witnesses, you interview them. Sometimes you make notes, sometimes you record them. If you're a former TV type, you might even film them. Amazingly, I suppose, Danny has done this a few times and even - gosh no! - he sells DVD's of those interviewed on his website.

And then someone comes along wittering on about "little documentation".

Perhaps it's me, but is their an absence of intelligence involved in making such statements?

[Evan Burton]

Does anyone believe LC has ever done any research to verify the official version of everything he spouts.

I think so; most, if not all, of his posts contain references for the statements he makes. It is very rarely - if ever - he has been proven incorrect with regard to these posts.