9/11 - Italian TV Network Covers WTC 7 Evidence

[Dave]

your a frigging hilarious piece of work. Do you really think ANYBODY buys this garbage you spread?

Oooooh, great argument. How about you either show some proof against what I'm saying, or do everybody a favor and keep quiet next time you have thought in that little brain of yours.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

read the quote again.....do you?

 

[Rokerijdude11]

And NORAD didn't know that the planes were hijacked until it was too late to do anything about it.

yes they did


Startling testimony:
Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta testified that on 9-11 he arrived at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center under the White House at 9:20 a.m. Vice President Cheney was already there. This timeline is important because if Cheney arrived at 10 a.m. it would have been about 20 minutes after the Pentagon was allegedly struck by a hijacked airplane at 9:38 a.m., too late for him to authorize the Air Force to shoot it down. Mineta’s account is also supported by Vice President Cheney himself, who told a reporter that the plane struck the Pentagon “some time after” he had arrived in the command center.
Mineta testified “during the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, ‘the plane is 50 miles out, the plane is 30 miles out.’ And when it got to ‘the plane is 10 miles out’, the young man also said to the Vice President, ‘Do the orders still stand?’ And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said ‘Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?’”

“Do the orders still stand, sir?”

Since the airplane was not intercepted and destroyed, even though the vice president knew of it, “the orders” must have been to allow the plane to hit the Pentagon. The repeated questioning of Cheney by the junior officer whether “the orders still stand” had to be about whether the order NOT to destroy the plane still stood. Given the known attacks against the Twin Towers using the commercial airliners as weapons, an order to destroy the plane approaching the Pentagon would be the only order to give and would not be subject to question by a junior officer as the plane approached. Furthermore, had Cheney’s order been to fire on the plane approaching the Pentagon (which first passed at low altitude near the White House), the anti-missile and anti-aircraft capacity of the Pentagon or White House would have sufficed to take out that plane, or at least they would have fired on it. Neither occurred, and since Mineta does not speak of a last-second change by Cheney, the only supportable conclusion is that Cheney’s order was NOT to defend the Pentagon, an order so contrary to both common sense and military defense that it, and it alone, explains the repeated questioning by the junior officer.


Mineta’s testimony raises more questions: If the standing order given by the Vice President prior to the aircraft hitting the Pentagon was not a shoot down order, then what was it?
Perhaps it was the danger of this question that caused the Vice President to testify to the Commission along with the President in closed session, with no transcript, no witnesses, and no public accountability. Remember, Cheney resisted testifying to the very end.

 

[Dave]

Got anything to back up those statements? Did anybody else hear it? The Pentagon is a pretty crowded place, so I'm sure a ton of people would have heard this conversation. Are you really going on the word of one man's hearsay testimony? I'm having a hard time believing this since Mineta's "testimony" is clearly hearsay and wouldn't be allowed in any court room in America. Do you even have anything that would make a suggestion as to what "orders" the Vice President was talking about? Or is this simply 100% speculation as usual?

Just curious, but what type of anti-air defenses do you think the Pentagon has?

 

[Rokerijdude11]

Got anything to back up those statements? Did anybody else hear it? The Pentagon is a pretty crowded place, so I'm sure a ton of people would have heard this conversation. Are you really going on the word of one man's hearsay testimony? I'm having a hard time believing this since Mineta's "testimony" is clearly hearsay and wouldn't be allowed in any court room in America. Do you even have anything that would make a suggestion as to what "orders" the Vice President was talking about? Or is this simply 100% speculation as usual?

Just curious, but what type of anti-air defenses do you think the Pentagon has?

You have got to be kidding me right? Do you live in a cave? Norman Mineta gave this testimony at Congressional hearings ! these quotes are from that testimony..... yes i do have the congressional hearings to back those statements???

It is PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE.....the minutes of these meetings, are availible through FOIA,So lets get this straight...You "Dave" some guy on the internet, actually have the gonads to question a statement, given under oath, in congressional hearings, by a high ranking white house official..... thats rich

Ok then, thats swell Dave...maybe you should have been at the congressional hearings huh? Then you could have asked those hard line questions.....I mean after all.... im sure NOBODY at the hearings, would have thought of those dave?

As well i am sure that a high ranking white house official would go on the record stating what had happened if it didnt occur? Im sure you have your staunch pro government stance as usual but i find it silly in this instance what did Mineta GAIN from his testimony?.....he lost his job actually they asked/forced him to retire over this

something that happens alot these days
this was snipped from an article somewhere ...........Personally i do not believe the pentagon has ANY type of air defence, outside of the air force, or national guard..... I do not believe the authors claims of missles, or anti air-craft guns...
although it is the pentagon, and if it were to be protected in this fashion,im not sure it would be public knowledge?


I wasnt in the room,I cant say for sure what Chaneys orders or intentions were.Norman Mineta was. he was a high ranking official with an impeccable record. I have NO reason to doubt what he says,and therefore no problem believing what he has implied Chaneys orders were

Funny how Chaney and Bush would only testify in private off the books????

wonder why that may be?

Sorry Dave once again Im not Buying what your selling

have a nice day

 

[Dave]

Once again, you missed the point. I'm asking if you have anything to back up what he is saying. He is just one man. There had to have been dozens of people in that bunker, and not just people in the Bush administration. There were several members of the press corps there too. Why is Norman Mineta the only one that heard this conversation? Do you really want to base an argument on what one person overheard in an extremely stressful situation? Hearsay isn't admissable as evidence in a trial for one simple reason. It isn't reliable.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

he was comfortable enough to testify to such at a congessional hearing,im not inclined to believe he is lying .Im sure others did hear what was said not to mention the one who kept coming in to point out how far the plane was


is there a report somewhere that suggests that nobody else heard this?