Mr. Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, now that you've killed 202 innocent people in the worst terrorist crime in Indonesian history, what are you going to do?
"I'm going to die by firing squad!"
"I'm going to die by firing squad!"
-
Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.
NOT going to Disneyland.........
- Thread starter Viper Driver
- Start date
This is definitely a good step for Indonesian government. they have been too soft on terrorism IMHO. Hopefully this is a sign that they will fight terrorism in Indonesia a lot harder.
I have relatives that are injured because of Marriot hotel bombing in Jakarta.
I have relatives that are injured because of Marriot hotel bombing in Jakarta.
Andrie Hartanto said:
Something is a little screwey about the Marriot hotel bombing. It appears that they knew it was going to happen several hours beforehand and they even evacuated most of the staff and guests. The U.S. embassy cancelled all their booked rooms four and a half hours before the bombing took place.
It's not just isolated to this terrorist incident. Past "attacks," including the ones on US soil, had similar "coincidences."Eric5273 said:
Viper Driver said:
"I'm going to die by firing squad!"
Excellent.
I almost shiver at the thoughts that I have against cowards like this a-hole. I'm normally a very loving, compassionate individual but gutless, cowardly, animals like this deserve to die a long, painful death.
Rot in hell, jackass!
Eric5273 said:
Please tell me where you got this information from.
That sounds like one of those scurrilous, false rumors that someone made up, similar to those following other terrorist attacks. If you have a reliable source for that contention, please refer us to it. Otherwise, false rumors should not be spread on the internet.Eric5273 said:
Ojas said:
I know.......I have a good friend who is helping to run an organization called "9/11 Citizens Watch". Most of the people helping out with this organization are family members of the victims of the 9/11 Attacks.
The "9/11 Commission" that is investigating the attacks for the government has been working closely with the Citizens Watch group and they have actually been asking many of the researchers for guidence on what to investigate and where to look for clues.
Back in June, during the hearings, too many unanswered questions showed up with NORAD related to the air cover over Washington. The Air Force officials who testified had no answers nor could they explain the lack of response of the Air Force and their falure to intercept Flight 77 which crashed into the Pengagon.
Their main excuse for not responding is that there was a "simulation" going on that morning in which a couple (imaginary) passenger planes were going to be hijacked and crashed into government buildings in Washington. The NORAD people were told not to respond to FAA alerts since this was only a simulation whose main purose was to test FAA procedure and response time. They claim that when the real event happened, the NORAD radar operators thought this was the simulation. When they finally realized this was for real, over a half hour had elapsed and their response was too late to intercept the plane.
I know this sounds far fetched, but the top generals in the Air Force actually sat there last month and told this story to the commission members. In my opinion, this is too much of a coincidence, especially since early on their main excuse for no response was that they could have never imagined a passenger plane being hijacked and crashing into a building. Now they say they actually had a simulation of such an event, and the simulation just happened to be taking place that exact day. What a coincidence!!
Needless to say, since June, NORAD (and the Pengtagon) has refused to cooperate with the commission and has refused to turn over any of the more than 10,000 documents that the commission requested. The Justice Dept. has also not turned over any of the requested documents to the commission.
Bush reluctantly went along with the idea of an independent comission to investigate these attacks, but it's obvious he had no intention of ever letting them do a real investigation.
So what you're saying is, you do not have a reliable source to corroborate the rumors you are spreading.
Those "coincidences" never occurred.Ojas said:
Sources:
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/israel.htm
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/taxi.htm
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/north.htm
See additional references cited in the above links.
Shame on you, Ojas, for spreading such outrageous nonsense.
Eric, I thought your post regarding the F-16 background picture was the dumbest thing I've ever read here on prime, but you have topped yourself with this last post. Do you honestly believe every conspiracy rumor you read no matter how far fetched, or are you just trolling here? Please post one reliable source for this nonsense.
nsxtasy said:
Gladly...
First of all, there was not "a bomb" but there were 4 seperate bombs, so this idea of "a car bomb" was a cover story by the Indonesian Government.
Here is an article from the Jarkarta Post, the main newspaper in the town where the bombing occured:
http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cach...m/detaillatestnews. asp?fileid=20030528153243
"I was going to take some pictures after the first blast when suddenly the second blast hit after about 10 minutes. The second was the largest of four,"
You may ask why I posted the article from google cache instead of from the Jakarta Post's website? Because that article since has been removed from their website. I guess this did not match the official story, so they must get rid of any such conflicts.
More sources:
TERROR BLAST AT HOTEL
6th Paragraph:
"Hotel bosses said staff and guests had been evacuated before the blast, which happened during the busy lunch hour"
http://www.detik.com/peristiwa/2003/08/05/20030805-183447.shtml
Translation from this article:
US Embassy cancelled the booking of Marriott Hotel 4.5 hours before the explosion
There was something interesting happened just hours before the explosion shocked the JW Marriott Hotel, Mega Kuningan, South Jakarta. The US Embassy cancelled the booking of 10-20 rooms in that hotel. The cancellation was on 8.00 West Indonesian Time, Tuesday, or only 4.5 hours before the explosion. This information is from employee of Marriot Hotel who refused to be identified. He explained that the booking was made several days ago. The US Embassy's guests were planned to stay for 3 days. And the ceremony was planned on Wednesday. For information, when there was the explosion, the security of US Embassy directly came to the Marriot Hotel in Mega Kuningan. JW Marriot Hotel is known to be used frequently by US Embassy. On 4 July 2003, the Independent Day of US was celebrated on this hotel. Last year, it was also celebrated there.
Jakarta police 'knew hotel was a target'
----------
This "multiple bomb" thing reminds me of Oklahoma City. Anyone who watched the news the morning of the Oklahoman City bombing remembers all the explosive crews removing additional bombs that were planted within the building. However, less than a day later, the FBI announced it had been "a car bomb" and everyone quickly forgot what they saw on television that morning. Here is a rather short sound clip of CNN broadcasts the morning of the Oklahoma City bombing:
CNN Sound Clips
dlongo said:
No, I don't believe evey rumour, but I believe my friend who was at all the hearings back in June. Besides, they were all televised on C-SPAN. I watched a couple of them, and you can also get the transcripts as they are available to the public. None of this stuff is top secret.
I spend a lot of time on some other message boards, some dedicated to the "conspiracy du jour" and have gone many rounds with people on the 9/11 subject. You can think you know what you are talking about, and you can do all of the finger-pointing you want. But when you start pointing fingers, you'd better be damn sure you have your facts straight.
Conjecture is the rule rather than the exception these days, and there are a lot of people out there in cyberspace who have made careers out of putting together puzzles without actually having enough pieces. Trust me, just by reading the first few sentences of these bogus 9/11 conspiracy reports, I can instantly recognize the disinformation (and sometimes outright lies.) If some of these kooks would take just a moment of their time to understand how the FAA, Naitonal Airspace System, NORAD, military operations, and even simple things like mach vs. true airpseed, then MAYBE their long-winded-but-short-on-facts reports might garner some serious attention outside of the gullible few.
I side with NSXtasy, this is getting out of hand. Post some reliable sources of this information (NOT anything from sites like http://www.rense.com, http://www.infowars.com, or http://www.whatreallyhappened.com.) If you read it on the internet, it most certainly doesn't guarantee it is true.
Conjecture is the rule rather than the exception these days, and there are a lot of people out there in cyberspace who have made careers out of putting together puzzles without actually having enough pieces. Trust me, just by reading the first few sentences of these bogus 9/11 conspiracy reports, I can instantly recognize the disinformation (and sometimes outright lies.) If some of these kooks would take just a moment of their time to understand how the FAA, Naitonal Airspace System, NORAD, military operations, and even simple things like mach vs. true airpseed, then MAYBE their long-winded-but-short-on-facts reports might garner some serious attention outside of the gullible few.
I side with NSXtasy, this is getting out of hand. Post some reliable sources of this information (NOT anything from sites like http://www.rense.com, http://www.infowars.com, or http://www.whatreallyhappened.com.) If you read it on the internet, it most certainly doesn't guarantee it is true.
nsxtasy said:
You are correct that there a lots of false rumours that find their way online. But there are also lots of legit things that are covered up by governments. Remember that the Iran/Contra scandal was uncovered 3 years after it happened by a reporter for a small Israeli newspaper. And it wasn't until the 1970s that our government officially admitted that the Spanish did not sink the battleship Maine. And I doubt that you believe that the Communists actually burned down the Reichstag, but the German people sure believed it. All of these items were originally referred to as "conspiracy theories". The biggest "conspiracy" is the claim that there are no conspiracies.
If you don't think governments are capable of committing terrorist acts against their own people and blaiming it on their enemies, then read this:
ABC News: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba
I've seen the document referred to in this article as it is available through the freedom of information act, and it contains the signatures of all 5 joint chiefs of staff. Only a veto of the plan by President Kennedy stopped this from happening. What do you suppose Bill Clinton or George W Bush would have done if this document had made it to their desks?
I would just like to add that I find it surprising that people would not believe that the Indonesian government is capable of such a thing. Remember that this is the same government that committed attrocities in East Timor for many years and has violated many UN Security Council resolutions over the last 30 years, and their military has been shown to have ties to terrorism.
An interjection, if I may.
Eric is now officially Allan's replacement in NSXPrime. But instead of getting people riled up about cars, he chooses politics as his poison. Eric, this IS an honor. Believe me.
Carry on.
Eric is now officially Allan's replacement in NSXPrime. But instead of getting people riled up about cars, he chooses politics as his poison. Eric, this IS an honor. Believe me.
Carry on.
Eric5273 said:
Please provide a reliable source for your claim regarding NORAD ignoring the hijackings. I want to read the transcript you are referring to. I even searched the conspiracy sites and cannot find an article to support your claim.
dlongo said:
Surely...
Here is an archive containing all the transcripts for the 9/11 Commission:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/
I do not have the time nor desire to find the exact location of the claims by the NORAD people as I have already spent countless hours reading all the transcripts, but I'm pretty sure they're in the Second Public Hearing (5/22-5/23). Feel free to read the transcripts yourself....there's lots of interesting stuff in there as well besides the NORAD stuff.
Here are a few articles discussing the "simulation" or "exercise":
Associated Press: Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building
Amid Crisis Simulation, `We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack'
Aviation Week: Exercise Jump-Starts Response to Attacks
Keep in mind that the existance of this "exercise" was never disclosed by NORAD or the CIA, and as you can see from the dates on these articles, it was almost a year after the attacks before some researchers discovered this information.
At the time, NORAD officials never made any comments about the exercise. It seemed more like an embarassment than an alibi. But when they testified in front of the commission, they had to explain how a half hour elapsed from the time the FAA notified them that Flight 77 had been hijacked to the time they sent interceptors into the air. So their excuse is that they thought it was part of the exercise.
If interceptors had been sent into the air only 5 minutes earlier, they would have successfully intercepted Flight 77. This and other NORAD screw-ups that morning has lead many people to believe that there was an Air Force stand down that day and this exercise was simply a planned alabi directed by the "higher-ups". Whether or not you believe that is for you to decide, but you must be educated as to the facts in order to make an intelligent decision.
Okay......I guess it's my turn to jump in on this. I really am sick of seeing threads get thrown so far off-topic by someone who clearly has an agenda to push. Eric, I understand your need to tell people how bad the USA is and how us in the military are all puppets for the oppressive regime, and how we should all hold hands and sing "kumbaya." Hey, I'm all for peace, too, but not when it means my family will be slaughtered years down the road because we failed to do something today about it.
Anyway, your opinion is noted. Now, I'll fill you in on some of my own.
I took a look at your "9/11 Citizens Watch" site (http://www.911citizenswatch.org/) and it really opened my eyes to where you are coming from. You actually buy into this stuff?
Here's an interesting question I found on the site. A friend of mine is VERY HIGH up on the NORAD chain of command, and he'd have a cow if even one word of this sentence were true:
Why in the wake of the most cataclysmic intelligence and air defense failures in American history have no government officials or Pentagon brass been held accountable for the September 11 tragedy?
Do you believe what this sentence says? That will tell me a lot about what you actually know about 9/11.
Also, I see that the 9/11 Citizens Watch organization is now running through the Washington Peace Center. Don't even get me started..........are you a Dennis Kucinich supporter? This is a lot worse than I thought it was.
Are you saying they couldn't explain it, as in the classification level was too high for this session, or they couldn't explain it as in there was no sufficient answer? I know why we didn't get to point A from B, but I'm not testifying before Congress, either.
This is a lie, either from out of your friends' mouth, or out of the USAF officials testifying under oath before Congress. Care to guess which one I think it is?
It does sound far-fetched. Either way, you are making this out to sound like there is blame somewhere here. I've talked to some of these folks, and I fail to see where the finger should be pointed other than to some very resourceful terrorists who got very lucky. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, and be sure to tell me where you get your facts from.
So, are you using conjecture here to show that (1) they are lying and weren't running the simulation program, or (2) they knew all along about the plot and didn't do anything to stop it? Which one is it?
Can you say classified? Can you say a matter of national security? I can. Knowing what I know, I'm glad to see the Pentagon standing it's ground on this witch hunt being perpetrated by a bunch of people who don't have a clue.
Anyway, your opinion is noted. Now, I'll fill you in on some of my own.
Eric5273 said:
I took a look at your "9/11 Citizens Watch" site (http://www.911citizenswatch.org/) and it really opened my eyes to where you are coming from. You actually buy into this stuff?
Here's an interesting question I found on the site. A friend of mine is VERY HIGH up on the NORAD chain of command, and he'd have a cow if even one word of this sentence were true:
Why in the wake of the most cataclysmic intelligence and air defense failures in American history have no government officials or Pentagon brass been held accountable for the September 11 tragedy?
Do you believe what this sentence says? That will tell me a lot about what you actually know about 9/11.
Also, I see that the 9/11 Citizens Watch organization is now running through the Washington Peace Center. Don't even get me started..........are you a Dennis Kucinich supporter? This is a lot worse than I thought it was.
Are you saying they couldn't explain it, as in the classification level was too high for this session, or they couldn't explain it as in there was no sufficient answer? I know why we didn't get to point A from B, but I'm not testifying before Congress, either.
This is a lie, either from out of your friends' mouth, or out of the USAF officials testifying under oath before Congress. Care to guess which one I think it is?
It does sound far-fetched. Either way, you are making this out to sound like there is blame somewhere here. I've talked to some of these folks, and I fail to see where the finger should be pointed other than to some very resourceful terrorists who got very lucky. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, and be sure to tell me where you get your facts from.
So, are you using conjecture here to show that (1) they are lying and weren't running the simulation program, or (2) they knew all along about the plot and didn't do anything to stop it? Which one is it?
Can you say classified? Can you say a matter of national security? I can. Knowing what I know, I'm glad to see the Pentagon standing it's ground on this witch hunt being perpetrated by a bunch of people who don't have a clue.
Eric5273 said:
Now I know you're full of it. I wonder......what if we didn't have these evil war machines at all, and we threw flowers up at the planes as they went by? I think you are very AGENDA-driven, and that ain't no compliment.
Please give me the source of this magnificent data, the one that shows how five minutes would have made a hill of beans of a difference. Also, be sure to show me how these calculations were arrived at, including (1) the average time it takes for a pilot and a jet to go from alert status to airborne, (2) the speed (in TAS, not Mach) these jets would have flown at, (3) the weapon employed against the airliner and it's maximum effective range, and (4) the HOSTILE identification criteria for shooting down civilian aircraft over CONUS on the morning of 9/11. Oh, wait, #4 will drive what weapon is used in #3. Oops. There, you've got your homework.....get to it. Until you can answer these questions, then I submit that you or your source is full of SHIT.
You don't think that we did everything we could to stop this from happening the morning of 9/11? I'd love to have someone like you meet the pilots of the jets that did get airborne that morning (too late) and tell them they were to blame. Or, for that matter, ANYONE sitting in the control room at NORAD as they watched in horror on CNN the result of them being too late. You people (yes, I am luming you into that category) are all-too-quick to say the military is too big and too powerful when things are at peace, but then are the first to point fingers at the military when something goes terribly wrong. Like I said, you are very agenda-driven, and are using a lot of conjecture here to insinuate things a lot more ominious than just a screw-up at NORAD happened. What you are here for is definitely not to talk about NSXs, that's for sure. Right now, you've successfully taken two threads I've been involved with completely off topic with your propaganda.
Educated? as to the FACTS? ROFL. You are definitely not one to claim to have the facts about anything here. And, like I just said, to insinuate that there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 (re: the deliberate "standing down") really shows me what type of person you really are. I know a lot more facts than you do on this subject, and it's an insult for you and your type to continually spew this type of filth unchecked on message boards across the internet.
If you read it on the Internet, it isn't necessarily true........
By the way.......why don't you start your own thread for a change so I don't have to wade through this garbage to read what people have to say about the original subject of this thread?
Eric5273 said:Surely...
Associated Press: Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building
Amid Crisis Simulation, `We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack'
Aviation Week: Exercise Jump-Starts Response to Attacks
Keep in mind that the existance of this "exercise" was never disclosed by NORAD or the CIA, and as you can see from the dates on these articles, it was almost a year after the attacks before some researchers discovered this information.
At the time, NORAD officials never made any comments about the exercise. It seemed more like an embarassment than an alibi. But when they testified in front of the commission, they had to explain how a half hour elapsed from the time the FAA notified them that Flight 77 had been hijacked to the time they sent interceptors into the air. So their excuse is that they thought it was part of the exercise.
If interceptors had been sent into the air only 5 minutes earlier, they would have successfully intercepted Flight 77. This and other NORAD screw-ups that morning has lead many people to believe that there was an Air Force stand down that day and this exercise was simply a planned alabi directed by the "higher-ups". Whether or not you believe that is for you to decide, but you must be educated as to the facts in order to make an intelligent decision.
Sorry, but none of these articles support your claim. In fact, the last one totally contradicts you with a timeline for when NORAD was notified by the FAA and when intercepts were ordered.
Viper Driver said:
The staff of the 9/11 Commission is working closely with 9/11 Citizens Watch. Thomas Kean, who is the Republican appointed head of the commmission buys into it and is taking it very seriously.
Viper Driver said:
Apparently not because I don't even know who he is.
Viper Driver said:
I am saying that they claimed the reason was because of the simulation. They didn't claim to have any other answer. Picture this question being asked during the testimony:
9/11 Commission Member: Sir....according to NORAD guidelines, when a plane is hijacked or when the FAA loses communication with the pilot, or when a plane goes off course by more than 5 miles, NORAD is to send up an interceptor immediately to make contact with the plane and escort them to the nearest airport if need be. So why did NORAD wait over 40 minutes after Flight 77 went off course, and over half an hour after being notified by the FAA that Flight 77 had been hijacked before sending up an interceptor?
Viper Driver said:
This has nothing to do with Congress. This is the independent 9/11 Commission that the White House commissioned to investigate.
Apparently they are being a little bit too independent in their thinking, and it is too late for Bush to get rid of them as they have had much media exposure, so instead they will be stonewalled and not given any information with which to investigate.
But I wouldn't be surprised if the USAF officials were lying. The have already changed their story so many times, changing it again does not shock me.
Viper Driver said:
2 at best. At worst, they were the ones engineering the plot.
Viper Driver said:
The 9/11 Commission was given sopena power. The members of the commission have top clearance to see all relevent documents. The Pentagon and NORAD are just stonewalling them because they know the commission's funding runs out in a year and if they have to go into to court, the proceedings will never be done by then.
As far as specifics of the hearings, read my last post.
Viper Driver said:
Read this:
Flight 77 Timeline
And because I'm sure you will question the source of such infomation, since cooperativeresearch.org is probably a "conspiracy website" in your book, they have included links to each and every sources of their information, and from the look of it, all their sources seem to be major newspapers or television networks. So if you have a problem with any of the information, address specific points.
Eric5273 said:Surely...
Here is an archive containing all the transcripts for the 9/11 Commission:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/
I do not have the time nor desire to find the exact location of the claims by the NORAD people as I have already spent countless hours reading all the transcripts, but I'm pretty sure they're in the Second Public Hearing (5/22-5/23). Feel free to read the transcripts yourself....there's lots of interesting stuff in there as well besides the NORAD stuff.
From your own source
MR. CLELAND: The reason I asked that question was the Commission has been made aware of a communication that alleges that there was some kind of planned test attack, a drill attack, on the United States on that day, scheduled for that day, and that maybe some of the slippage in time, either by the FAA or NORAD, might have been due to the fact that there was somehow an awareness that whatever problem was going on in the air was a drill.
Are you aware of any planned drill, mock attack on the United States, that might have just been misinterpreted by either people in the FAA or NORAD as just a drill, and then found out that something really was going on?
MS. GARVEY: No I am not, Commissioner.
MR. CLELAND: Mr. Mead, are you aware of any drill that was going on that day, some mock attack on the country that we should have, that people might, have, slowed down their reaction, said, "well this is just a drill, and it's not really real," that might have slowed down any reaction by NORAD or the FAA?
MR. MEAD: No, sir.
This is the ONLY mention in the transcripts of a drill, or how a drill may have affected response. NOBODY blames a drill on delays in respoonse time in these transcripts.
Here is what YOU claim above:
"Their main excuse for not responding is that there was a "simulation" going on that morning in which a couple (imaginary) passenger planes were going to be hijacked and crashed into government buildings in Washington. The NORAD people were told not to respond to FAA alerts since this was only a simulation whose main purose was to test FAA procedure and response time. "
Next time your "friend" tells you his latest rumors and half-truths, I suggest you check the facts yourself.
Similar threads
