IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Generals Myers And Arnold's Testimony, Verification of claims made by reporter Philip Shenon

politicstahl
post Dec 8 2014, 03:01 PM
Post #1





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 17
Joined: 1-May 08
Member No.: 3,260



Philip Shenon, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, (New York: 2008), pp. 118 ff. says: “The conspiracy theories about 9/11 began to circulate long before the ashes had stopped smoldering at ground zero. . . . [p. 119]But in his testimony, Myers offered the first of what would be several contradictory—and flatly inaccurate—statements from the Pentagon about the military response on September 11. He asserted that military fighters were not scrambled to respond to the hijackings until after the Pentagon had been hit at 9:37a.m. That was wrong; it would later be demonstrated that the first fighters had been scrambled almost an hour earlier than Myers suggested. . . . [p. 121]When Farmer and his team of investigators looked back at Arnold's testimony later, they were astonished; Farmer believed the testimony from Arnold and other NORAD generals should have been referred to the Justice Department for possible prosecution.It would later be deteremined that every one of those assertions by General Arnold in May 2003 was flat wrong, most startlingly his claim that the military had close-tracked United 93 and was prepared to intercept it. In fact, it was later shown, NORAD knew nothing about the hijacking of the United plane until after it had crashed into that lonely rural field in western Pennsylvania.”

Question (prior to asking Mr. Shenon): what was or were the demonstrations
that proved the generals wrong and criminally liable?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mainer
post Dec 8 2014, 06:01 PM
Post #2





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 21
Joined: 16-January 09
Member No.: 4,070



It sounds like Shenon is taking the Commission at their word. If that's his frame of reference, there isn't a lot one can say to him. So many "new" things suddenly appeared in that report that contradicted everything that was "known" before, that the only real answer is to subpoena all the staff and find out where they got the information they put into (and didn't put into) the report. I think a lot of it will come up having been manufactured out of whole cloth...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LARRYGILBO
post Dec 9 2014, 04:42 AM
Post #3





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 3
Joined: 19-July 09
Member No.: 4,494



Interesting- Gen. Meyers in his "Eyes On The Horizon" book lays to rest all the doubts anyone may have about what took place in the air on 911 : What he says is a pack of lies !

Gen. Arnold (aka"Benedict") now protects the USA from terrorist attacks "working" in the Department of Homeland Security.

Several other flag & general officers who failed our country on that day are enjoying their retirement.

Not a single investigation of their failures while in command of the Nation's defenses took place. A complete zero for the military upper echelons. At least when the 1st Pearl Harbor

military commanders were investigated, some heads were lopped although some were exonerated. FDR's role in not providing those leaders with timely information regarding the impending

Japanese "surprise" attack on Pearl was key in exonerating them. See Robert Stinnett "Day Of Deceit" the truth about FDR & Pearl Harbor. (With new after word by the author)

If anyone is really interested in the Pentagon Attack, I recommend viewing "Behind the Smoke Curtain" by Barbara Honegger. You will be amazed at the timelines & lies she reveals regarding

every aspect of the "Official" Pentagon story. The names of those involved in making the "enemy" attacks on 911 are boldly presented. What is stunning is that most of those named are still doing

their best to destroy our country. Thanks for mentioning the ignominious generals. Pray that someday their misdeeds & deceit are justly punished.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
excontroller
post Dec 9 2014, 03:21 PM
Post #4





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 101
Joined: 28-December 09
From: Ypsilanti, MI
Member No.: 4,819



QUOTE (LARRYGILBO @ Dec 9 2014, 03:42 AM) *
Interesting- Gen. Meyers in his "Eyes On The Horizon" book lays to rest all the doubts anyone may have about what took place in the air on 911 : What he says is a pack of lies !

Gen. Arnold (aka"Benedict") now protects the USA from terrorist attacks "working" in the Department of Homeland Security.

Several other flag & general officers who failed our country on that day are enjoying their retirement.

Not a single investigation of their failures while in command of the Nation's defenses took place. A complete zero for the military upper echelons. At least when the 1st Pearl Harbor

military commanders were investigated, some heads were lopped although some were exonerated. FDR's role in not providing those leaders with timely information regarding the impending

Japanese "surprise" attack on Pearl was key in exonerating them. See Robert Stinnett "Day Of Deceit" the truth about FDR & Pearl Harbor. (With new after word by the author)

If anyone is really interested in the Pentagon Attack, I recommend viewing "Behind the Smoke Curtain" by Barbara Honegger. You will be amazed at the timelines & lies she reveals regarding

every aspect of the "Official" Pentagon story. The names of those involved in making the "enemy" attacks on 911 are boldly presented. What is stunning is that most of those named are still doing

their best to destroy our country. Thanks for mentioning the ignominious generals. Pray that someday their misdeeds & deceit are justly punished.



Well..........regarding Roosevelt, and Pearl Harbor, It is MY understanding that someone in the Office Of Naval Intelligence, removed The President's name from the list of people to be notified of new intell, just a week or so prior to The Attack. General Short and Admiral Kimmel, at Pearl Harbor, were never warned of what was known in Washington to be an impending attack. It has been theorized that CNO Admiral Stark knew but failed to call Pearl of the warning.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LARRYGILBO
post Dec 10 2014, 09:51 AM
Post #5





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 3
Joined: 19-July 09
Member No.: 4,494



QUOTE (excontroller @ Dec 10 2014, 05:21 AM) *
Well..........regarding Roosevelt, and Pearl Harbor, It is MY understanding that someone in the Office Of Naval Intelligence, removed The President's name from the list of people to be notified of new intell, just a week or so prior to The Attack. General Short and Admiral Kimmel, at Pearl Harbor, were never warned of what was known in Washington to be an impending attack. It has been theorized that CNO Admiral Stark knew but failed to call Pearl of the warning.

Who might mysterious someone in the ONI ? By what authority does anyone at ONI remove the Commander in Chief from an intell list ? It's likely a "cloak the President from responsibility". With FDR there wasn't an attitude of "The buck stops here". FDR's style, like some our POTUS (including the present one) was "Pass the buck" and give me room to maneuver. Kimmel & Short were kept out of the intell chain by the White House & struggled for months before 7Dec. to be kept aware of Japan's navy in the Pacific. They never succeeded.
Thus after many years later when this was brought out Kimmel & Short were vindicated and the cloud of shame finally cleared.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
excontroller
post Dec 16 2014, 06:02 PM
Post #6





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 101
Joined: 28-December 09
From: Ypsilanti, MI
Member No.: 4,819



QUOTE (LARRYGILBO @ Dec 10 2014, 08:51 AM) *
Who might mysterious someone in the ONI ? By what authority does anyone at ONI remove the Commander in Chief from an intell list ? It's likely a "cloak the President from responsibility". With FDR there wasn't an attitude of "The buck stops here". FDR's style, like some our POTUS (including the present one) was "Pass the buck" and give me room to maneuver. Kimmel & Short were kept out of the intell chain by the White House & struggled for months before 7Dec. to be kept aware of Japan's navy in the Pacific. They never succeeded.
Thus after many years later when this was brought out Kimmel & Short were vindicated and the cloud of shame finally cleared.



Agree completely. It was definitely intentional. The excuse used to do it was that officials found classified papers in the trash can in the White House, thus, they did not trust the ability of those with access to the President, nor the President himself, to be able to conduct business and keep classified information CLASSIFIED. But the papers could easily have been planted in the trash to accomplish the reason to shut the President out. I have always felt high-level military people can NOT be trusted to avoid war at all costs. WAR is their entire reason for being! Besides, they and other top political leaders are ALWAYS too connected to the war machine, through investments and such. As the old saying goes, anyone who wants to be President, can never be entrusted with such a lofty position.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
excontroller
post Apr 14 2015, 11:55 AM
Post #7





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 101
Joined: 28-December 09
From: Ypsilanti, MI
Member No.: 4,819



QUOTE (politicstahl @ Dec 8 2014, 02:01 PM) *
Philip Shenon, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, (New York: 2008), pp. 118 ff. says: “The conspiracy theories about 9/11 began to circulate long before the ashes had stopped smoldering at ground zero. . . . [p. 119]But in his testimony, Myers offered the first of what would be several contradictory—and flatly inaccurate—statements from the Pentagon about the military response on September 11. He asserted that military fighters were not scrambled to respond to the hijackings until after the Pentagon had been hit at 9:37a.m. That was wrong; it would later be demonstrated that the first fighters had been scrambled almost an hour earlier than Myers suggested. . . . [p. 121]When Farmer and his team of investigators looked back at Arnold's testimony later, they were astonished; Farmer believed the testimony from Arnold and other NORAD generals should have been referred to the Justice Department for possible prosecution.It would later be deteremined that every one of those assertions by General Arnold in May 2003 was flat wrong, most startlingly his claim that the military had close-tracked United 93 and was prepared to intercept it. In fact, it was later shown, NORAD knew nothing about the hijacking of the United plane until after it had crashed into that lonely rural field in western Pennsylvania.”

Question (prior to asking Mr. Shenon): what was or were the demonstrations
that proved the generals wrong and criminally liable?


I have to take issue with the recurring statement that UA93 crashed. I have stated here before, that I was informed by a former ATC specialist that UA93 was seen to have been shadowed by a small, fast aircraft that day, and in this person's OPINION, the aircraft was probably a military jet and that it was thought by many controllers that were there, that UA93 was probably shot down by this aircraft. In FACT, the debris field it created was almost certainly that of an aircraft that had been partly destroyed in the air, before it hit the ground.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post May 24 2015, 01:04 PM
Post #8





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



The Pentagon is in fact a cult of mendacity. Making shit up is their primary job it seems sometimes. Arnold & Meyers are just 2. If you don't play the game you don't get promoted, which extends beyond the DoD because civilian organizations do it too.

All the general officers in command positions on 911, who actually failed to "defend the country", were promoted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post May 24 2015, 01:07 PM
Post #9





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (excontroller @ Apr 14 2015, 11:55 AM) *
I have to take issue with the recurring statement that UA93 crashed. I have stated here before, that I was informed by a former ATC specialist that UA93 was seen to have been shadowed by a small, fast aircraft that day, and in this person's OPINION, the aircraft was probably a military jet and that it was thought by many controllers that were there, that UA93 was probably shot down by this aircraft. In FACT, the debris field it created was almost certainly that of an aircraft that had been partly destroyed in the air, before it hit the ground.


What debris field do you refer to?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post May 24 2015, 01:27 PM
Post #10





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (amazed! @ May 24 2015, 12:07 PM) *
What debris field do you refer to?



I would like to hear more about this as well.
In my research I have read many reports of debris being scattered several miles from the 'crash' site.
When I mentioned this here before, I was also asked "What debris field?"

So any hard evidence of a debris field (sources)?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post May 24 2015, 01:36 PM
Post #11





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Recall that the first debris field was the one Wally Miller walked through and found nothing.

Then by nightfall, the feds had said that "actually" the debris field was in the woods about 1800' away, roped off.

Then some said debris up at Indian Lake, but that never got much coverage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 15th October 2019 - 10:42 PM