A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Breaking News - 9/11 Flight Confrimed



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 10th 04, 05:38 PM
John A. Weeks III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Breaking News - 9/11 Flight Confrimed

Since days after 9/11, there has been a story floating around
about a flight that carried a group of Saudi natives out of
the US on 9/13/2001 while all air traffic was supposedly shut
down. The Bush white house has denied that this flight had
taken place. The FBI and FAA still maintain that this flight
did not exist. One Bush staffer jokingly said that this story
has achieved grassy knowl status (refering to all the JFK
conspiracy stories).

Well, guess what? This morning, officials from Tampa International
Airport have confirmed that yes, the flight did take place. They
also released the names of eye whitnesses to the flight. They
further stated that at least 3 Arabs boarded the flight. One Arab
was a member of the Saudi royal family. In addition, 2 US
government officials boarded the flight, one of which was
identified as an FBI agent. The TIA officials who released
this information stated that they were not allowed to check the
passenger list against the US terrorist watch list.

So, why did President Bush lie? And what are they trying to
cover up?

-john-

--
================================================== ==================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications
http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ==================
  #2  
Old June 10th 04, 07:25 PM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John A. Weeks III" wrote in message
...
Since days after 9/11, there has been a story floating around
about a flight that carried a group of Saudi natives out of
the US on 9/13/2001 while all air traffic was supposedly shut
down.


No, you are getting your facts wrong. Most air traffic was shut down on the
day the alleged flight took place, not all--see the St. Petersburg Times
account. "Most of the aircraft allowed to fly in U.S. airspace on Sept. 13
were empty airliners being ferried from the airports where they made quick
landings on Sept. 11. The reopening of the airspace included paid charter
flights, but not private, nonrevenue flights."
(http://www.sptimes.com/2004/06/09/Ta...ies_flig.shtml)

The Bush white house has denied that this flight had
taken place. The FBI and FAA still maintain that this flight
did not exist. One Bush staffer jokingly said that this story
has achieved grassy knowl status (refering to all the JFK
conspiracy stories).


But oddly enough the 9/11 commission already knows that such flights
occurred: "The 9/11 Commission, which has said the flights out of the United
States were handled appropriately by the FBI..." That is from the St
petersburg newspaper's account.


Well, guess what? This morning, officials from Tampa International
Airport have confirmed that yes, the flight did take place.


Odd; the airport's website does not include this "announcement" in its press
releases. Maybe this was only announced on the "knowl"?

They
also released the names of eye whitnesses to the flight.


Only whitnesses? No darknesses? How dare they! That is not at all
politically correct! What were the names of those "eye whitnesses", if they
were released?

They
further stated that at least 3 Arabs boarded the flight. One Arab
was a member of the Saudi royal family. In addition, 2 US
government officials boarded the flight, one of which was
identified as an FBI agent.


What? The flight was identified as an FBI agent? Actually, according to the
same source I indicated above, only a suspicion that one of the individuals
might be a member of the Saudi royal family was expressed, a suspicion that
as of yet is uncorroborated. And your FBI agent was reportedly actually a
*former* FBI agent.

The TIA officials who released
this information stated that they were not allowed to check the
passenger list against the US terrorist watch list.


And who might these fine upstanding folks be, by name? In fact, what the
report says is, "The TIA Police Department said a check of its records
indicated no member of its force screened the Lear's passengers", not that
they were not allowed to perform such screening. Given that a couple of
retired officers were assigned to escort the individuals on the flight,
screening probably was not really required, now was it?


So, why did President Bush lie? And what are they trying to
cover up?


"The 9/11 Commission, which has said the flights out of the United States
were handled appropriately by the FBI..." Enough said.

Brooks


-john-



  #3  
Old June 11th 04, 03:45 AM
John A. Weeks III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , John‰]*
They are trying to cover up the fact that this "news flash" you

posted
is more than two years old.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flight.htm


It has been a rumor for 2 years. It was just officially confirmed
by the Tampa airport this morning, and it has been on the news
on the radio all day. Why the sudden reversal? Is Bush trying
to pre-emptively take some of the wind out of Michael Moore's sails?

-john-

--
================================================== ==================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications
http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ==================
  #4  
Old June 11th 04, 04:46 AM
Mike Dargan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John A. Weeks III wrote:

In article , John‰]

They are trying to cover up the fact that this "news flash" you


posted

is more than two years old.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flight.htm



It has been a rumor for 2 years. It was just officially confirmed
by the Tampa airport this morning, and it has been on the news
on the radio all day. Why the sudden reversal? Is Bush trying
to pre-emptively take some of the wind out of Michael Moore's sails?


I, for one, object to the knee jerk reaction that the shrub was lying.
The poor guy is so intellectually isolated by the neocons that he may
well have believed what he was saying.

Cheers

--mike


-john-

  #5  
Old June 11th 04, 05:20 AM
Chad Irby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article iW9yc.78545$Ly.18197@attbi_s01,
Mike Dargan wrote:

I, for one, object to the knee jerk reaction that the shrub was lying.
The poor guy is so intellectually isolated by the neocons that he may
well have believed what he was saying.


....like parts for those outlawed long-range missiles that Iraq was
supposed to have, but that we didn't find.

....until this week, in Syria.

And that WMD/missile production equipment that we couldn't find, until
they dug it out of a scrap pile in Europe, where it's been since last
year.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.
  #6  
Old June 11th 04, 11:26 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From the Wall Street Journal, June 1:

Elements of Myth
Enter Into Post-9/11
Flights by Saudis
By ALAN MURRAY

The secret evacuation of Saudi nationals from the U.S. after the Sept.
11, 2001, terrorist attacks has achieved grassy-knoll status. Craig
Unger, author of "House of Bush; House of Saud," calls it "the single
most egregious security lapse related to the attacks." Every Bush
hater can cite the basic details: At a time when Americans were
grounded, more than 140 Saudis, including members of the bin Laden
family, were spirited out of the U.S. without questioning by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.

It's a myth. But like all great myths, it has such suggestive power
that it will live on for years, despite its feeble connection to fact.

In a recent column, I criticized Michael Moore for adopting this myth,
both in his most recent book, "Dude, Where's My Country," and in his
new movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11." I mentioned I hadn't seen the film --
Mr. Moore declined to make it available before the Cannes festival --
but I relied on a synopsis provided by his publicist.

Mr. Moore responded, not by disputing the facts of the Saudi flights,
but with a blistering attack on me for daring to "review" a synopsis.
On his Web site, he said that everything I wrote about the film was
"completely false." This despite the fact it all was quoted directly
from his book or the synopsis, and confirmed in a telephone interview
with Mr. Moore himself.

But perhaps I shouldn't have picked on the hero of Cannes, who has
long had a loose relationship to truth. The Saudi story has made its
way into much more respectable journalism. And the flood of critical
e-mail I received after writing that column convinced me the myth has
considerable staying power.

For what it's worth, here are the facts, as gathered by the staff of
the bipartisan 9/11 Commission:

Between Sept. 14 and 24, 2001, six chartered flights carrying mostly
Saudi nationals among their 142 passengers departed from the U.S. The
9/11 Commission found "no credible evidence that any chartered flights
of Saudi Arabian nationals" left before U.S. airspace reopened.
Moreover, all six flights "were screened by law-enforcement officials,
primarily the FBI" to ensure that no one of interest was allowed to
leave. The most controversial flight, filled with members of the
sprawling bin Laden family, left Sept. 20. Of the 26 people aboard --
23 passengers and three private security guards -- the FBI interviewed
22 before the plane was allowed to leave.

Last week, I reviewed these facts with Mr. Unger, who is now a
principal proponent of the Saudi flight myth. "I think most of that is
true," he replied. "I never said any flight left the U.S. while there
were still restrictions on U.S. airspace."

I asked Mr. Unger, what's the problem then? He pointed to an account,
first reported in the Tampa Tribune, of a Lear jet with three Saudi
passengers that flew from Tampa, Fla., to Lexington, Ky., on Sept. 13,
2001, as part of an effort to help prominent Saudis who feared
reprisals in the U.S. While commercial airspace was open at that time,
private planes still weren't allowed to fly, according to Mr. Unger.
He said he believes it couldn't have flown "without a special favor
from the White House." Moreover, he says, he's not sure "the FBI did
their job thoroughly" in screening passengers on the Saudi flights
that later left the U.S.

The 9/11 Commission still is investigating the Tampa flight, but it
has found no evidence that any discussion of Saudi flights rose higher
than Richard Clarke, former antiterrorism czar and now a prominent
critic of President Bush. Moreover, the coordinated Saudi flights
turned out to be a convenience for FBI officials, who were able to
screen all passengers and interview any they wished -- something they
wouldn't have been able to do if the same passengers had traveled on
commercial airlines. To check the FBI's work, the 9/11 Commission this
year ran the names of all passengers on the Saudi flights against
current terrorism-watch lists, and found no matches.

As for bin Laden family members, Mr. Clarke strongly suggested in his
public testimony to the commission that they had been under close
surveillance by U.S. officials for some time. "The FBI was
extraordinarily well aware of what they were doing in the United
States," he testified. Mr. Clarke, who has shown no hesitancy to
criticize the Bush White House, concludes the Saudi flight story "is a
tempest in a teapot."

There are plenty of reasons to question President Bush's handling of
national-security matters during the past 3˝ years. But there is no
reason to rely on mythology in the process. Let's have a great debate.
But stick to the facts, please.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! www.vivabush.org
  #7  
Old June 11th 04, 02:04 PM
Stephen Harding
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John A. Weeks III wrote:

on the radio all day. Why the sudden reversal? Is Bush trying
to pre-emptively take some of the wind out of Michael Moore's sails?


Simply not possible.

Michael Moore produces way too much wind.


SMH

  #8  
Old June 11th 04, 02:30 PM
George Z. Bush
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stephen Harding wrote:
John A. Weeks III wrote:

on the radio all day. Why the sudden reversal? Is Bush trying
to pre-emptively take some of the wind out of Michael Moore's sails?


Simply not possible.

Michael Moore produces way too much wind.


That may be, but an awful lot of people who'll see his flic some time before
they enter the voting booth in November are going to believe his version of the
truth and will be influenced by it. The administration hasn't yet caught on to
the fact that a lot of people simply no longer believe their constantly changing
rationales for entering the war against Iraq....you can't keep on changing your
story without at least some of the audience figuring out that you're doing it to
keep from having to tell the truth.

George Z.


  #9  
Old June 11th 04, 07:06 PM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
Stephen Harding wrote:
John A. Weeks III wrote:

on the radio all day. Why the sudden reversal? Is Bush trying
to pre-emptively take some of the wind out of Michael Moore's sails?


Simply not possible.

Michael Moore produces way too much wind.


That may be, but an awful lot of people who'll see his flic some time

before
they enter the voting booth in November are going to believe his version

of the
truth and will be influenced by it. The administration hasn't yet caught

on to
the fact that a lot of people simply no longer believe their constantly

changing
rationales for entering the war against Iraq....you can't keep on changing

your
story without at least some of the audience figuring out that you're doing

it to
keep from having to tell the truth.


Constantly changing story? In late 2002 the White House published its case
against Iraq:

www.cnn.com/2002/US/09/12/iraq.report/


Looks like a lot of that claimed in that report has been born out by events
since; Saddam did indeed still have biological programs proceeding, he did
indeed conduct mass murder and bury his victims in mass graves, and as Bush
indicated yesterday when he said quite plainly that Mr. Al Zarqawi was
resident in Iraq before we attacked, he was indeed providing sanctuary and
support to various terrorists. That looks like a lot of the same old story
to me, not a "constantly changing" one.

Brooks


George Z.




  #10  
Old June 12th 04, 02:16 AM
Mike Dargan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chad Irby wrote:
In article iW9yc.78545$Ly.18197@attbi_s01,
Mike Dargan wrote:


I, for one, object to the knee jerk reaction that the shrub was lying.
The poor guy is so intellectually isolated by the neocons that he may
well have believed what he was saying.



...like parts for those outlawed long-range missiles that Iraq was
supposed to have, but that we didn't find.

...until this week, in Syria.

And that WMD/missile production equipment that we couldn't find, until
they dug it out of a scrap pile in Europe, where it's been since last
year.


Sounds like thin gruel at best.

Cheers

--mike
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
new theory of flight released Sept 2004 Mark Oliver Aerobatics 1 October 5th 04 10:20 PM
Flight Simulator 2004 pro 4CDs, Eurowings 2004, Sea Plane Adventures, Concorde, HONG KONG 2004, World Airlines, other Addons, Sky Ranch, Jumbo 747, Greece 2000 [include El.Venizelos], Polynesia 2000, Real Airports, Private Wings, FLITESTAR V8.5 - JEP vvcd Home Built 0 September 22nd 04 07:16 PM
Sim time loggable? [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 12 December 6th 03 08:47 AM
CFI logging instrument time Barry Instrument Flight Rules 21 November 11th 03 01:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.