NORAD has the ability to see trajectory based blips on their radar that are not using a transponder. These are usually highlighted on their radar screens as an unidentified craft. Dick Cheney was in control of NORAD by executive order just a few months before 9/11.

Confusion? - Yes...
Deliberate? - Unknown
NORAD Commander (Cheney) was in the basement of the Pentagon having an unusual conversation with an airman right before the crash in the Pentagon as reported by Mr. Mineta.

Was the Pentagon truly defenseless? Highly unlikely - details of air defense capabilities for the Pentagon are top secret.

False flag operation? Motives do exist according to the PNAC's desire for a "New Pearl Harbor" in order to expedite "their plans"(Wolfowitz,Cheney,Rumsfeld to name a few on the PNAC "think tank"). Pres. Bush used 9/11 as an excuse to attack Iraq and quickly abandoned the "search" for the "elusive" Osama Bin Laden.

We were quickly told how the "terrorists" pulled such an amazing feat off with extremely crude weapons and was supposedly orchestrated from a cave halfway around the world. 6 of the 19 accused terrorists are still alive today, so this story doesn't add up, among other flaws in the official story.

We want to believe we were told the truth.. that our government would never lie to us and commit or enable such a heinous crime, however many top level government and military officials have gone on the record protesting the official story.

Any logical criminal investigator would have to agree that the official story has many holes in it. Some evidence still exists but much of it was quickly shipped with armed guards to be permenantly destroyed in Communist China thanks to Rudy Giuliani.

It doesn't look good for this administration, however many people are refusing to look at the inconstencies of the official story.

On the same day as training exercises. What a coincidence.

I can agree that there are many, many inconsistencies with the official story. but I haven't seen the evidence that it was a planned, known inside job. let me amend that to say, I have seen what others call evidence that the whole thing was riggerd (loose change ??) but did not agree with their conclusions.

that doesn't mean that I don't find the vast inconsistencies unsettling to say the least. how no ones head was on a platter for this fuck up will forever perplex me. I think had it been a dem in office when this had happened that the extremists in the right wing would have immediately been screaming and dominating the media with impeachment for incompetency in allowing it to happen.

but, speculatives aside, let's try and stick with what is known and reported. If anyone is posting assertions, please supply attribution in the form of links.

"what is known and reported"?

Are you referring to reported by the mass media?

If you'll notice from researching.. they are not allowed to discuss bldg. 7, the pentagon attack and flight 98. Footage of the collapse of bldg. 7 is restricted. Also I recall very informative footage of the Pentagon right after it was hit.... they were zooming into the hole and the reporter had stated several times that there was no evidence of any plane hitting. Since 9/11 I've never seen this footage resurface.

^ there has been a lot of really great independent investigative reports that draw on a multitude of sources. {EDIT} I think the MSM has shied away from the edges of what might seem conspiratorial. Even though certain things that at first seemed conspiratorial, were later proved by evidence to be true. Such as these tapes which showed blatant conflicting testimony{EDIT}
Personally I'm not going to rely on one reporters thoughts while caught up in the craziness of the day. I'm not saying people haven't lied their ass off about certain aspects of this. Hell the stonewalling by the administration alone is enough to give one the impression that there are details that would look really, really bad for them (not perhaps in complicity but in competency.)

But, what would be the simpilest explanation ?

"...but, speculatives aside, let's try and stick with what is known and reported. If anyone is posting assertions, please supply attribution in the form of links."

That's kind of an unfair.

We only know what the administration allowed us to know.

The simplest explanation? The simplest explanation for when three buildings fall straight down within hours of each other - each owned by the same company, and one of the buildings not even hit?

The simplest explanation is that those buildings were rigged and they were rigged because they knew there would be planes hitting them in the near future.

wouldn't you say that through investigative research there has been quite a bit of information obtained through independent sources outside of government?
that has shown that the government hasn't been truthful and infact has been less than forth coming about the details. Luckily many people, within the government have come out and talked about how shoddy the 9/11 commission report was. I think it can probably be shown that each gov agency had some level of incompitence, each lending a hand in how that day played out. But I don't think that shows complicity, just gross incompitence and that people were trying to cover their ass after the fact.

Are you asserting building 7 wasn't hit ?
I believe I've seen pics on the net that show that it was hit (from the other angle that most people haven't seen)

does that explain why the guy used the word "pulled"? I don't think so, since "pulled" implies a controlled demolition. It's hard to fathom that among the chaos of that day anyone could have organized enough people and equipment to do a controlled demolition. If that's what you think happened, wouldn't that be fairly easy to prove with evidence (not speculation) as it took a group of people with specific knowledge and equipment to acomplish.

while I have an open mind to whatever information you want to present, it would be nice to try and keep this thread about the NORAD tapes, but i can see how a lot of this is intertwined.

All I will say is that the dissolution of civil rights and roll back of checks and balances oversight would not have been possible without the foreign threat of terrorism and the 9/11 attack.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20IIC%20-%20WTC%207%20Collapse%20Final.pdf

Complete report by the NIST on the collapse of building 7. Including pictures of the damage caused by the collapse of the first tower, fires that burned unchecked, and the layout of the fuel storage system and how it contributed to the failure of the main supports at floors 5-8. I just can't conceive of a way that an intelligent human being, given all the information that IS OUT THERE, could believe this building was demolished as part of a vast conspiracy. It would take stupidity beyond anything humanity has ever displayed.

Building 7 was Rudy's Command post. He made that his command post against the suggestions of his advisors. It was full of fuel, generators, and the like. Then that lying bastard has the cajones to claim that his advisors recommended it.
http://therealrudy.org/blog/12023-the-real-rudy-command-center?play=1

in case some people missed this clip, Donald Rumsfeld actually said Flight 93 was shot down :
http://www.videosift.com/video/Donald-Rumsfeld-Flight-93-was-Shot-Down

*dead yet still breathing, Olbermann: complicit in the dumbing-down of N. America

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by choggie.

Awarding geo321 with one Power Point for fixing this video's dead embed code.