[relaxed]Nine years later, who'se responsible for 911?

BEAT LA · Jan 24, 2010

The poll will be up soon. It's been a long time and I expect to hear something different from one at least one of you.

ryan_98 · Jan 24, 2010

other, because there are multiple responsible parties.

and, who's tim?

DonnyMost · Jan 24, 2010

this post is responsible: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=4980219&postcount=25

Landlord Landry · Jan 24, 2010

ryan_98 said:

and, who's tim?
Click to expand...

Duncan.

ryan_98 · Jan 24, 2010

Landlord Landry said:

Duncan.
Click to expand...

i like to think tracy should share some of the blame.

BEAT LA · Jan 24, 2010

Timothy.

Kojirou · Jan 24, 2010

Why Timmy? Can't it be like Stockton or AK or Dirk?

Dairy Ashford · Jan 24, 2010

BEAT LA said:

[relaxed]...911
Click to expand...

Really?

Answer 1:

In 1967, the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice recommended the creation of a single number that could be used nationwide for reporting emergencies.[11] The burden then fell on the Federal Communications Commission, which then met with AT&T in November, 1967 in order to come up with a solution.

In 1968, a solution was agreed upon. AT&T chose to copy the Canadian concept, but with a different emergency number, 9-1-1, which was brief, easy to remember, dialed easily, and worked well with the phone systems in place at the time. How the number 9-1-1 itself was decided upon is not well known and is subject to much speculation. However, many assert that the number 9-1-1 was chosen to be similar to the numbers 2-1-1 (long distance), 4-1-1 ("information", later called "directory assistance"), and 6-1-1 (repair service), which had already been in use by AT&T since the 1920s. Not all such N11 numbers are common throughout the telephone systems of North America. Some of the designated services provided by these numbers are regional, and there are significant differences in number allocation between Canada[12] and the United States;[13] only 4-1-1 and 9-1-1 are universally used. In addition, because it was important to ensure that the emergency number was not dialed accidentally, 9-1-1 made sense because the numbers "9" and "1" were on opposite ends of a phone's rotary dial. Furthermore, the North American Numbering Plan in use at the time established rules for which numbers could be used for area codes and exchanges.[14] At the time, the middle digit of an area code had to be either a 0 or 1, and the first two digits of an exchange could not be a 1.[15] At the telephone switching station, the second dialed digit was used to determine if the number was long distance or local. If the number had a 0 or 1 as the second digit, it was long distance, if it had any other digit, it was a local call. Thus, since the number 9-1-1 was detected by the switching equipment as a special number, it could be routed appropriately. Also, since 9-1-1 was a unique number, never having been used as an area code or service code (although at one point GTE used test numbers such as 11911), it could fit into the existent phone system easily. AT&T announced the selection of 9-1-1 as their choice of the three-digit emergency number at a press conference in the Washington (DC) office of Indiana Rep. J. Edward Roush, who had championed Congressional support of a single emergency number.
Click to expand...

Answer 2:

The 911 can trace its roots back to sketches drawn by Ferdinand "Butzi" Porsche in 1959. The Porsche 911 classic was developed as a much more powerful, larger, more comfortable replacement for the Porsche 356, the company's first model, and thus essentially a sporting evolution of the Volkswagen Beetle. The new car made its public debut at the 1963 Frankfurt Motor Show (German: Internationale Automobil-Ausstellung). The car presented at the auto show had a non-operational mockup of the 901 engine, receiving a working one in February 1964.

It originally was designated as the "Porsche 901" (901 being its internal project number). 82 cars were built as 901s. However, Peugeot protested on the grounds that in France it had exclusive rights to car names formed by three numbers with a zero in the middle. So, instead of selling the new model with another name in France, Porsche changed the name to 911. Internally, the car's part numbers carried on the prefix 901 for years. Production began in September 1964, the first 911s reached the US in February 1965 with a price tag of US$6,500.
Click to expand...

Pete Chilcutt · Jan 24, 2010

DonnyMost said:

this post is responsible: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=4980219&postcount=25
Click to expand...

Lol, nice one...

I was going to post a reference to that quote

marks0223 · Jan 24, 2010

My God, nine years later with all the evidence, if you say the government you are an IDIOT and need to get out of America. Why would you want to live in a country where you thought your government could do 9/11? Read this site: http://debunking911.com/ and stop bad mouthing my country.

rhino17 · Jan 24, 2010

marks0223 said:

My God, nine years later with all the evidence, if you say the government you are an IDIOT and need to get out of America. Why would you want to live in a country where you thought your government could do 9/11? Read this site: http://debunking911.com/ and stop bad mouthing my country.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

If you still think the government do this, go **** yourself

DaDakota · Jan 24, 2010

If you say government couldn't you mean the Taliban and Saudi Arabia's government?

I mean their way of doing things is a breeding ground for misguided hatred.

DD

Air Langhi · Jan 24, 2010

marks0223 said:

My God, nine years later with all the evidence, if you say the government you are an IDIOT and need to get out of America. Why would you want to live in a country where you thought your government could do 9/11? Read this site: http://debunking911.com/ and stop bad mouthing my country.
Click to expand...

While I don't think they caused or had anything to do with 9/11. They should take some responsibility for it. They had some major stuff they missed. Plus they get a zillion dollar budget to prevent this stuff.

The US government has done plenty of terrible things that they have tried to cover up. Therefore I wouldn't call some one an idiot for believing it. Plus where are you going to move to. Its not like other countries openly take in immigrants.

marks0223 · Jan 24, 2010

Air Langhi said:

While I don't think they caused or had anything to do with 9/11. They should take some responsibility for it. They had some major stuff they missed. Plus they get a zillion dollar budget to prevent this stuff.

The US government has done plenty of terrible things that they have tried to cover up. Therefore I wouldn't call some one an idiot for believing it. Plus where are you going to move to. Its not like other countries openly take in immigrants.
Click to expand...

The question was who was responsible for 9/11, not who could have prevented 9/11. You can point to millions of crimes and say the police, military or government could have prevented it, they have the big budget for it.

jo mama · Jan 24, 2010

marks0223 said:

My God, nine years later with all the evidence, if you say the government you are an IDIOT and need to get out of America. Why would you want to live in a country where you thought your government could do 9/11? Read this site: http://debunking911.com/ and stop bad mouthing my country.
Click to expand...

the government is not the country.

jo mama · Jan 24, 2010

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”
Click to expand...

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba
Book: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba
In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.

"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."

Gunning for War

The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.

The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show.

Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote, "the objective is to provide irrevocable proof … that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic]."

The plans were motivated by an intense desire among senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized power in 1959 to become the first communist leader in the Western Hemisphere — only 90 miles from U.S. shores.

The earlier CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by Cuban exiles had been a disastrous failure, in which the military was not allowed to provide firepower. The military leaders now wanted a shot at it.

"The whole thing was so bizarre," says Bamford, noting public and international support would be needed for an invasion, but apparently neither the American public, nor the Cuban public, wanted to see U.S. troops deployed to drive out Castro.

Reflecting this, the U.S. plan called for establishing prolonged military — not democratic — control over the island nation after the invasion.

"That's what we're supposed to be freeing them from," Bamford says. "The only way we would have succeeded is by doing exactly what the Russians were doing all over the world, by imposing a government by tyranny, basically what we were accusing Castro himself of doing."

'Over the Edge'

The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation Northwoods be run by the military.

Whether the Joint Chiefs' plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and transferred to another job.

The secret plans came at a time when there was distrust in the military leadership about their civilian leadership, with leaders in the Kennedy administration viewed as too liberal, insufficiently experienced and soft on communism. At the same time, however, there real were concerns in American society about their military overstepping its bounds.

There were reports U.S. military leaders had encouraged their subordinates to vote conservative during the election.

And at least two popular books were published focusing on a right-wing military leadership pushing the limits against government policy of the day.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee published its own report on right-wing extremism in the military, warning a "considerable danger" in the "education and propaganda activities of military personnel" had been uncovered. The committee even called for an examination of any ties between Lemnitzer and right-wing groups. But Congress didn't get wind of Northwoods, says Bamford.

"Although no one in Congress could have known at the time," he writes, "Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had quietly slipped over the edge."

Even after Lemnitzer was gone, he writes, the Joint Chiefs continued to plan "pretext" operations at least through 1963.

One idea was to create a war between Cuba and another Latin American country so that the United States could intervene. Another was to pay someone in the Castro government to attack U.S. forces at the Guantanamo naval base — an act, which Bamford notes, would have amounted to treason. And another was to fly low level U-2 flights over Cuba, with the intention of having one shot down as a pretext for a war.

"There really was a worry at the time about the military going off crazy and they did, but they never succeeded, but it wasn't for lack of trying," he says.

After 40 Years

Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film JFK, which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

As public interest in the assassination swelled after JFK's release, Congress passed a law designed to increase the public's access to government records related to the assassination.

The author says a friend on the board tipped him off to the documents.

Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had ordered all Joint Chiefs documents related to the Bay of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these remained.

"The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after," says Bamford.
Click to expand...

marks0223 · Jan 24, 2010

jo mama said:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1
Click to expand...

My friend, do you really believe the Bush administration who many feel is one of the dumbest in American history pulled off 9/11 without any trail of evidence that cannot be debunked. The Clinton administration couldn't keep a blow job a secret but Bush and 9/11...no problem.

Refman · Jan 24, 2010

marks0223 said:

My friend, do you really believe the Bush administration who many feel is one of the dumbest in American history pulled off 9/11 without any trail of evidence that cannot be debunked. The Clinton administration couldn't keep a blow job a secret but Bush and 9/11...no problem.
Click to expand...

Forget about who the President was at the time, there is no way that ANY administration could keep this quiet. It would require WAY too many people, and all of them taking the secret to their grave. Not likely.

sammy · Jan 24, 2010

who knows

couple of d's · Jan 24, 2010

marks0223 said:

My God, nine years later with all the evidence, if you say the government you are an IDIOT and need to get out of America. Why would you want to live in a country where you thought your government could do 9/11? Read this site: http://debunking911.com/ and stop bad mouthing my country.
Click to expand...

I had a customer come into my store yesterday wearing a shirt saying 9-11 was an inside job. Let's just say I wasn't as helpfull as I could of been. I don't understand how people can be so stupid, not to mention disrespectfull to the victims and their families.

Forums

[relaxed]Nine years later, who'se responsible for 911?

Who is responsible for 9-11? 2/3 answers are correct.

Osama.

Tim.

The Government.

Other.

BEAT LA Member

ryan_98 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

DonnyMost Member
Supporting Member

Landlord Landry Member

ryan_98 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

BEAT LA Member

Kojirou Member

Dairy Ashford Member

Pete Chilcutt Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions
Supporting Member

rhino17 Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

Air Langhi Contributing Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions
Supporting Member

jo mama Member

jo mama Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions
Supporting Member

Refman Member

sammy Member

couple of d's Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

[relaxed]Nine years later, who'se responsible for 911?

Who is responsible for 9-11? 2/3 answers are correct.

Osama.

Tim.

The Government.

Other.

BEAT LA Member

ryan_98 Contributing Member Supporting Member

DonnyMost Member Supporting Member

Landlord Landry Member

ryan_98 Contributing Member Supporting Member

BEAT LA Member

Kojirou Member

Dairy Ashford Member

Pete Chilcutt Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions Supporting Member

rhino17 Member

DaDakota Balance wins Supporting Member

Air Langhi Contributing Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions Supporting Member

jo mama Member

jo mama Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions Supporting Member

Refman Member

sammy Member

couple of d's Member

Share This Page

ryan_98 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

DonnyMost Member
Supporting Member

ryan_98 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions
Supporting Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions
Supporting Member

marks0223 2017 and 2022 World Series Champions
Supporting Member