IamSmooth wrote ...


From the press:
Assigning responsibilityFor several months after the 9/11 attacks, no one, nor any group, claimed responsibility for the attacks for the primary responsibility fell upon the hijackers, all of whom were killed and all of whom left no message or any claim of responsibility behind at explaining why they had carried the attacks out. As the media covered the 9/11 attacks unfolding, many quickly speculated that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks.[20] On the day of the attacks, the National Security Agency intercepted communications that pointed to Osama bin Laden,[21] as did German intelligence agencies.[22] This helped rule out other immediate suspects, such as Croatian nationalists, who had bombed Grand Central Terminal on September 11, 1976.[23]

Authorities in the United States and Britain also obtained electronic intercepts, including telephone conversations and electronic bank transfers, which indicate that Mohammed Atef, a bin Laden deputy, was a key figure in the planning of the 9/11 attacks. Intercepts were also obtained that revealed conversations that took place days before September 11 between bin Laden and an associate in Pakistan. In those conversations, the two referred to "an incident that would take place in America on, or around, September 11" and they discussed potential repercussions. In another conversation with an associate in Afghanistan, bin Laden discussed the "scale and effects of a forthcoming operation." These conversations did not specifically mention the World Trade Center or Pentagon, or other specifics.[24]

The investigators were quickly able to link the 19 men to the terrorist organization al-Qaeda, also by accessing material in their intelligence agency files. The New York Times reported on September 12 that: "Authorities said they had also identified accomplices in several cities who had helped plan and execute Tuesday’s attacks. Officials said they knew who these people were and important biographical details about many of them. They prepared biographies of each identified member of the hijack teams, and began tracing the recent movements of the men." FBI agents in Florida investigating the hijackers quickly "descended on flight schools, neighborhoods and restaurants in pursuit of leads." At one flight school, "students said investigators were there within hours of Tuesday’s attacks."[25] The Washington Post later reported that "In the hours after Tuesday’s bombings, investigators searched their files on [Satam] al-Suqami and [Ahmed] al-Ghamdi, noted the pair’s ties to [Nabil] al-Marabh and launched a hunt for him."[26]

Based on the evidence, authorities in the United States quickly asserted that Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization were solely responsible for the attacks, and other suspects were ruled out. The Government of the United Kingdom reached the same conclusion.[27] Although he denied the attacks at first, Osama bin Laden had since claimed full responsibility.

Author Laurie Mylroie writing in the conservative political magazine The American Spectator in 2006 argued that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his family are the primary architects of 9/11 and similar attacks, and that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's association with Osama bin Laden is secondary and that Al-Qaeda's claim of responsibility for the attack is after the fact and opportunistic.[28] In an opposing point of view, former CIA officer Robert Baer, writing in Time magazine in 2007, asserted that George W. Bush Administration's publicizing of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's claims of responsibility for 9/11 and numerous other acts was a mendacious attempt to claim that all of the significant actors in 9/11 had been caught.[29]

^ "NBC News (9:00 – 10:00 a.m.)". NBC / Internet Archive. September 11, 2001.
^ Blackhurst, Chris, and Paul Lashmar (September 30, 2001). "Piece by Piece, The Jigsaw of Terror Revealed". Independent on Sunday (London).
^ Tagliabue, John, and Raymond Bonner (September 29, 2001). "A NATION CHALLENGED: GERMAN INTELLIGENCE; German Data Led US to Search For More Suicide Hijacker

Of course, I expect you to say "Don't believe what is out in print". This, of course, would be coming from someone who quotes half-baked websites himself.

jpsmith123 wrote ...

The move would have been way too risky. At almost 600 mph and in a crosswind, the slightest deviation from perfect would mean missing the building altogether. The plane would've hit the building without the correction, it just would have been another 20 feet off center. Under the circumstances it was a precision maneuver that only a machine under some kind of guidance control would make,

jpsmith123 wrote ...

Getting back to the original issue, here's Paul Craig Roberts weighing in on it: