Each of the "events" and/or statements enumerated below either (1) are verified to have happened (many were watched by millions on TV) or (2) are claimed by the "authorities" to have happened -- or are maintained to be true by the same "authorities" (reporting in the major media).
An attempt is made here not to include out-and-out speculation or accusations that one or another group (the Government, the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the Secret Service, the vice president, the Lizard People, the ASPCA, the Illuminati, the Jews -- or "Zionists," the Arabs -- or Muslims in general, right-wing Christians, the Pope, liberal Christians, the New World Order-- or those who favor such, Janet Reno, O.J. Simpson, Jimmy Hoffa (who is still alive), Elvis (under the same assumption), the Raelians, a secret cult in Montana, Gray Davis (the current Governor of California), Saddam Hussein, Tony Blair, any President of the United States going back to Abraham Lincoln, Microsoft (although Microsoft does give me a head-ache at times), any oil company in America or overseas -- or any specific person or persons, organization or organizations, etc., ad nauseum) was responsible for what happened on 9-11. That's for you to decide. The intent here is only to state a number of events and such (not all independent) that taken as a whole would have an infinitesimal probability of having occurred under the assumption that all we have been told in the major media and by "the authorities" is true.
Remember that the events and/or beliefs listed below all stem from the stated "reality" that 19 Arabs under the direction of a mastermind in a cave or elsewhere in Afghanistan carried out the most complex and precision event in my memory. Although it appears that several such "Arabs" were involved (but not anywhere near the nineteen names provided by the FBI) and Osama bin Laden's Al-Quaida organization was at least used in some fashion, the facts are still basically unknown.
As regards the events and activities listed below, we should keep in mind that even the probability of only two dependent events both occurring has a probability of less than or equal to one since P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A and B) or alternatively stated, P(A and B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A or B). And even where you might argue that two or more events are "dependent," ask yourself if they would still be "dependent" under the assumptions as provided on UPI, AP, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN or Fox News. Under those assumptions, many seemingly dependent events become as random as the Lotto. There's additional discussion of the probabilities associated with these "dependent" events below, just after Event #128.
It should be noted that many of the items fall into a category of "pre-event" coincidences -- events whose inclusion in any overall probability of occurrence would be falacious (meaningless); that is, events that might occur at the same time as 9-11, but might have occurred anyway -- in the sense that other events happen every day that could be regarded as "coincidences" after the fact. They are included for interest sake only (some are quite interesting) and the reader may (should!) disregard them when computing his or her probability of "all" of the events having occurred. Certainly some events, such as the vertical collapse of the towers in free-fall time, the lack of any aircraft in the skies, Building #7 and all it implies, President Bush's memory of the seeing the first plane strike the North Tower, the anomalies surrounding the crash of Flight 77 into the Pentagon and dozens of others are not "pre-event" coincidences and, in most cases, are independent events. I think you will get the picture as you read the items themselves.
One respondent to my email address suggested that it's best to read only five randomly selected events from the list below at a time -- like #132, #51, #200, #12 and #85 -- and only do this once every day or two (using a different random set of five items each time, of course). He said that the impact of such a "random reading" was overwhelming after only two weeks. Hmmm . . . that was interesting, I thought.
Of course, since events where one event depends upon another are included, there is some seeming duplication. There might also be some inadvertant out-and-out duplication. Also, the order is admittedly somewhat random inasmuch as I am compiling this list from email and snail-mail responses (email me at: email@example.com) and under the time constraints associated with a full-time job (yes, I'm in my late sixties). I hope to reorder the list when I have a little time later this year. Should anyone wish to copy and use this list for any reason, feel free to do so. Let me know, so I can see any reordering and additions/deletions that you might accomplish -- and corrections (many, I'm sure) in spelling, punctuation and grammar.
If there is a thread of logic to all of what is listed below, it is simply that I believe that either all or most of the events actually happened or they didn't. If they did (defying probabilistic chance under the assumptions stated), then some of the assumptions (19 Arab terrorists pulled it off in the manner told to us by the mainstream media and Government) must be in error. If they didn't occur, then we didn't see much of what was shown live on TV and (again) some of the assumptions (19 Arab terrorists pulled it off in the manner told to us by the mainstream media and Government) must be in error. In either case ... [you can fill in the obvious!]
It is my belief that many of you could (each) write a complete book based on these events alone -- without speculation as to "who" or "what" is behind 9-11. Google.com will provide more than adequate resource material, but you can email me for any references (main media and Government) you may find difficult to find.
Now ... having said all of that ...
Consider each of these items/events/beliefs (or groupings of dependent events) and put an estimate of a chance of the occurrence of the event described; for example, one in a hundred, one in a thousand, etc. The chance of all of the following events happening is equal to one in a number equal to the product of all of the numbers estimated along the way.
This list was kicked off as a result of a spontaneous discussion at a cafeteria lunch table and began with only 27 items/events written strictly from the "top of my head." Emails and letters began to flow, and the list has about tripled at this point . . . and still grows. [June 2003: now more than 100!] Come back in a week and you will see changes, I'm sure. Every event is backed up by reference material from the main-stream press and electronic media or are from Government (e.g., www.WhiteHouse.gov) websites. Use www.Google.com on any of the events and see the full stories or supporting evidence yourself.
1. Chance of a 47 story building (heavily alarmed and with more than adequate sprinkling systems) catching fire and collapsing in a perfectly vertical "implosion." This was Building Seven, two blocks north of the North Tower and a building not struck by an airplane nor anywhere near the aviation fuel burning in that same Tower #1 -- a building two blocks south of it. (Huh?) this building (WTC Building #7") was even further north than the North Tower, about as far from the fires and collapses of the other towers as is possible for a WTC building. The collapse of Building #7, another ?skyscraper,? occurred more than five hours after the Twin Towers disaster; that is, fully eight hours after Flight 11 struck the North Tower?the tower closest to Tower #7 .
2. Chance of Item #1 above happening on the same day that two 110-story buildings also collapsed -- by fire, according to official Government statements, and not the impact of being struck by a commercial airplane. (Huh?)
3. Chance of three such ?implosions? occurring on the same day. These were the first, second and third time in history that high-rise buildings have imploded and vertically collapsed as a result of fire ? and not as a result of a deliberate well-planned and supervised demolition of an old building. (Huh?)
4. Chance of four aircraft crashing (two into tall buildings, one into a relatively short building and one into the ground) and then disintegrating to the extent that almost all of the engines, nearly every wheel housing and (naturally) all of the black boxes (and everything else) being literally pulverized. (Huh?)
5. Chance of the passport folder (with undamaged passport) of one of the perpetrators (Satam al-Suqami) of items #1 through #4, above, surviving the fire and crash and wafting to the ground from 90 stories up to three to four blocks away from the first tower struck. Oh yes, a second passport of this same person is reported to have been found in a vehicle parked at Logan Airport in Boston along with Mohammad Atta's drivers license. (Huh?) Actually, several items of this sort have turned up in various locations, all helping to nail down the Government's (and the mainstream media's) story that 19 Arabs managed to pull off the entire horrid affair -- at least no one has been arrested and charged with planning the activities of 9-11.
6. Chance of another of the perpetrators (Mohammad Atta) choosing to barely catch (Huh?) the plane he was planning to fly into the North Tower of the WTC -- all the time "knowing" he was initiating what would be the most electrifying event on America?s soil in more than two centuries. Barely catch such an important flight -- the most important flight of his life?
7. Chance of Atta?s baggage that missed that flight (of course) carrying incriminating evidence against him, including an airline pilot?s or navigator?s uniform. (Huh?) Had it made the plane, what value would that uniform have been in the baggage compartment?
8. Chance of the perpetrator?s (Atta?s) rent-a-car being in the airport of departure point of the intermediate flight (the one that crashed) and not the airport from which he (Atta) originally took off that morning. (Huh?)
9. Chance that not one of the perpetrators (19 in all) was caught on videotape before boarding any of the four flights that crashed. Atta was videotaped boarding a flight in Maine on its way to Boston where he nearly missed his connection. (Huh?) I doubt that was expected by any of the perpetrators -- Al-Quaida operatives or otherwise. Maine?
10. Chance that all four planes, all floors near the impact points in the Twin Towers and the wing and floor of the Pentagon where the plane crashed there ? were substantially below their usual occupancy levels. All of the building locations had construction ongoing and the planes were basically less than one-third full. (Huh?)
11. Chance that the Mayor of New York and city officials would choose to have NYC Command Center and bunker for senior New York City Government officials located on the 23rd floor (Huh?) of a Trade Center Tower ? the same mysterious Building #7. That at least explains why it was so well fire alarmed and sprinkler-protected.
12. Chance of both United Airlines and American Airlines stock being sold short (put options or short sells means an expectation of the stock going down, down, down) well beyond those of other airlines on the days prior to the crashes (two American Airlines and two United Airlines planes). (Hmmm . . .)
13. Chance of a disintegrating plane putting a ten-feet in circumference hole in the inner wall of the third ring in at the Pentagon -- that?s six walls, in and out from the outer wall. (Huh?)
14. Chance of a plane with a 125 feet wingspan hitting the Pentagon and leaving a hole less than 90 feet wide in outer wall ? with no seriously visible trauma to building?s outer wall outside of the hole in any of the earliest photos. Further, the ingress was at a planar (not from the horizontal or vertical -- but flat) angle of about 45 degrees, increasing its impact profile substantially (wider than 125 feet). (Huh?) The clipped lamp poles on the other side of the street (and beyond a large parking lot that nearly surrounds the Pentagon), a destroyed tree and damage to the stonework and windows at Corridor Four suggest that whatever struck the Pentagon was likely an airplane -- but of what size? We have no reliable eyewitness data to provide much information beyond a visual picture as sketchy as the video showing what looks like a missile impacting the Pentagon. Photos taken at different times show conflicting damage to the building itself inasmuch as the floors above the impact "hole" did not collapse until much later.
15. Chance of the President of the US recalling that he ?saw? the first plane crash into the first tower ? as stated and recorded on the White House.gov site ? not once but twice. (Huh?) Since the only films known of this event didn?t surface until late that evening, this must be one in a billion or something . . . I might add that this fact probably 100% clears George Bush himself of having known what was going on or he wouldn't have stated the truth so readily. But someone had that event videotaped from the git-go and that video was at least on the mobile Command Post's video screen, I would suggest. Do I smell a (bad word) conspiracy? ("Conspiracy" itself has become a bad word in the English vocabulary -- kind of like UFOs and Monica Lewinsky.)
16. Chance that so many businesses moved out of all three buildings during previous two weeks. Many of these businesses were owned by Jewish Americans. (Huh?), which leads to ?
17. Chance of Mossad and other Jewish intelligence personnel warning the US of an impending terrorist attack involving planes attacking large buildings, monuments and high profile targets, and of the US Government ignoring their serious and now-known-to-be-credible warnings. (Hmmm . . .) [These warnings have been verified to the very highest levels of the Israeli Government, yet we have yet to thank the Israelis for their attempt(s) to stop this horrific sequence of events. Many Americans are alive, it is believed, thanks to these warnings -- but why did the attacks still occur?]
18. Chance of four Arab terrorists with minimal training in flying commercial jets (largely from flying Cessna?s and practicing on a simulator) flying letter-perfect maneuvers into the two towers and the Pentagon (Huh?) and after having navigated from as far as Ohio. Their instructors referred to the entire group as ?bunglers? who would be incapable of flying large aircraft ? whereas experienced pilots repeatedly state that they doubt that they could have flown the maneuvers and simply could NOT have attacked the Pentagon from a horizontal pattern similar to that executed by AA77 (presumably a Boeing 757). Of particular note was a perfect downward spiral flown by whomever (or whatever) it was who (that) had the controls of AA Flight 77 from an altitude of 7,000 feet -- followed by a perfectly executed hairpin turn -- into a flat and level (at least four electrical/lamp poles across the street and both inside and on the other side of a large parking lot from the Pentagon were clipped) trajectory that took it into the first floor of the Pentagon at approximately 450 nautical miles per hour. Yes, the first floor! (double-huh!) That was the exact area and floor of the Pentagon undergoing rehab and having very low occupancy during the reconstruction.
19. Chance of four aircraft with experienced pilots and navigators having been hijacked without even one pilot transmitting the 7-7-0-0 "hijacked plane" code to the ground controllers. (Huh?)
20. Chance of dedicated terrorists who are fundamental Muslims being both so fundamental as to be willing to die for sake of Allah, yet willing to drink and womanize up until two nights before the terrorist attacks occurred. (Hmmm . . .)
21. Chance of same ?dedicated terrorists? being willing to leave substantial amounts of evidence so as to incriminate Al Quaida network (for whom they worked and to whom they owed allegiance), and yet have the leader of the organization (Osama bin Laden) deny that he had anything to do with the attacks within several days of the attacks. (Hmmm . . .)
22. Chance of Government officials (NYC and Federal) disposing of all of the steel girders that didn?t ?pulverize? before trained investigators could be put to work on the scene. (Huh?) Same, same for all other debris at the site of the three buildings that collapsed in New York and the Pentagon. (To make it easier for you, that would be the same probability as that of a policeman tossing a murder weapon into a trash compactor before a detective arrived on the scene.)
23. Chance that Congressional Investigation panel (into the 9-11 tragedy) would not have sufficient clearances more than a year and a half later ? panel members including former US Senators and others of similar stature and having had very high clearances in the recent past ? so as to even begin their investigation. Even the somewhat conservative former US senator Slate Gorton complained about the delay in his clearance as recently as March 16, 2003. (Hmmm . . .) They have since begun their work on what they refer to as a "shoestring." Why such low funding for a Congressional investigation? Are we going to ultimately see the publication of another "Warren Commission Report" such as the report [sic] of the Kennedy assassination? Why did Dr. Henry Kissinger first accept then resign as Chairman of that investigation committee. That's another "Chance of ..." I would suggest.
24. Chance of complete plans for the attacks onto Afghanistan and removal of the Taliban being in place before the attacks of 9-11. (You might include plans to attack Iraq and remove the Saddam Hussein regime too.) (Hmmm . . .)
25. Chance of FBI to be able to name the 19 Arabs who commandeered the hijacked aircraft (with photographs for the newspapers to publish) within 48 hours of the attack ? assuming they knew absolutely nothing of the attacks one moment earlier than the first hijacking. (Huh?)
26. Chance of the USAF (and all of NORAD) being incapable of scrambling even one jet (save two out of Massachusetts, far to the north) during the hour (actually more) between first knowing of hijacked aircraft and preceding the final crash into the Pentagon. (Hmmm . . .) The proximity of both Andrews AFB and Langley AFB close to Washington, DC makes this "chance" even less, I would surmise. Why did the fighter-interceptor aircraft at these bases stand down anyway?
27. Chance of manifests (lists of passengers on planes) given to reporters over full week after crash not including a single name of even one of the 19 Arabs mentioned above in #25. The reason given by airlines was that next of kin of not all of the deceased had yet been notified. (Huh?)
28. Chance of Building #6 (yes, another of the WTC buildings) exploding only seconds before the South Tower collapsed (Huh?). The film of it (CNN) shows the cloud of white smoke reaching to almost one-third of the height of the Twin Towers (all of this before they fell, of course) and there has never been an explanation for that explosion. Arial photos afterwards show it was a major explosion in the very center of the building (nice, round hole) -- but no explanation. (Huh?)
29. Chance of every one of the 1200 persons in Building #6 being evacuated only seconds before the explosion -- and all of the evacuation beginning only about ten minutes after the North Tower was struck by the first aircraft. How could they have known that Building #6 was about to explode? (Huh?)
30. Chance of no one in the Pentagon being evacuated before a plane (seen on radar traveling hell-bent towards Washington, DC) was reported hijacked -- after the Twin Towers had been struck up in New York City. (Huh?) How could anyone have known that the plane (or whatever) would strike the Pentagon "low and horizontally" at a point and side of the Pentagon undergoing reconstruction?
31. Chance of the owner of WTC Building #7 (See #1) having finalized and signed a 99-year lease on Buildings #1 and #2 (those are the Twin Towers and this was the first time in its thirty year history that the WTC had changed hands) only seven weeks before 9-11. (Huh???) He (Larry Silverstein) also took control of Buildings 4 and 5 plus square footage elsewhere in the WTC complex.
32. Chance of the South Tower -- that was struck after the North Tower -- collapsing first! (Huh???) Add to this the fact that the second plane struck the South Tower at a severe angle, striking the corner of the building and spilling the burning and exploding fuel outside the building (who could forget the sight?) -- quite different than the first aircraft that went straight in and put the fuel, fire and explosion in the center of the building to burn where it could cause more damage to the Tower itself.
33. Chance of cell phone calls being made from all four hijacked planes, some from altitudes above 10,000 feet, being successfully completed. (huh?) At least thirteen (13) and as many as thirty (30) or more calls are reported to have been made from Flight 93 (crashed in Pennsylvania) alone. Subsequent tests with light aircraft were unsuccessful at altitudes below 8,000 feet and the "skin" of a commercial jet is aluminum -- likely to attenuate such signals in the manner of a "Faraday Box" created by students in high school laboratories. These calls are an important piece of evidence used by the authorities to identify the terrorist/hijackers as Arabs. (It should be added that A.K. Dewdney analyzed this issue and determined that the cell phone calls could indeed have been faked by a determined agency.)
34. Chance of hijackers (in one case -- the second call from Barbara Olson) actually requesting the passengers to use their cell phones to tell their loved ones that they were "going to die." (huh?) This seems to me to be rather strange behavior for hijackers who don't want to be intercepted and shot down before arriving on target.
35. Chance of a terrorist pilot with minimal training choosing to attack the Pentagon the "hard way." This is not a repeat of #18 which was the chance of success. Here, we are asking what the probability is of a hijacker choosing to spiral down from 7,000 plus feet and then execute a hairpin maneuver to attack the Pentagon 'straight and level' over lamp posts, parked cars and an electrical generator, etc. (huh?) rather than simply attacking the Pentagon from above in, say, a 45 degree dive -- much easier and less chance of not accomplishing the goal.
36. Chance of weapon's grade Anthrax being used to kill Americans via the US Postal Service only a short while after 9-11. And for that matter what is the chance that, despite the fact that only Government laboratories are capable of producing spores as small as the ones used (huh?), that no one has yet been arrested and indicted?
37. Chance of approximately 3000 Americans being killed in a series of clearly illegal events happening on the same day and there not even being an inquest. (huh?)
Many of the next dozen or so were contributed by
Dr. Henry Lindner M.D.
whom I came to know while working in Riyadh during the 1990s.
38. Chance of the CIA Head of Station in Dubai meeting with Osama bin Laden several times in June 2001 while bin Laden was in the hospital there for treatment.(huh?) [Oldmanjoe: That particular hospital was the American Hospital in Dubai, by the way. There is a large entrance sign with "American" very, very prominent -- How do I know? I went to meetings there on a regular basis, at first in the psych ward and then (yes!) in the maternity ward where our Twelve Step Program met twice each week. Osama bin Laden's having been there has been verified by persons with whom I worked to get the Twelve Step meetings held there because I was the only regular member who was an "American."]
39. Chance of a brother of Osama bin Laden being a business partner of George W. Bush. (huh?)
40. Chance of the US massing troops around the borders of Afghanistan before 9-11 (huh?) -- not knowing that 9-11 would occur and that an invasion was forthcoming.
41. Chance of the US Government turning down repeated offers by Sudan and Afghanistan to turn over Osama bin Laden and all documents relating to him (huh?) -- at a time when the Al Quaida was being blamed for the Saudi bombings, the USS Cole attack, etc. -- and he was Public Enemy #1 for a time at least.
42. Chance of President Bush issuing Executive Order 199-Eye demanding that all investigations of Osama bin Laden's relatives cease -- prior to 9-11! (huh?)
43. Chance of numerous FBI agents publicly complaining that their efforts to track and investigate Al Quaida agents in the US were being blocked at "high levels." (huh?)
44. Chance of some of the alleged Al Quaida terrorists receiving flight training at the Pensacola Naval Air Station. (huh?)
45. Chance of the put options purchased shortly before 9-11 being purchased by a firm formerly run by the current CIA Director. (huh?) There are other details related to this, but it might be best to let you, the readers, dig around in google.com finding those details for yourselves.
46. Chance of several building emptying drills in the World Trade Center having been exercised in the weeks just prior to the attacks upon the Twin Towers. (huh?) One hypothesis is that the crucial bolts in the construction of the towers could have easily been loosened during such "drills." That might explain the pancake-like collapse of the Towers which has been explained [sic] in at least a dozen different and questionable speculations as to "How?" and "Why?" It has also been speculated that explosive charges could have been placed at crucial locations -- providing an explanation for a couple of other "items" in this growing list pertaining to explosions being heard after the planes struck and just before each of the collapses.
47. Chance of more than 400 relatives and friends of victims of the tragedy initiating a class action suite against (huh?) a dozen or so US Government officials, starting at the very top, as either perpetrators or abettors in the crime. It's difficult for me to believe or suggest that high-ranking Government officials actually "helped" the terrorists in any way, but it's certainly clear to me that after the fact, they are covering up something. But what?
And a half dozen or so from a close -- wishes to remain anonymous -- relative. Thanks!
48. Chance of both the President (in a televised speech) and others in his administration suggesting that it might be unpatriotic to suggest possible "conspiracies" if everything is otherwise quite explainable (huh?) in the manner suggested by the authorities.
49. Chance of Attorney general John Ashcroft discontinuing to fly on commercial aircraft starting in July 2001 -- two months prior to 9-11. (huh?) Both he (prior to July) and Janet Reno, etc. ad infinitum all flew on commercial aircraft regularly.
50. Chance of the FAA refusing to let Salmon Rushdie (author of Satanic Verses) fly in North America starting in the week before 9-11. (huh?) And we all know that Salmon Rushdie was often used as a sort of anti-Islamic poster boy. This only strengthens the case that some sort of "set-up" may have been in operation.
51. Chance of Florida Governor Jeb Bush activating the National Guard four days prior to the 9-11 attacks -- citing "acts of terrorism." (huh?).
52. Chance of high ranking Pentagon officials (according to Newsweek) canceling travel plans for morning of 11 September 2001 . . . on 10 September 2001. They cited "security concerns." (Huh? This was on the day before 9-11!)
53. Chance of San Francisco's Mayor (Willie Brown) being warned on 10 September not to fly the next morning. (huh?). He credited the warning to his "security people."
54. Chance of CIA Director, George Tenet warning congressmen just prior to day of attack of an imminent attack on the United States of this nature" (Hmmmm ...) (quote from NPR Morning Edition, 11 September 2003).
And the emails and letters continue to come in -- plus one phone call! Wow!
55. Chance of the President of the United States continuing to speak with children (reciting a story about a goat) in a classroom for a full 25 minutes after (huh?) having had Andy Card whisper in his ear brief details of the second aircraft plowing into the WTC, concluding with the words, "America is under attack."
56. Chance of the New York Fire Department (all shown on a wonderful and emotional film) setting up and maintaining a "Command Post" in the Lobby of Tower #1 -- if aviation fuel had spilled down to the bottom of the elevator shafts to burn "upward" so as to "melt" the steel girders, causing the ultimate perfectly vertical (and flat) collapse of the entire Tower #1. Note: there was no mention among those manning the Command Post of any radiation heat from such intense fires burning nearby. They did, however, report having heard muffled explosions just prior to the collapse. (Hmmm . . .)
57. Chance of passengers finally (at least a half hour after the time of the aircraft impact) emerging unhurt and unburned (huh?) from an elevator in the center of a building supposedly burning from inside the elevator shafts. Authorities would later refer to those fires down the center of the building as an "inferno."
58. Chance of non-pressurized aviation fuel burning at heat that would equal or exceed the melting point of steel. (hmmm . . .)
59. Chance of a video being taken of the second plane impacting WTC Tower #2 and that same video catching a significant portion of the flight of a missile-like object (however, no contrail) traveling downwards from Tower #1 (above the explosion relative to the second plane's impact) at a 45 degree angle towards the relative position of Building #6. (huh?) This might explain the explosion seen in the CNN footage described below.
60. Chance of a replay of some CNN footage shown just minutes after the second plane's impact (shown to millions of viewers) showing a significant explosion roughly where Building #6 would be (see #28, above) just after the video taken and cited in #59, above. (Hmmmm . . .)
61. Chance of the executive editor of the National Fire protection Association (NFPA) Journal stating in his November 1, 2001 article that the Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighters (ARFF) from Reagan National Airport arrived on-scene in two to three minutes (Huh?) and put out "the bulk" of the fire at the Pentagon in "the first seven minutes. after their arrival." (Double-huh? -- What were we watching on TV?)
62. Chance of the executive editor of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Journal stating in his November 1, 2001 article that the ARFF used foam to put the fire out. (Huh? Again, what were we watching on TV?)
And for that matter . . .
63. Chance of the fire fighters who arrived at the Pentagon actually using water on a fire fueled by aviation fuel -- which is what we all saw on TV and thousands of pictures afterwards have verified. (Hmmm . . .)
64. Chance of a fire that was presumably contained in seven minutes still burning more than sixty hours (Huh?) after the impact of Flight 77 into the outer wall of the Pentagon. Forget the nonsense report of the fire being extinguished in seven minutes -- just think, what is the chance of any fire in a masonry building burning for sixty hours while fire fighters are frantically working to extinguish the blaze? (Hmmmm . . . weird!)
65. Chance of the first New York witness (on NBC yet!) stating that she saw a small private jet flying into the North Tower -- when later it was stated and evidence seemingly shows it was a large commercial jet.
66. Chance of the first report on NBC relative to the Pentagon attack stating that there had been an explosion near the Pentagon heliport -- no mention of a plane! (Huh?)
67. Chance of neither wing of a commercial Boeing 757 which extended more than 40 feet beyond the size of the entrance "hole" remaining outside of the Pentagon. The Pentagon, incidentally, is constructed of masonry -- limestone -- not glass and steel! (Huh?)
68. Chance of all four pilots (of the hijacked planes) being told to turn off the transponders before the hijackings even took place. (Huh?)
69. Chance of at least two -- and likely all four -- of the planes dropping off conventional (FAA) radars after the transponders were turned off. (Huh?)
70. Chance of a passenger who had said that he and others were about to "attack" the cockpit also stating that "we are going to die!" . . . prior to attacking the terrorists (on Flight 93) when other evidence shows that the pilots were still alive -- having been herded to the back of the plane -- and yet not seemingly a part of the rush onto the cockpit. What were the pilots told -- if they were indeed still alive? (Huh?)
71. Chance of small debris being found as far as six miles from the impact point of a plane that crashed into the ground where (as we have been told) there was neither an on-board explosion nor a "shoot-down" of the aircraft. (Huh?)
72. Chance of several witnesses stating that they saw both an explosion in the air (at least one and possibly more) and fighter aircraft trailing a large commercial airliner (presumably Flight 93) prior to its crashing into the ground in the manner that we have been led to believe it did. (Huh?)
73. Chance of "significant chunks" of debris from Flight 93 (which, as we've been told, flew directly into the ground at full speed -- no air-borne explosions as witnesses reported and no "shoot-down" by an F-16) being found as far from the crash site as one mile. Not "Huh?" but "How?" My doctorate in math and my training in engineering and physics is challenged. (once again . . .) (Huh?)
74. Chance of as many as six of the Saudis (who comprised 15 of the 19 terrorists supposedly aboard the four ill-fated aircraft) and one non-Saudi being reported "alive, but frightened" by their families and/or close friends within three weeks after the 9-11 tragedy. (Huh?)
75. Chance of bin Laden family members residing in the US being flown hastily out of the US during the days following 9-11 while all commercial flights were "grounded." (Hmmm ...)
76. Chance of President Bush's Secret Service not having hustled the president to safety immediately after it was clear that "America was under attack" (being told directly to the president). It was later stated that this action was not accomplished so as "not to frighten the children." (Huh?)
77. Chance of paper documents incriminating Osama bin Laden being found intact and unburned at the WTC site, yet the black boxes and most everything else there being pulverized. (Huh?)
78. Chance of news cameramen being prevented for several days after the attack from photographing the site from certain angles. (Why?)
79. Chance of a clear discrepancy of as many as 34 names between the published passenger lists and the official list of those killed on the four flights. In fact, almost nothing really matched. (Huh?)
80. Chance of the New York Police Department liaison to the FBI being told he must discontinue in that capacity because he was a "security risk." (Hmmm)
81. Chance of a sophisticated terrorist plan such as 9-11 had to be -- most likely involving dozens of persons other than those aboard the airplanes -- not being noticed by the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc., etc., etc.(Huh?)
82. Chance of witnesses claiming to have heard additional explosions within the buildings -- including the persons, a New York fireman among them, who were miraculously rescued from the "bubble" buried in the debris. (Huh?)
83. Chance of the FBI acknowledging that the names of the hijackers might indeed be falsified -- yet picture IDs were required, I believe, to board the aircraft. (Huh?) That might explain why so many of the "hijackers" were reported to be "alive and scared" afterwards (see #74, above).
84. Chance of Al-Quaida "network" of terrorist operatives [and no argument about them in other activities!] being almost instantly (within 24 hours) being identified and blamed for 9-11, yet no shred of tangible evidence being presented to the American people. [How could there be? There hasn't even been an inquest yet, only two overseas wars plus the "War on Terror" ... as of this event being written.] (Huh?)
85. Chance of the FBI identifying the full contingent of Arabic hijackers from the non-Arabic names on the planes' manifests. (Huh?)
86. Chance of the seat numbers identified by the FBI as the seat numbers of the hijackers not matching up with the seats supposedly cell-phoned to authorities by Flight Attendant Amy Sweeney. (Huh?)
87. Chance of the FBI not updating their list on the basis of evidence given them by the Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister -- relating to the still living "hijackers". (Huh?)
88. Chance of the supposedly fundamentalist (Islamic) suicide terrorists carousing and searching for prostitutes the evening before 9-11 in Boston. (Huh?)
89. Chance of a hijacker leaving an incriminating note in the car at Boston's Logan Airport. (Huh?) Did they want Al-Quaida to be quickly identified and attacked? [Maybe ... yes!]
90. Chance of the terrorists having top secret codes relating to both the White House and Air Force One -- the reason given for taking the President hop, skipping and jumping all over the country on 9-11 --once he left the schoolhouse.(Huh?)
91. Chance of no additional evidence having been found relating to the 9-11 attacks since the day of the attacks -- and that after hundreds of arrests and a half million (the last time I read a number) tips. (Huh?)
92. Chance of hundreds of foreigners being held by the US in Cuba without criminal charges being pressed nor indictments prosecuted -- all relating to the 9-11 events, but still being held more than a year later. (Hmmm . . . ironic choice of the Island of Cuba for our detention camp, I think ...)
93. Chance of Flight 93 flying straight into the ground, yet having eye-witnesses who stated that they "saw" explosions and falling burning debris -- assuming as we've been told that there were no on-board explosions and no shoot-down. (Huh?)
94. Chance of Flight 93 not having been shot down with eye-witnesses having stated that they saw an F-16 following the plane -- and in fact maneuvering in circles around the plane -- prior to the crash.(Huh?)
95. Chance of knife-slitting, screaming, threats and other blood-curdling events having occurred, yet afterwards, having a passenger state on a cell phone that the hijackers "are being kind." (Huh?) This could be stated in reverse ... chance of that same soothing phone call after the hijacking and after the box-cutters were used in such a terrible manner.
96. Chance of the New York City's bomb-proof and disaster-proof Command Post (on the 23rd floor of Building #7) not even being activated during New York's worst disaster since its construction. (Huh?)
97. Chance of the New York City's bomb-proof and disaster-proof Command Post (on the 23rd floor of Building #7) being perfectly located in the trajectory of the first aircraft (the one that struck Tower #1) and in the curved trajectory (but further along that projected trajectory) of the second aircraft (the one that struck Tower #2). (Hmmm ...)
Holy Schmolie! If you folks continue to send emails (some have interesting links to incredible URLs), this list will go into three digits soon . . .
98. Chance of the New York City's bomb-proof and disaster-proof Command Post (on the 23rd floor of Building #7) being largely "pulverized" and its reinforced steel remains being shipped to China and India for "recycling" before investigators and the New York City Fire Department itself could examine the remains for possible evidence. (Huh?)
99. Chance of five former Israeli Army veterans who were witnessed (and photographed) across the river in New Jersey at the time of the tragedy dancing and giving 'high-fives' ... having box-cutters (huh?), almost $5000 hidden in a sock and European passports (according to ABC's 20/20). [Why were they so happy after such a tragedy anyway?] (Hmmm ...)
100. Chance of some of the hijackers leaving Arabic-language flight manuals and a Koran in a parked car at one of the "take-off" airports. Didn't they need the flight manuals -- and want the Koran? (Huh?)
101. Chance of FBI Director Robert Mueller openly admitting that some of the identities of the hijackers "are in question because of identity theft," then no more about that since -- that is, since about two weeks after 9-11. The same 19 persons' pictures continued to be posted as being the culprits until ... well, until the time that I wrote this "event." (Huh?)
102. Chance of an Israeli instant messaging company, Odigo, receiving instant message warnings only two hours before the attacks themselves. Odigo was reported to have offices in New York City at the time of the airing of this information. (Huh?)
103. Chance of Louie Cacchioli, a Harlem firefighter, saying (and I repeat the reported quote) "I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip, a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building." [This might explain the first, second and third time in the history of the world that tall buildings were said to have collapsed vertically ... due to ... fire!] (Yes, right.)
104. Chance of the media stating that fire caused the buildings to collapse when (1) it has never before happened in the history of the world (repeated, I know) and (2) no physical evidence, such as the melted steel, was retained for investigation or scientific inquiry. (Huh?)
105. Chance of Tom Ridge, the fairly new Director of Homeland Security and an extremely intelligent person in my opinion, lamenting that he "had no idea" why not one of the 1300 (the count at that time some weeks after 9-11) persons arrested was an Al-Quaida operative nor had they (again, at that time -- and even now as far as I know) found a single Al-Quaida cell operating in the US. (Huh?)
106. Chance of John O'Neill, head of WTC Security on the day of the attacks -- and who was killed at that time -- having left his FBI job only two weeks prior to 9-11 because persons from "higher up the chain of command" were interfering with his ongoing investigation of Islamic terrorists in America. (Hmmm ...)
107. Chance of the put options (mentioned above) on United Airlines stock being handled by a firm previously managed by the #3 Executive Director of the CIA (on the day of the attacks). (Huh?)
108. Chance of $2.5 million in profits (from the put options on UAL stock) never being picked up (huh?) after 9-11 and after a mention in the mainstream media about those options. [Depending upon how one views this "event," it might have a probability of 0.9 -- still below 1.0, however.]
109. Chance of the FBI requesting the airlines to keep the names of the suspected hijackers "quiet for now" [and this request remains in effect even today] because of the uncertainties as to their identities -- yet providing the newspapers and other media the full names and photos of the nineteen hijackers (no suggestion of uncertainty) within 48 hours and never retracting the list or updating it. (Huh?)
110. Chance of not one of the alleged phone calls (cell calls and back-of-seat phones) from the three aircraft that crashed into buildings -- seven or eight in all -- mentioning that the hijackers were of Middle Eastern descent (or at least mentioning that they were olive-to-dark skinned). One of those passengers involved in these particular calls was Barbara Olson, a relatively well-known journalist who would, it would seem to me, be unlikely to neglect mentioning something as important as that fact. (Hmmm ...)
111. Chance of copies of the "final letter of instruction" being found in specific locations that tied the plot to three of the crashed aircraft -- one accidentally left behind (off-board the aircraft) when the aircraft took of, one intact at the crash site of Flight 93 and one in a garbage can in an airport parking lot. (Hmmm ...)
112. Chance of that document (mentioned just above) beginning with the words "In the Name of God, the most merciful, the most compassionate -- in the name of God, of myself and my family ..." I lived in the Middle East for the better part of a decade and believe that Muslims always mention the Prophet Mohammed immediately after Allah in all of their prayers. (Huh?)
113. Chance of the Arabic text of the above letter not being released by the FBI -- even until now, more than a year later. (Hmmm ...)
114. Chance of the two F-15s that took off from Otis ANG Base flying at an average speed of 720 miles per hour towards New York prior to the second aircraft impacting the WTC at 9:02 a.m. Otis to NYC is 190 miles; planes took off at 8:52 a.m. and we are told they were still 70 miles from the WTC at the time of the impact ten minutes after the F-15s took off. Admittedly, this is a corrected item inasmuch as, although 720 mph is about half the max speed of an F-15, the 720 mph is within a reasonable "expected" average speed. I had previously computed the speed to be twelve miles per hour or less than the stall speed of an F-15 -- applying what I had called "simple arithmetic." Paint me "embarrassed." (Thanks, Alex!) I'd give this one a probability of 0.5 based upon my USAF years.
115. Chance of the President of the United States of America boarding Air Force One (after finally leaving the school building in Florida after continuing to read to the children for a half an hour) and then not returning to the nation's Capitol, Washington, DC, until 7:00 p.m. -- more than ten hours after the attacks began that morning. It was reported to the press later that he was routed and rerouted to numerous stops including Louisiana and Nebraska because the terrorists were known to have the codes to Air Force One, the President's aircraft. (Hmmm ...)
116. Chance of the Arab terrorists, including the 15 Saudis who allegedly died in the four crashes, having access to the 'Special Access Required' Top Secret codes [meaning higher than Top Secret] relating to Air Force One and Presidential procedures during a time of national emergency. (Hmmm ...) [Makes one wonder who all was involved and who all was/were ultimately targeted, doesn't it?]
117. Chance of the air space over Washington, DC being considered unsafe for Air Force One under any conditions for several hours after a major terrorist attack and a shutdown of commercial aircraft nationwide. (huh?) [This seems highly related to the fact that no USAF fighter aircraft were positioned to stop Flight 77 from attacking the Pentagon a full hour and a half after the first plane impacted the North Tower of the World Trade Center -- but then, who knows, right?]
118. Chance of the final "we really don't know" story from the White House about the terrorists intentions vis-á-vis attacking Air Force One being buried back on page eight and page twelve (Huh?) of the two largest US newspapers. [Most newspapers didn't even carry the story -- and most Americans still don't know why the President was very wisely moving from one Command Post to another across the country during the hours after the 9-11 attacks.]
119. Chance of the FBI Director (Robert Mueller) stating in April 2002 after seven months of exhaustive investigation after the 9-11 tragedy that the 19 alleged hijackers "left no paper trail" and to have said further that, "in our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper--either here or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere--that mentioned any aspect of the September 11 plot." (Whew!) [Recall that these same terrorists were reported to have left behind instruction letters, prayers, Korans, passports and other incriminating evidence at airports, etc.--which leads one to speculate just who were the 19 "Arab" persons aboard the aircraft if not the persons associated with the 19 pictures published in US newspapers immediately after 9-11--with complete names--that we've come to know so well?]
120. Chance of fewer than 25,000 of our weakest and most vulnerable souls on earth having died of starvation on 11 September 2001. Since the average has been computed to be 35,615 deaths by starvation daily, the chance that fewer than 25,000 would have died of starvation on 9-11 is about one in a million using a Gaussian Distribution. Just pen this one in and take my word for it. [no "Huh?" about it! Admittedly, there is some bias showing through on my part here and you may skip this item if you don't share my concern about the issue of starvation worldwide.]
121. Chance of fewer than 500 species of plants and animals having become extinct on 11 September 2001. Since the average number of plants and animals becoming extinct daily, 365 days a year -- not just on 11 September 2001 -- has been estimated at 578, we're still on the track of very low chances of this event occurring as stated. And before I get back to the miniscule chances of various 9-11 related events, it might be worth mentioning that more than 150,000 acres of rainforests were destroyed by mankind on 9-11 too. Yes, I have a fixation on the incredibly unlikely occurrence of a number of events directly or indirectly associated with the terrible events in New York on 9-11; but it puts things in perspective a little to reflect on these past two "chance of" events/truths, doesn't it? [no "Huh?" here either ... again, one of my personal biases is showing through here and this item can be skipped by those who don't share my personal concerns about the rapid decline in species due to the carelessness of one of them. And yes, many species do die out for purely natural reasons too; I know that.]
But getting back to the main thrust of this list ... (and to summarize some of the points above in a slightly different manner so as to make your job easier in establishing the chances of the events actually occurring . . .)
122. Chance of a full 35 minutes elapsing between the time that the FAA was notified that Flight 77 "was probably hijacked" and then (the FAA) notifying NORAD that something was amiss. Standard SOP says to do so instantly! (Huh?)
123. Chance of a full 24 minutes elapsing between the time that radio-transponder communications with Flight 11 was lost and the order for the scrambling of jets to occur. Standard SOP calls for instant scrambling of jets when any commercial aircraft is off course. (Huh?)
124. Chance of not a single fighter interceptor being in the vicinity of Flight 93 a full 50 minutes after it was declared hijacked. (Huh?)
. . . and completing this slightly different view of the time elapsed and the "empty" skies -- empty of USAF assets anyway ...
125. Chance of NORAD refusing to use the (many) bases closer to Flights 11, 77 and 175 (the ones that crashed into buildings) that had combat-ready squadrons ready to fly. Or alternatively stated ... chance of NORAD choosing to scramble jets from as far as 130 and 200 miles away from the aircraft that were hijacked -- when, for example, both Andrews AFB and Langley AFB are nearby with combat-ready fighters and are specifically charged with protecting the very airspace being used by the hijackers! (Huh?)
126. Chance of the entire civilian and military air defenses of the Unites States of America collapsing entirely within one month of two meetings wherein all top chiefs of all US intelligence agencies and the President of the United States were explicitly warned that hijacking of commercial aircraft was "likely" in the very near future. (Whew!)
127. Chance of my asking a random sample of ten persons -- all of higher than average intelligence and reasonably well read -- what they know about "Building #7 at the World Trade Center" -- and having all ten respond as if they had never really ever even heard of "Building #7 at the World Trade Center." Under normal circumstances, that should be about one in a billion since that building's perfectly vertical collapse (implosion) due to fire was the first of its kind in the history of the world. (Be sure to purchase the Commemorative film for the New York Fire Department and see Building #7 slowly collapse and disintegrate.) I indeed sampled ten persons and not one of them knew one thing about Building #7. (Did you, prior to reading #1 of this list?) In any event, that provided me with an excellent indication of just how well hidden so many of the actual facts associated with 9-11 have been for the past year and a half. Some are buried in the back pages of old newspapers, but many have simply not been mentioned at all by the major media or the Government. (Why?)
128. Chance of all of the load bearing supports on the ground floor of Building #7 failing at exactly the same time. (Huh?) And since we're reexamining Building #7's strange vertical collapse and implosion, what would be the chance of a fire caused by stored diesel fuel (again ... huh? ... and why?) burning so as to be equally distributed throughout the entire first floor?
Oh yes, notice that these last two "events" are closely related to each other and to #1, for that matter. Fine. Before continuing with the list it might be worthwhile to include a short lesson in Probability Theory for those who may be bothered by my including dependent or "not mutually exclusive" events. A well-known theorem is P(A Ç B) = P(A/B) * P (B) where P(A/B) is the conditional probability of A given that B occurs and P(A Ç B) is the probability that both A and B occur. Thus the probability that Building #7 collapsed perfectly vertically and that the intense fire on its first floor was uniformly distributed therein (the "official" story) is equal to the probability of having such an intense fire burning uniformly on the first floor which I think is a chance of about one in a million multiplied by the chance of the building collapsing vertically (without explosives to assist in the destruction of the building) given that the fire was uniformly intense at the location of each load-bearing support -- still a chance of one in 10, I would guess -- assuming the intensity was sufficient to melt steel, which is highly improbable. Thus the probability of both events (the official story) would be a chance of about one in ten million! And that is a conservative number. And that's only referencing Building #7. There are Buildings #1, #2 and #6 which should be included separately. I hope that helps. I knew there was a reason way back in the 60's for taking some time out to earn an extra masters degree -- a Masters in Experimental Statistics at N.C. State -- before going on to get my doctorate.
Well, back to the growing list . . .
129. Chance of not a single one of the firemen in the lobby nearby the elevator (shaft) in the North Tower (Building #1) shown in the marvelous documentary film commemorating the firemen's bravery ... even mildly complaining about a fire burning nearby in the building with a heat that was estimated (later) by FEMA to have been 900 - 1100 degrees Celsius -- that is, more than 1700 degrees Fahrenheit, a temperature sufficient to (naturally) melt the steel beams and support structures -- as well as (not mentioned by FEMA) casting aluminum and/or glazing pottery.
130. Chance of Vice President Cheney and his staff being administered Cipro (the specific antibiotic for Anthrax) on the morning of September 11, 2001 -- almost a month before the first Anthrax mailing in early October. (Huh?) Back to the age-old question: Who knew what -- and when?
131. Chance of the 1/118th Infantry Battalion of the South Carolina National Guard reporting for duty in July, 2001, and being unexpectedly informed that all of their activities (which had already been planned) for the next two months would be suspended so that they could prepare for a mobilization exercise scheduled for mid-September, 2001!
132. Chance of Bush's national security leadership meeting between 90 and 100 times in the months immediately prior to the 9-11 attacks, yet discussing terrorism only twice during those meetings. This was the "principals committee" of the National Security Council. Despite the discussion of an impending attack using commercial airliners only one month earlier, the Bush staff defended the lack of concern towards terrorism as a result of only "scattered hints" of Al-Quaida activities. (Huh?)
133. Chance of the banking confidentiality laws being strong enough to keep secret the names of individuals and organizations who placed the "put" options on American Airlines and United Airlines just prior to 9-11 -- more than a year and a half later! (Huh?) [... and the clock is still ticking in June of 2003 as this "event" is being posted.]
134. Chance of even one cell phone (let alone between 13 and 30) with a max power of five watts (most cell phones have three or four) being capable of even making the "handshake" required to make a call with a ground-based transponder. Add the following facts to your analysis before making the estimate of the chance of this "handshake" occurring: The planes were at an altitude of at least 5,000 feet, the planes were traveling at 450 miles per hour -- or faster, the electronic "handshake" takes roughly 45 seconds for a cell out of five-watt range, etc. A plane traveling at 450 mph is traveling at three times the max range of a cell phone's transmitter before such a "handshake" could occur. All of the following have to occur for the "handshake" to be successful: (1) contact must be made, (2) the tower must know "who" (including the provider) the cell phone is, (3) the tower must know the precise mode of the call, and (4) it must be established that it is indeed in a roaming area. This can be accomplished upon take-off and landing, but at 5000-plus feet and in a commercial airliner with its aluminum skin -- whew! Notice how little press the cell phone calls received after the second week or so. Wonder why?
135. Chance of George W. Bush's advisors insisting that he remain in an unprotected school on a known intersection reading to the children when the Secret Service desperately wanted to transfer Mr. Bush to Cheyenne Mountain, protected by hundreds of tons of granite, during this very uncertain period just after the second plane crashed into the South Tower. (Huh?)
136. Chance of a large 6,000 gallon (partially filled) tank of diesel (heating?) fuel being stored in an exposed location at 15 feet above the floor level in Building #7 of the World Trade Center . . . on 9-11. (Huh?)
137. Chance of there being no passengers in the subway below the World Trade Center at the time of the crashes and activities above. (Huh?)
138. Chance of there being no security guard at the gold reservoir (i.e., fairly large vaults) under the World Trade Center at the time of the crashes and activities above. (Huh?)
139. Chance of more than 40,000 visitors, clients and employees of/at the World Trade Center not showing up for work or appointments on 9-11-2001 by 8:30 a.m. (Huh?) All of the news reports during the day on 9-11 -- and continuing for a couple of days -- spoke of more than 50,000 persons usually inside the buildings at the time of the attacks. It was estimated by the New York Fire Department that fewer than 5,000 escaped from the buildings alive. The arithmetic simply doesn't "add up."
140. Chance of Huffman Aviation in Florida receiving notification from the INS six months to the day after 9-11 that both Mohammad Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi (alleged pilots of two of the hijacked aircraft) had had their visas upgraded from "tourist" to "student pilot." (Double Huh?)
141. Chance of an FBI Agent in Phoenix urging the bureau headquarters to investigate "Middle Eastern men enrolled in American flight schools." This was during the previous summer (a year before 9-11) and that agent also cited Osama bin Laden by name when expressing his concerns about terrorist activities.
142. Chance of a forty year-old FAA rule allowing commercial airline pilots to be armed being rescinded only two months prior to the 9-11 terrorist attacks. (Huh?) [To my knowledge, the airlines never permitted their pilots to be armed anyway, but the rules were already in place until two months before 9-11.] The rule allowing the pilots to be armed was instituted in 1961 after the Cuban missile crisis and then abolished two months before 9-11. Convenient, huh?
These next few were phoned to me some weeks back, but it took a bit of work to double-check their authenticity. Thanks CBS News!
143. Chance of virtually no preventive measures being taken by the US Government prior to 9-11 after receiving very specific warnings from the German, Israeli, Russian and Canadian governments. How specific? Well, for starters, the German BND warned both Israel and our own CIA in June of 2001 that Middle Eastern terrorists associated with Al Quaida were planning to hijack commercial airliners and attack "high profile" commercial and cultural targets. The WTC was specifically cited. Izvetia (Russian intelligence) warned of as many as 25 hijackers at airports -- specifically citing Boston's Logan Airport -- and provided additional specifics that would at least have had air cover in New York on 9-11. Canada? Well, the story of the former navy intelligence officer (Delmart "Mike" Vreeland) who wrote a very specific warning from his jail cell in Canada is now almost legendary. [The story of his two blue pens will make a great movie someday.] We might ask what the chance is of a former Navy intelligence officer asking for political asylum in Canada in the 21st Century. The Israeli warnings were less specific, but aimed directly at targets in New York and Washington, DC and on the date: September 11, 2001. (Huh?) [Of course, the instant messaging service, Odigo, received warnings only two hours prior to the attacks (previous item in this list), so this is old hat, right?]
144. Chance of virtually no preventive measures being taken by the US Government prior to 9-11 after receiving very specific warnings and indications from its own intelligence agencies (CIA and FBI, in particular) that Middle Eastern terrorists whom they had been tracking were taking flying lessons and making peculiar trips here and there about the East Coast. James Woods (actor) reported (a specific warning and the FAA received his warning) about Middle Eastern men acting "very suspicious" on a flight on which he was a passenger. He later identified two of the terrorists from the pictures published by the FBI. (huh?)
145. Chance of the German police eavesdropping on a telephone call of an jailed Iranian who was telephoning US Government intelligence agencies in the summer of 2001 to warn of an imminent attack on the WTC in the week of September 9. -- and no action being taken after this information was passed to US Government authorities. (huh?) I could write much more about the "Echelon" program which allows for electronic eavesdropping of cell phone calls by a number of "friendly" European countries. Partner countries share the information that is so "tapped." 'Nuff said.
246. Chance of the US Government passing a law making it nearly impossible (but not quite) for relatives of the 9-11 terrorists to sue anyone but the terrorists. (Huh? I'm confused by this one.)
The next couple or so are from the same source as above three items; however the specificity of the next couple of items in this list, in particular, really make the probabilities (chances of them having happened under the "standard" assumptions) even more remote than earlier references to the same activities. Subject: Insider trading just prior to 9-11.
147. Chance of the "puts" -- and other inside trading -- that occurred during the two weeks prior to 9-11 only involving companies that lost (big time!) as a result of the attacks. The specific companies were: United Airlines (of course!), American Airlines (of course!), Axa Reinsurance, Marsh & McLennan, Merrill-Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Munich Reinsurance, Swiss Reinsurance and Citigroup. (No "Huh?" needed here)
148. Chance of no alarm bells going off within the US Government's intelligence agencies with trading anomalies such as the following: (1) an increase in United Airlines (UAL) Put Options of ninety times -- not 90 shares or 90 percent, but a multiple of ninety! -- above the normal between 6 and 10 September 2001, (2) an increase in UAL Put Options of 285 times -- that's more than 28,000 percent! -- on the Thursday before the attack, (3) an increase in American Airlines Put Options of sixty times the normal -- again, not 60 shares or 60% but a multiple of sixty! -- on the day before the attacks, (4) nothing like such increases for any other airlines according to the Bloomberg Business Report, and (5) similar increases in Put Options for both Morgan Stanley and Merrill-Lynch (27 times and 12 times the normal, respectively). (Wow!) [To make your estimate of the "chance of" a little easier on this one, consider that Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg Business Report said the following on Good Morning Texas, "This would be one of the most extraordinary coincidences in the history of mankind, if it were a coincidence." How does one in a hundred million sound?]
149. Chance of no fighter cover over the White House on 9-11, yet 24-hour fighter coverage over the President's ranch in Crawford, Texas during the weeks preceding 9-11.
150. Chance of the FBI having an informant living with two of the alleged hijackers in the days preceding 9-11, yet not knowing anything helpful until it was too late. (Huh?)
151. Chance of the Bush Administration vigorously opposing Congressional Hearings that might investigate details relating to the attacks on 9-11 -- details that largely remain hidden even today almost two years after 9-11 -- details similar to those in this list for which we are estimating their likelihood of having occurred. For that matter, what is the chance that persons who wish to examine these details would be characterized as "unpatriotic" by many in Congress, and (specifically) that a Georgia Senator (Zell Miller) would have characterized former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's call for such hearings as "dangerous, loony and irresponsible"? [You may paint me "loony" -- but NOT unpatriotic or irresponsible! Please!]
152. Chance of General Richard Myers, USAF, being confirmed as Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff after answering "Sir, I don't know the answer to that question," or "I can get that for you!" to such questions as, "Was the Defense Department contacted by the FAA or the FBI or any other agency after the first two hijacked aircraft crashed into the World Trade Center, prior to the time the Pentagon was hit?" or "The time we don't have is when the Pentagon was notified, if they were, by the FAA or the FBI or any other agency relative to any potential threat . . ." etc., etc., etc. at the confirmation hearings on the 13th of September, 2001 -- only two days after 9-11 at which time General Myers was at the Pentagon in the Crisis Command Post. (Huh?) His memory was interesting to say the least. [Incidentally, General Myers is one of the very finest USAF generals who has ever served. It's only his confirmation hearing that seemed strange in retrospect.]
153. Chance of the Air Defense Intercept Zone (ADIZ) just off-shore over the Atlantic Ocean not being patrolled during the time of the 9/11 attacks. It is ordinarily patrolled -- most heavily in the mornings -- by fighter aircraft 365 days a year. These aircraft could vector onto a target instantly without even having to scramble and take off from an air base. Where were they?
154. Chance of the New York Fire Department's warnings to both the mayor and the Port Authority (New York and New Jersey) about the danger of having a large diesel fuel tank just above the first floor of a skyscraper ... being ignored, despite the fact that it grossly violated the fire code. (Huh?) [See Item #136, above.] This diesel fuel was stored for the purpose of fueling generators needed by the command bunker (on the 23rd floor???) that was never used during the attacks on New York -- at least not by the mayor! [I wouldn't occupy a 23rd floor Command Bunker during an attack on New York either. Why on earth was it built there?]
155. Chance of roughly one in every three email (and phone call) responses to this list/webpage being something like "Forget it Joe; what good does it do to dig up old crap that isn't even relevant any more. Let's get on with life!" On the other hand, someone recently wrote, " ... the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates taught his students that the pursuit of truth can only begin once they start to question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear. If a certain belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it should be kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded, but the thinker must also question why he was led to believe the erroneous information in the first place." [Paint me an elementary school "student thinker" who is wondering why I was led to believe so very much relating to 9-11 in the first place. At least that's where I am after reading #1 through #154.]
156. Chance of the 177th Air National Guard stationed at Pomona, New Jersey being instructed to cease normal sorties two weeks prior to 9-11. This would have been another source of potential interceptors providing coverage for both New York and Washington, D.C. (Hmmm ...)
157. Chance of the Andrews Air Base website being changed just after 9-11 so as to erase mention of its combat readiness. It was there on 9-12 and gone on 9-13. (Huh?) Of course, it was picked up by persons like myself in cache files, but . . . The answer as to "why?" may be in the next item below.
158. Chance of Andrews Air Base with the 121st Fighter Squadron of the 113th Fighter Wing (USAF F-16s), the 321st Marine Fighter Squadron (with super F/A-18 Hornets yet) and the 49th Marine Air Guard all stationed there ... not getting a single aircraft in the air until after the Pentagon was struck. Andrews AFB is between 11 and 14 miles from the Pentagon depending upon the runway and direction of take-off (i.e., the wind direction). Langley AFB is 140 miles away which partially explains why its jets didn't get to the Washington, D.C. area in time. The operative word in that last sentence is "partially." Even at a distance of 140 miles, the fighters from Langley should have been all over the place (New York, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania) by the time the Pentagon was struck.
159. Chance of the increased security following 9-11 including an Executive Order (amended and signed by the President on November 1, 2001) sealing all presidential papers going back to and including Ronald Reagan! (Huh?) This includes the papers of George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. Why back to 1980 for goodness sakes?
160. Chance of the same firm (an Israeli owned firm, ICTS) handling the security at Logan International Airport and selling security services to all of the airports involved in 9-11 through its wholly owned subsidiary, Huntleigh USA Corporation. This might be tied to a previous item (#102) relating to Odigo (also Israeli owned and being an instant messenger service company with offices in the vicinity of the WTC) whom the Washington Post reported had received a two-hour warning of the attacks. (Hmmm ...)
161. Chance of another Israeli owned firm -- one the largest in Israel -- pulling out of the North Tower of the World Trade Center only a few days before 9-11. The company is/was the Zim American Israeli Shipping Co., and it broke its lease and moved out of its offices on the 16th and 17th floors at a loss of $50,000 (for breaking its lease) in early September. (Huh?)
Lest this sound too anti-Israeli, recall that the Israeli Mossad tried to warn the US Government of these attacks -- and Al-Quaida involvement -- only months earlier.
162. Chance of the CIA secretly continuing to support Osama bin Laden despite the fact that the President of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto, told President Bush (the "senior" President Bush) that "You are creating a Frankenstein." (Whew!) [In President GHW Bush's defense, it should be recalled that we backed the Mujaheddin when they fought the Government in Afghanistan -- during the Soviet rule there -- and when we referred to the Mujaheddin and Osama bin Laden' forces as "Freedom Fighters."]. (no "Huh?" necessary)
163. Chance of both the United states (CIA and FBI) and the United Nations ignoring warnings directly from the Taliban foreign minister (oh yes, we rewarded the Taliban in the following months by overthrowing their government) during the summer of 2001 that Osama bin Laden was planning an imminent attack on US soil. (Huh?)
164. Chance of Russian President Putin saying publicly in early 2002 that he had ordered his intelligence agencies to warn the US prior to 9-11 of "suicide pilots" who were training for attacks on targets on US soil. (Huh?)
165. Chance of the Christian Science Monitor reporting that Jordanian intelligence agents came to Washington, DC prior to 9-11 to warn that a major attack "on American soil" was imminent and that airplanes would be used. (Huh?) [Jordan later denied this, but let it ride for several days after it was first reported.]
166. Chance of the person reputed to be "the most committed tracker of bin Laden and Al-Qaeda" quitting his job at the FBI, only to take a job as head of security [sic] at the WTC -- only to die in the mysterious implosions and vertical bullding collapses on 9-11. (Huh?) [You guessed it! That was John O'Neill who is mentioned in an earlier item.]
167. Chance of absolutely no one being fired, demoted or even reprimanded by the US Government for the complete failure of the "system" on 9-11. (Huh?) By "no one," I mean no one in the FBI, CIA, FAA, USAF, Pentagon Security or NORAD in particular. Clearly, standard operating procedures were ignored or violated over and over again during those critical morning hours -- not mentioning the weeks and months prior to 9-11 when critical information was misunderstood, ignored or accidentally misplaced. Why isn't this issue even mentioned by the mainstream media or the Government?
168. Chance of George Bush's (the older President Bush's) Chief of Staff not recalling that President Bush Sr. met with the bin Laden family on behalf of the Carlisle Group -- until after he was shown a "thank you" note confirming the meeting. (Yeh, sure ...)
169. Chance of several of the alleged hijackers making at least five and probably as many as ten trips to Las Vegas. I've been to Las Vegas and I don't recall too many Fundamentalist Muslims frequenting the dice and card tables, the bars (that serve alcohol) and the other "pleasures" of the Sin City. It is reported that these "suicide hijackers" willing to die for their beliefs even had strippers perform "lap dances" for them -- and I don't even know what a "lap dance" is -- really! These Fundamentralist religious suicide fanatics are an interesting lot, eh?
170. Chance of Sectretary of State Powell giving $43 million in aid to the Taliban Government in Afghanistan only a few months before 9-11. Yes, that's the government we overthrew in our first war after 9-11. (Huh?)
171. Chance of the White House stating just after 9-11 that no one in government ever imagined "in their wildest dreams" something as crazy as a suicide hijacking ... after, only about ten months earlier, a special and very elaborate drill was conducted at the Pentagon involving a hijacked aircraft being deliberately crashed into the Pentagon. (Huh?)
172. Chance of 9-11 being a complete surprise after German intelligence, only three months earlier, warned the CIA, Israel's Mosaad and Britain's M-16 that Middle Eastern terrorists were in the process of training for air-hijackings and targeting of US and Israeli "symbols." (Huh?)
173. Chance of the Associated Press (AP) reporting that an FAA official, while sitting next to Hani Hanjour (one of the alleged Hijackers) in his flight training class offering the soon-to-become hijacker a translator to help him pass the test to obtain a commercial pilot's license. (Huh?)
174. Chance of the Dallas Morning News reporting that Major General Paul Weaver, director of the Air national Guard would state that, "[relating to the two F-15s that did scramble from Otis AFB] . . . the pilots flew like a scalded ape, topping 500 mph, but were unable to catch up to the airliner. We had a nine minute window, and in excess of 100 miles to intercept [Flight] 175." (Huh? The top speed of those birds is Mach 2.4 or more than 1500 mph. And yes, I should know!) And surely he should have known that the jets mentioned could have flown more than 250 miles in those nine minutes. But why scramble from Otis in the first place, right? No point in belaboring that point; it was discussed in an earlier item.
175. Chance of the the US Air Force, in response to questions from the Wall Street Journal, remaining silent even until today (this item is being posted in June 2003) as to whether they sent up any planes of their own to intercept the hijacked planes. (Huh?) They will only say that they keep roughly twenty jets (F-15s and F-16s) on duty with the Air National Guard along the coastline to protect America from hostile aircraft entering our airspace. I mentioned the ADIZ in an earlier item, so there's no point in belaboring that issue either, right?
176. Chance of the Los Angeles Times reporting -- only one year after 9-11 -- that the Defense Science Board recommended to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld that a super-intelligence body (dubbed P2OG) "stimulate reactions" from terrorists and rogue states -- those possessing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). The idea would be to goad such organizations and states into pulling off terrorist acts that would expose them for targeting. (Whew!) I would surmise that 9-11 was such a terrorist act and they still haven't caught the culprits. Do we need another 9-11? The Defense Science Board should be ashamed of itself (in my opinion).
177. Chance of President Bush being correct in his assertion that the 9-11 attack was simply and purely to attack America's (and each American's) freedoms. Hmmm . . . considering the Patriot Act and some of the manifestations of the Homeland Security Department, maybe they were successful -- if President Bush's assertion about the reason behind 9-11 is correct.
178. Chance of members of bin Laden's being flown to a secret location in Texas (when the airspace was clear of all commercial aircraft and when most Americans -- e.g., you and me couldn't fly) and then later driven to Washington, DC so that they could be flown out of country on charter jets after the airports reopened.
179. Chance of Fire Engineering (a reputable trade magazine for fire fighters) stating that the investigation into the causes of the collapse of the Twin Towers (and Building #7 by extension) was "corrupted by political forces" whose primary interests are clearly not full disclosure. They were the same ones who called the investigation sanctioned by FEMA a "half-baked farce." [Those are Fire Engineering's words, not mine!]
180. Chance of 32 victims' families forgoing the large amounts of money (some amounts exceeding a million dollars) offered them to not call for a thorough investigation of 9-11. (Huh?) Mary Sweeney, whose husband, Brian, was among the victims, said "I declined the $2 million . . . [because] I want answers, and I want the answers to lead to accountability. And I want this accountability to lead to change . . ." About 300 persons met at the National Press Club in Washington, DC on 20 June 2002 to determine how they might precipitate such an investigation to be carried out by the Government.
181. Chance of C-SPAN choosing to ignore the press conference mentioned in #180 above in favor of (Huh?) reruns of Capitol Journal. Simply as a matter of everyday practice C-SPAN ordinarily covers all press conferences at the National Press Club. They skipped this very important one despite pleading and begging on the part of the organizers. But in this case, someone must have gotten to them first. Fear is an incredible motivating factor.
182. Chance of the families of the victims who attended the above-mentioned Press Conference being labeled as "unpatriotic" by some Government agencies. (Sad...) C-SPAN not only missed an important national event, it missed some very heart-wrenching stories from these "unpatriotic" Americans as well.
183. Chance of John O'Neill (former agent who was blocked from investigating Osama bin Laden's cells in America and subsequently on his new job in the WTC as security chief) meeting with someone from FEMA on the night of September 10, 2001. (Hmmm ...)
184. Chance of neither the CIA nor the FBI (nor the NSA, for that matter) utilizing the PROMIS Program (computer code installed to detect unusual stock market trading) to get a clue ahead of time that something was amiss. Recall from a previous item that short sells in the days prior to 9-11 were sixty and ninety times the ordinary on very specific airline stocks and other stocks associated with firms with offices in the WTC. Interestingly, later investigation showed that these trades were not related to Osama bin Laden or Al-Quaida. (Okay then -- who?)
185. Chance of the FBI list of the 19 terrorists being correct when the following is now known about the 19 "terrorists" whose pictures we have been shown in the newspapers (and never retracted):
American Airlines Flight 11
Mohammad Atta - was Egyptian and has been reported by the FBI from the very beginning as the ?leader? of the terrorists and the pilot of Flight 11. For Atta it was simply the usual story of training in Florida and simulator training. He was the face we so often see on the surveillance camera picture that was released. His father claimed that Atta was in Germany and had called him on September 12 (after 9-11) at his holiday home on the Mediterranean. He (Atta's father) was unaware of the attacks in America at the time since he was without radio or TV. He claimed that his son "hated Osama bin Laden" whom he referred to as a "sinner."
Abdulaziz Alomari - was a Saudi National and was a bona fide pilot and flight engineer. The Orlando Sentinel reported that when he saw his name and picture on the FBI list in a newspaper, he stormed into the US Consulate in Jeddah demanding to be removed from the list. He was still flying for Saudia Airlines. Another ?Abdulaziz Alomari? is an electrical engineer and he too was disturbed because the FBI had both his name and date of birth correct. He had lost his passport while studying in Denver, Colorado. This looks like a possible case of identity theft, but who knows?
Waleed M. al-Shehri - was a Saudi National who lived in the US since 1994 and had a Florida Drivers License. He is reported to be alive and well [hopefully still alive?] doing some training in Morocco. His father insists that he has spoken with his son and that he is indeed ?alive and well.? Waleed had/has a commercial pilot?s license.
Wail al-Shehri - was a Saudi National who was also a pilot (according to the FBI). He too is still alive and is the son of a Saudi diplomat in Bombay. Gaafar Allagany, the head of the Information Center at the Saudi Embassy, said that he spoke personally with both the father and the son on the very day that he (Gaafar) was interviewed.
Satam al-Suqami - probably from the United Arab Emirates. No further information on Satam.
United Airlines Flight 175
Matrwan al-Shehhi ? was supposedly Mohammad Atta?s cousin. Here again, there are reports of his being alive in Morocco, but there isn?t solid evidence of this.
Fayez Ahmed (also Banihammad Fayez) - had a pilot?s license, but the license lists the name of a flying school that he never attended ? at least no record of his attendance exists.
Ahmed al-Ghamdi - was a Saudi National who lived for some time in the same boarding house as Waleed M. al-Shehri.
Hamza Al-Ghamdi - was a Saudi national and presumably a brother of Ahmed?s.
Mohald al-Shehri - is another Saudi National whom the Saudi Embassy claims is still alive [knock on wood].
American Airlines Flight 77
Hani Hanjour - was a Saudi National and is often cited as the ?pilot? of the plane that did the 360 degree spiral down from crashed into the Pentagon. Was in the US for at least a decade on and off.
Khalid al-Midhar - is a Saudi National who was about the worst or second worst of the trainee pilots in Florida. Another ?Khalid al-Midhar? was shocked out of his Theobe and Gutra when he saw his name and picture in the FBI list in the newspapers. In any event, Arab newspapers claim he is still alive too.
Nawafal-Hamzi - was a Saudi National who was the other one of the ?worst or second worst? trainee in Florida. His father said that the picture released by the FBI looks nothing like his son and showed pictures of his son that looked nothing like the picture in the newspapers.
Salem Al-Hamzi - was a Saudi National and the brother of Nawaf. Here again, the Saudi Embassy claims he is still alive and works in Yanbou, Saudi Arabia. I assume that the FBI at least got his picture correct.
Majed Moqed - was a Saudi National and was often seen with Khalid, Nawaf, Salem and Hani.
United Airlines Flight 93
Saeed al-Ghamdi - was also a Saudi National and another person whom the Saudi Embassy claims is still alive. He presumably is working for Tunis Air. He was learning to fly an Airbus 320 with about two dozen other pilots at the time the Saudi Embassy contacted him.
Ziad Jarrah - was a young Lebanese man who attended an Evangelical Christian school in Lebanon. His family described him as anything but a Fundamentalist Muslim. He might have been a pilot, however, according to the FBI. He was scheduled to marry his Turkish girl friend two weeks after 9-11.
Ahmed al-Nami - was a Saudi National who (again) is reported to be alive ? and had never even lost his passport.
Ahmed al-Haznawi - was presumably a Saudi National, but little is known about him and the FBI ain?t talking.
186. Chance of our first two wars in response to 9-11 being against Afghanistan and Iraq when none of the alleged terrorists were from Afghanistan or Iraq. (Huh?) It might be interesting to see a list of the sixty countries that President Bush mentioned as rogue states with whom we could go to war when he gave the talk at West Point.
187. Chance of the yield for poppies in Afghanistan reaching a modern times low in 2001 after the Taliban outlawed the growing of poppies -- and a return to bumper crops since we have removed that "terrorist" government. (Huh?) Afghanistan had been -- and is again -- a source of more than half of the world's heroin. [Follow the money ...]
188. Chance of the hijackers who grabbed American Airlines Flight 77 letting the pilots fly the plane for about 40 minutes away from Washington, DC (and the Pentagon) before hijacking it and turning it around for the 45 minute flight back to Washington, DC. How could they (the hijackers) have known that NORAD wouldn't have interceptors waiting for them along that route back? For that matter, how could anyone have guessed that NORAD wouldn't respond in time after two buildings had already been struck and it was fully known that four aircraft were hijacked at that time? Recall that we have been told by the FBI and CIA that this was a meticulous plan that had been in the making for several years. (Strange ...)
189. Chance of the hijackers being capable of vectoring the aircraft over at least three states back to the Pentagon for the attack. (Huh?) Note which of the hijackers were aboard Flight 77, according to the FBI. [You can read about them just above under "American Airlines Flight 77" at Item # 185.]
190. Chance of both the pilot and co-pilot being alive at the back of the plane with Barbara Olson as we have been told was true -- she even asked her husband what she should tell them they ought to do (Huh?). All of this should be considered taking into account that the "Hijack Code" was not transmitted from the cockpit. One of the crew members was a graduate of the "Top Gun" fighter pilot school and a veteran of the Vietnam Conflict besides.
191. Chance of the Associated Press reporting on September 12th [day after 9-11]: ?In Sarasota, Florida, Bush was reading to children in a classroom at 9:05 am when his Chief of Staff Andrew Card whispered into his ear. The president briefly turned somber before he resumed reading. He addressed the tragedy about a half-hour later.? Later it was learned that what Andrew Card whispered into Bush?s ear was that the second tower had been struck and the words, ?America is under attack!? [Well . . . to make this one easier, we might consider estimating the chance that J. K. Rowling would write, ?Dumbledore was telling a very boring story to Harry (Potter), Ron (Weasley) and Hermione (Granger). It was a story of how he had saved the day for his house in a game of quidditch fifty years earlier. Suddenly, Professor McGonagall entered the room and whispered into Dumbledore?s ear. He whispered, ?three students from Slytherin house, Draco Malfoy with his buddies, Crabbe and Goyle, have just set fire to the Gryffindor House. Hogwarts is under attack!? He whispered it loud enough to be heard by Harry, Ron and Hermione. Dumbledore looked somber for a moment, but then smiled and continued reciting for 25 minutes how he had miraculously caught the Snitch at the last moment. Harry, Ron and Hermione clapped and smiled broadly. Dumbledor then held a press conference and addressed the attack on Gryffindor ? and by extension, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.? Hmmm . . . I?d say one in two million this time, wouldn?t you?]
192. Chance of Newsweek reporting on January 24, 2002 that Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle would assert that Cheney called him earlier in the day to urge him to avoid an inquiry into 9-11. [That kind of pressure on Senator Daschle continued thereafter.]
193. Chance of USA Today reporting on February 6, 2002 that CIA Director Tenet, in light of all of the evidence among these items, would tell a Senate hearing that "there was no 9-11 intelligence failure." (Huh?)
194. Chance of the New York Times reporting on July 23, 2002 that the New York City Government had decided that audio and written records of the fire department's actions on 9-11 should never be released. (Huh?)
195. Chance of the New York Times reporting on the first anniversary of 9-11 the following, "One year later, the public knows less about the circumstances of 2,801 deaths at the foot of Manhattan in broad daylight than people in 1912 knew within weeks about the Titanic." (Yup ... and it ain't too different today as the second anniversary approaches ...)
196. Chance of the media hardly even covering the "public" hearings on 22 and 23 May, 2003 on possible air defense failures resulting from the evidence (most of it articulated among the items on this webpage). For example, neither the New York Times nor the Los Angeles Times gave the event even one inch of space in their papers. (Huh?)
197. Chance of Transportation Secretary Meneta stating in the hearings mentioned in the item just above that prior to 9-11 the Government had no information that airplanes could be used as missiles or bombs in the manner of the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon. (Huh? I seem to recall that the Japanese used Kamikazes which were little more than aircraft with bombs strapped to their sides back in World War II. But then, I'm more than 68 years old; what do I know? And come to think of it, how long ago did someone try to fly an aircraft into the White House only to crash on the front lawn somewhere? Even my grandchildren might remember that!)
198. Chance of the US Intelligence Report filed after the thwarted Project Bojinka plot in 1995 having uncovering that commercial aircraft were planned to be flown against high profile targets in the US, including the Sears Tower and (you guessed it!) the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and several other "key structures" in the US. (Huh! Why am I not surprised?)
199. Chance of President Bush being warned first-hand by the Egyptian Government during the G-8 Summit in Genoa Italy only two months before 9-11 that his own assassination was being planned using (you guessed it!) "an airplane" stuffed with explosives. (Huh?)
200. Chance of no protection being afforded the Pentagon on 9-11 after, only two months earlier, the Italian Government kept air defense jets in the air and anti-aircraft guns ready during the entire above-mentioned summit meeting and (in the case of the pentagon two months later) having heard for almost two hours that three, and possibly four, aircraft had been hijacked over the Eastern US. (Huh?)
201. Chance of Israel having forewarned the US Military only one month before 9-11 that as many as 200 al-Quaida terrorists had infiltrated the Continental US and were planning an [... imminent] "major assault on the United States." (Huh?)
202. Chance of the Bush Administration stating -- after admitting that they knew of "more than 150" Al-Quaida terrorists training in the US -- that they were concerned that the Al-Quaida was planning overseas attacks only. (Huh?)
203. Chance of the same CIA that so badly misinformed the President about Iraq intentions with weapons of mass destruction a year after 9-11 having been given information one month before 9-11 that Osama bin Laden was planning -- and highly determined to carry out -- an attack on US soil on or about (you guessed it!) September 11, 2001. (Huh? They knew that in August 2001??)
204. Chance of President Bush being whisked to Air Force One and being made airborne (after his 25 minute reading lesson with the children after learning that "America is under attack!") ... after -- yes after -- the Secret Service was told that specific threats against Air Force One and a compromise of the Presidential Secret Service codes had occurred. (Huh? Wouldn't they have been more prudent to have driven him quickly to Central Command nearby under those circumstances?)
205. Chance of US Medicine Magazine on October 1, 2001, reporting that in May of that same year Department of Defense medical personnel trained to respond to a ... "guided missile in the form of a (hold your breath!) hijacked [Boeing] 757 airliner" crashing into the pentagon. (Whew!)
206. Chance of NORAD (as of 9-11) having already planned an upcoming exercise involving a simultaneous hijacking scenario. The current year 2001 exercise named Amalgam Virgo used a cruise missile launched from a barge off the East Coast and had (you guessed it!) Osama bin Laden's picture on the cover of the proposal for that exercise. This came out in NORAD's testimony a couple of months or so ago (May 23, 2003) of the most recent hearings. (Again ... Whew!) Those are the hearings that the media failed to barely cover. (See Item #196 above)
207. Chance of the Bush Administration's having refused to allow most of the findings of the 2002 9-11 Congressional Inquiry to be made public. Well, granted ... this is a high probability event, but still less than one. Then again, add to this the chance of that same administration asking that some of the material that has already been made public be made classified. It should be mentioned that the findings were restricted from naming names or pointing fingers, so it should have been of little interest anyway ... except, a friend of mine from Princeton University [name withheld] has it on good authority that in a couple of weeks (from today ... it's now 14 July 2003) that 2002 report will be released and he says that it will still be a bombshell. (Ouch!)
208. Chance of the prediction stated at the end of #207 coming to be. This one was thrown in to provide some excitement in the last half of July 2003. Who knows where this "list" will end ... (Mmmm ...)
209. Chance of yet another "public" hearing in 2003 hearing Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta say "That's correct!" in response to the following question: "Did this higher level of [terrorist attack related] chatter ... result in any action across the Government? I take it your answer is no." If whatever is released re. the 2002 hearings mentioned in Item #207 above doesn't catch the American people's attention, that one statement by our Secretary of transportation ought to. (Wow!)
210. Chance of interim FBI Director Thomas Pickard surreptitiously giving the New York Times for publication material critical of FBI Agent John O'Neill's attack on Osama bin Laden and his band of terrorists. This New York Times article was what caused O'Neill to resign his post at the FBI on August 22, 2001 (three weeks before 9-11) and take up a job at (you guessed it!) the World Trade Center in New York City. His death in the flaming rubble on 9-11 was a horrid ending to this sordid story. Isn't it time we replaced J. Edgar Hoover's name on the FBI Building and honored a real hero? Why do you suppose O'Neill went straight to a security chief's job at the WTC? What was he on the track of? (I predict that someday, in some way, this man will be lauded as a hero. But I won't add that to the "Chance of ..." list for fear it would jinx the idea.)
211. Chance of Ari Fleischer catching George Bush's eye in the Florida classroom (after Andy Card whispered in his ear) and holding up a sign that read, "Don't say anything yet!" in bold letters. I must give GWB some credit here in responding to the children's recitations with such appropriate lines as, "Really good readers, whew! These must be sixth graders!" Who stepped over even the Secret Service so early in the morning after it was known that a severe attack on America had taken place? (Yeesh!)
212. Chance of surface-to-air missiles having been placed atop and near the resort in Sarasota where President Bush slept the night before 9-11, yet no such defenses being placed at the Pentagon, the WTC or several other likely terrorist targets. (Huh?)
213. Chance of Attorney General Ashcroft rejecting a 58 million dollar increase in funding for counter-terrorism only one day before 9-11 while stating his seven top priorities -- not one of them related to counter-terrorism ... this after he had stated in May 2001 to a Senate committee that counter-terrorism was his "highest priority." Recall that he had been warned to stay off of commercial airlines. I wonder what the friends and families of the airline passengers who were murdered on 9-11 think their friends and relatives aboard the destroyed aircraft should have been told before boarding the aircraft.
214. Chance of NORAD reducing the stated scramble time ("guaranteed to be airborne") of their alert aircraft from five to fifteen minutes after 9-11 (Huh?) Looks like a little readjustment going on here ...
215. Chance of 9-11 being equal to -2. And if you put your mind to it and place yourself at September 10, 2001, it ain't no joke if you'll pardon my bad French. (!!! -- this gem from a recent correspondent and fellow traveler on the happy road of radioactive dustiny ... whose initials are also JR)
216. Chance of the US Government (seemingly) doing everything it could to prevent any thorough or independent investigation. (Huh?) (This is a more general statement that covers several other items; for example, #23. -- Thank you, HL!)
217. Chance of Mark Bingham calling his own mother with his cell phone from a hijacked aircraft and starting the call with the greeting, "Hi! This is Mark Bingham!" (Huh?)
218. Chance of The US Government placing Saudi Royal Family interests above those of the victims' families by filing a Federal Court motion to dismiss or delay the families' private lawsuit accusing the Saudi Royal Family of ties to Al-Quaida. (Huh?)
219. (Thanks here to Tom Flocco's website referenced at bottom of this page) Chance of The US Government, in light of the above item (and several others), being aware that the first paragraph of the First Amendment to our Constitution reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (Yup!)
220. Chance of President Bush not leaving Booker Elementary School immediately after his half hour listening to the children read. What would be the chance of his (and by then he was told that as many as eleven planes had been hijacked) having sat down in an adjacent room in the school to write some notes for his upcoming address to the nation and to quickly phone his National Security Advisor (Rice) and Vice President, Dick Cheney? He ultimately was able to give his speech at exactly 9:30 a.m. -- when it was originally on his advanced itinerary.(Huh?) The point is that he didn't immediately leave the school even after having spent the time with the children reading. (Huh?) This ties very nicely with the next "chance of ..." item . . .
221. Chance of President Bush endangering the approximately 200 persons at the school, including himself and the children, by continuing to listen attentively to the children reading the now-famous story about the pet goat -- if he was fully in the loop as to the severity of the attacks that morning. (Huh?) [I would suggest that President Bush was not fully in the loop and that's also why he said twice later (earlier items in this list) that he saw the first plane hit the first tower. I would also predict (no "chance of ..." here either because I don't want to jinx this thought) that when he learns of all of what various people actually knew both before and during the attacks, there will be H-E-double toothpicks to pay. For whatever else may be said about Mr. Bush, and whatever our political persuasions might be, he is a pretty decent man, I believe, and will act forcibly once fully aware of what this all adds up to.]
222. Chance of the then Acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, when asked only two days later during his Senate Confirmation Hearings, "(paraphrased) When was the first order to scramble jets given?" would reply "The order, to the best of my knowledge, was after the Pentagon had been hit!".(Huh?) This backs up my comments in the previous Item (#221) relative to President Bush's being out of the loop. So was General Myers, it appears, since the claim was always that the order was first given at 8:46 a.m. almost an hour before the Pentagon was struck. The highest ranking uniformed military man in the nation didn't just have a mental lapse, I'm sure. Surely, he believed what he was saying in those very important hearings. Senior NORAD spokesmen would back up General Myers statement about two days later. There was, and probably still is from what we are learning now vis-á-vis the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, a serious lack of communications between our intelligence agencies and both the military and the President -- who is, after all, the Commander-in-Chief.
223. Chance of the jet fighter escorts not merging with Air Force One (the President's aircraft) for a full two hours after Air Force One left Sarasota. (Huh?)
224. Chance of there being seven different stories as of now (July 16, 2003) as to how President Bush learned of the first plane striking the first tower. (Huh?) At least the two times that President Bush himself stated openly how and when he learned of the first suicide crash into the North Tower, the stories he told are consistent -- although not consistent with something ... like when the rest of us saw the video taken from some distance from the Trade Center complex (late that evening or the next day).
225. Chance of the mainstream media never (not once to my recollection) questioning either the President or his staff why the President remained in Booker Elementary School so long after hearing Andy Card whisper in his ear, "(paraphrase) the country is under attack" -- this, just after the second plane struck the World Trade Center.
226. Chance of ABC News announcing only one hour after the second tower was hit that the CIA had determined that it was Osama bin Laden who was behind the attacks. (Huh?).
227. Chance of the pilot of the plane that hit the Pentagon choosing to make a 180 degree turn so as to strike the Pentagon at a relatively insignificant spot in the "back" of the building. (Let's assume he was an Arab terrorist.) (This is a big "Huh?") Wouldn't he -- or she -- have gotten "more bang for the buck" striking the prominent front entrance to the Pentagon? As any of us who have worked in the Building know (as would a terrorist who's been planning the attack for "years"), it would also have been easier as regards the altitude and strike attitude of approach.
228. Chance of Sarasota's main newspaper printing the following only a few days after 9-11: "Sarasota barely skirted its own disaster. As it turns out, terrorists targeted the President and Air Force One on Tuesday [9-11], maybe even while they were on the ground in Sarasota and certainly not long after. The Secret Service learned of the threat just minutes after Bush left Booker Elementary." (Huh?) [The italics are mine.].
229. Chance of nearly every one of our closest allies having warned the US immediately prior to 9-11 that almost exactly what happened on 9-11 was going to happen. They specifically indicated that the attacks would be in the Continental United States and that prominent targets such as the World Trade Center and the Pentagon would be targeted. Some of these Allies were Russia, Germany, Israel, Canada (yes!), France and England. Even the Taliban warned us. (Yup!)
230. Chance of there being no outrage, no accusations, no serious investigation within the Administration -- or in any specific Governmental agency (to my knowledge) about the warnings mentioned in the item just above (all well documented) being ignored. (Maybe to be expected ...)
231. Chance of the following statements being made (and also well documented) in light of Item #229 above: National Security Advisor Rice: "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would use an airplane as a missile." President Bush: "Based on everything I've seen, I do not believe anyone could have prevented the horror of September the 11th." CIA Director Tenet: "... where there was a geographic context, either explicit or implicit, [the threats] appeared to point abroad, especially to the Middle East." (Whew! As regards that last one, it's a little strange today in light of the CIA having even accepted a piece of forged intelligence to give their "okay!" to the President's most recent  State of the Union Speech.) Personally, I would think that one warning would be enough. Even the Italians protected the G-8 Summit with anti-aircraft guns based on less good intelligence.
232. Chance of one or the other of the following two scenarios having occurred: (1) Flight 93 having flown without NORAD having even given chase to it for 51 minutes after NORAD had been alerted that it had been hijacked, or (2) NORAD fighter(s) having reached Flight 93 and having shot it down after the hijackers had been overwhelmed by the passengers who rushed the cockpit. NORAD can't have it both ways, and has been backpedaling on their official pronouncements for over a year and a half. (Whew!) [Maybe we really don't want to know on this one -- and you can count me in on that group.]
233. Chance of NORAD not having their escort fighters reach Air Force One until between 11:00 am and 11:30 am. NORAD has been almost silent on this because Homestead Air Station is only 182 miles from Sarasota and Tyndall Air Station is only 238 miles from Sarasota. Bush was in his motorcade by about 9:45 am and his Secret Service escort was quoted at that time as saying, "We're out of here! Can you get everyone ready?" (Huh?)
234. Chance of Universal Forest Products Industries of Grand Rapids, Michigan (primarily owned and run by Cheney/Bush friend, Peter Secchia) bottoming out twice -- only a day before 9-11 and a day before the first Anthrax mailings. (As Bill Topping asked: Is this clairvoyance, or what?")
235. Chance of NORAD already taking part in a war game (Vigilant Guardian -- don't we wish?) at dawn on 9-11 and the Northeastern US Sector Commander (Colonel Robert Marr) stating that "We had the fighters with a little more gas on board ... a few more weapons on board.)
236. Chance of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf warning (as recently as January 18, 2003) that, "Pakistan will become a target of war for Western forces after the Iraq crisis" -- this after Pakistan stood allegedly tall and alone with the US following 9-11 in an alleged search for Osama bin Laden and his senior cadre in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. (Huh?)[Surely, the sequence of wars that have resulted from 9-11 are now ended with the sad residual guerilla warfare in Iraq, this coming after Bush declared the major fighting there over. We can only hope.]
237. Chance of the terrorists having acquired the Secret Sevice Agency's code words for Air Force One procedures. This was apparently revealed when the Secret Service received the "Air Force One is next!" call. This call was serious enough that the pilot, Colonel Mark Tillman, asked that an armed guard be put at the cockpit door. Indeed, the plane stayed in the air at/near Sarasota for slightly more than an hour. Since this occurred after the "rocket like take-off," it appears that there may have been as many as three threats directed against Air Force One ... but by who? [There are many, many unanswered questions here ... and disturbing questions at that.]
238. Chance of the terrorists divulging to the Secret Service that they had acquired the Secret Service Agency's Air Force One "procedure codes" (if they actually had acquired them as is suggested in item #237 just above) when they could have held that information tight until a later time when our guard would be down, so to speak. (Huh? Something doesn't quite add up here ...)
239. Chance of none of the photos that we saw after the disaster of 9-11 showing anything remaining except steel -- no chairs, desks, filing cabinets, security safes, concrete blocks, partitions, toilets, sinks -- nothing but steel ... and dust. (Huh?) How is such total pulverization even possible, we might ask? Interestingly, we know also that the steel beams and trusses which barely survived and that might have provided some clues for subsequent investigation were shipped for recycling to India and China before they could be studied. The NY Fire Department is still fuming over that "error" of omission. Why was Mayor Guiliani so eager to have the steel shipped overseas anyway? They refuse to answer that question even today -- almost two years later.
240. Chance of every floor of both of the Twin Towers together with all of the plumbing, furniture (desks, chairs, filing cabinets, etc.) and partitions turning to powder. The explanation given was that the fire was just so intense ... but from the 110th floor all the way to the basement? And that goes for Building #7 too, by the way. (Hmmm ...)
241. Chance of an Army Captain Lincoln Liebner, who witnessed the crash from close-by stating, "I saw this large American Airlines passenger jet coming in fast and low ... and striking a helicopter on the helipad, setting fire to a fire truck." Note: he did not see it strike the section of the Pentagon that ultimately collapsed -- nor, strangely, did anyone else! (Huh?)
242. Chance of another witness, Steve Patterson from Pentagon City, reporting that he saw a "commuter plane" swoop over Arlington Cemetery heading in the direction of the Pentagon. He estimated the plane was capable of holding eight to ten persons. (Huh?)
243. Chance of the "pancake theory" put forth by FEMA for the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings making any sense at all. The chance becomes almost miniscule when we apply it to the South Tower which tilted a full 24 degrees before disintegrating into powder during the collapse which miraculously "straightened" to an almost perfect vertical implosion. (Huh?) Sir Isaac Newton would quickly tell us that only a force in the opposite direction could stop an accelerating tilting such as we saw with the South Tower.
244. Chance of FEMA admitting that the cause of the fires and (again) almost perfectly vertical collapse of WTC Building # 7 is "unknown at this time." And yes, it remains unknown a year and a half later. No surprise since the evidence (the steel beams that survived) has all been shipped to India and China for recycling. (Hmmm ...)
245. Chance of the New York Fire Department not putting out the fires that FEMA claimed raged for seven hours in WTC Building #7 -- and, in fact, claiming not to have even known about such fires burning out of control. (Huh?) Even the news media didn't notice the fires until five and a half full hours after the North Tower collapsed. It was when the firemen were posing for an Iwo Jima type picture of flag raising that someone noticed some fire in Building #7. (Huh?)
246. Chance of the City of New York (even to this date (July of 2003) not stating who or what was in the Crisis Command Bunker in Building #7 on the 23rd floor. (Huh?) They won't even state that it was empty. [Hmm ... Maybe it wasn't!]
247. Chance of every one of the 47 columns in the interior and 236 columns along the outside of the North Tower separating and/or snapping in such a perfectly balanced manner that the top never even tilted upon the building's ultimate collapse. Consider that if the columns on one side of the tower had broken before the columns on the other side -- even by only a couple of moments -- the top section would have tilted in the same manner as did the South Tower. [Note that I am not even hinting that there might be something strange about the 24 degree tilt of the South Tower being followed by its miraculously straightening and collapsing in the same manner as the North Tower and Building Seven both did somewhat later. That belonged in a separate item (#243), of course.]
248. Chance of both towers displaying an explosion of dust and powder away from the towers so as to spew that dust and powder hundreds of feet away from the towers as they collapsed. (Huh?) What phenomenon was occurring so as to create such a large volume of dust even while the buildings were more or less intact and vertical during the initial stages of the collapse?
249. Chance of most Government "experts" (including FEMA) to conclude that it was fire that caused all three WTC buildings to collapse when the actual fires observed don't appear to be any worse than hundreds of fires in other office buildings during the past century. (Huh?) The hundreds of other buildings either simply burned down or their fires were extinguished. Further, FEMA came to its remarkable conclusion without having been able to properly examine the "melted" steel beams and columns which, of course, were quickly shipped overseas for recycling.
250. Chance of the area around the World Trade Center being covered with a thick grayish-white coating of very fine particulates of pulverized concrete and gypsum -- no darker ash from burned partitions, furniture and other combustibles involved in the intense fires described by the FEMA report. (Huh?) [It was pretty similar to the area around a volcano eruption -- except that forest fires and even volcanoes produce darker ash! Some gypsum is to be expected, but what about the furniture that burned -- or hadn't yet burned, the carpeting that burned -- or hadn't yet burned, the ... ??? Yes, something very strange happened in New York on 9-11.]
251. Chance of one or the other of the following two possibilities reflecting reality: (1) the military, the CIA or some other agency(ies) of our Government has/have acted so incompetently since 9-11 that they only appear to be involved with whatever the Al-Quaida actually did that terrible day or (2) they are actually involved. [After reviewing the previous 250 items, I just couldn't resist. Actually, this is a paraphrase of a statement on the back cover of Eric Hufschmid's book, Painful Questions -- An Analysis of the September 11th Attack.]
252. Chance of someone other than President Bush or Vice-President Cheney declaring Washington DC a "free-fire zone" and that confirmed hijacked planes were to be "intercepted" after the Pentagon was hit and after Bush spoke with Cheney by telephone from Air Force One. And although President Bush concurred that such an order was probably a good idea [he said, "You bet!" when the idea was suggested by Cheney, according to his later statements], but he claims he never gave the order. Admittedly, this was a crucial and time sensitive decision and could have been made without the President's "okay" if he were out of communications with his staff, but that was not the case by the time the order from an anonymous person was given. No one has come forth and taken credit (the heat) for such an order after it now appears that Flight 93 was shot down after the passengers had killed or at least subdued the hijackers. That order, heard by many Flight Commanders and NORAD (by phone from a White House telephone) has been verified many times, not the least of which was by General Myers himself in testimony to Congress. (Huh?) Who gave the order?
253. Chance of President Bush stating on March 13, 2002 that, " ... I am truly not concerned about him ... I just don't spend that much time on him ..." when referring to Osama bin Laden -- this after he is quoted as stating, "If he [Osama bin Laden] thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he will be sorely mistaken" followed a few days later with, "I want justice, and there's an old poster out West, I recall that says, 'Wanted Dead or Alive!'" And now in the summer of 2003, how much do we hear at all about Osama bin Laden? Saddam Hussein's (admittedly grossly evil) sons are the news of the day, it seems, and gruesome graphic photos of their bodies may next be used to take our minds off the "mastermind of 9-11." (Yup, I'd say that's likely ... and not that unexpected.)
254. Chance of the US decisively killing Saddam Hussein's sons, Odai and Quasai and Qusai's 14 year-old son (who were entirely surrounded and who could have been waited or starved out in the home where they were holed up) with rockets, mortars and machine gun fire before we could learn of their possible connection(s) with Osama bin Laden and their (possible) involvement with the attacks of 9-11. Admittedly, they wouild probably have committed suicide had we waited them out, but we would not have brought upon ourselves world-wide condemnation for violating terms of the Geneva Conventions dealing with reasonable force used to capture/kill enemy government officials. [My memory is long enough to recall that the Italian people were permitted to execute Bennito Mussolini and even Adolf Hitler ingloriously committed suicide with Eva Braun as World War II was closing down -- whereas Odai and Qusai were buried as "artyrs" to many of the Saddam Hussein's remaining loyalists.]
255. Chance of Major General Larry Arnold (USAF) writing in late 2001 in his defense of NORAD's response having been both "immediate" and "impressive" that "we were able to identify, track and escort suspected hijacked aircraft after the initial attacks," and that "our well-practiced reaction response outpaced the process in some instances." Combine the chance of that statement with the chance of Major General Craig McKinley (while sitting next to General Arnold) having stated at the recent May 2003 hearings that "We had not positioned prior to September 11, 2001 for the scenario that took place that day," and he went on to state that, "NORAD was utterly unprepared for the attack." In fact, he called NORAD's 9-11 readiness "a Cold War vestige." (Huh?) At first NORAD argued how completely ready it was on 9-11 and then (after some facts about Flight 93 became apparent) how completely incompetent it was on that same day. [Note: Equally improbable are the different timelines that NORAD has given in sworn testimony vis-a-vis their activities on 9-11.]
256. Chance of a randomly selected person in the US not accepting any story except the "official" White House version of the way in which events unfolded on 9-11. (Huh?) [I know this to be true for the majority of people with whom I speak on the subject. Some of my friends and family don't even want to discuss the possibility of anything beyond the "official" story.] Still this is one "Chance of" that is changing rapidly as people are being exposed one peculiarity at a time to the anomalies of 9-11.
257. Chance of the US Government still lacking a uniform list of suspected terrorists on 24 July 2003 -- even after the release of the 2002 Congressional hearings that suggested that this was a major factor in the failure to thwart the 9-11 attacks. It has been promised by the Department of Homeland Security (President Bush's primary action to correct the mistakes of the past) that such a list will be available in two months. That is after the second aniversary of 9-11! (Huh?) Hopefully, this new cabinet position didn't cost more than a couple of hundred dollars to establish.
From this point forward and maybe also going back, when I have a chance to go back and edit the previous 257 items, I will no longer say "Huh?" after an item. For one thing, it detracts from the importance of the item and for another, it is unnecessary -- certainly at this point, 257 items under our belts, all of which are deserving of a big fat "Huh?"
258. Chance of newspapers all over the country suddenly noticing over the 27-28 July 2003 weekend that there are odd lapses in the 2002 Congressional Hearings Report after it was published. The Seattle Times' Monday (29 July 2003) headline reads "Sept. 11 report has tantalizinug gaps." But there were items more specific ...
259. Chance of the Congressional Report mentioned just above stating that the alleged hijackers, while making cross-country practice flights during the months preceding 9-11, always booked return stops in Las Vegas. No "Huh?" here anyway because the FBI Director, Robert Mueller, stated what is known about these stops honestly and without hyperbole, "... to date, the purpose of these one to two day layovers is not known." [I know I shouldn't, but I recall a TV series from years back called, "This is Your FBI!"]
260. Chance of the US Defense Department establishing a bonafide "futures market" on terrorism within its new Information Awareness Department -- a futures market available to the public over the Internet -- within two years of 9-11. It's scheduled to be available for traders to try to make money on terrorism this coming Friday, August 1, 2003. [This one is beyond a simple "huh?" -- it's beyond comprehension.]
261. Chance of the US Government cancelling the program mentioned in #258 above only two days after several senators (and thus, the media) learned of it and called it "crass and mindless." What is the chance of any of this even making sense?
262. Chance of Admiral (ret.) John Poindextor retiring as direcor of the Information Awareness Department of DARPA after the information about the "futures in terrorism" (See Item #258, above) project became public knowledge.
263. Chance of the Commander of the Third Infantry Division stating "absolutely not!" (and in so doing, specifically and openly disagreeing with his Commander-in-Chief) when asked if he would have photographed the mutilated bodies of Odai and Qusai Hussein for publication in newspapers worldwide. (See Item #254) Clearly, this senior American commander in the field was concerned about what might be done by Iraqi resistance forces with American solders' bodies under similar possible circumstances as the War on Terrorism drags on in the streets of Iraq.
264. Chance of 26 pages in the 2002 "Open" Congresional Hearings on the causes and concerns relative to 9-11 being blacked out. These pages reportedly point the finger at the Saudi Arabian Royalty (the Saudi government) and agreements between them and our own Government and Agencies -- and ties between the bin Ladens and the Bush family. Better stated, what is the chance of the 2002 hearings (sans those 26 pages) pointing the finger of blame at nearly everyone except the Saudis (15 of whom were allegedly among the 19 hijackers) and the Administration which itself acted so peculiarly during that terrible day back on September 11, 2001.
265. Chance of the engineers and design experts who designed the World Trade Center buildings having not provided a reasonable safety margin to allow the buildings to withstand the likely rise in temperature from a large fire.
266. Chance of every single one of the concrete floors disintegrating into dust-sized particulates before they hit the ground during the now-famous collapses of Buildings #1, #2 and #7. [ ... yes, before not after they struck the ground! One look at the pictures of the horizontal plumes of "dust" eminating from the collapsing buildings is enough.]
267. Chance of the rubble itself remaining "hot" for so long and in so many spots, as was shown by NASA data compiled and portrayed by the US National Geological Survey. Many spots remained hot for days afterwards and a couple of spots were shown to still be hotter than the temperature required to melt aluminum even after being watered for several days by New York firemen. [Note, I wrote "aluminum," not hardened steel! But even so ...]
268. Chance of NASA reporting the following: "The temperature at the surface of the rubble of the North Tower at 400 42' 39.94" N latitude, 740 00' 45.37" W was 7470C five days after the collapse." Even with these data, what is the chance that no one would take these measurements one step further and ask, what is the chance that no one would insert temperature probes -- or even think about it -- until the rubble was removed and shipped to China and India for recycling? Imagine how useful such probes might be today, if only ...
269. Chance of the stench that would come from the heat-disintegration of more than 50,000 pounds of human flesh not rivaling that of the stench that was reported in the vicinity of Hitler's extermination camps -- just from the ovens.
270. Chance of the hole seen in Building #6 in the three-dimensional elevation photos taken on September 23rd from the air by NOAA being below ground level. This gets back to one of the critical unanswered questions: what exploded with such force at/in Building #6?
271. Chance of both the North and South Towers collapsing in approximately ten or eleven seconds (I counted the seconds off myself while watching the several different video tapes) when that is approximately the same amount of time that would elapse for a brick to free-fall in a vacuum from a height of 1290 feet (roughly the height of the towers). We have to remember that the "official" story given to us by the Government (FEMA) was that the reason the buildings collapsed almost perfectly vertically was that the floors "pancaked" one atop another all the way down. For a free-fall in a vacuum, the equation to use is d = (1/2) a * t2 where d = the distance in feet (1290 feet), a is the acceleration (32 ft./ sec.2) and t is the time in seconds. Theoretically, t would be 8.979 seconds if the top of the tower (and everything below it) fell in a vacuum. The theoretical time to fall in a vacuum is therefore close to nine seconds. This certainly suggests that something occurred to provide such a collapse -- very close to a "free-fall." Properly placed and timed explosives would do the trick.
272. Chance of seismic data recorded at Columbia University at the time that each of the buildings collapsed showing a number of anomalous (totally unexplained by the videotaped ten-to-eleven second collapse) spikes. [Explosions?]
273. Chance of the FEMA report (the Government's official explanation of the buildings' collapsing) barely even attempting to explain how the South Tower collapsed. For the South Tower, it simply stated, "the same types of structural behaviors and structural mechanisms previously discussed [vis-á-vis the North Tower -- the 'pancake' theory] are equally likely to have occurred in WTC 2." This, despite the fact that the top of Building #2 tipped to a full 22 degrees during the collapse and yes, subsequently straightened out prior to the building crumbling atop a heap of powdered ashes and steel beams! There was no mention of these events, although they were videotaped and photographed extensively.
274. Chance of the FEMA report (the Government's official explanation of the buildings' collapsing] not even trying to explain why Building #7 collapsed. Regarding Building #7, the FEMA report simply stated, "the specifics of the fires and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown ..." Here, they didn't have the excuse of an airplane or large debris from other buildings striking Building #7, so they briefly mentioned the fires as the cause -- yet they made no mention of how the "fires" went unnoticed for seven hours prior to Bulding #7 collapsing -- again, in a perfectly vertical fashion. Nor did they mention that fire has never in the history of the world caused a tall building (Building #7 was 47 stories tall) to collapse. Would firemen ever enter a burning skyscraper if the likelihood of its collapsing on them even existed? Fortunately, they don't believe that explanation either (read their publications; in particular, Fire Engineering issues during October through December, 2001.) .
275. Chance of no one noticing the fires that were burning (presumably raging) in Building #7 from roughly 10:30 a.m. until 4:10 p.m. on September 11, 2001. (Yes, a "Huh?" belongs here, I think, since there were literally hundreds of onlookers and millions more watching the events on TV.)
276. Chance of Appendix C of the FEMA report itself (entitled, "Limited Metallurgical Examination") showing reasonable evidence that explosives were used to bring down the Twin Towers. The actual verbiage that surrounded the "boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain ... iron and copper ..." is lengthy, but has been determined by construction engineers, chemists and physicists to be curious enough that, for minimum further investigation, the steel should not have been buried quickly in landfills and/or sent to foreign countries for recycling.
277. Chance of expensive GPS units being installed in the trucks that carried away the steel to be buried or recycled -- because, it was later explained, the cargo was considered to be "sensitive." If it was sensitive cargo, why was it destroyed?
278. Chance of a 68 year-old computer nerd with very little knowledge of conspiracies managing to come up with more reasonable improbabilities and questions worth looking into (many quite serious!) than two Congressional Hearings seem to have come up with in almost two years.
279. Chance of Ameer Bukhari remaining on the FBI list of hijackers until today (August 26, 2003) when it is known by both our Goivernment and the Royal Saudi Government that he has been dead since the year 2000.
280. Chance of a photo, claimed by our Government to be authentic, picturing what appears to be a piece of a small remotely-controlled aircraft -- rather than a piece of a Boeing 757 airliner -- in the grass outside of the Pentagon shortly after the impact and fire. It could easily be a piece of a Global Hawk (more likely) or Preditor (less liekely), but no official explanation accompanies the photo -- which incidentally, was not released by our Government until 2002 when questions were being raised about there being no debris from the Boeing 757 aircraft.
281. Chance of Building #7 being the one building among those not struck by either of the two aircraft that collapsed vertically (due to fires, according to FEMA) when neither Buildings #5 nor #6 collapsed in such a manner (or possibly not at all!) after at least some debris fell upon those buildings. Building #5 was nine stories tall and Building #6 was eight stories tall and much thinner steel was used in their construction. The beams used in Building #7 are now known to have been massively thick beans -- so as to support the crisis center that was (presumably) not used on 9-11 -- an assumed crisis, I believe.
282. Chance of none of the black boxes producing any useful information (they were originally said to have been pulverized) until the summer of 2003 when substantial concern and legal quaestions forced the FBI to release allegedly "good information" that the Arab pilots crashed Flight 93 after it seemed apparent that the passengers who, after the "let's roll" phone call, charged forth to the front of the aircraft might overtake the cockpit. One of the Arabs allegedly told the other to crash the aircraft rather than give up control and his voice was clearly heard over the ... black box.
283. Chance of an excellent video being made portraying a perfectly formed line of military officers (ranks clearly shown) and civilians, many in suits, cleaning up every minute piece of debris in the grass over which the attacking aircraft passed before crashing into the Pentagon. Don't we generally leave a crime scene untouched until after a proper investigation ... usually? What evidence had to be removed so urgently and so carefully?
284. Chance of jet fuel melting the steel beams in WTC Buildings #1 and #2 in light of the fact that Ironworkers in Ohio having to use bottled oxygen, acetylene torches and numerous other expensive technologies to accomplish that feat. Oh yes, jet fuel runs only about 25 cents per gallon, even with the high prices we are experiencing in the summer of 2003.
285. Chance of 230,000 tons of conctrete (115,000 tons from each of the two 110-story towers) becoming pulverized without an external energy source -- aside from simple gravity. Whatever this energy might have been, it also sent out horizontal plumes of dust that were at least four to five times the rectangular area of a cross-section of either building -- that is, about three times the width of either building -- while the buildings were collapsing in those horrible lethal seconds. That same energy shredded corrigated steel as if it were paper mache (aerial photos of the scene afterwards clearly showed thousands of shards of steel lying atop the pulverized concrete. One author (Eric Hufschmid) suggested that either the buildings were terribly defective with unusually light/weak concrete throughout -- or that explosives were used.
286. Chance of nearly every occupant of both the North and South Towers below the floors that were impacted (up to about the ninetieth floor in the North Tower) having survived. Current estimates are that 98% of the persons (not including firemen) who died were above the impact points of the penetrating aircraft. Considering that the firewalls around the elevator shafts and stairwells were penetrated and largely destroyed, how is this possible unless almost none of the burning fuel and debris went into the stairwells and elevator shafts -- and then on down these "vertical tunnels," thus allowing thousands of persons to escape -- many by elevator. One video showed a packed elevator unloading just before the firemen left their posts in the North Tower after the South Tower collapsed. Of course, the stairwells were essentially completely passable according to all accounts from both firemen and survivors. This leads to the obvious question: What (if not fire and debris) weakened and/or destroyed the steel beams and other load-bearing elements of the buildings prior to the collapse?
287. Chance of the head of intelligence of one of our allies in the "War on Terror" funneling $100,000 to Mohammad Atta just prior to the attacks on 9-11. The head of ISI Pakistani Intelligence, Mahmoud Ahmad, not only did exactly that, but was one of the persons targeted by Daniel Pearl for investigation prior to his (Pearl's) capture, ultimate execution and decapitation by unknown extremists in Pakistan. He (Mahmoud Ahmad) was also (coincidentally) having breakfast on 9-11 with the heads of the committee that finished their investigation of the intelligence breakdowns that were largely responsible for the terrorists' being able to carry out the attacks.
288. Chance of the EPA stating to the public within seven days of the attack that "the air around Ground Zero is safe to breathe" -- this despite the fact that the chemical analyses of the air hadn't been completed and the rubble was still smoldering and emitting God-only-knows-what into the air. The IG report has now been partially revealed, and states that "EPA didn't have sufficient data and analysis to make [such] a blanket statement." The EPA didn't even recommend that the cleanup crews wear cloth or paper face masks. The next item possibly sheds some light on the "why?" of this incredible strategem of outright concealment.
289. Chance of the Inspector General of the EPA's report relating to EPA response to possible dangers from the dust and other pollutants in the air near Ground Zero in New York being kept under wraps until the summer of 2003. Interestingly, the White House required that the early warnings to the population in New York (and the American public) have any concerns for safety removed and specific reassurances inserted. The EPA IG Report states that the White House insisted that EPA's draft be modified so as to satisfy "competing considerations, such as national security [huh?] and the desire to reopen Wall Street [again, huh?]." Even now, on 28 August 2003, the report is only partially being disclosed to the public. What is it that we, the public, can't be trusted to know about the air around Ground Zero in those early hours and days? Do we possibly have a reason for Christine Todd Whittman's resignation from the EPA earlier this summer -- before the release of this incriminating IG report?
290. Chance of the National Guard at Andrews Air Force base changing its website (cached files still available) on September 12, 2001 (the next day) to suddenly show no F-16 and F-18 fighter aircraft. The previous site (only a day earlier) showed both the 121st Fighter Squadron of USAF's 113th Fighter Wing (with F-16s) and the 321st Marine Fighter Attack Squadron of the 49th Marine Air Group Detachment (with F-18s) located at Andrews. That was on September 11 -- then suddenly on September 12 ... gone! As a Field Investigator for an international investigatory group, I have reason to call the Freedom of Information officer at Andrews AFB often and their answers to my questions are friendly but evasive ... "I'm sorry, sir, but I have never actually viewed the website to which you are referring. You might try contacting the Wing History Office at Langley." That leads to a run-around worse than some of what I get when checking on radar data that I htink might possibly be available after reported scrambles in the middle of the night.
291. Chance of a Boeing 367-200ER with a maximum take-off weight of 395,000 pounds bringing down a building designed to withstand the take-off weight of a Boeing 707-320B which is 395,000 pounds. Since both of the hijacked aircraft were estimated to have had only about 10,000 gallons of jet fuel when they took off (as opposed to the maximum capacity of 23,000 gallons) and were only about 30% occupied, they were surely below the tolerances included in the architects' and engineers' estimates. Further, the cruising speed of a Boeing 767 is about 100 mph less than that of a Boeing 707 suggesting that the kinetic energy at impact was substantially below that used in the safety margins inherent in the design of the building. One estimate of the differences in actual kinetic energy, using what we know of the flying parameters of the hijacked aircraft, is that the hijacked aircraft actually impacted the building at about ten percent lower kinetic energy than that required to match the lower bound of the design specifications.
292. Chance of fires being the cause of the collapses when both aircraft had less than half the fuel on board (see previous item) than that assumed in setting safety margins in the design of the buildings.
293. Chance of Columbia University's seismic record registering a 2.1 Richter Scale earthquake at precisely the moment that WTC Building #2 began to collapse. Of course, additional seismic readings established the time that the large mass of rubble crashed to the ground a few seconds later. And yes, the same peculiar readings were true for Building #1 (the North Tower).
294. Chance of Columbia University's seismic record registering a 2.3 Richter Scale earthquake at precisely the moment that WTC Building #1 began to collapse a half hour or so after Building #2 collapsed. (This item and the previous item taken together deserve a "Huh?" even if it suggests a bias. All independent experts are puzzled, believing that the largest seizmic "event" should have occurred when the massive amounts of debris struck the ground.)
295. Chance of an explosion occurring in Building #6 just as Building #2 was struck -- an explosion so massive that it sent debris 540 feet into the air! No aircraft was ever assumed to have hit Building #6 -- but the crater in Building #6 discussed in previous items gives credence to the fact that the explosion occurred just as it was seen on CNN's live broadcast -- but never replayed on CNN.
296. Chance of the History Channel waiting almost two full years (until September 7, 2003) before presenting a video that restated the FEMA position that the vertical collapses of the buildings (plural in their final conclusions) was completely "to be expected." Of course, the film made no mention of Building #7 and the argument depended (again/still) on the assumption that thousands of gallons of ignited fuel passed down both the stairwells and elevator shafts so as to melt the reinforced steel all the way to the base of the building (singular, because they were only able to really "look" at debris from Building #1). Of course, no mention was made of the fact that almost all of the persons who worked in the building below the impact point escaped down those same stairwells and even (as seen on the Firemen's Commemmorative Video) using the elevators right up until seconds before the South Tower collapsed. Not a single person on either the Firemen's Commemmorative Video or in subsequent interviews complained of intense heat in either the stairwells or the elevators. Yet the claim by FEMA is that the fire was so intense as to melt reinforced steel in those very areas.
297. Chance of the video shown on the History Channel on 7 September 2003 suggesting that the building (speaking only of the North Tower, interestingly) was basically a truss building when experts say that you could never build a truss building that high -- aside from the lack of any design documentation on the buildings that would suggest such a thing to begin with. Be assured, the buildings were all supported by reinforced steel. These latter day explanations can't have it both ways!
298. Chance of a previous CEO of one of the companies that provided electronic security information to the World Trade Center was (not another brother!) Marvin P. Bush, George W.'s youngest brother. [admittedly, more in the "for what it's worth" department]
299. Chance of the same company that "cleaned away" the debris in Oklahoma City (Murrah Building explosion in 1995) being selected to clean away the debris from the World Trade Center Towers in the days and weeks after 9-11. Interestingly, the name of that company is "Controlled Demolition." And that is exactly what we all seemed to have seen on out TVs on 9-11 -- a controlled demolition.
300. Chance of the South Tower (WTC #2) falling a full half hour before the North Tower (WTC #1) fell considering the following facts: (1) the South Tower was struck seventeen minutes after the North Tower was struck; (2) the fires in the building were largely out shortly after the impact and only the black smoke (indicative of lack of oxygen to feed the fire) was evident from the street below (even the New York Fire Department reported that the fire in the South Tower was reduced to two small pockets of flames -- at and above the impact region -- within about a half hour of the impact); (3) the South Tower was struck at such an angle that it took the main impact (inertia of the aircraft and the fuel) away from the center structure of the building; (4) most of the fuel spilled and burned outside of the South Tower -- and we all saw that; (5) almost all persons whose offices were below the impact point survived by walking down the stairwells in the center of the building; and now, from the History Channel's most recent (September 2003) presentation of FEMA's explanation, we are told that (6) the primary load-bearing reinforced steel was around the center portion of the tower -- the portion that received substantially less impact and burning fuel than was the case in of the North Tower. There's lots more relating to the South Tower, like why did it not tilt towards the corner that was struck and/or why was that 22 degree tilt "righted" so that the building still imploded perfectly vertically and downward in only a little more time than suggested by the theoretical speed of a free fall in a vacuum? [And we can ignore, for this item anyway, the fact that persons departed elevators in the center of the North Tower -- on the Firemen's Commemmorative Video -- just prior to the South Tower collapse and, oh yes ... there are all of those elusive questions relating to WTC # 7, the other World Trade Center 49-story highrise that collapsed (vertically imploded) that same day -- a collapse that even now in 2003 fewer than 5% of the American people even know about.]
301. Chance of the Ladies Home Journal (Oct '03) publishing, in answer to interviwer Peggy Noonan's quesion, George Bush's rather surprising response, "We got a laugh out of it!" The question and answer went as follows: Ms. Noonan asked, "So the day starts in tragedy and ends in Marx Brothers?" (This was as a punctuation to a humorous story from the President and his wife, Laura, relating to his experiences on 9-11.) President George W. Bush responded, "That's right! We got a laugh out of it." [This one is already in the magazine racks in mid-September 2003, so I guess we might give it a "post-event" probability of one -- but the rules are: what is the "chance of" whatever occurring if you were to estimate the probability in advance of the event.]
302. Chance of the offical Government's explanation of the collapse; i.e., because the only connections between the outer walls and the inner cores of the two towers (no mention of Building #7) were extremely lightweight and weak trusses -- and that the impact of the planes weakened these trusses -- is true. Recall that both buildings fell after a fairly long time after the planes impacted the buildings. Besides, ... [See items below.]
303. Chance of all of the floors below the impact floors -- and fires, thus not afffected by the weak trusses mentioned above in Item #302 -- pancaking in a perfectly symmetrical manner so as to allow for the perfectly vertical collapses which actually occurred.
304. Chance of there being no substantive steel girders between the outer (perimeter) wall and the central core -- considering a calculation of the amount of steel that went into the central core yields only 2/3rds of the steel that went into the construction of the towers. This assumption would leave about 32,000 tons of steel unaccounted for. (Besides photographic evidence shows that they existed despite the FEMA report.)
305. Chance of there being no strong support between the central core of the buildings and the outer wall considering that the loads due to heavy winds (and yes, New York does periodically experience wind) would move the outer walls several feet with the central core remaining still -- causing severe buckling -- which never occurred in the history of the Twin Towers. The possibility of there being flimsy trusses was a center argument in the videos and films produced, based on FEMA's report, for the buildings' collapses.
306. Chance of the South Tower, in particular, collapsing symmetricaly when it was struck by the hijacked aircraft at an angle through one corner. The perfectly vertical collapse (and the "Pancake Theory" given us by the Government) would have required the fires to be distributed evenly throughout each floor, reaching both the outer perimeter and the inner core (assuming the most recent revelations by FEMA in September 2003) at about the same time. The timing of the explosives in controlled demolitions is very critical to avoiding collateral damage around the building -- to avoid a building toppling like a tree over a populated area. One expert in controlled demolitions said that the vertical collapse of a high-rise without preset explosives would be "more than miraculous." Yet we have examples of three buildings collapsing in that manner in one day -- all presumably caused by fire alone!
307. Chance of the reinforced steel melting so as to at least give some semblance of credibility to the official story given Americans vis-á-vis the collapse of the three towers. The following quote from Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics! Part II: "... heating steel is like pouring syrup onto a plate: you can't get it to stack up. The heat just flows out to the colder parts of the steel, cooling off the part you are trying to warm up. Am I to believe that the fire burned all that time, getting constantly hotter until it reached melting temperature [1538 degrees C, not 800 degrees C as was reported]? Or did it burn hot and steady throughout untl 200,000 tons of steel [the amount of steel in one of the Twin Towers] were heated molton -- on one plane load of jet fuel?". [The next item only strengthens this item.]
308. Chance of the reinforced steel melting so as to at least give some semblance of credibility to the official story given Americans vis-á-vis the collapse of the three towers given that ... [this next quote from a sequel to the above] "... the maximum temperature in the unprotected steel supprt in ... test fires [in the UK, Japan, US and Australia] was 360 degrees C (680 degrees F) and that is a long way from the first critical threshold in structural steel, 550 degrees C (1022 degrees F) ... I think the case is made: the fire did not weaken the WTC structure sufficiently to cause the collapse of the towers." [emphasis mine]
309. Chance of the FEMA Emergency Action Team assigned to the WTC on 9-11 arriving in New York on Monday evening, September 10, 2001 -- as stated to Dan Rather on live TV by Tom Kenney, a member of the FEMA tean. [Recall, that it was FEMA that insured that the debris was shipped to Asia for recycling before it could be thoroughly examined for possible bomb residue ... and it was FEMA whose analysis was referred to as a "farse" by the 125 year-old Fire Engineering Magazine.]
310. Chance of employees of the facility at Indian Lake Marina, which was six miles from where Flight 93 went into the ground, reporting that they saw confetti-like debris (one witness said "a cloud of debris") falling on the lake and nearby farmland a couple of miinutes after hearing the explosion of the crash six miles away. The "Huh?" on this one might be related to the fact that there was only a ten mph wind blowing in that area at the time. This seems to suggest that the plane was indeed shot down (or exploded) and was breaking apart over somewhere nearby Indian Lake as it went overhead.
311. Chance of none of the Federal Agencies involved (CIA, NSA, FBI, FAA, White House, Congressional Inquiries, etc.) even yet -- on 27 September 2003 -- having released any recorded transponder or radar data to the American public. Only recently was a small number of vignettes of voice data released (from Flight 93, presumably), and even that was confusing and contradictory in and of itself.
After viewing the video, "9/11 in Plane Site" on 17 September 2004
312. Chance of a rather noticable flash occurring (very visible on the videotape) only milliseconds prior to Flight 11's impact into World Trade Center Tower #1.
313. Chance of a rather noticable flash occurring (very visible on the videotape) only milliseconds prior to Flight 175's impact into World Trade Center Tower #2.
314. Chance of the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon leaving a hole only sixteen feet wide (at the most!) in the outer wall of the Pentagon. [Note: Item #14 still holds, but isn't it interesting how the 90 feet reduced to 16 feet after videotape of the Pentagon prior to the collapse of the roof over the impact area was made public?]
315. Chance of videotaped viewers -- both in interviews and "live" at the time of the "airliner" impacts -- stating that the aircraft were not passenger airliners at all.
316. Chance of not a bit of debris from the wreckage of a Boeing 757 striking the Pentagon being seen on the videotape footage taken immediately after the attack. Photos released several months later did indeed show some (presumed) pieces of the phantom Flight 77. (Huh?)
Now, if you wish to estimate what the "chance of" all of the events described above happening, simply multiply the numbers you jotted down along the way. That is, if you said "one in a hundred" write a 100. When you have jotted such numbers for all of the events, simply multiply them and see if you don't get a number larger (by far) than the number of atoms in the known universe. The chance of all of these events having happened (which they did!) is only one in that number -- -- a probability that is most likely less than 0.0000000000000...01. (between 80 and 100-plus zeroes)
Makes you think, huh?
I don't presume to know the answers, but perhaps one of you with greater imagination than me and perhaps more knowledge can come up with an answer.