Amanda Angelika wrote:

Bryan Olson typed:

Nonsense. Small and surprising operations are the ones most
likely to escape the defense systems.

True but they still need to be undertaken with professionalism, require
preplanning, intelligence and coordination so require a large and well
organised infrastructure.

What is remarkable about 911 is the considerable amount of response time
available between the first and second plane hit should have been sufficient
to scramble the fighters.

Sixteen minutes is not long. At the time no one but the
terrorists knew that another plane was headed for the second
tower.

> Especially when you consider there were

helicopters on the scene and flying around within minutes and helicopters
fly much slower than fighters.

They were already airborne and could see what happened.

Admittedly one would not want to down a US civilian passenger aircraft,
under any circumstances.  but the second plane could have been buzzed
sufficiently to send it on a different course

Your just making that up right?

Flying into a skyscraper requires as much preparation and precision as
landing on an airport runway.

Not even close.

[...]

The problem is even highly experienced commercial pilots would have
difficulty flying a passenger jet into a particular building hundreds of
miles away with practically no navigational aids.

Finding the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on a clear day is hard?
Where did you get that incredibly stupid idea?

[...]

The fact that both missions were accomplished with such deadly military
accuracy

Two of four were accurate. One so-so. One failed.