It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why There Were No Helicopter Rescues At The WTC’s On 9-11

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Who said there were any calls during take-off?? There wasnt anything going on at that time. As far as a landing?.....

AND... I have spoken to my boss SEVERAL times while he is in flight on his cell.

Your lying again.




posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Dear Ultima1:

Naw, been there, done and tried that. It doesn’t work. Can’t say for sure why not, but it doesn’t work. See for yourself, give it a go. During take-off and landing phases the flight attendants are securely strapped in their seats anyways. See if you can chat on your phone. I know I can’t.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods


Well problem is the flight attendents were not strapped in during the hijackings. Also if thier were no phone calls then that would mean some of the evidence against the official story is wrong too.

The flight attendent on flight 77 called and stated the pilots and crew where taken to the back of the plane. Now protocol for pilots is to follow the instruction of the hijackers "but not to turn over control of thier plane to the hijacker", plus family and friends of the pilot (who was a Vietnam vet) stated that he would not have given up his plane without a fight.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Dear Cameron Fox:

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills here.

Fine. You’re the only person in the world who is able to talk to someone on their cell phone while they are flying in a commercial jet. Unfortunately, no one else seems to be able to do this. Which means the flight attendants weren’t able to make their calls as ‘reported’. Which means the entire highjacking story on 9-11 is a bunch of nonsense.

And as Ultima1 stated, the pilots wouldn’t have given up the planes without a fight or at least sending out a distress signal. None of this happened. Which is why the whole story had to be based on impossible cell phone calls in the first place — since to the planners of 9-11 this seemed not as easily refutable as reports coming from the pilots directly. And they were right. The public swallowed it, hook line and sinker. This discussion we’re having now is ample proof of that.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



[edit on 3/4/2007 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 07:38 AM
link   
You have proved nothing.... I once again have proven you a LIAR ! You need to get some evidence that all the calls that were made from ALL the airliners were FAKE.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   


I feel like I’m taking crazy pills here.


Let me be the first to say...you said it, we did not.



Fine. You’re the only person in the world who is able to talk to someone on their cell phone while they are flying in a commercial jet. Unfortunately, no one else seems to be able to do this.


Not quite. I've received several calls from friends in the air, short phone calls, but they did come through. (and yes it was a "test" to see if it could work)



Which means the flight attendants weren’t able to make their calls as ‘reported’. Which means the entire highjacking story on 9-11 is a bunch of nonsense.


Not even close. Several of the calls were made from the airphones and also calls were made on the airline maintenance radio net.



And as Ultima1 stated, the pilots wouldn’t have given up the planes without a fight or at least sending out a distress signal.


Do some research on airliner hijackings will you? Off the top of my head can only think of ONE instance of the aircrew resisting a hijack, and that was an El Al flight. US aircrews were taught to cooperate in so far as they could get the plane on the ground.




Which is why the whole story had to be based on impossible cell phone calls in the first place


Ah yes...the "impossible" cell phone calls.......Don't you think if there was some masterful conspiracy, they would have stuck to just the Airphone calls??...since EVERYBODY KNOWS you cant use a cellphone in flight? I mean this is one of the most telling aspects of the story. They are smart enough to plan a vast (and it would be VAST) conspiracy, and yet they would make an exceptionally stupid mistake and use cellphone calls as a way of establishing the "story".



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Do some research on airliner hijackings will you? Off the top of my head can only think of ONE instance of the aircrew resisting a hijack, and that was an El Al flight. US aircrews were taught to cooperate in so far as they could get the plane on the ground.


US pilots are trained to cooperate but not to hand over control of thier plane. Also it is very surprising that out of 4 planes not 1 got off a call or used the emergency transponder. Other hijacked planes have gotten off calls or used transponder code.

I can not see how flight 93s pilots were overtaken by surprise since they had recieved notificaiton of the other hijackings from the airlines.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Everyone in the upper floors would have witnessed that there were no


how strange



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999

Ah yes...the "impossible" cell phone calls.......Don't you think if there was some masterful conspiracy, they would have stuck to just the Airphone calls??...since EVERYBODY KNOWS you cant use a cellphone in flight? I mean this is one of the most telling aspects of the story. They are smart enough to plan a vast (and it would be VAST) conspiracy, and yet they would make an exceptionally stupid mistake and use cellphone calls as a way of establishing the "story".


Dear Swampfox46_1999:

The entire 9-11 operation wasn’t carried out masterfully at all. Rather it was done radically ruthlessly and that’s why it succeeded so well. It’s so over-the-top that no one dreams of asking questions.

Since ya’ all keep screaming for sources and refuse to think for yourselves I’ll post two links.

1. Mother of All Lies About 9/11
Barbara Olson's "Phone Call" From Flight 77www.vialls.com...

Former US Solicitor General Ted Olson — in his Washington Office
Such a lawyerly man wouldn’t lie now would he?

Addressing the Supreme Court of the United States of America on Monday 18 March 2002, Theodore Olson: “ It is easy to imagine an infinite number of situations . . . where government officials might quite legitimately have reasons to give false information out."

2. Dot-Connectors' Notebook - Part 1 — by Sherman Skolnick and Lenny Bloom 01-Jul-2005
from a site you guys keep belly-aching about, good ol’ rense.com rense.com...

Greeting,
The Wizard In The Woods

[edit on 3/4/2007 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Former US Solicitor General Ted Olson — in his Washington Office
Such a lawyerly man wouldn’t lie now would he?



So since he's a Lawyer, he is not only a liar...but lied about the death of his wife to cover up the murder of 3 thousand americans?

Once again.... Your need your med's UP'd



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator

Originally posted by craig732

Roof doors are locked for safety and security reasons.



What possible security reason could be given for locking the roof door?

What possible safety reason could be given for locking the roof door?

Locking firedoors is not to be advised, the owners should be on manslaughter charges.


Roof doors are not fire exit doors. When people in high-rise buildings in NYC are trained in evacuation procedures they are trained to NEVER go up in the event of an emergency... always go down.

The roof doors are kept locked to prevent people from going up there and tampering with the myriad of equipment on the roof... communication gear, ventilation and exhaust equipment, etc. All the stuff that would have made landing on the roof an impossibility.


Originally posted by Rotator

Originally posted by St Udio

the roof doors are made to keep people from accessing the roof area


Surely roof doors are made for the purpose of accessing the roof?


Yes... maintenance people. Not the general public.

I think the quotes from the NYPD helicopter pilots make all of this moot, don't they?



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 04:16 AM
link   
OK the roof door was for maintenance people, no access for the public.

That still leaves the viewing platform (built for the public) sited above the roof.

So that's two exits that would have saved lives, locked for some reason.

I can't accept the helicopter could not land on top of the south tower because on top of the south tower is a helicopter landing pad (sited on a steel platform above the roof, well away from all the equipment).

Many people never made it out the building because they could not gain access through the fire exits, they were locked in.

Somebody should at least be charged with manslaughter.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator
Many people never made it out the building because they could not gain access through the fire exits, they were locked in.


What fire exits are you refering to?


Originally posted by Rotator
That still leaves the viewing platform (built for the public) sited above the roof.


The viewing platforms would not have been open at 9:00am. If I remember correctly they opened at 11:00am. They would have been locked.


Originally posted by RotatorSo that's two exits that would have saved lives, locked for some reason.


I don't know which 2 exits you mean... there were probably many doors that led out onto the roof areas of the towers... all of them should have been locked to prevent the public from going out there to tamper with all the equipment up there. Roof doors are not fire exits.


Originally posted by RotatorI can't accept the helicopter could not land on top of the south tower because on top of the south tower is a helicopter landing pad (sited on a steel platform above the roof, well away from all the equipment).


Please go back and read the quotes from the interview with the NYPD helicopter pilot. I think he explained pretty well why he could not land on the roof or make any type of roof rescue. Beside that, the helicopter landing pad on the roof of WTC had not been use in MANY years; who knows what condition it was in.

[edit on 8-3-2007 by craig732]



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by craig732

I am a Fire Safety Director in a high-rise building in NYC,

There is no such thing as a rooftop rescue in NYC.




Nonsense when you say there are no rooftop rescues in New York, thats just bs and you know it.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 08:28 AM
link   
I'm still awake over here, crazy. Just wanted to weigh in on the side of common sense. There should not have to be so much argument. Why does every twist and turn have to be planned for maximum evil? people purposefullly locked in for no good reason but cold-blooded murder, heli pilots what, told to satay away? Do not attempt rescueof the people locked inside? am i mistaken in seeing this as to silence the no-plane witnesses high up? more cartoon planes offered by a fellow member with a cartoon avatar. For god's sake, this is a cartoon argument! Who here really takes this seriously? Why even bother arguing against it?
as long as it's just a long-running joke I like you wizard. i like tricky wizards and enchanted forests just fine. otherwise i feel sorry for you. peace.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Dear Everybody:

We keep hearing that “the doors were locked” on the roofs of the twin towers. But this cannot explain why no one at least tried to rescue people from the top of these buildings. It’s deeply engrained in human nature to at least TRY. And, besides, those doors might very well have been the type (commonly used on skyscrapers) that lock from the inside but will open from the outside. No, something else is afoot here. There were standing orders of sorts to keep the airspace specifically around the WTC’s clear of “unauthorized” air traffic. Why else was reporter Tom Kaminski ordered to get his helicopter away from the towers!

Tom Kaminski: “We were able to stay another three or four minutes in that area when we were ordered to exit the airspace immediately.”

Tom Kaminski '84 was an eyewitness to history when the Newsradio 880 traffic reporter watched the attack on the World Trade Center from a bird's eye view. The WCBS 880 helicopter was one of the first on the scene. It was a day Kaminski will never forget. The following is his first-hand account that appeared on the WCBS Web site shortly after the event.
Here’s the link: www.montclair.edu...

Seems someone didn’t want any independent interference of any kind, especially not from the air and so close to the “impact holes” on the WTC-1 and 2.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   
It blows my mind that ANYONE doubts that the rooftop doors would have been locked.

Have you guys ever tried to get on the roof of a really tall building? 99% of the time, unless you're lucky and they forgot, they've got them locked. And they don't lock them up with little flimsy doors you can kick in. They're specifically to keep people from getting up there--especially at the WTC, where there had already been incidents of terrorism.

Not only is it a huge liability if someone goes up there and gets hurt, but there's usually equipment and stuff up there that they don't want people mucking around with. Hell, some of the taller buildings even have radio equipment on them, the radiation of which is harmful. On the tallest building where I live, people have to wear special suits when they go onto the highest point of the building.

This rooftop argument is crazy.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
There were standing orders of sorts to keep the airspace specifically around the WTC’s clear of “unauthorized” air traffic. Why else was reporter Tom Kaminski ordered to get his helicopter away from the towers!


Do you think maybe it had anything to do with the fact that people were flying jetliners kamikaze-style into the building?

Call me crazy, but that seems like a pretty good reason to tell people to get their helicopters away from it.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Caustic Logic
I'm still awake over here, crazy. Just wanted to weigh in on the side of common sense. There should not have to be so much argument. ...as long as it's just a long-running joke I like you wizard. i like tricky wizards and enchanted forests just fine. otherwise i feel sorry for you. peace.


Dear Caustic Logic:

Sorry to have kept you from going to sleep. Although it seems you’ve been asleep all along — and just didn’t know it! Didn’t mean to burst your bubble. Or to keep you from remaining a Rip Van Winkle. Don’t know what you do or how you live. And surely it’s none of my business. But quite likely you pay federal taxes, purchase power from Con Edison or the likes and buy petroleum based products. So whether you like it or not, you are a resident of this here country, even if you’re not a citizen, and you have responsibilities. And it doesn’t matter if you putz around all day and only watch television, you’re still part of the ‘system’. The USA is YOUR country. And what it does to itself or the rest of the world is very much YOUR concern. In case you haven’t noticed we have invaded a sovereign country — Iraq — and are about to invade another one — Iran. Now you may not give a rip, but that doesn’t absolve you from your involvement. By doing nothing you’re allowing others to do anything and everything.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 10:55 AM
link   
FACT.

New York City's fire code requires roof doors to be unlocked or to have devices that allow someone to open a locked door from the inside.

Ask a fireman from NYC.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Alan Reiss, ex Port Authority official responsible for the trade center reckoned....People who needed access to the roof, such as window washers and technicians who serviced the antennas, were issued electronic-key cards and also had to be buzzed through by security guards who monitored the doors by closed-circuit television from a 22nd-floor office.

But low and behold guess what...... On Sept. 11, falling debris knocked out the 22nd-floor security center's equipment just after the plane hit, says Mr. Reiss, who is still with the Port Authority and was helping with the transition to new management that took over the complex in July. The guards, who had to be rescued themselves, couldn't have buzzed anyone through to the roof. Even after the building's electricity was cut off, internal batteries in the electromagnetic locks would have kept the doors closed for several hours

Falling debris knock out the equipment on the 22nd floor, what?? was the equipment being held out the window.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join