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 not strike the White House first?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 11:08 PM
link   
"Again you are trying to pick out a relatively small target surrounded by
trees and other buildings using minimal trained pilots while moving at
500mph...."

Yeah, and we're supposed to believe that these "minimally trained pilots" were able to maeuever an aircraft at 500 MPH into a building which was only 77 feet high. Don't mean to throw your words back at your face Mr. TinFoil Police, but "what is it"?

[edit on 23-8-2009 by SphinxMontreal]




posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   
I think they didnt hit the White House because they are terrorist's, and terrorist are idiots (obviously). If they hit the white house it would have had a greater effect, but being they are friggin morons... well you get it.



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Yeah, "morons" who were able to invade and allude the most protected air space on the planet.



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 01:22 AM
link   
I am astounded of the ignorants in this thread! Looks to me a lot of you have NOT done any real research into 911.


United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar

1405 (10:05 a.m.)

ntmo-e: ok united ninety three we're now receiving a transponder on and he is at eighty two hundred feet

doug: now transponder and he's eighty two-hundred

ntmo-e: southeastbound still

doug: eighty two hundred feet and now getting a transponder on him

ntmo-e: correct

doug: ok buddy

10:06

ntmo-e: ok we've lost radar contact with united ninety three
doug: all right

10:07

ntmo-e: sixteen south of Johnstown where they lost united ninety three and it was heading turning one four zero heading

doug: which will put him to what do you think

ntmo-e: uh I guess that put him down coming right just west of Dulles

doug: ok

ntmo-e: if he stays on that heading of course

doug: how we doing John with getting stuff on the ground

ntmo-e: uh we're they 're not they 're still going to their original destinations if you look at TSD you'll see that the eastern part of the unites states is thinning out

doug: ok

ntmo-e: uh you know airports like dulles uh new york there we have no aircraft going into there

doug: ok

10:08

ntmo-e: ok uh there is now on the on united ninety three

doug: yes

ntmo-e: there is now a report of black smoke in the last position I gave you fifteen miles of Johnstown

doug: from the airplane or from the ground

ntmo-e: uh they're speculating it's from the aircraft

doug: ok bud

ntmo-e: uh who hit the ground that's what they're speculation it's speculation only

doug: ok

10:10

doug: hey john

ntmo-e: yes

doug: do we have anything on delta nineteen eighty nine is she still heading to cleveland?

ntmo-e: delta nineteen eighty nine was returning to Cleveland and they were no longer treating it like a hijacked aircraft

doug: ok

ntmo-e: I don't know if he's landed ok; the last position of united I'm going to give some coordinates united ninety three

doug: yes

ntmo-e: three nine five one north zero seven eight four six west

doug: zero seven eight four six

ntmo-e: west

doug: west

doug: all right

ntmo-e: you got the thirty nine fifty one north

doug: ya thirty nine fifty one north zero seven eighty four six west

ntmo-e: that's the last known position of united ninety three
Full Transcript Here
United 93 transponder is recognized by Air Traffic Control as airborne after alleged impact time. Some have made the excuse this is due to Coast Mode tracking. ATC did not recognize any signs of CST (Coast Mode). Further confirmation that this was not any type of "Coast Mode" is that ATC also recognized United 93 reporting an altitude. The only way ATC could observe a reported altitude is if United 93 were squawking Mode C on the transponder, which means altitude reporting capability. Further confirmation comes in the form of latitude and longitude positions reported by ATC. N39 51 - W78 46 were reported as the last known radar position of United 93. It is unclear if the position is reported as Degrees, Minutes or Decimal, however, standard aviation terminology is in Degrees, Minutes. With that said, both positions are well past the alleged United 93 Crash site.
It is impossible for ATC to have observed United 93 transponder and altitude after the reported impact time and southeast of the crash site, if United 93 did in fact crash in Shanksville as the 9/11 Commission would have you believe.
Pilots For 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Flight Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The data does not support observed events. See Pandora's Black Box - Chapter Three - Flight Of United 93 for full in depth analysis of United 93 Flight Data Recorder (Black Box) data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.

pilotsfor911truth.org...

The only people who do not support this “fact” are disinformationist who will do anything to steer you all way from the truth.

How come most of you choose to ignore the Facts, what more proof do you all need to show flight 93 never crashed I mean the government was so sloppy at covering their own crime and here is the proof, WAKE UP!



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
"Again you are trying to pick out a relatively small target surrounded by
trees and other buildings using minimal trained pilots while moving at
500mph...."

Yeah, and we're supposed to believe that these "minimally trained pilots" were able to maeuever an aircraft at 500 MPH into a building which was only 77 feet high. Don't mean to throw your words back at your face Mr. TinFoil Police, but "what is it"?

[edit on 23-8-2009 by SphinxMontreal]



Yeah I was surprised to hear that quote as well. Especially considering that the White House is basically the exact same height as the Pentagon.




The overall height of the White House (to the top of the roof) is 70 feet on the south and 60 feet 4 inches on the north; the façade (grade of lawn to parapet) is 60 feet on the south (lawn at 54 feet above sea level) and 50 feet 4 inches on the north.


www.whitehousehistory.org...

Considering that f77 slid under the second floor, I'd say he could have easily hit the White House.

Also, something to keep in mind, if my memory is correct, the government claims that they(the 9/11 hijackers) invested in hand held GPS navigators. Expensive ones, that I believe could be used by pilots in small aircraft. So all this talk about the unskilled hijacker pilots not being able to find the supposedly tiny 70ft tall, almost 200 ft wide White House is typical of debunkers. They all know that if f77 wanted to have hit the WH, it would of had no problem doing so.

Besides, It could also be very possible and likely that these guys might have had overhead view type of photos/maps that were specifically to be used once the autopilot systems had told them they were over their perspective target cities(now I sound like a debunker).



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 





None of what you said changes the fact that a Flight out of JFK would be much less likely to be intercepted given the amount of time "in air." As you mentioned, the flights were hijacked very quick, into the flights. So the same applies.


Have a problem with basic comprehension - hijackers picked flights
because they fit their requirements! Not because they were close to
NYC. As can see it took a half hour minimum before hijackers
ready to take over. Even if left JFK would still have fly west then come back to NYC .



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Stillresearchn911
 





Yeah I was surprised to hear that quote as well. Especially considering that the White House is basically the exact same height as the Pentagon.


WH and Pentagon maybe same height, but WH is relatively small while
Pentagon is one of largest buildings in the world

Pentagon is also isolated, in an open field with no trees or buildings
around it. Makes it easier to spot from air and to line up approach

Here we fall back on usual tinfoil trutherism - that Hani Hanjour was
incompetent pilot. Yet same clowns expect him to pick out small
target in crowded city.

Even with GPS still have to see target long way off to line up for
approach - remember are also working in 3 Dimensions!

At 500mph moving 1 mile in 7 1/2 seconds !

Can see this in Pentagon attack - Hanjour spotted Pentagon too late
and was too close to line up which is why had to put plane in 270 deg
turn to come back around to hit building



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 07:15 AM
link   

posted by thedman

Here we fall back on usual tinfoil trutherism - that Hani Hanjour was incompetent pilot. Yet same clowns expect him to pick out small target in crowded city.



No.

Same clowns expected him to be popping a few cool ones in a girly bar.



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stillresearchn911
So all this talk about the unskilled hijacker pilots not being able to find the supposedly tiny 70ft tall, almost 200 ft wide White House is typical of debunkers.


This is a statement of almost breathtaking casuistry. I'm not surprised that you consider the hijackers to be relatively skilled and highly dedicated - this is, after all, pretty obvious from the evidence. But to write that it is "typical of debunkers" to suggest that they were not, and that this is redolent of some debunkers' tendency to alter their opinions, takes some neck.

An absolute sovereign truth of 9/11 conspiracy theory regarding the pentagon plane has been that Hani Hanjour was an incompetent, unable to execute the vaunted 270 degree maneouver and unlikley to have been able to hit the building at all. If there is an Official Story of Conspiracy then this is a central plank in it. I point you in the direction of the garlanded SPreston writing here last month:

"For those who believe that the inept Hani Hanjour managed somehow to fly a 757 like a fighter pilot, and miraculously flew the aircraft down a hill through five light poles and pulled up with an extremely high G rate to fly the aircraft inches above the lawn and into the 1st floor of the Pentagon; read further."

He goes on to quote from Mark H. Gaffney

"How the FBI and 9/11 Commission Suppressed Key Evidence about Hani Hanjour, alleged hijack pilot of AAL 77

The evidence was crucial because it undermined the official explanation that Hani Hanjour crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon at high speed after executing an extremely difficult top gun maneuver...

Crucially, the FBI file includes not a scintilla of evidence that Hani Hanjour ever trained in a Boeing 757...

One such pilot, Philip Marshall, who is licensed to fly Boeing 727s, 737s, 747s, as well as 757s and 767s, recently authored a book, False Flag 911, in which he states categorically that the alleged 9/11 hijacker pilots, including Hani Hanjour, could never have flown 767s and 757s into buildings at high speed without advanced training and practice flights in that same aircraft over a period of months. As Marshall put it: “Hitting a 90-foot target [i.e., the Pentagon] with a 757 at 500 mph is extremely difficult -- absolutely impossible for first-time fliers of a heavy airliner. It’s like seeing Tiger Woods hit a 300-yard one-iron and someone telling you he never practiced the shot.” "

I chose this example from ATS because it's recent, but there are literally dozens of similar assertions stretching back years. Here's 911research's summary of the issue:

"The complexity and precision of the approach maneuver are nearly impossible to reconcile with the official account that the plane was piloted by Hani Hanjour, an incompetent pilot of even single-engine prop-planes"

Presumably you strongly disagree with Spreston, Gaffney and (ironically)911research? You might also reconsider how "typical" it is of debunkers to change their version of the story when the only person doing that here appears to be you.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by TrickoftheShade]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 



Right, and the most logical thing to do is "be in the air" less, because of the Greatest Air-Force and Military in the World! So that you would think, would be part of the 'game plan.'



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
dman

You just said:



As can see it took a half hour minimum before hijackers ready to take over.


earlier you said.....



Flights were hijacked minutes after takeoff, right after planes reached cruising altitude and pilots relaxed.



So which is it? They hijacked the plane "minutes" after and relaxed, or did they take a half-hour? Minutes after JFK does the job quick, which is what I pressume they wanted given "The United States Military."

Or do you honestly think they wanted to be in the air more?


[edit on 24-8-2009 by talisman]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2PacSade
I understand that to successfully hijack & fly planes into the WTC towers would be quite a slap in the face to the USA. . . But many innocent people from dozens of foreign countries were also killed, and the cowardly act united our nation for a short period of time as it's never been in decades. . .

aThe true perps don't care who they kill. Yes they are cowards.

qDid it really terrorize the common man & woman to the point of surrender? Did the terrorists actually think
this would be our response to such an act?

aNo--- it has awakened them to the true danger facing this country they are uniting to address this running amuck goment.

qDon't you think that if everything we've been told is true that the US government & military were much more embarrassed by Pentagon airspace being breached & struck with a visible & less than super-sonic commercial airliner?

aYou must be out of the loop to think there is any official truth.
Mortified and pissed would be the emotions of the military folks I know.

qDon't you think the “ terrorists “, would also consider this a much greater triumph that the striking the twin towers?

aActually this entire OP is a moot attempt at an effort in futility.

qIf the answer to this last question is YES, then;

aN/A

qWhy not hit the White House first???

aN/A

qWouldn't this have been the most humiliating slap in the face? To see the President of the United States house on fire & destroyed from a hijacked commercial airliner broadcast all over the world? ( Jihad? )

Don't get me wrong-

aCan't help it the whole concept is wacky

qI'm not making light of any of this, just asking questions. I'm not satisfied. . .

aCheck out all the new info

qI think the terrorists were led to believe part of the plan was to strike the White House and this would eventually happen. . .

Iat is silly to suppose anything of this nature. Vie for a REINVESTIGATION
and then you may find out something substantial.



qBut I also think that they were betrayed & Flight 93 was taken out BEFORE this could happen. . .

If I was Osama, I would have spent my suprise on destroying the White House first. . .

qAny thoughts?

aYeah, silly thread.



2PacSade-


[edit on 24-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


As said flights hijacked minutes after takeoff - aka about half an hour

As stated before hijackers waited until planes leveled off at cruising
altitude

I take it you don't fly much - on takeoff plane does climb out to reached
assigned altitude. Sometimes very steep climb - try running up aisle
and fighting with people on a steeply pitched floor. Hijackers knew this
and planned accordingly. Wait until plane levels off, everyone relaxes
and then strike

So what are trying to get at - hijackers grab controls at take off and
hit the building right away ?

By waiting until reach cruising altitude also take advantage of height to
build up speed in a dive



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by talisman
 


As said flights hijacked minutes after takeoff - aka about half an hour

As stated before hijackers waited until planes leveled off at cruising
altitude

I take it you don't fly much - on takeoff plane does climb out to reached
assigned altitude. Sometimes very steep climb - try running up aisle
and fighting with people on a steeply pitched floor. Hijackers knew this
and planned accordingly. Wait until plane levels off, everyone relaxes
and then strike

So what are trying to get at - hijackers grab controls at take off and
hit the building right away ?

By waiting until reach cruising altitude also take advantage of height to
build up speed in a dive





Your changing what you said to suit your argument. Which is it? Minutes after or Half-Hour after? They don't mean the same thing. That is like saying an hour is "minutes" after.

You can't change the simple fact that a flight from JFK would get them where they wanted to go a lot faster. It doesn't have to be "right away" but it sure has them in "striking" distance.

So far nothing you have said offers a good rebuttal to this.

As far as I am concerned, it seems much more logical for them to have taken the quickest route unless of course they "knew" in advance there would be no military response, which of course is very strange of them to think this way...


EDIT: Remember you said...
"took a half hour minimum before hijackers ready to take over. "


So they took half an hour before they were *READY to "take over."



[edit on 24-8-2009 by talisman]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


You keep missing the point - hijackers had specific plan in mind. Needed
specific aircraft (B757/767), light passenger loads so hijackers could get
seats in first class and control passengers. flights leaving at 8AM from
east coast airport, transcontinent flight.

Now apparently these flights meet their criteria. Also notice how
same airlines used - United and American. Not becuase they were
"in on it" in tin foil code. It was because these are two largest airlines,
fly mostly Boeing aircraft, have numerous flights from east coast
airports.

We know hijackers took several test flights to check on crew and
passenger activities

Actor James Woods noticed one such flight



Several weeks before the attacks, the actor James Woods was in the first-class section of a cross-country flight to Los Angeles. Four of his fellow-passengers were well-dressed men who appeared to be Middle Eastern and were obviously travelling together. “I watch people like a moviemaker,” Woods told me. “As in that scene in ‘Annie Hall’ “-where Woody Allen and Diane Keaton are sitting on a bench in Central Park speculating on the personal lives of passers-by. “I thought these guys were either terrorists or F.B.I. guys,” Woods went on. “The guys were in synch-dressed alike. They didn’t have a drink and were not talking to the stewardess. None of them had a carry-on or a newspaper. Nothing.

“Imagine you’re at a live-music event at a small night club and you’re standing behind the singer. Everybody is clapping, going along, enjoying the show- and there’s four guys paying no attention. What are they doing here?” Woods concluded that the men were “casing” the plane. He said that his concern led him to hang on to his cutlery after lunch. He shared his worries with a flight attendant. “I said, ‘I think this plane is going to be hijacked.’ I told her, ‘I know how serious it is to say this,’ and asked to speak to the captain.” The flight attendant, too, was concerned. The plane’s first officer came over immediately and assured Woods that he and the captain would keep the door to the cockpit locked. The remainder of the trip was bumpy but uneventful, and Woods recalled laughingly telling his agent, who asked about the flight, “Aside from the terrorists and the turbulence, it was fine.”



Hijackers had a plan and carried it out

Seem to have problem - since reality does conform with your conspiracy
fantasy.



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


I am not "missing the point"

You gave two contradictory statements. One having do with "minutes after" the other having to do with "at the minimum of half-hour."

Most of what you listed could be fulfilled with flights from JFK.

Your missing MY POINT:

WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THEIR LIST OF THINGS MOST IMPORTANT:
The UNITED STATES AIR DEFENSE

It does not seem like that was much of a thought since they chose to be "IN THE AIR LONGER."


Since they didn't include this, then they must have known the Air Defense was of no consequence, which of course it wasn't. Which leads me to conclude that the Gov tale is a bunch of hogwash.




[edit on 24-8-2009 by talisman]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Thanks for posting the "still airborn" information.
As I live I learn. I had no idea that documented truth was out there.
I would say another nail in the coffin.
A big one!

[edit on 24-8-2009 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


With all of this talk about not striking the White House first, THEN there is this red herring brought in about UAL 93. Sigh. Likely EITHER gonna target the WH, or more likely the Capitol.

To Donny....I am looking at the UA93 SSFDR readout, showing all the traces ending just after 10:03 EDT. (every trace stops at 10:03:15)

The airplane started the descent from 10,000 and impacted almost straight down from 5,000 feet. The altitude lines and airspeed lines all match up.

Can provide a link....ah shoot, why not do it now! Here:
FDR study

The allegation from P4T comes from ONE instance, and it is dubious at best. As always, the preponderance of other evidence points one way, but the little group that tries so hard tend to latch on to ANY anomaly they can find, no matter how tenuous.

Of course, there's no way a computer screen could be displaying an image of a previous radar 'hit', could it?? I mean, 1960s era computers are state of the art, right??

Info:


Although experimental use of computers in ATC had begun as early as 1956, a determined drive to apply this technology began in the 1960s. To modernize the National Airspace System, the FAA developed complex computer systems that would replace the plastic markers for tracking aircraft. Instead, controllers viewed information sent by aircraft transponders to form alphanumeric symbols on a simulated three-dimensional radar screen. By automating some routine tasks, the system allowed controllers to focus on providing separation. These capabilities were introduced into the ATC system during the ten years that began in 1965.


OK, the initial computerization of ATC began in the 1960s. There have been "improvements" *cough, cough* of course...



In January 1982, the FAA unveiled the National Airspace System (NAS) Plan. The plan called for modernized flight service stations, more advanced systems for ATC, and improvements in ground-to-air surveillance and communication. Better computers and software were developed, air route traffic control centers were consolidated, and the number of flight service stations reduced.


Sounds good, eh? Finally!! The 1980s!! ALL that spanking new, modern equipment.....wait a minute! President Ronald Reagan fired the Air traffic Contollers in 1981....hmmmm....well, that fancy new equipment ment it was smooth sailing, right...? Nope. Air traffic was reduced, to allow for the on-the-job traiining and spooling up of all the new hire controllers, who struggled to learn with the same old systems.



The FAA recognized the need for further modernization of air traffic control, and in July 1988, selected IBM to develop the new multi-billion-dollar Advanced Automation System (AAS) for the Nation's en route ATC centers. AAS would include controller workstations, called "sector suites," that would incorporate new display, communications and processing capabilities.


Whew!! Except.......



In December 1993, the FAA reviewed its order for the planned AAS. IBM was far behind schedule and had major cost overruns. In 1994 the FAA simplified its needs and picked new contractors. The revised modernization program continued under various project names. Some elements met further delays.


It was known to be a complete joke. The basics from the 1960s remained, with some newer stuff piggy-backed on to it. You can ask air traffic controllers from that time period. (1990s)



In 1999, controllers began their first use of an early version of the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System, which included new displays and capabilities for approach control facilities. During the following year, FAA completed deployment of the Display System Replacement, providing more efficient workstations for en route controllers.

Link

This was not accomplished all at once. And not without snags.

Point is, just because ONE radar screen somewhere MAY have still been showing the UA93 target, it is not conclusive evidence.

ALSO....the hijackers knew how to kill the transponder. When in standby, there is no altitude reporting. SO WHY DID the report floated by P4T say that the airplane was 'squawking' an altitude?? HOW did they see a return, other than a primary skin paint?

You can read this United 93 timeline. Look at page 2, especially.

Always check sources!!!
_______________________________________

Spelling, as always.






[edit on 24 August 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Notices, none of the debunkers want to touch it either they avoid the truth and dance around it with insults and smug remarks. The proof that a small part of our government pulled off 911 is being reveled every day. I have always said this, that all the evidences points to our government, just look at the mass cover-up, the lies that the FBI has been caught repeatedly over their evidences. Evidences they planted and it is obvious like only one engine found at the pentagon, wonder what happened they couldn’t find a matching one at the bone yard.

Look at the lie that the FBI told and Ted Olsen, about Ted receiving a phone call from Barbra Olsen his wife that was supposently on board one of the hijacked airplanes she claimed that there were knife welding Muslims taken over the airplane Ted Olsen work for George Bush, in fact it was Ted Olsen who called the media and talk how his wife was frighten to death and the descriptions of the hijackers and this is how the media got the information within the hour of the alleged hijacking and broadcasted it on all the New networks.

Several years later the NEW mastermind terrorist who allegedly pulled off 911 was in the custody of the military and during his trail the FBI testified that Barbra Olsen call to her husband NEVER HAPPENED. It is just that plain and simple who is covering who a….
I find it appalling how our government gave millions of dollars to people in Afghanistan and Iraq who turn over innocent people for award money people that they claim were terrorist. Then our military tortured these people into confession in crimes they did not do and yes some were even murdered in the process. This is how you get innocent people to say anything if they want to live.

Our government needed someone to be the Mastermind, (originally Bin Laden) and they needed to create a group of people who they can call the plotters and carried out 911, like the alleged hijackers, whom 7 out of the 19 are still alive and have filed law suits to clear their name. More lies by our wonderful FBI, they claimed they identified all 19 hijackers using DNA! Yea right but over 1,500 bodies were never recovered at ground zero at the WTC and the FBI want you and me to believe they have some supper duper DNA kite that can sift all of the millions of tones of the WTC dust for the alleged hijackers DNA.

A small group of evil, greedy, people looking to profit and change our laws by doing a false flag operation, in the Bush and Clinton administration using a small group part of our military. They flew those planes by remote control and blew up all the WTC and science proves this to be true so far, and the FBI is helping the perps to cover- up their crime. How can any one support the OS lie when the truth is starring them in the face, one only needs to look at it.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join