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.

 

Flight School Head Admits Neither He Nor 9/11 Hijackers Could Fly 9/11 Planes

page: 9
18
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Thanks for the post COOL HAND. I don't know what the deal was with Chic. I didn't know him or ever meet him. But he is alive. All DNA supposed evidence was faked.

Prove that. Show me the evidence which you possess which I will be more than happy to pass on to the family. I am sure they would be overjoyed to hear that he is alive.



I don't know what they told the participants in 911. It must have been a real good story to get all of them to agree to kill over three thousand of there fellow citizens.

Where are all these people kept, and who is keeping them. Do you seriously expect us to believe that these people are all alive and have no access to the outside world? Do you expect us to believe that whoever is keeping them is part of a completely leak-proof organization? Are you serious?



Many deaths were faked on 911. No passengers or crew members died in any airplane crashed because there were no airplane crashes. It is an unfortunate and ill-informed public that would believe that airplanes crashed on 911.


Then where are the airplanes at? Did they go to some kind of chop shop where they filed off the serial numbers and then resold them?



Yes, Chic, in my opinion is alive. He missed the top of the Pentagon by about 373 feet according the Digital Flight Data Recorder. Unfortunately, Wendy his daughter is not and he will have to live, wherever he is, with that fact.

Wendy's death was tragic, but completely unrelated.




posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:40 AM
link   
It's amazing that some people have a hard time comprehending that planes can hit a building, and yet jump to the conclusion that there is a giant conspiracy involving holographic planes, exactly placed demolitions, and all the loose ends in between.

No offense Mr. Lear, I don't care who your daddy is but if you seriously think that holographic planes hit the WTC, and that THAT theory is a more logical and probable one, then you may need to reevaluate.

Occam's Razor people! Whats harder to accomplish:

-Having people HIJACK planes and crashing them into objects?

or

-Using state of the art 3d holographic imagery and precisely timed and coordinated demolitions in place to fake a plane hitting a building. Taking the people that were supposed to be on those planes and hiding them somewhere, and maintaining the story without a single leak of information.

We are talking about the same government that can't even keep dirty little lovegames with underage boys secret. And thats a personal one on one thing. If they can't hide that information for long, and thats involving 2 people in on a secret, what happens when several hundred are in on the secret, and the secret costed lives, alot of them?

"If I only had a brain."

admin edit: removed impolite comment

[edit on 11-28-2007 by Springer]



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWarWe are talking about the same government that can't even keep dirty little lovegames with underage boys secret. And thats a personal one on one thing. If they can't hide that information for long, and thats involving 2 people in on a secret, what happens when several hundred are in on the secret, and the secret costed lives, alot of them


Nicely put, WoW.


Another useful link on debris and passengers' bodies:

www.cooperativeresearch.org...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Senator John W. Warner (Va.), the ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee, helped spearhead the campaign on Burlingame's behalf, saying he was driven in part by evidence that the pilot died fighting the hijackers, not in the crash.

"I felt very strongly that this was a meritorious case," he said yesterday. "The final cog in the wheel was the examination of his remains, which indicated Captain Burlingame was in a struggle and died before the crash, doing his best to save lives on the aircraft and on the ground."
Source

I guess the good senator may disagree with John Lear.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar
Occam's Razor people!


No doubt. Who says they had to know how to fly these planes like WW II aces? They just needed to know how to load flight plans. The answer is so obvious it should have been brought up years ago.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


Capt Lear,

I will respect you and your accomplishments and will not argue with you, ever. But I ask you to not 'cut and paste' segments out of what I post and then use those to twist my intent, please.

You will note, for instance, regarding UA11, AA175 and AA77 recorders I said 'as far as I know' none have been recovered. Then, you state 'That is untrue'. You see, I wrote something that was not meant to be a statement of fact, just talking about what I know, and letting others make up their own minds. I'm a little insulted because it seems my words were taken out of context.

About USAIR in PIT...I was flying the B737 at that time, 1994. Yes, I had heard about the suicide theory. Then, I thought, if I were Boeing, and I KNEW that a pilot intentionally put an airplane into the ground to kill himself (and take over a hundred with him) for a suicide, for what? Insurance money? (because insurance policies specifically exclude suicides when deciding to pay out). I mean, if a company like Boeing would allow their reputation to be damaged, instead of saying "Hey! The guy committed suicide, not our fault!" NO, Boeing went along with the 'faked' yaw damper explanation? Costing the Corporation millions of dollars?

Anyway, not arguing 'with' you, just stating my opinion...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:59 AM
link   
I was ready to give up on this thread as it seemed to have become a vehicle for some quite outlandish claims which I can only see as being used to get "airtime" and promotion for a particular name.

I'm always open to ideas if they can be backed up, sadly this has not been the case.

9/11 was a truly awful day - and I'm not a US citizen.
The live images I saw (I was working for BAA at the time) will stay with me forever.

As I've said before, I believe there was/is a conspiracy - whatever form it takes, and a tragic and needless loss of life.

To use this loss of life as a vehicle for self promotion is IMO just plain wrong, and indeed may be part of the conspiracy, although from another side.

The interesting part of this discussion has focussed on the OP, and whether or not the hijackers could fly the planes.

There have been good cases made on both sides of the argument, and I'm not qualified to judge who is right.

I welcome all opinions and realistic theories about what happened that day and in the time leading up to it, and afterwards too - but I must stress the word realistic.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Originally posted by Sandals24




I see you have avoided my question? Why cant you explain holographic technology???? If your so well informed? I put it to you you dont know anything...


Thanks for the post Sandals24 I can sympathize with your anger and frustration. Holographic technology can project what appears to be a real image which includes light, heat and sound when there is nothing there but a projected holograph. The technology is secret but someday soon I expect to figure out exactly how the technology works.


Also I find your assertion that no crew members or passengers died in the Plane crashes as quite frankly disgusting!!


Many feel the way you do. They simply cannot believe that 911 not only was an inside job but that over 3000 Americans were killed just to come up with an excuse to grow opium in Afghanistan and steal oil in Iraq.

I am personally outraged that the perps tried to blame arab/muslims for this disaster.


How people can ignore the grieving familys of those lost on 9/11 is absurd! Im English i dont know anyone who died in the attacks but every time i see the footage of the planes hitting the WTC it brings a tear to my eye.


Dry up that tear, Sandals24, that footage of airplanes hitting the buildngs is fake.


To make up!! with no evidence whatsoever!! that it was faked is utterly disgusting! you should be ashamed!

do you sleep at night??


Right after David Lettermans Great Presidential Speech's until about 7:20am.

Thanks for your post and opinions they are greatly appreciated.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   
ok john we will have to agree to disagree, One last thing you said you had dinner with a Scientist from Lockheed, where he explained the holographic technology... now you say you hope to one day understand this.... explain your contradiction...

And if your atempting to take the piss out of me for feeling sad for thousands of people dying when the planes DID hit the WTC i suggest you stop right now......

thanks for getting back to me..

regards..

[edit on 28-11-2007 by Sandals24]



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by dbates

Originally posted by WolfofWar
Occam's Razor people!


No doubt. Who says they had to know how to fly these planes like WW II aces? They just needed to know how to load flight plans. The answer is so obvious it should have been brought up years ago.


Interesting link...heck, they didn't even have to load a 'flight plan' at all...on the FMS you push a button labeled 'LEGS', that brings up the legs page on the screen. Then you type in a waypoint...a waypoint is coded into the database and can be a navigational aid (NDB, VOR, etc) an intersection between two airways, or the ICAO identifier for an aerodrome.

SO, hit 'LEGS', type in, oh...KJFK (Kennedy INt'l) push 'EXECUTE' and the FMS draws a line on the EFIS (electronic flight information screen) to the waypoint you've selected. There are two EFIS, the upper is the EADI, the lower is the EHSI. Pilots here will know that HSI means 'horizontal situation indicator.' IF the Saudi bastards knew that much about the FMS, then they just had to steer and follow the magenta line on the EHSI back to the New York area and take over visually after that.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
The technology is secret but someday soon I expect to figure out exactly how the technology works.


Well, why don't you just ask your friend to explain it to you and then you can pass it on to us? You know, the one who:


I had dinner a few nights ago with a former Lockheed scientist who described the technology in detail. And no, I can't pass it on.


Surely if he is willing to discuss (what would be if it were true) TOP SECRET information to someone without a clearence, then he can discuss it a bit more and you can fill the rest of us in on it. Then maybe we can stop pestering you about it?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:18 PM
link   
nice one COOLHAND, Im glad someone else is noticing the contradictions in mr lears statements, keep up the good work...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Originally posted by weedwhacker




I will respect you and your accomplishments and will not argue with you, ever. But I ask you to not 'cut and paste' segments out of what I post and then use those to twist my intent, please.


Thanks for the post WW and please accept my apologies for inadvertently cutting and pasting and twisting your your comments.



About USAIR in PIT...I was flying the B737 at that time, 1994. Yes, I had heard about the suicide theory. Then, I thought, if I were Boeing, and I KNEW that a pilot intentionally put an airplane into the ground to kill himself (and take over a hundred with him) for a suicide, for what? Insurance money? (because insurance policies specifically exclude suicides when deciding to pay out). I mean, if a company like Boeing would allow their reputation to be damaged, instead of saying "Hey! The guy committed suicide, not our fault!" NO, Boeing went along with the 'faked' yaw damper explanation? Costing the Corporation millions of dollars?


Boeing also agreed to fabricate the center tank fuel pump explosion on TWA Flight 800, for Boeing 747-100 series only in return for being allowed to merge with McDonnell Douglas, a merger which had been tied up in anti-trust litigation.

That agreement cost most airlines millions of dollars in lost revenue because it led the way to rules that limited the amount of fuel that could be carried in the center tank of airplanes. This hit the Lockheed L-1011 cargojet that Kitty Hawk International, who I flew for, really hard because we were operating on a very tight margin and that particular rule deprived us of 3000 pounds of cargo we could carry.

So Boeing got to merge with McDonnell Douglas and Kitty Hawk filed for bankruptcy.

As far as the fabricated yaw damper theory for UAL585 and Flight USAIR487 the damage that would have been done to the airline industry if the truth were told would have been incalculable. Surely you must agree with that.

Life is not always fair. But its not whether we win or lose, its how we meet the challenge that’s important.

Thanks for the post and your opinions. They are greatly appreciated.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


John, your post does not answer the question posed by Mr.TJ/WW. Instead, it goes on a tangent about how Boeing is evil. But nothing on the matter TJ/WW was inquiring about, namely why the evil Boeing risked its reputation, spent millions, all to protect the (now dead) nutty jealous pilot??



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Boeing also agreed to fabricate the center tank fuel pump explosion on TWA Flight 800, for Boeing 747-100 series only in return for being allowed to merge with McDonnell Douglas, a merger which had been tied up in anti-trust litigation.

What? How did Boeing agree to fabricate the center tank pump explosion? Who did bring it down, and please don't tell me it was done by the Navy.



As far as the fabricated yaw damper theory for UAL585 and Flight USAIR487 the damage that would have been done to the airline industry if the truth were told would have been incalculable. Surely you must agree with that.



What damage are you talking about? People would be less inclined to fly because one (of two) pilots might be suicidal? You don't think that the airlines would have come up with a better screening system for the pilots to weed out the ones who MIGHT have mental problems?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


Indeed, if you google "airline pilot suicide", there have been a few suicidal pilots already... Nothing new.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Capt Lear has a point...I know that as recently as two years ago there was an FAA Advisory Circular that mandated the Center Fuel Pumps on B737 and B757 be turned off when the quantity reached 1000lbs. (I may have slight inaccuracies, but the gist remains the same).

Background: Erring on the side of caution? Based on TWA800, Boeing decided to issue this advisory due to the design of the pumps. (the 767 center pumps are different, so exempt). I don't know the L-1011, never flew it. But I know what John meant when he mentioned having to carry extra fuel, considered 'unusable' in lieu of cargo. Could be the final nail in the coffin of a company on the edge of bankruptcy. Airlines' profits/losses hinge on a very thin edge in any case...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Originally posted by COOL HAND



What? How did Boeing agree to fabricate the center tank pump explosion? Who did bring it down, and please don't tell me it was done by the Navy.


Thanks for the post COOL HAND. No center tank fuel pump on any Boeing 747 ever ignited fumes and caused an explosion in any center tank of any Boeing 747. It was a ridiculous explanation. Couldn't have happened. Didn't happen. Wouldn't happen. No possible way could it happen.

When the government intially proposed the planned coverup Boeing first said no. Then the government said, how about just limiting the fuel pump story to just 100 series 747's and we'll let you merge with McDonnell Douglas? Boeing then agreed.

Boeing is not a bad company and I never said it was. Boeing is just looking out for Boeing.

That fuel tank fairy tale was a government sponsered ruse to cover up the accidental shooting down of TWA Flight 800 by the U.S. Navy. I believe that it was the 5th civilian airliner accidentally shot down by the Navy. The first one being the Flying Tigers Constellation full of marines headed for Viet Nam in 1963 over Guam. A Navy fighter was using the Connie for target practice and accidentally let loose some live rounds. Everybody on board was killed. And the U.S. Navy went into maximum cover-up mode as they did after TWA Flight 800.

This proved fortunate for FTL because it paved the way for their future and the future of their subsidiary Flying Tiger Air Services, Inc. based in Japan as the main freight airlines for the U.S. Military in Viet Nam.



What damage are you talking about? People would be less inclined to fly because one (of two) pilots might be suicidal?


The government din't see it that way.


You don't think that the airlines would have come up with a better screening system for the pilots to weed out the ones who MIGHT have mental problems?


Heck, they let ME fly for over 40 years. What does that say for their 'weeding out'.


Thanks for the post CH, your comments are appreciated.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Oh, Capt. Lear, you raise an interesting point I hadn't considered, that is knowledge of a suicidal airline pilot, and what it might do to the industry. So, yes I could see a lead/loss scenario where Boeing/McD, et al, would cover up in order to secure more future orders and deliveries...I see that logic. If it is indeed, true...I fear my heart will break. Sometimes I just want to stay in bed and pull the covers over my head...



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Dry up that tear, Sandals24, that footage of airplanes hitting the buildngs is fake.

So they faked the video on hundreds of home video tapes? That's quite a trick. If it was a hologram as you say, then where did the noise come from? Your theories have more holes than swiss cheese in a rat nest.




new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join