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 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

page: 76
24
<< 73  74  75    77  78  79 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Even if an exercise was focused on a possible threat posed by international flights, I don't see why a domestic flight might not be able to serve the purposes of the exercise unless they were trying to intercept the inbound traffic before reaching US airspace.




posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 09:51 PM
link   
I see most of us are in agreeance that no Boeing 757 crashed in shanksville.

Crash site and debris fields = Shoot down / Crash simulation drill site
Flight 1989 and others - Mock hijack drills
Phone calls were part of the exercise.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Seems to be the case. Or at least a lot closer to it than the "real" story ever got.

You wouldn't happen to be an operator figuring out how to get it right the next time, would ya Ivan?



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
Before we get into this discussion ULTIMA1, I need you to clarify two things.
1. What was their normal patrol route?
2. If the fighters were on their normal patrol routes, would it have made any difference on 9/11?


A quick search of Northern Vigilance would have given you the information on aircraft being deployed to Alaska and Canada.

This depleted the number of aircraft that could have been used to intercept the planes on 9/11.

www.cooperativeresearch.org...

September 9-11, 2001: NORAD Begins Northern Vigilance Military Operation NORAD begins Operation Northern Vigilance. For this military operation, it deploys fighters to Alaska and Northern Canada to monitor a Russian air force exercise in the Russian Arctic and North Pacific Ocean, scheduled for September 10 to September 14. The Russian exercise involves its bombers staging a mock attack against NATO planes that are supposedly planning an assault on Russia. [BBC, 2001, pp. 161; NORAD, 9/9/2001; Washington Times, 9/11/2001] The NORAD fighters are due to stay in Alaska and Canada until the end of the Russian exercise. At some time between 10:32 a.m. and 11:45 a.m. on 9/11, Russian President Vladimir Putin will call the White House to say the Russians are voluntarily halting their exercise. [Washington Post, 1/27/2002] It is unknown from which bases NORAD sends fighters for Operation Northern Vigilance, and how many US military personnel are involved. However, in December 2000, it took similar action—called Operation Northern Denial—in response to a “smaller scale” Russian “long-range aviation activity in northern Russia and the Arctic.” More than 350 American and Canadian military personnel were involved on that occasion.



[edit on 12-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:31 AM
link   
Now asfar as the eyewitnesses, I would assume their view was no better than this picture and attached vid.
. Can you identify this plane?

No?

Watch the vid.


Do you think this is what hit shanksville?



[edit on 13-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


It strongly appears you resolved the mysteries, of what went through the Pentagon wall, with those naturally folding wings, and Shanksville, PA ground impact. That certainly does explain why no correct wing scars the wing span of Boeing 757s appeared on the Pentagon wall or the ground outside Shanksville, PA. No doubt about it. I am quite serious concerning what I stated.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Most of us are not in agreeance and I find it strange that if the US had such a weapon, why would they not use it on Iran or even when we invaded Iraq. If we used some type of particle based or beam weapon I am sure that the rest of the world would not care what we did and thererwould be alot of fear in the former Soviet UNion and China as well as NK.

I mean, with that weapon we could get rid of Irans nuclear problem or NK's as well in hours. As far as the video posted that 'looks' like a jet, that did not cause nearly the damage that the plane did after it was SHOT down and strcuk the ground in Shanksville.

There was a plane and 40 people died, not at the hands of terrorists, but at the hand of a pilot who on instructions from Dick Cheney through MIneta shot down Flight 93. The only psyop is those who are trying to make other beleive that something else happened.

YOu are trying to blame the government for something that alot of other people KNOW they did. It is traceable, and you can find all the information if you stay clear of propoganda driven sites. Look at forign news and news in the days following 9/11 that has not disaapered. Minetas testimony to the 9/11 comission is a perfet example as well as why did Cehcny not want to testify.

The government did it but the blame is going to some bull# psyop that involves more resources then were needed to actually over it up.The US got lucky. LUcky that 93 did not slam into the Capitol building and kill more.

Also, since Flight 1989 originated that day from the same ariport as 2 that had already crashed into the towers and maybe it was precaution or maybe there was a fifth plane that was never revealed? However, that was not Flight 93.

This is the Suspicious plane that you are all talking about

link ot mystery plane

It was a civilian aircraft asked to look and see if it was down and it was.

[edit on 13-1-2008 by esdad71]

[edit on 13-1-2008 by esdad71]



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 

A quick search of Northern Vigilance would have given you the information on aircraft being deployed to Alaska and Canada.

This depleted the number of aircraft that could have been used to intercept the planes on 9/11.


Could have? How many of those fighters would have been armed and on alert? NORAD normally keeps 14 fighters on alert at seven different bases in the United States, 2 at each base.

Do you think all the fighters in the country were in Alaska and Canada?



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


Because it is abnormal to go around attacking countries which have not attacked the US. As it was, Bush broke constitutional and international law unilaterally attacking Iraq. The UN did not give approval to attack Iraq. Other countries were correctly following international law in not complying with Bush's demand to attack Iraq, because the Bush administration lied the US and the rest of the world into war. The ABA is in consensus with what I stated.

Are you ready for WWIII? Because that is what you are encouraging to happen. Einstein had this to say about that. He did not know with what the world would fight WWIII. However, if humans survived, they would be fighting WWIV with sticks and stones.

Do you have any idea what those can do in dispersing radioactivity to friend and foe alike? You want to drop those on the US' own citizens in Iraq, or filter all that radioactivity to Iraq from Iran? What about the water supplies? Food grown in the earth? Air breathed?

Ever hear of Agent Orange? Do you know how many people, including our own citizens, died from cancers caused by Agent Orange use in Vietnam, many years after Vietnam was over? Do you realize how much cover-up was done over Agent Orange for years when dropped on our own soldiers? The same happend with those involved in Desert Storm. The same is happening with the current international police action in Iraq.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


Betty Ong, alleged to be on Flight 11, was supposed to be having a 25 minute discussion with authorities over what was allegedly happeneing. Where were the inceptor planes NORAD can have flying in 15 minutes or less? They do have bases close to NYC with planes and pilots, with armed planes, with small missiles, for necessity purposes at enemy planes. No doubt about it. In fact, they were already set to do "exercises" on 9/11/2001 around NYC.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
Do you think all the fighters in the country were in Alaska and Canada?


But the evidence posted shows there were still plenty of NORAD planes that were out of the area that could have helped in the intercept of the 9/11 planes.

Do you have any evidence to debate it ?


The NORAD fighters are due to stay in Alaska and Canada until the end of the Russian exercise.


[edit on 13-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 

But the evidence posted shows there were still plenty of NORAD planes that were out of the area that could have helped in the intercept of the 9/11 planes.

Do you have any evidence to debate it ?


If they were armed and alert they may have been able to help. That seems to be what causes confusion. NORAD only had 14 fighters on alert because that was all that was required. It doesn't matter if the fighters in Alaska and Canada were at there normal bases, they would not have been armed or on alert. Which means that they would not have been able to help.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


They are supposed to keep armed planes ready at all times. That is why pilots can be ready in 15 minutes to leave the ground from the closest available base. They do not take time to load up interceptor planes, or this country has no actual national defense on a moment's notice. Either it does or does not.

The fact is the stock in the area necessary were sent elsewhere on 9/11/2001 to play "anti-terrorist games" or so we were told it was playtime. That is documented. They were not where they were needed when immediately needed.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 

They are supposed to keep armed planes ready at all times. That is why pilots can be ready in 15 minutes to leave the ground from the closest available base. They do not take time to load up interceptor planes, or this country has no actual national defense on a moment's notice. Either it does or does not.
They did have armed fighters ready on September 11. There were 14 of them at seven different bases.


The fact is the stock in the area necessary were sent elsewhere on 9/11/2001 to play "anti-terrorist games" or so we were told it was playtime. That is documented. They were not where they were needed when immediately needed.
The fighters that were required to be on alert were at their bases. None of them were pulled away for the three exercises happening that day.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Interesting one of the exercises was over Shanksville and it entailed mock hijacking and cruise missile attacks.

The one exercise was a simulated shoot down of a commercial airliner.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


They were not defending this nation. That is for certain. Why weren't they defending this nation? Where were those 14 or whatever number of all ready readied planes? All on the west coast with the pilots still in bed or what?



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   
THere was no stand down because there was a plane and the US government knew it. This is why this transaction of words occured..




On the Sept. 16, 2001, edition of NBC's "Meet the Press," Vice President Dick Cheney, while not addressing Flight 93 specifically, spoke clearly to the administration's clear policy regarding shooting down hijacked jets.

Vice President Cheney: "Well, the – I suppose the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft."

NBC's Tim Russert: "And you decided?"

Cheney: "We decided to do it. We'd, in effect, put a flying combat air patrol up over the city; F-16s with an AWACS, which is an airborne radar system, and tanker support so they could stay up a long time ...

"It doesn't do any good to put up a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act, if, in fact, they feel it's appropriate."

Russert: "So if the United States government became aware that a hijacked commercial airline[r] was destined for the White House or the Capitol, we would take the plane down?"

Cheney: "Yes. The president made the decision ... that if the plane would not divert ... as a last resort, our pilots were authorized to take them out. Now, people say, you know, that's a horrendous decision to make. Well, it is. You've got an airplane full of American citizens, civilians, captured by ... terrorists, headed and are you going to, in fact, shoot it down, obviously, and kill all those Americans on board?

"... It's a presidential-level decision, and the president made, I think, exactly the right call in this case, to say, I wished we'd had combat air patrol up over New York.'"




The closer the plane got to Washington the harder it was to make the decision on what to do. Planes were in the air. Planes were in the air before the first planes hit and 93 took off minutes before the first plane hit. THere is plenty of time.

Whether by cannon or ATA missle, an F-16 shot down 93 on orders from the president of the United States enforced by Cheney and covered up by Mineta and company. That is conspiracy.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


Dick Cheney said he did not know about any planes flying into any twin towers. Rumsfeld said he thought the sound at the Pentagon was a detonated explosion, and then changed his story on that one.

Apparently, they did not have any TVs running at the White House or the Pentagon. Which is very likely a lie. They always have them running at the White House and Pentagon for obvious reasons of news reports.

The White House reported Bush as saying he was devastated when he saw planes flying into the towers. Yet, Bush was in a Florida elementary classroom reading "My Pet Goat", and never stopped reading even when told what had happened. He did not even bother to get out of his seat and immediately leave, as any president should do under those circumstances.

They have TVs running in the limos. Even if the driver was watching a different station, the information would be run across the bottom of the screen, and then cut into any other programming already in progress by news broadcasting.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 



Did you pay attention to the date Dick Cheney is saying all that? Yes, it does matter.

Yes, there is a proved stand-down order from Cheney. Rumsfeld never put in his two cents to stop any stand-down order. He could have done that from his appointed cabinet position, but did not. He can override the vice-president, unless the vp is constitutionally the acting president, due to complete incapacitation of the elected president. Pro tempore - temporarily acting in place of by US Constitution law.

Rumsfeld was appointed secretary of defense answerable only to the president and no one else.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Rumsfeld also said that 93 was shot down during an interview/press conference. Read the 9/11 comission report where it states that they kept asking Cheney if the order still stands, and that order was to shoot down any plane that was a threat. Came from the president and the vice president with Mineta, who ordered all traffic out of the sky that day, initiated the final moments of 93.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 73  74  75    77  78  79 >>

log in

join