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: 80
24
<< 77  78  79    81  82  83 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Its pretty amazing how detailed the terror drills can get.

This one drill was in russia. If i didnt see the captions, I would believe them to be real.

SOURCE


Here is a natural wing scar similar to flight 93's alleged wing mark. This is a mile from the crash site, common feature.





Remember, no plane crashed in Shanksville.



Wow. I am totally convinced now more than ever that NO Boeing Crashed in Shanksville, on Spetmeber 11th,2001.

Originally posted by IvanZana



This picture is avoided and undebunkable.


There is no proof of a boeing 757 crashing.





As you can see no fuel, no fire, no parts, NO Boeing 757 at Shanksville on 9/11




Mabey they are looking for cruise missile parts?

???


THE SCREAMING THING

At the horseshoe-shaped Indian Lake, about a mile east of the official crash site, several eyewitnesses recalled hearing “a screaming thing” that “screeched” as it passed over the golf course and lakeside community immediately before a huge explosion shook the ground.

Chris Smith, the groundskeeper at the golf course, said something with a “very loud screeching sound” passed over in the immediate vicinity of the golf course before he heard a huge explosion.



Cruise missile video. Look like a small white plane.




posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 

You will take what as a "no"? I did not respond to anything that required yes or no. How absurd your statement is.


Let me help you out again. You stated this:

originally posted by OrionStars
They were already in NYC playing anti-terrorist games with real airplanes on 9/11/2001. So why didn't they intercept because they were there? They did not do that. NORAD and the FAA claim they thought it was part of the games.


I replied with this:

originally posted by me
NORAD was not in New York before the attacks. Can you provide a link confirming that the FAA and NORAD thought the attacks were part of a drill?


One more time. Do you have any links to back up your statements, yes or no?



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


Please get over it. There was no plane crash outside Shanksville, PA, at 10:03 am or any other time on 9/11/2001. All your twisting to defend the lies in the "official" reports are not going to change that fact.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


You have received enough validation of military anti-terrorist games being played on 9/11/2001, including around NYC, to fill a small pond. Did you bother to read it when it was presented each and every time? If not, stop asking. Nothing is going to change from what was already redundantly presented.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
You really just dont get it do you? Those planes that were taken to the exercises werent "alert" planes. Again, go reread the history of the 90s. The Air Force wasnt provided the money to keep more than 7 bases as alert bases (yes it DOES take money) nor more than 14-16 planes on ready alert.


And you really don't get it that any plane can be made an "alert" plane in an emergency like 9/11.

Those planes that were on the exercise could have been used to help intercept the 9/11 planes.



[edit on 17-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 

You have received enough validation of military anti-terrorist games being played on 9/11/2001, including around NYC, to fill a small pond. Did you bother to read it when it was presented each and every time? If not, stop asking. Nothing is going to change from what was already redundantly presented.


I have not received any validation proving that terrorists games were being played on 9/11/ 2001 around NYC.

The only thing that I have received is you parroting yourself over and over and over with no facts or links to back up what you say. Zero, none, nada, null, nill, nothing, zip, zilch, zippo.

Step up to the plate and back up what you say.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
stupid.
if i was at the helm, i would be BROADCASTING on ALL AVAILABLE CHANNELS, "THIS IS NO LONGER A DRILL! WE HAVE LIVE HIJACKINGS!! STOP ALL TERROR DRILLS, AND AWAIT ORDERS FROM YOUR SUPERIORS!".

total BS. a purposeful smokescreen put in place to create a 'fog of war'.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
if i was at the helm...


That's exactly what my buddy says after every football game. Of course he can't play at all, but in his mind he's one amazing quarterback.

It seems pretty easy for him to come up with the "perfect play" or best plan after the fact too.

It always amazes me how many experts at national security and terrorism we have around now. Other then my in-laws who ARE actual experts, I probably know another 40 or 50 that became experts just a few years ago.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
And you really don't get it that any plane can be made an "alert" plane in an emergency like 9/11.

Short answer no. With all the confusion that I imagine was going on in that day, the contingency plans would stand as they were at the time, meaning follow written actions and procedures. That why we practice in the military over and over and over.


Those planes that were on the exercise could have been used to help intercept the 9/11 planes.

[edit on 17-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]


What you have to take in consideration is what was the flow of information in that day, how much fuel the jets had and other factors. Could they be used? Of course. If all the other factors fall in place.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander

Originally posted by billybob
if i was at the helm...


That's exactly what my buddy says after every football game. Of course he can't play at all, but in his mind he's one amazing quarterback.

It seems pretty easy for him to come up with the "perfect play" or best plan after the fact too.

It always amazes me how many experts at national security and terrorism we have around now. Other then my in-laws who ARE actual experts, I probably know another 40 or 50 that became experts just a few years ago.


so, you feel it was good that they didn't unambiguate the situation?

i don't watch sports, and i don't do military stategy, either.

however, if i do happen to watch a game, and the quarterback shouts to the opposite team's running back, and yells, "TAKE IT IN!!!", and then the running back scores a touchdown, i could fairly say, "that was not what that quarterback should have done."



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 10:37 PM
link   


And you really don't get it that any plane can be made an "alert" plane in an emergency like 9/11.


Yep, and by the time we regenerated our jets for combat sorties (i.e. armed them, fueled etc...) it was just over an hour...so yes, we now had combat ready jets.......but by that time, it was too late. So Ultima, I DO understand, taking a cold jet and generating it for combat STILL takes time, time that wasnt available that day, nor would it have mattered if the "exercise" jets had been sitting at their homebases cold



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999

Yep, and by the time we regenerated our jets for combat sorties (i.e. armed them, fueled etc...) it was just over an hour...so yes, we now had combat ready jets.......but by that time, it was too late.


5 minutes is the MAX Swamp. Jets are always on standby, that means, running, fueled, loaded with weapons and pilots meteres away playing cards.


Ok Swamp you just lost all your credibility and anything you will say from beyond this time will be considered as poor attempts at debunking, and deraiiling.

You have proven to have zero experience in this topic. Your hatred for truth and people who seek truth is quite obvious and you've offered nothing to this thread but call people names, looks for little grammatical errors, or just say no, with no experience or rational explanation to boot.


Like I said..... Flight 93, Flight 11, was part of the Mock Hijacking Exercise on September 11th,2001.

Everyone thought it was an exerscise untill the last minute.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 09:39 AM
link   


5 minutes is the MAX Swamp. Jets are always on standby, that means, running, fueled, loaded with weapons and pilots meteres away playing cards.


Which ended with the end of the Cold War.

We did not keep planes on hot alert like that anymore. The 14 detailed to continental air defense were normally on 10 minute alert and even then, that didnt mean loaded with anything other that ammo for the cannon.

Basically, I could care less what you think of me Ivan. My life isnt this website. All I can do is continue to point out the facts to people like you, whether or not you chose to listen to me or to people like Alex Jones is up to you.

My unit, when on alert status, is supposed to launch within 10 minutes of the word being given. However, that only means the two jets in the alert facility. For us to launch any others, it would be about an hour to get them ready and launched.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana

5 minutes is the MAX Swamp. Jets are always on standby, that means, running, fueled, loaded with weapons and pilots meteres away playing cards.


On paper yes, in reality no. The jets that are on stand by are those that are assigned to that specific mission, on my base we dont have jets assigned to that mission, ever since 9-11 they perform readiness exercises but trust me it dont take them 5 minutes from when Command Post gives the order to them being in the air and thats on regular exercises that they now that at some point during the day they going to get called up.

And thats now after 9-11, after the Cold War our forces went to sleep, after SAC was disbanded, our skies became fair game.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
Short answer no. With all the confusion that I imagine was going on in that day, the contingency plans would stand as they were at the time, meaning follow written actions and procedures. That why we practice in the military over and over and over.


Well your wrong, because i was a crew chief in the Air Force and know what can be done on a flight line.

If those planes would have been at thier home stations the planes could have been used.

NORAD and the Secret Service had things well in hand. If they would have been left do their jobs.



[edit on 18-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


From where do you get that unproved statement? Please provide validation for what you claim. I have read the words of military and ex-military people who are or were interceptor pilots. They completely disagree with you. I and others have placed refences to their words in these discussions, either by link and/or inclusive or excerpts. Why did you not prove them wrong at the time or even try? You did read them. Because you immediately began arguing against them every time, with no proof to support your arguments.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well your wrong, because i was a crew chief in the Air Force and know what can be done on a flight line.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]


Im not denying the fact that they could have been used. Im talking about how effective they would have been. Jets sitting on the ground, get a call, by the time they get fuel, weapons loaded and pilots if they are not on standby (and why should they if that is not their mission), they would have been ineffective to respond to the threat.

BTW: Im in the AF too.

[edit on 18-1-2008 by Bunch]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Bunch
 


Where would the military place its most strategic bases for early interception? In the interior of the US? Or closer to each coastline and at each border?



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by Bunch
 


Where would the military place its most strategic bases for early interception? In the interior of the US? Or closer to each coastline and at each border?


Well before 9-11 you would assume it was the coastline, after 9-11 I think it has become more integrated.

Look, Im not debating the point of that interceptors could have been called into action, my point is towards how effective they could have been. Even if they were on the ground, pilots ready to go, and the only thing they need it to do was load the weapons, I doubt they could have gotten to the planes.

Now I have questions, did any of the bases around the area of the attack was assigned as part of the this intercepting task? Because if they werent they had no reason as to have planes fully fueled in the ramps with pilots sitting on stand by.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


Fine then, buy yourself a plane ticket, fly to Des Moines, Iowa and I will be HAPPY to try to set up as many interviews as you like with the members of my squadron who were on duty that day. In addtion, we can also talk to them about the alert procedures set in place (i.e. 10 minutes) for continental air defense taskings.

I say TRY to set up, because several of our pilots have been approached by the likes of Orion already and werent real happy about their integrity being called into question by conspiracy nuts.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 77  78  79    81  82  83 >>

log in

join