Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

BETTY ONG / FLIGHT 11 Was A Mock Hijacking Exercise.

page: 15
15
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Ivan, that is an interesting link, I may print it up so I can review it in more detail later. Thanks for finding it.

Again, from my experience in the airline business, everything there is completely in line with the initial confusion that would occur because Betty Ong's initial call was to the Reservation Center. The woman (Nydia?) that was put on the line, was a Supervisor. In that capacity, she would be tasked with fielding the call, because up to a certain point, Ms. Ong had not clearly identified, or the Res Agent who first answered did not realize, that she was as crewmember. The call, at first, was handled as if it was a customer calling Reservations. The Female supervisor, likely was called in because...she was a Supervisor, and as such she would be trained to handle 'bomb threats' called in to airlines...since, that is generally where bomb threats come in, to Reservations via the 1-800 number.

(Even when Ms. Ong said she was the 'number 3', you would not expect the Res agent to understand that. It is 'crewmember speak', if you will. It refers to the bid position, of a flight attendant, on that particular trip. What is more, they can agree, the F/As, at the beginning of a trip, depending on the work rules at their company, to 'swap' positions before the trip begins...just more info to show you that things can get confusing...)

Nydia conferenced in the call with a man in DFW, where AA has their main Dispatch and SOCC. Just for comparison, UA's is in Chicago, DL's is in Atlanta, and CO's is in Houston. Every airline has a 'headquarters', where Dispatch and the SOCC are located....along with Crew Scheduling to boot. Think of it as the 'nerve center' for the airline.

Ms. Ong knew she could make a 'free' call to Reservations, from the Airphone. She needed to call someone, and it is obvious, although she seemed calm, she was stressed. If she 'knew' it was an exercise, she would have been more composed, IMO.

The F/As at my airline know that they can dial a number, from an airphone onboard, and be connected to SOCC. Many, though are reluctant to do this, instead they prefer to let the pilots do it...since, although the F/As are trained well in cabin procedures, and evacuation drills, they are not conversant with everything that pilots are aware of. So, there is an intimidation factor...or there was, then ... maybe not so much, hopefully not so much now.

In any event, our procedures are so very different, forgive me for not giving details, I think you will understand (and please do not speculate, on this board...) in a post - 9/11 environment. Sept 11, 2001 was a watershed event, as it relates to how airlines operate, and how security is handled now, as anyone who travels will attest.




posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 12:07 AM
link   
There is alot of evidence that shows that there was life-fly hijacking drills, mock plane crash simulations into buildings, plane shoot-downs, bio attack in Manhatten to name a few running simultaneously with the attacks of 9/11.

Is there any type of evidence that suggests that the Betty Ong recording was not part of a Mock Hijacking exercise taking place that day?


In any of the calls is there anything to suggest that it was real? How can we know for sure we are not hearing these Norad, Faa training exercises?



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   
dble post.

[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana


There is alot of evidence that shows that there was life-fly hijacking drills, mock plane crash simulations into buildings, plane shoot-downs, bio attack in Manhatten to name a few running simultaneously with the attacks of 9/11.

Is there any type of evidence that suggests that the Betty Ong recording was not part of a Mock Hijacking exercise taking place that day?


In any of the calls is there anything to suggest that it was real? How can we know for sure we are not hearing these Norad, Faa training exercises?



Ivan, I would very much like to see your 'alot of evidence' about our claims. What I keep seeing, and reading, from you are claims of these 'drills', on that day in 2001....but instead, you provide links to other countries' drills, a few decades earlier......and, you, yourself, claimed earlier that the FAA required these drills every three years. The FAA, as you know, is the authority in the USA. Maybe, just maybe, the FAA required 'disaster' drills be conducted, as part of AOA requirements...this relates to the Airport Operations Area...and that relates to the airport, not the airline.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 01:20 AM
link   
There WERE exercises going on that day. However, as I have claimed repeatedly, it would NOT have affected the fighters that were standing alert, ready to defend US airspace. Those fighters are NEVER flown in a routine exercise, which those were that day. The number of alert fighters had been drawn down since the early 1990s as the cold war wound down and the threat was seen as diminished.

As to real flight hijacking drills, they were never done with commercial planes. If they were going to use a real plane they used a military plane, such as a KC-135. They would not use real passenger planes, because part of the drill including launching interceptors and intercepting the aircraft. They wouldn't do that with regular planes because it would scare the crap out of the passengers.

Global and Vigilant Guardian were the same exercise. It was a command post exercise involving Space Command and Stratcom. Global Guardian was the Stratcom Command Post exercise. Vigilant Guardian was a designated Space Command Command Post exercise. No actual assets were used in this exercise. They were designed to see how the command posts would respond to a nuclear attack, involving a massive attack from Russian bombers and missiles.

Northern Vigilance involved moving fighters to Alaska and Canada to "shadow" Russian bombers. These would have come from the West Coast, as they would have a MUCH faster turn around time getting up there, and would not have affected East Coast operations.

There was NO "Vigilant Warrior" that day that anyone has found, except for one reference. There was an Amalgam Warrior in June, but the only Vigilant Warrior exercise found was in 1994 in another country. Amalgam Warrior is a drone involved exercise that practices intercepts. None of these exercises would have involved the 14 fighters on alert that day in the continental US.

[edit on 2/10/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Zaphod,

You continually amaze, with information.

Thank you for contributing.

Cheers



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 01:59 AM
link   



"Is this real world or exercise?" when Norad was informed of Flight 11 Hijacking......



At least five exercises were in operation in the days leading up to and on 9/11.
1) Operation Northern Vigilance.
2) Biowarfare Exercise Tripod II.
3) Operation Vigilant Guardian.
4) Operation Northern Guardian.
5) Operation Vigilant Warrior.

The exercises caused great confusion during the 9/11 attacks.

Here is audio download www.whatreallyhappened.com...



"First thing that went through my mind was, 'Is this part of the exercise? Is this some kind of a screw-up?'" said Air Force Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold, who was at a command center at the Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida.
www.billstclair.com...


Sgt. Jeremy W. Powell of North American Aerospace Defense Command's (Norad) Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) in Rome, N.Y., took the first call from Boston Center. He notified NEADS commander Col. Robert K. Marr, Jr., of a possible hijacked airliner, American Airlines Flight 11. "Part of the exercise?" the colonel wondered. No; this is a real-world event, he was told.

s3.amazonaws.com...


At 8:40, Deskins noticed senior technician Jeremy Powell waving his hand. Boston Center was on the line, he said. It had a hijacked airplane. "It must be part of the exercise," Deskins thought. At first, everybody did.
www.newhousenews.com...




As far as Mock Hijackings, they are quite common, required by the FAA every 2 years minimun and utilising real airports, real planes, real atc in real time.

Here is some links to explore.

MOCK SECURITY HIJACKING ALARMS INDIANS, INCLUDING SOME OFFICIALS

FBI, police train for terrorists with mock hijacking at real airports


Mock hijacking at Delhi airport

NEW DELHI, Sept 20: Commandos on Saturday ringed an airplane at the New Delhi airport they thought was being hijacked, only to find it was a false alarm meant to test their alertness, officials said.

The aircraft of state-owned Alliance Air was carrying 127 passengers from central India to New Delhi when the pilot flashed a hijack alert to air traffic control in the Indian capital.

Commandos surrounded the aircraft but then were told it was only an exercise, the second false alarm in as many months.

“We carried out the drill to check the alertness of security forces,” Civil Aviation Secretary K. Roy Pal was quoted as saying.

On Aug 20, troops surrounded a plane at New Delhi’s airport that was about to leave for occupied Kashmir after the pilot falsely alerted that the flight was being hijacked.—AFP

www.dawn.com...

here is just a few, I am compiling another big presentation page with many links. see you soon.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   
I like how you post about mock hijackings in other countries. Two of your articles are about training drills in INDIA. What does that have to do with the US?

The US does NOT use live passenger planes in mock hijackings. Not with real passengers. Mock hijacking exercises involving the police or non-military authorities are done with real flight crews, involving planes that are out of service or can be taken out of service with limited disruption to service. There may be volunteers on board playing passengers, but they know everything that's going to happen, when it's going to happen, and it's planned out ahead of time. You do NOT get a plane in the air, decide that you're going to use it in an exercise, and fly a fighter up next to it and park it off the wing without warning.

As I said, there WERE command post and other exercises happening on 9/11. The NEADS personnell didn't know if it was a no notice exercise related to what was going on, or if it was real world, so they asked. With three exercises going on that they were involved in, what do you expect them to do?

[edit on 2/10/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

As to real flight hijacking drills, they were never done with commercial planes.




Your wrong again guys. They were using REAL CIVILIAN AIRPLANES on 9/11. Do some research.



NORAD had drills of jets as weapons

www.usatoday.com...


By Steven Komarow and Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties.
One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center. In another exercise, jets performed a mock shootdown over the Atlantic Ocean of a jet supposedly laden with chemical poisons headed toward a target in the United States. In a third scenario, the target was the Pentagon — but that drill was not run after Defense officials said it was unrealistic, NORAD and Defense officials say.

NORAD, in a written statement, confirmed that such hijacking exercises occurred. It said the scenarios outlined were regional drills, not regularly scheduled continent-wide exercises.

"Numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft," the statement said. "These exercises tested track detection and identification; scramble and interception; hijack procedures; internal and external agency coordination and operational security and communications security procedures."


In cased you missed it.....



"Numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft," the statement said. "These exercises tested track detection and identification; scramble and interception; hijack procedures; internal and external agency coordination and operational security and communications security procedures."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 02:26 AM
link   
And most of those exercises were COMMAND POST exercises, where they look at a radar screen, pick out a radar return and decide that one was hijacked. Then they respond as if it was real. They don't use real assets for those. IF they're using real assets, they will launch a KC-135 or similar aircraft, pick out the real flight they want to use, and simulate it with the tanker, THEN launch fighters to intercept it. I've seen this done many times, including post 9/11.

If they were really intercepting commercial planes, and using them in a drill there would be pictures of them hanging off the wingtip, or there would have been a LOT of pissed off passengers screaming about it to the media. The only time commercial planes are used in intercept practice is when they're flying into a combat theater (Saudi Arabia during Desert Shield) and transporting troops or personnel.

I've seen how they do these exercises, and I've talked to the pilots involved in these exercises. But apparently experience means little to you because someone said it on the internet. And we all know if it's on the internet it must be true.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Airline pilots are well instructed as to how a military intercept will happen, as Zaphod mentioned.

First of all, the interceptor will attempt to call on 'guard'...that is 121.5 MHz, a frequency that we all now monitor on VHF #2.

Secondly, the lead of the flight will fly up to the Captain's side of the airliner, and will rock wings in order to indicate what commands to follow, if radio contact was not made on 'guard'.

I won't waste time talking about these procedures, they are readily available on many sites. There are procedures that vary, based on whether it's daylight or night time...and, I admit, I don't have them memorized...that's why we have laminated cards on board, plus the Jeppesen manuals to reference.

These are considered International signals, and are understood and standardized by ICAO regulations.

If you don't know what 'ICAO' is, please look it up. While you're at it, educate yourselves on the AIM as well...and learn about Sectional Charts, and WACs...and Class B Airspace, and Restricted Areas, and Prohibited Areas....oh, just go learn to fly, it would be so much easier to explain!!



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
don't use real assets for those. IF they're using real assets, they will launch a KC-135 or similar aircraft, "


Oh Brother


At 8:37 a.m., the FAA's Boston Center contacted officials at NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector in Rome, New York, to tell them that Flight 11 was in the hands of terrorists.

FAA: Hi. Boston Center TMU, we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed toward New York, and we need you guys to, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.

Northeast Air Defense Sector: Is this real world or exercise?

FAA: No. This is not an exercise, not a test.



Why would they ask if it is real world or a test if they already knew it was Flight 11 (a scheduled comericial flight).

For these exercises to be effective they must do it in real world using real world assets in real time. Its the only way.

I get all my information and intel from a good 'friend' from CFB Petawawa, Ontario. He has been involved in many types of these mock hijackings and training exercises.

He is a CFB Pilot and that all the credibility I need to know what I am talking about.




A little bit more advanced than your average pilot.





[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Sorry Ivan, you have a 'content from external source' in your post, with no reference to the source. It reads wrong, the terminology, in the small 'snip', sounds false, sorry.

I know how controllers talk, I know how pilots talk.

With a valid reference, I will entertain your assumptions...

[adding]...you are using, as your 'reference', a 'friend' in the 'CFB'?

In Ottawa? Again, and I hate to belabor this, how do exercises that occur in Europe in 1987, or that may hve occured in Canada (whenever) relate to your assertion that the FAA required 'mock hijacking' scenarios every three years? I have told you what the FAA required, of crewmembers' re-current training....what part of that did you not understand?

[edit on 10-2-2008 by weedwhacker]

[edit on 10-2-2008 by weedwhacker]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   
Do you have ANY idea how many commercial flights depart US airports every HOUR? How do you expect the controllers to have the flight schedule memorized for EVERY AIRLINE?

This is how a command post exercise would go. The FAA would call and say they had American 123, and it wasn't responding to controllers. The military would find it on radar, and try to track it. They would find the nearest fighters to launch, "launch" them (in the real world, the fighters would stay on the ground). The whole time they would be working their communication systems, and responding as if it was real.

Do you SERIOUSLY think that they have a flight schedule for every single airline sitting there so they can look up the flight number and see if it's a real flight or not? They would lose too much time to look it up, which is why he said "Is this real world or exercise?" As to using real planes, as I have already said three times, they use real commercial planes for COMMAND POST EXERCISES, that do NOT use real assets. By the way, since you don't seem to understand what I mean by assets (don't know if you just don't have the experience or are being deliberately obtuse), I'm talking about the fighters that you claim are involved. In a command post exercise there are NO real fighters used. They may talk to the units they would be "launching" and work with those controllers, but they're not physically launching any aircraft.

To give you an idea of how many planes fly over the US any given day, here's a screen shot of the FAA command post's giant radar screen. This was taken, I believe, in 2006, when air traffic was supposedly DOWN after 9/11.




All those yellow dots are airplanes. Now how was NEADS supposed to know that Flight 11 was a real flight and when it was scheduled to depart, with the exercises that they do? For all the controller knew he was being graded on a no notice exercise, or it was the start of an ORI.

Oh right, of course your friend is right, and everyone else with any experience with this is wrong.
So sorry for trying to post anything resembling our experience in this. I guess we're supposed to let you have the thread to yourself and aren't allowed to post dissenting information based on personal experience. Sorry about that.

[edit on 2/10/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 03:00 AM
link   
dble post.

[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 03:07 AM
link   
I don't know if you are under the impression that NORAD was listening to the controllers talking to the plane, but this was not the case. NORAD relies on the FAA to notify them if something happens to a plane in flight. The FAA is responsible for radar tracking across most of the US, with some military airspace exceptions obviously. NORAD has no idea what's ahppening with a plane. They can get the radar screens the FAA sees repeated to their displays, but they're not sitting there listening in to the FAA talking to all the planes. Again, there are simply too many and they would be overwhelmed.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 03:15 AM
link   

8:28 a.m.: The FAA's Boston Center calls FAA Command Center in Herndon, Virginia, and reports that American 11 has been hijacked.

8:34 a.m.: Boston Center receives another transmission from American 11: "Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves."

8:37 a.m.: Boston Center informs NORAD of American 11's hijacking. It is the first notice the military receives of the unfolding events.

FAA: "Hi. Boston Center TMU, we have a problem here. We have a hijacked aircraft headed towards New York, and we need you guys, we need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out."


NORAD: "Is this real-world or exercise?"

FAA: "No, this is not an exercise, not a test."

www.americanrhetoric.com...



Betty Ong never once mentioned the hijackers saying anything, she didnt even describe them as terrorists. I dont think there is one call that decribes any terrorist from any of the planes.

She did mention some men in 1st class are up in the cock pit but that description is a far cry from a real hijacker.

Mabey it was this guy, check out this amazing thread www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



The FAA chief said that she established a phone bank immediately after the first notification and that ALL partries were kept advised up to the minute. You statement, like many, has no research and a lot of guesses that turn out to be wrong most of the time. You are IMAGINING things versus what did happen that day. The military had all the info they needed within a minute of the call bank being set up. Read the testimony of the FAA chief to the 9-11 commission.

That will get you started on research so we can spend more time on threshing out how it happened and not educating you.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 



HMMM. Ivan, I am thinking...what about this: The FAA and ATC controllers obviously had been briefed on the GAMES for that day, and no doubt had a LIST of the flights that were to be affected. When the emergency was declared by the phony calls and remote teansponder turn off, the ATC controlled saw that the plane WAS on the list, and thus asked the obvious question" Is this real or games"? If the ATC knew that the plane was NOT a part of any exercise, it would make no sense to ask if it was real or not. A flight not scheduled to be a part of the games would have no reason to be asked that question, see?

That would open a new kettle of worms..and recall that Lewin was offed and in a prefect position to be someone who had knowledge of the computer system and likley could well have been a major player in the games..perhaps he was shot in the head elsewhere and creditied with being on a plane. NO GUN was reported, and the stew said that LEWIN was KNIFED to death....totally impossible given who and what he was..no way.

So WHO shot Lewin and where? Betty Ong reads from an OBVIOUS script and Amy says that the nice highjackers who had killed and slashed and maced other crew members had. for some reason, been kind enough to show her a ' bomb ' and the wires!! Imagine that!! Rather than slahs her throat as well, they show her a bomb to describe. Remember that Amy showed NO emotion on her calls; only the first call that am to her kid did she show any emotion..the other calls were stone cold and casual, like Bettys. The perps did not count on Betty's call being recorded,Amy's was not. Bettys transcript is odd, but to hear her read it is glaring evidence that the flight was involved in the GAMES.

What ya think?



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 


How the hell do you know how much research I've done on this subject? But I love the way you condescend to everyone who disagrees with you. But you're right, it's OBVIOUS that the call where the controller asks if this is real world or exercise is well AFTER that first phone bank was set up, and he was just asking that so that the military could have an excuse to cover up everything going on that day.


Or, wait a second, this was the INITIAL CALL that set up the phone bank and notified the military......Nah, it COULDN'T be that. You're right, I'm just some fool that has done NO research whatsoever into 9/11 and have
no idea what I'm talking about when it comes to the military.

After reading your next post you're a fine one to talk about doing research. It wasn't an ATC controller that asked if it was real world or exercise. It was someone in NEADS, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with ATC, except in a situation like this.

[edit on 2/10/2008 by Zaphod58]





new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join