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.

 

The U.S was prepared for 9/11

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 


Is it your claim then that the exercises that day did not impede a proper response? Even considering the official admissions of such?

Is it also your opinion that the exercises being carried out by USAF, NORAD, CIA, NRO, FAA and FEMA were all purely coincidental.

Lastly, is it your opinion that these exercises were being carried out, while no one at the highest levels of natioanl authority could have possibly imagined such an attack?




posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by snoopy
 


Is it your claim then that the exercises that day did not impede a proper response? Even considering the official admissions of such?

Is it also your opinion that the exercises being carried out by USAF, NORAD, CIA, NRO, FAA and FEMA were all purely coincidental.

Lastly, is it your opinion that these exercises were being carried out, while no one at the highest levels of natioanl authority could have possibly imagined such an attack?




I am not the one making claims first of all. You need to prove they interfered and mimiced the events. You can't do it because it's simply not true. You need to prove their response was impede by the exercises that were cancelled 30 seconds into the attacks.

And no the exercises were most certainly not coincidental seeing as that's all those groups do all year long is train and run exercises.

And correct. Being that none of those exercises in any way was related to the types of attacks on 9/11 means that it does not constitute proof they were prepared. And that doesn't mean there wasn't anyone who didn't conceive of the idea. But for a person or two to think of the possibility is one thing. To implement preparedness on a nation wide level is another. Perhaps you could provide us with some evidence that the defense system was fully prepared for such an event. There are people on this forum involved in military and ATC who can verify that there were absolutely no such procedures for such an event at the time. The closes you can get is a hijacked domestic plane and the procedure for that is to escort it to a landing place and begin negotiations. There was nothign what so ever for planes being used as missiles.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



I am not the one making claims first of all. You need to prove they interfered and mimiced the events. You can't do it because it's simply not true. You need to prove their response was impede by the exercises that were cancelled 30 seconds into the attacks.


It has now become abundantly clear that you are unaware of the facts in this case. I have no idea where you find this figure of "30 seconds" when in fact it took at least 14 minutes to stand-down Operation Northern Vigilance. (One example of the many exercises taking place that day in various capacities.)

It is also important to note that planes involved in the exercise were deployed to the other side of the continent, well out of range to make an effective defense of the skies over the Northeast United States.

Also of note and according to the US Department of Defense...


NORAD has the capacity to inject simulated material, including mass attacks, during exercises, “as though it was being sensed for the first time by a radar site.”


This means that well into the actual real-world events of 9/11, NORAD still had false radar signatures displayed as a part of the exercises.

Clearly there was confusion, and delays well after the attacks had begun.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by snoopy
 



I am not the one making claims first of all. You need to prove they interfered and mimiced the events. You can't do it because it's simply not true. You need to prove their response was impede by the exercises that were cancelled 30 seconds into the attacks.


It has now become abundantly clear that you are unaware of the facts in this case. I have no idea where you find this figure of "30 seconds" when in fact it took at least 14 minutes to stand-down Operation Northern Vigilance. (One example of the many exercises taking place that day in various capacities.)

It is also important to note that planes involved in the exercise were deployed to the other side of the continent, well out of range to make an effective defense of the skies over the Northeast United States.

Also of note and according to the US Department of Defense...


NORAD has the capacity to inject simulated material, including mass attacks, during exercises, “as though it was being sensed for the first time by a radar site.”


This means that well into the actual real-world events of 9/11, NORAD still had false radar signatures displayed as a part of the exercises.

Clearly there was confusion, and delays well after the attacks had begun.







As usual you are completely wrong. operation Northern Vig took place over ALASKA. Do you really think that they are going to be confused by blips over Alaska while trying to track a plane in NY? And let's get your facts RIGHT. it wasn't 14 minutes, it was 14 fighter Jets. Learn the difference between jets and minutes. And this wasn't even the exercise that involved injections, so you have not only got the wrong numbers, but the wrong exercise.

---------
116. On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union. We investigated whether military preparations for the large-scale exercise compromised the military’s response to the realworld terrorist attack on 9/11. According to General Eberhart, “it took about 30 seconds” to make the adjustment to the real-world situation. Ralph Eberhart testimony, June 17, 2004. We found that the response was, if anything, expedited by the increased number of staff at the sectors and at NORAD because of the scheduled exercise. See Robert Marr interview (Jan. 23, 2004)
Footnote to Chapter 1
9/11 Commission Report

----------

I think we are past the point of you simply being ignorant of what happened that day and now getting into the area of fraud. If you simply don't understand what happened that day, fine. But when you start posting incorrect information intentionally, then that is crossing a line. So maybe you are just ignorant of the events, but you're getting really close to the line of fraud. I suggest you go learn what happened before you start accusing others of not having facts right.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



...it wasn't 14 minutes, it was 14 fighter Jets. Learn the difference between jets and minutes...I think we are past the point of you simply being ignorant of what happened that day and now getting into the area of fraud.


NEADS contacted NORAD at 8:46 a.m. to inform them of the hijacking of Flight 11, and to request permission to launch a sortie. Operation Northern Vigilance was not canceled until 9:00 a.m., at which point the false radar signatures were supposedly removed from the displays.

I suggest you tread lightly with your thinly veiled accusations, and stick to the subject matter.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by snoopy
 



...it wasn't 14 minutes, it was 14 fighter Jets. Learn the difference between jets and minutes...I think we are past the point of you simply being ignorant of what happened that day and now getting into the area of fraud.


NEADS contacted NORAD at 8:46 a.m. to inform them of the hijacking of Flight 11, and to request permission to launch a sortie. Operation Northern Vigilance was not canceled until 9:00 a.m., at which point the false radar signatures were supposedly removed from the displays.

I suggest you tread lightly with your thinly veiled accusations, and stick to the subject matter.





Hello? That wasn't the exercise that put injects on the screens. Again, you have the wrong exercise. The one you are talking about was over Alaska. hell, they could have kept the drill going all day and it wouldn't have made a difference.

I AM sticking to the subject matter. You are the one getting your facts wrong. And YOU are the one who is still unable to back up this claim that the exercises mimiced the events of 9/11 or that they interfered. And you won't be able to because you and I both know you can't.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy
 



That wasn't the exercise that put injects on the screens.


Okay, then show me how you know this.



The one you are talking about was over Alaska.


Yes, over Alaska, instead of the planes being in place to defend the continental US during an actual attack. Seems like a pretty clear case of how an exercise interfered with the response.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by snoopy
 



That wasn't the exercise that put injects on the screens.


Okay, then show me how you know this.



The one you are talking about was over Alaska.


Yes, over Alaska, instead of the planes being in place to defend the continental US during an actual attack. Seems like a pretty clear case of how an exercise interfered with the response.







You want me to show you a negative now? You were the one making the claim that there were injects from that exercise. There wasn't, but if you can show us there were, great. Even if we were to pretend there were, then it still wouldn't prove your case since it was over Alaska. And not to mention that injects are on NORAD's screens, NOT the FAA or the ATCs.

Any way you add it up, this claim is bunk. Likewise you won't be able to provide any sources that show fighters were removed form needed areas on the East coast and as such interfered with the events of that day.

on 9/11 NORAD had 14 fighters on the east coast. Prior to 9/11 NORAD had 14 fighters on the east coast. Here's an article form 1999:

The Air National Guard exclusively performs the air sovereignty mission in the continental United States, and those units fall under the control of the 1st Air Force based at Tyndall. The Guard maintains seven alert sites with 14 fighters and pilots on call around the clock. Besides Homestead, alert birds also sit armed and ready at Tyndall; Langley AFB, Va.; Otis Air National Guard Base, Mass.; Portland International Airport, Ore.; March ARB, Calif.; and Ellington Field, Texas.

www.af.mil...


Enjoy!



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
I will return to this thread when the prospects of a fruitful debate and/or collaborative discussion re-emerge. Until then, I urge members to look into the details of the many exercises that were taking place on 9/11, and how they may have affected responses to the events that took place that day.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Yeah, let us know when you finally are able to actually show that those exercises interfered with 9/11. I look forward to seeing those arguments. heck, I look forward to anyone at all being able to show this. Or at least something more than 30 seconds taken to turn off injections, or looking for Russian bombers over Alaska.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 05:59 PM
link   
I wouldnt listen to snoopy

He is obviously angry and ignorant of the facts.

please review this web page to see some of the tactics being employed on forums such as ATS to smear and derail the truth while creating fantastic, stupid theories in the name of 911 truth.

Snoopy please review this aswell

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation ~

Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
Become incredulous and indignant
Create rumor mongers
Use a straw man
Sidetrack opponents w name calling, ridicule
Hit and Run
Question motives
Invoke authority
Play Dumb
Associate opponent charges with old news
Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
Enigmas have no solution
Alice in Wonderland Logic
Demand complete solutions
Fit the facts to alternate conclusions
Vanish evidence and witnesses
Change the subject
Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
False evidence
Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
Manufacture a new truth
Create bigger distractions
Silence critics
Vanish
www.pnl-nlp.org...



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
911 wargames




new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join