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.

 

Why the Longer Flight paths?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
stop asking questions, present evidence of an inside job.




posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Only certain airports were controlled by the perps. Both airlines were customers of the Bush cabal's security company. Thats why they used those airports...they could control the action totally and had all the keys to the whole deal.

As far as telling us to prove an inside job, there is so much evidence that already exists, the burden is on YOU to prove the official conspiracy theory to be the true one...it is not. It is far from being even close. If you had a detective looking at a case..any case, and hundreds, thousands even, of ' inexplicable anomalies' were directly associated with the event, would'nt that ring a bell or two? Get the picture?

How many anomalies can go unexplained before you wake up? A million? My God, what does it taake? Two major 100 story buildings turn to dust the consistency of flour at virtual free fall speed....from a fire and collapse? Never before in history...and never again!! Unless they need another show. Two Towers trun to dust the same day in the same exact way!! Imagine that !! Some coincidence, eh? Maybe the war games were too..ya reckon? How many ' coincidences ' will you swallow before you retch? We who know the truth hit our limit already...when will you?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
So they were more afraid of "AIRPORT SECURITY" as opposed to "AIR FORCE" security>?

Can you explain why they had no fear of the air defense of the United States the only superpower in the world at the time?


How do you keep getting "smaller number of passengers on the planes" to equal "more afraid of airport security"? NO ONE has mentioned airport security in their posts but you. The number of passengers on the plane was important. If you fly out of JFK you are FAR more likely to have a maximum passenger load than if you fly out of Logan and Newark. The fewer passengers, the easier to control with a small team. The smaller the team the less likely to get caught.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


From your source:

UBL: (...inaudible...) then he said: Those who were trained to fly didn't know the others. One group of people did not know the other group. (...inaudible...) (Someone in the crowd asks UBL to tell the Shaykh about the dream of ((Abu-Da'ud)).



UBL: He did not know about the operation. Not everybody knew (...inaudible...). Muhammad ((Atta)) from the Egyptian family (meaning the Al Qa'ida Egyptian group), was in charge of the group.



At least one of them knew.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by fastfingersfunk
stop asking questions, present evidence of an inside job.


Any court of law where "evidence" is argued about has questions asked.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
reply to post by talisman
 


From your source:

UBL: (...inaudible...) then he said: Those who were trained to fly didn't know the others. One group of people did not know the other group. (...inaudible...) (Someone in the crowd asks UBL to tell the Shaykh about the dream of ((Abu-Da'ud)).



UBL: He did not know about the operation. Not everybody knew (...inaudible...). Muhammad ((Atta)) from the Egyptian family (meaning the Al Qa'ida Egyptian group), was in charge of the group.



At least one of them knew.


No doubt, but this wasn't a "ONE MAN" job. This strongly suggests that there is a problem with the OFFICIAL STORY and to add to it, the flight paths which crossed and were longer then one would expect.

You could ask how in the world could have they pulled this thing off not knowing very much and leaving most of what was known to "ONE MAN". But that is for another topic.

The point is this, with so many hijackers not knowing the plan, which is practically everyone.

The fact they had no crystal ball to tell them this would be a success.

Whomever planned this had ZERO RESPECT FOR THE CAPABILITY OF THE UNITED STATES AIR-FORCE OR MILITARY

Whomever planned this, had the hijackers do this basically blind.
Had them take longer flight routes approx an hour in air.

Even though they didn't have a crystal ball, they sure acted like they did.

[edit on 14-4-2008 by talisman]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by talisman
So they were more afraid of "AIRPORT SECURITY" as opposed to "AIR FORCE" security>?

Can you explain why they had no fear of the air defense of the United States the only superpower in the world at the time?


How do you keep getting "smaller number of passengers on the planes" to equal "more afraid of airport security"? NO ONE has mentioned airport security in their posts but you. The number of passengers on the plane was important. If you fly out of JFK you are FAR more likely to have a maximum passenger load than if you fly out of Logan and Newark. The fewer passengers, the easier to control with a small team. The smaller the team the less likely to get caught.



Because something is "NOT MENTIONED" doesn't mean it wasn't "IMPLIED", while not explicit it is implicit. People have mentioned that security was greater at JFK because of the greater amount of people.

But this still is saying that the hijackers were more afraid of "AIRPORT SECURITY" or "LARGER AIRPORTS" then "THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE".

Remember these guys didn't have a crystal ball. They didn't know it would be clear sailing for an hour in the air over the United States the Only Superpower in the World at that time.

IT seems that they had *NO* respect whatsoever for the capability of the UNITED STATES MILITARY OR AIR-FORCE.

The question is .......WHY?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
IT seems that they had *NO* respect whatsoever for the capability of the UNITED STATES MILITARY OR AIR-FORCE.

The question is .......WHY?


Well gee if you can crash a boatload of explosives into a sophisticated American warship, what makes you think they have any respect for the U.S. Air Force???

You think the ARABS have any respect for the Marine Corps and the Army in Iraq? Oh wow Americans are invinicible lets not F@@@ with them!



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


And the people "implying" that never worked security at an airport. I was a screener and supervisor at an airport on 9/11. I don't care if it was JFK or Logan, or Bangor Maine, security is exactly the same at them all. It doesn't matter if you have 10,000, 1,000, or 100 people an hour going through your checkpoint, you screen each and every one of them exactly the same way.

Just for you, I will state it explicitly. Security was exactly the same at both airports. They flew out of Logan because there were fewer passengers on the flights out of Logan than there were out of JFK.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
IT seems that they had *NO* respect whatsoever for the capability of the UNITED STATES MILITARY OR AIR-FORCE.

The question is .......WHY?


They counted on mass confusion and surprise. Im sure it took quite a while for ATC to even suspect something was amiss. When they did, I bed they tried everything to contact the plane directly. When that failed, then they contacted the Air Force for assistance. At this point, the first tower has already been hit, and the second one is about to be.

I bet when the first plane hit, military switchboards all over the place lit up like Christmas trees. Confusion. The first fighters sortied by the Air Force were not even armed.

This country hadnt experienced a direct attack on our soil since 1814, so Americans nearly 190 years later were used to being safe. Its that simple.

Now its a different world. I used to live by a reserve Air Force base. Drove past it all the time, and had a clear view of the facility, planes, buildings, and the runway. Before 9/11 the place had only KC135s and a few C130s. Now the place has 6 F-16s. While I think a hijacking could happen, however difficult, the difference now will be fighters launched the instant things get hairy.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


Crashing a boatload of explosives is far different then hanging in the air for aprox an hour and being tracked.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


How would they know that day there would be fewer passengers?

Even *IF* this is the case, that would mean they are still not that afraid of the *AIR FORCE* and showed very little respect. The question is why>?

Lets suppose you rob a bank. Do you take the longer getaway or a shorter one?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by DisInfo
 



No doubt mass confusion was part of the plan. But go back over my thread. I posted a quote from Bin Laden, where he says the hijackers didn't even know the plan "not even one letter" until just before they boarded the planes. The only one who might have had more knowledge was Atta.

Now who sounds confused?

Let us assume the confusion. How is hijacking a plane confusion? The Air Force is prepared for hijackings.

Remember the only unusual thing occurred when they actually crashed the planes and that was almost an hour later. Hijacking planes have been going on for the longest time.

Again why would they have NO RESPECT for the AIR FORCE?


[edit on 14-4-2008 by talisman]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by DisInfo

Originally posted by talisman
IT seems that they had *NO* respect whatsoever for the capability of the UNITED STATES MILITARY OR AIR-FORCE.

The question is .......WHY?


They counted on mass confusion and surprise. Im sure it took quite a while for ATC to even suspect something was amiss. When they did, I bed they tried everything to contact the plane directly. When that failed, then they contacted the Air Force for assistance. At this point, the first tower has already been hit, and the second one is about to be.

I bet when the first plane hit, military switchboards all over the place lit up like Christmas trees. Confusion. The first fighters sortied by the Air Force were not even armed.

This country hadnt experienced a direct attack on our soil since 1814, so Americans nearly 190 years later were used to being safe. Its that simple.

Now its a different world. I used to live by a reserve Air Force base. Drove past it all the time, and had a clear view of the facility, planes, buildings, and the runway. Before 9/11 the place had only KC135s and a few C130s. Now the place has 6 F-16s. While I think a hijacking could happen, however difficult, the difference now will be fighters launched the instant things get hairy.

And yet, they had fighter jets on the tail of Payne Stewart's aircraft 15 minutes after it went off of it's flight plan.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


NO, sir, they did not.

15 minutes, you say? Stop putting out nonsense, and prove it.

Thank you.

[added] just looked up on Wiki....the F-16s intercepted the LearJet about ONE HOUR and TWENTY minutes after ATC determined they had lost contact, or had gone NORDO.

One hour and twenty minutes is 80 minutes, not 15 minutes. OK?

Thanks for your post

[edit on 4/14/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


Why do you think they did trial runs and took the same flights before hand? You get a feel for how many passengers are on the plane any given day. For that matter, when you book your flight you can simply go online and book your seat and get an idea of how many people are on the plane. If you take the flight that day and it's too full, you simply stay in your seats and nothing happens.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by talisman
 


Why do you think they did trial runs and took the same flights before hand? You get a feel for how many passengers are on the plane any given day. For that matter, when you book your flight you can simply go online and book your seat and get an idea of how many people are on the plane. If you take the flight that day and it's too full, you simply stay in your seats and nothing happens.


Osama said they didn't know the plan. They didn't take "TRIAL" runs. Only one member might have known something.

They didn't know the plan..."not one letter until just before they boarded the planes".

That is what Osama said.

But again, why did they have Zero respect for the capability of the United States Air force?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


NO, sir, they did not.

15 minutes, you say? Stop putting out nonsense, and prove it.

Thank you.

[added] just looked up on Wiki....the F-16s intercepted the LearJet about ONE HOUR and TWENTY minutes after ATC determined they had lost contact, or had gone NORDO.

One hour and twenty minutes is 80 minutes, not 15 minutes. OK?

Thanks for your post

[edit on 4/14/0808 by weedwhacker]


www.wanttoknow.info...

KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: The Dallas Morning News - Texas
Copyright (C) 1999 KRTBN Knight Ridder Tribune Business News; Source: World Reporter (TM)


Instead, according to an Air Force timeline, a series of military planes provided an emergency escort to the stricken Lear, beginning with a pair of F-16 Falcons from the Air National Guard at Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., about 20 minutes after ground controllers lost contact.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
And yet, they had fighter jets on the tail of Payne Stewart's aircraft 15 minutes after it went off of it's flight plan.


Wrong. It was a lot longer than 15 minutes before it was intercepted.


The FAA says controllers lost contact with it at 9:44 a.m. [Washington Post, 10/26/1999] , but according to a later report by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) the plane first failed to respond to air traffic control at 9:33 a.m., after which the controller repeatedly tried to make contact for the next 4 1/2 minutes, without success. [National Transportation Safety Board, 11/28/2000] NORAD’s Southeast Air Defense Sector was notified of the emergency at 9:55 a.m. [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 459] At 10:08 a.m., two F-16 fighters from Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida that were on a routine training mission had been asked by the FAA to intercept the Learjet, but never reached it. At about 10:52 a.m., a fighter from Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, was directed to within 9 miles of it, and at around 11:00 a.m. began a visual inspection of the plane. It accompanied the Learjet from 11:09 to 11:44 a.m. At 11:59 a.m., according to early accounts, four Air National Guard fighters and a refueling tanker from Tulsa, Oklahoma were told to chase the Learjet, but got no closer than 100 miles from it. However, the NTSB later claims that two Tulsa fighters were with it between 12:25 and 12:39 p.m., and were able to visually inspect it. At 12:54 p.m., two Air National Guard fighters from Fargo, North Dakota intercepted the Learjet. Soon after 1:14 p.m., it crashed in swampland, after spiraling to the ground.

www.cooperativeresearch.org...

Hmm, NORAD was notified at 9:55, and it was intercepted between 10:52 and 11am. That's a long 15 minutes.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


talisman, stop it. stop it.

This is a stupid thread, and you know why.

'Why the Longer Flight paths? indeed....

Boston to New York? Do you know how close those two cities are??? Normal flights, about 30 minutes.

Maybe you don't understand how the take-overs were orchestrated. We can surmise the 'plan' based on data from UAL93, since the DFDR and CVR survived intact enough to be able to be 'read'.

I can recount, from personal experience, that we did not ever consider a 'storming' by someone, even if only armed with a boxcutter, or better yet, a knife from First Class....or, hey! A corkscrew!!! No, we had this naive mindset, that any hi-jacker would be afraid of dying. That was one basis for the (old) 'common strategy' of the bygone days.

It was common, and can be told here, since procedures are different now, that shortly after reaching cruise altitude, this is about 20 to 25 minutes after take-off the F/A would, after attending to the First Class passengers, possibly offer a beverage to the cockpit. It was routine, and could have been observed over and over again, as flights were 'cased'.

Because, that is exactly what happened. Flights were 'cased', just as a criminal will 'case' a house or business they want to steal from.

Of course, I'm sugar-coating this, by using terms that are not aviation related....trying to make a point.

Four flights, chosen for their 'scheduled' departure times, all to co-incide. Four flights, allowing for the 'scheduled' departure times, and knowing that shortly around 20 minutes after take-off, the 'take-over' would occur.

One flight, UAL93, was out of Newark...I can tell you from considerable personal experience, Newark is notorious for delays. Push-back on time? Maybe....taxi to take-off? Well, took lot longer than planned....

Thanks for your post, but.....



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join