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.

 

Widow: 9/11 passengers planned to resist

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
maybe I'm more sensitive because I worked in NYC for a year and a half, was in NYC that day, and 18 of my co-workers were killed in tower 2, but some of the theories on here are disgusting. "so called" calls to loved ones.....do you think the passengers were in on it ?

the animals that flew the planes took training in the US. what was weird was they were interested in how to turn off the transponders, turn, bank, and fly, but not how to land or take off.

prior to 9/11, hijackings lead to stand offs on runways, not suicide missions.

the passengers probably wanted to save their butts by staying out of the way. The 4th plane fought because the "so called" calls to loved ones resulted in them being told about the towers, so they knew it wasn't a runway standoff deal.

.







posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 02:59 PM
link   
mrmulder

I believe it was reported at the onset of the hijacking they cut someone's throat, that would have given them the shock they needed to gain control and seduce the rest of the passengers into submission. There attack was planned and orchestrated, any means of resistance would have had taken time as not to be a futile attempt.

I also believe that an attempt to resist was being sought as the widow in the link provided had said. Only when you have established the number of hijackers, weapons and possible intent can a plan of resistant be sought. I feel this all transpired for the brave people onboard the ill fated flight.

God Bless all who perished on 9/11 and the loved ones they left behind.

I believe God will show no mercy for those who committed these horrific acts.

[edit on 17-7-2004 by sniper068]



posted on Aug, 15 2004 @ 01:31 PM
link   
I was watching the 2nd plane hitting the wtc, and I just don't understand, how could they fly that plane so precisely through the smoke with such high speed? A video shows, that the plane goes through the dense smoke, directly to the tower. It is a main factor to miss the building.



posted on Aug, 15 2004 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I agree the people in the second wtc plane MUST have been able to see the smoke from the first wtc plane. They would have naturally reacted as they approached it; made calls, done something.

Also how are some arab guys, that have barely learned how to fly a plane, going to be doing the articulate flying with a jumbo jet at full throttle to exactly hit a particular tower? I bet that wouldn't be that easy even for an experienced airline pilot.
.



posted on Aug, 16 2004 @ 12:53 AM
link   
The piloting wasn't that hard.

Pilots have said how easy it would be to do as the 9/11 hijackers did. Remember, al-qaeda waited until they had enough trained pilots.

Afterall, successfully landing on an airport in the right place is significantly more difficult, and pilots do it all the time in bad weather. The 9/11 guys crashed in perfect clear conditions.

I don't think there is any conspiracy, except the one from the mind of Osama bin Laden.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 12:20 AM
link   
No matter how bad flight security was pre-911, there is no way that the alleged hijackers could have gotten on those planes without being on the flight manifests. Therefore, there is much more to this story than meets the eye.

Home run hits close to home.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Radagast said:

"maybe I'm more sensitive because I worked in NYC for a year and a half, was in NYC that day, and 18 of my co-workers were killed in tower 2, but some of the theories on here are disgusting. "so called" calls to loved ones.....do you think the passengers were in on it ?

the animals that flew the planes took training in the US. what was weird was they were interested in how to turn off the transponders, turn, bank, and fly, but not how to land or take off.

prior to 9/11, hijackings lead to stand offs on runways, not suicide missions.

the passengers probably wanted to save their butts by staying out of the way. The 4th plane fought because the "so called" calls to loved ones resulted in them being told about the towers, so they knew it wasn't a runway standoff deal."


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

Sorry to hear about your friends but I don't buy the "official" story. Those planes were set up to be flown by remote control.

Check out my post on remote control posted earlier tonight.

.



posted on Oct, 28 2006 @ 07:49 AM
link   
To all those who have lost someone on 9/11 i do feel your anger and frustration but I would like you to consider that if they died by the hands of Iraqi's then that is a tragic lost. If they died by the hands of our own government, that is even more horrible. I am not accusing anyone, but I would just like to get some answers. First off, how high was the plane flying when the calls were made. If we can determine that, we would know if calls were possible at their altitude. Secondly, if calls were possible, have we had a full documentation as to how many died on the plane and has anyone done an autopsy on the deceased?



posted on Oct, 28 2006 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel
The piloting wasn't that hard.

Pilots have said how easy it would be to do as the 9/11 hijackers did. Remember, al-qaeda waited until they had enough trained pilots.

Afterall, successfully landing on an airport in the right place is significantly more difficult, and pilots do it all the time in bad weather. The 9/11 guys crashed in perfect clear conditions.

I don't think there is any conspiracy, except the one from the mind of Osama bin Laden.
What about the Pentagon,if indeed a plane did hit it(and I'm not saying one didn't)that would take an extremely gifted pilot to fly that fast just a few feet off the ground, without leaving a mark on the lawn ,and hit the side of the Pentagon.



posted on Nov, 9 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by clearmind
 

YES ..A BIT OF SENSE AT LAST ..THAT FLIGHT WAS SHOT DOWN OR IT EXPLODED IN MID AIR TO MUCH DEBRIS OVER WIDE AREA... TOTALLY OBVIOUS..9/11 APPEARS TO OF BEEN COINCIDENCE AND SUSPICIOUS EVENTS DAY...



posted on Nov, 9 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by crowpruitt
 


Skilled pilot?

Lets see - struck bunch of lamp posts on highway outside of Pentagon then had right wing strike a trailer
with a generator and the left wing hit a concrete steam vent before hitting the Pentagon

Cant say too much skill on show here


Mickey Bell, Sean Boger, Omar Campo, Michael DiPaula, Frank Probst, and Jack Singleton, all of whom saw flight 77 approach and came within feet of being struck as it roared across the Pentagon lawn. Probst dove out of the way to avoid being hit by the 757's right engine, which tore through this fence and damaged the construction generator trailer at right:




[img]http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/022.jpg[/img




Steve Riskus: "I could see the "American Airlines" logo...It knocked over a few light poles in its way." Mark Bright: "...at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down." Mike Walter: "...it clipped one of these light poles ... and slammed right into the Pentagon right there. It was an American Airlines jet." Rodney Washington: "...knocking over light poles" Kirk Milburn: "I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles." Afework Hagos: "It hit some lampposts on the way in." Kat Gaines: "saw a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles." D.S. Khavkin: "First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles." Wanda Ramey: "I saw the wing of the plane clip the light post, and it made the plane slant. Penny Elgas: A piece of American Airlines Flight 77 was torn from the plane as it clipped a light pole. It landed in her car. Now in the Smithsonian Institution's 9/11 collection. Lincoln Liebner: "It was probably about thirty feet off the ground, clipping the lampposts. I could clearly see through the windows of the plane. It was maybe going 500 miles an hour - when it just flew...into the Pentagon ... less than a hundred yards away."



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join