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.

 

NOVA:Says NSA monitored hijackers phone calls the entire time and told no one.

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   
On a NOVA special called the SPY factory , which happens to be on right now , I just caught the preview and they said that they will talk about how the NSA service listened to the hijackers the entire time before the attacks as they made there ways moving across the US. (James Bamford guest).

Will watch and see what they say sounds interesting though.




posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   
WOW. This seems to be all about the 9/11 attacks.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Stillresearchn911
 


Truthers can't have it both ways...

It was a controled explosion and there were no hijackers or there actual psychotic furballs whodid this.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
This is hardly shocking though. It is foolish to expect otherwise.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   

posted by crmanager
reply to post by Stillresearchn911
 


Truthers can't have it both ways...

It was a controled explosion and there were no hijackers or there actual psychotic furballs whodid this.


Says who? You? Personally I believe there were no hijackers. There were covert agents with stolen identities pretending to be the 19 hijackers, and setting up false hijackers to be blamed for 9-11. They were deliberately leaving behind evidence and credit card numbers and hanging out in bimbo bars. There is no reliable evidence that any hijackers boarded the four original aircraft. There is evidence that some of them were trained on US Military bases, and some of them were trained in CIA centers.

However, this is how you could be wrong if there were actually hijackers on the four aircraft. The NSA and other control agents would have allowed them to board, allowed the aircraft to take off, killed every person on board with a quick acting nerve agent, and remotely taken over the aircraft and flown them out to an Atlantic graveyard or elsewhere. There were early reports that radar showed four aircraft off transponders flying out over the Atlantic.

At some point in each flight path, the aircraft would be merged on radar with a remotely flown military aircraft, the transponder codes switched, then transponders turned off and the hijackings simulated, and the new Flight 11-175-77-93 would be flown to its pre-planned target, while the original flight flew out to its deep water gravesite or elsewhere. Apparently something broke on the Flight 93 remote control system and the aircraft had to be destroyed far from its target.

Several of the flight paths flew directly over US Air Force bases and nuclear power plants. There is evidence that Flight 77 disappeared over Ohio and never returned to Virginia. There is evidence that there were two Flight 175s at Boston Logan. There is evidence that Flight 11 never took off as scheduled.

Two "Flight 175" taking off from Boston Logan: CONFIRMED

The key people picked out for cell phone and air phone transmissions would have been removed to secure locations (on the ground so their cell phones would work) to read their scripts at the right time, and if they were not part of the team, eliminated when their roles were complete. If there had been any hijackers in the aircraft, they and the original pilots would have been helpless to do anything about the remote takeover of their aircraft.



So the two aircraft could have been remotely flown into the towers whether or not there were hijackers. It would have been much easier because there would have been a skilled pilot remotely flying the aircraft, instead of suicidal Cessna rejects screwing everything up. The two aircraft which replaced Flights 11 and 175 could have had extra fuel tanks installed instead of passengers for much more splendid Shock & Awe special effects.






[edit on 2/3/09 by SPreston]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Oh My...

Agents on board

Fast Acting Nerve agents.

Whew, I love active imaginations.

That being said I stick by my original thought. If they tracked the hijackers that means there were hijackers so truthers are simply wrong.


BTW, what on Earth has been said in this thread to justify "scrutiny?"



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   

posted by crmanager

That being said I stick by my original thought. If they tracked the hijackers that means there were hijackers so truthers are simply wrong.



No. The National Security Agency has often been at odds with the illegal activities and drug running of the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA could have been running the pretend hijackers and setting up official believable perpetrators for the 9-11 Attack on America, and the NSA could have been tracking the pretend hijackers. pResident Dubya could have ordered the NSA to remain silent for National Security reasons. Obviously a lot of 'insiders' have been leaking a lot of information, otherwise why is the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY in such RUINS?



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by crmanager
BTW, what on Earth has been said in this thread to justify "scrutiny?"


I think the way the Eschelon and Carnivore programs work, everything is scrutinized, so scrutiny itself is not the issue.

What would cause any sort of communication to be looked at more carefully is the presence of key words, like hijacking, bin Laden, etc. The words would probably have to occur in certain groupings and with a specified frequency.

Given the above, it is not hard to see how humanity as a whole could render such eavedropping protocols useless. Communicating in euphemisms could be one approach that terrorists themselves might use.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Well I must say that was definitely a must watch video on 9/11.

It discusses a FOIA'd secret day by day by hour timeline of every single thing that the hijackers did from the time the first ones entered the US. It basically said(which I had come across this info before vaguely I believe it was in "Crossing the rubicon" where there supposedly was FBI agents that were in the CIA Bin Laden unit that knew about the two hijackers and that they had entered the states but that the CIA would not let them report the info to the FBI HQ ..well they actually had the FBI agent on the program explaining what happened. They showed pages of the FBI timeline and its amazing how much information they were able to obtain, mostly (seems to me ) due to the fact that the hijackers did not try to "hide" themselves at all. Everything they did or purchased was done thru credit cards or debit cards. So they literally know what they bought and what they ate when they went where they went. Literally having it listed next to the entries in the timeline.

Anyways, highly recommend checking it out, I was wrong though the entire thing is not about 9/11 but I'd say the first 30 or 40 mins of the hour program were. Again it was PBS's NOVA -The Spy Factory----Check it out.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Actually, there were months of surveillance that were not reviewed that allowed 9/11 to happen. It was all there but overlooked. This is common knowledge. It was not allowed to happen but it was oversight based on not having enough people to staff the operation to review all of the information. We can thank military cuts in the 90's for that.

NSA listens to everything....



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:10 AM
link   
i'm so mad,,,i wanted to watch it,,,, and totally forgot it was on


i waisted my time and fell asleep on biggest loser,,,which was about the best i coulkd find on,,,,,i lost a few brain cells in the 30 minutes i saw


anybody know when they repeat it????



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by shortywarn
 


Here is the link to watch it online.

www.pbs.org...

I haven't seen it yet myself, but I have to say that, although I really like the programming on NOVA and Frontline, I always watch these programs with a Spockian eyebrow raised.

They are very slick with high production values, aimed at the intelligencia and potentially ideal vehicles for the subtle massaging of the facts.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
reply to post by shortywarn
 


Here is the link to watch it online.

www.pbs.org...

I haven't seen it yet myself, but I have to say that, although I really like the programming on NOVA and Frontline, I always watch these programs with a Spockian eyebrow raised.

They are very slick with high production values, aimed at the intelligencia and potentially ideal vehicles for the subtle massaging of the facts.


No question they did that also here.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:32 AM
link   
[edit on 4-2-2009 by Reevster]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
Actually, there were months of surveillance that were not reviewed that allowed 9/11 to happen. It was all there but overlooked. This is common knowledge. It was not allowed to happen but it was oversight based on not having enough people to staff the operation to review all of the information. We can thank military cuts in the 90's for that.

NSA listens to everything....




Esdad you might want to check it out b/c while Nawaf Hamzi was on his way into the USA the CIA was tracking him in real time and actually had the officials in SA copy his passport. As I said before, they had two senior FBI agents on that special OBL team that also were made aware of this but CIA had forbid those two FBI agents to report this info back to their supervisors let alone the FBI HQ.

If you ask me though, this program was definitely aimed at trying to back up the so called official story like what you have repeated, that basically we were watching and listening but one couldn't tell the other and the other couldn't tell them untill it was over with.

If that was the only part of it maybe I could buy it ..but I don't due to all the other numerous warnings and signals that were going off all around the country in field offices and intelligent reports. To me , when you add on all this info it just makes it all the more apparent that all of the blockages and passes seem to trace back to the CIA. Hmmmm. Which means will never know what happened.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Right on , maybe not to a tee but close, I think the planes were switched as there were eye witnesses who said they saw a military plane hit the second tower and not a normal airliner. I mean to say that the said airliners where landed ( crew disposed of by what ever means ) and the other military planes where sent up or were already in the air and loaded with explosives of some type.



www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...







[edit on 4-2-2009 by Reevster]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

posted by crmanager
reply to post by Stillresearchn911
 


Truthers can't have it both ways...

It was a controled explosion and there were no hijackers or there actual psychotic furballs whodid this.


Says who? You? Personally I believe there were no hijackers. There were covert agents with stolen identities pretending to be the 19 hijackers, and setting up false hijackers to be blamed for 9-11. They were deliberately leaving behind evidence and credit card numbers and hanging out in bimbo bars. There is no reliable evidence that any hijackers boarded the four original aircraft. There is evidence that some of them were trained on US Military bases, and some of them were trained in CIA centers.

However, this is how you could be wrong if there were actually hijackers on the four aircraft. The NSA and other control agents would have allowed them to board, allowed the aircraft to take off, killed every person on board with a quick acting nerve agent, and remotely taken over the aircraft and flown them out to an Atlantic graveyard or elsewhere. There were early reports that radar showed four aircraft off transponders flying out over the Atlantic.

At some point in each flight path, the aircraft would be merged on radar with a remotely flown military aircraft, the transponder codes switched, then transponders turned off and the hijackings simulated, and the new Flight 11-175-77-93 would be flown to its pre-planned target, while the original flight flew out to its deep water gravesite or elsewhere. Apparently something broke on the Flight 93 remote control system and the aircraft had to be destroyed far from its target.

Several of the flight paths flew directly over US Air Force bases and nuclear power plants. There is evidence that Flight 77 disappeared over Ohio and never returned to Virginia. There is evidence that there were two Flight 175s at Boston Logan. There is evidence that Flight 11 never took off as scheduled.

Two "Flight 175" taking off from Boston Logan: CONFIRMED

The key people picked out for cell phone and air phone transmissions would have been removed to secure locations (on the ground so their cell phones would work) to read their scripts at the right time, and if they were not part of the team, eliminated when their roles were complete. If there had been any hijackers in the aircraft, they and the original pilots would have been helpless to do anything about the remote takeover of their aircraft.



So the two aircraft could have been remotely flown into the towers whether or not there were hijackers. It would have been much easier because there would have been a skilled pilot remotely flying the aircraft, instead of suicidal Cessna rejects screwing everything up. The two aircraft which replaced Flights 11 and 175 could have had extra fuel tanks installed instead of passengers for much more splendid Shock & Awe special effects.






[edit on 2/3/09 by SPreston]


OR - what really happened. The planes had remote flight controls installed and all that was need was for them to be directed to their targets.

The radio comms were cut.

Thats all that needed to be done.

Further the remote flight control equipment installed on these craft were made by Israelis.

The AWAC seen at Washington was to guide it in - hence manoeuvres that no untrained pilot could achieve.

NY aircraft were controlled from building 7 - was brought down to conceal this.

WTC was primed to come down for maximum effect. Contractors providing fire retardent for the steel were given thermite instead of fire retardent.

Thats all that is needed. Remote contolled planes (please see the 5000 odd remote aircraft in use in Iraq alone).

The majority of strikes in the first weeks of the war were conducted from remote controlled aircraft ....nothing new here folks.

Pilot - who needs a friggen pilot.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   
What?

So now we have the TM believing what the MSM AND one of the "three letter agencies" say?

What if this is all a deliberate disinfo campaign?

How does the collective intellect of the TM decide what to believe, and what to accept as true from the MSM and/or "three letter agencies" ?

SURELY it's NOT based on a filter that says "whenever they say something that I think helps my beliefs, they are beyond reproach, but when they say something that goes against my beliefs, they can't be trusted" ???????????



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
What?

So now we have the TM believing what the MSM AND one of the "three letter agencies" say?

What if this is all a deliberate disinfo campaign?

How does the collective intellect of the TM decide what to believe, and what to accept as true from the MSM and/or "three letter agencies" ?

SURELY it's NOT based on a filter that says "whenever they say something that I think helps my beliefs, they are beyond reproach, but when they say something that goes against my beliefs, they can't be trusted" ???????????


That's kind of odd hearing that come from the DM your side does the same thing just in the opposite way. The DM believes anything that comes out of those so called three letter agencies and doesn't question it period. The debunkers have not contested one thing that has come out of NIST's, FEMA, FBI, CIA, or the Commission's mouth you guys have backed it up 100 percent and then go and attack and insult people who do question it.

Don't ever be confused about it the Debunkers are the same type of Americans that if we were back in 1775-1776 you guys would all be running around doing whatever you could to back the Brits.

Our forefathers founded the country on the principles of always questioning our government.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stillresearchn911

The debunkers have not contested one thing that has come out of NIST's, FEMA, FBI, CIA, or the Commission's mouth you guys have backed it up 100 percent and then go and attack and insult people who do question it.



You're woefully misinformed.

There have been MANY challenges from reputable engineers that question certain aspects of NIST, even though they agree about the overall findings.

Go here to find a few:

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

Then come back and admit that you made an inaccurate statement.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join